104 replies to this topic

[The6thMessenger]

FupDup, on 14 February 2021 - 07:18 PM, said:

No, it's a characteristic determined by the weapon's stats. A Heavy Gauss for example is never gonna be a DPS weapon regardless of build or playstyle. It's a frontloaded weapon by its nature. Extreme example yes but it gets the point across.

A Medium Laser and AC/5 both deal 5 damage, but the ML is a good frontloaded weapon and the AC/5 is a DPS weapon with really bad frontloaded characteristics, because the AC/5 pays so much for its 5 damage that it has to shoot faster in order to be somewhat relevant. The Magshot and AC/2 both deal 2 damage. The Magshot would work fine with a slow cooldown because it only weighs 0.5 tons, but since the AC/2 pays 6 tons it has to shoot really fast to be worth its weight. Etc.

That's what I just said, you only elaborated it.

FupDup, on 14 February 2021 - 07:18 PM, said:

Basically a weapon can get away with low damage if it either has very low weight (laser) or fairly fast firing (AC). Low damage and moderate tonnage and slow firing is the worst of all worlds.

Doesn't matter, because the point of it was you can amass more LACs to compensate for it. It doesn't make that much sense to make LAC5s compete with AC5s, rather it's better to put two of them where AC10 would be.

AC10 is 10 damage very 2.25s, translating to 4.44 DPS right? The 2x LAC5 at -2 tons, does 10 damage every 1.95s + 0.33s = 2.28s, = 4.386 DPS, which is still pretty ballpark DPS considering that AC10 weighs 2 tons more. Despite the ****** stats you think they are, they are actually quite good.

It's when the Urbie can forgo an AC10, for 2x LAC5 instead. You literally get more that way and still have similar damage out, so I don't see the problem.

FupDup, on 14 February 2021 - 07:18 PM, said:

Adder, Fox, and Cougar can handle it, but they are outclassed by the other higher-damage builds available. But they are at least doable.

And that's the aim, doable. Just don't expect to be as good.

FupDup, on 14 February 2021 - 07:18 PM, said:

The IS 35-tonners can squeeze it in but backup weaponry won't be so great. The Urbanmech enters meme territory with a UAC/10 because it requires a substantial engine downgrade (XL180 only leaves room from 1 ton of ammo, and that's without adding JJs).

Urbie doesn't need 100 KPH, 78 to 72 KPH is plenty. Hell, XL170 at 98 KPH is enough in most cases, it's +0.5 and just 3 slots less. It's just a small jump of speed from 98 to 104.5 KPH

Urbie UAC10 + ERSL | 2t ammo

At any rate, ammo-ton quirk should totally be done, up to +100% ammo/ton for Urbie.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 14 February 2021 - 08:01 PM.

[LordNothing]

Miss Greene, on 14 February 2021 - 07:16 PM, said:

Does not compute. You have the weight of the casings, primers, and possibly sabots for every shell, now, some of which you would otherwise only need one of. The overall weight would likely be higher, not lower, with smaller calibre doing the same damage against armor with all else being equal.



Not really. Small lasers are useful on Assaults, too, you know.



You use all the cACs poorly and would do better with PPFLD. Sorry to be blunt.

when i want ppfld i take the freaking warhawk.

also when did battletech ballistics ever compute? a bigger gun getting less range? unheard of. an ac20 is like an 8 inch naval gun which has a 13 kilometer effective range. yet somehow only works out to 270ish meters. the gau-8 because the ammo feed is synced to the barrels and start firing the second a shell passes the firing position, yet somehow we have to wait a half a second for that to happen with a rac. stop applying logic!

Edited by LordNothing, 14 February 2021 - 08:36 PM.

[LordNothing]

FupDup, on 14 February 2021 - 06:08 PM, said:

New content would probably help them milk it better because it would beef up the player population for at least a while and give bored veterans a reason to start up the game again (in one of their threads they did say they wanted to bring back old retired players).

i would love for pgi to commit to another civil war scale pack with something for everyone. even if they had the will to do the work, they got some internal cultural problem that keeps them from doing it. they are like a bunch of construction workers under an ocd foreman who is trying to micromanage everything, and so people are waiting around doing nothing until they get their assignments because they dont want to be fired for taking initiative. most of these weapons already exist in mw5 mods and within weeks of the launch of the mod tools. pgi got to be ergophobes or bureaucrats or something. if they actually did commit to say a jihad pack, and put up the preorder today, id buy it now. id buy mw5 dlc if it was available.

