Battletech: Why Do We Love Autocannons?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 гру 2022
- Today we dive into the awesomeness of autocannons in #Battletech.
If you want to support the channel, check out my ko-fi. You can become a member and join our Discord community.
#Tabletop #Mechwarrior #Mech #Battletechlore - Ігри
To quote a fellow MechWarrior: "Big guns never tire!" That's why we love autocannons
Well put.
"All fall to hard ball."
Regardless of how practical it is, there's just something magical about having a chance at a rear armor, or headshot with an AC 20. I love the Atlas AS7-D!
Fair.
In the computer game “Battletech”, my favourite mech is a Highlander with jumpjets, max armour, a medium laser, an LRM20 and my favourite weapon : a UAC20! 😁
UAC20, when you want to make a really big impression.
Two AC5’s is my preferred right arm on a Highlander in that game. The long range and aimed fire morale ability (whatever its called) means it can consistently core heavy mechs and seriously hurt assaults.
In Mechwarrior 5, Autocannons are tons of fun. The rate of fire easily balances them and the ability to hit stuff at unlimited range (as long as you lead your shots and fire at the correct elevation) is also a huge plus.
In the tabletop game, unfortunately, the rate of fire is the same as with any other weapon and when you run the numbers, ACs are not very impressive at all. For instance:
The AC/20 has the same range as a medium laser, but weighs 14 tons (plus one ton of ammo minimum), so 4 medium lasers have the same damage output and you got 11 tons free for heatsinks or other weapons compared to the AC/20. On one hand, the damage is going to be spread out, but on the other, odds of getting a hit are improved, so it kinda depends on taste.
However the comparison of PPC+heatsinks vs. same tonnage in AC/10+ammo is something that the AC/10 is going to lose, even without double heat sinks.
_And still_ there is nothing as satisfying as hitting some dude in the face with your trusty old Autocannon. Special ammo also gives them a bit of a boost and never derivatives such as UACs, RACs or LB-X ACs are also very good. This just goes to show: mathematically, ACs aren't the way to go, but they are just way too cool to pass up.
Yeah, Autocannons in the video games are WAY better than on tabletop.
@@MechanicalFrog Yeah, but in TT, there's just this visceral fun of shooting someone in the face with a giant cannonshell.
BattleTech in general has a tendency to have things not be super optimized (The armament of many stock Mechs are testament to that), but I really like that design philosophy to not minmax everything and go only by numbers.
FedSuns likes autocannons, so they have a ton of mechs with autocannons. I love that about the setting. Certainly has more appeal than "generic minmaxing on all levels".
Watching 'back issues' of Mechanical Frog, for the chancellor!
I can't watch the really old ones... too rough.
Personally i think ac's should weigh like 1 to 2 tons less to make the more viable.
That is an idea worth exploring. The light ACs were a step in the right direction.
ac-2 : doesnt weight much, only takes up one slot, and fires very quickly, but hits like a locust trying to headbutt a highlanders legs
ac-5 : is a heavier, bigger, ammo reliant, medium laser
ac-10 : is much heavier, take up a lot of space, and hits like a truck
ac-20 : the ac-20 is like the tiger's 88mm cannon, just for mechs
UAC : normal autocannon, but heavier, takes up more space, and can jam
RAC : **chuckles in gatling gun**
@@temp3608 Actually if we look at real world autocannons, the AC2 would be more akin to a 20mm, which stands to reason then that the AC 10 would be at least 100mm, while the AC20 would be at least 200mm. So, the 88mm would be closer to an AC10, though more realistically it'd be a Heavy Rifle which against standard armor deals only 5 damage making it more or less equal to the AC5.
@@temp3608 yeah the only really viable ones are racs and light ac 5s then maybe an ac 20 but thats in its own class.
@@KageRyuu6 i was comparing less how big the gun itself is but more how hard it hits compared to other AC's
the ac-20 is effectively the 88mm of battletech where the ac-2 is the 20mm piece of junk that can hardly kill anything from the front, where the ac-5 and ac-10s are more like the usual 50-75mm
if you want i geuss you could change the comparison from an 88mm to the dcker max's cannon, which i think was 100-105mm? simply because compares to other autocannons it just hits that much harder
LBx10 ACs are amazing for crit fishing. Up to 10 hit locations means you have plenty of chances of finding that one location that already has the armor open
Stories about lucky AC20 head shots? Ah a fellow Hunchback pilot!
