54 replies to this topic

[Elendil]

DrRedCoat, on 09 May 2016 - 06:22 PM, said:

I would disagree with the sentiment that suppressive fire has little value as I've witnessed it change the behavior of enemy mechs (at least in non-comp).

Well that's the thing...

Do you ever have those matches where you spend most of the match successfully sniping and suppressing the enemy team, then you look up at the scoreboard and realize your team is getting trashed somehow?
That happens to me constantly...

The only thing it actually accomplishes is to deny a certain area to them. Which means they have to bunch together and go a different route, which means that you're forcing them into a semi-organized rush on wherever your defenses are weakest, which means they will crush your allies there.
In low-end matches it's much more effective, but beyond that it's actually counter-productive a lot of the time.

Plus you are devoting a huge amount of weight and match time to something that doesn't get you much damage or any kills.

In higher-end matches people know what they're being shot with, and will shrug off suppressing fire. They are given orders, and will follow them even when being rattled by AC2s or poked with ER Larges. It just makes you a target.
The only way to stop them is to kill them, and the best way to do that is ambushes at medium/close range. You bring a sniper or 'suppressing fire' mech, and you're wasting tonnage in your dropdeck.

I'm only just learning all of this (the hard way). I used to really like sniping and suppression, but I got tired of only hitting 200 damage a match with 0 kills.
So I started brawling instead. I die a lot more often, but I get a lot more damage and kills now (which means more money and XP), and I've been winning more too.
Just need to be smart about your positioning so you don't get cut off at the front lines and torn apart.

[DrRedCoat]

Elendil, on 10 May 2016 - 09:57 AM, said:

Well that's the thing...

Do you ever have those matches where you spend most of the match successfully sniping and suppressing the enemy team, then you look up at the scoreboard and realize your team is getting trashed somehow?
That happens to me constantly...

The only thing it actually accomplishes is to deny a certain area to them. Which means they have to bunch together and go a different route, which means that you're forcing them into a semi-organized rush on wherever your defenses are weakest, which means they will crush your allies there.
In low-end matches it's much more effective, but beyond that it's actually counter-productive a lot of the time.

Plus you are devoting a huge amount of weight and match time to something that doesn't get you much damage or any kills.

In higher-end matches people know what they're being shot with, and will shrug off suppressing fire. They are given orders, and will follow them even when being rattled by AC2s or poked with ER Larges. It just makes you a target.
The only way to stop them is to kill them, and the best way to do that is ambushes at medium/close range. You bring a sniper or 'suppressing fire' mech, and you're wasting tonnage in your dropdeck.

I'm only just learning all of this (the hard way). I used to really like sniping and suppression, but I got tired of only hitting 200 damage a match with 0 kills.
So I started brawling instead. I die a lot more often, but I get a lot more damage and kills now (which means more money and XP), and I've been winning more too.
Just need to be smart about your positioning so you don't get cut off at the front lines and torn apart.

You're not wrong. But there's also other opportunities for suppression fire. I often like to poke with my assaults and use my rapid rate of fire to shake cockpits of those trying to shoot my assaults. If I can make one or more of them back off or throw off their aim, then I call that a win.
What sort of mechs and builds did you use for suppression? I often hit 400 damage or higher in my Rifleman racking up a few kills. On the flip side, I'm usually a piss-poor brawler often getting around 300 damage and dying early on so I'm willing to chalk it up to different folks having different strengths.

[Intenebrus]

Speaking for the Kit Fox, Raven, Black Jack, Mauler, and every other mech that can utilize AC/2's really well, I think the weapon is in a very good spot right now.
Even my urbanmech has had alot of success with nothing but an AC/2. I used to run a kit fox with an LB/2X, that worked out just fine. I see dire wolves load up on Ultra AC/2's all the time. And the Blackjack... oh man, the blackjack. 2 ac/2's on a blackjack is about as scary as it gets for a mech it's size, that kind of range and fire rate, it's a very powerful weapon if used right.
One of the best builds I've ever made is a 4 AC/2 rifleman... firing 5 shots per second at that kind of range? Absurd. That's literally an AC/10 shot with higher optimal range than your average PPC.

Edited by Intenebrus, 11 May 2016 - 09:37 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

You can double-shoot UAC-5 with just 15% chance of failure, so i think it's better.

If it were UAC-2, i'd pick that though.

[Livaria]

Intenebrus, on 11 May 2016 - 09:34 AM, said:

One of the best builds I've ever made is a 4 AC/2 rifleman... firing 5 shots per second at that kind of range? Absurd. That's literally an AC/10 shot with higher optimal range than your average PPC.

