28 replies to this topic

[El Bandito]

Currently it is like this.

AC/20 5.00 DPS 1.50 HPS
AC/10 4.00 DPS 1.20 HPS
AC/5_ 3.01 DPS 0.60 HPS
AC/2_ 2.78 DPS 1.39 HPS

Should be more like this.

AC/20 5.00 DPS 1.50 HPS
AC/10 4.00 DPS 1.20 HPS
AC/5_ 3.01 DPS 0.90 HPS
AC/2_ 2.78 DPS 0.85 HPS (+0.18 GH for quad AC2, +0.45 GH for penta AC2, from Smurfy)

AC2 impulse should be lowered from 0.38 to 0.28 just so people won't cry too much about the shakes, but I really liked AC2 as suppression weapon.

Discuss.

Edited by El Bandito, 20 July 2014 - 08:22 PM.

[FupDup]

I've never really been a fan of "normalizing" things, because much of the time the end resulting values aren't as balanced as they appear "on paper." The most infamous example of this is the original Pulse Laser normalization pass, and we all know how that turned out... I believe in balancing each individual weapon as a piece of the whole puzzle, rather than trying to balance them as "families."


For this specific suggestion, the AC/2 heat reduction would be nice but not really that tangible in real gameplay. The weapon's real weaknesses are spreading damage all over and not doing much damage overall, not heat (which can be dealt with by simply easing off the trigger for a few moments). The AC/5 heat increase doesn't seem necessary. Yes, builds using 2 PPCs and 2 [U]AC/5 are an annoying meta scum, and I hate their guts, but builds using [U]AC/5 without PPCs are not meta and probably don't need this.

Memory lane time: I drove a LL + AC/5 + 3 SSRM2 Shadow Hawk once, and I pretty much couldn't stand how that cannon on my shoulder felt like it was firing wet noodles at my targets (and this was with their old cooldown value, prior to the RoF nerf). I ended up replacing it with an AC/10 and a ML (in addition to the 3 Streaks), which still wasn't that good but at least it had more of a kappow factor...


EDIT: As for reducing AC/2 impulse, I'd exchange that for some sort of RoF buff. The screen shake is what caused PGI to add the gun to ghost heat in the first place, after all.

Edited by FupDup, 20 July 2014 - 08:24 PM.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Seems like a fine plan to me.

[Quizzical Coconut]

I'd put the damage/heat advantage in favor of the closer ranged weapons to promote brawling.

[Postumus]

Basically what the OP is saying is that the AC/2 sucks again. And it does, because the only thing it had going for it was good DPS from high rate of fire. Now the ROF has been more or less rolled back, but it still has crazy high HPS.

This weapon needs a serious rework if it is ever going to be useful. First, because it does low damage per shot, you have to expose your mech for long periods of time in order to do any meaningful amount of damage to the enemy, where all of the other autocannons allow you to take a shot and then find cover during the cooldown.

The one thing that can mitigate this exposure is firing at long range, which is technically what this gun is supposed to be all about - it is the longest ranged weapon in the game. The problem is that the gun, while having high velocity for an autocannon, still isn't fast enough or accurate enough for consistent, targeted shooting at the kind of range that would allow you to avoid most enemy fire, especially LRMs. I suspect that if you took the AC/2, lowered its HPS, and upped the velocity/lowered the bullet drop, it would find it's niche as a constant damage sniper weapon.

What would be even better is if the new targeting computers came with a lead indicator for targets close to max range (1000m+).

[El Bandito]

Quizzical Coconut, on 20 July 2014 - 08:36 PM, said:

I'd put the damage/heat advantage in favor of the closer ranged weapons to promote brawling.

The larger ACs already have the advantage of bigger front loaded damage.

[FupDup]

Postumus, on 20 July 2014 - 08:38 PM, said:

Basically what the OP is saying is that the AC/2 sucks again. And it does, because the only thing it had going for it was good DPS from high rate of fire. Now the ROF has been more or less rolled back, but it still has crazy high HPS.

This weapon needs a serious rework if it is ever going to be useful. First, because it does low damage per shot, you have to expose your mech for long periods of time in order to do any meaningful amount of damage to the enemy, where all of the other autocannons allow you to take a shot and then find cover during the cooldown.

The one thing that can mitigate this exposure is firing at long range, which is technically what this gun is supposed to be all about - it is the longest ranged weapon in the game. The problem is that the gun, while having high velocity for an autocannon, still isn't fast enough or accurate enough for consistent, targeted shooting at the kind of range that would allow you to avoid most enemy fire, especially LRMs. I suspect that if you took the AC/2, lowered its HPS, and upped the velocity/lowered the bullet drop, it would find it's niche as a constant damage sniper weapon.

What would be even better is if the new targeting computers came with a lead indicator for targets close to max range (1000m+).

