Jump to content

Ac20 Nerfed?


424 replies to this topic

#361 Myomes

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 318 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:44 PM

View PostRoland, on 08 January 2014 - 11:03 AM, said:


EVERY AUTOCANNON IN BATTLETECH FIRES A SINGLE SHELL.

None of the fluff matters. None of that is actually in the rules set.

Each Autocannon does all of its damage in a single shot. It doesn't matter what you actually imagine is taking place while rolling the dice and doing the calculations.. because from the perspective of the rules and balance, it is doing it as a single shot. There is no burst, there is no spread. One "hit".
it fires a single shell in terms of damage done. You may considers that "single" but the reality is, a burst fire like an M16 that is aimed at, and hits, a single location, is going to APPEAR like single shot with regard to damage, but that doesnt make it "single shot". All canonical source even state they are differing bore sizes firing different amounts of ammo.Here, have a burst fire AC http://youtu.be/WfH_fDH_zO4?t=2m4s In case you cant tell, the MWO forums are giving me glitchy message postings, with the formatting all screwed up. whats this

p> business about, and why is it only happening when I come here...

Edited by Myomes, 08 January 2014 - 01:45 PM.


#362 Victor Morson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 6,370 posts
  • LocationAnder's Moon

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:45 PM

View PostDeadlyFred, on 07 January 2014 - 10:11 AM, said:

It was effective, weapons in MWO are not allowed to be effective. Not sure why the AC/10 was included though. AC/20 and AC5/2 seem to be the popular choices.


Clearly, Paul got killed by an AC/10 and went mad screaming "NERF IT, NERF IT!" because otherwise there is absolutely no reason they'd nerf the AC/10 over buffing something like, oh I don't know, pulse lasers.

#363 Varent

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,393 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationWest Coast - United States

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:46 PM

View PostMyomes, on 08 January 2014 - 01:44 PM, said:

it fires a single shell in terms of damage done. You may considers that "single" but the reality is, a burst fire like an M16 that is aimed at, and hits, a single location, is going to APPEAR like single shot with regard to damage, but that doesnt make it "single shot". All canonical source even state they are differing bore sizes firing different amounts of ammo.Here, have a burst fire AC http://youtu.be/WfH_fDH_zO4?t=2m4s In case you cant tell, the MWO forums are giving me glitchy message postings, with the formatting all screwed up. whats this

p> business about, and why is it only happening when I come here...


This isnt TT. Its its own rendition of the game, Just as all other BT games have taken a unique feel this one is going this way.

#364 Victor Morson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 6,370 posts
  • LocationAnder's Moon

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:47 PM

View PostMyomes, on 08 January 2014 - 01:44 PM, said:

it fires a single shell in terms of damage done. You may considers that "single" but the reality is, a burst fire like an M16 that is aimed at, and hits, a single location, is going to APPEAR like single shot with regard to damage, but that doesnt make it "single shot". All canonical source even state they are differing bore sizes firing different amounts of ammo.Here, have a burst fire AC http://youtu.be/WfH_fDH_zO4?t=2m4s In case you cant tell, the MWO forums are giving me glitchy message postings, with the formatting all screwed up. whats this

p> business about, and why is it only happening when I come here...


Furthermore different brand weapons work differently, too. Meaning some AC/5s might be a single shot tank-shell and others might be a more rapid fire burst. This would have been an awesome way to include tons of weapons, including "equal but different" unlockables, if they had done anything with the IP. It's something we'd never seen in a MW game and would be a thousand times more awesome than that module system.

#365 Victor Morson

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • 6,370 posts
  • LocationAnder's Moon

Posted 08 January 2014 - 01:52 PM

View PostVarent, on 08 January 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:

This isnt TT. Its its own rendition of the game, Just as all other BT games have taken a unique feel this one is going this way.


While this is true, they could have done it like this, with the AC/5 example:

Scarborough Limited AC/5 (Default) - The typical AC/5 we have now
General Motors AC/5 (GXP) - A quick burst fire style AC/5 with a slightly lower refire
Quickscell AC/5 (GXP) - Fires even slower than the Scarborough Limited model, but higher velocity
Defiance AC/5 (MC) - Slightly faster refire than the Scarborough, slightly more damage, adds neat visual tracers

Etc, etc. This could have been a gold mine for PGI, added a ton of options, etc. The trick would be keeping the alternate versions that cost GXP or MC to unlock equal to the core version overall, but with different quirks that make it worth investing and tuning.

