22 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

So not too long ago there was a thread about how lighter ballistics are practically worthless for Light mechs (outside the outlier that is the Ember). In that topic, I brought up a particular problem with the AC family, and that was that the ACs fulfill a very different role depending on the size rather than the whole family fulfilling a particular role but at different tonnages/ranges.

So I did some simple playing around with values and I came up with a set of values that keep the DPS of each weapon except for AC2 because they have always been boosted because they are near worthless (AC2 = 2 DPS, AC5 = 3 DPS, AC10 = 4 DPS).

Happy Medium Values

Spoiler

AC2

• Damage: 2 -> 5
  
• Heat: 1 -> 1.5
  
• Cooldown: 0.72 -> 2.5
  
• Ammo Per Ton: 75 -> 30
  
• Speed: 2000 -> 1050 (or 1150 if you hate weapons syncing that much)
  
• Ghost Heat Group: 0 -> New AC Group
  
• Ghost Heat Threshold: 3 -> 4
  
• Ghost Heat Multiplier: 1.67 -> 24

AC5

• Damage: 5 -> 10
  
• Heat: 1 -> 3
  
• Cooldown: 1.67 -> 3.33
  
• Ammo Per Ton: 30 -> 15
  
• Speed: 1150 -> 950
  
• Ghost Heat Group: * -> New AC Group
  
• Ghost Heat Threshold: 0 -> 2
  
• Ghost Heat Multiplier: 0 -> 24

AC10

• Damage: 10 -> 15
  
• Heat: 3 -> 4.5
  
• Cooldown: 2.5 -> 3.75
  
• Ammo Per Ton: 15 -> 10
  
• Speed: 950 -> 800
  
• Ghost Heat Group: * -> New AC Group
  
• Ghost Heat Threshold: 0 -> 2
  
• Ghost Heat Multiplier: 0 -> 24

EDIT: Removed the standardized recycle time values as they were a bit ridiculous, would require too much balance tweaking to actually get in a good area.

This would also require the all the other AC weapons to follow suit which wouldn't be a huge deal as the Clan ACs outside of the Dakkawolf and its dreaded screen shake, aren't impressive and the small LBX could use the pellet count boosts. The only weapon that would need a significant tweak is the IS UAC5 which would be absurdly powerful if the smaller ACs were changed in such a way. Thus why it would probably need to be changed to behave similar to the Clan UACs.


While it may not quite be as useful on light mechs since these ballistics would still require a serious tonnage investment, they would make it more plausible for the smaller mediums like the Blackjack with its quirks that are meant to take advantage of the smaller ACs as well as may require looking into as far the quirks for the Dakkarine and Dakkagon (DGN-1N or 5N in this case) go, but overall I think it would be a beneficial change for the standard ACs since it allows for more to room to deviate from when other ACs come down the timeline (RACs specifically).

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 11 November 2014 - 11:19 PM.

[Kassatsu]

What's what? A 10-12 damage AC5 on my Spider?

ANANSI

Now picture that doing 12 damage per shot. Who cares about the cooldown when you can do more damage than a current AC10 literally instantly and be gone before anyone even realizes what just stripped their rear CT?

Edited by Kassatsu, 11 November 2014 - 09:34 PM.

[FupDup]

These changes are pretty drastic, but not necessarily in a good way. For the most part we don't really need to reinvent the wheel, we just need some simple +/- stat changes here and there.

Also, why do you want all ACs to have the same role at different sizes? There's nothing problematic with them having their own special zone. It actually makes them easier to balance if anything (more distinctive pros/cons).


Specifically, for the AC/10, what it needs at the bare minimum is its old projectile speed restored or perhaps higher. Its old speed was 1100 m/s, so maybe set it to around 1200-1300 m/s because it was kind of mediocre even before the nerf. A slightly faster cooldown would be kewl too.

For the AC/5, I dunno what to do. On one hand it's great for mechs that can carry 3+ of them and/or combine them with other guns, but using only 1-2 doesn't feel very satisfying. It's a tough call to make whether to slightly buff it or leave it alone. Definitely doesn't need a nerf.


For the AC/2, we have two possible paths:

The easier and more obvious path is the rapid-fire suppression role that we used to have, before all the cooldown and heat nerfs. So, basically, restore the cooldown at least partially, and preferably also remove it from heat or at least reduce its penalty.

The less likely path would be to convert it into a slower cooldown but higher upfront damage "mini-sniper" cannon of sorts. It would probably have its damage set to approximately 4, with a cooldown of approximately 2 seconds, giving it 2.0 DPS (compared to current 2.78). Its projectile speed might be increased a bit to help it truly SNIPE things at ER Large Laser ranges. Ammo per ton would be reduced accordingly to preserve a damage per ammo ton of roughly 150 (give or take).

