Balancing ACs, LRMs, and energy weapons in 3025. Or, justifying the AC/5.

[Shin Ji]

And only solves the problem on custom designs and not that many existing designs.

Problem 1:  Unless you're suggesting a Streak effect there is over a 50% chance only one of the two shots land anyway leaving you in the same boat you were in before except now you're using up ammo faster.

Problem 2:  Unless also suggesting changing the number of shots per ton of ammo this still leaves existing designs such as the Clint, Enforcer, Urbanmech, Hermes II, Blackjack, Shadow Hawk, Wolverine, Rifleman, Jagermech, Cataphract, Marauder, Zeus, Banshee, and King Crab all with their single ton or sharing one ton of ammo between multiple guns dangerously short on ammunition.

I'm not sure if you're responding to me or someone else (there have been a lot of interesting ideas put forward in this thread), but letting each AC roll twice isn't a 50% chance of both hitting.  It's the same chance to hit each time.  If you're rolling 8s for the first shot, you roll 8s for the second.  The Deep Ones help the poor soul next to you and prone as you level your AC/20.

As for your second point, I agree totally.  Most mechs don't have enough ammo anyway.  The King Crab in particular has got to be some sort of in-joke.  Who (in-universe) approved that design?  They should be dragged out into the street and shot.  There's no easy fix for all the mechs that have been made.  Several are sub-par.  A few are notably awful.  At best, we can hope to make more of them potentially more effective.  And it also reduces my personal need to rip out all those autocannons and replace them with lasers and PPCs, which makes me happy. 

[Wolflord]

Dead-simple solution:

Code: [Select]

Weapon Damage Heat Range Mass Size
Light Autocannon 5 2 (0-2) 3-8 / 9-16 / 17-24 6.00 2
Autocannon 10 3 (0-1) 2-6 / 7-12 / 13-18 8.00 4
Heavy Autocannon 15 5 (0-1) 2-6 / 7-12 / 13-18 12.00 6
Assault Autocannon 20 7 (0)   1-5 / 6-10 / 11-15 14.00 8


I think I'd dial back the range a bit on all save your class 10 but otherwise I'd not object to playing against these. Do you see them using special ammo? Do you see UAC, LBX, RAC variants growing from these versions?

[monbvol]

I'm not sure if you're responding to me or someone else (there have been a lot of interesting ideas put forward in this thread), but letting each AC roll twice isn't a 50% chance of both hitting.  It's the same chance to hit each time.  If you're rolling 8s for the first shot, you roll 8s for the second.  The Deep Ones help the poor soul next to you and prone as you level your AC/20.

As for your second point, I agree totally.  Most mechs don't have enough ammo anyway.  The King Crab in particular has got to be some sort of in-joke.  Who (in-universe) approved that design?  They should be dragged out into the street and shot.  There's no easy fix for all the mechs that have been made.  Several are sub-par.  A few are notably awful.  At best, we can hope to make more of them potentially more effective.  And it also reduces my personal need to rip out all those autocannons and replace them with lasers and PPCs, which makes me happy.

Ah so not even using the cluster table, missed that.  I honestly do debate the cluster table in general and that is something that could easily be re-worked to help provide incentive to use fewer larger launchers(and by extension the larger cluster guns) by changing how many missiles/clusters hit for each result without having to change a single record sheet.

And yeah the ammunition counts in general have always struck me as somewhat nonsensical.  Very few designs that mount standard ACs actually have more than one ton of ammo.  This makes most of the useful specialty rounds dubious since they drop the count in half round down.

[mutantmagnet]

And then your opponent mixes the ML spam huchie with the AC20 spam hunchie and tears your force that can't punch to pieces.

A lance of all swaybacks will defeat a mixed team of 2 swaybacks and 2 AC 20 hunchbacks like 90% of the time.

You obviously never played with swaybacks.

[CloaknDagger]

You obviously never played with swaybacks.

I don't really see the point of hunchbacks without the hunches.

[imperator]

A lance of all swaybacks will defeat a mixed team of 2 swaybacks and 2 AC 20 hunchbacks like 90% of the time.

You obviously never played with swaybacks.

I've played out that same scenario.  The 20s will do a number on the swaybacks.  Every time I hit the 20s, their is a 1/36 chance of a dead mech.  Sometimes I either leg a Mech or core a torso as well.  I just see too much spread in ML spam.

[evilauthor]

Yep. Above the OP suggested treating AC double tapping as if they were ultras though. Only jamming on a 2 and such.