Instead we get people who can't even figure out how to buff a machine gun and spend time nerfing the AC/10 instead.

Edited by Victor Morson, 08 January 2014 - 01:53 PM.


#366 Myomes

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 318 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:03 PM

View PostAlex Warden, on 08 January 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:


long range harasser...see discussions from OBT early phase..it´s meanto to be a counter-sniper as i understand it (current MWO design, so spare me with "but TT" comments :P ) ...so surpressing snipers on their effective range is what an ac2 can easily do (screenshake, destroy a snipers aiming)
as for the 20: well i kinda get the tweak, bringing it more in line with short range... BUT... honestly it would have been way  enough to reduce the max range from X3 to X2 effective...
ac10 was perfectly fine imho...decent range, decent damage, nothing OP or UP ...ac10 did it´s job
the problem is that its a bad design. You can have screen shake and massive blinding or DPS, not both. They fire like RAC5's and do about as much damage when stacked. But from double the range.

#367 Sandpit

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 17,419 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:05 PM

View PostVictor Morson, on 08 January 2014 - 01:52 PM, said:

GXP or MC to unlock .

The problem with that is it's a VERY slippery slope to P2W.

#368 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 26,888 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:08 PM

View PostSandpit, on 08 January 2014 - 02:05 PM, said:

The problem with that is it's a VERY slippery slope to P2W.

It would basically be like hero mechs, but with weapons instead. As long as they had specific weaknesses to counteract their strengths, it would end up fine. That being said, I'd still personally prefer all of them to be somehow available for free (even if grindy).

Edited by FupDup, 08 January 2014 - 02:08 PM.


#369 Varent

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,393 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationWest Coast - United States

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:09 PM

View PostVictor Morson, on 08 January 2014 - 01:45 PM, said:


Clearly, Paul got killed by an AC/10 and went mad screaming "NERF IT, NERF IT!" because otherwise there is absolutely no reason they'd nerf the AC/10 over buffing something like, oh I don't know, pulse lasers.


AC10 was being used quite extensively in many jump sniping builds, as well the ac20, Changing them to a slower projectile speed takes away some of that and makes them more dedicated brawling weapons while keeping the other ac as long distance ones.

#370 Varent

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,393 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationWest Coast - United States

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:13 PM

View PostVictor Morson, on 08 January 2014 - 01:52 PM, said:


While this is true, they could have done it like this, with the AC/5 example:

Scarborough Limited AC/5 (Default) - The typical AC/5 we have now
General Motors AC/5 (GXP) - A quick burst fire style AC/5 with a slightly lower refire
Quickscell AC/5 (GXP) - Fires even slower than the Scarborough Limited model, but higher velocity
Defiance AC/5 (MC) - Slightly faster refire than the Scarborough, slightly more damage, adds neat visual tracers

Etc, etc. This could have been a gold mine for PGI, added a ton of options, etc. The trick would be keeping the alternate versions that cost GXP or MC to unlock equal to the core version overall, but with different quirks that make it worth investing and tuning.

Instead we get people who can't even figure out how to buff a machine gun and spend time nerfing the AC/10 instead.


View PostVarent, on 08 January 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:

THere is alot they could do for diversity. Personally I would love to see different manufactures of different AC. They have the manufactures listed in Sarna. Could make different ones have different CD. Perhaps slightly different heat, one a little bigger or smalller, more durable, less reliable... cost more cost less.... etc... etc... Would be neat, specially if they threw it into CW and made you rearm on planet only with what was available there.


THIS IS WHY THERE ARE TOO MANY THREADS!

#371 Strum Wealh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 5,025 posts
  • LocationPittsburgh, PA

Posted 08 January 2014 - 02:40 PM

View PostVictor Morson, on 08 January 2014 - 01:52 PM, said:

While this is true, they could have done it like this, with the AC/5 example:

Scarborough Limited AC/5 (Default) - The typical AC/5 we have now
General Motors AC/5 (GXP) - A quick burst fire style AC/5 with a slightly lower refire
Quickscell AC/5 (GXP) - Fires even slower than the Scarborough Limited model, but higher velocity
Defiance AC/5 (MC) - Slightly faster refire than the Scarborough, slightly more damage, adds neat visual tracers

Etc, etc. This could have been a gold mine for PGI, added a ton of options, etc. The trick would be keeping the alternate versions that cost GXP or MC to unlock equal to the core version overall, but with different quirks that make it worth investing and tuning.

Instead we get people who can't even figure out how to buff a machine gun and spend time nerfing the AC/10 instead.

