124 replies to this topic

[Vulpesveritas]

Redshift2k5, on 17 May 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

You're not accounting for the time it takes the weapon to cycle the next shot. If the AC/20 does more damage and cycles faster, it will do far more damage within a two minute span than a longer reloading weapon that does less damage, to boot

It doesn't cycle faster. The Guass does 75% of the damage within the same time frame, period, end of line according to TT rules. The guass has 250% the range. So you're doing basically getting in two and a half or more shots (if you backpedle after getting into range like you should.) versus that AC/20. Given two shots will core a light, three a medium, four a heavy, and five will core just about anything, with decent aim you will kill that AC/20 carrying mech before it gets in range if you have good aim. And if you match his speed, he will never get close. also, you have ~50% more ammo/ton, so you are going to do more damage overall with your ammo, so you can kill even more mechs. And since the Guass also takes fewer critical slots, it opens up endo/ferro/DHS for the mech, further saving weight. The main downside to the guass is its 50 meterish minimum range in TT (which is fully correctable by a simple backpedle in most cases.) and the system overall is more expensive.

[Eradicator]

ac20's ammo is prone to explosion when critically hit. The entire gauss rifle (not the ammo) is prone to explosion when hit, ftr you can't jettison a weapon as far as i know...

[Gigaton]

Garth Erlam, on 17 May 2012 - 07:59 AM, said:

A Gauss rifle does 75% of the damage an AC/20 does, and weighs a ton more. That means you could add a Medium Laser, meaning for the same tonage you're doing yet another five extra damage. Or you add ammo. Or armour. Etc etc.

But there's the heat too. In TT, heat neutral AC/20 with ton of ammo is 22 tons, heat neutral Gauss Rifle with ton of ammo and additional heat neutral medium laser is 21 tons. The latter uses 6 less critical slots too, and doesn't need to be divided between two sections of the 'mech (which you need to do often enough with AC/20).

As for the general topic, I think adjustment of heat, ammo count per ton and DPS are the most obvious solutions, if the balance between the two weapons turns out to be a problem.

Edited by Gigaton, 17 May 2012 - 11:18 AM.

[Helmer]

*IF* the Gauss Rifle has a clear shot, and *IF* the target is outside the AC/20s range, and *IF* you can hit the enemy..... yes, the Gauss rifle is better.


It's situational. Guaranteed those preaching one or another will change their tune based on the next map that they drop into




Cheers.

[Garth Erlam]

Vulpesveritas, on 17 May 2012 - 08:54 AM, said:

It doesn't cycle faster. The Guass does 75% of the damage within the same time frame, period, end of line according to TT rules. The guass has 250% the range. So you're doing basically getting in two and a half or more shots (if you backpedle after getting into range like you should.) versus that AC/20. Given two shots will core a light, three a medium, four a heavy, and five will core just about anything, with decent aim you will kill that AC/20 carrying mech before it gets in range if you have good aim. And if you match his speed, he will never get close. also, you have ~50% more ammo/ton, so you are going to do more damage overall with your ammo, so you can kill even more mechs. And since the Guass also takes fewer critical slots, it opens up endo/ferro/DHS for the mech, further saving weight. The main downside to the guass is its 50 meterish minimum range in TT (which is fully correctable by a simple backpedle in most cases.) and the system overall is more expensive.

This seems more of a 'why the hell are you running in a straight line in an open field' argument than a 'Gauss > AC/20' argument.

[Zakatak]

You are forgetting rate of fire, and the Gauss Rifle spits slugs very slowly. I don't see the balance issue at all actually.

[wwiiogre]

Why are you playing on an open field and moving straight towards a Gauss rifle? Why are you doing this alone? Where is your fire support with LRM's, where is your commander calling in an arty strike on the sniper standing on the hill or better strafe him and make him duck and run for cover while you maneuver close to him and oops. Now the AC20 gets first shot and more shots.

Chris

[Victor Morson]

As far as TT goes, the OP is right. That's why LBX and UACs were invented, to justify Autocannons in the post-Gauss era. Pre-Gauss they were the kings.

In MWO, you'll probably see some non-TT buffs, like the much mentioned recycle time. It'll be a while before we see IS UAC/20s.

EDIT: If you want to complain about terrible guns, Autocannons no less, pick on the AC2/5. They're horrible TT weapons; I am seriously crossing my fingers the AC/2, 5 and UAC/5 all get buffs in MWO to make them viable choices.

Edited by Victor Morson, 17 May 2012 - 05:08 PM.

