Author Topic: Why Tweak the Autocannon?  (Read 56996 times)

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19827
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #240 on: 19 October 2019, 21:08:58 »
You can do a straight up swap with an AC/10. It makes units like the Orion and centurion much better skirmishers

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37060
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #241 on: 19 October 2019, 21:15:04 »
Not to mention the Steiner Banshee...  ^-^

Apocal

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 547
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #242 on: 20 October 2019, 00:54:27 »
Guys, question.

If you took the light gauss and put it in introtech, absent the rest of star league tech, what would you consider it?

Personally, GIMME. I don't care about the crap tonnage/damage ratio, the range means I'm getting multiple hits, and pretty solid hits, before the other guy.

It would eclipse the AC/5 but still fall short of being better than the usual introtech AC/5 alternatives. It would cancel Big mechs decently but lots of weapons do that, even in introtech.

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13267
  • I said don't look!
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #243 on: 20 October 2019, 01:04:21 »
13 tons with ammo, 1 heat with range to rival the AC-2, and 8 point damage clusters.  That'd be damn tempting for sure on anything that mounts an AC-10 in terms of straight up replacement.

Not light enough to truly eliminate the AC-5 or AC-2 but if you have pairs, or more, of such weapons then it is much more interesting.

Not enough punch to completely replace the AC-20 either.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37060
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #244 on: 20 October 2019, 05:24:16 »
It edges the AC/2 at both Medium and Long range.  Imagine a JaegerMech with two of these...

Sabelkatten

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6952
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #245 on: 20 October 2019, 05:35:33 »
Without DHS any gauss weapon is scary compared to other guns. LGR+32 rounds+SHS is 15 tons, 2 tons less than PPC+10SHS, 80% of the damage but 40% more range.

Greatclub

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3036
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #246 on: 20 October 2019, 05:46:43 »
It edges the AC/2 at both Medium and Long range.  Imagine a JaegerMech with two of these...

It exists, sort of: Rifleman RFL-7M. I've assigned one to a sparring partner, it hit a bunch but he says he wasn't impressed with it. I know it impressed the guy he was shooting at (me)

The reason I brought it up? The damage/tonnage ratio is the same as the ac/5, almost exactly. Only the range is better.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37060
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #247 on: 20 October 2019, 05:48:09 »
Hmmm... Off to make even lighter Gauss Rifles... thanks for the idea!  :thumbsup:

Retry

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1433
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #248 on: 20 October 2019, 11:59:36 »
The reason I brought it up? The damage/tonnage ratio is the same as the ac/5, almost exactly. Only the range is better.
The damage/ton ratio of the LGR is non-trivially better than the AC/5 (.6667 LGR vs .625 AC/5 w/o heat sinks for a 6.66% improvement, or .615 LGR vs .555 AC/5 w/ heat sinks for a 10.7% improvement, or .5771 LGR vs .5 AC/5 w/ heat sinks & 1 ton ammo for a 14.3% improvement).  That's on top of the more damage potential per ton of ammo and drastically superior range brackets (LGR's medium range is nearly as long as AC/5's long range).

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4444
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #249 on: 20 October 2019, 16:17:33 »
So... how is that not outperforming the AC/5?  ???

Other than in range? Just a bonus. Same as rapid firing and hitting with both shots. Bonus.



Dudes... he already said he doesn't believe in the math behind probabilities. Just let it go.

Thank you.


Sometimes it takes a while to wrap your head around how wrong someone is

I’ve got it now

Why is it wrong to believe what one has experienced instead of what one is told?



My question as to alternatives, How about a Improved Rifle Cannons? Ones without the -3 damage against BAR-8 and above armor? 

The HRC has the same weight and range of the AC/5. It's also bulkier, hotter, and has less ammo but it's hitting nearly twice as hard with a smaller minimum range. So there'd be trade offs. The HRC could also be used as a replacement for the AC/10. Slightly hotter, slightly less damage, and less ammo but greater range, and 4 tons less weight.