[LordNothing]

Ialdabaoth, on 14 February 2021 - 06:43 PM, said:

Never change, MWO community... never change.

change? what is this? a functional relationship between a game developer and a game community? absurd!

[FupDup]

The6thMessenger, on 14 February 2021 - 07:39 PM, said:

Doesn't matter, because the point of it was you can amass more LACs to compensate for it. It doesn't make that much sense to make LAC5s compete with AC5s, rather it's better to put two of them where AC10 would be.

AC10 is 10 damage very 2.25s, translating to 4.44 DPS right? The 2x LAC5 at -2 tons, does 10 damage every 1.95s + 0.33s = 2.28s, = 4.386 DPS, which is still pretty ballpark DPS considering that AC10 weighs 2 tons more. Despite the ****** stats you think they are, they are actually quite good.

It's when the Urbie can forgo an AC10, for 2x LAC5 instead. You literally get more that way and still have similar damage out, so I don't see the problem.

We can already demo your version of 2x LAC/5 by using the CAC/10, which is an okay weapon but isn't a good choice for low-tonnage mechs (also 2x LAC/5 needs more tonnage for ammo and generates a bit more heat, has less range). It works fine on things with high pod space like the Hunch IIC, but mechs like that already have a lot of options.

The6thMessenger, on 14 February 2021 - 07:39 PM, said:

And that's the aim, doable. Just don't expect to be as good.

If the goal we're aiming for is only being "doable" then that means we don't need any new ballistic weapons at all. You can already put in an AC/2 or AC/5. Pack it up guys, we've got em.

The goal is to make them better than they are now because the lack of low-tonnage ballistics presents a large hole in the weapons sandbox. I admit that a LAC/PAC light mech is unlikely to be completely and truly equal to something like an MPL Wolfhound even with the most generous implementation, but the gap needs to get a lot smaller at least. Otherwise there's no compelling reason to clamor for their inclusion, if they don't open up new niches.

The6thMessenger, on 14 February 2021 - 07:39 PM, said:

Urbie doesn't need 100 KPH, 78 to 72 KPH is plenty. Hell, XL170 at 98 KPH is enough in most cases, it's +0.5 and just 3 slots less. It's just a small jump of speed from 98 to 104.5 KPH

Urbie UAC10 + ERSL | 2t ammo

67 kph Urbie is a meme build.

I wouldn't go below a 170 engine because you have to downgrade so many ratings before there's a tonnage difference (150 weighs as much as 170) but then you have to spend more slots on external DHS, meaning you may need to swap your armor to a heavier type, which eats up that tonnage you just freed up.

This also makes me wonder how ammo quirks as a percentage would work, if the game knows to round them down or if we'd get decimal ammo values. Listing them as % would certainly make the Magazine Capacity and Missile Rack skills cause far less clutter in the UI...


Side note, just did some SSW experimenting and found that an Urbie with XXL180 and XL Gyro (Endo structure and STD armor) would have 14.5 tons to play with (and 2 JJs). Or, if we're in a YOLO mood, Composite Structure with FF armor gives you 15 tons.

A 35-tonner with the same specs (Composite + FF + 210 XXL + XL Gyro) would get 18 tons...actually might be viable for dakka.

Edited by FupDup, 15 February 2021 - 01:34 PM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

The6thMessenger, on 14 February 2021 - 01:33 AM, said:

Yes please.

Light ACs are always welcome.

This is something most people can agree on

[FupDup]

Oh, and there's still more tech that I forgot to list.

Supercharger: Like MASC, but it damages your CT instead of your legs. You can stack it with MASC at the same time. Omnimechs can pod-mount this. Weight varies based on engine size so PGI would have to split it up like they did for TC's (Supercharger Mk. I, Mk. II, etc).

Chameleon Light Polarization Shield: Actual visual cloaking device. Not compatible with Stealth Armor (thank god). I strongly advise against adding it to MWO.

Void Signature System: Visual and sensor cloaking. I dunno how it's different from CLPS honestly (CLPS also makes you invisible from sensors and vision) but let's avoid this one too.

