An idea: the AC-15

[mutantmagnet]

I said can not must. You could add extra armor or CASE. Depending on the weight difference you might even be able to do all three.

Technically in the example I was  making I was already assuming usage of maximum armor so you would have to subtract armor to add more ammo. The only good thing is CASE if you are in a time period where it can be used.

That's presuming you have room to add a medium laser. The PPC does weigh more than the AC/10. The AC/10 being lighter can also add a medium laser. While the PPC does have  unlimited ammo the weight difference gives the AC/10 a lot of options.

The AC 10 is only a ton lighter than the PPC. Adding that first medium laser and the heatsinks to support it gives you a damage and weight profile very similar to the PPC simply adding 3 medium lasers without any additional heatsinks.

Thanks.  CASE does give AC/s and Missiles an advantage.

No prob.  8)

Now you're adding extra weapons fire in. That will throw everything off. You're not just comparing AC vs LRMs but AC and extra vs LRM and extra.It isn't about how one weapon does but the combination. That's a completely different thing.  And if they're that concerned about the number of turns they could always rapid-fire the AC.

Let me put forward what I was trying to say in a different way because I'm not purposefully considering additional weapon types as a major factor.

The LRM 10 does triple the damage of the AC 2 version in setups where all you can fit is one of each weapon. If you can fit multiple weapons of the same type your typical LRM 10 setup can do no less than double the damage of the AC 2.

And this is while assuming if the LRM is using a +4 long range mod relative to the AC2's +2 at medium range.

Yes, but its that 20 point concentration that makes the AC/20 so dangerous.

I used to think the same way until I started playing around with the hunchback and a 6 medium laser version that moved 5/8.

Even if it didn't have the integral heatsinks that allowed it to reach such speeds my playtime with the design has proven once you reach a certain critical mass with lower cluster damage weapons the AC 20 doesn't compete.

To be fair without the integral heatsinks the SRMs and Medium laser fall short of that critcal mass but not by much so I err on them being better in general. For SRMs they have an edge because of infernos and for Medium lasers because of the lack of ammo usage.

[FedComGirl]

Technically in the example I was  making I was already assuming usage of maximum armor so you would have to subtract armor to add more ammo. The only good thing is CASE if you are in a time period where it can be used.

If the AC is lighter than the PPC you wouldn't have to remove anything because you'd still have tonnage available before you equal the PPC's weight. If the Armor is maxed out you use that tonnage on something else. Same thing for if CASE isn't available.

The AC 10 is only a ton lighter than the PPC. Adding that first medium laser and the heatsinks to support it gives you a damage and weight profile very similar to the PPC simply adding 3 medium lasers without any additional heatsinks.

Um...what? If you're not adding heat sinks for the PPC's medium lasers, why does the AC/10 have to add them?

No prob.  8)

Let me put forward what I was trying to say in a different way because I'm not purposefully considering additional weapon types as a major factor.

The LRM 10 does triple the damage of the AC 2 version in setups where all you can fit is one of each weapon. If you can fit multiple weapons of the same type your typical LRM 10 setup can do no less than double the damage of the AC 2.

And this is while assuming if the LRM is using a +4 long range mod relative to the AC2's +2 at medium range.

Um...I'm not sure where you're getting triple the damage. The LRM-10 can do 40 points more damage than the AC/2 but that's providing every missile hits. I've never gotten that lucky.

I used to think the same way until I started playing around with the hunchback and a 6 medium laser version that moved 5/8.

Did all the lasers hit the same spot all the time or did they just do more damage in the long term?

Even if it didn't have the integral heatsinks that allowed it to reach such speeds my playtime with the design has proven once you reach a certain critical mass with lower cluster damage weapons the AC 20 doesn't compete.

The integral heat sinks are what allow those weapons to get to that mass though. And none of them do as much damage in one shot.

To be fair without the integral heatsinks the SRMs and Medium laser fall short of that critcal mass but not by much so I err on them being better in general. For SRMs they have an edge because of infernos and for Medium lasers because of the lack of ammo usage.

But missiles are vulnerable to AMS. And if you're in range to use SRMs, you're in range of the AC/20. I'd prefer to face infernos to the AC/20. In a mech anyway. My other troops would prefer the AC. Not that I'd want to get in range of either.  :)) Unlimited ammo is a big advantage but its also within the range of the AC/20.

[evilauthor]

If the power of the propellant increases, you either use less propellant or a stronger/heavier gun. AC/s ammo is already fluffed at being more powerful than that of the rifle cannon to make the rifle cannons inferior. There's even different types of propellant. Considering, how many rounds are carried per ton compared to rifle cannons, I'd have to go with the they used less propellant. The AC/s would still need to be stronger though to fire more rapidly.  I would think shorter barrels would make the AC/s less accurate.

