What's the point of sub-20 autocannons?

[Nakkivene]

In trying to run this stock only campaign, the big problem I've run into is that many stock mechs come with various autocannons that :

- weigh a million tons
- aren't accurate and get less so the more you fire
- do very minor amounts of damage more than the otherwise better energy weapons
- still generate heat?

I don't have the firepower to finish almost any mission because over a half of my mechs have autocannons and do like a quarter of the damage they really could. Now while this is an issue of a gimmick run, I'm just left wondering why would you ever equip an autocannon other than AC-20?

 

[Na'Shar]

I've completed the campaign with stock mech's, other than adding + weapons and never had an issue with AC's. The smaller caliber AC's are great at range and are much easier to manage heat wise in heat restricting environments like deserts. If accuracy is an issue, my suggestion would be to look at the gunnery skills of your pilots. As your pilots skill up their gunnery, the recoil penalty is less of an issue.

 

[Nakkivene]

Firepower is the greatest issue, followed by their poor accuracy. This is not yet the all skills at 10 phase, though again I wonder what's the point of the smaller autocannons when you have maxed out pilots and assaults.

 

[Captain Slide]

Why would you even want to take an AC20? Would be my response.

I guess a lot of it comes down to play style. I personally think the AC20 is over rated. Sure it hurts when it hits but if you let one get into range you've done something wrong IMO. Likewise why would you spend all that tonnage only to have to put your mech in imminent danger. Personally I would take 2 AC5 or 2ppc (or combo there of) over an AC20 any day, but I like to play at range. Most stock mechs which you face in this game have the majority of their firepower at close range, kill them at range with LRM, PPC, LL and low calibre AC's.

Hunchbacks, Victors, King Crabs, Demolishers all die long before they get into range for the AC20, in my current play through which is at about day 1000 I have been hit by AC20 only 5 or 6 times, none of them fatal and only when the computer basically cheats by spawning them on top of you.

Everybody plays different, no weapon is entirely useless.

 

[RavenDB]

AC5s are excellent sniper weapons, i frequently headshot mechs with those.

 

[Camicon Dachass]

In trying to run this stock only campaign, the big problem I've run into is that many stock mechs come with various autocannons that :

- weigh a million tons
- aren't accurate and get less so the more you fire
- do very minor amounts of damage more than the otherwise better energy weapons
- still generate heat?

I don't have the firepower to finish almost any mission because over a half of my mechs have autocannons and do like a quarter of the damage they really could. Now while this is an issue of a gimmick run, I'm just left wondering why would you ever equip an autocannon other than AC-20?

Do you like the Gauss Rifle? +dam AC10's are essentially lighter Gauss Rifles, with slightly shorter range. I'll take an AC10 over an AC20 any day.

 

[asaz989]

Smaller AC2 and 5 are quite accurate, especially at range - their low damage is the tradeoff you make for that, but they're quite light anyway.

AC20 is a very specialized weapon which I happen to like - getting that much damage concentrated into one mech section has certain advantages over doing the same damage spread out over lots of bits of a mech. e.g. doing 80 damage to one spot will seriously degrade the combat ability of a light or medium mech, while doing it spread out will just leave it stripped of armor and vulnerable. But it's only accurate at knife-fighting range, which usually leaves you vulnerable to their lance-mates (defeat in detail is hard at such close ranges) so you kind of have to build your mech around the gun.

AC10 is a middle ground which can be either the best or worst of both worlds, depending on the + bonuses and the exact HP numbers of the enemies you're up against. In the right situations it can one-shot mech sections or at least punch through armor to do immediate crits, while it doesn't require you to get quite as up-close or spend as much weight as a 20. A lot of the stock mechs using an AC10 are basically mediums that are built around the gun in the same way that a heavy would be built around an AC20.

 

[Havamal]

Do you like the Gauss Rifle? +dam AC10's are essentially lighter Gauss Rifles, with slightly shorter range. I'll take an AC10 over an AC20 any day.

For my part I wouldn't say "Any day" but I still mostly agree with this depending on the build and role.

 

[Edmon]

The best part about the smaller autocannons is beating the whole game with them, when everyone is saying you couldn't possibly....

 

[Critter667]

As I recall, the heat generated is rather small compared to the equivalent Energy weapon. This reduces the heatsink requirements often associated with energy weapons. Now I am not saying go heat neutral, that is insane. However, you can maintain sustained fire for a tad longer when using ACs.

 

[ThatGuyMontag]

AC5s aren't even that low damage: they deal as much damage as a PPC. When you take heatsinks into account they compete directly with PPCs only as long as you're using internal heatsinks: past a couple and the weight savings of heavier energy weapons gets entirely eaten up by the heatsinking.

