Do you retcon the AC/5 in your SW-era games? If so, how?

[iamfanboy]

So, the AC/5 hate. Uh. Kind of.

I figured that since eventually a thread of this sort was bound to appear on the new forums, I'd rather have it be kind of CONSTRUCTIVE rather than just random AC/5 hatez - even though I number myself among the haterz.

A bit of history to show that I'm not completely ignorant. When Battledroids/Battletech was first created with the Macross/Dougram/Crusher Joe designs, there was only one autocannon, and by default it was stuffed into a lot of designs. However, when it went into the next edition and original designs were created, it was deemed necessary that there should be more than one size of Autocannon - the /2, /10, and /20 were created. Each of them are somewhat competitive, or at least have a good niche.

However, the AC/5 is... well, it has the weight of a main gun, the damage and heat of a secondary gun, and none of the benefits of either. It is, in short, an example of flawed game design - and what makes it worse is that nine of the initial 55 'Mechs (almost 10%!) were equipped with it.

This is only a problem in SW-era play, of course, because there are plenty of variants outside of SW-era, but it IS a problem there. Far too many otherwise-excellent designs are crippled by its inclusion, and the first thing most variant designs of an AC/5 equipped 'Mech DO is rip that thing out (See: Grand Dragon, Zeus, Marauder-3D, Hermes, Wolverine, Jagermech, Rifleman...)

So, how do you handle it in your games? I'm honestly curious (not that I'm likely to change my obvious opinion), because gosh darnit, I LIKE the community here and its ability to argue without flinging feces.

[phoenixalpha]

The AC5 has its place in lvl1 tech games. Its a low heat gun which adds a bit of oomph when things get tricky. Yes there are better weapons for the stats, but not everything should be balanced or maxed out. It matches the lrm for range and the medium laser for damage. Its not a bad weapon, it's just not a good weapon. Classic Marauder tactics include pulling a PPC for the AC5 when things get a bit hot from using the double PPC. Yes it would be better if the AC5 was dropped for a LL and some heatsinks to enable you to constantly fire the PPCs or single PPC/LL combo but not every mech should be optimised.

Also I'm a big fan of DAKKA :)

[topcat]

I wouldn't retcon it at all.  It fills a niche in the single heat sink era for a low heat, long range weapon.  I think people get too hung up on the damage, while missing out on average damage per round.  Unlike LRMs, the AC/5 is still useful up close, though an argument could be made that an LRM+ML setup might be better if you could handle the added heat.

One of my 3025 mods focuses on the AC/5.  Start with a MAD-3R, drop 5 heat sinks, swap the PPCs for AC/5s and two more tons of ammo, and add a ton of armor to it.  Now you've got a 200af, alpha+run without heat, 25 dmg/rnd heavy mech.  It can throw 15dmg regularly at ranges up to 18 hexes, which is pretty good for 3025 tech, and it has enough ammo to take a few risky shots without worry.  You lose the 10pt chunks of the PPCs, which hurts, but the added protection and heat management make it a great option.  Less-conservative players might drop a 6th heat sink and add yet another ton of armor.  Good stuff!

[IndyRI]

Well without changing the performance specs enough to throw the balance of the other ACs off, it's hard to rebalance the AC5. As such, I prefer simply to find ways to use it to its maximum potential. Is it as good as a lot of weapons? Hell no. But finding a way to make that 5, low heat damage work for you, and in making designs unoptimized to to having it work well in their roles, is an excellent exercise in tactics.

[JPArbiter]

in a succession war game, an autocannon 5 can hold its own, it is when the clans come that it loses it's purpose.

people tend to undervalue 5 damage dealing weapons, despite the fact that the fall back, the medium laser, is still to this date the number one damage dealer in the game.  for an energy weapon to do more then five damage you pay through the nose in mass and heat.  Seriously, a 400% increase in tonnage for 3 more damage to upgrade a large laser. 600% for a PPC. 

if you want an example of a well thought out AC 5 packing desgin, look no further then the CLNT-2-3T Clint.  this little 40 ton 6/9/6 jumper packs two medium lasers for up close work, and even though it could swap the auto cannon 5 for a PPC it would be unwise.  Why?  because the 6 heat from the jump jets and 10 heat from a PPC CRIPPLE the machine's heat burden, particularly if things get close enough for the medium lasers to come into play.  load balancing the mass savings from the AC-5 to PPC conversion does little to alleviate this.  the autocannon permits continuous long range fire at high maneuverability.