Triple-Strength Myomer: Increases movement speed when you get hot. Probably overpowered in MWO because everything in this game runs so hot and riding the red line is the main way to play. Does not work with MASC but does work with Supercharger.

Small Cockpit: IS-only cockpit that takes up 1 less ton and 1 less slot. In MWO, the penalties would translate into having increased cockpit shake from weapons/JJs and having nerfed sensors. Probably too much of a direct upgrade even then. Ideally equipping this would actually shrink down your field of view as well but there's no way PGI is gonna make a second cockpit model for every IS mech. Maybe avoid this one, but I guess 1 ton and 1 slot for a slap on the wrist penalty isn't a gamebreaker.

Heavy-Duty Gyro: Heavier than normal gyro. In TT it can survive multiple crits, but obviously we can't port that to MWO. Instead I think some ways to translate it to this game include a drastic cockpit shake reduction (also reducing shake from JJs, MASC, etc.), better hill climbing, and/or better agility in general (your mech can balance better so it can make faster movements without losing its balance). Maybe a bit underpowered.

Edited by FupDup, 15 February 2021 - 01:59 PM.

[The pessimistic optimist]

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 01:46 PM, said:

Oh, and there's still more tech that I forgot to list.

Supercharger: Like MASC, but it damages your CT instead of your legs. You can stack it with MASC at the same time. Omnimechs can pod-mount this.

Chameleon Light Polarization Shield: Actual visual cloaking device. Not compatible with Stealth Armor (thank god). I strongly advise against adding it to MWO.

Void Signature System: Visual and sensor cloaking. I dunno how it's different from CLPS honestly (CLPS also makes you invisible from sensors and vision) but let's avoid this one too.

Triple-Strength Myomer: Increases movement speed when you get hot. Probably overpowered in MWO because everything in this game runs so hot and riding the red line is the main way to play. Does not work with MASC but does work with Supercharger.

Small Cockpit: IS-only cockpit that takes up 1 less ton and 1 less slot. In MWO, the penalties would translate into having increased cockpit shake from weapons/JJs and having nerfed sensors. Probably too much of a direct upgrade even then. Ideally equipping this would actually shrink down your field of view as well but there's no way PGI is gonna make a second cockpit model for every IS mech. Maybe avoid this one, but I guess 1 ton and 1 slot for a slap on the wrist penalty isn't a gamebreaker.

Some of that stuff shouldn't not be added for sure but some of it would be great. Add the things they will not break the game.I like to see X-Pulse added it post to be upgrade to pulse lasers and not a new weapon system could add it like Artemis were you toggle on or off. But it would have to be very hot to make it balanced

Edited by SirSmokes, 15 February 2021 - 01:57 PM.

[FupDup]

SirSmokes, on 15 February 2021 - 01:50 PM, said:

Some of that stuff shouldn't not be added for sure but some of it would be great. Add the things they will not break the game.I like to see X-Pulse added it post to be upgrade to pulse lasers and not a new weapon system could add it like Artemis were you toggle on or off. But it would have to be very hot to make it balanced

It would be a lot easier for X-Wubs to be their own separate weapons. The Artemis toggle by the way is actually switching between different weapons anyways.

As for their stats, they'd probably need to inherit the range boost that IS pulse lasers got (roughly 22% each). Assuming this 22% carries over:

SXPL: 183m (actually longer than CSPL)
MXPL: 329m (matches CMPL, but with longer max range)
LXPL: 549m (not quite CLPL range but pretty close, also longer max range)

Maybe bump the medium down to 300 and large down to 510 (keep the small at about 180-185 though).Or even keep them at these high values, depending on where we set the heat...

Assuming they inherit the heat reductions of IS pulses:

SXPL: 2.04 (SPL is 1.35)
MXPL: 5.70 (MPL is 3.8)
LXPL: 10.15 (LPL is 7.25)

I think the MXPL could nudge down to somewhere between 5 to 5.5. Maybe nudge the large down to 9.75? The SXPL might be a little too good if it had almost the range of the ERSL and a lot less heat so I guess bump that one up a little.

I used to be pretty pessimistic about X-Wubs but if we carry over the regular pulse changes then they could actually be pretty nasty. Not revolutionary in terms of opening new roles that didn't yet exist like MRMs did, but certainly strong. Same goes for Clan ER Wubs (especially ER MPL, if it got to keep its TT range it would be pretty darn good).

