269 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Galenit, on 02 December 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Its the whole line, cutting only the ac20 down will lead to a problem with the ac10 then and so on ...

Lets the gauss maybe have its 3x range,
the mg should stay the same as it is now,
but the ac-line should be reduced to 2x range in the whole.

Then its a simple case of clipping all the ranges. TT Made it fine for 30+ years using Much shorter ranges. It would also put a bit of an end to the whiners who don't like snipers! Its nice having the range don't get me wrong, but the increase was handled poorly.

[Wolfways]

Too good? No.
Too widespread? Imo yes.

But that's what happens when you give players too much customization freedom.

Edit: I should point out that i do think ballistics need their range decreased to X2 like energy weapons, but compared to other ballistics the AC20 is not OP.

Edited by Wolfways, 03 December 2013 - 02:24 PM.

[ErebusTheScarred]

I've been looking at this and thinking that AC20 mechs, especially dual AC20 mechs (AC40) are overpowered. I tend to agree, that reducing the max range would be a great help, but I also feel that AC20 mechs could potentially be countered by increasing seismic ranges, that, however, forces just about everyone to have seismic. I don't know, I feel that being able to walk up and kill somebody in 4-8 seconds from full health is a little overpowered.

[Whatzituyah]

Mystere, on 02 December 2013 - 06:01 PM, said:

Well, you gotta do what you gotta do to defeat the enemy, no matter how distasteful the deed.




Why dodge when you can annihilate them totally instead?

hmmmm....


Yes totally relevant..

[Piney II]

ErebusTheScarred, on 02 December 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:

I feel that being able to walk up and kill somebody in 4-8 seconds from full health is a little overpowered.

If it is as easy as just walking up to a mech and blasting away, then one might consider them OP. But it's not. The tradeoff for carrying those big guns is running a squishy mech to do it. The side torsos on an AC40 Jager are easy to blow and get to that XL engine. Once you're spotted, you can count on the enemy team making a concerted effort to kill you with focused fire.

I run an AC40 Jager every now and then. It's fun - but a challenge to make it through the match alive. It's a "shoot and scoot" mech and you better have an exit strategy every time you commit to running in for the shot. You're not going to stand toe to toe to brawl in a Jager and live long.

Want to counter the AC20? Stay outside of lethal gun range. Cut the mech off from the blob, single it out and hammer it from range.

The bottom line is the AC20 is a powerful weapon - but you make some serious tradeoffs to use it. If the players that QQ about it would try it out in a battle, they might have a different point of view. It is definitely not "easy mode".

[Joseph Mallan]

ErebusTheScarred, on 02 December 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:

I've been looking at this and thinking that AC20 mechs, especially dual AC20 mechs (AC40) are overpowered. I tend to agree, that reducing the max range would be a great help, but I also feel that AC20 mechs could potentially be countered by increasing seismic ranges, that, however, forces just about everyone to have seismic. I don't know, I feel that being able to walk up and kill somebody in 4-8 seconds from full health is a little overpowered.

AC20, 2 Mediums and a few SRMs to the head, tend to end a Mech in less than 4-6 seconds. I look for the opportunity to end an enemy with a coup-de-gras while wading into the enemy. Sure I die often, but it's worth the pleasure of a clean kill.

[Ecto Cooler]

ErebusTheScarred, on 02 December 2013 - 10:38 PM, said:

I've been looking at this and thinking that AC20 mechs, especially dual AC20 mechs (AC40) are overpowered.

Instead of looking at this -- go play one and report back. I doubt you'll hold the same opinion.

[Elwood Blues]

I think the perception is that the are overpowered because of the amount of damage you take in one strike. However, a good AC20 user really must have good aim. It isn't a prospect fire weapon. It's hot and has only 7 ammo per ton. Yes it may do 10 damage at a decent range, but you are sacrificing more heat and a greater percentage of your ammo to do that 10 damage. I think sometimes people forget that there are other factors other than just range and damage.

