85 replies to this topic

[Duke Nedo]

I think I have a good solution for this one:

- Cooldown = 0.6s
- Then for ALL weapons in the main engine: Actual cooldown = (cooldown < 0.52) ? 0.52 : cooldown

That means, cooldown starts at 0.6s and if you mod it below 0.52s it remains 0.52s, so whatever you do to mod it lower is wasted modules/quirks.

Then make sure that any specific AC/2 quirks are not always wasted. You can still quirk cooldown up to ~13%, and in that case use weapon modules for other weapons, or just make sure that any specific AC/2 quirks are for velocity, heat, range etc.

[Escef]

FupDup, on 12 January 2015 - 10:41 AM, said:

If we absolutely had to, something like 3.5 damage with 1.75s cooldown (still 2.0 DPS) might be workable. Ammo per ton adjusted accordingly to 42. I'm just trying to make the gun actually threatening at long range, because a gun can only be good for long range combat if it does more than just tickle...

Or we could just bump the range a little and call it done. We're already looking at 2.78 DPS, with a comically small ghost heat penalty. Maybe drop impulse a little.

[AssaultPig]

AC2s are worse than AC5s in terms of both heat per second and damage per heat. As long as that's the case they will not be worth using. Even their small edges in DPS per ton and slot size become disadvantages once their heatsink needs are factored in.

They were already a marginal weapon compared to AC5s before the recent 'balancing,' but at least they had meaningfully higher DPS and a useful range advantage.

Their ghost heat should be removed; AC2s are plenty hot enough and it causes problems with quirks and stagger fire. Hardly any mechs can use more than three anyway so this is unlikely to be a big deal. After that, they should get some of their range advantage back (something like the 810/1620 ERPPC range band), and maybe a slight increase in ammo per tonnage or something.

[FupDup]

Escef, on 12 January 2015 - 10:59 AM, said:

Or we could just bump the range a little and call it done. We're already looking at 2.78 DPS, with a comically small ghost heat penalty. Maybe drop impulse a little.

Being able to do damage 9001 meters away isn't sufficient for a gun to be good. You have to be able to actually inflict significant damage from that far to be good.

Simply tickling somebody isn't useful.




And why nerf the impulse if it still fires relatively slow? I'd understand that with a faster RoF so that people don't get complain about being cockpit-shaken, but with the current RoF? No.

Edited by FupDup, 12 January 2015 - 11:10 AM.

[Escef]

FupDup, on 12 January 2015 - 11:03 AM, said:

Being able to do damage 9001 meters away isn't sufficient for a gun to be good. You have to be able to actually inflict significant damage from that far to be good.

Simply tickling somebody isn't useful.

And why nerf the impulse if it still fires relatively slow? I'd understand that with a faster RoF so that derps don't get cockpit-shaked, but with the current RoF? No.

The problem I see with your point of view is that you are only considering the weapon singly, for the most part.

THIS is doing a sustained 7.08 DPS at 720 meters, 8.33 DPS if you ignore heat and just hold the trigger. (And you will overheat and shut down after firing your last AC2 round if you just stand there firing.)

The ghost heat penalty is tiny, but by lowering impulse I'm addressing the real reason why the AC2 got nerfed: 4-6xAC2 macro'd for sustained rapid fire. Another possible fix is shrinking the size of the AC2 explosion. People were getting bounced around and couldn't see, that's why we have ghost heat and lower RoF on the weapon.

The AC2 was NEVER made to do significant damage, so your idea that it should is flawed from its inception. If you want a long range gun that will do significant damage get a Gauss. If you want to "tickle" someone at range, use a single AC2. If you want to DPS the crap out of someone at range than load up multiple light ACs.

Edited by Escef, 12 January 2015 - 11:22 AM.

[Roadkill]

If they'd just put in the missing AC/2 cooldown module it'd be fine.

[wanderer]

AC/2 occupy the bottom of the "big ballistic" list in many ways.

