50 replies to this topic

[Modo44]

AC2 fire is returned last because even lights can shrug it off for quite a while. High burst DPS and vicious cockpit shake used to make it dangerous, but now the AC2 will only affect rookies. Seriously consider upgrading to any other gun.

[jss78]

Modo44, on 28 March 2015 - 04:16 AM, said:

AC2 fire is returned last because even lights can shrug it off for quite a while. High burst DPS and vicious cockpit shake used to make it dangerous, but now the AC2 will only affect rookies. Seriously consider upgrading to any other gun.

I see your point, and it all makes sense. But I wonder, though, that if enough enemies consider you a secondary threat for large enough part of the game, whether that might work out to your benefit.

I mean, looking at the numbers, my damage average (about 225) in that 2xAC/2 (edit: and 4xML) BJ-1 is currently by far the best in any mech I've tried. And I feel like it's at least somewhat well pinpointed damage.

I've only played less than 300 games altogether though, and maybe I'll easily improve on that damage average with another style of a mech -- I'll have to see.

Edited by jss78, 29 March 2015 - 04:04 AM.

[Modo44]

No, the damage potential is too low. You can do OK damage if left alone for the entire match with AC2s, or under heavy fire with good weapons. The difference is, you can do incredibly if left alone while using good weapons.

[Tim East]

Tylerchu, on 27 March 2015 - 08:53 PM, said:

The aforementioned screenshake and annoying sounds are also a quick suppressing weapon; if the enemy sees shells flying they won't be able to distinguish between what kind of autocannon it is aside from its fire rate (which could be from multiple mechs firing AC/20s for all they know). Once someone figures that it's just a bunch of AC/2s they'll usually rush you and you're gonna die if you don't have a teammate or two with you.

It's pretty easy to tell the difference between 2s and 5s on the one hand and 10s and 20s on the other. Even if the projectile looks the same, which I really didn't think it did, the speed at which it moves is a dead giveaway.

[Koniving]

jss78, on 28 March 2015 - 04:35 AM, said:

I see your point, and it all makes sense. But I wonder, though, that if enough enemies consider you a secondary threat for large enough part of the game, whether that might work out to your benefit.

I mean, looking at the numbers, my damage average (about 225) in that 2xAC/2 BJ-1 is currently by far the best in any mech I've tried. And I feel like it's at least somewhat well pinpointed damage.

I've only played less than 300 games altogether though, and maybe I'll easily improve on that damage average with another style of a mech -- I'll have to see.

AC/2s exclusively? Bad idea, even in tabletop (where AC/2s can do really well) it was never something done by itself. The sad irony is that AC/2s were used for long range, low heat damage.

Anyway... An idea of what that would look like (pure stock BJ).

In comparison to the source material, AC/2s are supposed to be low caliber, high rate of fire gatling guns mounted inside of protective 'barrels' akin to the information here. And while the main Artist for MWO is well aware of this (as evidenced by the Jagermech to the right of the artistic border around this forum), PGI chose to make autocannons into "tank" rounds, akin to what BattleTech Rifles are supposed to be. Rifles are supposed to be much higher front loaded damage in terms of fluff, but a single large impact suffers degraded performance against enemy mech armor (the rifle's -3 damage against Battlemech armor) versus rapid, smaller, explosive ordnance (Autocannons).

AC/2s in the source material are specifically for use against light mechs (because they would easily out run you as well as leave accurate ranges for other weapons), against vehicles, against infantry and regarded for excellent use in anti-air applications. (The Jagermech is actually an anti-air mech. The Blackjacks are infantry support mechs).

None of these applications are placed in MWO. The front loaded nature of the autocannons in MWO also further reduce the usefulness of the AC/2, which would otherwise easily outperform the AC/5 with the current settings if not for the way the Inner Sphere ACs are made.

Spoiler

A simple change such as 1 bullet/rating for AC/2, 2 bullets/rating AC/5, 3 bullets/rating AC/10 and 4 bullets/rating AC/20 would significantly increase the value of the AC/2. (AC/2 with a bullet of 2 damage could -- without skill trees or quirks -- would deal 6 damage in 3 individual bullets before the AC/5 would be able to finish reloading after dishing out 5 damage in 2 shots. In a 10 second cycle, the AC/2 would dish out 15 shots at 2 damage each [30 damage] within 10.08 seconds while the AC/5 dishes out 12 shots at 2.5 damage each for 30 damage within 9.05 seconds [but won't get that next complete volley out until 10.86 seconds.)

