424 replies to this topic

[Novawrecker]

Khobai, on 07 January 2014 - 11:43 AM, said:

Why would you want standard autocannons to be less appealing compared to ultra autocannons?

Not only this, but it would also nullify the argument of why the LB is the lackluster child compared to the AC10 as to not out class the AC by implementing the LB to handle both cluster and slug rounds.

Edited by Novawrecker, 07 January 2014 - 11:54 PM.

[Evil Ed]

I love the AC20-nerf, now it's so slow that I can fire, keep running and watch the round hit from the side. Very entertaining.

Edited by Evil Ed, 07 January 2014 - 11:59 PM.

[Cerberias]

Launching an ac20 round with an oversized ballista attached to your mech

Edited by Cerberias, 08 January 2014 - 12:05 AM.

[Sandpit]

So far, I like that adjustments. They don't make a huge difference at short ranges but those "sniper" shots from max ranges aren't nearly as fearsome at this point. Still withholding judgement but so far it's looking like I agree with the adjustment

[kapusta11]

The nerf is pretty meh but it shows that PGI have ho idea what they're doing thus it was not the last one. AC5s are next, mark my words.

[Khan Hallis]

Consider them marked. Hard to argue the point when it looks correct.

[Curccu]

Evil Ed, on 07 January 2014 - 11:59 PM, said:

I love the AC20-nerf, now it's so slow that I can fire, keep running and watch the round hit from the side. Very entertaining.

Like MechWarrior 2 PPC?

[Joseph Mallan]

Trauglodyte, on 07 January 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

The AC20 needed to be hammered. Now, it keeps people from using it as a sniper weapon. Yes, it can do more damage than the AC10 at the AC10's max effective range (why wasn't that freaking nerfed?) but good luck being accurate with it beyond 500ish meters.

I guess that they nuked the AC10 speed to keep people from using it like people were using the AC20. The AC2 and AC5 are, after all, designed to be THE long ranged ACs. The Gauss, though, poses a perplexing problem. It weighs 2.5x that of the AC2 and has only 8% less range but does 7.5x the damage of the AC2. So, if the GR is supposed to be the premiere sniping weapon, than what does that make the AC2?

Yeah cause nothing says light low caliber accurate weapon like a .50 Cal sniper rifle!

[ReXspec]

The fact that people are complaining about the AC 20 is truly curious... I've played TT and previous battletech games for years now. The weakness of the AC20 has ALWAYS been it's range.

When people complain about the AC-20 that tells me they either don't know how to steer clear of a target that is armed with the weapon that is not effective outside of a 350m range and that people do not know how to look at their target's load out to see how to best approach the 'mech they are targeting...

Seriously... God forbid people use their brain when engaging targets. Now we have to complain to a dev that is notorious for shotty-deliverence and balancing in all the wrong places?

Edited by ReXspec, 08 January 2014 - 04:44 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

You can nerf the range without affecting the velocity though.

[Voidsinger]

With the AC/20 they had only 2 real choices. Slow the round, or limit the carriers. I admit I'd rather they limited the mechs the AC/20 could be carried on. The AC/20 is just too darn common in gameplay given its overall role.

[ReXspec]

Joseph Mallan, on 08 January 2014 - 04:43 AM, said:

You can nerf the range without affecting the velocity though.

I can understand a nerf in velocity. With an AC-20, you are effectively firing a projectile the size of a car at another 'mech, but to nerf it's canon max damage range is a TERRIBLE idea.

[ReXspec]

Voidsinger, on 08 January 2014 - 04:44 AM, said:

With the AC/20 they had only 2 real choices. Slow the round, or limit the carriers. I admit I'd rather they limited the mechs the AC/20 could be carried on. The AC/20 is just too darn common in gameplay given its overall role.

The best way to pull that off is to borrow MW4's slot size system. With MWO, I notice that virtually every mech comes with hardpoint restrictions (as they should) but the number of slots available in each body part is virtually untouched.

[Joseph Mallan]

ReXspec, on 08 January 2014 - 04:47 AM, said:

I can understand a nerf in velocity. With an AC-20, you are effectively firing a projectile the size of a car at another 'mech, but to nerf it's canon max damage range is a TERRIBLE idea.