Well, I've got some questions for you, because your math doesn't add up. Theres no way an AC/2 can have the same damage output as an AC/10. The best rifleman that fits your description is the legend killer.

It has 15% Ballistic cooldown. With the fast fire skill it gets an additional 5%. So if I were to subtract 20% from 0.78 I get 0.62 shots per second. I can't even get in two shots in a single second.

Spleenslitta, on 10 May 2016 - 08:31 AM, said:

Let's not get caught up in how well an AC2 can be boated.

It's still important to talk about how well it can be boated, since that's one of the biggest reasons why people might use them. It might be helpful to consider the possibility of the AC/2 being a stand alone weapon but I'm not counting on it. If we make the AC/2 have more pinpoint damage, it might as well be an AC/5. AC/2s as a weapon will have to bring something new to the table, and it already does, which is DPS and long range.

I think people need to understand why I'm comparing it to the Ultra AC/5, and that is because they are very similar. They are both projectiles, used for DPS and long range, and are ballistic weapons. I'm less focused on tonnage since I consider the role of weapons more important than tonnage. Right now; the Ultra AC/5 is the biggest competitor when it comes to combat role.

I'm more open to the idea of reducing the ability of the Ultra AC/5 to suddenly double up on damage. It is only slightly impeded by a 15% chance to jam. Why should performance be a dice roll? Honestly I prefer that ultra autocannons as a whole need have a different jam mechanic that's more consistent.

Edited by Livaria, 15 May 2016 - 04:11 AM.

[Spleenslitta]

I wanna look at the AC2 from a nonboating perspective because there are no light mechs capable of carrying a reasonable amount of ammo and several AC2's while retaining the speed necessary to stay alive.
Even if the AC2 had endless ammo and half the heat i would still take an ER PPC instead.
Increased velocity doesn't help much either.

I do understand that making the AC2 into a weapon best fired in bursts due to high heat would make it a bit too similar to the UAC5.
But when the combination of high velocity/ ammo count per tonn and lower heat cannot make me even look at the AC2 instead of an ER PPC then what?

Increasing damage is not an alternative. Increased chances to crit components and such is good but are there any other alternatives? Anything at all?

Oh yeah....2 questions. Do you find the AC2's firing flash to be distracting when it's mounted close to the cockpit?
I found that the explosions hid the target when it was at long range. Did you have the same experience?

[Nik Reaper]

Elendil, on 10 May 2016 - 09:57 AM, said:

.....


In higher-end matches people know what they're being shot with, and will shrug off suppressing fire. They are given orders, and will follow them even when being rattled by AC2s or poked with ER Larges. It just makes you a target.
The only way to stop them is to kill them, and the best way to do that is ambushes at medium/close range. You bring a sniper or 'suppressing fire' mech, and you're wasting tonnage in your dropdeck.

Though there is an exception here, being an over-watch sniper high damage pinpoint front loaded damage variety , if you watched EMP vs SJR Jagger used a jumpsinper Timber wolf to great effect , as long as the team was able to hold the other team at a distance and maneuver around them.

As far as AC2 goes , it has a similar problem as the LRM have, they are weapons that make the enemy not want to be in the open , but due to heat, are even less efficient at it. I use mine in "fun" dakka builds but would never think to use them in a serious game. The thing they need , after they got the increased crit chance, is a rate of fire increase module and a serious heat decrease.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 15 May 2016 - 04:04 PM.

[Livaria]

Spleenslitta, on 15 May 2016 - 04:47 AM, said:

Oh yeah....2 questions. Do you find the AC2's firing flash to be distracting when it's mounted close to the cockpit?
I found that the explosions hid the target when it was at long range. Did you have the same experience?

I agree that the muzzle flash from an AC/2 is a bit much, and this applies to machine guns as well. The explosion effect on targets is something I haven't really noticed as much, This is probably because I've managed to adapt without really noticing. I took a closer look in testing grounds and I can see why you pointed it out, I wouldn't mind a smaller explosion.

Spleenslitta, on 15 May 2016 - 04:47 AM, said:

I wanna look at the AC2 from a nonboating perspective because there are no light mechs capable of carrying a reasonable amount of ammo and several AC2's while retaining the speed necessary to stay alive.