The MRC is pretty close to the Light AC/5. It'd be a good lower tech stand in. It'd also be a good replacement for the AC/2. Shorter range, twice the heat, and less ammo but 3 times the damage also with a smaller minimum range.

The LRCs size and range makes it kind of hard to know what it could be used instead of but it'd be a good for low tech units. And if one doesn't mind the loss of range two could be used instead of 1 AC/2 for increased damage. A Blackjack with quad LRC would be scarier in a city. No min range. 12 damage at a range of 12. Blast away with the LRC then move in and finish off with the lasers.



Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37060
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #250 on: 20 October 2019, 16:34:49 »
Other than in range? Just a bonus. Same as rapid firing and hitting with both shots. Bonus.
*snip*
Ok, if a bonus of 5 is the same as a bonus of 10 to you, who am I to argue?

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13267
  • I said don't look!
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #251 on: 20 October 2019, 16:43:09 »
Why is it wrong to believe what one has experienced instead of what one is told?

There are many reasons to not rely on personal experience when evaluating these sorts of things.

One of them is we tend to remember extremes more than the typical and tend to think any trend of extremes is actually the typical.

As such I'm willing to bet if you really kept track of how you roll over time you'd find you don't roll low often enough or high often enough to see much in the way of outliers or atypical behavior versus what objective probability tells us we should expect.

At least if your dice are not severely flawed and your rolling technique is good.

Personally I don't believe it is possible to change what the most common result of a die roll is without serious damage/defect or using certain techniques and yes there are techniques you can use to skew results.

Another is a goal of objective analysis is to remove such bias whenever possible.  And yes the idea of people rolling lower than typical or higher than typical is an inherently subjective bias to introduce.

dgorsman

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1977
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #252 on: 20 October 2019, 16:51:57 »
One of my favorite phrases: "Remove yourself from the equation".
Think about it.  It's what we do.
- The Society

Thunder LRMs: the gift that keeps on giving.  They're the glitter of the BattleTech universe.

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4444
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #253 on: 21 October 2019, 00:26:32 »
Ok, if a bonus of 5 is the same as a bonus of 10 to you, who am I to argue?

Presuming you mean an LRM-15 the bonus isn't 10. The bonus is up to 10.

There are many reasons to not rely on personal experience when evaluating these sorts of things.

One of them is we tend to remember extremes more than the typical and tend to think any trend of extremes is actually the typical.

As such I'm willing to bet if you really kept track of how you roll over time you'd find you don't roll low often enough or high often enough to see much in the way of outliers or atypical behavior versus what objective probability tells us we should expect.

At least if your dice are not severely flawed and your rolling technique is good.

Personally I don't believe it is possible to change what the most common result of a die roll is without serious damage/defect or using certain techniques and yes there are techniques you can use to skew results.

Another is a goal of objective analysis is to remove such bias whenever possible.  And yes the idea of people rolling lower than typical or higher than typical is an inherently subjective bias to introduce.

There could be all kinds of reasons for poor rolls. I also never said that I never had good rolls. I said I'm not going to count on them. I'm certainly going to hope for them. I'm just not going to take them for granted. Telling me that I have to ignore personal experience isn't going to change that. Its like saying the tire is only flat on one side. Its true but I'm still not getting anywhere.



And the only way to remove bias from the equation is to remove people from the dice rolling.







Hptm. Streiger

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 968
  • 3d artist, spread sheet warrior, KTF
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #254 on: 21 October 2019, 02:12:44 »
After reading the discussion of the other lighter gauss rifles - what if you hone the function of the ACs to fire (in most cases) multiple rounds? -
I don't think about cluster roles but simply use the MoS - so if your AC doesn't get the toHit number (for example 9 instead of 10) it might still deal 50% of its damage (rounded down). You could push it to a negative MoS (or better MoF) of even -4.