Edited by FupDup, 15 February 2021 - 02:28 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 01:27 PM, said:

We can already demo your version of 2x LAC/5 by using the CAC/10, which is an okay weapon but isn't a good choice for low-tonnage mechs (also 2x LAC/5 needs more tonnage for ammo and generates a bit more heat, has less range). It works fine on things with high pod space like the Hunch IIC, but mechs like that already have a lot of options.

Well that's what the quirks are for, also backup lasers. Besides, that's LAC5 for IS, while CACs are for Clans, they have a different set of equipment.

After that's all said and done, you can't reasonably expect lights to pull in the same numbers as mediums do, hell even to be competitive or just as near as an MPL Wolfhound. And if you really need ballstics to be relevant for lights, again that's what the quirks are for. Ballistic CD and Ammo/Ton Quirk all around.

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 01:27 PM, said:

If the goal we're aiming for is only being "doable" then that means we don't need any new ballistic weapons at all. You can already put in an AC/2 or AC/5. Pack it up guys, we've got em.

I don't know what to tell you, the "doable" standard that you made use of Cinder, Adder, and Kitfox doing Ultra AC20 is much different than putting an AC2 or AC5 to IS mechs that couldn't at most effective capacity.

Giving them access to basically almost an Ultra AC10 for merely 10 tons is quite a massive departure from where we are now. And in fact, if they can already put those weapons such as an AC5, having a 2x LAC2 would probably be a better option, which fulfills the intended spirit.

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 01:27 PM, said:

The goal is to make them better than they are now because the lack of low-tonnage ballistics presents a large hole in the weapons sandbox. I admit that a LAC/PAC light mech is unlikely to be completely and truly equal to something like an MPL Wolfhound even with the most generous implementation, but the gap needs to get a lot smaller at least. Otherwise there's no compelling reason to clamor for their inclusion, if they don't open up new niches.

Sure, but they are going to be already better by the stats I have given, they will be able to do what otherwise joke builds do poorly. The fact that they can mount a set of ballistics in serious capacity changes that. Any shortcomings must only be addressed with quirks, because that's what we always had been doing.

On an Urbie I had to use either an XL145 or XL125 with more ammo for an AC10 with 2x ERML. Having to use 2x LAC5 in place instead would allow me to get to a higher engine, add more armor, and a laser or extra ammunition since it's almost an Ultra AC10 for IS. Realistically it's going to only feel like an Ultra-ACs. Anything else, the Mech Rifle would probably fill in the alpha better.

The Clans, well, I don't think I can expect much for 25s and 20 tonners to put on a bit of dakka. The 30 to 35 tonners can already mount the good dakka, and having more options would be better. The Cinder that could bring 2x UAC5 instead bring 4 PAC4s for a burst of 16 damage every 1.88s and not jam -- that's already a massive plus. Or if not, maybe combination PAC2s and PAC4s that can feel totally like a pint-sized 2x UAC2 + 2x UAC5 or 2x UAC10 + 2x UAC5 but for kids, also PAC4 + PAC8s that will feel like 2x UAC10 + UAC20.

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 01:27 PM, said:

I wouldn't go below a 170 engine because you have to downgrade so many ratings before there's a tonnage difference (150 weighs as much as 170) but then you have to spend more slots on external DHS, meaning you may need to swap your armor to a heavier type, which eats up that tonnage you just freed up.

145 and 125 are workable, one's 78 KPH, other's 67, and those are heavy speeds. You won't be easily flanking, but you won't be left behind.

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 01:27 PM, said:

This also makes me wonder how ammo quirks as a percentage would work, if the game knows to round them down or if we'd get decimal ammo values. Listing them as % would certainly make the Magazine Capacity and Missile Rack skills cause far less clutter in the UI...

Same as Skill Tree ammo-nodes. Don't overthink it.

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 01:27 PM, said:

Side note, just did some SSW experimenting and found that an Urbie with XXL180 and XL Gyro (Endo structure and STD armor) would have 14.5 tons to play with (and 2 JJs). Or, if we're in a YOLO mood, Composite Structure with FF armor gives you 15 tons.

A 35-tonner with the same specs (Composite + FF + 210 XXL + XL Gyro) would get 18 tons...actually might be viable for dakka.

Urbie should have been a 35-tonner.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 15 February 2021 - 05:29 PM.