I would love it if mounting an AC/2 on a light mech could be a lot more desirable than it is now, I'm just unsure if it's within the realm of possibility AND acceptability. Here are the variables that we can probably change about the AC/2:

- Velocity
- Heat
- Fire Rate
- Range
- Ammo Per Ton

Now comes a difficult question; If we make the AC/2 a good weapon by changing any of these variables. Would the AC/2 become a reasonable choice to have on a light mech? If none of the above methods work, then it's definitely a good idea to add a new idea like the ones you've mentioned. I just can't be onboard with those ideas just yet.

Nik Reaper, on 15 May 2016 - 04:04 PM, said:

The thing they need , after they got the increased crit chance, is a rate of fire increase module and a serious heat decrease.

I've got a serious question to everyone suggesting a faster fire rate. Is it acceptable for the AC/2 to have more DPS than the AC/5? Because the DPS of an AC/2 is already close to an ordinary AC/5.

Edited by Livaria, 17 May 2016 - 04:49 AM.

[Spleenslitta]

Livaria, on 17 May 2016 - 04:26 AM, said:

I've got a serious question to everyone suggesting a faster fire rate. Is it acceptable for the AC/2 to have more DPS than the AC/5? Because the DPS of an AC/2 is already close to an ordinary AC/5.

That is a worrisome thing. But what if heat stayed the same? Then we would have to limit ourselves to firing it in bursts.
But then it would become too much like an ER LL maybe? I think it would be worth a shot but there is one obstacle standing in the way regardless of solution.

The obstacle is Paul's AC normalisation thingie or whatever he called it.

As for whether it's reasonable to mount an AC2 on a light mech- Why not?
I can put a single ER PPC which is about the same weight on a Kit Fox/Firestarter and still have tonnage left for other weapons and other stuff.
So it's far from unreasonable. They share range and weight. Besides i've heard of light mechs with Gauss rifles and those are a lot heavier.
Not to mention the Urbie with AC20.....

Edited by Spleenslitta, 17 May 2016 - 06:24 AM.

[Spleenslitta]

I guess we have to put our hopes on that new system they got coming down the pipe. The thing that will stop us from alphaing so often.
If that is a battery/energy/reactor system it can help the AC2 come onto equal footing with the ER PPC by consuming far less energy with each use.
If it is something about recoil instead the AC2 might fall even further behind.

Edited by Spleenslitta, 17 May 2016 - 07:14 AM.

[Livaria]

Spleenslitta, on 17 May 2016 - 06:17 AM, said:

As for whether it's reasonable to mount an AC2 on a light mech- Why not?
I can put a single ER PPC which is about the same weight on a Kit Fox/Firestarter and still have tonnage left for other weapons and other stuff.

I'll rephrase the question as best as I can.

If an AC/2 were to perform better by changing values like fire rate; would that be enough for players to consider equipping an AC/2 instead of a PPC? This question assumes that the AC/2 will find a good balance with other weapons.

Edited by Livaria, 18 May 2016 - 12:11 PM.

[Elendil]

It really wouldn't be that difficult to add a consumable that shuts down your mech for a little while and calls in a support drone to refill your ammo.
I don't think that would break the game too badly...

Then maybe you'd see meta builds that actually have ACs in them.

[Spleenslitta]

Livaria, on 18 May 2016 - 11:59 AM, said:

I'll rephrase the question as best as I can.

If an AC/2 were to perform better by changing values like fire rate; would that be enough for players to consider equipping an AC/2 instead of a PPC? This question assumes that the AC/2 will find a good balance with other weapons.

Yeah...that was more understandable. Thank you. Please take a look at this.

A) 5x0.35 secs= 1.75 secs for 10 damage.
B ) 5x0.30 secs= 1.5 secs for 10 damage.
C) 5x0.25 secs= 1.25 secs for 10 damage.

An IS ER LL does 9 damage during a burntime of 1.25 seconds for 8 heat. After that a 3.25 sec cooldown.
If the AC2 shoots a shell every 0.25 secs like in C) it does 10 damage in 1.25 secs for 5 heat.
AC2 is heavier than the ER LL and does not have instant hit like the laser furthermore it takes a bit more crit space to have enough ammo for a full match.
But it might be too powerfull so i suggested Burst Fire Limitations. That's a cooldown of 4 secs or so (same as PPC) when it's fired at maximum firerate.
But that might be too different to the other AC's so.....

How about going with option A)? A middleground that would not be dangerous when comparing with the ER PPC or ER LL.
Problem is the AC5...but it might work out. What do you think?

Edited by Spleenslitta, 18 May 2016 - 02:20 PM.

[Livaria]

I've read this earlier and I'm not really keen on increasing fire rate; I've only brought it up as an example. If this is something we want however, I think It should only be a small increase. If I had to choose; i would pick option A. It could very well be too powerful even then, and I want to be careful when it comes to fire rate. I don't want to complicate things more than I need too.