That's what we have Ultras ACs for. And I think Ultra ACs are garbage precisely BECAUSE they jam, turning a dangerous weapon into so much dead weight. And an AC is ALOT of dead weight!

Plus I invariably jam on the by the third time I double tap. Sometimes I don't even get the first shot off!

[CloaknDagger]

Plus I invariably jam on the by the third time I double tap. Sometimes I don't even get the first shot off!

 ???

The first shot doesn't jam...

[majesticmoose]

???

The first shot doesn't jam...

I think he means on the first shot.  Like he rolls a two, and the first shot misses, and the gun jams... which is LAME!!!

[CloaknDagger]

I think he means on the first shot.  Like he rolls a two, and the first shot misses, and the gun jams... which is LAME!!!

It only jams on the second shot.

[majesticmoose]

It only jams on the second shot.

Page 114 of TW:

o Each time a rapid-fi re weapon fi res more than a single shot in a single turn, the weapon may jam, making it useless for the rest of the game (see Rotary Autocannon, p. 140, for the exception); the shots are still fi red, however. When fi ring two or three shots, if the to-hit roll result is a 2, the weapon is useless for the rest of the game; for every two additional shots fi red, add 1 to that number. This means that for two or three shots, the jamming only occurs on a to-hit result of 2, for four to fi ve shots the jamming occurs on a to-hit result of 3 and so on.

So when you roll a two the weapon fires. You expend ammo. Then, the weapon is useless. Technically the weapon fires all the shots in that burst, 2-3, but that's functionally irrelevant since you MISSED & the weapon is not the biggest waste of space since a hoarders cardboard box collection.

[Feign]

I would say, an AC2 can fire up to three times without risk of a jam, but uses the AC5 range brackets when firing in this mode (though the minimum range remains the same regardless of the firing mode) when it does so, the 5 can fire two times, but uses the AC 10 range as above, the AC10 and 20 are once per turn only.  With Ultra ACs being able to fire one extra shot (in either mode) with the standard chance of jamming.  Jams for UACs are automatically cleared after 1d6+2 turns.

Light AC2 can only double fire as above, with the LAC 5 being single fire only

For Rotory AC2, the gun hits in two 2-point locations per 'shot' that is fired, with all other rules for RACs the same.  RAC jams are cleared after 1d6+[number of shots in the jamming burst] turns.

[ialdabaoth]

I think I'd dial back the range a bit on all save your class 10 but otherwise I'd not object to playing against these.

Well, note that the -10 and -15 are identical in damage-to-weight ratio, while the -5 is a little low and the -20 is a little high.

5/6 = .833
10/8 = 1.25
15/12 = 1.25
20/14 = 1.43

Do you see them using special ammo? Do you see UAC, LBX, RAC variants growing from these versions?

Yes, and yes.

Here's what the rest would look like:

Code: [Select]

Light Snub Autocannon 5 2 (0-1) 2-6 / 7-12 / 13-18 4.00 2
Snub Autocannon 10 3 (0)   1-5 / 6-10 / 11-15 7.00 3

Light LB-X Cannon 5 1 (0-2) 3-10 / 11-20 / 21-30 5.00 2
LB-X Cannon 10 2 (0-1) 2-7 / 8-14 / 15-21 7.00 4
Heavy LB-X Cannon 15 3 (0-1) 2-6 / 7-12 / 13-18 11.00 6
Assault LB-X Cannon 20 5 (0)   1-5 / 6-10 / 11-15 13.00 8

Light Ultra Autocannon 5 2 (0-2) 3-8 / 9-16 / 17-24 7.00 3
Ultra Autocannon 10 4 (0-1) 2-6 / 7-12 / 13-18 9.00 5
Heavy Ultra Autocannon 15 6 (0-1) 2-6 / 7-12 / 13-18 13.00 7
Assault UltraAutocannon 20 8 (0)   1-5 / 6-10 / 11-15 15.00 9

Light Rotary Cannon 3 1 (0-1) 2-6 / 7-12 / 13-18 8.00 3
Rotary Cannon 5 2 (0)   1-5 / 6-10 / 11-15 10.00 6


[Death by Zeus]

 ;) Ya know, when I think of it, to not have to invalidate any designs for the AC/2 and 5 I have to agree with........wait for it....... evilauthor.  :D

So, evil, heat per shot or just 1 heat for the burst?     

[mutantmagnet]

I've played out that same scenario.  The 20s will do a number on the swaybacks.  Every time I hit the 20s, their is a 1/36 chance of a dead mech.  Sometimes I either leg a Mech or core a torso as well.  I just see too much spread in ML spam.

