388 replies to this topic

[Doctor Strangelove]

Different weapons and mechs for different maps.
How could one not be satisfied with all the configurations we are going to have?
I'm happy and I'm not even in the Beta.

If the JagerMech pilot gets in the first Alpha Strike with 2/AC2's and 2/AC5's, it's going to rock the enemy Mech and he may never get to aim straight until the JagerMech disengages. After the Alpha Strike the reload times are going to be different and the AC/2s and AC/5s are going to alternate fire in a seriously nasty smack down.That rocking effect that 4 AC's do is something I think many in this thread are forgetting.
Again, whether I would run an AC boat would depend on the map.

I think people will be surprised at how quickly the AC's chop up a Mech.
Just like the blurb in the BattleMech 14 story.

"but all four firing in unison quickly adds up in damage. Many people overlook the JagerMech this way, almost always do to their own end."

The Devs are in Closed Beta (duh) and I think the Devs are not only spinning a good yarn but also throwing us a bone/giving us a good hint on how effective this Mech will be.

We won't really know until we get in game but it's going to be really fun finding out.

Edit: Plus if I understand correctly there is no minimum range for the AC's?

Edited by Doctor Strangelove, 04 July 2012 - 09:44 PM.

[Damion Sparhawk]

Doctor Strangelove, on 04 July 2012 - 09:39 PM, said:

Different weapons and mechs for different maps.
How could one not be satisfied with all the configurations we are going to have?
I'm happy and I'm not even in the Beta.

If the JagerMech pilot gets in the first Alpha Strike with 2/AC2's and 2/AC5's, it's going to rock the enemy Mech and he may never get to aim straight until the JagerMech disengages. After the Alpha Strike the reload times are going to be different and the AC/2s and AC/5s are going to alternate fire in a seriously nasty smack down.That rocking effect that 4 AC's do is something I think many in this thread are forgetting.
Again, whether I would run an AC boat would depend on the map.

I think people will be surprised at how quickly the AC's chop up a Mech.
Just like the blurb in the BattleMech 14 story.

"but all four firing in unison quickly adds up in damage. Many people overlook the JagerMech this way, almost always do to their own end."

The Devs are in Closed Beta (duh) and I think the Devs are not only spinning a good yarn but also throwing us a bone/giving us a good hint on how effective this Mech will be.

We won't really know until we get in game but it's going to be really fun finding out.

Edit: Plus if I understand correctly there is no minimum range for the AC's?

AC's typically have never had a minimum range (barring of course rammed up someone's tailpipe range) as long as the projectiles have reached their maximum velocity and escaped the barrel I see no reason why they should. however, if you're point blank with an AC2/5 you're doing something wrong.

[Xinaoen]

An AC2 weighs six tons plus ammo, and does less damage than a Small Laser. Seriously, think about that for a second.

The Jagermech carries two AC2's, two AC5's, and two medium lasers - a total of 30 tons of weaponry (not including ammo). Coincidentally, that's exactly enough tonnage for two Gauss Rifles. The range of those rifles is only slightly shorter than the AC2's, and each of them does more damage than all four of the stock Jager's autocannons combined.

So, yeah. AC2's could use a buff.

Edited by Xinaoen, 04 July 2012 - 10:02 PM.

[Doctor Strangelove]

Damion Sparhawk, on 04 July 2012 - 09:48 PM, said:

AC's typically have never had a minimum range (barring of course rammed up someone's tailpipe range) as long as the projectiles have reached their maximum velocity and escaped the barrel I see no reason why they should. however, if you're point blank with an AC2/5 you're doing something wrong.

I'm thinking of Scouts that make it all the way through.

[Damion Sparhawk]

Doctor Strangelove, on 04 July 2012 - 10:00 PM, said:

I'm thinking of Scouts that make it all the way through.

I'm not saying don't shoot them if they're that close, just that, if you're that close with those weapons you really should be scooting it out of there run and fire XD

[Damion Sparhawk]

Xinaoen, on 04 July 2012 - 09:56 PM, said:

An AC2 weighs six tons plus ammo, and does less damage than a Small Laser. Seriously, think about that for a second.

The Jagermech carries two AC2's, two AC5's, and two medium lasers - a total of 30 tons of weaponry (not including ammo). Coincidentally, that's exactly enough tonnage for two Gauss Rifles. The range of those rifles is only slightly shorter than the AC2's, and each of them does more damage than all four of the stock Jager's autocannons combined.

So, yeah. AC2's could use a buff.

yes, but a small laser has a very short range comparitively, the AC's primary advantage is the range and firing rate (and potential critical and rocking but we don't know how those will be handled in game yet) and as I stated earlier, I wouldn't fault anyone for swapping gauss on the jager, it's primary loadout is intended for anti-aircraft, not mech to mech.

