Changes to Autocannon

[RiTz21]

I recently started a new campaign of RPG Btech with my son and his friends (reference). So far, we stayed in light mechs. But before we go up in tonnage, I was thinking of a changing how the Autocannon works (rule-wise).

In my experience in playing (and designing!) the mechs (3025 tech mostly), I found AC to be... lacking compared to energy weapons. Having ammo automatically means that at some point, your weapon will just be a dead-weight you drag around. worst, AC are VERY heavy compared to energy weapons.

So I've been thinking of tampering with the AC combat wise... and I was wondering if this was discussed.
My first idea is to allow AC2 and AC5 the ability to 'fire twice' in a round.
Another idea would be to permits ANY AC to fire twice, if some type of roll is made (piloting to re-align the weapon before firing!?)

Were these ideas discussed on the forum?
Was any consensus reached on the best way to handle such changes?

I am currently using the 2nd edition rules (Mechwarrior)

Thank you for your help!!

RiTz21

[MadCapellan]

Honestly, if you are playing pure 3025, autocannons are competitive thanks to their low-heat output.

If you still feel they need a boost, allowing armor-piercing & prefision ammo before they technically are introduced should do the trick. One allows AC hits to generate chances for critical, while the other reduces target movement modifiers by 2. While in cannon they were introduced in the 3060s, I feel they fit in just fine with 3025 tech if you're concerned ACs aren't holding their own.

[Siberian-troll]

Like in Megamek - give AC/2 and AC/5 precision ammo. Jagermech become thin-skinned uber-monsher lights-killing mech.

[RiTz21]

Like in Megamek - give AC/2 and AC/5 precision ammo. Jagermech become thin-skinned uber-monsher lights-killing mech.

Can you clarify what 'precision ammo' is exactly? How does that work?

RiTz21

[Jackmc]

The thing you may be missing is that in lv 1 tech (ie 3025) the mass and ammo consumption of AC's counter balances their phenomenal damage to heat ratio.  This probably hasn't been a noticeable if you've been playing with light mechs, but it's a huge advantage in heavier designs where heat management is a fundamental part of the game.  Also, AC 2's allow to outrange everything else in the game save actual artillery.

Now having said that, there are several designs that have the heat capacity to swap a PPC for an AC/5.  Frex. the Shadowhawk.


-Jackmc 

[Jackmc]

Can you clarify what 'precision ammo' is exactly? How does that work?

RiTz21

Unfortunately, it isn't introduced into the setting until almost 30 years past the point you are playing in.  What it does is halves ammo per ton (round down) in exchange for negating up to two points of your target's movement modifier.

-Jackmc

[RiTz21]

Honestly, if you are playing pure 3025, autocannons are competitive thanks to their low-heat output.

Well in all the designs we made over the years, we never used ACs...
Their ONLY advantage is their low heat generation - while they take up lots of tonnage, and, as a bonus, have a possibility of Ammunition Explosion, which (without CASE), will destroy the Mech in a single shot...

It does not seem worth it...
RiTz21

[Jackmc]

Fear of ammo explosions and a preference for energy weapons.  Do you guys typically ride high on the heat scale?


-Jackmc

[MadCapellan]

Well in all the designs we made over the years, we never used ACs...
Their ONLY advantage is their low heat generation - while they take up lots of tonnage, and, as a bonus, have a possibility of Ammunition Explosion, which (without CASE), will destroy the Mech in a single shot...

It does not seem worth it...
RiTz21

If you aren't using the AC/10 or AC/20, you're missing out on some of the best weapons in 3025. I can understand people's frustration with the AC/5 & AC/2 - they're really specialist plinking weapons that are best used for sniping at a distance, and don't really grant you a lot of power in the close-to-mid range most Introtech engagements take place at.  The AC/10, however, is easily comparable to the PPC in 3025, as it deals the same damage for a fraction of the heat and doesn't suffer from minimum range penalties. Where most energy boats have to drop their PPC at close-range to fire medium lasers, the design with the AC/10 fires the autocannon and the medium lasers, which makes for a significant benefit.

The AC/20 doesn't really need me to sell it.  It shatters limbs, crumples torsos, and basically will kill most 'Mechs in 3 hits or less.

[ehlijen]

Even in 3025, autocannon struggle as soon as you enter campaign play.