My son headshot my Timberwolf with a Gauss Rifle from his King Crab the other day.
I agree, 5here is more satisfaction in landing an AC round than a Laser or pack of missles.
Kinetic joy.
For me I love them because of the sound and that they let me deal with the birds in the mech warrior games without having to manage heat too much.
It's half the reason that I like the BJ-1 in MW5 so much.
The sparks are pretty.
@@MechanicalFrog yes
Late to this one, but honestly, I'm digging the classic Centurion on the tabletop. It's by no means an all-star, but every game I've taken it in, it just performs, and the AC-10 is a big part of that. I don't expect to throw it head to head with an assault and come out alive, but paired with the rest of a lance, it's a good team player.
The Centurion is great. I'll definitely be giving it its own video this year.
*Speaks of AC rounds filled with Inferno Gel*
Me with my LB-X autocannon: Its free real estate.
toasty!!
I love autocannons, especially of the rotary variety, but when it comes to the standard single shot ones I won’t run anything smaller than an AC 10. I may run an ultra 5, but I’m not running a 2 until it’s a rotary.
Standard 2s and 5s are mostly for anti aircraft or anti vehicle work, if you don't play battletech classic with combined arms they really don't feel worth it until rotary.
*Intense FedRat noises*
*Unintelligible yelled german*
@@MechanicalFrog *Shouts in batchall*
@@derekburge5294 _responds in 155mm_
On Sunday during the campaign session, my alt character's Warhammer got one-shotted by a through-armor crit from a Von Luckner's AC/20 that blew up the engine. This happened at maximum range after I'd jumped, mind you.
That was not a good day. The upside was that the rest of the mech was largely intact and the company had a spare 280-rated engine lying around, but that's still an expensive repair bill. The mission itself was also successful with the Warhammer being the only casualty on our side.
Imagine the look on that tech's face when you tell him/her the mech needs a brand new engine...
We love autocannons because "BANG!" is always going to sound more satisfying than "pew pew"
Solid reasoning.
Man I am really enjoying this series, thanks for keeping it going. I'm looking forward to learning more about weapons in later eras
Me too... I need to play catch up with things like Plasma weapons.
Ive played many of the videogames which show off the weaknesses of Autocannons, namely limited Ammunition and heavy tonnage. Mechcommander 2 by default had the option for Unlimited Ammunition making every weapon useful. There Autocannons were useful but took up a lot of space. Battletech-2018 PC game buffed Autocannons, improving daamge for AC-2s by +150%, AC-5s by +90%, and AC-10s by +20%. I remember things like the Blackjack and Jagermech being top-tier units in Battletch-2018-PC.
In games like Mechwarrior 2, 3, 4, and Mechcommander 1 with limited ammunition Autocannons are much worse.
Its really just a design flaw that whoever owns the Battletech IP at the time wont change. Autocannons are a bad Primary weapon. Thyre just too heavy and you can rarely mount enough ammunition. Theyre much better as Secondary Weapons when you have the tonnage to mount them, but not the critical slots to mount heat sinks. In particular the Inner Sphere Double Heat Sinks makes something like an LBX AC-10 (about 13 tons including ammo, less than 10 space slots) much more appealing than an ER PPC with Double Heat Sinks(14 tons and about 25 space slots).
Which is the Rookie weapon? Energy Weapons that dont require ammo, or Autocannons that dont worry about heat?
All the special autocannons change things to make Autocannons "the Gambler's Weapon". LB-X Cluster ammo fires a random number of weak shots in random locations. Ultra Autocannons can permanently jam if you ever rapid-fire with them. Rotary Autocannons may temporarily jam, shoot a random number of shots, and being Inner Sphere weapons theyre heavy and fairly short ranged.
Now then Energy Weapons become Clean, Pretty, Reliable.
Autocannons are pretty good in Mechwarrior 4. The larger ones do a lot of damage and most don't have that big of an ammo constraint. Ultras, lbxs, and RACs are effective and since there's no ammo explosion, the only downside is the higher weight which is partially mitigated by the reduced heatsink requirements.
I like the Orion and Centurion and ive grown to like the Enforcer
I'm a big Enforcer booster.