1) Reduce impulse. Seriously. People don't mount one AC/2 generally, it's 2 or more and rattlerattlerattlerattlesmoke.
2) Give ghost heat the heave-ho. See above, it's pretty much a given to see 2+ mounted and the ROF just turns AC/2's into an overheat generator. If you REALLY are that torqued, up the heat a bit.
3) Give ballistic hardpoints something in the spot between the MG and AC/2's. Add the L/M/H Rifles and halve the armor damage penalty, as armor is doubled in MWO anyway.

I used to like AC/2's. They were fun for suppressive fire, poking, what had you. Now, they're heat-hogs firing spitwads.

[Escef]

Roadkill, on 12 January 2015 - 11:26 AM, said:

If they'd just put in the missing AC/2 cooldown module it'd be fine.

I'd be just as happy with that.

[Tidy]

In a fantasy, ac2 @ 2 tons same everything else but locked to lights(maybe mediums if doomcrow got deleted)
Sick of machine guns or a comedy ac2 with 1 or maybe 2 tons ammo.

[Duke Nedo]

If 3x AC/2 are not better than 2x AC/5 there is no point ever using them... so imo just lower the cooldown on AC/2 a bit and hard code that cooldown can never go below 0.52s ever and give us AC/2 cooldown module. That probably would make them somewhat viable.

Or... do something crazy like making AC/2 the cool option by reducing heat by a lot and give it to AC/5's. I can hear the outrage, but anyways... sort of could make some sense.

[Bishop Steiner]

Duke Nedo, on 12 January 2015 - 11:31 AM, said:

If 3x AC/2 are not better than 2x AC/5 there is no point ever using them... so imo just lower the cooldown on AC/2 a bit and hard code that cooldown can never go below 0.52s ever and give us AC/2 cooldown module. That probably would make them somewhat viable.

Or... do something crazy like making AC/2 the cool option by reducing heat by a lot and give it to AC/5's. I can hear the outrage, but anyways... sort of could make some sense.

or use them for what they are meant for? AC5 are a mid-long range weapon, ac2s an extreme long range.

Build their functionality around their intent.

[ToxinTractor]

Kinda get the feeling they should improve the AC2s ability to hit targets at range consistently and maybe increase its ammo per ton. Right now (Some of) the issues is it either runs out of ammo and doesnt justify the use of a 6 ton weapon, or if it has too much ammo youll never even come close to firing off that many shells unless you boat them. And we all know the issues around that.

Heck some maps also dont really favor the AC2s ability to suppress either since the only thing that scares people is a hit from a large weapon.

Not sure what I lean towards out side of increasing its ammo per ton though..

[Duke Nedo]

Bishop Steiner, on 12 January 2015 - 11:32 AM, said:

or use them for what they are meant for? AC5 are a mid-long range weapon, ac2s an extreme long range.

Build their functionality around their intent.

...but as long as the AC/5 are near Gauss in range (not max range though)... that niche for AC/2 is tiny....

Edited by Duke Nedo, 12 January 2015 - 11:36 AM.

[AssaultPig]

Escef, on 12 January 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

The problem I see with your point of view is that you are only considering the weapon singly, for the most part.

THIS is doing a sustained 7.08 DPS at 720 meters, 8.33 DPS if you ignore heat and just hold the trigger. (And you will overheat and shut down after firing your last AC2 round if you just stand there firing.)

The ghost heat penalty is tiny, but by lowering impulse I'm addressing the real reason why the AC2 got nerfed: 4-6xAC2 macro'd for sustained rapid fire. Another possible fix is shrinking the size of the AC2 explosion. People were getting bounced around and couldn't see, that's why we have ghost heat and lower RoF on the weapon.

The AC2 was NEVER made to do significant damage, so your idea that it should is flawed from its inception. If you want a long range gun that will do significant damage get a Gauss. If you want to "tickle" someone at range, use a single AC2. If you want to DPS the crap out of someone at range than load up multiple light ACs.