[PocketYoda]

crazytimes, on 14 February 2021 - 05:44 PM, said:

I appreciate the optimism... but it has been what 4 years since a weapon, over 2 years since a mech... and they are forecasting another 9 months until they consider putting a new hardpoint on an existing chassis.

If you think new weapons are happening before the heat death of the universe...

Sometimes all it takes to get things done is optimism.

The6thMessenger, on 14 February 2021 - 07:39 PM, said:

Urbie doesn't need 100 KPH, 78 to 72 KPH is plenty. Hell, XL170 at 98 KPH is enough in most cases, it's +0.5 and just 3 slots less. It's just a small jump of speed from 98 to 104.5 KPH

Urbie UAC10 + ERSL | 2t ammo

At any rate, ammo-ton quirk should totally be done, up to +100% ammo/ton for Urbie.

Urbies only need 91kph imo. I've seen them do ok with 85+kph

Edited by Samial, 15 February 2021 - 07:04 PM.

[FupDup]

Samial, on 15 February 2021 - 06:58 PM, said:

Sometimes all it takes to get things done is optimism.

Around here it usually takes a good old fashioned dumpster fire.

[FupDup]

The6thMessenger, on 15 February 2021 - 05:28 PM, said:

Well that's what the quirks are for, also backup lasers. Besides, that's LAC5 for IS, while CACs are for Clans, they have a different set of equipment.

After that's all said and done, you can't reasonably expect lights to pull in the same numbers as mediums do, hell even to be competitive or just as near as an MPL Wolfhound. And if you really need ballstics to be relevant for lights, again that's what the quirks are for. Ballistic CD and Ammo/Ton Quirk all around.

-Le snip-

Ultimately, my hardline stance is a result of completely lacking faith in our Balancing Overlords™ in giving proper care to bad robots. If they did help bad robots then we probably wouldn't be here right now talking about it.

Even if quirks were unleashed as they should be, I think it's still kind of clunky that we'd have to give cooldown and ammo quirks to any future ballistic-oriented mech that is low on pod space. It gets the job done, but it would be nicer to not need it in the first place (kinda like how MRMs mean we don't need to give mega missile quirks to mechs that have only one missile hardpoint).

Lastly, I'm not comparing lights to mediums, I'm comparing lights (and tonnage-starved mediums) to energy and missile loadouts on similar chassis (i.e. Raven 2X vs. 4X). Heck, even some tonnage-starved bigger mechs like the Gargles and Linebacker could have some fun with new lightweight ballistics (and/or better ballistic quirks).

I'll leave it at this because we're kind of talking past each other. TL;DR: The Nerfinator is the reason why we cannot have nice things. The glass is neither half empty nor half full, it's been tipped over and nuked from orbit for good measure.

The6thMessenger, on 15 February 2021 - 05:28 PM, said:

Same as Skill Tree ammo-nodes. Don't overthink it.

I'm over-thinking it because it would be awkward to list out every single possible ballistic weapon that you get ammo for in the quirks section (which skill tree ammo nodes currently do). Making it into a % instead would be a nice quality of life change.

The6thMessenger, on 15 February 2021 - 05:28 PM, said:

Urbie should have been a 35-tonner.

I mean, there is a certain other IS 35-ton mech known for ballistic weapons, and it seems to consistently score high in GasGuzzler's polling...but then we come full circle back to the lack of quirkage.

Edited by FupDup, 15 February 2021 - 07:15 PM.

[Blood Rose]

LordNothing, on 14 February 2021 - 08:25 PM, said:

also when did battletech ballistics ever compute? a bigger gun getting less range? unheard of. an ac20 is like an 8 inch naval gun which has a 13 kilometer effective range. yet somehow only works out to 270ish meters.

As I understand it the barrel lengths are cut down and the guns have a lower velocity, reducing the range.

[The6thMessenger]

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 07:12 PM, said:

Ultimately, my hardline stance is a result of completely lacking faith in our Balancing Overlords™ in giving proper care to bad robots. If they did help bad robots then we probably wouldn't be here right now talking about it.

They have bad takes on weapons too. If you believe they can add new weapons, you should assume that they can also tweak mechs in response. I mean if you can't really trust them to balance the mechs with their promise of better MWO, why would you even expect them to add new weapons? That's a whole-'nother work.

