85 replies to this topic

[Matthew Ace]

As with a few of them who had posted in this thread, I feel the AC2 needs at minimum:

-Reduced heat (suggestion: 0.4 to 0.5)
-Removal of ghost heat penalty

-Optionally, ammo count to 80/ton. Pet peeve with battletech not giving ac2 50 rounds/ton.

And my opinion to bring something interesting to it:
-Effective Range increased to 1000m (Max 1500 or 2000m)
-Velocity boost to 3000m/s to compliment the range.
-Cooldown such that it does not exceed AC5 DPS?

And then this 2 biggie (one can dream):
-Critical hits in battletech rolls to destroys item for every hit. Scale up damage to items for smaller weapons.
-Through-armor critical.

Edited by Matthew Ace, 13 January 2015 - 02:38 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

ok some minor stats:

I think Alpha Value is important for a short window of engagement - you pop out of cover - deliver your damage and move back - important for Hit & Run and long range engagements.

the other aspect is DPS - DPS is important in stand and gun engagements where you can't move (defense or offense in CW for example - where you need much damage fast) - mostly at short range - where cover is not given.



first i think the weight of a weapon is a kind of balancing factor - to make things not to difficult - i did not use the critical space consumed by a weapon.

Regarding Alpha per ton - the bigger 3 ACs are almost on spot - (a sum of damage values in range brackets of 10) says that AC 5 and AC 20 get a rating of 57 - while AC 10 get a 55 - that means the AC 10 need more damage or a minor range buff. (460 and 920 should be enough)
The AC 2 is complete off - with 39 - considering range of the AC 2 - it is not useful for long range combat - and considering the low output given the weight not useful for Hit and Run either. To get the same rating:
increase the range (effective range 720m - max range the good old 2160m) - increase damage towards 2.4 per bullet
alternative: 900-2700m (and we know that 2700m is enough to hit any target anywhere on any map)

The Gauss with a rating of 131 - is of the chart either - pure and simple the best long range weapon in the ballistic sector - and even with an increase of damage and range it stays in this role.

Regarding pure DPS / per ton - the ratings are increasing with range - simple because lighter weapons got more range.
So because I think that DPS is at short range more important - this behaviour is counter intuitive.
Each Ballistic weapon generates 50% rmore DPS/Range - rating per ton than the heavier autocanons. (don't get the feeling that the rating does work here in other ways)
But a glance in the charts is helpful to see again that the three bigger ACs (5/10/20) are almost on spot - maybe the AC 5 need a minore nerf - to get the chart below the AC 10. But if i want to keep the 50% increase - and want to use the AC 2 figures from the upper Alpha chart (2.4 dmg, range of 2160max, including range upgrade for AC 10.
I have to reduce RoF for AC 20 - towards 3.6 ; reduce RoF of the AC 10 towards 2.4 - keep the Rof of the AC 5 - and bring the AC 2 in line with a RoF of 1.1

this is the result:


I'm not so happy about the DPS/ton chart - although the AC 20 behave to AC 10 - like the AC 5 to AC 2 - while AC 5 generates the same DPS as the AC 20 - but for the costs of Alpha Damage and the advantage of range.

- so this are the new LAC formerly known as AC 2:
range: 720/2160
damage per bullet: 2.4
cycle time 1.1

OK this calclulations did not use the "Criticals" - and more important heat. (because it doesn't matter if you mount 10 AC 2 - or one AC 20 - because DPS/ Alpha per ton is not effected.
Heat on the other hand- or the need to cool the weapon increases the weight of a weapon - based on the cycle time.
If it is wished i could use this additional layer

[Duke Nedo]

I just miss the old AC/2 and like several ppl here wrote, the "problem" with the old AC/2 probably isn't a problem really.

Screen shake contra 6x cUAC/5 double-tap or cLRM spam?
DPS contra 6x cUAC/5 spam or 1N steroid 2x AC/5?