Of course, you could go the other way as well but pls not in 50% segments  ;D

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13267
  • I said don't look!
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #255 on: 21 October 2019, 02:45:41 »
There could be all kinds of reasons for poor rolls. I also never said that I never had good rolls. I said I'm not going to count on them. I'm certainly going to hope for them. I'm just not going to take them for granted. Telling me that I have to ignore personal experience isn't going to change that. Its like saying the tire is only flat on one side. Its true but I'm still not getting anywhere.

And the only way to remove bias from the equation is to remove people from the dice rolling.

It is fair to say bias can never be fully eliminated because of the human factor when dice meet table but one should still strive to minimize it.

I do grant people can be using bad rolling techniques that skew the average of what they roll without realizing it but there are lots of methods to reduce that.

Dice manufacturing will never be perfect either and dice do wear down but anything that would actually throw off the average one way or the other in any noticeable will almost certainly be detectable.

Still it does strike me as something of a double standard to take if you only apply that methodology to the cluster hit roll and nothing else.

After all if you can't count on rolling a 5 or higher on the cluster hit table after an LRM-10 has hit it's target it is not fair to count on rolling a 5 or higher when making the to hit roll when double tapping an AC-5.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37060
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #256 on: 21 October 2019, 03:31:20 »
Presuming you mean an LRM-15 the bonus isn't 10. The bonus is up to 10.
*snip*
That's the spirit!  :D

And in the same vein, if you mean double-tapping an AC/5, the bonus is "up to" 5.

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4444
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #257 on: 21 October 2019, 06:58:51 »
After reading the discussion of the other lighter gauss rifles - what if you hone the function of the ACs to fire (in most cases) multiple rounds? -
I don't think about cluster roles but simply use the MoS - so if your AC doesn't get the toHit number (for example 9 instead of 10) it might still deal 50% of its damage (rounded down). You could push it to a negative MoS (or better MoF) of even -4.

Of course, you could go the other way as well but pls not in 50% segments  ;D

There are rules for Glancing/Direct Blows that use MoS in TacOps.


It is fair to say bias can never be fully eliminated because of the human factor when dice meet table but one should still strive to minimize it.

I do grant people can be using bad rolling techniques that skew the average of what they roll without realizing it but there are lots of methods to reduce that.

Dice manufacturing will never be perfect either and dice do wear down but anything that would actually throw off the average one way or the other in any noticeable will almost certainly be detectable.

Still it does strike me as something of a double standard to take if you only apply that methodology to the cluster hit roll and nothing else.

After all if you can't count on rolling a 5 or higher on the cluster hit table after an LRM-10 has hit it's target it is not fair to count on rolling a 5 or higher when making the to hit roll when double tapping an AC-5.

I've tried all kinds of things. Sometimes they're normal. Sometimes they're good. Usually they're bad.

I don't count on rolling 5s for the LRM-10 or a double tapped AC-5. I hope everything hits but I don't count on it.

That's the spirit!  :D

And in the same vein, if you mean double-tapping an AC/5, the bonus is "up to" 5.


lol  :)) Thanks :)

Well, for double tapping the AC/5 the bonus would be 5 since each shot does 5 points of damage. The LRM-15 is up to 10 bonus because it could be a bonus of 1-10. Obviously more is better.  >:D

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19827
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #258 on: 21 October 2019, 08:34:02 »
nvm i can't read
« Last Edit: 21 October 2019, 08:52:59 by Sartris »

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13267
  • I said don't look!
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #259 on: 21 October 2019, 10:15:10 »
I've tried all kinds of things. Sometimes they're normal. Sometimes they're good. Usually they're bad.

I don't count on rolling 5s for the LRM-10 or a double tapped AC-5. I hope everything hits but I don't count on it.

Again I suspect that is more you remembering the exceptions than the typical.

The way you argue it frankly does seem like you're counting on rolling 5 or better when rapid firing any ACs.

Because no matter what the to hit drops to if you don't roll a 5 or better on the to hit when rapid firing the AC it'll either jam(doing zero damage) or explode(doing it's damage to your unit).

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4444
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #260 on: 22 October 2019, 03:55:37 »
Again I suspect that is more you remembering the exceptions than the typical.