One ton divided by 7 (# of rounds per ton) means we are not firing a round the size of a car through an AC20. Its the size of a large man (285lbs per shell) which includes the casing and propellant.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 08 January 2014 - 04:52 AM.

[ReXspec]

Joseph Mallan, on 08 January 2014 - 04:51 AM, said:

One ton divided by 7 (# of rounds per ton) means we are not firing a round the size of a car through an AC20. Its the size of a large man (285lbs per shell) which includes the casing and propellant.

Source? lol

If you go on SARNA you can find projectile calibers that range from the 180mm - 203mm + http://www.sarna.net/wiki/AC-20

Meaning, that the ammo-per-ton should actually be five instead of seven because of the tremendous weight of the ammo.

Even if the projectiles are not the "size" of a car (arguing semantics here...) the weight is still consistent with that of an economy-sized vehicle.

Digressing aside, nerfing the range is still not justified. Nerfing the velocity, however, makes sense. Again, the AC-20 is a close range weapon. If you engage targets at the minimum damage ranges, you will do little more then scratch paint, and give the enemy pilot a serious case of the shakes.

Edited by ReXspec, 08 January 2014 - 05:00 AM.

[anonymous161]

Good wont see so many of those pansy ac40 jags

[Joseph Mallan]

ReXspec, on 08 January 2014 - 05:00 AM, said:

Source? lol

If you go on SARNA you can find projectile calibers that range from the 180mm - 203mm + http://www.sarna.net/wiki/AC-20

Meaning, that the ammo-per-ton should actually be five instead of seven because of the tremendous weight of the ammo.

Even if the projectiles are not the "size" of a car (arguing semantics here...) the weight is still consistent with that of an economy-sized vehicle.

Digressing aside, nerfing the range is still not justified. Nerfing the velocity, however, makes sense. Again, the AC-20 is a close range weapon. If you engage targets at the minimum damage ranges, you will do little more then scratch paint, and give the enemy pilot a serious case of the shakes.

Source is MW:O One ton of AC20 ammo provides 7 shots. we are not firing burst fire so each shell is 285 lbs per. Even at 5 shells per ton a 500 lbs shell is not the size of a car. A ton of ammo is the size of a car but each shell fired down range is not.

Don't care, unless you are a clown... you are not getting inside that shell!

[ReXspec]

Darth Bane001, on 08 January 2014 - 05:03 AM, said:

Good wont see so many of those pansy ac40 jags

I would hardly call and AC-40 Jag "pansy." Remember, he still has to close the distance to be effective...

On top of that, he is vulnerable because he is fairly slow, and is likely carrying his ammo in his under-armored legs. An AC-40 Jaegermech is a high-risk-high-reward gamble: If you can close the distance and take out foes quickly, you'll be fine. But if your opponent is smart and engages you at range, or takes out your ammo, you're screwed.

TL;DR - AC-40 Jaegermech is nothing but a noob-stomper.

[Ransack]

Used the 10 and 20 last night. No big deal to me, but it seems like the AC 20 damage is down a bit too. Still it's a helluva lot better than how they mangled the Gauss.

What's the next weapon that doesn't need to be adjusted that will be? My bet is that streaks are going to get another nerf.

These guys....

[ReXspec]

Joseph Mallan, on 08 January 2014 - 05:10 AM, said:

Source is MW:O One ton of AC20 ammo provides 7 shots. we are not firing burst fire so each shell is 285 lbs per. Even at 5 shells per ton a 500 lbs shell is not the size of a car. A ton of ammo is the size of a car but each shell fired down range is not.

Don't care, unless you are a clown... you are not getting inside that shell!

"500 lbs shell is not the size of a car"

Mass =/= size. Take this link for example:

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Economy_car

Yes, many of those cars are 500 pounds. And yet they are bigger then an Average AC-20 shell... why is that?

Well, again, as science tells us volume does not necessarily equal mass... an AC-20 shell holds heavier material in a much more compact space, but is, nonetheless, HUGE.

Besides, That picture looks awfully small for a 180mm shell... that looks more like a 150mm artillery round.

*EDIT*

Used a pic by mistake. I meant to use another pic in it's place, but I decided to use a link instead.

Edited by ReXspec, 08 January 2014 - 05:43 AM.