Personally, what I might do to rebuild the AC/2 from the ground up would be:

+ Increase damage per shot to ~3.5
+ Increase projectile velocity by some amount, probably at least +300 m/s
+ Perhaps even boost the overall range of the gun by some amount
- Reduce cooldown time to ~1.75 seconds (~2.0 DPS)
- Reduce ammo per ton to ~42 shots (~147 damage per ton)

The end results would be higher upfront damage and projectile speeds helping at extreme ranges, while a reduced cooltime time reduces its effectiveness in closer ranges. Even with the ammo reduction, its slow RoF would make it highly ammo and heat efficient (meaning you wouldn't need as much ammo or as many heatsinks to use AC/2s). Paul could also be happy that he finally normalized the DPS of all the ACs!

Edited by FupDup, 20 July 2014 - 08:44 PM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

I'd like to consider a bursting mechanic.

6.0 Damage (number of projectiles to vary between regular, LB-X, and Ultra)
1.0 Heat
2.00 Cooldown
3.00 DPS
0.50 HPS
150 Damage per Ton (projectile counts to vary between regular, LB-X, and Ultra)

[Sephlock]

El Bandito, on 20 July 2014 - 08:16 PM, said:

Currently it is like this.

AC/20 5.00 DPS 1.50 HPS
AC/10 4.00 DPS 1.20 HPS
AC/5_ 3.01 DPS 0.60 HPS
AC/2_ 2.78 DPS 1.39 HPS

Should be more like this.

AC/20 5.00 DPS 1.50 HPS
AC/10 4.00 DPS 1.20 HPS
AC/5_ 3.01 DPS 0.90 HPS
AC/2_ 2.78 DPS 0.85 HPS (+0.18 GH for quad AC2, +0.45 GH for penta AC2, from Smurfy)

AC2 impulse should be lowered from 0.38 to 0.28 just so people won't cry too much about the shakes, but I really liked AC2 as suppression weapon.

Discuss.

DON;T USE THAT WORD!

"Normalize" doesn't mean the same thing to PGI as it does to you and I...

I'm still mourning IS pulse lasers... just when I thought they couldn't get any worse (did they really need ghost heat? Really?), they got "normalized".

[El Bandito]

FupDup, on 20 July 2014 - 08:23 PM, said:

I've never really been a fan of "normalizing" things, because much of the time the end resulting values aren't as balanced as they appear "on paper." The most infamous example of this is the original Pulse Laser normalization pass, and we all know how that turned out...

There are ways to normalize the Pulse family using PGI's damage and heat ratio. If I am allowed to try my hands, here is how I would have normalized the Pulse family. Note that I am being very conservative in the numbers change--I just want you guys to see the direction where I am heading. The numbers probably need even more tweaking to make the Pulse family worth it.

Current value:

LPL Damage--10.6 Heat--8.00 Cooldown--3.25 DPS--2.75 HPS--2.08 DPS to HPS ratio--1.32
MPL Damage--6.00 Heat--4.60 Cooldown--3.00 DPS--1.67 HPS--1.28 DPS to HPS ratio--1.3
SPL Damage--3.40 Heat--2.40 Cooldown--2.25 DPS--1.24 HPS--0.87 DPS to HPS ratio--1.42

LPL to MPL to SPL damage ratio is roughly 1.77. So we can take that as a base. All I am gonna do here is to increase damage of Pulse family slightly and reduce the cooldown time of all sizes by 0.5 second. Heat stays the same.

Here is my normalization:

LPL Damage--12.0 Heat--8.00 Cooldown--2.75 DPS--3.58 HPS--2.39 DPS to HPS ratio--1.5
MPL Damage--6.80 Heat--4.60 Cooldown--2.50 DPS--2.19 HPS--1.48 DPS to HPS ratio--1.48
SPL Damage--3.85 Heat--2.40 Cooldown--1.75 DPS--1.64 HPS--1.02 DPS to HPS ratio--1.61

The new DPS to old DPS ratio is roughly 1.3 for all pulse lasers. HPS has also been increased due to faster cooldown. DPS to HPS ratio is slightly higher due to the small increase of damage value. However, since a lot of the actual DPS increase went to the cooldown reduction, one volley will not have too much damage difference. One must stay in range and fire constantly to see the difference. Through this change, Pulse family is now even more of an infighting weapon compared to regular lasers. Naturally one must watch the heat gauge even more.

TLDR: No matter how long PGI beats around the bush, there must be even more DPS to the Pulse family to offset the extra weight and shorter range, thus defining its role even further. By using cooldown reduction method, one can still effectively increase the DPS without raising the damage value too much.

Edited by El Bandito, 21 July 2014 - 05:18 AM.

[AllSystemsNominal]

FupDup, on 20 July 2014 - 08:23 PM, said:

I've never really been a fan of "normalizing" things, because much of the time the end resulting values aren't as balanced as they appear "on paper." The most infamous example of this is the original Pulse Laser normalization pass, and we all know how that turned out... I believe in balancing each individual weapon as a piece of the whole puzzle, rather than trying to balance them as "families."


For this specific suggestion, the AC/2 heat reduction would be nice but not really that tangible in real gameplay. The weapon's real weaknesses are spreading damage all over and not doing much damage overall, not heat (which can be dealt with by simply easing off the trigger for a few moments). The AC/5 heat increase doesn't seem necessary. Yes, builds using 2 PPCs and 2 [U]AC/5 are an annoying meta scum, and I hate their guts, but builds using [U]AC/5 without PPCs are not meta and probably don't need this.