First Battletech TT game I ever played I had an Enforcer. Just a 1 mech each melee to teach newbies and showcase the game. I immediately put the Battletech Compendium on layby when we finished. Liked Enforcers and the game ever since.
I'm a big fan of the Orion. I'm still fairly new to BT, but right after learning some lore, I wanted to try Kerensky's signature mech.
I cannot express how fond of the Centurion I became. A nice Medium Mech, with fairly thick armor, with a gun that could 'reach out and touch someone'. Although, having said that, I did play around with various configurations of the Mech, and found a few 'all energy' builds that I liked.
Problem with ACs even in them olden days is that often enough only AC/10 or 20 is a viable investment of weight. And I say that as an avid fan of Merkava VIII.
For instance when comparing CN9 variants, I inevitably come to a conclusion that AL version is just... Better. Safer. More armoured. Less prone to exploding. And still pretty damn heat efficient.
There are many examples like this. Usually units with big ACs have something working for them (like Saladin with speed) or can be used effectively on specific terrain (Hetzers love them Urban areas and Double Blind)
The Light AC 2-5 was a step in the right direction, and the RACs helped. I need to explore the RACs more in builds.
@@MechanicalFrog Clans have some insane ranges on AC/2 that might just make it into an effective Fly Swatter with right quirks and TarCom. RAC/5 can be a beast. Not the biggest fan of RAC/2. You only win range over SRM6 and you lose ammo types and get a chunky nice chance to jam the damn thing. If you feel the need to use RAC/2, put more JJts and get a bunch of SRM6s, I say.
Davions be like
*slaps Rotary autocannon*
This bad boy can fire off so many shots
*RAC jams*
*davion initiates percussive maintenance*
This thing will be absolutely amazing in battle for between .5 and 5 seconds. Your mileage may vary.
I think you hit the nail on the head. Double Heat Sinks mean that energy weapons' primary weakness just isn't as pronounced as auto-cannons. I feel like auto-cannons, as a whole, should come with some other kind of bonus. Considering they're explosive weapons, what if auto-cannons got a +1 on rolls to confirm critical hits, or something like that?
I dunno, I'm not a long beard in BattleTech terms but I love me the auto-cannons. Anecdotally, it seems like my Marauder's AC always seems to land that important critical hit when the PPCs fail to do so.
I think the Light Autocannons were a step in the right direction. I'm curious if cutting another ton from the ACs would help bring them in line.
I agree with Mr Frog. Slice off another ton off the AC's weight to make them 'competitive' with energy weapons. But, I take it further. Add at least +3 to all range brackets for ACs only. This should make the competitive with things like the Gauss Rifle and PPC.
@@franksmedley7372 why not just make autocannons have a increased chance to knock down the target? It’s a way to make it competitive while also making them different. It fits their shorter ranged role while also encouraging its usage as a way to get that pesky lighter mech to have to take time correcting its balance.
I have the standard FedSuns love for autocannons. So much so I removed a twin AC/2s on a MWO Panther to replace them a RAC/5. Truely a dastardly little machine.
That sounds, fun!
2 ppc +10 heat sinks is 24 tons. Ac20+ 3 tons ammo is 17 tons. Yes, the range is short but considering you can get a ppc and an ac20 with 3 tons of ammo for the same weight as 2 ppcs and the heat sinks to manage them, you can still have long range capabilities. The Ac20 is the biggest game changer on the tabletop in 3025...it can turn the tide of a battle with one well placed shot. I love all autocannons because I hate spending so much weight on heat sinks.
I know people love it, but I am just always wary of putting all my eggs in one basket hoping for that lucky hit.
king crab, by far my favorite ac 20 mech
My son's favorite as well. He likes to recount how he blew the head off of my Timberwolf on turn 2 in a recent game.
@@MechanicalFrog I have had a few games where a luck shot cores a mech or a lucky headshot. I built a whole pseudo lance with 2 Crabs and 1 King crab, called sea food dinner got the minis. They haven't been painted yet.
I like to allow AC2s and 5s to double tap combined with fixing the 2 cluster probabilities. Ultras can fire up to four times, and rotaries up to six times. Ignore jamming, as it's horribly punitive for already lackluster weapons.
That'd be interesting to try out.
Mech warrior 3, Ultra LBX 20... Fucking mint.
Good times had by all.