[Cimarb]

Elwood Blues, on 03 December 2013 - 07:25 AM, said:

I think the perception is that the are overpowered because of the amount of damage you take in one strike. However, a good AC20 user really must have good aim. It isn't a prospect fire weapon. It's hot and has only 7 ammo per ton. Yes it may do 10 damage at a decent range, but you are sacrificing more heat and a greater percentage of your ammo to do that 10 damage. I think sometimes people forget that there are other factors other than just range and damage.

True, but the "one strike" damage can be fixed if they make them work like lasers or MGs, which would help balance all weapon systems.

[Joseph Mallan]

Cimarb, on 03 December 2013 - 07:30 AM, said:

True, but the "one strike" damage can be fixed if they make them work like lasers or MGs, which would help balance all weapon systems.

That is not the definition of Fix I would be thinking of.

As you see it.
Fix=Repair

As I see it
Fix=Neuter.

one strike damage is fine, it make us leery of poking our heads out. Make a bad choice drop like a multi ton of bricks.

[Dawnstealer]

The AC20's supposed to be powerful: it's literally supposed to be the most powerful weapon in the game [that mechs can carry]. The problem is the kinds of mechs that can carry it. A Jagermech shouldn't be able to carry an AC20 (much less two of them). A Catapult should not be able to carry an AC20 (much less two of them).

I think the easy solution is to have size limits to hardpoints as well as weapon type, but this has all been discussed before elsewhere. The problem isn't the AC20, but its prevalence on the battlefield. And it's so prevalent, moreso than in tabletop, because any mech that can fit one (or a Gauss), does.

[Joseph Mallan]

Dawnstealer, on 03 December 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

The AC20's supposed to be powerful: it's literally supposed to be the most powerful weapon in the game [that mechs can carry]. The problem is the kinds of mechs that can carry it. A Jagermech shouldn't be able to carry an AC20 (much less two of them). A Catapult should not be able to carry an AC20 (much less two of them).

I think the easy solution is to have size limits to hardpoints as well as weapon type, but this has all been discussed before elsewhere. The problem isn't the AC20, but its prevalence on the battlefield. And it's so prevalent, moreso than in tabletop, because any mech that can fit one (or a Gauss), does.

Even though it is built with an AC5(8 tons) and an AC2(6 tons) in each arm? that is 14 tons per arm or the exact weight of an AC20... for each arm!

[Cimarb]

Joseph Mallan, on 03 December 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

That is not the definition of Fix I would be thinking of.

As you see it.
Fix=Repair

As I see it
Fix=Neuter.

one strike damage is fine, it make us leery of poking our heads out. Make a bad choice drop like a multi ton of bricks.

I appreciate that you are fine with it, but that doesn't make it a neuter. AC2s and (U)AC5s are not intimidating because of their large single hit - they are feared because they can sustain that pounding over a long duration. AC20s are the opposite, feared because they do a single hard hit. AC10s fall somewhere in the middle, being the ugly step kid currently, unable to hit as hard as the AC20 but not able to sustain the fire rate of the smaller cannons. They all should function the same, just like lasers do compared to each other, but with the quirks of ballistics (causes screen shake, takes ammo, low heat and high damage, etc)

[Khobai]

Quote

Theoretically, the higher rate of fire would still give the AC/10 a leg up

It doesnt. Most players dont just stand out in the open firing non-stop. They hide behind cover, pop out, fire off a few shots, then retreat back into cover. The AC/20 is outright better for that reason.

And if you are going to stand out in the open guns blazing then you'd be better off loading up on AC/5s instead of AC/20s or AC/10s. Because AC/5s fire much faster and can keep enemy mechs suppressed, which is your only real defense when youre standing in the open.

Reducing the AC/20 max range so it doesnt overlap so much with the AC/10 is the only real way to make the AC/10 work. That and all autocannons should fire in 3-5 shot bursts so they spread damage around more.

Edited by Khobai, 03 December 2013 - 08:04 AM.

[Thorqemada]

The AC20 makes the using Mech suffer a higher level of structural stress than a couple lighter Guns that work in sort of a staggered firing chain...