I've critted out the AC 20 too often before they could take down swaybacks. The medium spam spreads but the higher DPS is simply too much.

[monbvol]

*nod*

The AC-20's only advantage is when it hits that 20 points of damage is all going to one location.  The problem with that is if it hits.  I dislike predicating so much of my firepower on one if, especially when it is that much of an investment in tonnage and critical slots.  Frankly I'd still be nervous about it if it did 40 damage on a hit just because of how easy it is the render non-operational.

[A. Lurker]

I've critted out the AC 20 too often before they could take down swaybacks. The medium spam spreads but the higher DPS is simply too much.

And yet, which unit do you give the wider berth when you're the one facing it -- the one with the AC/20 or the spam boat?

Edit: To qualify that, I know that if I have to close to within nine hexes I all but expect to be hit by some medium lasers and generally shrug the possibility off as just another expected part of combat. A genuine AC/20? Yeah, that I'm always that much less sanguine about.

[evilauthor]

;) Ya know, when I think of it, to not have to invalidate any designs for the AC/2 and 5 I have to agree with........wait for it....... evilauthor.  :D

So, evil, heat per shot or just 1 heat for the burst?   

Per shot of course. The AC/2 and AC/5 generate so little heat that extra amount they'd make when firing multiple times per turn would be fairly trivial even in the SHS era. Well, an AC/2 firing 4 times and generating 4 heat in the SHS era wouldn't be TRIVIAL, but it'd be reasonable for the potential damage it'd be sending down range.

And heck, the Jagermech could actually overheat if it fired all its ACs at full S7 rates of fire, although it probably wouldn't hit shut down or even ammo explosion rolls before running out of ammo.

[Khell]

Hands-down, an ER-MLas will always be better than an AC-5, an LRM-5 superior to an AC-2, and for the cost, a pair of 2 regular PPCs out-perform an AC-20.  There are too many penalties on autocannons.  They're big, heavy, still cause massive heat, and need ammo.  The only perk is that they are cheap, and as an in-game effect, that doesn't matter.

I like some of the ideas you folks came up with, but in my eyes, there is a real easy fix to the Autocannon problem (aside from just getting rid of them).
Either make them lighter, and/or make them more compact, and give them all the same range.  Autocannons should fill the niche between LRM and SRM, because lasers and PPCs cover everything else.

AC/2 - 2T / 1 Crit / 1 Heat - 1/5/10/15 Range
AC/5 - 4T / 2 Crit / 2 Heat - 1/5/10/15 Range
AC/10 - 7T / 3 Crit / 3 Heat - 1/5/10/15 Range
AC/20 - 12T / 5 Crit / 5 Heat - 1/5/10/15 Range

Using the same ammo values, those stats would fit nicely between LRM and SRM.  And both L.Las and PPC fit well with them too.  For the same damage potential and slightly better range, you'd take a PPC over an AC/10, but pay for it in heat.  Both LRMs and SRMs have slightly better weight/crit costs, but the AC's trade-off is doing full damage with each hit, instead of a chance to do a fraction of what's possible.

That's my $0.03 on the matter.

Oh, and Ultra/Rotary/LB...  That's a whole other can of worms I ain't touching.

[monbvol]

The one niche that I've found that the bog standard AC-2 fills fairly nicely is the sheer range it offers.  An ASF performing level bombing from Altitude 8 is counted as being 16 hexes farther away.  That's still medium range for an AC-2.  Slap some Flak ammo in the bins and that's a real good way to get that ASF to start having to make control rolls.

As such I don't like shortening the range of the AC-2 or AC-5.

I am considering if my revisions do go far enough because they do still have some shortfalls.

My revisions as they currently stand for stats:

AC-2 4 Tons 1 Critical 1 Heat Short Range: 9 Medium Range: 18 Long Range: 27 Ammo: 60 Standard / 40 Precision and the like / 90 for Caseless and the like
AC-5 6 Tons 3 Criticals 1 Heat SR: 7 MR: 14 LR: 21 Ammo 24 / 16 / 36
AC-10 10 Tons 6 Criticals 3 Heat SR: 5 MR: 10 LR: 15 Ammo 12 / 8 / 18
AC-20 12 Tons 9 Criticals 7 Heat SR: 3 MR: 6 LR: 9 Ammo 6 / 4 / 9

I am starting to think about making them all even lighter and more compact, at least the ones that can be made more compact.  I am considering extending the range of the AC-10 to 6/8/12 with no minimum but I do still have to deal with the Ultras and LB-Xs then and that doesn't give me a lot of room.

