Let's have a discussion: The Autocannon 5

[SCC]

I wouldn't call a 200 rating engine common, it only works for 40, 50 and 100 tonners

[A. Lurker]

Construction-wise, in terms of tonnage left for weapons, armor, and miscellaneous gear after accounting for unavoidables (like engine, gyro, internal structure etc.) the best weights for the 5/8 speed bracket are 60 tons if you're not planning to jump and 55 if you do, assuming all-intro level tech. (You'll notice that that is exactly where the Dragon and the "trio" are, respectively.) So in that sense there's little practical reason to build a 40-45-ton design moving at the same rate -- you'd probably save a bunch of C-bills, but with internal structure, maximum possible armor protection, and possible warload all not insignificantly reduced from what you could have had in and on a heavier frame capable of going the exact same speed you'd also only get what you paid for.

Of course, that's the out-of-universe side of the argument. In-universe, if the biggest fusion engine you can readily have built and shipped to your 'Mech factory is about a 225-rated one, you might as well stick it on a 45-ton BattleMech (possibly in preference to the more expensive 75-ton frames that you could also mount it on after suitable modification but which it would only propel up to 3/5) and call it a day, at least until the situation improves.

We've also drifted a bit away from the AC/5, haven't we? :)

[Getz]

Daimyo?

Good catch, but we're still not exactly flooded with designs...

[Sartris]

You're quite right about the Dragon and the "trio," but I was thinking more about the lighter and cheaper end of the scale.  Recently I was trying to get something (anything) to round out a 5/8/0 medium lance that cost less than about 1000 bv and was quite surprised to learn that even with TRO 3055 and 3058 I don't have many options other than the Hammer and the Hollander.

The Trebuchet 7K perhaps?

Snake?

[Ian Sharpe]

Snake?

Not 5/8/0, which seems to be the sticking point.  5/8/X opens up the Battle Hawk, Snake, the Watchman and later, Sentry, etc...but I suppose that a 40-45 tonner that slow probably needs JJs.

[Sartris]

Not 5/8/0, which seems to be the sticking point.  5/8/X opens up the Battle Hawk, Snake, the Watchman and later, Sentry, etc...but I suppose that a 40-45 tonner that slow probably needs JJs.

Oops.  I guess it's an alien concept to me to consider jump jets a criterion for not picking a mech

[Sabelkatten]

Not 5/8/0, which seems to be the sticking point.  5/8/X opens up the Battle Hawk, Snake, the Watchman and later, Sentry, etc...but I suppose that a 40-45 tonner that slow probably needs JJs.

Wasn't the starting point about SW-era designs? ??? Post-3050 there are quite a few.

[Diablo48]

Wasn't the starting point about SW-era designs? ??? Post-3050 there are quite a few.

It is no unreasonable to expand the definition out to include the 3050+ designs which could be built under intro tech rules or be converted to intro tech rules with minimal modification (e.g. swap SPL for Flamer).  Of course, that does not change the fact that TRO 3025 is very limited in available movement profiles which was really the point here, but whatever.

[A. Lurker]

It is no unreasonable to expand the definition out to include the 3050+ designs which could be built under intro tech rules or be converted to intro tech rules with minimal modification (e.g. swap SPL for Flamer).  Of course, that does not change the fact that TRO 3025 is very limited in available movement profiles which was really the point here, but whatever.

You actually do get a fair number of movement profiles in the medium 'Mech range, from the 4/6/- of the Centurion to the 7/11/7 and 8/12/- of the Assassin and Cicada. That there's only one 5/8/- among the originals in TRO: 3025 is kind of besides the point -- the 5/8 bracket in general is well represented, it's just that most of those 'Mechs can then also jump.