[Cimarb]

Dawnstealer, on 03 December 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

The AC20's supposed to be powerful: it's literally supposed to be the most powerful weapon in the game [that mechs can carry]. The problem is the kinds of mechs that can carry it. A Jagermech shouldn't be able to carry an AC20 (much less two of them). A Catapult should not be able to carry an AC20 (much less two of them).

I think the easy solution is to have size limits to hardpoints as well as weapon type, but this has all been discussed before elsewhere. The problem isn't the AC20, but its prevalence on the battlefield. And it's so prevalent, moreso than in tabletop, because any mech that can fit one (or a Gauss), does.

In addition to Joseph's great points, your last sentence is inaccurate. I only equip an AC20 in a Jäger, and only in pairs, and I have tons of mechs that could equip them if I wanted to. An AC20, for me, is not worth the weight and space 99% of the time. I prefer missiles and energy weapons now that the Gauss is too clunky to have fun with.

Size limits to hardpoints are an unnecessary restriction. If there is already a weight and crit restriction, limiting it even further is counterproductive. If you like playing with the stock loadouts (which is what you are leaning towards with restricting hardpoints even more), then just play with the stock loadout and let us have fun tweaking the mech to how we like.

[Cimarb]

Khobai, on 03 December 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

It doesnt. Most players dont just stand out in the open firing non-stop. They hide behind cover, pop out, fire off a few shots, then retreat back into cover. The AC/20 is outright better for that reason.

And if you are going to stand out in the open guns blazing then you'd be better off loading up on AC/5s instead of AC/20s or AC/10s. Because AC/5s fire much faster and can keep enemy mechs suppressed, which is your only real defense when youre standing in the open.

So you are saying that the different weapons are situationally better than each other? That sounds balanced, then. The problem I think is the Ac10, which is stuck in the middle and needs to have a little more legroom to be as useful as it should be.

Khobai, on 03 December 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

Reducing the AC/20 max range so it doesnt overlap so much with the AC/10 is the only real way to make the AC/10 work. That and all autocannons should fire in 3-5 shot bursts so they spread damage around more.

Exactly - well put.

[Khobai]

Quote

So you are saying that the different weapons are situationally better than each other?

No im saying the AC/20 is always better than the AC/10.

[Cimarb]

Khobai, on 03 December 2013 - 08:17 AM, said:

No im saying the AC/20 is always better than the AC/10.

I agree in general, but the AC10/LBX has its uses as well. What you stated in your post, though, is that you prefer the AC5 over the AC20 if you have to stand in the open to advance because it is a suppression weapon. That means it has a situation (open areas) where it is better than the AC20, which is better in other situations (covered fire). The AC10, as I mentioned, falls awkwardly in the middle, so it could use some help, but the autocannons as a whole are all situationally good.

Reduce the range of autocannons in general (to x2), reduce AC20 to the max range in line with TT, and make them all fire in burst instead of single slugs. That is how PGI should fix autocannons.

[Joseph Mallan]

Cimarb, on 03 December 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

I appreciate that you are fine with it, but that doesn't make it a neuter. AC2s and (U)AC5s are not intimidating because of their large single hit - they are feared because they can sustain that pounding over a long duration. AC20s are the opposite, feared because they do a single hard hit. AC10s fall somewhere in the middle, being the ugly step kid currently, unable to hit as hard as the AC20 but not able to sustain the fire rate of the smaller cannons. They all should function the same, just like lasers do compared to each other, but with the quirks of ballistics (causes screen shake, takes ammo, low heat and high damage, etc)

AC2 should not be feared and are not by me, AC5 is a bit more respectable but it takes 2 at least to be formidable. AC10 is a respectalbe punch and an AC20 is a Hammer of the gods. Ballistic weapons should not all function the same. An M-16 isn't the same as a .50 cal. One can punch a bullet through a brick wall at 1,800M one can plick off the wall at that range.

One Medium laser (10 damage in 10 seconds) is not the same as one Large laser(18 damage in 10 seconds) That is using beam duration + cool down per 10 seconds. But over 10 seconds 4 outta 5 ACs deliver the same level damage. that is just dumb to me.