Like the two cases above, the AC/2 requires face time, more tons of ammo, has less focused damage and MUCH MORE HEAT, the only benefit being a bit better range and using fewer slots. Imo the AC/2 needs to have significantly better dps/ton than the AC/5 has, otherwise the small range advantage is just not enough to justify it. Most engagements take place within the effective range of the AC/5 anyways and it's way cooler and allows you to twist a bit between rounds.

Perhaps it's not perfectly loreish, but as far as I can see the logical niche for the AC/2 is being the high dps/low alpha alternative to the other ACs, especially for Mediums and Heavies (where 1 slot can allow it to roll with endo or even endo+ff with 2 or 3xAC/2, whereas 2xAC/5 could not).

For Lights I say rather quirk machineguns on a few variants and introduce HMGs sooner rather than later. AC/2's require so much ammo that I don't think it will ever be a Good™ option for Lights compared to MG/laser-builds.

Ghost heat can probably just be removed if they want to, but afaic they can keep it as well I don't care. The important thing is that Ghost heat should not stand in the way of the cooldown module. Ghost heat can stay if they just hard code that cooldown never goes below 0.52s for any weapon. A modded cooldown of 0.52s is good enough dps and we want/need that module and the heat could be reduced a notch.

Edited by Duke Nedo, 13 January 2015 - 04:08 AM.

[Curccu]

Tahribator, on 12 January 2015 - 08:03 AM, said:

• The Ghost Heat has to stay to limit ridiculous/abusive builds.

Err want to explain?

[Tombstoner]

FupDup, on 12 January 2015 - 01:34 PM, said:

The AC/2 is actually a very horrible choice for light mechs because light mechs are limited by tonnage above all else. The AC/2, even if it got some of the buffs proposed by myself or others in this thread, would still be somewhat inefficient for a 6 ton weapon. Lights need to make the most use of the limited tonnage they have for guns.

Energy weapons are by far the best choice for light mechs because they have the best damage per tonnage ratio, with missiles coming in second place. Ballistics aren't an optimal choice unless they're very very light like MGs are (but MGs aren't very good either...).

Actually it depends on the game.... For MWO i agree with you, unless you give it such an extreme range boost such as 9K meters... then you can effectively attack assaults from the rear at range. or turrets and gate controls. THe ac-2 in TT was an anti materal weapon 27 hexes carried by a 6/9 mech with some gunnery could counter some assault mechs.

Its just that PGI for some reason decided to make all auto cannons have the same DPS for a time.

[Koniving]

Not a fan of the damage change or the weight change.

There are many more factors for balancing how a weapon works.

*For example if the other IS weapons fired in bursts while the AC/2 was still single shot, the AC/2 would pump out 2 damage slugs while the AC/5 pumped out 2.5 damage slugs (meanwhile the Clan AC/2 is already 1 damage slugs and the Clan AC/5 is already 1.333(repeating) damage slugs). Without changing anything else, this would reduce the pinpoint front loaded damage and significantly improve the value of the AC/2 without it becoming overpowered or ridiculously buffed. (In terms of a 10 second cycle, it already blatantly outclasses twin Battletech RAC/2s in terms of damage to time.)

Spoiler

For the above:
IS AC/2: 1 bullet = 2 damage
IS AC/5 and UAC/5: 1 bullet = 2.5 damage. 2 round burst.
IS AC/10: 1 bullet = 3.33(repeating) damage. 3 round burst gets 10 damage.
IS AC/20: 1 bullet = 5 damage. 4 round burst gets 20 damage.

Clan AC/2: 1 bullet = 1 damage. 2 round burst.
Clan AC/5: 1 bullet = 1.33(repeating) damage. 3 round burst.
Clan AC/10: 1 bullet = 2.5 damage. 4 round burst gets 10 damage.
Clan AC/20: 1 bullet = 4 damage. 5 round burst gets 20 damage.

Maintains the IS PP/FLD advantage, greatly improves the value of the AC/2 over other ACs without outclassing them, fits in line with the Clan setup rather than leaving it as the odd cannon out.