The way you argue it frankly does seem like you're counting on rolling 5 or better when rapid firing any ACs.

Because no matter what the to hit drops to if you don't roll a 5 or better on the to hit when rapid firing the AC it'll either jam(doing zero damage) or explode(doing it's damage to your unit).

Could be?

Nope. Might seem that way but I don't count on both shots hitting. Hope they do but don't count on it. But if you count on a 5 or better for missiles, why wouldn't you count on a 5 or better for a double tap?  ???

Which is why I rarely ever did it in a game. I only did it when the dice gods were favoring me. As in getting lots of hits and lots of missiles hitting.

Apocal

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 547
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #261 on: 22 October 2019, 07:41:30 »
Could be?

Nope. Might seem that way but I don't count on both shots hitting. Hope they do but don't count on it. But if you count on a 5 or better for missiles, why wouldn't you count on a 5 or better for a double tap?

Because a double tap requires an 8 or better. A 5, 6, or 7 means your double tap whiffs.

AlphaMirage

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3600
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #262 on: 22 October 2019, 07:44:09 »
Because a double tap requires an 8 or better. A 5, 6, or 7 means your double tap whiffs.

Which is always frustrating and was one of my first house rules.  7 is 2 hits.

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4444
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #263 on: 22 October 2019, 17:42:19 »
Because a double tap requires an 8 or better. A 5, 6, or 7 means your double tap whiffs.

Then why ask me about a 5?

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 37060
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #264 on: 22 October 2019, 18:06:50 »
Check the cluster table... the LRM-15 is more likely to yield a bonus than an AC/5 double tap...

monbvol

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13267
  • I said don't look!
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #265 on: 22 October 2019, 19:29:07 »
The LRM-10 outperforms the AC-5 with a 5 on the cluster table unless the AC-5 rapid fires.

Which lines up quite nicely with the fact that even when the to hit drops below 5 you still need to roll a 5 or better to have anything other than a useless hunk of weight or an internal explosion.

The LRM-15 makes an interesting case for itself in that 5 on the cluster chart results in 9 missiles hitting.  Rolling 9 or better delivers more damage than a rapid fire AC-5 is able to put out.

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4444
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #266 on: 22 October 2019, 22:37:16 »
Check the cluster table... the LRM-15 is more likely to yield a bonus than an AC/5 double tap...

Yes. So?


The LRM-10 outperforms the AC-5 with a 5 on the cluster table unless the AC-5 rapid fires.

Which lines up quite nicely with the fact that even when the to hit drops below 5 you still need to roll a 5 or better to have anything other than a useless hunk of weight or an internal explosion.

The LRM-15 makes an interesting case for itself in that 5 on the cluster chart results in 9 missiles hitting.  Rolling 9 or better delivers more damage than a rapid fire AC-5 is able to put out.

True. If one can trust the dice.

Ok.

So?  I know the LRM-15 has the possibility of doing more damage than an AC/5. I never said otherwise. I'm not going to count on it though.


How many times are we going to do this? ???  Can we please get back to autocannons and possible improvements, replacements, and additions to?

I can see more ammo types. I can see improved Rifle Cannons. I can see experimental AC types. A Shotgun AC for example as a low tech version of the LB-X but reduced range. AC/s with cut down barrels to reduce weight with reduced range and to hit penalty. I can see an Autocannon that can select between single shot and burst. Burst functions normally while shot does half damage but has double ammo. Maybe even more range. I can even see just the single shot versions. I'm also thinking of a Gast Gun type AC and a Gatling Gun AC. I can't see gauss rifles of any kind being available during the later succession wars but I can see their predecessors, Rail Guns being used.

Retry

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1433
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #267 on: 22 October 2019, 23:41:17 »
How many times are we going to do this? ???  Can we please get back to autocannons and possible improvements, replacements, and additions to?
Until either you or he gets tired, I wager.  Or, rather, when he gets tired.