I have my doubts on the burst fire method. If I were to hypothesize on the situation; players themselves would probably wouldn't be accepting of the idea even if burst fire could theoretically work. They could argue that it strays too far from how an autocannon should operate. If any of you guys are reading this, feel free to share opinions on this statement.

I still don't like comparing an AC/2 with a PPC or an ER large laser. To do this is to make an abstract comparison. Like Apples and Oranges; they are technically competition, But they don't really have enough similar qualities except for range.

Edited by Livaria, 19 May 2016 - 11:30 AM.

[Spleenslitta]

Hmm...i got another way to make a comparison. Imagine you got a small laser with the same range and most importantly weight as the AC2 and capable of continuous fire.
Would you use such a heavy laser with such a long facetime to do so little damage that's spread out all over?

Edited by Spleenslitta, 19 May 2016 - 11:28 AM.

[Spleenslitta]

But in any case we might not see eye to eye on how things should be done. I'm just glad someone else is trying to save the poor neglected AC2.
Sadly i cannot find any new methods to save the poor thing. My biggest hope is the new mechanics the dev's have promised us that will stop us from alphaing so often....
Yeah. It's a thin string of hope but it's all i got at the moment.

[Livaria]

Oh boy, I don't think you understand the incredible weight of the question you've just asked. There is a quite the lack of information, and this is already a difficult question. However, I'll try to play along and I will assume some of the important details of this hypothetical scenario (Mind you that these scenarios can't happen all the time).

The Scenario:
- The laser shoots at the same rate of an AC/2.
- There are only light mechs involved.
- The heat and damage and burn time is the same as a small laser.
- I'm firing from a distance of whichever weapon has longer range.
- Modules and quirks are not used
- I'm fighting against one 'mech that carries a single ERLL or a PPC.
- All 'mechs have the same mobility.
- Torso twisting is not factored.

ER Large Laser Comparison:
The ER Large laser will deal 8.6 damage because of an estimated 9.5% damage reduction from having shorter range. The Mystery laser will probably win if all shots are accounted for, (which shouldn't be too hard since it's hitscan).

If both mechs are not in cover; The mystery laser would probably win against an ER large laser since it has better DPS, and the damage can be focused about as well as an ER large laser.

If both mechs are in cover; I estimate the light mech average exposure time is about 2.5 seconds. That's about, 3.5 shots fired from the mystery laser. Which turns out to be 10.5 damage inflicted on average

ERPPC Comparison:
The ERPPC will deal 10 damage and would statistically win. But there is a greater danger of missing a target. In this scenario, the mystery laser would have a damage reduction of 10.5% and deals a rounded 2.7 damage.

If both mechs are not in cover; The mystery laser deals 2.7 damage and the ERPPC deals 10 damage, however the PPC may not land successful hits all the time. It can be a close call, but the mystery laser could still possibly win since it has good DPS. It only needs to be held on target as opposed to leading very fast, and very distant targets with ERPPC projectiles.

If both mechs are in cover; Since mechs are in cover, there will be no target leading. Since the average exposure time is 2.5 seconds. The mystery laser will deal 9.45 damage on average each time a mech is exposed. The ERPPC will deal 10 damage. In this scenario, ERPPC is a little more likely to win but it's also another close call, especially if the player decides to suppress the location as to where a player is likely to peek.

Edited by Livaria, 20 May 2016 - 10:03 AM.

[Spleenslitta]

Aww...If it had a base damage of 2 instead of 3 every 0.72 secs.You gotta factor in facetime. Such a long time to do good amount of damage.
....a whatever. We won't see eye to eye no matter what it seems. XD
I'm just glad someone takes a stand for the sake of the AC2. Fight the good fight.

Edited by Spleenslitta, 19 May 2016 - 09:42 PM.

[Crux7]

UAC5s ALWAYS jam for me.
and when I have two BOTH jam at the same time.

[Livaria]

I did factor face time. I called it exposure time in the "mechs were in cover section". Anyways yeah, I'm done talking about it.

Crux7, on 20 May 2016 - 03:51 AM, said:

UAC5s ALWAYS jam for me.
and when I have two BOTH jam at the same time.

A UAC5 cannot ALWAYS jam. It can jam often, but it can't ALWAYS jam. After you've shot several shots into the enemy, would you say that you've gotten more out of a UAC5 more often than having two AC2s?

Edited by Livaria, 20 May 2016 - 06:16 PM.