[Odweaver]

I plan on going quad ac/2s on the jager.
Rumor has it that ac/2s are going to have roughly double the range of LRMs and ppcs, and longer range than the gauss.
A quad mount configured in chain fire or as an alpha strike provided the cycle time is low enough should cause some stability issues.
For urban maps you should be able to fit two lb-10x in chainfire configuration, two flamers and then up-armor it.

[Dragoon Furey]

Perhaps the best way to balance the AC's is to make them function exactly as they do in TT and as described in the novels. A stream of high explosive ballistic shells that can be walked across a mech or mechs with each individual shells impact causing a bit of knock. Sort of like how they are doing lasers you would need to keep your ac's on target to do full damage to one location, even with the mighty AC/20.

MW3 came close to this, they got the animations down pretty good, but the damage dident walk across sections unless you were using the Ultra or LBX versions.

Autocannons firing a single shot every few seconds always seemed silly to me after how the novels depicted them and thier very name seeming to imply that they are essentialy full auto tank cannons.

[Fire for Effect]

Zerik, on 13 April 2012 - 03:43 AM, said:

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.

Marauder likes his gun. Marauder now quite mad...

[Skyefox]

JUST SO EVERYONE KNOWS: There will be support elements to call in, it's in a sort of hidden page. Under the games tab, if you just click "games" on the last section it states:

"The battlefield commander will be able to call in air strikes, artillery strikes and other support unit requests."

http://mwomercs.com/game

So the possibility of an AA role will come into play (hopefully)

The LRM vs AC argument: invalid in my opinion, as both carry ammo and are both susceptible to splosions. Since one is a Line of Sight weapon and one can be fired indirectly, you really can't compare them even when they both fall into the same range category.

What we don't know is that whether the AC's in this game will shoot a single round or a long burst. The Hunchback in the video fires it's AC/20 as a single shot, but nobody knows if this will be true for all AC sizes. I've always pictured in my mind that an AC/2 fires 20 shells in one burst, an AC/5 15, an AC/10 10, and an AC/20 5 (as 1 ton of ammo for an AC/2 is going to be MUCH smaller rounds than an AC/20, hence the higher count). I feel MW3 did the best to reflect this.

It's hardly an auto cannon if it doesn't fire multiple rounds.

AC vs PPC, for me it's really a toss up, situational and personal preference factors coming into play. If you are a DoT player, then AC is your friend. If you like the "knockout punch" offered by a PPC, that's your choice.

[csebal]

Okay, a few of these have already been mentioned by others, but it never hurts to hammer a point away, so here it comes:

Quote

AC5s have similar ranges to PPCs, for half the damage;

It only generates about 1/10 the heat of a PPC, so yes.. the PPC is a little smaller and does not require you to waste tonnage and crit slots on ammo. Instead you will be wasting it on extra heat sinks.

Quote

AC2s only have a tiny few hex range advantage over other long-range weapons and definitely not enough to justify a weapon that does the damage of a small laser for 6 tons.

Apples and oranges. small laser is very small, but that is offset by its very short range. AC/2s have excellent (one of the best) range, offset by their bulkier size.

Quote

If you look at LRMs...

You don't. It generates more heat and has a lower ammo efficiency (less shots overall / tonnage). Yea sure, it can deal more damage, but so do lots of other weapons.

Quote

But the rate of fire will be...

I believe, that the stats on sarna are already normalized for ROF versus damage, meaning that AC/5s will not have a ROF that would push their average DPS higher than 5 / unit of time, if the devs plan on sticking to canon, so a PPC for example should and will most probably deal twice the damage over the same period of time, as the AC/5.. that damage is offset (balanced) by the 10x increase in heat generation.

Bottomline being: weapons are more or less balanced as per canon rules. Sure the unique properties of this game (mech on mech combat only, real time versus turn based, etc) make some weapons more desirable or usable than others and I'm quite certain, that some balancing will be required, but at the end of the day, unless you boil it down to a rock/paper/scissors system, there will always be better items and worse items. Nothing you can do about that, if you can keep variety in the game.

If you do not like a weapon, well then.. just do not use it. If others share your views, then said weapon will not be seen too much in fights and the devs - assuming they see it as a problem - will step in to balance it a little.

