26 replies to this topic

[Charons Little Helper]

The AC2 was only borderline viable before the recent nerf. I can see why they wanted to lower the dps, but the AC2 has by far the worst heat of any ballistic - and is a tie (with the SRM2) for the least heat efficient weapon sans energy.

In addition, the 2 damage at a time means that the damage will be spread to some degree even with awesome aim. If the heat were cut in half, the AC2's heat would be in line with other ballistics.

The advantage would be high DPS for their weight, the disadvantages would be spread damage, no torso twisting while firing, and due to the spread damage, the ammo is in effect less efficient.

I still don't think that they'd be top tier, but they'd be solid middling range suppression and perhaps even brawler DPS if in the arm (as you could still torso twist some).

Edited by Egomane, 24 April 2014 - 05:47 AM.

[Onmyoudo]

Signed (because I just bought a BLR-1D and feel like I missed out).

[Joseph Mallan]

I have always scratched my head over the low damage COOL running AC2 OVERHEATING a Mech worse than the 6 times hotter AC20?

[Shlkt]

Joseph Mallan, on 24 April 2014 - 05:19 AM, said:

I have always scratched my head over the low damage COOL running AC2 OVERHEATING a Mech worse than the 6 times hotter AC20?

The correct way to evaluate the "hotness" of a weapon is to look at the ratio of damage to heat. The AC/20 yields 3.33 (average for an AC), while the AC/2 yields 2.0 (almost as hot as an energy weapon). The AC/2 is indeed quite hot compared to the other ACs.

ER PPC: 0.667
PPC: 1.0
Medium laser: 1.25
Small laser: 1.5
AC/2: 2.0
AC/20: 3.33
AC/5: 5.0

The AC/2, then, is 67% hotter than the AC/20 and 150% hotter than an AC/5.

On a fixed heat budget (btw: all mechs have a fixed heat budget, though it recharges) an AC/5 will do 650% more damage than an ER PPC. Machine guns and Gauss are even better, of course, but they're also a little gimmicky with other significant drawbacks.

On paper missiles appear deceptively cool compared to energy weapons, but you also have to consider the amount of damage delivered to the CT (or whatever component you're aiming for). If only 50% of your missiles are hitting the CT then it'll take twice as much heat to kill the enemy.

Edited by Shlkt, 24 April 2014 - 05:35 AM.

[Daekar]

Signed. This never made sense to me. I don't understand what advantages it has that they're trying to balance out now that it's been normalized. An AC that is too hot to be practical to fire between laser bursts is useless in most situations, in my opinion.

[MonkeyDCecil]

agreed time to low the heat and ghost heat.

[Charons Little Helper]

MonkeyDCecil, on 24 April 2014 - 05:47 AM, said:

agreed time to low the heat and ghost heat.

The ghost heat wouldn't actually bother me if they lowered the base heat. The penalty for AC2 penalty % isn't much until you get up to 6 or 8 - which is only possible if chain them try to game the AC2 for ultra-suppersion (likely with a macro) - and I don't really mind the ghost heat preventing that use of them.

With ghost heat at the current % - even 5 (the most I've ever seen - and only possible with a Jager DD - and not that great with current lower range) the heat would be 2.73 if the AC2's base heat were cut in half - putting it in line with other ballistics. (the ghost heat itself only 0.23) It'd be high enough to worry about a bit - but low enough to be viable.

Edited by Charons Little Helper, 24 April 2014 - 06:15 AM.

[Wildstreak]

The heat by itself is not the problem. I actually emailed Support about this last year.

The RoF affects heat. Even with the recent change, the AC/2 has a faster cooldown than the equal heat AC/5. This results in more AC/2 firings over the same time period so the heat builds up faster than the AC/5 making the AC/5 look better. If you equalize the RoF, they would have the same result to your heat scale but then new complaints would show up.

The faster RoF I am guessing is to compensate for the AC/2 doing less damage for the same heat as the AC/5 but that builds up heat over time. PGI pretty much told me they would not fix this given that if the AC/2 had the same effect on the heat scale as the AC/5 then no one would use the AC/5 and this is true. Why take an 8 ton AC over a 6 ton AC when both produce the same heat? Doesn't matter the AC/5 does more damage, the AC/2 can save tonnage and you could pack more in.

Cutting AC/2 heat is not that simple. Lower the heat with zero change in RoF and the AC/5 will become meaningless then we have a whole new complaint.

[Charons Little Helper]

Merchant, on 24 April 2014 - 06:24 AM, said:

Why take an 8 ton AC over a 6 ton AC when both produce the same heat?