Watching your vids, like this one, is the quick morning jog before work for my brain. Autocannons and their subsequent variations are gratifying. Fire gun. Hear staccato boom. See opponent crumble. It is also hard to argue when the air around you is 50% metal. Cookoffs are good when it is a chili competition, not when it’s ammunition going off like explosive popcorn inside your torso.
Yeah ammo explosions are always more fun when they're taking place in the opponent's mech and not your own.
I mostly play either 3025 or Clan Invasion games and have to admit that I'm extremely fond of ACs of most types. The Enforcer is one of my favorite mechs, it gets things done with an AC10 and Large Laser and while I could easily imagine a version with a PPC and heat sinks replacing the AC10, it just wouldn't have the same charm.
The Enforcer doesn't get enough love. It's a great mech.
autocannons probably should have a beefing up vs infantry(and maybe BA) long with VTOLs and hovercraft since rapid fire large guns are very very good vs those. It also would make them more worth the mass and ammo bombs.
Good idea.
i feel like ac's are really not made for turn based games like tabletop but in FPS style games like MWO and MW5 are where they're really good
ac-5 may do the same damage as a medium laser for 8x the tonnage and 4x the slots, but they come off cooldown so much faster that they start doing a whole lot more damage
Interesting as most people I've heard talking autocannons from MWO, the reports aren't positive.
@@MechanicalFrog AC-5s arent exactly great in MWO, but they're certainly not bad
ac-2s though are in my opinion forever doomed to a fate being not worth it, though they shoot incredibly fast
like seriously they just arent worth it beyond fire rate
then again i also tend to use assaults and heavier heavy mechs that can actually fit things like ac-10s and several tons of ammo without needing to replace something with lighter versions
@@temp3608 I think the advantage they have in MWO is the ability to really mess up the ability of a mech to return fire accurately. That's not a thing in the tabletop.
@@MechanicalFrog ac-5s and ac-2s are kind of good for that even then a RAC version does that job just as well, and makes it so you can hardly see whats happening through the repeated impact
so either way ac-2s really arent that great and ac-5s are only meh
ac-10/20s tho are amazing, ac-10s being very hard hitting, firing somewhat rapidly, and having plenty of ammo, and ac-20s taking ages to reload, having low ammo, but hitting like a freight train
if the freight train had a nuclear bomb strapped to the end
also can we just talk about how 3 ac-2s does in one shot the same damage as a rotary ac-2's DPS?
AC2's have a place in swatting VTOLS and choppers in bad planetary conditions or that are sitting at AC2 range themselves.
AC10 is a decent low heat gutpunch alternative to a PPC.
AC20 is our lord of single location short range damage.
The ac5 was the only AC i ever felt like i never had a good reason to bring, and would always wish for something better. The range boost just isn't all that for the introduced chance of ammo explosion.
Really hard to look at the AC5 and see it as a good option unless you have no other choice due to regional/local availability.
I heard once that before the VTOL rules were changed to make them more durable, an AC/5 could one-shot the rotor of any VTOL, so it was an efficient form of anti-air back then.
I had a teir 4 UAC20 on a Banshee in HBS that was OP AF. I was routinely one-shotting mediums and heavies.
Never underestimate the power of dakka
Big boom.
_Big robot gun go boom._
Kablooey!
Why do we love them? Because DAKKA!!!!!111111oneoneone
ratatatatatatatatatatatatatat
@@MechanicalFrog Amen brother. AMEN.
My only exposure to Battletech is a tiny bit of Megamek and a lot MW5 modded, and i love my Marauder 2 with 4 rac/2s(c)s its an immense amount of fun the amount of damage you do is insane like core an Atlas in under 3 seconds within optimal range levels of damage and with the double ammo bins the amount of extra dakka you can carry is never really a concern, you should all try it out its really fucking fun
The Marauder II is a beast in most configs. Love it.
Dakka!!!!!!💥💥💥💥💥💥
Kablooey!
AC ammo should have CASE as standard or have a special roll that makes ammo only explode on a 1 in 6 chamce when hit. Machine gun ammo shouldn't explode at all
That and making the optional rapid fire rules standard would make ACs not suck. As is, they have two benefits: range (but gauss and PPC are better for actual damage) and low heat. In exhcange they have very low damage per ton, are reliant on ammunition, and can have ammo explode. All the later teched-up AC variants and special ammo have even more drawbacks, most of which risk completely stopping the weapon from firing or straight up destroying it.