[csebal]

Skyefox, on 04 July 2012 - 10:45 PM, said:

What we don't know is that whether the AC's in this game will shoot a single round or a long burst. The Hunchback in the video fires it's AC/20 as a single shot, but nobody knows if this will be true for all AC sizes. I've always pictured in my mind that an AC/2 fires 20 shells in one burst, an AC/5 15, an AC/10 10, and an AC/20 5 (as 1 ton of ammo for an AC/2 is going to be MUCH smaller rounds than an AC/20, hence the higher count). I feel MW3 did the best to reflect this.

It's hardly an auto cannon if it doesn't fire multiple rounds.

Wiki to the rescue: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/AC/5

Quote

The Autocannon is a direct-fire ballistic weapon, firing HEAP (High-Explosive Armor-Piercing) rounds at targets either singly or in bursts.
Different manufacturers and models of autocannons have different calibers (25mm-203mm) and rates of fire. Due to this, autocannons are grouped into generic "classes" of autocannons with common damage ratings, with Autocannon/5s usually having a long range with a small to moderate damage level.

An example of the rating system: the Crusher Super Heavy Cannon is a 150mm weapon firing ten shells per "shot", while the Chemjet Gun is a 185mm weapon firing much slower, but causing higher damage. Despite their differences, both are classified as Autocannon/20s due to their damage output.

So as I wrote earlier, the weapon AC/5 is a general name for autocannons of a given category. If might fire a burst or it might fire single shells, the important thing is, that for it to classify as AC/5, it has to deal 5 damage / action.

Ammo capacity is also normalized, counted in the number of actions you can take with that weapon, be that burst or single shots. Just like for example an LRM20 is listed as 6 "ammo" / tonnage, while an LRM10 is listed as 12 "ammo" / tonnage. In reality, both mean 120 missiles / ton, which for an LRM20 is enough for 6 volleys and for the LRM10 is enough for 12.

[Aeryk Corsaer]

ice trey, on 13 April 2012 - 05:09 AM, said:

Individually, I'll agree they're not much more than a stop-gap.

Still, I'll tell you one thing about low-cal autocannons: They're all about keeping heat to a minimum.

Sure, you can fire off an LRM10 rack, but you're going to be making 4 heat and only hitting with 6 of those missiles on average. Plus, you'll only get 12 volleys to the ton, while an AC5 gets 20 shots per ton, and doesn't waste potential damage from missed missiles. Sure, you could use a PPC, but you'll be racking up 10 heat in the process. That might not be a big deal for a light 'mech (or even some mediums), if we're playing in the pre-Double Heat-sink era, the low-cal ACs mean that not only can you reach out and touch someone, but you can do so without fear of roasting your ride.

Consider, for a second, the Rifleman (2X LLas; 2X Medium Las; 2X AC5) - It's not got enough heat sinks to fire off it's whole armament safely. In fact, an alpha strike even while standing still is enough to risk an ammo explosion. It can only reliably fire the two autocannons per turn (Coupled with a Large laser or a brace of mediums), but those ACs are really the best way to avoid shutdown. Also worth considering is the difference between the Dragon and the Grand Dragon. The Grand Dragon swaps out the Dragons' old AC5 for a PPC, sure, but that PPC means that the dragon now has to watch it's heat curve - Firing it at the same time as the LRM10 mean that you're building up heat each time. The vanilla Dragon can pummel opponents with that AC5 all day, even if it takes two engine hits, spilling ridiculous amounts of heat into the 'mech.

There's a time and a place for low-caliber ACs, they have a bad rep because they're way heavier than the energy weapons and don't have the wow-factor of a wall of missiles or big-bore ACs, but as a ranged weapon that is both ammo and heat efficient, you can't really go wrong.

Of course, when the age of the Ultra Autocannons and gauss rifles rolls out, then yes, the low-cal ACs will become very redundant, very quickly. It's something the tabletop tried to remedy by making specialty ammo types, but they're still not very popular weapons systems unless someone uses random 'mech tables.

Exactly - the balance of the 'low-end' autocannons is the low heat! Good post.

[Tincan Nightmare]

csebal, on 04 July 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

Wiki to the rescue: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/AC/5



So as I wrote earlier, the weapon AC/5 is a general name for autocannons of a given category. If might fire a burst or it might fire single shells, the important thing is, that for it to classify as AC/5, it has to deal 5 damage / action.

Ammo capacity is also normalized, counted in the number of actions you can take with that weapon, be that burst or single shots. Just like for example an LRM20 is listed as 6 "ammo" / tonnage, while an LRM10 is listed as 12 "ammo" / tonnage. In reality, both mean 120 missiles / ton, which for an LRM20 is enough for 6 volleys and for the LRM10 is enough for 12.