*Simply remove ghost heat on AC/2s. Even heavily boated, the 6 AC/2 builds required extreme face-time and XL engines. Any mech using them was always slower than 56 kph. Are you honestly afraid of a 48 kph Jagermech? Are you afraid of a triple AC/2 Hunchback or Centurion or Shadowhawk? Are you afraid of a 6 AC/2 King Crab that has to spend all of its tonnage on ammo (making it easy popcorn for lights to munch on not to mention AC/2s being practically unusable against lights) and engine? The only real reason for the AC/2 ghost heat was at the time the AC/2 out-DPS'd the AC/10 which was TWICE its weight, while creating identical screenshake to the AC/20. In addition to removing ghost heat, remove or significantly reduce the screenshake to nearly nothing.

*Bishop Steiner's suggestion of returning the extreme range. In BT the real reasoning behind AC/2s was to have a weapon that outranged standard PPCs with a high chance to hit. While this is currently true, the time it takes for that PPC to close in enough to hit isn't factored in. This is because all weapons have double range, and by that point there still isn't a real reason to try to outrange a PPC.

[Tahribator]

Curccu, on 13 January 2015 - 04:30 AM, said:

[/list]Err want to explain?

My reasoning is this: If you allow boating a weapon, then PGI tries to balance that weapon for the worst case. So you get weapons that feel decent in numbers just like the AC5, but feel underwhelming as single. If you discourage boating by adding ghost heat, then that weapon can be allowed to be decent even when you bring one. I'm just trying to think like PGI here.

Other posters came up with their own suggestions that involve removing ghost heat like:

• Remove ghost heat, allow boating and return AC2 values to their former glory. Give ballistic Mediums and Lights a global AC2 (ROF?) bonus to compensate.
  
• Remove ghost heat, allow boating and return AC2 values to their former glory. It will just balance itself out because of the heat.

To be honest, at this stage it doesn't matter what is changed as long as AC2 gets some love. It's in such a situation that it can't get any worse.

[Mechteric]

If they would address the screen shake/screen obscuring of weapon hits that aren't even hitting near the cockpit that would go a long way towards being able to allow stagger fired AC/2's by removing their punishing ghost heat (even 2 AC/2's generate ghost heat, which is silly)

[MauttyKoray]

Fixes
-Cooldown Module.
-Reduce rock caused by it heavily.
-Increase ammunition per ton slightly.
-Reduce heat generation so its not causing more than AC5s (original heat gen would be nice). However, the ghost heat can stay...more than 4 AC2? That's just silly, use bigger ACs.
-Raise range SLIGHTLY, not pre-nerf, but with the ability to at least contend against Gauss at long range without the straight punch that it has.

This right here would bring the AC2 back to effective use as a long range ballistic support weapon that it is meant to be.

[Graugger]

(Puts on Guass / PPC Sniper face)
You people are nuts for wanting to bring the AC/2 back. It's the smallest and lightest of all the ACs making it the easiest to boat. Why should a weapon that's less than a quarter the size and less than half the weight of my Gauzzagedon be able to even hope to pair up against me? Seriously? I have to take my time aiming, lead the target, charge my gun, and shoot, what do they have to do, pull the blasted trigger. I'd sooner they buff LRMs again than buff AC/2s.

Ok so you want a range buff, drop the velocity to 1400m/s like they had the CUAC/2s in their original testing before they released them. You want a faster cooldown, give the AC/2s screen shake on the mech that's using them to decrease their accuracy or set it so they can only fire 2 within 1 second of each other similar to how they have the gauss / ppcs setup.

AC/2s don't need no buffin, if you want to "balance" them by giving them a better stat somewhere you "have" to nerf them somewhere else.

Here's an idea, implement your little buffs but make it so ACs in general don't have a fixed cooldown but have it so that is in fact affected by the number of ACs being fired. The ammo has to be split between the ACs which takes longer than feeding 1 gun directly. Thus you have max DPS from 1 AC but it becomes less efficient the more your are firing.

For example each additional AC increases cooldown by 25% (compounded)
1 AC/2 - Cooldown .78
2 AC/2 - Cooldown .975
3 AC/2 - Cooldown 1.2
4 AC/2 - Cooldown 1.5

(Takes off Guass / PPC Sniper face)

I like DAKKA, fix the bloody weapon so I can haz DAKKA.