Actually, that is along the lines of what PGI (specifically, Thomas Dziegielewski, whose profile lists him as "Senior Gameplay Engineer", "Weapon Systems Specialist", and "Auxiliary Systems Specialist" (though, I don't know whether either of those last two are actually PGI job titles)) has expressed interest in doing at some (as yet unspecified) point in the future. ;)

View PostThomas Dziegielewski, on 02 October 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

I think so not to throw off weapon balance initially the bonuses will have to be quite small.

1% damage boost
-5% range penalty
and the AC Bullet is tinted a bit blue
etc.

And to add to the RPG element it'd like to see, say if the manufacturer headquarters is located on a hot planet, the weapon by that manufacturer would reflect the need for a cooler running weapon by sacrificing some other stat.

View PostThomas Dziegielewski, on 30 September 2013 - 02:21 PM, said:

We're looking into this. To me, it's a must have.


#372 Strum Wealh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 5,025 posts
  • LocationPittsburgh, PA

Posted 08 January 2014 - 03:27 PM

View PostRoland, on 08 January 2014 - 11:03 AM, said:

EVERY AUTOCANNON IN BATTLETECH FIRES A SINGLE SHELL.

None of the fluff matters. None of that is actually in the rules set.

Each Autocannon does all of its damage in a single shot. It doesn't matter what you actually imagine is taking place while rolling the dice and doing the calculations.. because from the perspective of the rules and balance, it is doing it as a single shot. There is no burst, there is no spread. One "hit".

Actually, that ACs in battletech more-often-than-not fire in multi-shell bursts is in the BattleTech gameplay rules - specifically, it's on page 100 of Tactical Operations.
  • "Multiple Targets: Rather than firing at a single target, any type of autocannon can be 'walked' across two targets close to one another. An LB-X autocannon firing a cluster shot and Ultra and Rotary autocannons firing at multiple targets are a special case."
  • "Determine the to-hit number for both targets and make separate to-hit rolls against each target, using the higher (more difficult) of the to-hit numbers and adding a +1 modifier for firing at multiple targets with a single shot... if the to-hit roll succeeds, the target is struck by a single hit that inflicts damage equal to half the normal damage done by the weapon (rounded down)."
The ability to walk AC fire as described applies to all standard ACs, slug-firing LB-X ACs, all Light ACs (only available in LAC/2 and LAC/5 models, and not generally available until 3068), and Hypervelocity ACs (only available in HVAC/2, HVAC/5, and HVAC/10 models, and not available until 3059); the "basic gameplay rules" (found in Total Warfare) simply assume that all of the individual shells within a burst land in the same general location (e.g. if one shell in a three-shell burst hits the targeted 'Mech's thigh while the remaining two hit the targeted 'Mech's shin, all three shells have "hit the leg").

(The same arguably applies to the lasers as well (which don't have their own version of the Multiple Targets rule) - all of the damage being applied to one location operates on the assumption that the MechWarrior is simply able to keep most of the beam (or pulses, in the case of Pulse Lasers) in more-or-less the same general area; a Large Laser burning a scar along a targeted 'Mech's arm from a target's shoulder joint to the wrist joint is said to have "hit the arm" with the full beam, even though the end point may be several meters from the initial impact point.)

As noted previously, cluster-firing LB-X ACs, as well as Ultra ACs & Rotary ACs, follow special subsets of the Multiple Targets rule:
  • "For an LB-X autocannon firing a cluster shot, make a single to-hit roll against the highest to-hit number plus 1... if some of the damage missed the [first] target, use that 'missed' Damage Value as the new number to roll on the Cluster Hit Table to determine what damage struck the second target."
  • "For Ultra and Rotary autocannons, make a single to-hit roll against the highest to-hit number plus 1... if only one shot hit, it will strike one of the targets - determined at random - with a single shot that does full damage... If two, four or six shots hit, one, two or three shots will strike each target at full damage... if three or five shots hit, one or two shots will strike each target; randomly determine where the other shot lands."
The statements regarding UACs and RACs seem to imply that they may fire a single shell per unit of ammunition (e.g. one individual shell per unit in the "ammo per ton" counter) & that a single unit of LB-X cluster ammo corresponds to a single individual cluster shell (which, of course, contains a number of individual submunitions), but every other AC situation goes by the statement given in the novel The Sword and the Dagger (e.g. each unit in the "ammo per ton" counter represents a cassette/magazine containing multiple (usually 3-10, but sometimes as many as 100) individual shells).