I've said my improvements once or twice to the Autocannon here which makes them competitive:
1.Cut the AC/2's heat down to 0
2.Cut the minimum ranges of autocannons (AC/2 and /5 variants) down to 0
3.Give autocannons 20% more ammunition (optional but it helps them utilize point 4)
4.Make autocannons automatic with a kinder version of Rapidfire Autocannons to fire like the Ultra currently does (while making the Ultra even better at it: 2 rolls to-hit without jamming instead of relying on the cluster table).  Apply to all non-Ultra, non-Rotary autocannons.

If these criteria are met (specifically Criteria 4), then I would view ACs as serious contenders that are fully worth their weight compared to the other options.
Quote
I can see more ammo types. I can see improved Rifle Cannons. I can see experimental AC types. A Shotgun AC for example as a low tech version of the LB-X but reduced range. AC/s with cut down barrels to reduce weight with reduced range and to hit penalty. I can see an Autocannon that can select between single shot and burst. Burst functions normally while shot does half damage but has double ammo. Maybe even more range. I can even see just the single shot versions. I'm also thinking of a Gast Gun type AC and a Gatling Gun AC. I can't see gauss rifles of any kind being available during the later succession wars but I can see their predecessors, Rail Guns being used.
The existing ammo types need to be improved first so there's more viable, useful types other than just Precision and sometimes Flak.  The utility of AC ammo pales in comparison to either LRM or SRM ammo.  I made an honest try of that here: https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=67185.0

Rifle cannons are not really relevant to Autocannons.  I've done that before though, mostly to have another "Intro-tech" ballistic option so the vanilla ACs aren't so lonely.

AC's with "cut down barrels to reduce weight and accuracy" are just LACs and PACs.

The single-shot/burst-shot AC idea sounds like an Ultra, except your "ultra" mode is just firing a non-nerfed shot.  I don't think that adds anything of value.

"Gast Gun" mostly sounds like one of those configurations that some of the autocannons of a given class are split up into
fluff-wise, as some may be single-barrel, double-barrel, rotaries, etc.  Introducing the Gast Gun as a separate entity, outside of maybe a model of an existing AC class with a quirk if we're stretching it, sounds like clutter for the sake of clutter.

"Gatling Gun" -> RAC

RifleMech

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4444
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #268 on: 23 October 2019, 00:48:55 »
Until either you or he gets tired, I wager.  Or, rather, when he gets tired.

 :(  I was tired of it a long time ago.



Quote
I've said my improvements once or twice to the Autocannon here which makes them competitive:
1.Cut the AC/2's heat down to 0
2.Cut the minimum ranges of autocannons (AC/2 and /5 variants) down to 0
3.Give autocannons 20% more ammunition (optional but it helps them utilize point 4)
4.Make autocannons automatic with a kinder version of Rapidfire Autocannons to fire like the Ultra currently does (while making the Ultra even better at it: 2 rolls to-hit without jamming instead of relying on the cluster table).  Apply to all non-Ultra, non-Rotary autocannons.

1) I think the AC/2 should generate heat. Exploding propellant generates heat.
2) The AC/2 and AC/5 are longer ranged weapons. I can see them hitting at close range but they're intended to hit at a distance.
3) Mixed feelings. More ammo is nice but it only seems to help the bigger guns.
4) Mixed feelings. Looks nice but if it works so well why develop the Ultra?


Quote
If these criteria are met (specifically Criteria 4), then I would view ACs as serious contenders that are fully worth their weight compared to the other options.The existing ammo types need to be improved first so there's more viable, useful types other than just Precision and sometimes Flak.  The utility of AC ammo pales in comparison to either LRM or SRM ammo.  I made an honest try of that here: https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=67185.0

I don't know that they'd need to be improved.

Quote
Rifle cannons are not really relevant to Autocannons.  I've done that before though, mostly to have another "Intro-tech" ballistic option so the vanilla ACs aren't so lonely.

I think they're relevant. Their different sizes, and damages (especially without the -3) give a lot of options, as I mentioned above.