This is really the only edge case where you can make an argument for AC2s: chassis with three ballistic hardpoints that can fit three AC2s but only two AC5s. But even in the case of your BLR-1D, replacing one AC2 with an AC5 and stripping out two heat sinks (to even out the tonnage) will result in a build that does more DPS at basically the same range, for less heat.

[FupDup]

Escef, on 12 January 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

The problem I see with your point of view is that you are only considering the weapon singly, for the most part.

THIS is doing a sustained 7.08 DPS at 720 meters, 8.33 DPS if you ignore heat and just hold the trigger. (And you will overheat and shut down after firing your last AC2 round if you just stand there firing.)

I don't see anything particularly powerful or exceptional about that build.

Escef, on 12 January 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

The ghost heat penalty is tiny, but by lowering impulse I'm addressing the real reason why the AC2 got nerfed: 4-6xAC2 macro'd for sustained rapid fire. Another possible fix is shrinking the size of the AC2 explosion. People were getting bounced around and couldn't see, that's why we have ghost heat and lower RoF on the weapon.

If there was some kind of actual counter-buff at the same time as reducing the shake, that would be fine. But reducing the shake without any significant buff would just make the gun even more sad. No, making it have 9001 meters (exaggeration) of range isn't that great of a buff, and it probably wouldn't make people use it or make it worth 6+ tons (ammo considered).

Escef, on 12 January 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

The AC2 was NEVER made to do significant damage, so your idea that it should is flawed from its inception. If you want a long range gun that will do significant damage get a Gauss. If you want to "tickle" someone at range, use a single AC2. If you want to DPS the crap out of someone at range than load up multiple light ACs.

Except it has the same tonnage as weapons that do do reasonable damage, which is the flaw with that viewpoint. Weapons with moderate-high tonnage requirements that don't give much of anything in return is inherently crappy as a balancing idea.

The ER Large Laser in particular eclipses the AC/2 at its own role by doing over 300% more upfront damage per mouseclick while requiring less tonnage, having infinite ammo, and being hitscan. While not even having that much heat buildup.

[Escef]

FupDup, on 12 January 2015 - 11:40 AM, said:

I don't see anything particularly powerful or exceptional about that build.

I know you don't. If you have a BLR-1D, try it yourself. You can do the same build with a 300 standard engine if you want to cut costs (just to not be 1.5 tons shy you can upgrade the right arm laser to pulse and fill out the leg armor). You can ridiculously drill people with this thing. I've gotten 2+ kills and 700+ damage in that thing several times. And I'm pretty mediocre.

FupDup, on 12 January 2015 - 11:40 AM, said:

If there was some kind of actual counter-buff at the same time as reducing the shake, that would be fine. But reducing the shake without any significant buff would just make the gun even more sad. No, making it have 9001 meters (exaggeration) of range isn't that great of a buff, and it probably wouldn't make people use it or make it worth 6+ tons (ammo considered).

I'd gladly see a range buff or ghost heat removal, but only if we lower impulse and blast size.

FupDup, on 12 January 2015 - 11:40 AM, said:

Except it has the same tonnage as weapons that do do reasonable damage, which is the flaw with that viewpoint. Weapons with moderate-high tonnage requirements that don't give much of anything in return is inherently crappy as a balancing idea.

The ER Large Laser in particular eclipses the AC/2 at its own role by doing over 300% more upfront damage per mouseclick while requiring less tonnage, having infinite ammo, and being hitscan. While not even having that much heat buildup.

Trying to compare it to energy weapons is just not going to work, they're too different. It's just not a useful comparison. Maybe if we had unlimited customization I'd say go for it. But until energy and ballistics can use the same hardpoints: no.

[MauttyKoray]

MauttyKoray, on 12 January 2015 - 09:18 AM, said:

If they want to give us the AC/2 cooldown module I would be 100% content with the current state of the weapon. It would make up for the reduced cooldown and the current Ghost Heat limit of 4 will keep it from being super boated by the larger mechs still, however my little mechs with AC/2s need some love as they have no use currently.