[Jonas]

It depends on cost vs. the rate of fire of the 2 weapons. If the AC-20 fires faster then I will go with it

[FinnMcKool]

ya , what he said!

[Owl Cutter]

Assuming overall DPS is not tweaked to make the firepower disparity wider than in the turn-based game, and no new mechanics are implemented to give AC a leg up over other weapon types, which is a lot to assume, then the Gauss Rifle will be usually more desirable for most designs for most purposes. I don't see a problem with that, as long as the AC/20 actually performs at least that 4/3 as well in its specialty, which is probably not a lot to assume. "Popular" and "desirable" are distinct attributes which ought not be confused. A very dramatically specialised in-your-face design like the Victor might not be the best general-purpose 'mech, but it is very effective in its niche and a well-balanced team with complementary specialisations may often be much more effective than a lance full of generalised soloist designs. I don't think the game balance goal should be that everything available ends up being equally common, and in fact I think that's a dangerous error. As any ecologist can tell you, most specialists exist in relatively small numbers per species, but their existence at all proves the viability of their adaptations. Making everything equally popular would probably require saddling us with an excessive abundance of general-purpose Swiss Army halberds to split that huge ecological role among more species, leaving a relative paucity of specialised tools that are just perfect for a particular use, because the developers had to spend time making mostly halberds in pursuit of ensuring every weapon is about evenly popular. I am probably not unusual in wanting to see a good variety of _viable options_ filling the whole spectrum from those dull but tough specialists at one extreme to some brittle but incredibly sharp specialists at the other. As might be becoming a prominent part of our language here, it adds nuance.

Kudzu, on 17 May 2012 - 07:44 AM, said:

Lower BV, once the ammo is gone from an AC/20 your risk of explosion is also gone, AC/20's can use specialty ammo, 15 is close to 20 but 20 is still more (look at the leg armor of a Marauder or Warhammer).

I keep forgetting that powering down Gauss weaponry is an optional rule, not the standard. Well, it is an official rule so I hope Piranha agrees that it makes vastly more sense than NOT being able to power it down, even if only automatically upon ammo depletion. The "jettison ammo" key probably should simply power it down, of course, even if for gameplay balance purposes it cannot be powered back up during the match. (easy enough to fluff; takes a few minutes to run through power-on self-test, emergency powerdown requires difficult reset, whatever)

[Tarellond]

I must say i am glad the OP mentioned this unbalance, however it is only unbalance on paper.
Both weapons are situational. If you fire with gauss from distance on enemies not caring about you, AC20 is almost useless because if you get close they will just shoot at you too, but hurting them from distance at which they can't reliably respond is invaluable.

So, given both are situational weapons, they fufill different roles in role warfare gap. We know role warfare is supposed to be somehow important, we will pick our mechs based on what impact do we choose to have on the battle. Fire support guys will have their choise fairly easy and clear and brawlers can say the same, while both pick up different weapons in the end.
There is your balance For the exact numbers, we can only assume until the beta starts.

[Black Mamba]

Its good that the GR does less damage than the AC/20 as Garth mentioned. The AC/20 should be a nightmare at close range, it should be feared!

While we're on topic about the Gauss Rifle, Garth is the weapon modelled in game by now?

[Owl Cutter]

Huh. I always thought of the Gauss Rifle as one of the less situational weapons in the game, being pretty useful in most situations. The AC/20 is much better in the AC's niche, but it's hard to find a place where the Gauss Rifle isn't at least reasonably useful for its cost. More telling, the way I see it, is that the Gauss is more often used by itself- or, at least, with just piddly supporting weapons, on designs not criticised for a particular weakness except perhaps ammo issues or maybe failing to take advantage of the base cooling. The Victor is as specialised in the AC/20's niche as it gets, but even then the missiles and lasers are essential too. I find those contrasts very pleasing, and hope Piranha does too.

[Strum Wealh]

Based on David Bradley's statement in Q&A 05, I would doubt that they would implement the TT Gauss Rifle's 60 meter minimum range - a solid slug has no arming distance and is not subject to the effects of a field inhibitor, so giving it a minimum range would, as with the lighter ACs, be difficult to justify without sounding too silly.

From the gameplay videos released thus far, it seem that one unit of AC ammunition equates to one shell (as opposed to "high-speed streams of high-explosive, armor-piercing shells" - verbiage taken from the glossary of the Legend of the Jade Phoenix onmibus).

If the S7 rules are used as a reference, the AC-20 and the Gauss Rifle have the same recycle time (7.5 seconds), indicating that they were on some level intended to have similar or close recycle times.
Time will tell whether the Dev's use a similar philosophy for MWO.
Though, the Hunchback in the Medium Mech Developer Breakdown (~1:05-1:25) demonstrates an AC-20 with a recycle time on the order of ~5-7 seconds...