[Khell]

I understand how you might not want to give up the range perk of the original AC/2.  It's really about the only good thing about the gun (considering a machine gun can match it for damage).  But based on my previously-stated revisions, I'd figure a good replacement for the nice long-range AC/2 would be a re-spec of the Light Gauss.  Make the L.Gauss lighter by half, drop it to about 5dmg, and shave off a few crits, and you'd have a wicked long-range toy instead of a weak, pointless version of the better "standard" Gauss Rifle.  Yeah, it doesn't get the Flak ammo, but considering it's a gigantic rail-gun, why couldn't they make some grape-shot rounds for a Gauss?

[monbvol]

*nod*

I've never really felt the Heat/Damage ratios of the Gauss weapons were all that great in the first place and as such I do still have to consider further revisions to them as well.

To an extent I don't mind making ACs an obviously obsolete technology but they should still be just good enough that for a Mech it is no longer a matter of automatically ripping them out for something else until things like the ER weapons and Gauss Rifles come along.  From my perspective that is something they have never had.

LRMs probably do need a bit of re-balancing as well even before such weapons come along but their one niche of being the only Introtech/tourny legal weapon capable of indirect fire does a lot to save them so they don't need too much I think.

My main revisions focused on the minimum range issue.  Instead of taking a to hit penalty you take a cluster hit penalty.  To provide an example say an ARC-2R Archer is face to face with a Black Knight.  It decided to unload it's LRMs on the Black Knight so it can save it's fists for physical combat.  Because they are face to face the Archer will roll with a -6 on the Cluster Table.  I'd even apply this to the advanced Missile Defense rules in Tactical Operations so that if you roll poor enough no damage would be dealt.

To help out a little I'm considering an exception to count a target as one hex farther away only for the purposes of determining minimum range for indirect fire.

I'm also thinking of re-working heat of LRMs and SRMs a bit and the criticals of LRMs.

[CloaknDagger]

I understand how you might not want to give up the range perk of the original AC/2.  It's really about the only good thing about the gun (considering a machine gun can match it for damage).  But based on my previously-stated revisions, I'd figure a good replacement for the nice long-range AC/2 would be a re-spec of the Light Gauss.  Make the L.Gauss lighter by half, drop it to about 5dmg, and shave off a few crits, and you'd have a wicked long-range toy instead of a weak, pointless version of the better "standard" Gauss Rifle.

L Gauss is NOT a bad weapon. Like IS Pulse Lasers, it has a niche. That's aerospace. L Gauss has extreme range. That's only shared by the clan ERLL, ELRMs, and AC2s of all varieties. So it has the damage advantage by far on all of them, especially considering reflective armor and AMS. 

Yeah, it doesn't get the Flak ammo, but considering it's a gigantic rail-gun, why couldn't they make some grape-shot rounds for a Gauss?

It's called a Silver Bullet Gauss. Identical to the regular kind, but it acts like LBX cluster.

[monbvol]

Standard AC-2 as written is only Long range in the Aerospace component of the game.

[Khell]

L Gauss is NOT a bad weapon. Like IS Pulse Lasers, it has a niche. That's aerospace. L Gauss has extreme range. That's only shared by the clan ERLL, ELRMs, and AC2s of all varieties. So it has the damage advantage by far on all of them, especially considering reflective armor and AMS. 

Forgive my ignorance on most things Aerospace, I haven't had much of a chance to play anything Aerotech/Battlespace.  But for battlemech use, the L.Gauss is a poor weapon with no discernible niche.  For 3T / 3Crit more and only 3Hex less range, you double the damage just using a regular Gauss.  Against even the slowest mechs, they can close a 3-hex gap in just one turn, so that range advantage is soon lost, while the regular gauss is now hitting you for 15 to your 8.  If the L.Gauss went, say 6 or more squares further, then maybe it could have a tactical advantage.  Otherwise, an pair of IS Ultra-2's trump the L.Gauss at nearly the same cost.

[Nebfer]

Well personally I would allow ACs to fire like Ultras are now, Ultras can now unjam like RACs (perhaps they can fire 3 rounds instead of two..., but the third one dose the perma jam? or perhaps ACs have a +2 to hit for that second shot, while Ultras have +1? -see below)

They no longer use the Clusters table but the second shot has a +1 to hit, (For RACs shots 2-4 = +1, 5 & 6 = +2)

Also all ballistic weapons (Sans MGs, AP Gauss & Magshots) for propose of causing a mech to fall (20+ damage in a turn) is assumed to have done is one plus an extra point of damage for every 5 the weapon dose (rounding up). So an AC-2 would be assumed to have done 4 damage for the purpose of the knock down role (even though it only did 2). I would also use the knock down role gets a +1 for every 20 damage over 20...