If you greatly reduce the risk of ammo explosions and make it possible for them to gamble for higher burst damage, ACs become a more reasonable alternative to lasers.
The ACs, especially the smaller ones, need some rethinking to make them more viable. That could include your idea for a 2nd look at the ammo explosion rules.
If you haven't had a head get popped off a Battlemech by an AC/20... Well play more because it 'll happen.
Sooner or later.
(In 'Agent Smith' voice from the Matrix) It is Inevitable.
Hello Frog.
A good video about autocannons. As others have said, I feel that the Autocannon is 'over weight' for its damage potential. It really should be a ton or so lighter, and with the Helm Memory Core's data, there should be a way to use advanced machining and tooling, as well as new metallic alloys, to lighten the venerable weapon's overall mass.
Although you did a good job at describing the autocannon and its variants, there is one feature of the autocannon that you never touched upon.
This would be the weapon's availability. With the reduced Tech of the late Succession Wars Era, up to the discovery of the Helm Memory Core, the autocannon was a reliable weapon that was easily produced upon any half way decent industrial world in the Inner Sphere. Thus, almost all Inner Sphere planets, with any industry, could produce autocannons and their associated ammunition.
This being true, the autocannon was a weapon that anyone could 'lay their hands upon', was easy to replace if needed, and available in large numbers and in differing calibers.
The low 'heat burden' of the weapon system usually offset the potential for ammunition explosions, and the lower potential damage versions (AC-2, AC-5, and even the A-10) gave military units a decent range beyond that of the Medium Laser.
It should be noted, that the Medium Laser is about as ubiquitous as the Autocannon, as far as availability and ease of replacement.
For me, this explains why so many Mechs had Autocannons of various sizes built into them, until after the discovery of the Helm Memory Core, and re-introduction of Double Strength Heat Sinks.
As you mentioned, DSHSs radically changed Mech design practices to favor 'beam' weaponry, over projectiles. Although, I will say that should lighter alloys be used to create autocannons, this shift might swing back somewhat into the autocannon's favor, and again 'balance' things in the game.
I also imagine that things like: Armor Piercing, Delayed Action, High Explosive autocannon rounds will probably appear as soon as 'Fire and Forget' missiles make their debut into the game. DAHEAP (delay action high explosive armor piercing) would probably be the 'death knell' to Endo Steel internal structures, since such lightweight materials would probably take MORE damage from such a round than 'conventional' internal structures.
The 'game mechanics' for Fire and Forget missiles is already in the game, in the use of single shot Rocket Launchers. Such a weapons system would generate an immediate response of R&D to produce better Chaff and Anti-Missile Systems.
As to lighter materials for Autocannons... well, I do have one suggestion. Titanium-Carbide-Tantalum-Carbide alloy, This is a 'real' alloy. Although one, current technology cannot produce at this time. TaC-TiC (Tantalum-Carbide-Titanium-Carbide), or TACTIC, is a very special alloy, and one where the covalences of the atoms comprising the material 'mesh' to produce a relatively light weight, yet very strong alloy. When 'creating' this alloy, along with a friend of mine with both a Physics and Materials Technology bachelors degrees, we thought that 'TiC-TaC' sounded too silly to use.
Given what me know, to date, the resulting alloy would be at least 8 to 12 times as strong as the best high-carbon steels, and weigh only 1/3rd as much. By adding several layers of carbon fiber materials to the barrels of the weapon, one could further reduce the weapon's overall mass, by adding the bulky carbon fiber material to relieve the stresses from firing the autocannon that the barrel would experience.
Overall, this would decrease the weight of Autocannons considerably. Probably to such an extent as half the current weight of the weapons in game, or more. Doing this, would increase the 'viability' of Autocannon weaponry.
Just some thoughts, although I again point out that the Autocannon's ease of production, and availability in large numbers, was the primary motivation for their use in and during the Succession Wars.
Interesting, I didn't consider the in-game rationale, but that is a very real concern. You build with the guns you have, not necessarily the guns you want.