Whatever. I guess that means "super materials" that are lighter and far stronger than what's used in existing ACs would be the way to go then, at least used in conjunction with newer, hotter propellants. End result: lighter AC that runs hotter.

But heat can effect the mech's speed and targeting and force the mech to shut down. Non of which are good things in the middle of battle.

I'm sorry? Are you equating a mech being slightly slowed down and becoming more inaccurate (both of which are temporary conditions as far as single battles go) with an explosion that destroys ENTIRE SECTIONS or even outright kills the mech instantly (which is permanent)? Are you actually saying that heat penalties and ammo explosions are EQUAL in terms of how badly they gimp a mech? You don't think a mech that runs hot has an advantage over a mech filled with explosive ammo bins? Really???

Then you must be the only one, because I have NEVER heard of overheating outright killing a mech (outside of a video game anyway) unless it touches off said ammo explosion (and not every mech carries ammo), nor have I ever heard anyone complain about it.

How do you know it'd be lighter? It might not be 4 tons. It could be 8. You'd also need a lot more heat sinks to support it, making it heavier. The only difference between the two would be one has a limited ammo supply and the other doesn't. There isn't any reason to use the autocannon then.

Have you been following what I've been saying AT ALL? Using more heat sinks is actually an advantage for weapons because heat sinks can be SHARED. And when you have two equivalent weapons that are alike in performance except where heat generation is concerned, the hotter weapon will always be lighter and the difference in tonnage will be identical to the difference in heat generated.

Ergo, making a weapon hotter and changing nothing else will lighten the weapon in tons by the same amount heat is increased. Why? Because game balance demands it.

It'd still be a big game changer though.

Well duh. That's the point!

They go boom too. But the size of the ammo explosion goes down with ever round fired. You can also dump ammo if you think you need to. You can't do that with energy weapons. You can only dial them done, under advanced rules.

And? You can dial them down to zero too (aka turn them off). The entire point of this exercise (which I did say before) is to remove one of the advantages that make energy weapons so much better than ammo using ones.

Missile ammo isn't too much of a problem since you can use most of it up in one battle. At least you do for the larger sizes. Machine gun ammo though. I don't know why they put so much ammo in the bins. I'd rather have CASE or another half ton of armor.

Even if you only have 1 or 2 shots left for missile ammo, you're still looking at a range of 4 damage (1 shot of SRM-2 ammo) to 40 damage (2 shots of LRM-20 ammo). An exploding energy weapon would fall well inside that range so that it's no more disadvantageous than the near empty ammo bin. And of course there's always the freak TAC that nails nearly full bins through intact armor.

[mutantmagnet]

If the AC is lighter than the PPC you wouldn't have to remove anything because you'd still have tonnage available before you equal the PPC's weight. If the Armor is maxed out you use that tonnage on something else. Same thing for if CASE isn't available.

Well it depends on how much ammo you wanted. Considering the difference in weight is slim it doesn't take much to compromise the armor.
More importantly you are increasing the chance that ammo will be available to explode and thus crippling a mech with CASE or destroying it without it.

Um...what? If you're not adding heat sinks for the PPC's medium lasers, why does the AC/10 have to add them?

You are making the same mistake with evilarthur as well as myself.  For some reason you aren't accounting for bracket firing properly.

Um...I'm not sure where you're getting triple the damage. The LRM-10 can do 40 points more damage than the AC/2 but that's providing every missile hits. I've never gotten that lucky.

LRM 10 on average does 6 damage per turn. Regardless I'm being silly. The damage is triple if the targeting mods are the same which wasn't the example I was using. With the difference in targeting mods the LRM 10 does 50% more damage.

Did all the lasers hit the same spot all the time or did they just do more damage in the long term?

This was done with multiple playthroughs. It didn't matter if they were on the same side or if they were facing each other. The medium laser version outperformed the AC 20 standard version when it came to killing power.

The integral heat sinks are what allow those weapons to get to that mass though. And none of them do as much damage in one shot.

That concentration in damage matters even less than you would think or I used to think. One person on the old forums used to make a computer program that just tested the effectiveness of damage clusters on assault mechs. He proved that cluster size doesn't matter at all. If the damage modifiers are the same. 4 Five damage clusters were just as effective as 10 two daamge clusters which also were the same as 1 twenty point damage cluster.

In my own preliminary testing (that admittedly wasn't as thorough as a computer simulation) I've concluded high damage clusters like an AC 20 matters more fore targets with very low hitpoints, in other words light mechs. If you are facing off against heavies and assults you defintely aren't going to be anymore effective no matter how dilutaed or concentrated the damage is. All that matters for those 2 weight classes is the total amount of damage you are putting out for the targetting modifiers you have to roll with.

I'm not so sure about medium mechs because noone has tested what would happen with them.