if anything I am of the mind that PPCs are overstated, over used, and almost not worth their time.  the PPCs main advocate machines, the Marauder and Warhammer, are better served with large lasers due to the reduced heat load and just how much armor they sacrifice to use such weapons

[LastChanceCav]

Although it's outclassed by a lot of modern weapons, I agree with the previous posters that the AC5 can be a useful weapon in the 3025/SW era.  More than any other piece of equipment, I think the DHS has contributed the most to the decline of the AC5, as one of it big advantages (heat efficiency) is nerfed.  The advent of advanced munitions (especially precision rounds) has helped slightly as the AC5's 20 shots per ton allows it to still carry useful loads of specialty ammo.

Cheers,
LCC

[IndyRI]

if anything I am of the mind that PPCs are overstated, over used, and almost not worth their time.  the PPCs main advocate machines, the Marauder and Warhammer, are better served with large lasers due to the reduced heat load and just how much armor they sacrifice to use such weapons

I will agree with you that the PPC is overstated in 3025 play. 10 heat is a huge burden for your average mech with only SHS available. The advent of DHS was and is the single largest nail in the coffin of ACs, especially the smaller ones. The ability to instantly go from 10 base heat dissipation to 20 without any added tonnage on even the smallest or most cramped designs was a huge step forward. In strictly Level 1 play, PPCs are such heat hogs that they force bracket fire in places where it would otherwise be unneccessary. It was simply easier to replace it with a heavier weapon with ammo than finding the space for all of the extra heat sinks to make the thing worthwhile.

[Demon55]

It has its uses, but there are better weapons. 

[Kit deSummersville]

- and what makes it worse is that nine of the initial 55 'Mechs (almost 10%!) were equipped with it.

Actually 15-20%.

Huzzah!

[Fear Factory]

in a succession war game, an autocannon 5 can hold its own, it is when the clans come that it loses it's purpose.

people tend to undervalue 5 damage dealing weapons, despite the fact that the fall back, the medium laser, is still to this date the number one damage dealer in the game.  for an energy weapon to do more then five damage you pay through the nose in mass and heat.  Seriously, a 400% increase in tonnage for 3 more damage to upgrade a large laser. 600% for a PPC. 

if you want an example of a well thought out AC 5 packing desgin, look no further then the CLNT-2-3T Clint.  this little 40 ton 6/9/6 jumper packs two medium lasers for up close work, and even though it could swap the auto cannon 5 for a PPC it would be unwise.  Why?  because the 6 heat from the jump jets and 10 heat from a PPC CRIPPLE the machine's heat burden, particularly if things get close enough for the medium lasers to come into play.  load balancing the mass savings from the AC-5 to PPC conversion does little to alleviate this.  the autocannon permits continuous long range fire at high maneuverability.

if anything I am of the mind that PPCs are overstated, over used, and almost not worth their time.  the PPCs main advocate machines, the Marauder and Warhammer, are better served with large lasers due to the reduced heat load and just how much armor they sacrifice to use such weapons

To be fair, just about every weapon suffers the same fate as the AC 5 when the Clan's come.  It just suffers about the most.  You're also forgetting that a 10 point hit has it's place in BattleTech.  Concentrated damage is NOT a bad thing and it can offer a lot more than a bunch of 5 point hits.

I've also been playing around with Ultra Autocannons/LB X Autocannons in MegaMek a lot lately, especially class 5, and a lot of you peeps blow the disadvantage of jamming and low damage out of proportion.  And I roll poorly in MegaMek.

[Trenchknife]

I haven't ever found a reason to cheese up the AC/5.  It's a decent weapon for its time, not great. 

[Morpheus1975]

We sometimes make the AC 5 do 7-8 and the AC 10 do 12.

[Hellraiser]

I figured that since eventually a thread of this sort was bound to appear on the new forums, 

/cough...And here I think, we could have avoided it till you just had to start it up again.  :D

It is, in short, an example of flawed game design - and what makes it worse is that nine of the initial 55 'Mechs (almost 10%!) were equipped with it.

Flawed.......Unoptimized........somehow I don't see those terms as being interchangeable.
9 of 55 is almost 10%.........might want to check your math there.