Another optional idea is to also reduce the heat of Autocannons a bit... I.e. perhaps AC-20 do 5 instead of 7 heat...

[HazMeat]

Can we just say that warheads and Gauss weapons fail safe, and have those energy weapons be explosive instead?  IOW, have most ammo and the weapons that consume it all be safe to carry like Plasma Rifles, and have all or most ammo-independent energy weapons be more like PPC Capacitors and Improved Heavy Lasers.  For legacy purposes, CASE acts like a sort of weak component armor, absorbing one crit hit to a weapon that would otherwise disable and possibly destroy it.  I dunno, maybe ammo for Autocannon could also be doubled?  With it being nonvolatile, sensible loads might get to be a bit higher, and due to a lot of canon configurations I think I'd like that more than S7-inspired increased fire rate.  Machine Guns, OTOH, I'd want rapid fire for instead of ammo increases, again for legacy reasons, but also to help differentiate them from autocannon. 

[ialdabaoth]

Well personally I would allow ACs to fire like Ultras are now, Ultras can now unjam like RACs (perhaps they can fire 3 rounds instead of two..., but the third one dose the perma jam? or perhaps ACs have a +2 to hit for that second shot, while Ultras have +1? -see below)

I dunno, at that level of complexity I usually punt back down to something simpler. Dead-simple (and somewhat balanced) would be:

1. LB-X autocannon can shoot once, normal and light autocannon can shoot twice, Ultra autocannon can shoot four times, rotary autocannon can shoot six times.

2. Ultra autocannon have the same ranges as normal autocannon of the same caliber; rotary autocannon have the same ranges as light autocannon of the same caliber, LB-X autocannon have +2/+4/+6 longer range than normal autocannon. All ammunition is doubled; otherwise, weight, space, etc. are all identical to canon Battletech rules.

3. Each shot is a seperate to-hit roll; every shot past the first jams if the to-hit roll is a '2'.

4. Ultra and Rotary autocannon can't use special ammunition; LB-X, light and normal autocannon can use all special ammunition types.

5. All autocannon can unjam using RAC rules, but if you roll a '2' while unjamming, you suffer a single-shot ammo explosion inside that weapon.

[FedComGirl]

I don't really understand your post. Especially the second one. You say crits in 3025 don't matter and then complain about the AC/20 being critted.

I really don't see why AC/s must be fixed at all. It's all about balancing damage, heat, and weight. And to a lesser extent crit space. Not every mech has the space to add all those extra heat sinks needed to cool all the energy weapons. Not every unit even comes with free heat sinks. Which leads me to the key point I believe you're all missing. Not every unit uses fusion engines and support engines don't come with any free heat sinks. That makes balancing weight, damage, and heat, very important. For those units a medium laser doesn't just weigh 1 ton. It weighs at least 4 with heat sinks. More if a power amplifier is needed. At that rate, I'm just as liable to choose a tank cannon over the medium laser.

On a ICE powered tank I could have
a) 8.8 cm Tank cannon with 20 shots of ammo, weighs 4.5 tons does 3 points of damage out to 15 hexes or B) Medium laser with 3 heat sinks and power amplifier, weighs 4.1 tons doing 5 points of damage out to 9 hexes.

If you don't like that comparison how about a support fusion powered tank with either a)
AC/20 + 1 ton of ammo=15 tons or B) 4 MLs +12 heat sinks=16 tons.

I'd go with the cannons both times. In the first example the 8.8 out ranges the ML so even though the ML is ammo free and does more damage it doesn't matter if it can't get into range in the first place. In the second example, while 4 MLs do as much damage as an AC/20 that's only if they hit the same place. Those 4 shots could hit different places. If they even all hit. The AC/20 is going to do a lot more damage if it hits. The chance of a 1 shot knock out is a lot more appealing to me than hoping I live long enough to paper cutting my opponent to death.

[monbvol]

Because ACs are poorly internally balanced.

And before you try and point out specialty ammunition that for me is a non-starter because there are so few designs that mount a weapon that can use it and carry more than one ton of ammo, meaning you'd better be right about what kind of ammunition you brought and what your enemy brought to the fight.

I will grant there are a couple niches that the AC-2 and AC-20 can occupy that cannot be done better by either Missile, Energy, or Gauss weapons but not many.