Quote
AC's with "cut down barrels to reduce weight and accuracy" are just LACs and PACs.

Those are high tech options. I'm talking a low tech version. Hence the negative targeting modifier. But no minimum range.

Quote
The single-shot/burst-shot AC idea sounds like an Ultra, except your "ultra" mode is just firing a non-nerfed shot.  I don't think that adds anything of value.

Not if the single shot gets adds range to to lack shaking from the burst's recoil. Maybe there could even be a positive to hit modifier?  It would also increase the ammo. It probably doesn't a whole lot of "value" but reaching out and hitting your opponent from beyond what they thought your range was is of some value.

Quote
"Gast Gun" mostly sounds like one of those configurations that some of the autocannons of a given class are split up into fluff-wise, as some may be single-barrel, double-barrel, rotaries, etc.  Introducing the Gast Gun as a separate entity, outside of maybe a model of an existing AC class with a quirk if we're stretching it, sounds like clutter for the sake of clutter.

I'm thinking more of a lower tech ultra but not as fast. It can also fire single shots if one side jams.

Quote
"Gatling Gun" -> RAC

Again lower tech version of the ultra only you roll on the to hit chart. Only it only fires bursts. It'd also roll on the cluster hit chart. I'm thinking at least a 4 since walking fire gives splits a shot in 2 and a rapid fire would double that. So an GAC/2 could do up to 4 points of damage, and GAC/5 could do up to 8? (not sure if I want to round up or down), and so on. That's a lot less than the RAC. Like the RAC though, jams wouldn't stop firing but would reduce damage.




Apocal

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 547
Re: Why Tweak the Autocannon?
« Reply #269 on: 23 October 2019, 01:02:59 »
Then why ask me about a 5?

That was monbvol, not me. monbvol brought up the to-hit roll of 5 because the rapid-fire AC/5 jams on a 4 or lower. You replied with the counterpoint of counting on a 5 on the cluster roll for a double tap. You'd be fair to do so, but it would only produce 5 points of damage regardless.

True. If one can trust the dice.

Ok.

So?  I know the LRM-15 has the possibility of doing more damage than an AC/5. I never said otherwise. I'm not going to count on it though.

This is where it gets confusing. You're outright stating you can't trust the dice, yet also you said previously that the rapid-fire AC/5 more reliably produces damage than its LRM equivalent. The only way this is possible is by trusting the dice rolls to markedly favor the rapid-fire AC/5 over the LRM10 in terms of to-hit rolls (to prevent a jam) and on the cluster table.

I've said my improvements once or twice to the Autocannon here which makes them competitive:
1.Cut the AC/2's heat down to 0
2.Cut the minimum ranges of autocannons (AC/2 and /5 variants) down to 0
3.Give autocannons 20% more ammunition (optional but it helps them utilize point 4)
4.Make autocannons automatic with a kinder version of Rapidfire Autocannons to fire like the Ultra currently does (while making the Ultra even better at it: 2 rolls to-hit without jamming instead of relying on the cluster table).  Apply to all non-Ultra, non-Rotary autocannons.

1. Yeah, this I agree with but if you're  still using the rapid-fire rules, do you keep it zero heat for both shots? It would break consistency in those optional rules if you wanted to generate heat in that case although I wouldn't be opposed to zero heat for 2.82 damage on average.
2. Yep. It is a dumb rule.
3. Totally fine and I'd even be willing to go higher.
4. That's a good solution, yeah. The cluster table is the biggest reason I don't get as much use out of Ultras. UAC/5s would decent, while the bigger weapons would be dead-serious contenders. Hunchback IICs, lmao.

edit:
4) Mixed feelings. Looks nice but if it works so well why develop the Ultra?

Because two to-hit rolls avoids rolling on the cluster table. If you don't believe in dice probabilities, it doesn't matter but for everyone else, independent to-hit rolls are flatly superior any time the target number goes below 8, without slowing gameplay or adding any complicated rules.
« Last Edit: 23 October 2019, 01:21:04 by Apocal »