This is only a problem in SW-era play, of course, because there are plenty of variants outside of SW-era, but it IS a problem there. Far too many otherwise-excellent designs are crippled by its inclusion, and the first thing most variant designs of an AC/5 equipped 'Mech DO is rip that thing out (See: Grand Dragon, Zeus, Marauder-3D, Hermes, Wolverine, Jagermech, Rifleman...)

Where to start....lets see....
1.  I hardly think the Grand Dragon or Zeus are great improvements, it totally botches up the heat curve to get that extra 5 points of damage.
2.  The Marauder-M is a better fix IMHO w/ LL instead of PPC and leave the AC5 as is.
3.  The Hermes completely changes the mission profile and doesn't substitute another long gun.
4.  The Wolverine is very nice, but also runs a mean heat curve in the M form.
5.  The Jagermech is possibly the one version where I see a clear, no trade offs, improvement.
6.  The Rifleman, I hope your looking at the C and not the D which IMHO is a crap machine.

So, how do you handle it in your games?

Certain models I just don't use very often.
For example I happen to use the MAD-3D, RFL-3C, WLV-6M more often than the originals.
I'm not a fan of the DC so I don't really use Dragons very often.  That said I've used both in 3025.
The Jaggermech 3025 version I use more often in 3067 as a VERY cheap way to get precision/Flak ammo on the board.
I've used the Zeus in both configurations before and they work fairly well either way.

[Fear Factory]

What if autocannons operated like this:

Standard, Light and ProtoMech Autocannons fire standard rounds at single or double rate, roll on 2 column, and all other rounds at single
Ultra Autocannons fire at triple rate, roll on 3 column with -2 modifier, jam on 2
LBX Autocannons can fire slugs at double rate, roll on 2 column, cluster rounds fire single

[Sigma]

There are optional advanced rules for rapid-fire of standard AC's, Machine Guns, and Small Lasers and such.

That and special ammo keeps the old girl on the board for me.

But then I love the AC2 carriers as well (Mauler and Blackjack especially).

[House Davie Merc]

IMHO if the autocanon 5  weighed 6 tons instead of 8 then it would have been
better balanced for  SW games ,and the painfully obvious weaknesses of many of the
early mechs would have been mitigated without unbalancing the game .

I know a lot of people will argue that the original autocanon has it's place
but I just can't find many situations where I would rather keep an AC/5 on a mech
then replace it with something else.

LRMs ,PPCs,Large lasers,an extra medium laser for close up,more heat sinks,more armor-
there are just far to many other items that might work better for the tonnage used .


Consider these possibilities if the AC/5 weighed 6 tons :

A Rifleman with 2 more heat sinks and 2 more tons of armor .

A Marauder with another heat sink and 16 more armor points.

A Shadowhawk with all 5 jump jets and another medium laser .


This small change would have made it a more viable weapon without
unbalancing the scale of the other weapons .


That boat has long since sailed so I just tend to use variants that
replace the AC/5 .

Sorry guys but the AC/5 just doesn't deliver enough value for it's cost
to make it a weapon I choose .


For those that adamantly defend the AC/5 -have at it . I'll pass.

[House Davie Merc]

<snipped>
if anything I am of the mind that PPCs are overstated, over used, and almost not worth their time.  the PPCs main advocate machines, the Marauder and Warhammer, are better served with large lasers due to the reduced heat load and just how much armor they sacrifice to use such weapons

The Warhammer WHM-6D seems to have worked out just fine with PPCs because the designers dropped
the secondary weapons and focused on it's ability to lay down a PPC smackdown .
Similar to how the Archer ARC-2R doesn't waste it's resources on a good secondary weapon array .

It's often considered one of the best variants of the era.

IMHO if the Marauder would have had a lighter 225 engine then the whole design would have worked better
from the get go and the design would see signifigantly more table time .
It winds up as a 3/5 a good bit of the time anyway because firing it's 2 PPCs and the AC/5 in one turn
makes it go from 4/6 to 3/5 anyway .

The problem was never the PPC but the rest of the design .

[iamfanboy]

If flawed or unoptomized isn't the right word, how about nerfy?

And yes, my math was quite wrong. Blame cat-inflicted distractions, but sheesh, we all make math mistakes sometimes. However, I think my arguments still hold firm.