@@MechanicalFrog : I have been playing since 1984. So I had to learn the efficiencies of which weapons worked best out for myself. In doing so, with my playing group, using tabletop results to build our 'backstories', we all noted that some weapons were just more plentiful in the game. This led to altering various Mech designs. Example: Panther. Remove the PPC, replace with a Large Laser. With the saved tonnage, add another SRM-4. You now have 12.5 salvos for the SRMs, and no penalty when getting into close range of your target. And, since the Large Laser is far more available than the PPC, your costs go down, even with the addition of the 2nd SRM-4. As far as usage, I would field a Panther as 'standard', and if the PPC took damage, swap it for the Lrg Laser, and add the 2nd SRM. People HATED this 'minor' re-design. Yes, the 'loss' of the PPC meant that the Panther no longer 'sniped' at heavier Mechs, but instead, now was a dedicated Light Mech ambush hunter.
@@MechanicalFrog : Another example of 'quick redesigns' was the basic Locust (1 Med Laser and 2 MGs). Yank the MGs and their ammo (a massive improvement, by ridding yourself of ammo explosions), and adding 2 more Med Lasers (one on each arm). This alone, tripled the damage output of the Locust and made it a 'real' threat to encounter.
@@franksmedley7372 That's awesome. I love it.
Why do we love autocannons? Why because we live in the Federated Suns of course.
I suppose that's one reason. :D
Why do I love autocannons?
More DAKKA, more fun. ;)
Definitely.
I shall mount the Dardanelles gun on my Urban mech!
O_o
@@MechanicalFrog * periphery music getting louder and closer*
I was really thrilled with how autocannons were balanced in MechWarrior5... AC/2 will deal the same damage per minute as a PPC and the rest just get better from there. Any 'mech with a pair of AC/5 is a serious threat.
Since a lucky salvage early in the campaign my battlemech has been the Cyclops-11-P... primary armament is two AC/5 in the RT and I back it up with a couple SRM launchers and four Medium Lasers.
On the tabletop I think autocannons are okay. The basic AC/5 with one ton ammo is less total mass (9t) than a Large Laser and enough heatsinks (12t) to bring it down to the same total heat. The AC/10 stacks up similarly to the PPC, 14t for cannon and 2 tons ammunition vs 14 tons for PPC and 7 heatsinks.
My only thing is that ammo based weapons, like covered at the beginning of the video, always advanced, but for some reason in Battletech, Mechwarrior and MWO, they seem to have fallen behind.
Projectile weaponry is as old as humanity itself. Making lighter and more effective is just simple a no Brainerd. Personally I believe game ACs are are too heavy and ranges are too short. The technology that developed ACs is not really a lostech issue as guns have been understood for centuries. Why there have been no more advancements in this primitive basic but effective technology is beyond me.
But yes, I do love me some autocannons.
I think the game makers wanted to keep ranges within the distances covered by the two original paper folding maps. More 'realistic' ACs would fire out to ranges of 3 of those maps, laid out as upright rectangles. Basically, out ranging anything in the game by a wide margin. To a lesser extent, this applies to ALL weapons in the game (and yes, I am ONLY referring to tabletop).
Mechwarrior 4 introduced me to RACs and i frigging love them, MWO made me love them even more
sure punching big holes with AC 10s, 20s or standard and heavy gauss rifles is fun
but there is no greater expression of bringing the rage to your enemy than with RACs
i however don't know any specific stock mech that uses them in battletech ... i think there was an atlas?
Rotarys are more useful in MWO because of they force enemies to retreat and hide.
I still wanna keep the quad ac2 in my Mauler 1P
By all means. All yours.
Then again, a LAC/20 would probably have a range of 6-7 at best. Great for whacking some Clanner in an alley, but not much use in most places.
(By the way, you forgot the HVAC/2 and the HVAC/5.)
What software are you using for that Sim? It seems nice!
I think the tabletop simulation was done with Megamek.
Mechwarrior5 for the FPS video. MegaMek for the tabletop sim video.
@@MechanicalFrog Thank you! I've gotta try MegaMek here then.
@@AlexDenton0451 It's pretty fun.
They change the rules for the jam roll for rotary Auto cannons? I thought the jam number was equivalent to the number of shots?
Now I'm not sure.
Brand new to the universe myself and wow…it’s like stepping into a more realistic 40k..no worries leaving my 40k bible at the door! Just wondering what your preference of atlas ac weaponry is I always find it hard to choose between an ac-20 or a heavy rifle also how to properly set it up in mechwarrior 5 out of a job for now so no money for tabletop right now
Personally, in Tabletop, I prefer an LB10x over an AC20. The all or nothing big weapons make me a sad panda more often than not. In MW5, go wild with that AC20.