Sure -- if one wants to complain about the lack of canon 40-45 ton intro-level 'Mechs that specifically go exactly 5/8/-, no more, no less, then there really isn't much to be found in that by now pretty narrow category. (The only one I can find on a quick search is a Blackjack 1X, which I think is the flamer-equipped prototype mentioned in the fluff and thus not a production model.) But to me that's what the construction rules are for: I can't expect TPTB to read my mind and design my every 'Mech for me 24/7, so if I want one badly enough, I'll just sit down and make one myself.

[Diablo48]

You actually do get a fair number of movement profiles in the medium 'Mech range, from the 4/6/- of the Centurion to the 7/11/7 and 8/12/- of the Assassin and Cicada. That there's only one 5/8/- among the originals in TRO: 3025 is kind of besides the point -- the 5/8 bracket in general is well represented, it's just that most of those 'Mechs can then also jump.

Sure -- if one wants to complain about the lack of canon 40-45 ton intro-level 'Mechs that specifically go exactly 5/8/-, no more, no less, then there really isn't much to be found in that by now pretty narrow category. (The only one I can find on a quick search is a Blackjack 1X, which I think is the flamer-equipped prototype mentioned in the fluff and thus not a production model.) But to me that's what the construction rules are for: I can't expect TPTB to read my mind and design my every 'Mech for me 24/7, so if I want one badly enough, I'll just sit down and make one myself.

Actually, my complaint was that the 4/6/X band is very badly overused in TRO 3025, and if you go that and the 5/8/X band there are virtually no good options which hurts variety.  I would have much preferred to see more 3/5, 6/9, and 7/11 'Mechs than the mass of 4/6 messes we got.  Basically every 4/6 assault 'Mech would be greatly improved by slowing down to 3/5 as would the Marauder, and there are a silly number of mediums and even lights moving 4/6/X for no good reason.

[A. Lurker]

Actually, my complaint was that the 4/6/X band is very badly overused in TRO 3025, and if you go that and the 5/8/X band there are virtually no good options which hurts variety.  I would have much preferred to see more 3/5, 6/9, and 7/11 'Mechs than the mass of 4/6 messes we got.  Basically every 4/6 assault 'Mech would be greatly improved by slowing down to 3/5 as would the Marauder, and there are a silly number of mediums and even lights moving 4/6/X for no good reason.

Nah. No 'Mech is ever improved by merely slowing down, otherwise overheating by 5 would obviously be a good thing. ;)

Yes, I know that's not what you mean, but I've experimented with reducing 'Mech speeds in favor of more armor and firepower and the results have been decidedly...mixed. So I'm certainly not in favor of reducing the entire assault 'Mech weight class to a single herd of lumbering 3/5 behemoths, especially when the "optimal" weight range for intro-tech 4/6 designs (at 75-85 tons) actually overlaps with the lower end of the assault scale anyway. Firepower's nice, but firepower alone won't win me the fight -- I also need to be able to get it where I need it when I need it, and that's where the extra MP definitely comes in handy.

With regard to slow lights and mediums, though...mm, yeah. I mostly blame that on many of those being among the first designs ever, so even the game's own creators likely weren't quite sure what might be "good" and what a lemon yet.

[ANS Kamas P81]

if you go that and the 5/8/X band there are virtually no good options which hurts variety

Trebuchet, Dervish, Dragon, Ostsol, Wolverine, Shadow Hawk and Griffin are all very good options in 3025 for any 5/8/whatever designs.  Some of their variants are a bit goofy (see also Davion SHDs) but the base models are solid and have some great variants (like the PPC DRGs) that you can play.

[Diablo48]

Nah. No 'Mech is ever improved by merely slowing down, otherwise overheating by 5 would obviously be a good thing. ;)

Yes, I know that's not what you mean, but I've experimented with reducing 'Mech speeds in favor of more armor and firepower and the results have been decidedly...mixed. So I'm certainly not in favor of reducing the entire assault 'Mech weight class to a single herd of lumbering 3/5 behemoths, especially when the "optimal" weight range for intro-tech 4/6 designs (at 75-85 tons) actually overlaps with the lower end of the assault scale anyway. Firepower's nice, but firepower alone won't win me the fight -- I also need to be able to get it where I need it when I need it, and that's where the extra MP definitely comes in handy.