As for the 10s, running an Orion with a +dam AC10 and +dam Llaser backed with some Mlasers was the highlight of one of my runs a little while back. With an excellent punch along the best range bracket in the game, it was ridiculously versatile, slotting in precisely where I needed it to every single time. At times it felt a little weird running what was in effect a 75 ton Enforcer, but that beaut just kept on delivering right into the end game.

 

[LemurFromTheId]

Huh? AC/5 is great. The only reason it seems heavy compared to energy weapons is because you're not accounting for the ten free heat sinks you get with your mech chassis. AC/5 is very evenly matched with large laser. Slighly more range, damage and stability damage with slighly more heat-compensated weight, potential ammo issues and no accuracy boost. Minimun range and recoil are easily mitigated by pilot skills.

One of my favourite AC/5 setups is Blackjack with AC/5, LL and 3xML (+ 3xJJ). AC/5 and LL do great damage from long range and their combined heat is easily handled by your built-in heat sinks. 3 MLs add more punch when you really need it. If you overheat from alphas, you can still cool off when shooting the AC/5 only. You can't replicate the same performance with LLs and MLs only.

 

[Edmon]

So, all discussion and joking aside... I understand the idea that on paper the autocannon has little value... compared to the energy weapons in terms of raw dps.

Their value, IMO, comes from their penetrating stablity damage. This allows you to strip evasion and add stab damage to braced and otherwise highly defended targets.

Now, that said, I think LRM's can be better in that role. But autocannons do have the benefit of also having high single hit damage.

They are sort of generalist weapon (AC/20 excepted) which is useful in most situations.

But, I do agree, they are a bit of the heavy side. I favour the AC/5 like most people here have said, if I am playing seriously and if I am fitting any AC's at all.

 

[Sigil]

The true advantage of lighter caliber autocannons is their range. Unfortunately, HBS has imposed severe limitations to both visual and sensor range, seriously handicapping their utility. If you open up the range at which engagements begin, their value will become much more obvious.

In the current release, your quite correct. When the engagement begins, if you've maneuvered for it, the AC/20 is practically within range right from the beginning. You have to make a concerted effort to create situations where the true range advantage of the AC/2, AC/5, and to a lesser extent, the AC/10, can be used to full advantage. The use of Sensor Lock or the use of an advance scout can help create such scenarios.

 

[Jamey]

In trying to run this stock only campaign, the big problem I've run into is that many stock mechs come with various autocannons that :

- weigh a million tons
- aren't accurate and get less so the more you fire
- do very minor amounts of damage more than the otherwise better energy weapons
- still generate heat?

I don't have the firepower to finish almost any mission because over a half of my mechs have autocannons and do like a quarter of the damage they really could. Now while this is an issue of a gimmick run, I'm just left wondering why would you ever equip an autocannon other than AC-20?

The only two substantially subpar weapons right now are the AC2 and (even moreso) the PPC. When you factor in heat sink and ammo weight, the LL, AC5, AC10, and AC20 are quite similar.

The problem with stock mechs is twofold:

1) 3025 mechs were mostly not optimized
2) Mechs were built with TT rules rather than video game rules in mind

Why would you even want to take an AC20?

Because it makes a satisfying thump and a big hole in the enemy's armor.

Also because it is more weight efficient than the smaller ACs (granted at the cost of range).

Even moreso because the AC20+++ dishes out 120 damage and 60 stab in one go.

Also, did I mention the satisfying thump and big holes in enemy mechs?

 

[Kereminde]

What's the point? Well "what's the point" is a question often left out there in BattleTech for several things. BNC-3E. ZEU-6S. WSP-1A. CP-10-Z. SRM 2 . . . for some the SHD-2K over the GRF-1N over the WVR-6R . . .

. . . the CGR-1A1.

The point is, at the heart of things, not having only 5 or so weapons for the game and there being "sub-standard" facets of every unit. Weapon mixes, armor shortcomings, mobility problems, waste heat dissipation issues . . . this is what gives any given 'Mech "it's character". Every 'Mech, every weapon, every vehicle has a use it was designed for - some of these fill the role better than others, and some are barely capable, but they are indeed designed with a certain purpose.

The point is "Variety", and it's what keeps the game fresh in the 3025-3039 era as opposed to later where things start to collapse down towards the singular purpose of "kill the target before it kills you".