@@MechanicalFrog hehe good to know
We love ac 20s because it feels like your firing a schoolbus at your enemy
When they hit, it feels so good...
ACs go brrrr
ratatatatatatatatatatatatatatat
Because Dakka!
Indeed...
I love autocannons because I have poor self control and tend to cook myself alive with energy builds
In terms if damage over time auto canons are point and click as opposed to point and track. At least in terms of MWO
Yeah I don't know many people who are happy with how Piranha handled autocannons in MWO.
AC/10s and AC/20s are fine but AC/2s and 5s are hardly worth taking same with their LB versions , AC/5 ultras and lights are passable , RAC/2s finally make AC/2s worth it and the RAC/5 is excellent . Clanners dont suffer too much for using them
RACs really change the game.
I will duck tape a AC10 to my mech just to say I brought one. Weirdly my favorite weapon, love building around them.
Is that a timeline thing or have you tried swapping out for the LB10x and just using standard ammo on it?
@@MechanicalFrog like put one on top of a locust so he can say he is part of the gun line. Just a big fan of the gun over the energy weapons.
@@jonathanamsberry3971 Shotgun Locust... hmm...
Unfortunately AC´s are more viable for vehicles than they are for mechs. Even with fusion engines (let alone xl or fuel cells) the best option for vehicles is using the 10 heat engine capacity for secondary weapons and taking AC´s or missiles as main armament.
That being said, specialist ammunitions (namely precision) make standard AC´s a good option against lighter and faster targets and thus giving them an edge similar to pulse lasers.
I dont know if we will ever get something else for AC´s that will boost their profile in battle, but until then they will remain the cheap-ish RP option and pale in comparison to gauss, missile and energy weapons.
Fair.
I dunno about you, but with the alloys available to build Mechs with, one would think that ACs would benefit from this as well, making them lighter. Ah, well, another 'road less traveled'.
There already is an Ebon Jaguar configeration with two ultra AC/10s you should already be using it
I think I will go with UAC5s to add a mix of lasers too.
I want to like Autocannons, and at least with Ultras 5 and above, RACs of any size and the AC 10 and 20, I do. But the weight of the the base AC-2 and AC-5 have always frustrated me, as has how the range brackets of the AC weapons seems to imply that the AC-2 and the AC-20 (as well as everything in between) seem to use the same powder charge, despite having vastly different sizes of round (I realise that the weapon ranges is an attempt to give the lighter ACs a role as long range harassing weapons, and to attempt to discuss weapons in Battletech 'realistically' is a fast path to insanity, but it still bugs me). The light ACs go a long way to amending the dire state of the AC-2 and AC-5, but I admit that, if I was the line runner for BT, I would bite the bullet and either make base AC-2s and 5s effectively Ultra AC-2/5s (with the actual Ultra AC-2/5 having a max fire rate of three), or make the Light AC 2 and 5 the default AC 2 and 5, redesign all the 'mechs effected (and yes I realise that's a lot of 'mechs) and be done with it.
Because what's according to the lore either a 20 to 30 mm cannon or a 40 to 80-ish mm cannon should have more impact than it does in that game ATM.
I'd also allow pilots to clear jams from Ultras like they can from RACs, largely because IMO I can't understand how the more complex, gun can clear a jam where the simpler one cannot (Yes, I know there's an explanation in setting about the barrel rotation being able to move jammed rounds out of the way, but TBH, there is no good reason I can think of why similar logic or jam-clearing systems can't be attached to a rapid-firing, reciprocating gun, which is what an Ultra Autocannon essentially is).
Stepping down from the soapbox, The AC-10 and its permutations is to me one of the two 'trooper' weapons of Battletech (the other being the Large Laser and it's variants). It's got reasonable reach, hits hard, and has adequate ammo endurance. Like the Large Laser, it's not fancy, but it's got enough punch and versatility to make itself useful in most situations. It's also a fairly cool weapon, which IMO makes it competative despite its weight.
The AC-20 (and especially the Ultra AC-20) however, is high risk, high reward. You have precious few shots, shooting an AC-20 regardless of model generates a lot of heat, have to get right up close to use it, but if you do, it's a snub cannon that will remove heads, arms, legs and even sometimes centre torsos of whatever poor sap you point it at. You might be able to outmanoeuvre a 'mech with an AC-20, but you can never ever ignore one.