Since I was squeezing out 30 points of damage in my modified hunchback it is understandable why it would outperform the AC 20 version.

But missiles are vulnerable to AMS. And if you're in range to use SRMs, you're in range of the AC/20. I'd prefer to face infernos to the AC/20. In a mech anyway. My other troops would prefer the AC. Not that I'd want to get in range of either.  :)) Unlimited ammo is a big advantage but its also within the range of the AC/20.

PreInvasion all of your points are moot. PostInvasion infernos are diluted by doubleheatsinks for mechs but that has zero impact on their utility against vehicles, infantry, prootomechs and battlearmor which the alternative ammo for the AC 20 can't match.

As for AMS it is effectively just additional armor that 1) isn't fixed to a specific location and 2) effective only against missiles with a modest level of efficiency compared to regular armor. It's not a big deal.

[evilauthor]

You are making the same mistake with evilarthur as well as myself.  For some reason you aren't accounting for bracket firing properly.

I'm not? I've already stated that hotter running weapons have an advantage over cooler running weapons (all other stats being equal except for the tonnage difference due to heat) because the hotter running weapon can share its heat sinks. Bracket firing is ALL ABOUT sharing heat sinks!

So if you have a hotter running "AC" its tonnage should go down by the same amount its heat goes up (according to the game balance math apparently used by the game designers).

LRM 10 on average does 6 damage per turn. Regardless I'm being silly. The damage is triple if the targeting mods are the same which wasn't the example I was using. With the difference in targeting mods the LRM 10 does 50% more damage.
This was done with multiple playthroughs. It didn't matter if they were on the same side or if they were facing each other. The medium laser version outperformed the AC 20 standard version when it came to killing power.

That concentration in damage matters even less than you would think or I used to think. One person on the old forums used to make a computer program that just tested the effectiveness of damage clusters on assault mechs. He proved that cluster size doesn't matter at all. If the damage modifiers are the same. 4 Five damage clusters were just as effective as 10 two daamge clusters which also were the same as 1 twenty point damage cluster.

In my own preliminary testing (that admittedly wasn't as thorough as a computer simulation) I've concluded high damage clusters like an AC 20 matters more fore targets with very low hitpoints, in other words light mechs. If you are facing off against heavies and assults you defintely aren't going to be anymore effective no matter how dilutaed or concentrated the damage is. All that matters for those 2 weight classes is the total amount of damage you are putting out for the targetting modifiers you have to roll with.

I'm not so sure about medium mechs because noone has tested what would happen with them.

Since I was squeezing out 30 points of damage in my modified hunchback it is understandable why it would outperform the AC 20 version.
PreInvasion all of your points are moot. PostInvasion infernos are diluted by doubleheatsinks for mechs but that has zero impact on their utility against vehicles, infantry, prootomechs and battlearmor which the alternative ammo for the AC 20 can't match.

As for AMS it is effectively just additional armor that 1) isn't fixed to a specific location and 2) effective only against missiles with a modest level of efficiency compared to regular armor. It's not a big deal.

And did all this math check how many of those hits were TACs or went into previously opened holes? There's a reason why we call weapons that do damage to multiple locations at a time "crit seekers". The more locations that are hit, the greater odds you'll get a TAC or other critical hit because more locations hit equals more chances of a crit.

An LRM-10 and 2 LRM-5s do the same average damage no question. But the LRM-10 only gets you two clusters only slightly better than half the time. The LRM-5s give you two clusters almost guaranteed (depending on your TN rolls). The LRM-5s also weigh 1 ton less which I can devote to other things (like a heat sink).

The same goes for LRM-15s and LRM-20s vs an equivalent stack of LRM-5s. The LRM-5 stack is more likely to get more clusters and at the same time is lighter and can free up tonnage for more heat sinks (which can be shared with other weapons such as in a bracket shooter set up) or something else.

And the LRM-15/20 vs LRM-5 stack is what I base my "exchange tonnage for heat" theory on. LRM-15s and -20s are heavier than an equivalent stack of LRM-5s by exactly the same amount they generate less heat. Meaning hotter running weapons = lighter weapons = more heat sinks bought that can be shared.

[mutantmagnet]

I'm not?

LOL. I said you were.

[FedComGirl]

Whatever. I guess that means "super materials" that are lighter and far stronger than what's used in existing ACs would be the way to go then, at least used in conjunction with newer, hotter propellants. End result: lighter AC that runs hotter.

Except you'd be rewriting all the AC/s then.

I'm sorry? Are you equating a mech being slightly slowed down and becoming more inaccurate (both of which are temporary conditions as far as single battles go) with an explosion that destroys ENTIRE SECTIONS or even outright kills the mech instantly (which is permanent)? Are you actually saying that heat penalties and ammo explosions are EQUAL in terms of how badly they gimp a mech? You don't think a mech that runs hot has an advantage over a mech filled with explosive ammo bins? Really???