Change them from burst to automatic fire and that could be a little more even. The change above, though simple and still far from what ACs are supposed to be would also remove the one shot kill for twin AC/20 to the cockpit. At the same time, it could remove the need for additional structure to the cockpit, so that snipers could be rewarded for cockpit shots -- encouraging snipers that actually try to snipe for skill rather than snipe for trolling. You'd probably see some more diversification in weapon types in the field.

Still not close to what I'd like, but certainly would be a start.

If ACs could have other purposes, say shooting down airstrikes and/or fighter craft/vehicles/infantry, they'd have that much more going for them. You'd find AC/2 type weapons more useful in a combined arms environment. Then again, most of the levels with brush would be covered in flames and smoke, because flamers. (Lots of use in both source material and tabletop of weapons such as flamers to set fires, building smoke and raising local heat levels. In such an environment it's usually better to have autocannons than lasers, because in addition to generally being lower heat the ACs aren't affected by smoke particles. Such details are not found here sadly).

But for now, supplement 1 to 2 AC/2s with larger weapons or plenty of smaller ones. Don't use AC/2s as a primary weapon.

Edited by Koniving, 28 March 2015 - 12:51 PM.

[stealthraccoon]

I have a ball plopping an AC2 on a Locust - damage and ammo capacity are horrendous, but even assaults take cover when they start getting peppered with autocannon fire.


They did make a lot more sense in TT, everything had half as much armor.

[Koniving]

An AC/2 or an AC/5 can mean great fun on a Locust.

But then again, when isn't a Locust that behaves like an Urbanmech fun?

[The Massive]

AC2's can't be countered by AMS or ECM. And also don't require a lock. Plus the constant impact of AC rounds will almost always make a mech duck. PLUS the constant annoyance of getting hit by AC rounds makes it that much more difficult for the pilot to concentrate on whatever he might be trying to do at the time.

[jss78]

Koniving, on 28 March 2015 - 12:42 PM, said:

AC/2s exclusively? Bad idea, even in tabletop (where AC/2s can do really well) it was never something done by itself. The sad irony is that AC/2s were used for long range, low heat damage.

Quote

But for now, supplement 1 to 2 AC/2s with larger weapons or plenty of smaller ones. Don't use AC/2s as a primary weapon.

Oh, not AC2's only, but with 4xML, which I find myself increasing using towards the later game. So that basic BJ-1 build.

Edited by jss78, 28 March 2015 - 02:45 PM.

[Tylerchu]

Tim East, on 28 March 2015 - 09:58 AM, said:

It's pretty easy to tell the difference between 2s and 5s on the one hand and 10s and 20s on the other. Even if the projectile looks the same, which I really didn't think it did, the speed at which it moves is a dead giveaway.

I don't really pay attention to projectiles; I just know there's small explosions in the ground near me and that I shouldn't go there if I want to stay healthy. Observant people might be able to do as you say though...

[Tim East]

Tylerchu, on 28 March 2015 - 09:10 PM, said:

I don't really pay attention to projectiles; I just know there's small explosions in the ground near me and that I shouldn't go there if I want to stay healthy. Observant people might be able to do as you say though...

Yeah, if you don't get to see the thing fly it's a lot harder to guess. Heck, a lot of mechs you can tell what they're using just from the model if they get close enough, and from far away you can use the projectile speed to guess. It depends if you are facing who is shooting, I suppose. Just don't face away from them? You know, unless you're twisting to spend armor on a different section or something.

[Madcap72]

Play a 6x AC2 Crab and watch componants fly off at the cyclic rate and they make sense.



They are not GOOD.... but it's hilarious. I manage to get a few kills a game, and if nothing else, the satisfacion of eating lights alive when they try to grief.

[Tylerchu]

Madcap72, on 29 March 2015 - 03:04 AM, said:

Play a 6x AC2 Crab and watch componants fly off at the cyclic rate and they make sense.

They are not GOOD.... but it's hilarious. I manage to get a few kills a game, and if nothing else, the satisfacion of eating lights alive when they try to grief.