In one off battles where ammo explosions are not pain inducing set backs but cool firework displays (even for your own mechs, if you have a laid back attitude) and rearming or lasting for several engagements is a non factor, ammo dependent weapons are not that bad. As soon as multi battle survivability and endurance comes in, energy zombies are the only logical choice (unless you need what missiles offer).

Missiles get away with it by doing things energy weapons don't (indirect fire or better crit seeking), but without specialist ammo, ACs are just worse lasers in campaign play.

Allow some specialist ammo?

[MadCapellan]

If the small chance of suffering an ammo explosion is so worrying that no one will play ACs, there's nothing stopping everyone playing from just ruling that everyone has free CASE for all their ammo.  The Clans do it already.

[SCC]

If you aren't using the AC/10 or AC/20, you're missing out on some of the best weapons in 3025. I can understand people's frustration with the AC/5 & AC/2 - they're really specialist plinking weapons that are best used for sniping at a distance, and don't really grant you a lot of power in the close-to-mid range most Introtech engagements take place at.  The AC/10, however, is easily comparable to the PPC in 3025, as it deals the same damage for a fraction of the heat and doesn't suffer from minimum range penalties. Where most energy boats have to drop their PPC at close-range to fire medium lasers, the design with the AC/10 fires the autocannon and the medium lasers, which makes for a significant benefit.

The AC/20 doesn't really need me to sell it.  It shatters limbs, crumples torsos, and basically will kill most 'Mechs in 3 hits or less.

The problem with plinking is that the chance of finding a fire lane that long is unlikely and the chances of your opponent staying in it are even lower

The AC/5 isn't as bad in that regard, it has the same range bracket as the PPC

[MadCapellan]

The problem with plinking is that the chance of finding a fire lane that long is unlikely and the chances of your opponent staying in it are even lower

That depends on the type of map you play on, and yes, there are a lot of maps where that's less than an ideal strategy.

[SCC]

If you do want to use the AC/2, especially in the Air Defense role, I'd suggest Field Guns

[Legion]

The lackluster performance of the AC5 and AC2 has been discussed to DEATH over the years.  Personally I don't think they need much to make them competitive (in 3025, they almost don't need anything at all, really), my favorite "fixes" are to give free CASE, and allow special munitions (precision and armor piercing).  IMO, this makes the AC's excellent choices, and adds fun abilities to differentiate from the straight damage of energy weapons.  Look around the forums a bit more, and you'll find loads of these types of threads discussing how to "improve" the AC5, in particular.

I should also point out that I like these fixes because the ammo fix does not affect BV, and the CASE fix has only a small effect, therefore they don't really invalidate the BV of the designs you're using.

[SteveRestless]

there IS a rule I love that makes the standard ACs capable of ultra style fire, but they jam on 4 or worse, with a chance at a catastrophic failure. Still, opens a few eyes when you're playing a 3049 clan v.s. IS game and they underestimate your autocannon.

[MadCapellan]

there IS a rule I love that makes the standard ACs capable of ultra style fire, but they jam on 4 or worse, with a chance at a catastrophic failure. Still, opens a few eyes when you're playing a 3049 clan v.s. IS game and they underestimate your autocannon.

That's another option. We've always called it the "risky double-tap" rule, because you can blow your gun up, but if you're a brave soul, you can pump out devastating damage with an AC/10 that way!

[Fear Factory]

I second allowing special ammunition in your 3025 games.  I do this all around so even missiles don't miss out.

There are a few house rules I use.  First, all ammo suffering 1/2 shot penalties no longer suffer that.  They get the full ton.  Second, I do "fractional accounting" with ammo types.  SO if someone has an autocannon 5 and wants 10 regular, 6 precision, and 4 armor-piercing, then it weighs a full ton and takes up 3 crits (all separate per ammo type).  This seemed to work ok.

[SteveRestless]

Nothin more satisfying than getting off a successful doubletap from a Hunchback, and having the direct blow rules on. 44 damage tends to give nearly any mech a bit of pause. Helps you churn through those CASEless ammo bins too.

[RunandFindOut]

In general when dealing with ACs in campaign play I do a fairly major overhaul.  LB-X and Ultra versions go away, instead standard autocannons have the range bands of an LBX and weight/crits are reduced by a third.  LBX-cluster ammo becomes just another alternate ammo type.  I also make some types of special ammo widely available during the SW at more normal prices.  In more ballistic adverse groups I've extended that to allow rapid fire like RACs (only 2-3-4 though) with a chance of a jam that takes a successful roll to clear.