My problem with the "Oh, it produces less heat so it's fine" thought is that 'Mechs can dissipate 10 heat to start with (which just happens to be the amount needed for a PPC or Large Laser), and the 'Mechs that can't push their heat envelope lack options. Not to mention that a 'Mech so equipped with a PPC/LL instead of an AC/5 has (at least) 2/4 more tons to devote to heat sinks, if the designer so chooses, making secondary weapons and movement that much easier to use without overheating.

The Grand Dragon and Zeus-6T are perfect examples of what I'm talking about here: they can choose to remain heat-neutral by only firing their main gun(s) while moving, can add the LRMs to achieve more damage at range with minimal heat, can forgo their main gun(s) in favor of secondary guns to lower heat, or can alpha strike without threatening an immediate shutdown or ammo explosion. There's no wasted heat capacity, but neither is there enough heat to destroy an incautious pilot in a single round (like the Rifleman-3N, btw I was talking about the -3C when I mentioned an upgrade - even though I have a 2xLL 2xAC/2 version that I enjoy quite a bit). 

This thoughtline is exacerbated by my newly found habit of playing Quickstrike/Battleforce rules games where the ability to Overheat can make a huge difference. It's not something you use every time, just as you don't alpha strike in regular BT every time, but when you need it... you need it.

The Clint, I will agree, is an OK user of the AC/5, though I'd like to note that by swapping it out for a large laser you have the essence of a 40-ton Phoenix Hawk, and the Pixie is a classic favorite... the "Denton" variant listed in the new 3039 record sheets fails by not upgrading the armor at least slightly, but with 14 heatsinks it can jump and fire all day long.

the 3xAC/5 version of the Marauder is... interesting, but a Marauder-3D can outdamage it at ranges over 9 with no appreciable heat burden, has no ammo to explode, and can (once again!) alpha strike viciously, an ability your variant lacks - sorry, dude, I still do not approve.

To get a true sense of how wretched it is, let's take something like, oh... the Scorpion. Classic ICE light tank, great user of the AC/5 right? Well, rip that AC/5 out and replace it with a Medium Laser and an LRM-5. Still the same damage at long range and short range, has a 'money spot' where you might actually deal 10 damage, and even after the heatsinks and power amps STILL has two tons more to play with! SRM-2 anyone? Or another LRM-5?



However, in further rumination while utterly bored at work today, I think my bitterest gripe against the AC/5 is its presence on the Shadow Hawk. All the other AC/5 users I can either ignore with dignity or use a variant design, but the Shadow Hawk is... one of my favorite designs, is completely classic in all ways, and yet is wholly inadequate on the battlefield and is absolutely hobbled by its friggin' AC/5. I make no joke when I say that the second thing I did with the design rules, way back when I started playing over twenty years ago, was make a 1xLL, 1xLRM-10, 1xSRM-4, 1xML version that has remained almost unchanged on my table since.

[mutantmagnet]

So far in games with other people I've been playing by the rules; but I've been playtesting new rules and stat revisions to make the weapons better defined at the introductory level.

It's far from ideal but current weapon dynamics don't work.

[Mattlov]

I agree with those who believe the AC/5 would be fine if it was lighter.  As it is, it is just a heavy piece of junk.

Think of the Hermes II or the Clint.  They devote almost a quarter of their mass to do 5 points of damage.  Why would I use these 'Mechs when the I can get, what, a dozen Scorpions of the same price?  In 3025, there wouldn't be any reason not to scrap these designs for piles of cheap tanks. 

What do you do if you have these units in your force?  You are fighting at a disadvantage against forces that don't use the AC/5, even if you are BV matched.

Nope, the AC/5 is awful, hands down.  Either swap it out for a Large Laser or a PPC, or find three more tons and mount an AC/10.

[Hellraiser]

But then I love the AC2 carriers as well (Mauler and Blackjack especially).

No No, the litteral LRM-Carrer (AC2), hehe, its a beast.
Well, it is when you figure the BV of it and the fact that AC2 ammo is great for specialty munitions at 45 rounds each.
I load that thing up with AP, Prec, Flak, and maybe even a single ton of standard.
Makes for a nice little suprice against certain unit types.

[mutantmagnet]

Since the OP was talking about SW era where most special ammo doesn't exist or is rare it doesn't count.

