388 replies to this topic

[Jonas]

There have been a lot of pros and cons of the AC 2/5 ( non-ultra or LBX ). In short AC 2/5 are for heavier light Mechs & lighter medium Mechs ( except for the Rifleman ). That is what there designed to mounted on and to fight against. No one is going to be mounting a AC 2/5 on a heavy or an assault as a main weapon system. As a back up or apart of weapons array maybe but never as a main gun. Now I could see maybe an Ultra AC/5 used with dual large laser x2, medium pulse laser x2 set up like the Daishi prime, in that since it apart of a X pattern of death per arm. But since the clans are so fare away at the moment we not going to be dealing with them. I do have ideas on a few set ups for the Mediums that we have but I have to wait and see how exactly the Lab works in real time and not just on paper.

[Paul Inouye]

5 pages of pure speculation?

Did you guys install a peep camera in our studio? And how did you get to see what the AC/2 does before I did?

[Sug]

Just let us in the Beta for the love of God!!!

[Mason Grimm]

Paul Inouye, on 13 April 2012 - 12:29 PM, said:

5 pages of pure speculation?

Did you guys install a peep camera in our studio? And how did you get to see what the AC/2 does before I did?

[El Loco]

Paul Inouye, on 13 April 2012 - 12:29 PM, said:

5 pages of pure speculation?

Did you guys install a peep camera in our studio? And how did you get to see what the AC/2 does before I did?

1) The community speculating wildly shouldn't be new to you devs
2) I'm pretty sure Aegis has one installed above your desk
3) It's a magic trick

To the question at hand: Every weapon is good for something, if you had the feeling the lower caliber ACs were useless in previous installments of the franchise don't make the mistake and think they will be the same in MWO. After all: This is not your father's Mechwarrior

[Helmer]

Paul Inouye, on 13 April 2012 - 12:29 PM, said:

5 pages of pure speculation?

Did you guys install a peep camera in our studio? And how did you get to see what the AC/2 does before I did?

Just the bathroom.


And for shame.



Cheers.

[BerryChunks]

Victor Morson, on 13 April 2012 - 11:40 AM, said:

If we're talking T2 tech like AMS, then we can start bringing ER Lasers/PPCs and such into this which even further out dates the AC/2.

The problem is an AC/2 is so heavy that it takes so much out of a 'mech you could literally pit a fast moving design with nothing but close range weapons against it, make it run across an entire field, and the AC/2 'mech would still get utterly mauled. It just does not do enough damage to accomplish anything at all for it's extreme weight - as has been the case in every MW game aside from LL.

EDIT: The irony of all of this isn't that I'm trying to tell people to not like light ACs, but rather, encourage them to be made into viable weapons that actual competitive players will consider carrying or even deem vital to their company's make up. Everyone seems to be literally fighting against buffing them under the impression they've been good weapons in the past, when really, other than HC and LL - two unofficial products - they have never been.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/AMS

AMS were invented in 2600's, and came back in 3040. so it fits fine.

[MagnusEffect]

Odanan, on 13 April 2012 - 03:26 AM, said:

I've been playing Battletech (table-top) and all Mechwarrior computer series for the last 20 years, so I can say I'm a long time fan.

It's only me or more people think the Autocannons 2 and 5 are seriously underpowered? They weight too much, use ammo (which is always a risk) and deal a very small damage. OK, they are long range, but any mech can sustain single 2s and 5s of damage for a many turns.

The "Rapid-Fire" rule (two shots at the same time, with the risk of complications) improves the use of these weapons, but will it be implemented in the game? Please, devs, say yes!

I would suggest the developers to make it possible for the pilot to shoot again immediately after a shot with the autocannon: the second shot would be harder to hit and has a small chance to jam/destroy the gun.

The AC2s and 5s were only ever intended as long range fire support. While it is true a PPC was almost always a better option, the light ACs did have successful use in one area in particular: conventional vehicles. PPCs were far more expensive and required either a fusion powerplant or many heatsinks (for vehicles, ten tons of them). This made PPCs a poor option for cheap conventional units. An AC5 or 2 could be mounted to almost anything (including portable gun emplacements). While alone, an AC5 didn't do much, when they were placed enmass and firing from long range, they could be quite deadly.

READ: "The Scorpion Nest"
http://www.sarna.net...mbat_Vehicle%29

Helicopter squadrons also use them very effectively. However, in regards to mechs, it is true that a PPC is a better choice in almost every situation. Cost and ease of repair were usually the biggest factors if a light AC found its way onto a mech.

Sadly, none of this has really made much of a difference in the MW games, hence the disparity.

Edited by MagnusEffect, 13 April 2012 - 12:56 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Paul Inouye, on 13 April 2012 - 12:29 PM, said:

5 pages of pure speculation?

Did you guys install a peep camera in our studio? And how did you get to see what the AC/2 does before I did?

I think what's happening is less speculation and more "past experiences with the AC2/5" in previous incarnations of the game.

In fact I think that's the primary purpose of the thread, really: The hope that you guys will find some way to buff these weapons to be effective selections for our 'mechs.

[Suskis]

Yes. And that's the reason for every MAD-3R Marauder needs the AC/5 to be removed and replaced with a Large Laser and more heat sinks

[MagnusEffect]

@ Suskis: That fit already exists as the 3D model

And yeah... I think it is better too. If nothing else, no more ammo worries.

Edited by MagnusEffect, 13 April 2012 - 01:27 PM.

[Alizabeth Aijou]

GrimJim, on 13 April 2012 - 09:15 AM, said:

Oh....and I forgot.

For the 3050 crowd, AMS can't shoot down a slug, nor can an ECM screw with it.

Ah, but that is where you're wrong.
*sets ECM to Ghost Targets*
Now it *does* screw with your autocannon shots.