Both of the RACs deserve special mention though, as their niche is a little different than autocannons. Where most Autocannons are predictable, reliable performers (with a bit of instability in the Ultras) RACS are all about risk. Yes, you can burn away with six shots in a round, but then you have to risk a jam and there's no guarantee all your shots will hit even if you succeed at the attack roll. They also have good range, especially if you factor in the potential damage they can unleash. So, in my mind, the threat of what thy can do is as valuable as the actual damage they can do. 30 potential damage from a single attack, even if scatter across a 'mech, is enough to give most 'mech jockeys pause, so a well placed RAC 'mech can play zone control firing at a low rate until an opportunity for a full volley to seriously impact the flow of the battle emerges. However, the more shots you fire, the more likely you are to roll a jam, and I can say from personal experience, yes, you can *theoretically* clear a jam from a RAC, if your mechwarrior manages to fluff your piloting checks to clear the weapon for several turns in a row, that's several turns where the 'mech is dead weight, and that can be frustrating as hell. RACs are like spinning the Roulette wheel: Sometimes the risky bet pays off, but it can also blow up in your face spectacularly.
Jeebus, that grew into a wall of text... Sorry for the long post. :P
My favorite weapon by far...huh? yes im a house Davion fan why did you ask? If i had to choose mechs for them well, excluding the obvious pick of the Anihilator (cause come on), the one i'd go with 1st since i do believe it's reputation is worse than it actually is, the Banshee, drove one in my modded run of MW5 career mode, gave it 3 burst fire AC5's and several medium lasers as back up, that thing would just shred enemies to pieces, and in the totally opposite corner, the beyond Legendary Maurader, because in MWO that bastard is borderline more durable than an Atlas, it is a perfect match for the RAC's, and that's what i have on mine, the standard build of 3 RAC2's and 4 medium lasers
Is LB-X good for AA?
Yes it is. It can make flak attacks on flying targets pg.114 in Total Warfare.
Cause BOOM BOOM BOOM......vs bzzzzzzzzzzzz of a laser. Its visceral. I still have MekTek and its add ons installed:)> That game..is tough 100%...you can easily get in over your head.
Good times had by all.
...or the lucky early game AC20 to the head kill that guarantees the win for the killer. Especially worse if playing 2025 tech. Especially hilarious if the killer is an Urbanmech.
The 9 hex cookie ring of Hunchback avoidance is real!
Yeah no slow dancing with the hunchback.
Using 3025 tech, the best reply to a Hunchback, is a Locust with 3 Med Lasers. Run-and-Gun, with little heat build up, and always be able to out maneuver the Hunchie.
Do we? They are great in MWO and MW5 but I've never seen them praised in TT or Lore apart from the dreaded AC20.
Yeah we talk about it a bit in the video.
I mean... we circumvent the BS by never playing beyond 3067... XD
Aww...
@@MechanicalFrog Not saying we don’t retcon in RAC and some other cannons to pre-3067… we just dislike the direction the lore went. 😉
Because they are the underdogs, and ammo types.
FASAs Energy Weapon bias, is ridiculous. More range, damage, efeciency, often even heat efeciant and are cheeper then most weapons.
You would imagine the ray gun would be more expensive then the ballistic option but make up for it after sevel revel boxes of ammo. It should be a investment were it may be more expensive up front, but in the long run they pay off, due to infinite ammo (and lack of ammo explosions)
But this is not how they are written.
Genuinely a shame that specialty AC ammo took so long to (re)invent and implement; especially for lighter weapons, the main niche for ACs post-3050 is flexible payload delivery, and the options to make that viable just... don't really feel there
Yeah the ACs really needed a boost for a long time.
One thing I've thought about is the idea of a variant ammo that squeezes the lance/pilebunker rules onto an AC/5 shot: +1 to hit, but if you don't penetrate you can roll to do 1 damage to the internal structure
It'd give a lot of obsolete and unloved weapons a new lease on life, with the tradeoff that you're paying extra to use suboptimal guns in the ilClan era
When the specialty ammo comes up, I want to scream. Halving ammunition capacity- what the hell is that? If you're going to say something stupid in the rules, you need a reason based on reality. Ammunition is either correct, or it's not going to works.
There is never reason to mount an AC2 on anything.