Edited by FupDup, 11 November 2014 - 09:38 PM.

[Mothykins]

Literally the major issue is the AC5 and the high heat on the ac2.

I had a huuuge speil on it. Can cross post.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

FupDup, on 11 November 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

Also, why do you want all ACs to have the same role at different sizes? There's nothing problematic with them having their own special zone. It actually makes them easier to balance if anything (more distinctive pros/cons).

The reason is simple, the other AC types will fulfill different roles. If we were to add all the different types of AC2s within canon, what real flavor would there be if the all do the same thing? You would have an LBX2 that only spits out 2 pellets, a UAC that fires 2 pellets in rapid succession (ironically doing the same damage), a RAC2 that does god only knows what, and a LAC2 which is an AC2 at a shorter range because it is lighter. There isn't much differences between those, especially considering all of them fire fast which will leave some severely invalidated. Where as you add some damage and increase the cooldown times, and suddenly the differences are a little more apparent. The LBX2 would fire 5 pellets, the UAC2 would fire 2 shots in rapid succession with the ability to double tap, the RAC2 could loads of bullets at a faster rate, the LAC2 could suffer a range and cooldown penalty to keep it more inline. The point being that the differences are more exaggerated.

This is partially the purpose for the proposed changes, and yes they are fairly drastic in some regards and would require severe ghost heat penalties to keep them in check, but it would definitely make the AC10 competitive with the Gauss for once (without quirks), which it hasn't been able to do since forever. One has an annoying charge mechanic and a slightly higher recycle but a much higher velocity, the other has no charge and a faster recycle but travels slow. Hell the 2 AC10, 4 ML K2 would actually be fearsome with either of these new values.

As for AC2 velocity, I only suggested what I did, because it should sync with the ERPPC to allow for AC2/ERPPC combos since they are a similar range profile. That is to say if the AC2 gets a buff, the ERPPC should too and currently the ERPPC still needs a buff imo to justify the outrageous heat (at least on the IS side) especially when the average range of engagement in competitive matches from what I've heard is around 400-500m.

The real problem comes from the possible PPC/AC5 combo which would probably be too powerful because the AC5 is just at a great tonnage so it should probably have a reduced FLD potential.

Edited by WM Quicksilver, 11 November 2014 - 09:58 PM.

[Lykaon]

FupDup, on 11 November 2014 - 09:35 PM, said:

These changes are pretty drastic, but not necessarily in a good way. For the most part we don't really need to reinvent the wheel, we just need some simple +/- stat changes here and there.

Also, why do you want all ACs to have the same role at different sizes? There's nothing problematic with them having their own special zone. It actually makes them easier to balance if anything (more distinctive pros/cons).


Specifically, for the AC/10, what it needs at the bare minimum is its old projectile speed restored or perhaps higher. Its old speed was 1100 m/s, so maybe set it to around 1200-1300 m/s because it was kind of mediocre even before the nerf. A slightly faster cooldown would be kewl too.

For the AC/5, I dunno what to do. On one hand it's great for mechs that can carry 3+ of them and/or combine them with other guns, but using only 1-2 doesn't feel very satisfying. It's a tough call to make whether to slightly buff it or leave it alone. Definitely doesn't need a nerf.


For the AC/2, we have two possible paths:

The easier and more obvious path is the rapid-fire suppression role that we used to have, before all the cooldown and heat nerfs. So, basically, restore the cooldown at least partially, and preferably also remove it from heat or at least reduce its penalty.

The less likely path would be to convert it into a slower cooldown but higher upfront damage "mini-sniper" cannon of sorts. It would probably have its damage set to approximately 4, with a cooldown of approximately 2 seconds, giving it 2.0 DPS (compared to current 2.78). Its projectile speed might be increased a bit to help it truly SNIPE things at ER Large Laser ranges. Ammo per ton would be reduced accordingly to preserve a damage per ammo ton of roughly 150 (give or take).

I am in agreement with you on this.

The AC2 would probably find it's role as a suppression fire weapon with a few minor tweaks to heat.

Another thing I would like to see is an LB10 X slug gun option similar to the clanners "placeholder" ACs.

I think it would be cool if we would have the option to mount a conventional canister shot LBx or a burst fire AC version of the LBX.

The AC10 has the front loaded pinpoint damage at the cost of 1 ton and 1 crit and higher heat while the LB10 X sluggun fires bursts yet has lower heat crits and tonnage.