[Hellraiser]

My problem with the "Oh, it produces less heat so it's fine" thought is that 'Mechs can dissipate 10 heat to start with (which just happens to be the amount needed for a PPC or Large Laser), and the 'Mechs that can't push their heat envelope lack options. Not to mention that a 'Mech so equipped with a PPC/LL instead of an AC/5 has (at least) 2/4 more tons to devote to heat sinks, if the designer so chooses, making secondary weapons and movement that much easier to use without overheating.

I think the flaw with this line of thought is that you assume that I have nothing else I want to devote that 10 HS towards.
Like say a 2nd PPC, or a ML battery.
The AC5 can add in firepower to either of those situations where the PPC can not.
If you assume a PPC & 3 MLs...and 9 spare tons...how would you spend that last 9 tons, a PPC and 2 HS ?  or an AC5 and ammo ?   I'm going AC5 if given the choice.
Where the AC5 is flawed is being used as the only "sniper" weapon on a platform that has room for other options.
Even then the Clint example is accurate above.......a PPC can NOT combine JJ's w/ the PPC even if it does get 2 extra HS.
The issue with the Rifleman for example isn't the AC5s, IMHO, its the Twin LL's and lack of armor & HS.
Would removing an AC5 help ?  Yes, but so would removing a LL.

The Grand Dragon and Zeus-6T are perfect examples of what I'm talking about here: they can choose to remain heat-neutral by only firing their main gun(s) while moving, can add the LRMs to achieve more damage at range with minimal heat, can forgo their main gun(s) in favor of secondary guns to lower heat, or can alpha strike without threatening an immediate shutdown or ammo explosion.

My issue with the 6T/S is you can alpha at range every round with the AC5 model but the PPC model suddenly has to choose to only fire 2 of the 3 long guns.
For that matter, in close, say 5 hexes, it can fire the LL/AC5/MLs w/o any heat, not true the PPC version.
Grand Dragon has less weapons over all and then sticks in another ML instead of more HS.
Had it dropped some ammo from the LRM for another HS so it can actually shoot the PPC WITH either the LRM or ML w/o building heat I might have liked it more.
Instead it took an alpha baby (with medium damage) and made it a bracket fighter (with medium damage).  If anything I think the Grand Dragon might have been better suited to using a LL and packing in 2 more HS than the PPC model.

The Clint, I will agree, is an OK user of the AC/5, though I'd like to note that by swapping it out for a large laser you have the essence of a 40-ton Phoenix Hawk ...........

the 3xAC/5 version of the Marauder is... interesting, but a Marauder-3D can outdamage it at ranges over 9 with no appreciable heat burden, has no ammo to explode, and can (once again!) alpha strike viciously, an ability your variant lacks - sorry, dude, I still do not approve. 

Try that with a PPC and TWO AC5's and 2 less HS.......assuming you are talking custom.
Otherwise the Mad-M I mentioned is 2 LL and an AC5 with 20 HS to run and alpha at range all day.

To get a true sense of how wretched it is, let's take something like, oh... the Scorpion. Classic ICE light tank, great user of the AC/5 right? Well, rip that AC/5 out and replace it with a Medium Laser and an LRM-5. Still the same damage at long range and short range, has a 'money spot' where you might actually deal 10 damage, and even after the heatsinks and power amps STILL has two tons more to play with! SRM-2 anyone? Or another LRM-5?

Well I would point out that the LRM5 is NOT the same damage as the AC5,  its 60% on average, earning it the nickname "AC3" at our game table.
But really, that is a bad example IMHO, the way heat is handled in tanks it makes ANY weapon other than Missile Launchers to be a complete waste of tonnage.
Tanks should use all LRM/SRM/MMLs if ICE and all LRM/SRM/MMLs with a brace of MLs if SFE.

However, in further rumination while utterly bored at work today, I think my bitterest gripe against the AC/5 is its presence on the Shadow Hawk. All the other AC/5 users I can either ignore with dignity or use a variant design, but the Shadow Hawk is... one of my favorite designs, is completely classic in all ways, and yet is wholly inadequate on the battlefield and is absolutely hobbled by its friggin' AC/5. I make no joke when I say that the second thing I did with the design rules, way back when I started playing over twenty years ago, was make a 1xLL, 1xLRM-10, 1xSRM-4, 1xML version that has remained almost unchanged on my table since.