With regard to slow lights and mediums, though...mm, yeah. I mostly blame that on many of those being among the first designs ever, so even the game's own creators likely weren't quite sure what might be "good" and what a lemon yet.

Honestly, I really do not consider 80 tons to be part of the assault bracket because in most ways those designs really behave like heavies, and even 85 tons can have the same effect due to the way Jump Jet weights work, although that is more prevalent once iJJs and XLEs hit the scenes.

As for speed, I have always been able to offset that with planning.  3/5 assaults work great if you work with them, you just need to plan ahead so you are somewhere you want to be when the fighting starts because they do not have the speed to reposition much under fire.  They also allow you to pack staggering amounts of firepower and armor which usually more than make up for the slightly reduced ground speed once the shooting starts.  After all, dropping the Marauder to 3/5 lets you carry enough sinks to fire both PPCs and the AC 5 until the ammo runs dry and still have weight left to get near max armor or more secondaries, and that is not even one of the designs that gets an efficiency boost like the Banshee.

[Getz]

Trebuchet, Dervish, Dragon, Ostsol, Wolverine, Shadow Hawk and Griffin are all very good options in 3025 for any 5/8/whatever designs.  Some of their variants are a bit goofy (see also Davion SHDs) but the base models are solid and have some great variants (like the PPC DRGs) that you can play.

But these are all at the heavier end of the spectrum - what irks me (although not a lot, mind) is all the slow mediums in the 40-45 ton range.  Jump capability is a bit beside the point, although I would say that when we're talking trooper mechs with relatively marginal payloads, I'd probably rather the 2.5 tons needed to make a 5/8 medium jump was devoted to armour or weapons.

[A. Lurker]

Honestly, I really do not consider 80 tons to be part of the assault bracket because in most ways those designs really behave like heavies, and even 85 tons can have the same effect due to the way Jump Jet weights work, although that is more prevalent once iJJs and XLEs hit the scenes.

Well, officially they are. I suppose there's nothing wrong with defining weight categories differently to one's personal taste -- even the official ones are pretty arbitrary, after all --, but until you actually share those new definitions, people are apt to reflexively assume you're still using the ones they're more familiar with. :)

As for speed, I have always been able to offset that with planning.  3/5 assaults work great if you work with them, you just need to plan ahead so you are somewhere you want to be when the fighting starts because they do not have the speed to reposition much under fire.  They also allow you to pack staggering amounts of firepower and armor which usually more than make up for the slightly reduced ground speed once the shooting starts.  After all, dropping the Marauder to 3/5 lets you carry enough sinks to fire both PPCs and the AC 5 until the ammo runs dry and still have weight left to get near max armor or more secondaries, and that is not even one of the designs that gets an efficiency boost like the Banshee.

To be honest, 3/5 is where I consider armored ground units too slow to be of general use anymore. Partly depending on what tech level we're talking about, even 4/6 can seem pretty sluggish already, but the next lower level is just right out. Sure, if such units bring enough armor and firepower they still work well enough as such things as siege guns, bulldozers, or quasi-mobile defense turrets, or just plain on postage stamp maps in general -- but their pronounced inability to keep up with a moving battle marks them as dedicated specialists rather than general combatants in my book. So chances are that I wouldn't be happy with that notional 3/5 Marauder on general principles no matter how much anyone sung its praises -- in the 75-ton range I can get faster machines and in the 3/5 bracket I can have (or build) more solid ones.

[Diablo48]

Well, officially they are. I suppose there's nothing wrong with defining weight categories differently to one's personal taste -- even the official ones are pretty arbitrary, after all --, but until you actually share those new definitions, people are apt to reflexively assume you're still using the ones they're more familiar with. :)

Honestly, my definitions are more about speed than weight because that is really what determines a unit's roll on the battlefield more than anything else so I would consider the Urbie an assault and he Charger a medium/heavy (depending on timeframe).  Of course, it really does not matter that much in a discussion of movement speed variety so it is kind of whatever.