[Vassago Rain]

No.

[The Basilisk]

Vassago Rain, on 12 November 2014 - 12:19 AM, said:

No.

nufsaid

[The Boz]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
No.

[Revorn]

Give me Back my AC2 Range.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

if this is about fixing ac2's then yes plx fix ac2's.

ac5's/ultra5's are plenty deadly and actually are part of the reason ac10's are useless.

ac20 is simply better then ac10's and ac5's ROF+range again makes them a better option then AC10's almost all the time.

why take a single ac10 when you can take 2 5's or a single ac20? and if you cant fit the 20 you just take a gauss.

the AC10 and AC2 are the most useless ballistics in the game even machine guns are better then them.

[The Boz]

AC10 could use a reduction in weight, and the AC2 could use a reduction in heat, but being on the weak side of the AC line doesn't mean a weapon is weak in absolute terms.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mellifluer, on 12 November 2014 - 01:41 AM, said:

if this is about fixing ac2's then yes plx fix ac2's.

ac5's/ultra5's are plenty deadly and actually are part of the reason ac10's are useless.

ac20 is simply better then ac10's and ac5's ROF+range again makes them a better option then AC10's almost all the time.

why take a single ac10 when you can take 2 5's or a single ac20? and if you cant fit the 20 you just take a gauss.

the AC10 and AC2 are the most useless ballistics in the game even machine guns are better then them.

AC5s are only useful when they support an alpha like when combined with PPCs, by themselves they aren't the greatest (but they aren't AC10 bad). No one complains about a 3 or 4 AC5 Jager over a Boomjager or Gaussjager for a reason. Gauss and AC20 are the best ballistics the IS has to offer, and it all centers around PPFLD. If you want fire suppression, cool that is what the UAC2 or RAC2 could be for, but I would love to see the other ACs be competitive on their own and fulfill a different role than that of fire suppression (this would be glorious for mediums) and this would be a way to go about it (with someway to keep them in check).

[Punk Oblivion]

As a long time ballistics user. I would have to say no to the OP. Though I agree the AC's need some tweeks.

I would say to fix the AC2. It needs to weight a ton less, have a bit of heat taken off of it. And add in some extra crit chance to internals. Maybe not as much as the machine gun or LBX. But maybe half or two-thirds of those weapons into the AC2.

The LBX 10 should fire at .5-.75 seconds faster than the standard AC10 and have a bit less range
The AC10 needs more projectile speed and a bit more range.
The AC20 should weigh 2 tons MORE

I am actually a fan of the AC10 and have had some ridiculous matches with it. I just think it looks bad compared to 3-4 (u)AC5's or an AC20. If you add a couple tons to the AC20, now all of a sudden that 10 looks way better haha.

[Ultimax]

I'm not sure how you came to the conclusion that ACs should be balanced around providing value to light mechs.


While there are some lore light mechs designed around them, they appear to be an exception to the rule.


Ballistics provide big bang at a very poor efficiency ratio with regards to their weight.



So I disagree with this proposal.

[Walluh]

Why would you ever want to raise the cooldown on ACs? Don't butcher the dakka, man.

And changing the base damage on autocannons is almost certainly going to get you a flat out no.

[Almond Brown]

If the AC2 weighed 5 tons they would scale better for a damage/weight ratio similar to the other 3.

Current ratio is W/D 6/2 (3) - 8/5 (1.6) (23%) - 12/10 (1.2) (15%) - 14/20 (.70) (16%)

with AC2 @5 tons it changes to W/D 5/2 (2.5) - 8/5 (1.6) (16%) - 12/10 (1.2) (15%) - 14/20 (.70) (16%)

noted % is ratio of change between 2-5-10-20 by weight

[terrycloth]

I'd suggest lowering AC/2 heat to half its current value, and reducing the AC/10's tonnage to 11 -- say it's a placeholder for an LBX firing solid slugs, instead of an actual obsolete old-school AC/10.

[LordKnightFandragon]

The Boz, on 12 November 2014 - 01:46 AM, said:

AC10 could use a reduction in weight, and the AC2 could use a reduction in heat, but being on the weak side of the AC line doesn't mean a weapon is weak in absolute terms.

If PGI starts messing with weapon weights and un-TT's them, then I want my 12dmg/13.5Heat C ERPPC

[The Boz]

LordKnightFandragon, on 12 November 2014 - 11:01 PM, said:

If PGI starts messing with weapon weights and un-TT's them...

...because totally that isn't what's been going on so far?