Memory lane time: I drove a LL + AC/5 + 3 SSRM2 Shadow Hawk once, and I pretty much couldn't stand how that cannon on my shoulder felt like it was firing wet noodles at my targets (and this was with their old cooldown value, prior to the RoF nerf). I ended up replacing it with an AC/10 and a ML (in addition to the 3 Streaks), which still wasn't that good but at least it had more of a kappow factor...


EDIT: As for reducing AC/2 impulse, I'd exchange that for some sort of RoF buff. The screen shake is what caused PGI to add the gun to ghost heat in the first place, after all.

I agree. Furthermore I don't think TT purity is necessary. This is an online PVP game and balance is important, being 'based on' is fine to me.

[El Bandito]

AllSystemsNominal, on 21 July 2014 - 07:10 AM, said:

I agree. Furthermore I don't think TT purity is necessary. This is an online PVP game and balance is important, being 'based on' is fine to me.

Oh I agree. I would even go as far as telling PGI to incorporate weight changes for balancing, TT be damned. PGI is trying make pulse lasers balanced to their regular counterparts while blatantly disregarding the fact that two of the pulse family have double the weight when compared to regular lasers.

Edited by El Bandito, 21 July 2014 - 02:19 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

HPS=Heat Per Second?

DPS isn't what I am worried about with IS ACs. When I hit you I do 2/5/10/20 damage, what that divides out to don't mean a thing to me.

[Navy Sixes]

AC/2 is garbage, now. Another, "Why are these even in the game, again?" weapon. AC/5 is the smallest reasonable ballistic option.

Put the AC/2's back the way they were...

GIMME BACK MY BULLETS!!!!

[Scratx]

*cough* Excuse me, but... normalize? Like the pulse lasers? I don't think you want Paul to go do that. He won't just normalize heat, you know......

[El Bandito]

Scratx, on 21 July 2014 - 02:36 PM, said:

*cough* Excuse me, but... normalize? Like the pulse lasers? I don't think you want Paul to go do that. He won't just normalize heat, you know......

But normalizing a viable Pulse laser can work using PGI's formula, as I had explained in my 3rd post. Yes, Paul is not a competent balancing director, but the normalizing method itself can work. That's why I proposed it, instead of suggesting PGI to remove the GH from AC2s. Cause GH is here to stay, Blake be damned.

Joseph Mallan, on 21 July 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

HPS=Heat Per Second?

DPS isn't what I am worried about with IS ACs. When I hit you I do 2/5/10/20 damage, what that divides out to don't mean a thing to me.

Yes, it is heat per second. Mostly I am trying to save yet another weapon from fading to obscurity. DPS might not worry you, but I am worried about the duration where I can press the fire button and keep my finger there--for AC2s. The amount of time I can dakka non-stop directly correlates to the amount of fun I can have.

Edited by El Bandito, 21 July 2014 - 03:04 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Ok. Thanks.

Only problem I have with ACs at all is the Ghost Heat on 2+. It took a perfectly good build and made it... manageable.

Yes I like the Jager40! Hits as hard as a TT AC20 for double the weight and ammo!

[Y E O N N E]

FupDup, on 20 July 2014 - 08:23 PM, said:

EDIT: As for reducing AC/2 impulse, I'd exchange that for some sort of RoF buff. The screen shake is what caused PGI to add the gun to ghost heat in the first place, after all.

This, please. AC/2 have been pretty terrible since the RoF got nerfed with the Clan drop. They aren't even good at keeping heads down or running quad-mount ambush Jagers anymore.

[El Bandito]

Yeonne Greene, on 21 July 2014 - 02:50 PM, said:

This, please. AC/2 have been pretty terrible since the RoF got nerfed with the Clan drop. They aren't even good at keeping heads down or running quad-mount ambush Jagers anymore.

RoF buff will mean the DPS of AC2 will surpass that of AC5. Plenty of people will cry about that, just as they cried about it before. Do not forget, AC2 used to have very strong DPS per tonnage among AC family and there were plenty of posts complaining just that.

If PGI increases the RoF for AC2, they will have to decrease the damage to compensate, or people will cry.

Edited by El Bandito, 21 July 2014 - 02:58 PM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Joseph Mallan, on 21 July 2014 - 02:22 PM, said:

HPS=Heat Per Second?

DPS isn't what I am worried about with IS ACs. When I hit you I do 2/5/10/20 damage, what that divides out to don't mean a thing to me.

Yeah the main thing for AC/2s is that they need both ammo and heatsinks compared to AC/5s, then get hit hard by Heat Scale Penalties, so building on my crazy thought, that I posted earlier of raising them to 6 damage, this is what I was thinking:

With each at 6 damage, 3.00 DPS, 2 second cooldown and 1 Heat; their bursts could be:

C-LB2-X AC

3 groups of 2 pellets, 1 damage each pellet

C-UAC/2

6 projectiles, 1 damage each projectile

IS-AC/2

4 projectiles, 1.5 damage each projectile