Quote

But a Light or Medium mech who might have speed on their side but low armor that they can't go toe to toe against the heavier mechs that having a AC/2/5 or two will be handy in being a real pain in the *** of those Heavies and Assault.

An Large Laser or PPC even more so.

Quote

It's also worth noting Grimm that there was an intermediate version of the Dragon between the classic DRG-1N Dragon with the AC/5 and the DRG-5K Grand Dragon with the ER PPC, DHS and XL Engine.

It was known as the DRG-5N Dragon and mounted an UAC/5 in place of the standard AC and adding CASE to each side torso, while retaining the standard SHS and Engine.

For a moment there, I really thought you'd mention the DRG-1G Grand Dragon with its regular PPC.

Quote

Hmm ... a Annihilator (MW4 Mercs) with 10x Ultra AC2 is fun!

You mean the Bane?

10× UAC/2, 4× MG, 3/5/0.

Quote

Actually, I believe I covered how to minimize ammo explosions due to penetration. As for over heating and cooking off your rounds? If you are over heating a mech that has primarily ballistic rounds that mechwarrior shouldn't be sitting at that computer let alone inside the cockpit of a mech.

Or in that fire.
Or being fired upon with a flamer/plasma cannon/plasma rifle/inferno SRMs.

Quote

All those shiny toys come with a price tag which acts as a negative in my opinion; especially if reactors, gyros blah blah blah are destructible items in MWO

Pity then, that the engine and gyro are the single most expensive pieces of equipment on a 'Mech.

[Kip Wilson]

(please forgive any duplicated info, I only skimmed the 6 pages of posts)

After the 10 free heatsinks are used by an energy based weapon, the AC2/5 becomes more economical than an additional high heat energy weapon in terms of weight.

2xPPC + 20xHS = 24 tons
vs
1xPPC + 1xAC5 + 1t Ammo + 11xHS = 18 tons
or
1xPPC + 2xAC5 + 2t Ammo + 12xHS = 29 tons

So its really the 10 free heatsinks that make energy weapons better. After they are used however, ballistic weapons begin to make more logical choice.

With that being said, during my TT days, we played with a house rule that made AC2/5's naturally armor piercing at closer ranges. 1 point of their damage would be applied to the internal structure at short range for the AC5 and at short and medium range for the AC2. This allowed for a critical hit role which made these weapons more potent, especially in a post Helm/Clan era.

This worked pretty well and made these weapons much more deadly without drastically altering the established rules for them (like retconning weights, damage and range stats)

[MaddMaxx]

Victor Morson, on 13 April 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:

I think what's happening is less speculation and more "past experiences with the AC2/5" in previous incarnations of the game.

In fact I think that's the primary purpose of the thread, really: The hope that you guys will find some way to buff these weapons to be effective selections for our 'mechs.

If the thoughts are based on the last game, MW4, right off the change from the MW4's 30pts/ton of armor, down to the known MWO armor rate of 16pts/ton should help. With half the armor the smaller AC's won't just be the Paint Scratchers anymore.

That is the hope anyways.

[Yeach]

MaddMaxx, on 13 April 2012 - 04:01 PM, said:

If the thoughts are based on the last game, MW4, right off the change from the MW4's 30pts/ton of armor, down to the known MWO armor rate of 16pts/ton should help. With half the armor the smaller AC's won't just be the Paint Scratchers anymore.

That is the hope anyways.

You forget that MW4 increase armor values were for the increase damage (DPS or reduced recycle time of the weapons)
Gauss riifle 17 damage / 8 recycle = 21 dmg (over 10 seconds DPS) which is 140% compared to regular 15 damage TT value.

As I mentioned in another thread there is a damage-armor-ammo/heat delicate balance relationship in Battletech.

[Cochise]

I want 4 AC-10's. Two as moveable nipples supported by two racks of SSRM's and two in the arms along with 4 X-pulse medium lasers. Then my nipples won't be useless.

[GrimFist]

I agree, AC2 was all about anti-aircraft.

That is why the Rifleman with say extra zoon range like a high powered scope vs. other mechs would be fun. And with the AC2 you'd get a lot of rounds per ton.

Put like 8.. and you'd kill a medium for sure.

[ManDaisy]

Don't look down on ac's no matter how small. For one thing they have solid damage as compared to lasers, and also they cause a lot less heat, which makes them a good filler for after you toast your mech. Add in special ammo such as armor peircing shells for thru armor crits and you got a nightmare on your hands.

Edited by ManDaisy, 13 April 2012 - 07:40 PM.

[The1WithTheGun]

MagnusEffect, on 13 April 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

An AC5 or 2 could be mounted to almost anything (including portable gun emplacements).

Yes - infantry platoons with AC2/5 guns could give mechs a nasty surprise.

Also - regarding this subject - didn't one of the devs state/suggest that AC2s and 5s would have no minimum range in this game (while other weapons like PPCs and LRMs would keep theirs)? So, if true, that would give the lower-end ACs a bit of a boost right there.

[Victor Morson]

ManDaisy, on 13 April 2012 - 07:37 PM, said:

Don't look down on ac's no matter how small. For one thing they have solid damage as compared to lasers, and also they cause a lot less heat, which makes them a good filler for after you toast your mech. Add in special ammo such as armor peircing shells for thru armor crits and you got a nightmare on your hands.

If they weighed less, sure, but AC/5s stacked against Medium Lasers is not a pretty damage/ton ratio. You could effectively put 4 Medium Lasers and enough heatsinks to run them all, dealing 4 times the damage of a single AC5, in the same tonnage.

I think many, many people are in love with the idea of AC2s and AC5s and haven't had much actual practical experience against a player who sticks to good weapons, it's the only explanation.