[Firesprocket]

Another alternative is to look at the old Solaris rules which turns were in a scale of 2.5 seconds and gives down times for all of the older weapons.  Low caliber ACs and MGs are fairly potent due to the fact they have rapid reload times.  It's not ideal for large scale fights, but small scale it could be easily adapted.

[Neko_Bijin]

Precision ammo is a good option.  A lot of the 3025 models carry more ammo than they need (precision ammo gives half the rounds per ton), and there are no pulse lasers to bring down flitting gnats, like the Locust and Cicada.

[House Davie Merc]

IMHO the A/C 10 and 20 are balanced weapons .

I honestly wish there were more well designed mechs
that carry the A/C 10 .

As for the A/C 2 and 5 -
The A/C 2 may have a slight anti-aircraft advantage because
of it's range but I see no advantage to the A/C 5 that can't be
done better with something else .

Our fix for the A/C 5 is to either avoid mechs using them as their main gun
or in campaign games rip them off and replace them with something else ASAP .

Their weight to damage ratio makes them dead weight .
I've found only a handful of A/C 5 users that were worth their cost  and
most would be far better with something else .

IMHO- the A/C 5 should have weighed at least 2 tons less and the
A/C 2 1 ton less .

[YingJanshi]

To be honest I just don't get all the hate ACs get. Sure they may not be as good as energy weapons, but that's part of their charm and challenge. Where's the challenge in only ever taking the "best"?

As for campaign play, ACs actually fit that era very well. They are both less expensive than energy weapons and easier to maintain.

So I would suggest that instead of trying to change the rules to make them "more competitive", you should instead explore tactics that make them "more competitive".  Just a thought...

[Marwynn]

Have you considered using Inferno SRMs? Or playing on a high-heat map?

Don't be quick to change the weapon rules, I play mostly 3025 (still) and you can find a use for all of those weapons. A game or three where you slather some Inferno gel on some heat hogs will give you an appreciation for the Infernos and the ballistics.

[The Eagle]

I honestly wish there were more well designed mechs
that carry the A/C 10 .

The Orion is all the AC/10 I need!

[bytor]

To be honest I just don't get all the hate ACs get. Sure they may not be as good as energy weapons, but that's part of their charm and challenge. Where's the challenge in only ever taking the "best"?

As for campaign play, ACs actually fit that era very well. They are both less expensive than energy weapons and easier to maintain.

So I would suggest that instead of trying to change the rules to make them "more competitive", you should instead explore tactics that make them "more competitive".  Just a thought...

Totally agree with this  O0

[SCC]

To be honest I just don't get all the hate ACs get. Sure they may not be as good as energy weapons, but that's part of their charm and challenge. Where's the challenge in only ever taking the "best"?

As for campaign play, ACs actually fit that era very well. They are both less expensive than energy weapons and easier to maintain.

So I would suggest that instead of trying to change the rules to make them "more competitive", you should instead explore tactics that make them "more competitive".  Just a thought...

The problem is that they have very sub-optimal damage to tonnage ratios and the ones that have the better ratios (the -10 and -20)  have reduced ranges.

And there's nothing I can see that says AC's are easier to maintain. And you still have to pay for the ammo

Have you considered using Inferno SRMs? Or playing on a high-heat map?

Don't be quick to change the weapon rules, I play mostly 3025 (still) and you can find a use for all of those weapons. A game or three where you slather some Inferno gel on some heat hogs will give you an appreciation for the Infernos and the ballistics.

Depending upon how many inferno's actually hit energy weapons may not be affected, if there's only a 2 or 4 point heat spike you would favor weapons that build up that much heat and AC's favor those low heat values. Plus there's the issue of ammo explosions caused by heat spikes.

And playing in 3025 will make them seem better

[bobthecoward]

To be honest I just don't get all the hate ACs get. Sure they may not be as good as energy weapons, but that's part of their charm and challenge. Where's the challenge in only ever taking the "best"?

This is how I feel. I just like having a blackjack that can do medium range at 9-16 hexes.

[SteelRaven]

Like how the Solaris rules gives you different rates fire for each auto cannon, gives the AC 2 and AC 5 more bite.