60 replies to this topic

[OznerpaG]

hey PGI, you want to know why it's all laser vomit out there?

AC's SUCK.

they weigh a billion times more to do the same sort of damage as lasers, and even though they'r pinpoint it's not like the rounds rocket to the target to hit where yer aiming unless you'r 10m away.

guess what - the whole world is lazy. we all take the easiest way out because that's the laziest way to do things. effort sucks - yeah yeah sure, I used to bullseye womp rats in my T-16 back home and they're not much bigger than two meters. but why bullseye when you can hit-scan the laser on the target even though you started firing 50m to the left of the target? THAT's how the real world works, and THAT's what you see in MWO every day. i like watching competitive matches, and how many PPCs and ACs do i see in competitive play? lots, right? well, maybe some here and there, but really barely any overall.

why? because when the last enemy remaining's CT only has 1 point left, and you'r 600m away, you going to trust that to a slow pinpoint weapon when you can hitscan that last point out with a LL even in a panic when you started firing 180 degrees away from the target? hitscan is like nuking the whole planet from orbit - it's the only way to be sure.

AC's seem like heavy remnants of an ancient past, and they only really work on heavy and assault mechs since they are so bulky and need so much ammo. problem is, people like using what they know, and if they pilot only lights and mediums for a while and have to use energy weapons because that's what's practical for those mechs, then they are going to carry those habits over to heavy and assaults because again people are lazy and stick to what they know. and what they know is energy weapons are easy. ACs are hard.

so PGI, follow the lazy route everyone else takes anyways - ramp up the ammo/ton AC's need. it's only fair - in the battle against hitscan it's the only way ACs have a chance, and it's worth a shot so why not give it a shot?

IS: AC20 10 shots per ton....AC2 100 sots per ton
Clan, burst fire makes them even more useless: AC20 12 shots per ton....AC2 120 shots per ton

[Lorian Sunrider]

Auto cannons are meant to be the low heat option (well mostly) to add to your DPS. I personally rock at least one autocannon on all of my mechs over 50 tons of some variety.

They are in a good spot. Really.

[Felbombling]

No, they don't. The AC/20 is my go-to weapon of choice for the Inner Sphere Mechs. I love it.

[Sandpit]

no they don't. ACs are pretty cool

rarely seen? Not a single match is played I don't see ACs
not one
ever

literally
Dakka is just as good and popular today as it was 3 years ago

[El Bandito]

Well, there is a reason why the Inner Sphere developed Rotary ACs, Light ACs, their own UAC2-20s, as well as Precision shells, and Armor-Piercing shells for the standard ACs. Cause standard ACs were getting obsolete after Clan invasion.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Lasers do beat the pants of ACs in terms of damage for weight and the whole infinite ammo thing. I only bring lasers when I go into CW just because when I used to use ammo I'd always run out and be mostly worthless.

I'd love ACs, and ammo weapons in general to at least get a massive ammo buff to compete.

[El Bandito]

Dakota1000, on 31 December 2015 - 06:17 PM, said:

Lasers do beat the pants of ACs in terms of damage for weight and the whole infinite ammo thing. I only bring lasers when I go into CW just because when I used to use ammo I'd always run out and be mostly worthless.

I'd love ACs, and ammo weapons in general to at least get a massive ammo buff to compete.

Nothing chews up the base generators faster than the ACs/UACs though. I know teams who do generator rush tend to bring in a lot of ACs/UACs. The sustained fire is unbeatable by other weapons, especially since the target is stationary.

[Sandpit]

Dakota1000, on 31 December 2015 - 06:17 PM, said:

Lasers do beat the pants of ACs in terms of damage for weight and the whole infinite ammo thing. I only bring lasers when I go into CW just because when I used to use ammo I'd always run out and be mostly worthless.

I'd love ACs, and ammo weapons in general to at least get a massive ammo buff to compete.

you're forgetting about the drastic heat differences between ACs and Lasers


You know what I find truly ironic about this? For nearly 3 years now it's been widely accepted that lasers were "inferior" to ACs

[Otto Cannon]

Shortest engagement timescale of a single alpha, lasers win because you can fit more damage for the tonnage.

Medium engagement the autocannon can fire without stopping to cool down, so it has the advantage.

Longest engagement the lasers win again, because although you have to cool down you never run out of ammo.

[Alistair Winter]

They don't suck, but they're still a bit too hot. Same as SRMs. If you've got enough hardpoints, it generally seems like laservomit is still the best option. I can do ok with my mixed builds, but boy: the finely tuned laservomit builds are still so much more devastating.

Put 8-9 lasers on a heavy mech and just go BLARF on mechs at close or medium range.

And remember when Russ said that he forgot about arm lock, about a year ago? He admitted it was never meant as a tool for people to get perfect pinpoint convergence with arms and torso. Well, oops! It's still there. And it's still kind of a big deal for laservomit.

[Metus regem]

AC's are heat efficient, lasers are weight efficient....

Take a large laser (TT stats, as that is what I can pull up on my phone fast):

5T
8 damage
8 heat

So to make that heat netural in Tech level 1, you need 8 tons of heat sinks, bringing the total weight of the weapon + heat sinks up to 13 tons for 8 damage.

AC/10:

12t + ammo
10 damage
3 heat

For the AC/10 to be heat netural you will need 15 tons for three single heat sinks and the gun. You will need at least one tone of ammo.

So 16t for an AC 10, that will deal 100 damage in 10 turns vs. 13t for a large laser that will deal 80 damage in 10 turns.

Now to you, what sounds like the better deal? I'll take the AC personally.

[FupDup]

Metus regem, on 31 December 2015 - 07:01 PM, said:

AC's are heat efficient, lasers are weight efficient....