Cooldown Module 5 - 12% reduction

Old AC/2 Cooldown - 0.52s (3.85 dps)
Current AC/2 Cooldown - 0.72s (2.78 dps)
Module 5 Cooldown - 0.63s (3.17 dps)

Its not quite back to the old AC/2, but its a significant boost to the now useless and unused weapon that could bring it back into play. It also avoids the Ghost Heat refire rate still and shouldn't have the same issues as the old fire rate with hitreg being still over 0.6s.

So I'm not sure if the Quirk/Module stacks or is sequential (12% of base, then 12% of that), so assuming either:

Sequential (0.63 * 0.88) - 0.55s (3.63 dps)
Stacking (0.72 * 0.76) - 0.56s (3.57 dps)

Either way as long as the mech doesn't get a specific AC/2 cooldown quirk, then a general ballistic cooldown quirk will not push it into the cooldown threshold that was causing the issues previously happening.

Getting the AC/2 cooldown module coupled with a small reduction in the ghost heat that occurs under 4 AC/2s (seriously why so much ghost heat under 4?) and the AC/2 range module would bring the AC/2 back to its original role.

Edit: Oh wait I forgot, REDUCE THE DAMN IMPULSE! AC/2s should not shake a mech like that, even using 3 AC/2 shake a mech far more than an AC/5. It should add up to roughly equivalent or just more than an AC/5's shake.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 12 January 2015 - 12:01 PM.

[FupDup]

Escef, on 12 January 2015 - 11:54 AM, said:

I know you don't. If you have a BLR-1D, try it yourself. You can do the same build with a 300 standard engine if you want to cut costs (just to not be 1.5 tons shy you can upgrade the right arm laser to pulse and fill out the leg armor). You can ridiculously drill people with this thing. I've gotten 2+ kills and 700+ damage in that thing several times. And I'm pretty mediocre.

I have an Overlord badge under my faction icon, of course I have one.

I actually did try that build (different armor/engine/stuff but same weapons) during the Phoenix release time period, and honestly it wasn't that great (the AC/2 wasn't as nerfed back then, either). I ended up switching it out for 4 ML + ERPPC + AC/10 (or 2 AC/5).

Escef, on 12 January 2015 - 11:54 AM, said:

I'd gladly see a range buff or ghost heat removal, but only if we lower impulse and blast size.

heat removal it is.


That also means we'd have an excuse for AC/2 cooldown mods and better quirks.

Escef, on 12 January 2015 - 11:54 AM, said:

Trying to compare it to energy weapons is just not going to work, they're too different. It's just not a useful comparison. Maybe if we had unlimited customization I'd say go for it. But until energy and ballistics can use the same hardpoints: no.

It wasn't about energy vs ballistics so much as a role comparison. In this case, I think that the ERLL just so happens to occupy a nice role that it would be kewl (IMO) for the AC/2 to be somewhat capable at. That doesn't mean it needs the same upfront damage or heat or etc, it's just the general idea of being good at long-extreme range sniping while not as good up close.

For customization, we can swap out hardpoints on Mister Potatohead Omnimechs. For normal Battlemechs we can just choose to play a different mech or leave a hardpoint unfilled. Unless you're playing stock matches, it can get removed for other things.

Edited by FupDup, 12 January 2015 - 12:37 PM.

[Pjwned]

While I agree that AC2 needs some help, I don't agree with giving it triple max range again because AC2 was the worst offender by far for people sitting at ridiculous range and pelting any mech that came into view for decent damage because it took so long for the damage to scale down.

[kapusta11]

I use 2xAC2s and 2xUAC5s on my Banshee 3E. If it were up to me I'd cut heat to 0.5 per shot and projectile speed to 1150 so that it syncs well with AC5s/UAC5s.