 

[Nakkivene]

Eh, it seems like medium mechs spot other mechs roughly at medium laser ranges so the range almost never seems useful, and if you backpedal and lock, something locks you and 15 different units poke at you with various long range weapons. Only in the rare map where you can position your mechs behind something and the enemy doesn't have a big pile or LRM tubes have I felt staying at range can work.

I do remember the big ticket AC-10's having some value in the later stages of the campaign because the Orions I found. Not as strong as the Grasshopper that mounts 12 different lasers or something, though.

What I find suprising is the love for AC5. Why? With the weigh difference a L laser would be even more heat efficient, or more likely you could have much more firepower.

 

[Kereminde]

Well, a couple things.

You don't always get the option for Large Lasers in place of an AC/5 - the Dragon DRG-1N can't swap it for one or a PPC, without using up one of the Medium Laser mounts. Furthermore, the issues with heat build becomes a consideration when you're dropping in hot biomes. Which for me seemed to be rather common, meaning heat-heavy energy builds were not as good an idea as they were on paper. Autocannons were quite useful at that point.

The Orion ON1-V is, well, a little hazardous to use due to trading armor for weapons with more ammo. The ON1-K already has an issue with so much ammo-based weaponry, making it vulnerable to 'splosions. However, they are quite capable compared to Grasshopper GRH-5Hs; the extra armor matters. The earliest AC/10 with good value is an Enforcer ENF-4R or Centurion CN-9; one is maneuverable, the other is quite robust for its weight.

Lastly, concerning the spotting ranges? This is why you don't face-tank with your long-range units. If you are sending your Blackjack in first with its dual AC/2s it is going to take all the damage it is not necessarily made to take, and you're gonna have a bad time.

 

[LemurFromTheId]

Eh, it seems like medium mechs spot other mechs roughly at medium laser ranges so the range almost never seems useful, and if you backpedal and lock, something locks you and 15 different units poke at you with various long range weapons. Only in the rare map where you can position your mechs behind something and the enemy doesn't have a big pile or LRM tubes have I felt staying at range can work.

I do remember the big ticket AC-10's having some value in the later stages of the campaign because the Orions I found. Not as strong as the Grasshopper that mounts 12 different lasers or something, though.

What I find suprising is the love for AC5. Why? With the weigh difference a L laser would be even more heat efficient, or more likely you could have much more firepower.

I've yet to come across a map where I can't use range to my advantage. Obivously if your playstyle is such that long weapon range brings no benefit, then AC/5 is not the weapon for you, but this certainly isn't the case for every player out there. I daresay that most players will mix short-range and long-range mechs so that the former will act as spotters for the latter.

As for LL's supposed superiority...

AC/5 (45-55 damage) with 1 ton of ammo and 3 heat sinks weighs 12 tons and actually loses one heat per round of firing. Theoretical heat-neutral weight would be 11.67 tons.

LL (40-50 damage) with 6 heat sinks weighs 11 tons and is heat-neutral.

Therefore, AC/5 deals 10%-12.5% more damage for 6% more heat-compensated weight - but it also deals stability damage* and has longer reach. To counter this the LL has the innate accuracy bonus.

So... which is better? The real answer: it depends -[Mod edit: personally focused]one is somehow significantly superior to the other one overall. Personally I like to combine them both whenever it makes sense.


(*: Every mech, if at all feasible, should have at least one source of stability damage, no matter how small. Even a single point can know down a mech that has been brought to full instability directly from stable status.)

 

[Nakkivene]

Well, a couple things.

You don't always get the option for Large Lasers in place of an AC/5 - the Dragon DRG-1N can't swap it for one or a PPC, without using up one of the Medium Laser mounts. Furthermore, the issues with heat build becomes a consideration when you're dropping in hot biomes. Which for me seemed to be rather common, meaning heat-heavy energy builds were not as good an idea as they were on paper. Autocannons were quite useful at that point.

Lastly, concerning the spotting ranges? This is why you don't face-tank with your long-range units. If you are sending your Blackjack in first with its dual AC/2s it is going to take all the damage it is not necessarily made to take, and you're gonna have a bad time.

Especially if you go with stock builds, who are all about the AC's!

The spotter is dead if all your other guys do is pepper afar from weak weapons, really. I think the typical battle is against 8-12 units, right? And a large amount of drops put you in the worst spot in the map, or are shaped like these concave bowls with only a few little rocks here and there. Even if all he does is bracing the amount of shots that rain from everywhere is too much. In these missions it's necessary to kill whatever gains sight on you as fast as possible, or sometimes go after the tanks with their massive LRM tubes.

(OT : Yay, I found a Hunchback finally and the campaign became so much easier!)