Take a large laser (TT stats, as that is what I can pull up on my phone fast):

5T
8 damage
8 heat

So to make that heat netural in Tech level 1, you need 8 tons of heat sinks, bringing the total weight of the weapon + heat sinks up to 13 tons for 8 damage.

AC/10:

12t + ammo
10 damage
3 heat

For the AC/10 to be heat netural you will need 15 tons for three single heat sinks and the gun. You will need at least one tone of ammo.

So 16t for an AC 10, that will deal 100 damage in 10 turns vs. 13t for a large laser that will deal 80 damage in 10 turns.

Now to you, what sounds like the better deal? I'll take the AC personally.

I'd take the LL since I won't be instagibed by a through-armor-critical detonating my ammo.

Also, you have to remember that you get 10 free heatsinks with every engine. This gave all energy weapons a "head start" in terms of what you had to invest, and what led to them being overall better than most non-energy weapons.

That lone LL actually only needs 5 tons because your base sinks easily handle that one weapon. The AC/10 is 13 tons when the base 10 sinks are counted. Thus, using the LL instead of the AC/10 allows you to mount up to 8 tons of additional equipment, which can often be used to increase your damage -- thus the LL indirectly lets you carry more firepower than going AC/10.

Heck, even with SHS in TT you can have a single free "heatless" PPC because you get 10 dissipation and a PPC is 10 heat.

[Mystere]

El Bandito, on 31 December 2015 - 06:16 PM, said:

Well, there is a reason why the Inner Sphere developed Rotary ACs, Light ACs, their own UAC2-20s, as well as Precision shells, and Armor-Piercing shells for the standard ACs. Cause standard ACs were getting obsolete after Clan invasion.

Well, this is MWO, not TT.

<See, I can also do the same thing.>

[ZenFool]

Sandpit, on 31 December 2015 - 06:25 PM, said:

you're forgetting about the drastic heat differences between ACs and Lasers


You know what I find truly ironic about this? For nearly 3 years now it's been widely accepted that lasers were &quot;inferior&quot; to ACs

Was thinking the same thing when I read the OP. Pulse lasers in particular were right next to flamers and mgs in usefulness. Long memory in this game just makes me want to gibber in a corner while fingerpainting in my own fluids.

[Metus regem]

FupDup, on 31 December 2015 - 07:17 PM, said:

I'd take the LL since I won't be instagibed by a through-armor-critical detonating my ammo.

Also, you have to remember that you get 10 free heatsinks with every engine. This gave all energy weapons a &quot;head start&quot; in terms of what you had to invest, and what led to them being overall better than most non-energy weapons.

That lone LL actually only needs 5 tons because your base sinks easily handle that one weapon. The AC/10 is 13 tons when the base 10 sinks are counted. Thus, using the LL instead of the AC/10 allows you to mount up to 8 tons of additional equipment, which can often be used to increase your damage -- thus the LL indirectly lets you carry more firepower than going AC/10.

Heck, even with SHS in TT you can have a single free &quot;heatless&quot; PPC because you get 10 dissipation and a PPC is 10 heat.

True, very true Fup. But when you start to look at 2 PPC's or 1 AC/20 for raw damage, keeping range out of the equation, that AC/20 is the better deal.... Ahh the nuances of the Table Top, so much more skill needed in the Mech lab vurses tgee one in MWO....

[FupDup]

Metus regem, on 31 December 2015 - 07:45 PM, said:

True, very true Fup. But when you start to look at 2 PPC's or 1 AC/20 for raw damage, keeping range out of the equation, that AC/20 is the better deal.... Ahh the nuances of the Table Top, so much more skill needed in the Mech lab vurses tgee one in MWO....

The AC/20 is a special case for AC's because it had the highest damage per tonnage ratio of any one of them, by a long shot. It also concentrated all of that damage into a single hit location against TT's 1x armor values. Juicy...

Most ACs were not as blessed.


Mechlab: I actually have an easier time min-maxing in SSW (TT building rules) than I do in MWO. The best weapons are usually very clear there, and making mechs either heat neutral or close to heat neutral is comically easy in TT.

Edited by FupDup, 31 December 2015 - 07:52 PM.

[Sandpit]

Metus regem, on 31 December 2015 - 07:45 PM, said:

True, very true Fup. But when you start to look at 2 PPC's or 1 AC/20 for raw damage, keeping range out of the equation, that AC/20 is the better deal.... Ahh the nuances of the Table Top, so much more skill needed in the Mech lab vurses tgee one in MWO....

I'd say it's a different type of skill on MWO for building. Having a knowledge of Btech helps, but with all the different mechanics, heat, no tacs, etc. there's a very deep learning curve to building mechs in either game

[John Archer]

Unless I am mistaken...it seems that the 'low heat' AC's put forth a LOT of ghost heat. It just lingers there...seemingly forever. Lasers appear to have less ghost heat; that or laser ghost heat dissipates faster.

Just my two cents... any experts out there who can tune up my thinking?

[Tarogato]

Nerf laser duration across the board by 0.20 sec. Bam, autocannons become more relevant.

pgi hire me, I'll work for one-third of Paul's rate.

[Sandpit]

Tarogato, on 31 December 2015 - 08:23 PM, said:

Nerf laser duration across the board by 0.20 sec. Bam, autocannons become more relevant.

pgi hire me, I'll work for one-third of Paul's rate.

no thanks
one thing people who call for blanket nerfs on lasers like this forget?

Here's a good example of the trade-off that everyone seems to conveniently leave out.

AC 10 = 10 damage
LL - 8 damage
right?

AC 10 hits it deals 10 damage to one spot
LL hits but the target moves and it may only do 10% of its damage for the same heat