Personally, I would have gone LRM15, SRM4, and 3 MLs myself, but that is me.
I agree with you though, its not a great machine, but it is a nice support unit, able to add in small damage at any range and mostly get ignored as not being worth the effort to kill....much like a Jaggermech.
To me the Shad is a training tool for different weapon ranges, its not a front line combat machine. 
I tend to use the 2K myself........ as a Griffin.......while using the 1S Griffin as a Wolverine......but I'm unconventional that way.  :D

[Hellraiser]

Since the OP was talking about SW era where most special ammo doesn't exist or is rare it doesn't count.

Well technically he mentions variants outside the SW era in his original post AND mentions special ammo in his poll....... so I disagree.
But, as we were off on a tangent about AC2's its really quite irrelevant.

[Nebfer]

Well I think if the Autocannons where a ton or two lighter they would be a lot more competitive with their energy based counterparts.
And perhaps some alternate ammo for the 3025 time frame, like Anti-personnel ammo...

Example of the base autocannons where something like
AC-2 = 5 tons
AC-5 = 7 tons
AC-10 = 10 tons
AC-20 = 12 tons

The Clan Autocannons being a ton lighter.
With the Light AC-2 & 5s being 3 and 5 tons respectively.

[majesticmoose]

I really think the SW Marauder is the best example of how to use an AC/5.  At med range you can alternate the 2PPC fire then the PPC/AC5 to keep the heat in check, the unit uses med lasers for close in fire to suplement the PPC's, and in a pinch you can Alpha with everything, and that AC5 gives you a nice cherry on top (more accurate than the MLs) for almost no increase in heat over the PPC's and ML's.  Using a LL or other setup, it would be hard to remain heat efficient...

sure they're there (2ML's and 6-7 HS I'm looking your way) but then you're not talking about "real life" designs (man i use that loosely) where they have non-optomized builds.

What I will give as major criticism to the AC5 is that it's easy to use incorrectly.  But all the AC's are.  So is the LGR.  that's an easy weapon to abuse.  Hell, the word Hollander comes to mind...

The LAC5 is what needed to happen, because IMO that is the tactical gap that the AC5 should have filled, but just as I don't give Clan AC5 added damage over an IS AC5, I wouldn't change the AC5 to make it more"useful".  In the grand scheme of narrow weapons, the AC5 isn't the worst... Rocket lanchers, One Shot launchers, you know who you are...

ps.  I did a rebuild of the original marauder, basically the same chassis, but replaced the PPC's and ML's with LPPC's x 4 and the AC5 with 2 LAC5's on torso turrets, and some TSM.  I have to say I've been very happy with it's performance in Megamek.  it's not perfect, lord no, but it has good heat control (16 or 17 SHS), nice range and arcs, and can alpha for 30 damage with a minimal heat gain, but can standard strike for 20-25 damage as long as ammo holds. In a pinch, I could sub 2 LPPCs for ML's, up grade the LAC5 to AC5s and I wouldn't be too sad.  The design would be less effective yes, but I still think it would be competitive.

[iamfanboy]

What always struck me as odd about the conversion from Glaug Officer Pod to Marauder is that the obvious conversion would be 1 PPC mounted in the torso and 2xLL and 2xML in the arms, 2x MGs and 1 ton of ammo (or .5 and .5 more armor), and 20 heatsinks... but that'd be just me. I mean, everything else that has an AC/5 from the Unseen at least HAD some sort of auto-cannon style weapon... (well, except the Raider-X/Rifleman), and the Marauder wasn't even one of the Combat Books!

[JPArbiter]

The Warhammer WHM-6D seems to have worked out just fine with PPCs because the designers dropped
the secondary weapons and focused on it's ability to lay down a PPC smackdown .
Similar to how the Archer ARC-2R doesn't waste it's resources on a good secondary weapon array .

flawed argument since the 6R Warhammer is the Flagship of the series for the succession wars, and appears more often in RATs.  more often then not alternate variants of mechs are more efficent then baseline models anyway.  how many people gripe about the AS-7 K and either custom an Atlas or go fir a different model?

[garhkal]

Although it's outclassed by a lot of modern weapons, I agree with the previous posters that the AC5 can be a useful weapon in the 3025/SW era.  More than any other piece of equipment, I think the DHS has contributed the most to the decline of the AC5, as one of it big advantages (heat efficiency) is nerfed.  The advent of advanced munitions (especially precision rounds) has helped slightly as the AC5's 20 shots per ton allows it to still carry useful loads of specialty ammo.