To be honest, 3/5 is where I consider armored ground units too slow to be of general use anymore. Partly depending on what tech level we're talking about, even 4/6 can seem pretty sluggish already, but the next lower level is just right out. Sure, if such units bring enough armor and firepower they still work well enough as such things as siege guns, bulldozers, or quasi-mobile defense turrets, or just plain on postage stamp maps in general -- but their pronounced inability to keep up with a moving battle marks them as dedicated specialists rather than general combatants in my book. So chances are that I wouldn't be happy with that notional 3/5 Marauder on general principles no matter how much anyone sung its praises -- in the 75-ton range I can get faster machines and in the 3/5 bracket I can have (or build) more solid ones.

I will grant that 3/5's are specialized, however proper tactics prevents this from being a problem.  What you need to do with them is establish a defensive position the enemy must secure based on the larger objectives of the scenario.  Assaults are for holding or taking positions, so if the enemy tries to engage you in the open you either ignore them as you press on to your objective or crush them if they try to engage you.  You can also use them as an anchor for lighter units to fall back to or drive the enemy into for victory.  If they are ever involved in a moving battle they should define where your position is because you should not let the enemy draw your faster forces away to be destroyed piecemeal, although harassers can be sent out to annoy the enemy from a safe distance while they contemplate throwing themselves onto your big guns.

You may want to try using 3/5's in assault or defense type objective based missions where the battle will be forced to center around a static point like a supply depot or command center because I think you will see how overwhelmingly useful their incredible armor and firepower can be when you need to take or hold ground.

[A. Lurker]

You may want to try using 3/5's in assault or defense type objective based missions where the battle will be forced to center around a static point like a supply depot or command center because I think you will see how overwhelmingly useful their incredible armor and firepower can be when you need to take or hold ground.

I didn't say 3/5s were useless; if the enemy has to engage them for some reason (even including the classic straight-up "two forces enter, one force leaves" scenario), they can be great. I said they're no longer much good as general combatants.

And on that point we actually seem to agree. ;)

(Just how much "proper tactics" can compensate for their low speed might be somewhat debatable, but that's only getting further off topic. For the record, I for one am not convinced that relying on that always being the case -- to the point of actually preferring them over more mobile units -- is a good strategy.)

[Diablo48]

I didn't say 3/5s were useless; if the enemy has to engage them for some reason (even including the classic straight-up "two forces enter, one force leaves" scenario), they can be great. I said they're no longer much good as general combatants.

And on that point we actually seem to agree. ;)

(Just how much "proper tactics" can compensate for their low speed might be somewhat debatable, but that's only getting further off topic. For the record, I for one am not convinced that relying on that always being the case -- to the point of actually preferring them over more mobile units -- is a good strategy.)

You just have to be patient and make the enemy play your game.  The big guns set up a semi-mobile base of fire which your faster units can leverage to great effect so long as you do not have them run off because the enemy will have to engage you at some point.  Really, the only thing they cannot do is scouting, but 4/6 is no better for that anyways which is why I view 3/5 and 4/6/0 as roughly interchangeable.

[Neufeld]

So, for unrelated reasons, I started to research how many mechs mounted an AC/5 during the Age of War.

Known to mount AC/5s:
MSK-5S Mackie: AC5, PPC, LL
BNC-1E & BNC-3E Banshee: AC5, PPC
BWP-X1 & BWP-2B Ymir: 2xLRM5, AC5, LL
SHD-1R & SHD-2H Shadow Hawk: AC5
EMP-5A Emperor: 2xAC5, 2xLL

Suspected to mount AC/5s, no record sheet available:
Wolverine, Rifleman

BTW, know Age of War mechs to mount an AC/2: none.