Ok I got to put this in here as its become a pet peeve of mine about the AC's. Sarna is extremely useful and very informative, but it is a wiki and is only as good as the author of the article. Case in point the AC's. Here is the definition of AC's from Techmanual pg. 208

'For what amounts to one of the most basic combat systems on the modern battlefield, autocannons (often abbreviated as AC's) are a broadly varied class of rapid-firing, auto-loading, heavy ballistic weaponry-gigantic machine guns, in other words. With calibers ranging from 30 to 90 mm at the lighter end, to as much as 203mm or more at the heaviest, most autocannons deliver their damage by firing high-speed streams or bursts of high-explosive, armor-defeating shells through one or more barrels.'

So even an article of Sarnas is not above reproach, especially as the only source of info is the sourcebooks (like the one I quoted.) As for its remark about the Chemjet guns of the Demolisher. TRO 3026 pg. 70

'The Demolisher is an efficient battle machine. Its two turret-mounted 185mm guns use a popular propellant system that mixes two chemicals in suspension to propel the huge shells out of the barrel.'

As this is the only remark that even comes close to talking about the Demolishers ROF, I assume the person that wrote the Sarna article assumed it meant that it was a single fire weapon, though the defintion of AC's goes against that. AC's are all about RATATATATATAT, not BOOM.

[Tincan Nightmare]

Xinaoen, on 04 July 2012 - 09:56 PM, said:

An AC2 weighs six tons plus ammo, and does less damage than a Small Laser. Seriously, think about that for a second.

The Jagermech carries two AC2's, two AC5's, and two medium lasers - a total of 30 tons of weaponry (not including ammo). Coincidentally, that's exactly enough tonnage for two Gauss Rifles. The range of those rifles is only slightly shorter than the AC2's, and each of them does more damage than all four of the stock Jager's autocannons combined.

So, yeah. AC2's could use a buff.

The combined damage of the 4 AC's a Jagermech mounts is 14 points. 2 Gauss Rifles do 30 points of damage (15 each.) So you can do twice as much total damage at similar ranges to the Jagermech, but may have lower ROF (don't know until we play.) Also a ton of gauss ammo is 8 shots, while an AC/5 is 20 and an AC/2 is 45.

[Skyefox]

csebal, on 04 July 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

So as I wrote earlier, the weapon AC/5 is a general name for autocannons of a given category. If might fire a burst or it might fire single shells, the important thing is, that for it to classify as AC/5, it has to deal 5 damage / action.

Earlier was after me, so I didn't ignore it, just didn't see it.

It's still a matter of speculation which "style" of AC is going to be used. So a single shot AC/2 seems much less effective in a video game than a burst fire or even fully automatic style AC.

csebal, on 04 July 2012 - 11:26 PM, said:

Ammo capacity is also normalized, counted in the number of actions you can take with that weapon, be that burst or single shots. Just like for example an LRM20 is listed as 6 "ammo" / tonnage, while an LRM10 is listed as 12 "ammo" / tonnage. In reality, both mean 120 missiles / ton, which for an LRM20 is enough for 6 volleys and for the LRM10 is enough for 12.

LRM missiles no matter the size the launcher are going to be the same size missile. The same doesn't qualify for AC's, so once more I cannot possibly know exactly how autocannon damage/ROF will be resolved, though if I had to guess it'd be single shot AT LEAST for the AC/20 (the only one I've seen fire in this game.)

EDIT: Ultra AC's will be available at start, at least for the AC/5 (Saw it in the Snow Map reveal on a Dragon.)

Edited by Skyefox, 04 July 2012 - 11:57 PM.

[BulletChief]

i guess that's a problem of the 'mech-only' approach.

embedded in a complete universe those weapons make sense. but if you only focus on mech battles, some weapons and/or mechs themselves might lose their justifications.

take for example the AC/2, AC/5, machine guns (!), small lasers etc. or even non-scout mechs in the 20-25 ton region like a flea.
those weapons and mechs make perfect sense in the universe as they still dominated infantry and light vehicles and are perfect for stuff like surveillance tasks, containment of protests etc.

in a straight up mech battle they are completely worthless (well, kinda). it's like sending a doorman into real combat. sure, he has some capabilities which fit his original task but he can't stand a big war scene.

therefore it's not a problem of the weapons itsself but of the circumstances they appear in - in this case a mech-only environment.

Edited by BulletChief, 04 July 2012 - 11:59 PM.

[Future Perfect]

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.

I have suggested to remove the AC/2 from MechWarrior Online but it seems that everyone wants it left in and they are quite vocal about it.

[Skyefox]

^LOL WUT?

[HybridTheory]

Perhaps when we meet on the battlefield good sir, and I use a variant heavy with AC/5s and rip you to shreds, you may change your mind!