AC/2
Optimal Range: 850M
Maximum Range: 1700M
Velocity: 2250M/S
Cooldown: .68
DPS: 2.94
Heat: 1
HPS: 1.47
Impulse: .011 (Same as an SRM rocket which hey does about 2 damage)

[cSand]

Ac2 is a supporession weapon IMO

I have good success using it to keep the snipers' heads down so we can close the distance

[Graugger]

cSand, on 13 January 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

Ac2 is a supporession weapon IMO

I have good success using it to keep the snipers' heads down so we can close the distance

Yeah and for 6 tons it shouldn't be able to suppress a 60 damage alpha strike.

[wanderer]

Generally, given an opponent who realizes what's shot at him, it doesn't. Trading 30-point ERPPC blasts vs. dink-dink-dink usually means a cored AC/2 user, since he has to keep a stable firing position and the ERPPC chucker can fire and turn to spread damage.

[MauttyKoray]

Graugger, on 13 January 2015 - 02:17 PM, said:

Yeah and for 6 tons it shouldn't be able to suppress a 60 damage alpha strike.

You mean the 60 pointAlpha strikes that SHOULDNT EVEN EXIST? Pinpoint alpha builds are EVERYTHING that is wrong with this game in the first place.

Edited by MauttyKoray, 13 January 2015 - 10:37 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Pinpoint alpha builds are EVERYTHING that is wrong with this game in the first place.

this.

the only way a weapon like the ac/2 could possibly compete with a pinpoint weapon like the ppc is if its dps was substantially higher or if its weight was substantially lower.

ppc = 2.5 dps, 10 pinpoint damage (weighs 7 tons)
ac2 = 2.78 dps, 2 pinpoint damage (weighs 8 tons with 2 tons of ammo)

obviously we see the problem there...

IMO the best way to fix the AC2 is the early introduction of the Light AC2. The Light AC2 weighs 4 tons instead of 6 tons. Youd also probably want a ghost heat limit of 3 with steep penalties for using more than that.

Edited by Khobai, 13 January 2015 - 10:59 PM.

[YueFei]

AC2 screenshake to suppress/disrupt would actually work if shake actually moved your crosshairs, like it did in MW4. Chain-fired LRMs in MW4 actually did prevent a sniper from easily lining up a return shot.

But here the screenshake is purely cosmetic, a good player with a good gaming rig can fire steadily through screenshake that doesn't actually shove his crosshairs around, so high ROF impact weapons don't keep a target's aim disrupted.

[PACoFist]

I don´t think PGI will touch the weight or damage of the AC2.

But they could reduce heat / ghost heat, increase range or increase rate of fire. All viable options to make this gun a bit less useless than it is right now.

Even if they raised the DPS back to the old level, this gun would not be OP. You still have to constantly stare at your enemy, no "shoot and twist". And the damage will spread all over the target (if it is not standing still while being shot).

I used to love my TBT-7K armed with 2 AC2 and 2 ML. But now taking an AC2 as your main weapon is completely useless. I have tried.

[Y E O N N E]

Graugger, on 13 January 2015 - 02:17 PM, said:

Yeah and for 6 tons it shouldn't be able to suppress a 60 damage alpha strike.

Nobody should even be able to fire a 40 point alpha strike, let alone 60.

[Matthew Ace]

Its not the alpha damage in question, but how they're all fully and instantly converges on an exact pixel, and then a solution that will work but wont incur the community's wrath.

[Y E O N N E]

Lack of convergence would be stupid in a game genre that revolves entirely around the ability to aim your shots, though While some sort of recoil and bloom mechanic would be fine, strike vectors not ultimately aligning with the reticle wouldn't. No matter how long you delay that convergence, though, it has to converge and the high alphas are still a problem. Better than making shots go all over the place would be fixing the heat system so you don't get swaths of "l33t" players trying to burn 6 long-range, high-damage, high-heat lasers at once.

You also solve the problem whereby those players complain about their 'Mechs "running too hot."