But hey, if you don't trust PGI to properly balance mechs, why would I expect them properly balance the heat of LACs and PACs? Hell, they can't even balance their own weapons.

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 07:12 PM, said:

Even if quirks were unleashed as they should be, I think it's still kind of clunky that we'd have to give cooldown and ammo quirks to any future ballistic-oriented mech that is low on pod space. It gets the job done, but it would be nicer to not need it in the first place (kinda like how MRMs mean we don't need to give mega missile quirks to mechs that have only one missile hardpoint).

But that is the point of quirks, is to make mechs more effective with what they are supposed to be. Lights aren't supposed to be that effective here as they were designed in actual TT battletech, they are just supposed to run objectives.

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 07:12 PM, said:

Lastly, I'm not comparing lights to mediums, I'm comparing lights (and tonnage-starved mediums) to energy and missile loadouts on similar chassis (i.e. Raven 2X vs. 4X).

Heck, even some tonnage-starved bigger mechs like the Gargles and Linebacker could have some fun with new lightweight ballistics (and/or better ballistic quirks).

Sure? But that's unrealistic, Lasers and Missiles adhere to light meta better, as in hit-and-run.

Overtuning the PACs and LACs isn't the right approach especially when it will work it's way upward, it's just multiplication Their direct damage output should be balanced by their tonnage as it produces a hard cap of output.

You can't just expect heat to balance it all out, hell, there's incredibly hot weapons in the game, and players frequently ride those no problem. I have no doubt that they too can work around the heat.

I think it would serve better that LACs and PACs like ACs before it, are generally cold. It can augment lights' use of hot lasers, into sustained shots once they are hot.

FupDup, on 15 February 2021 - 07:12 PM, said:

I'm over-thinking it because it would be awkward to list out every single possible ballistic weapon that you get ammo for in the quirks section (which skill tree ammo nodes currently do). Making it into a % instead would be a nice quality of life change.

I don't see the problem of individual weapon type ammo/ton improvement. This will allow you to selectively add different bonus ammunition for different weapons, and address simply what they need to.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 15 February 2021 - 09:51 PM.

[LordNothing]

Blood Rose, on 15 February 2021 - 07:39 PM, said:

As I understand it the barrel lengths are cut down and the guns have a lower velocity, reducing the range.

that works. but battletech likes to roll accuracy and range into a single stat, which it just calls range. the range limits are actually the range where its more likely to miss more than hit. but when you apply game physics to it, accuracy becomes the player's job and range is attenuated and then cut off at arbitrary limits. thats what goes against reality, atmospheric drag is really terrible at decelerating high mass projectiles, it takes kilometers, not a few hundreds of meters.

[PocketYoda]

The6thMessenger, on 14 February 2021 - 07:39 PM, said:

That's what I just said, you only elaborated it.



Doesn't matter, because the point of it was you can amass more LACs to compensate for it. It doesn't make that much sense to make LAC5s compete with AC5s, rather it's better to put two of them where AC10 would be.

AC10 is 10 damage very 2.25s, translating to 4.44 DPS right? The 2x LAC5 at -2 tons, does 10 damage every 1.95s + 0.33s = 2.28s, = 4.386 DPS, which is still pretty ballpark DPS considering that AC10 weighs 2 tons more. Despite the ****** stats you think they are, they are actually quite good.

It's when the Urbie can forgo an AC10, for 2x LAC5 instead. You literally get more that way and still have similar damage out, so I don't see the problem.

Some mechs can't add a AC10 and backup weapons and ammo but could add 2x LAC5s with ammo.. to achieve the same results somewhat.

Edited by Samial, 15 February 2021 - 10:09 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Samial, on 15 February 2021 - 10:06 PM, said:

Some mechs can't add a AC10 and backup weapons and ammo but could add 2x LAC5s with ammo.. to achieve the same results somewhat.

And that's the point.

All things considering, a single AC10 is actually serviceable given their low tonnage capacity. The problem is many cannot fit them at all, but now they have something that can.

[The pessimistic optimist]

Samial, on 15 February 2021 - 06:58 PM, said:

Sometimes all it takes to get things done is optimism.

Nothing ever got done when people threw up their hands and said there is no hope truth

Edited by SirSmokes, 16 February 2021 - 01:11 PM.

[Grus]

Mmmm direwolf UV with HAG's....