I really don't think it's a good think to have your mech over heat and shut down in the middle of battle making you one big easy target a good thing.

Then you must be the only one, because I have NEVER heard of overheating outright killing a mech (outside of a video game anyway) unless it touches off said ammo explosion (and not every mech carries ammo), nor have I ever heard anyone complain about it.

It's happened.

Have you been following what I've been saying AT ALL? Using more heat sinks is actually an advantage for weapons because heat sinks can be SHARED. And when you have two equivalent weapons that are alike in performance except where heat generation is concerned, the hotter weapon will always be lighter and the difference in tonnage will be identical to the difference in heat generated.

Ergo, making a weapon hotter and changing nothing else will lighten the weapon in tons by the same amount heat is increased. Why? Because game balance demands it.

But that doesn't bare up in the game stats. The LB-10X is a ton lighter than the AC/10 and generates 1 point less heat. If getting lighter should generate more heat like you say, the LB-10X should generate more heat.

Well duh. That's the point!

That isn't always a good thing. You'd be pushing people away from energy weapons.

And? You can dial them down to zero too (aka turn them off). The entire point of this exercise (which I did say before) is to remove one of the advantages that make energy weapons so much better than ammo using ones.

And reduce the reasons for using them at the same time.

Even if you only have 1 or 2 shots left for missile ammo, you're still looking at a range of 4 damage (1 shot of SRM-2 ammo) to 40 damage (2 shots of LRM-20 ammo). An exploding energy weapon would fall well inside that range so that it's no more disadvantageous than the near empty ammo bin. And of course there's always the freak TAC that nails nearly full bins through intact armor.

True but every weapon would be a potential bomb. Nobody would use lighter units since any hit could cause it to blow up.

Well it depends on how much ammo you wanted. Considering the difference in weight is slim it doesn't take much to compromise the armor.
More importantly you are increasing the chance that ammo will be available to explode and thus crippling a mech with CASE or destroying it without it.

Possibly but like you said, that depends on how much ammo you want.

You are making the same mistake with evilarthur as well as myself.  For some reason you aren't accounting for bracket firing properly.

Um... if you're bracket firing you wouldn't be firing the AC/10 when firing the medium lasers so why would the AC/10 have to add more heat sinks for them?

LRM 10 on average does 6 damage per turn. Regardless I'm being silly. The damage is triple if the targeting mods are the same which wasn't the example I was using. With the difference in targeting mods the LRM 10 does 50% more damage.

Ah. that's where you're getting it.

This was done with multiple playthroughs. It didn't matter if they were on the same side or if they were facing each other. The medium laser version outperformed the AC 20 standard version when it came to killing power.

Never worked for me.

That concentration in damage matters even less than you would think or I used to think. One person on the old forums used to make a computer program that just tested the effectiveness of damage clusters on assault mechs. He proved that cluster size doesn't matter at all. If the damage modifiers are the same. 4 Five damage clusters were just as effective as 10 two daamge clusters which also were the same as 1 twenty point damage cluster.

uh huh. okay. I'll take stripping off huge sections of armor, if not entire body sections, with one shot over paper cutting any day. The quicker your opponent goes down or retires the more likely you are to survive.

In my own preliminary testing (that admittedly wasn't as thorough as a computer simulation) I've concluded high damage clusters like an AC 20 matters more fore targets with very low hitpoints, in other words light mechs. If you are facing off against heavies and assults you defintely aren't going to be anymore effective no matter how dilutaed or concentrated the damage is. All that matters for those 2 weight classes is the total amount of damage you are putting out for the targetting modifiers you have to roll with.

I'm not so sure about medium mechs because noone has tested what would happen with them.

Since I was squeezing out 30 points of damage in my modified hunchback it is understandable why it would outperform the AC 20 version.

If you're just looking at the amount of damage fired, then sure 6 mediums is going to outperform an AC/20. But how much you fire down range and how much you connect are two different things. You still need at least 4 of those lasers to hit to do the same amount of damage of an AC/20.

PreInvasion all of your points are moot. PostInvasion infernos are diluted by doubleheatsinks for mechs but that has zero impact on their utility against vehicles, infantry, prootomechs and battlearmor which the alternative ammo for the AC 20 can't match.

That depends entirely on when you're playing as those items could be in use.  That's true, under the new rules missiles are more effective against infantry than AC/s. Either way, to get into SRM range you still have to get into range of the AC/20. The infernos will cause problems for the AC/ but the opponent won't be feeling all that smurfy either.

As for AMS it is effectively just additional armor that 1) isn't fixed to a specific location and 2) effective only against missiles with a modest level of efficiency compared to regular armor. It's not a big deal.

Every little bit helps and if it means reducing or eliminating on avenue of attack against me, I'm all for it.