62 replies to this topic

[Elessar]

Depends on their imlementation in game.
Within tabletop their main advantage was their long range (longer than even LRM IIRC).

Cannot imagine how this could be implemented in Mechwarrior type games (thinking of my experience with MW 1-4) unless shooting at stationary targets or with some kind of targeting computer implemented that calculates where you have to aim if you want to hit mech x at distance y with angle z

Edited by Elessar, 29 July 2012 - 03:53 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

and I must say, in MW terms, in 15 years or so when the Rotary AC/2 arrives, that there are few more elegantly brutal weapons one can have. With the superior range, payload and rate of fire to the rac/5 THE LESSER DAMAGE OF THE INDIVIDUAL ROUND IS MOOT.

Even the Ultra version is not all bad.

[Noaceik]

they are only usefull on suport vehicles that are fast like marik Herassers,and steiner Warrior 7's. They have 90 meters longer range then LRM's but do less damge then a 2 ton LRM5. I feel the same about ultra,and LBX ac2's.

[Pinkdemon]

I am new to these forums, but familiar with battletech from some other Mechwarrior game, although I don't remember which one it was 2 or 3. Anyway when I was starting to think of AC2s, you could add 4 of them + 4 Medium Pulse Lasers you could make constant alpha barrage with quite small heat build up. Also I am pretty sure there are better weapons for alpha , but this is just a thought.

Edited by Pinkdemon, 29 July 2012 - 04:05 AM.

[Xevian Flux]

I only used AC2s if I expected to encounter heavy armor/air support. Versus a 'Mech... no thanks.

[StickEGreen]

Too heavy, too little damage. Not worth a ballistic hardpoint atm imo. Really only the gauss, AC20 and Ultra AC5 are worth using now (in my opinion). I once tried using 3 on my dragon 5n, but it was a train wreck.

[Bishop Steiner]

StickEGreen, on 29 July 2012 - 04:14 AM, said:

Too heavy, too little damage. Not worth a ballistic hardpoint atm imo. Really only the gauss, AC20 and Ultra AC5 are worth using now (in my opinion). I once tried using 3 on my dragon 5n, but it was a train wreck.

Disagree. LB-10X AC is totally worth it, though it was better represented in MW#, where I mounted 2 on a bushwacker with a lot of ammo, and was able to jackhammer mechs into oblivion with chain fire.

[BigLuigi]

will love to try out the ac2 and ac5 versions as a skirmishing and fire-suppression weaponary.
especially missle boats could profit from them, as the off-aim effect by the impacts of fast firing ac-shells is more severe when the enemy is at longer distance. imagine a mech with 2 ac2 and LRM20 with plenty ammo, that cannot be hit properly at open maps because the crosshair dangles up an down. beautiful vision.

[Panthead]

I used to run a Jagermech with varied success, but the only time I really loved the AC2 is with the level 3 rules came AP rounds, and then they were great! Built me a Raven with with 2 AC2s could stand at extreme range and destroy mechs from the inside out.

[Baenlynn]

I can honestly say that in the 14 years in which I have been familiar with and off-and-on playing Battletech and Mechwarrior I have NEVER, not once, EVER used an AC2. Not in TT, not in the MW RPG, MW2, MW2: Mercs, GBL, MW3, Pirate's Moon, MW4, or MW4: Mercs. This is a trend I intend to keep following as long as I possibly can. I have found more use for MGs than I have for AC2s

Edit: forgot to mention... Not even in Mechwar. Anyone else remember that one?

Edited by Baenlynn, 29 July 2012 - 05:02 AM.

[Konner Duko]

only use i founf in table top was agianst vehicles and intrenched infintry bunkers in city combat. no need to heat up and get that job done quite easily. and the range was great to taking out the rooftop groups before they could hit you. other than that i don't think i ever fired one at another mech.

[Madddog]

Many of these comments don't belong here NDA is still in effect, pay attention to where you are posting

[Khobai]

AC2s are crap. Their damage is too low for their weight in TT. Thats why FASA introduced Light AC2s in maximum tech and made them weigh 2 tons less.

Edited by Khobai, 29 July 2012 - 05:46 AM.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Every weapon has a use someplace, but there are darn few places where an AC 2 fits in. If vehicles were Implemented, the AC 2 is a great weapon to mount on a helicopter, so that it can fire on dangerous battlemechs from a different postal code.

Original tabletop had a use for the AC 5. At 2 tons heavier than a PPC (including ammo) and producing 9 less heat, it was a viable, if suboptimal, choice. But the more tech that was introduced, the less optimal it became. The light auto cannons and rotary auto cannons put it back onto the tabletop, but we won't see those weapons for quite some time in MWO.

Until then, I'll play around with the Ultra AC 5, assuming it has a superior rate of fire like we think it will.

[RogueSpear]

Given that all AC rounds cause rock, I plan to use an UAC5 and an AC2 on something like a centurion. Offset reload times that are very close to each other, with a low cooldown will result in very hard to predict and counter for staggering - sure, I'm not going to do the same damage as an AC20, but that doesn't matter if I'm moving fast enough and staggering the other guy enough that he can't hit me. And unlike the AC20, the AC2 and UAC5 have range.
If possible, I'll stick an MG on it as well - once the ACs rub off the armour, the MG can just sandpaper the internal structure for crits.
XL Engines beware.

[zebrahead]

Is it possible to run a kiting style strategy that was a bit popular in MPBT?

Hit the throttle full reverse, and use the range on the ac/2's to trim down an opponent before switching into engage combat tactics?


/shrug I can dream!

[Pht]

Enervation, on 28 July 2012 - 08:00 PM, said:

I'm still not sure where to stand on the AC/2 situation. Unless they come in quads like on the Mauler; where is the damage potential, besides extreme nickel and dime snipering?

You mean, the job they were designed to do?

[Exilyth]

The viability of any autocannon depends on one factor: can it deal the same damage as the next bigger AC during the time it takes your enemy to close the distance between your maximum firing range and the range of the next bigger AC?

E.g. can the AC2 deal >= 5 damage before the enemy can come into AC5 range?

Edited by Exilyth, 30 July 2012 - 03:02 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

I think the issue of AC/2s are that they aren't really an anti-mech/armor weapon. They are anti-vehicle, anti-air and anti-personal weapon.

Battle in the universe isn't really only mech on mech, it is really a combined arms operation just like armies today. The vast bulk of any force is the supporting infantry and light units because at the end of the day, only infantry can hold the ground once taken.

So if battle was real, Mechs would find themselves often engaging light armored units similar to Hummers, APCs, light helicopters, etc. in those scenerios, an AC/2 would be invaluable.

The issue is, the glamor of Mechwarrior/Battletech isn't infantry or light vehicles, it is Mechs so that is all that is ever really showcased and since it is all that is showcased, we end up with disucssion such as this talking about how crappy an AC/2 is.

[Deceptor]

I always wished they could be a step up from the machine gun. As it is How many machine guns fit into equivalent?