Cheers,
LCC

Personally i would love to see them eventually let AC2s and 5s go by the half ton, like they do with MGs..

IMHO if the autocanon 5  weighed 6 tons instead of 8 then it would have been
better balanced for  SW games ,and the painfully obvious weaknesses of many of the
early mechs would have been mitigated without unbalancing the game .

I would love it had they dropped it to 6 tons..  What of the crits though?

[topcat]

My problem with the "Oh, it produces less heat so it's fine" thought is that 'Mechs can dissipate 10 heat to start with (which just happens to be the amount needed for a PPC or Large Laser), and the 'Mechs that can't push their heat envelope lack options. Not to mention that a 'Mech so equipped with a PPC/LL instead of an AC/5 has (at least) 2/4 more tons to devote to heat sinks, if the designer so chooses, making secondary weapons and movement that much easier to use without overheating.

Depending on the design, you need 9 more heat sinks for a PPC or 7 more heat sinks for an LL.  You may or may not have those to spare on any particular model.

the 3xAC/5 version of the Marauder is... interesting, but a Marauder-3D can outdamage it at ranges over 9 with no appreciable heat burden, has no ammo to explode, and can (once again!) alpha strike viciously, an ability your variant lacks - sorry, dude, I still do not approve.

I get the no ammo thing, believe me (I'm a flashbulb enthusiast), but 28pts at 10-15 hexes (20pts at 15-18) for +8 heat is a bit far from "no appreciable heat burden".  Move and that's +9 or +10.  If you average the MAD-3D out to heat neutral in those ranges, it does a whopping 20pts/rnd if you don't move, 19pts/rnd if you walk on average, or 18pts/rnd if you run on average.  The AC/5 Marauder does 15pts/rnd running, which is admittedly less, but not so much less as to be debilitating.  It does lack crazy alpha strike potential, but it has either 1 or two more tons of armor and it won't be crippled by heat afterward.  And its long range weapons all use base-6 range brackets, as opposed to the MAD-3D, which has one weapon in base-5.

My favorite personal MAD-3R variant combines the MAD-3D and the MAD-3M for 3xLL and 2xML with 24 heat sinks.  Lots of flashbulby goodness and incredible heat management for a 3025 design - good stuff!  So I totally understand the appeal, I'm just saying that there are options available.

To get a true sense of how wretched it is, let's take something like, oh... the Scorpion. Classic ICE light tank, great user of the AC/5 right? Well, rip that AC/5 out and replace it with a Medium Laser and an LRM-5. Still the same damage at long range and short range, has a 'money spot' where you might actually deal 10 damage, and even after the heatsinks and power amps STILL has two tons more to play with! SRM-2 anyone? Or another LRM-5?

Well, the LRM-5 causes a median of 3dmg, or 60% of the AC/5's damage.  It does have better long range accuracy, though much worse short range, and it doesn't layer well on top of the ML.  It also uses twice the heat.  Make it an LRM/10 and you've got four times the heat and 8 fewer shots per ton with 20% more damage per hit (again, the median figure).  You still have slightly better long ranges, but take a beating at short range.  If you add a second ML to account for the drop in short range accuracy ( better than the AC/5 up close), you've got at least 8 tons devoted to the effort for a net savings of 1 ton.  You need 5 additional available heat sinks to stay heat neutral, too.

What we see is that it makes more sense to use higher-heat weapons if you have the heat sinks to spare.  If you don't, then lower-heat weapons make more sense.  Replacing the AC/5 on a MAD-3R with a PPC gives you +5pts/rnd of theoretical damage, but due to heat constraints, the PPC is absolutely wasted.  It already has two 10-heat weapons and a third doesn't help it outside of redundancy or alpha striking.  The AC/5, however, adds 5pts of almost-always usable damage for negligible heat.  The heat issue is also why the MAD-3M works so well, despite downgrading from PPCs to LLs.

The other end of that spectrum is the Shadow Hawk, which for all its fan appeal is a case study in poor design.  The terribly inefficient SRM-2 makes an appearance, an LRM-5 tosses SL damage at great ranges, and it gets the ultimate in heat-efficient weapons (the AC/5) despite having heat sinks to burn.  It isn't a good use of an AC/5, but it isn't really a good use of anything when you look at it.  It's not all the AC/5's fault, though.