"Ardan ran a hurried check on his Victor's main armament. The right arm Pontiac 100 autocannon had the best chance of scoring a crippling hit on the Thunderbolt, but he was afraid that his swim in the mud might have fouled its feed mechanism. The autocannon was a devastating weapon. It fired high-speed, rapid-fire streams of explosive, armor-piercing shells from cassettes or carousels fed into the gun one at a time by a complex and occasionally balky autoloader mechanism. Each cassette held 100 shells, and by a widespread but commonly accepted looseness of terminology, each cassette was itself considered to be one round. One cassette round was already loaded. Nineteen more were stored in the autoloader chamber high up in his Victor's right torso. He would have to use that single round carefully, because if the loader jammed, he would not get another chance." (The Sword and the Dagger, ch. 13; source)


Edited by Strum Wealh, 08 January 2014 - 03:42 PM.


#373 Gremlich Johns

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,855 posts
  • LocationMaryland, USA

Posted 08 January 2014 - 03:31 PM

You guys patched? LOLZ!

#374 Monky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 3,219 posts
  • LocationHypothetical Warrior

Posted 08 January 2014 - 03:51 PM

There is no way they are pre-nerfing the AC20/10 in preperation for clan gear.

I think they make mistakes balance wise frequently but they can't be dumb enough to not have the clan's weapons have their own projectile speed if that is what is needed.

#375 Amsro

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 3,441 posts
  • LocationCharging my Gauss Rifle

Posted 08 January 2014 - 03:56 PM

View PostGremlich Johns, on 08 January 2014 - 03:31 PM, said:

You guys patched? LOLZ!


Does that mean your uninstalling?

#376 SirLANsalot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,540 posts
  • LocationWashington State

Posted 08 January 2014 - 04:07 PM

View PostMonky, on 08 January 2014 - 03:51 PM, said:

There is no way they are pre-nerfing the AC20/10 in preperation for clan gear.

I think they make mistakes balance wise frequently but they can't be dumb enough to not have the clan's weapons have their own projectile speed if that is what is needed.


Might of be this reduction for either one of two things.

A: Clan weps have there own speeds, this then gives them more room to bring in some diversity.

B: This reduction was for the clan UAC10 and UAC20. With firing 2 shells a the old speed might of been a little too good. This reduction then would make sence making the UAC20 at least, a little bit of a diffrent beast with slower shells.



Either way, this isn't a nerf, noobcakes like to overreact like that. This is an adjustment, not a nerf. A nerf would of been a change to its Damage or RoF, which is a direct change to what the weapon is (aka a nerf). This didn't change what the weapon IS or what it DOSE, this was an adjustment to increase the skill needed to use these two guns at longer (out of optimal) ranges. Those that cannot understand that concept, need to be removed from this forum. As they will never have ANY constructive feedback on anything, because they cannot see what XX change would do, much less understand why said change was done. Doesn't matter if you have been in BT for 6 zillion years, if you cannot understand game development or understand game balance on an intuitive and mechanical level, then what good are you?

#377 Mister Blastman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 8,444 posts
  • LocationIn my Mech (Atlanta, GA)

Posted 08 January 2014 - 04:29 PM

View PostZensei, on 08 January 2014 - 04:24 PM, said:


I'm sorry, Come to your ELO? How do I do that? Do I have to get better or worse? Are you being ironic or egotistic?

Truthful and egotistic. When you get to the top you will know it.

#378 Scandinavian Jawbreaker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,251 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationFinland

Posted 08 January 2014 - 05:32 PM

View PostVoidsinger, on 07 January 2014 - 05:34 PM, said:

11 pages, and one person touched on my views.

A/C nerfing has only 3 options: Recharge, Heat, round speed.

How about 1) increasing cone of fire, 2) reducing significantly damage beyond max range.

#379 Solidussnake

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Undertaker
  • The Undertaker
  • 319 posts
  • LocationSC

Posted 08 January 2014 - 05:37 PM

Yet another fantastic example of PGI's complete inability to balance anything.

#380 Myomes

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 318 posts

Posted 08 January 2014 - 05:55 PM

View PostAmsro, on 08 January 2014 - 03:56 PM, said:

Does that mean your uninstalling?
you know what's funny? The amount of people uninstalling and trying to be vocal about it to prove to PGI they're making mistakes actually encouraged PGI to make a SUPER SERIOUS RULE in the forum rules about how you can't say you're uninstalling.





4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users