At that point:

• The AC-20 is one ton lighter (a ~7% difference).
  
• The AC-20's standard ammunition canonically costs half as much per ton as that of the Gauss Rifle (10K c-bills for the former vs 20K c-bills for the latter).
  
• The AC-20 delivers five additional units of damage per salvo (a ~33% difference).
  
• If the feature is implemented: the AC-20 would have access to a variety of munitions (for 3049: Standard (HEAP), flak, incendiary, and tracer), making it more versatile.
  
• If the feature is implemented: the AC-20 is more commonplace and "lower tech", so it may(/should?) have lower maintenance costs than the Gauss Rifle (while still having the same acquisition price), making it cheaper over time.

The AC-20 is, IMO, essentially the elephant gun to the Gauss Rifle's sniper rifle.
"An elephant gun is a large caliber gun, rifled or otherwise, so named because they were originally developed for use by big-game hunters for elephants and other large dangerous game... Whether double rifle, single shot, or bolt action the concept of the elephant gun is the same: to provide enough stopping power to prevent harm to the hunter in the case of charging game."
"In military and law enforcement terminology, a sniper rifle is a precision-rifle used to ensure more accurate placement of bullets at longer ranges than other small arms... The term is often used in the media to describe any type of accurized firearm fitted with a telescopic sight that is employed against human targets, although "sniping rifle" or "sniper's rifle" is the technically correct fashion to refer to such a rifle."

Your thoughts?

[zorak ramone]

Victor Morson, on 17 May 2012 - 05:06 PM, said:

As far as TT goes, the OP is right. That's why LBX and UACs were invented, to justify Autocannons in the post-Gauss era. Pre-Gauss they were the kings.

This basically. If everything from TT is held up (relative damage output, mass/size, ranges, mech armor model etc.), there there is no reason to use an AC20 over a GR. The massive range buff and lack of heat overcomes the lower damage and negligible miniumum range. This is why you see many AC20 mechs switching to GRs in the 3050 upgrades (Atlas, Victor, etc.).

Overall, standard ACs become obselete relative to other weapons once DHS and GRs get introduced. The UAC and LBX classes of AC are necessary to keep ACs relevant.

That said, there's alot the devs could do to deviate from TT to make the AC20 worth something relative to the GR. The could mess with recycle times to make the AC20's rate of damage output eclipse the GR. The could also jack of the armor of all mechs proportionally to make fights last longer. Incidentally, MW4 did both of these things (armor values up accross the board, and AC20s had a recycle of 6 while GRs had a recycle of 8).

[canned wolf]

I think the AC/20 was always a little underpowered inTT. The combination of weight, crits, heat output and ammo consumption make it a weapon I would rarely chose in a fight. The Gauss on the other hand has a serious heat advantage over other weapons that tends to make it very attractive.

If the economy is robust then there is no need for these weapons to be blanced. You can just play the long game and crit adversaries into the poor house.

[00dlez]

Prosperity Park, on 17 May 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

The rules say a Gauss deals out 15 damage per unit time and the AC/20 deals out 20 damage per unit time... that's pretty close. And, if the Gauss-slinger nails a preliminary shot from outside of AC/20 range and then they start slugging one-on-one, the fight will be completely tied after each of them land 3 close-range shots each with a total damage of 60 being recieved by both parties (15 + 15x3 = 3x20).

And that 1 ton of extra armor you got by keeping the AC wouldn't really hold up to that shot fired from 500m away... I guess only the dedicated, in-your-faciest, brawliest of brawlers would go AC/20...

I had no idea that 33% more was an insignificant amount... I'll go demand a 33% raise from my boss and convince him its so small that it doesnt matter.
The damage is plenty different for me, especially for the tonnage.

[RedDragon]

Maybe this is where it makes sense for the AC/20 to fire a burst of bullets. There would be some advantages over a Gauss resulting from this:
-Easier to aim - If you are hit while firing the Gauss and can't keep your aim, the shot is wasted. In the same situation an AC/20 would still hit with some shells.
-More energy delivered per salvo = more rocking your enemy - Basically a Gauss would be like being hit by one great punch while the AC/ would hit numerous times, wobbling your aim for a longer period of time.

[Felicitatem Parco]

I tried suggesting that in an other thread - I said a Gattling AC/20 would be a nice alternative to the standard "Carronade" AC/20.

Some people got it , most people just said "Use a UAC/RAC, they fire multiple rounds like a Gattling Gun..."