I'd venture to say that a 6 LBX-2 or LBX-5 wolf would be better because the hardpoints are set so that you don't lose 50% of what little firepower you have with one arm.

[Madcap72]

Tylerchu, on 29 March 2015 - 09:13 AM, said:

I'd venture to say that a 6 LBX-2 or LBX-5 wolf would be better because the hardpoints are set so that you don't lose 50% of what little firepower you have with one arm.

Which, would be an outstanding point, if the thread was not about loyalty IS mechs.

[Tylerchu]

Madcap72, on 29 March 2015 - 01:42 PM, said:

Which, would be an outstanding point, if the thread was not about loyalty IS mechs.

This thread's about "what is the reasoning behind AC/2s" is it not?

[Madcap72]

Tylerchu, on 29 March 2015 - 01:59 PM, said:

This thread's about "what is the reasoning behind AC/2s" is it not?

you know, you're right.


That's what I get for having multiple tabs open, my apologies.

[xengk]

Tylerchu, on 27 March 2015 - 08:53 PM, said:

I love running that build. Here's my mentality behind it.
As of now, the AC/2 has no ghost heat. 4 AC/2 can be chainfired for a relatively long time, bordering absurd, and if you're targeting someone that's engaged with one of your teammates they're not gonna see absurd screen shake, but they're gonna hear this constant TANG-TANG-TANG-TANG and their screen shake like a small earthquake. It's a horrible distraction. And you also tend to get the kills because you're constantly pouring out damage as opposed to massive one-shot alphas which will ALMOST kill that but then the AC/2 does that one last little bit to finish the job.
DISCLAIMER: I'm not a habitual kill-stealer; I just have to do that in this build to get match points.
-
This build can also do absurd damage. I can pull an easy 600+ on a good match and once hit high 900s.
-
The aforementioned screenshake and annoying sounds are also a quick suppressing weapon; if the enemy sees shells flying they won't be able to distinguish between what kind of autocannon it is aside from its fire rate (which could be from multiple mechs firing AC/20s for all they know). Once someone figures that it's just a bunch of AC/2s they'll usually rush you and you're gonna die if you don't have a teammate or two with you.

Pretty much this.
I have a BJ-1DC that fill this role.
Put the AC2s on chain fire, follow a few hundred meter behind the team brawler.
Blind enemy the brawler is fighting.

6x SL for point defend or finishing damaged mech/component.

[Modo44]

Madcap72, on 29 March 2015 - 03:04 AM, said:

Play a 6x AC2 Crab and watch componants fly off at the cyclic rate and they make sense.

Unfortunately, 4xUAC5 has a higher burst DPS (using double taps) and sustained DPS (even without double taps) while also sporting a higher alphastrike, providing enough spare cooling for some backup lasers, and having enough ammo for a full match. In the current balance, there is really no contest.

Edited by Modo44, 29 March 2015 - 10:24 PM.

[SnagaDance]

jss78, on 28 March 2015 - 04:13 AM, said:

(I'd gladly take AC/5s, but I don't think they fit without an XL engine, and I really often lose one side in the BJ-1 because of the way that mech is waving its armpits around.)

This remark makes me think you are not yet acquainted with the wonderful Smurfy mechlab site, where you can tinker mech builds to your hearts content (and even save them for later use, I've got absolutely tons of them stored) without risking a single C-bill: http://mwo.smurfy-net.de/

[Mercer Skye]

Others have already covered it better than I can, but A/C 2's are an unfortunately 'orphaned' weapon system in MWO at it's current state.

They're Materiel weapons; Anti---vehicle, structure, fortification. They do good work against 'soft' targets like armored infantry and aircraft, and a fair bit of damage to lighter 'mechs with thinner armor than more direct combat-oriented 'mechs.

In theory, they'd make great weapons for trashing turrets in Assault mode, but the way the game works right now, I'm still not too sure on that, a couple well placed Gauss/LRM15 volleys tend to do the job much better than sniping them from outside their radar ranges. /shrug

If turrets were more hardened and not 'invulnerable/totally vulnerable' toggled like they are now, utility weapons like A/C2's, SRM2's and the like might find more use. But that's probably a whole lot of work for more flavorful base battling (Though I think it would pay off.....I think).

One day, we'll have ground transports and aircraft.....and A/C2's will be glorious!

Edited by Mercer Skye, 30 March 2015 - 12:21 AM.