3 Ac10 Vs 3 Lbx10 Vs 4 Uac5
#1
Posted 20 May 2018 - 10:05 AM
I originally built the Mech around using 3 AC 10. Then I wondered whether I could fit in 4 UAC 5 instead. I can, but the ammo is a bit tight and it produces quite some more heat. Then I wondered whether the 3 LBX 10 would be a better choice, seeing as they are producing less heat and I can carry a lot more ammo.
So essentially I keep going in circles. I just have no idea whether the additional damage spread of the LBX offsets the lesser heat production and additional ammo.
So I am looking for advice. Can anybody help a confused newbie out?
#2
Posted 20 May 2018 - 10:20 AM
#3
Posted 20 May 2018 - 10:34 AM
https://mwo.smurfy-n...d4e46c11c444873
Edited by Darakor Stormwind, 20 May 2018 - 10:34 AM.
#4
Posted 20 May 2018 - 10:43 AM
https://mwo.smurfy-n...68669b85eaaf4f7
ST:
https://kitlaan.gitl...b1d33#s=Weapons
Edited by VXJaeger, 20 May 2018 - 10:46 AM.
#5
Posted 20 May 2018 - 09:03 PM
Then I wondered whether putting 2 RAC5's into the mix would be fun, but I think it will just confuse things even more. ;-)
#7
Posted 20 May 2018 - 11:18 PM
Darakor Stormwind, on 20 May 2018 - 09:03 PM, said:
Then I wondered whether putting 2 RAC5's into the mix would be fun, but I think it will just confuse things even more. ;-)
210 has dmg potential of 1050, and with ST addentum 252 ammo is quite enough for match. If that ain't enough, you should learn how to shoot.
And it's pretty much always bad idea to mix different ACs together. In some mechs 2*RAC5 + 2*LBX2 is manageable, but that's very rare.
Edited by VXJaeger, 21 May 2018 - 04:16 AM.
#8
Posted 21 May 2018 - 12:46 AM
That said it is solid, so if you can make it work do it. Just take off the 3ERML lasers. They are simply not needed and get more ammo.
You can also try other options
ONE - Slight change
Or...
TWO - The big boss. This is how you DPS. Decent speed and you can lay out 70-80pts in a fairly short space (no jams).
#9
Posted 21 May 2018 - 02:22 AM
#10
Posted 21 May 2018 - 02:43 AM
#11
Posted 21 May 2018 - 04:17 AM
In another quarter of the matches I play, the other Assaults do weird stuff, like the lone Assault gone flanking. Or a single Assault staying at the very very back of the line and sniping. It often is the last Assault to die, but I have never seen that strategy work, yet. The pilot usually has the highest damage out of the Charlie lance, but we still lose.
I have found that I can lead pushes in the midgame. The ACs are usually good in getting people to head back into cover, so we can advance quite nicely. Works great when attacking the flanks. And is a very embarrassing way to die when the flank turns out to be the main force. ;-)
#12
Posted 21 May 2018 - 04:35 AM
AC10 style guns aren't necessarily terrible, but they're generally weight inefficient.
Edited by Averen, 21 May 2018 - 04:36 AM.
#13
Posted 21 May 2018 - 06:15 AM
We kinda rolled over the enemy really quickly, though, and in the end I was a bit surprised that I had only gotten around 250-300 damage every time. It felt like more and I do not think I would have gotten that kind of damage with the old build. (EDIT: I think it would have been lower) I am going to stick with that build for a bit longer. Worked much better for me than the 4 UAC5 build, for some reason....
I did, however do a slight change. As I do not have another engine and cannot really afford one, I stuck with mine, kept the heatsinks in and just put in more ammo. ;-) Even on a fairly hot map it felt fine.
Thank you for all the suggestions.
Edited by Darakor Stormwind, 21 May 2018 - 06:16 AM.
#14
Posted 21 May 2018 - 09:06 PM
ACs in GroupQ where yoir team is presenting lots if targets and players than can aim, will absolutely shred enemies.
So yeah, you'll find UACs generally will work better and IS UAC10s, despite being too hot, will smash through targets better than UAC5s
#15
Posted 22 May 2018 - 02:17 AM
Darakor Stormwind, on 21 May 2018 - 04:17 AM, said:
Strangely enough, when that's me, I always win... Then again, I'm 1-shoting them with dual HGauss and 3x-5x ERML from an ECM Fafnir.
I literally only do this for two reasons:
1. My team is nascaring, and I have no hope of ever keeping up.
2. There are no responses whatsoever to my "hello" on voice comms.
If the team is intent on not communicating or doing stupid stuff, I'll go looking to keep my score out of the gutter.
[/end rant about bad teammates in QP]
Here is the list of ballistics DP10s (damage dealt over a 10 second period) if the weapon doesn't jam. (and the weapon's slots/tonnage, and DP10s/ton, and DP10s/heat)
30.00 DP10s C-Gauss 6s/12t 2.500/t 15.00/h 55.56 DP10s C-UAC2 2s/5t 11.11/t 2.500/h 60.00 DP10s C-UAC5 3s/7t 8.571/t 3.000/h 80.00 DP10s C-UAC10 4s/10t 8.000/t 2.857/h 100.0 DP10s C-UAC20 8s/12t 8.333/t 2.857/h 27.78 DP10s C-AC2 3s/5t 5.556/t 4.000/h 30.00 DP10s C-AC5 4s/7t 4.286/t 3.557/h 44.44 DP10s C-AC10 5s/10t 4.444/t 5.000/h 50.00 DP10s C-AC20 9s/12t 4.167/t 3.333/h 27.78 DP10s C-LBX2 3s/5t 5.556/t 5.000/h 30.00 DP10s C-LBX5 4s/7t 4.286/t 4.980/h 44.44 DP10s C-LBX10 5s/10t 4.444/t 5.000/h 50.00 DP10s C-LBX20 9s/12t 4.167/t 3.333/h ---------------------------------------------- 30.77 DP10s LGauss 5s/12t 2.565/t 14.55/h 30.00 DP10s Gauss 7s/15t 2.000/t 15.00/h 50.00 DP10s HGauss 11s/18t 2.778/t 12.50/h 55.56 DP10s UAC2 3s/7t 7.936/t 2.500/h 60.00 DP10s UAC5 5s/9t 5.557/t 3.000/h 80.00 DP10s UAC10 7s/13t 6.154/t 2.857/h 100.0 DP10s UAC20 10s/15t 6.667/t 2.857/h 27.78 DP10s AC2 1s/6t 4.630/t 4.000/h 30.00 DP10s AC5 4s/8t 3.750/t 3.557/h 44.44 DP10s AC10 7s/12t 3.704/t 3.636/h 50.00 DP10s AC20 10s/14t 3.571/t 3.333/h 27.78 DP10s LBX2 4s/6t 4.630/t 5.000/h 30.00 DP10s LBX5 5s/8t 3.750/t 4.980/h 44.44 DP10s LBX10 6s/11t 3.704/t 5.000/h 50.00 DP10s LBX20 11s/14t 3.571/t 4.000/h
I use DP10s instead of DPS because it's easier to represent in a useful manner. (especially if you want to start including jam times and chances into calculations, or firing delays to prevent Ghost Heat)
I'll let you decide which is best for you yourself, but the most efficient ballistic weapon in the game is the Clan UAC line, (topped by the cUAC2) followed by the IS UAC2.
Edited by BTGbullseye, 22 May 2018 - 02:21 AM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users