Because it concentrates damage more, gives you more upfront damage, and now has slightly better range. (even cut in half - the AC2 would still have slightly higher heat) The AC2 simply isn't viable for poptarts or hill-humpers either.

By that logic - absolutely no one should be using the PPC instead of the ERLL. The ERLL is more heat efficient, more damage efficient (higher damage to tonnage ratio), longer ranged, and has no min range.

Yet - for some reason - the PPC is the more popular of the two. Go figure.

[DONTOR]

Yep if your going to make the DPS equal to the AC5 its time to lower the heat. The downside to its higher DPS was the higher heat now the DPS is normalized, so bring the heat inline.

[Almond Brown]

With the current Meta a mix build, with Ballistics as the LOW heat add on, it doesn't seem that lowering the AC2's heat would be a good option really.

Not many really like the current Meta anyways (other than the min/max'rs) so how about we get PGI to raise the Heat on the other Ballistics (AC5/AC10) to match or have more parady with the others (AC2/AC20) and see how the Meta holds up against that.

Ballistics lack of Heat, although canon based, is killing Energy use and that is a shame.

Charons Little Helper, on 24 April 2014 - 06:56 AM, said:

stuff

Yet - for some reason - the PPC is the more popular of the two. Go figure.

Pinpoint vs DoT is why the PPC, despite the drawback, sees more use.

Damage vs Logic, same deal.

Edited by Almond Brown, 24 April 2014 - 07:09 AM.

[Charons Little Helper]

Almond Brown, on 24 April 2014 - 07:06 AM, said:

With the current Meta a mix build, with Ballistics as the LOW heat add on, it doesn't seem that lowering the AC2's heat would be a good option really.

Not many really likes the current Meta anyways (other than the min/max'rs) so how about we get PGI to raise the Heat on the other Ballistics (AC5/AC10) to match or have more parady with the others (AC2/AC20) and see how the Meta holds up against that.

Ballistics lack of Heat, although canon based, is killing Energy use and that is a shame.

Most of the best builds are a mix of Energy & ballistics. I don't see how that's killing energy use. (and smaller mechs are generally use energy only)

If SRMs are finally fixed next week - the missile/energy builds will also be viable. (LRMs are decent niche builds since the speed buff.)

(also of note - the AC10 & AC20 are the same heat to damage ratio - with AC5/LB10 a notch better - the AC2 much worse)

[FupDup]

Merchant, on 24 April 2014 - 06:24 AM, said:

Why take an 8 ton AC over a 6 ton AC when both produce the same heat? Doesn't matter the AC/5 does more damage, the AC/2 can save tonnage and you could pack more in.

How can you not see the benefit of having a 2.5 times strong alpha strike?

[Charons Little Helper]

Almond Brown, on 24 April 2014 - 07:08 AM, said:

Pinpoint vs DoT is why the PPC, despite the drawback, sees more use.

That was my point exactly. The AC2 - while technically pinpoint - in effect fires a stream of 2 point bullets - spreading around the damage.

[DONTOR]

Charons Little Helper, on 24 April 2014 - 07:13 AM, said:

(also of note - the AC10 & AC20 are the same heat to damage ratio - with AC5/LB10 a notch better - the AC2 much worse)

So much this, except now the AC2 has less range than an AC5 also. So basically all AC weapons are normalized, tonnage vs heat vs DPS... except the hot AC2

[Charons Little Helper]

Merchant, on 24 April 2014 - 06:24 AM, said:

If you equalize the RoF, they would have the same result to your heat scale but then new complaints would show up.

If all ACs had the same RoF - then all but the AC20 would suddenly suck. A lot.

Merchant, on 24 April 2014 - 06:24 AM, said:

The heat by itself is not the problem. I actually emailed Support about this last year.

The heat of any weapon itself is never an issue. It's the heat to damage ratio.(as described by Shlkt - though I tend to figure it out the other way around - with low numbers being superior)

[Graugger]

Lower AC/2 heat you ask? ---- No, it needs increased.

[Charons Little Helper]

Graugger, on 24 April 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

Lower AC/2 heat you ask? ---- No, it needs increased.

What? With what reasoning? It's already more than 3 times the heat ratio of any other ballistic.

[DONTOR]

Graugger, on 24 April 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

Lower AC/2 heat you ask? ---- No, it needs increased.

looks like a sarcastic post to me.

[Charons Little Helper]

DONTOR, on 24 April 2014 - 02:09 PM, said:

looks like a sarcastic post to me.

Quite possibly - it's hard to tell with text unless it's super obvious. (I'll sometimes even put "*insert sarcasm here*" in there to prevent misunderstanding. )