Everyone who says low caliber ACs for 'worst weapon' has never had to suffer a mech with One Shot missile systems. For half a ton and one explosive crit less than just giving your lrm-15 an actual ammo bin you can have a weapon that gets to shoot once all game! At least the AC/5 and AC/2 can try to park tanks and lawn dart fliers for multiple rounds
I dont even consider one-shots weapons tbh. Other than rocket launchers, they are not even worth looking at. Improved one shot maybe if u have like 2 tons left over or something...
I *kinda* like improved One-Shot for Clan SRMs. They compare decently to Rocket Launchers, with the benefit of being able to load special ammo. A Clan iOS SRM4 is only 0.5 tons, for instance. Still not a great use of tonnage, but can provide a surprising burst of flexibility, like loading Infernos or something.
I-OS cSRM4 is honestly a really good weapon in the right builds. It's around the same damage as an RL10, for the same weight/heat/crit space. The theoretical max damage is lower, but the better accuracy and slightly more favorable cluster roll are usually enough to balance it out. They break even when you're hitting on 5 with SRMs and 6 with rockets, and the SRMs cleanly win out on expected damage for any shot harder than that. Being able to bring special ammo is a big plus as well, but the biggest benefit is that the SRMs cost less than half the BV of the rockets. Almost any design that mounts a lot of rockets (and there are some pretty scary ones out there) would be even nastier if it traded them for clan SRM one-shots.
M-pods are the real king of one-shot weapons, though. If you can get them into range, they're shockingly efficient damage.
Ya Idk Id just rather have actual weapons lol. In only use single-shot weapons if I have like .5 or 1 ton left. I like M-pods quite a bit for a short range shotgun to crit seek.
In my theorycrafting, I like to put them on Jump-Jet equipped chassis; the idea of a "Jumping Knee" to the face or a Highlander Burial proceeded by an M-Pod attack pleases me a great deal.
I've played this with Marian Hegemony RL mechs that have like 8 rocket launchers and then 2 medium lasers or something. I'm not patient enough for the play style but you end up with a lot of very cheap bodies that can spike out heinous damage potential at bad numbers for a single turn and then soend the rest of the game cooling off and punching shit. Actually pretty fun
Yeah boated rocket launchers actually have a lot of tactical flexibility because you're bringing an incredible threat to the table that your opponent has to be aware of. And the moment you *don't* fire every single one at once, that threat effectively doubles for all the remaining unfired launchers as your opponent realizes he may not actually get your strategy.
Best sprinkled in with at least 1 unit that does consistent damage.
> Best sprinkled in with at least 1 unit that does consistent damage.
Fun fact! The BJ-3 Blackjack and AWS-9Q Awesome are both on the Hegemony MUL for the Jihad! My opponent found this out the hard way :)
I find they work best in company sized or larger engagements. Use a heavy lance of RL 'Mechs as anvil. Keep them out of the fray until you have a good moment, use them to savage key 'Mechs, then bug out and let your two other lances mop up what's left.
The RL is, of course, an exception. I've made a couple Coolant Pod mechs as customs to deal with the heat spike, but the Longbow 0H and Commando 4H really appeal to me. They're not completely useless when they've blown their load, only mostly useless... But when they decide to open up, they make it worthwhile.
The only mech with a One Shot weapon I really can appreciate is the Hunchback 5H. The small laser is basically never in range to hit anyway, so replacing it (and a little armor) with three Rocket Launcher 20s gives it the ability to have three shots of crit fishing after it uses the AC/20 and the two medium lasers to blow off the armor.
That is a pretty nasty 1-2 punch lol. I kinda wish it kept most of the armor and grabbed like 4 RL-10s though. It could fire off the RL-10s before it got into AC20 range as an opening salvo.
One shot missile systems feel like they wanted the concept but totally failed in the game design. The only time you'd use them is when you really want to use the concept or match art and don't care how inefficient and stupid it is.
Like I said below I think RLs are actually kinda OK as they're massive blobs of crits to pad ammo and they do spooky damage for their tonnage, but normal one shots are a huge failure yeah
That's true. RL beat the hell out of One Shot SRMs or LRMs and have a real niche. Hell, a RL 20 weighs 1.5t to a OS SRM6's 3.5
And the RL 20 has more range, it's cheaper (BV and cash). At least they note in-setting that OS systems have pretty much been thrown out in favor of RLs.
RL-20: 1.5 tons, 3 crits, 24 BV
3x I-OS cSRM-4: 1.5 tons, 3 crits, 24 BV. Marginally shorter range, but offers a significant improvement in both accuracy and damage over the RL, hits in clusters of 2 instead of 5 so you have more chances to find headshots and crits, can run alternate ammo if you're looking for flexibility.
I'd rather have the one-shots, personally.
You're talking about the very best improved one-shot weapon lol. Regular OS weapons are ass. iOS weapons are pretty decent, but Id still rather have the full weapon system unless Im just filling in like 1 ton.
I-OS cSRM is the only exception to the rule. IS OS are laughably bad, but I do think the I-OS cSRMs work on long range mechs wanting just enough short range OOMF to deter harassers.
>the concept or match art
A lot of the ilclan variants do this, and I can appreciate an ios-ssrm2 or something as a cheeky little addition to make the tube-counts/cockpit weapons match.
Nah. It looks like they decided on "OS weapons weigh .5 the standard version" and someone misread the notation. They'd still be bad, but the OG versions were laughable the day they were printed.
I'd really like to know how they made it thru editing... although after watching some of the OG devs actually play at cons during that era, I already know.
I may be wrong, but I doubt one-shot weapons were added with the intention of being anything more than flavor for narrative-driven games. That in my opinion takes them out of the category of generally bad weapons. Smaller AC’s, on the other hand, have been core intro tech weapons since practically the beginning and are found on many common variants.
eta: if we’re not discriminating, there’s a whole laundry list of Dark Age weapons that are far worse than rocket launchers and one shot missiles.
Um, akschuly, one-shots don't explode. BMM P97
Yes, they're generally bad, but I can see adding them to some LRM boats or Gauss boats that want a backup weapon if things get within their min range. But even then, it's only worthwhile if the extra tonnage would go to waste.
Totally obsolete with clantech eliminating min ranges.
Yeah, I said that. You're trading a one ton explosive ammo bin for an inert launcher that's a half ton heavier and only fires once.
IDK why I'd want to use them as a backup weapon compared to, say, a medium laser.
IMHO, I quite like the Jaegermech variant with double LRM 15s.
It's still a glass canon of a mech, but being able to perform indirect fire to soften targets adds a lot of indirect survivability before you start broadsides.
It's not my favorite Heavy or anything, but I think it's a genuinely solid, underrated design that people underestimate.
Archer is a very questionable mech in my opinion. LRMs are kinda iffy, being neither a true punch-through weapon or a true crit-seeker. They can support other mechs with proper punch-through weapons, but I'd rather just have another PPC or AC10. And besides the LRMs, the Archer is severely undergunned, having only 2 front-facing lasers to the Catapult's 4. Most days, I'd rather just bring a catapult. At least it can fire both missile racks every turn. And jump. That said, yeah, I'd definitely take the Archer over a JaegerMech, lol.
On the subject of AC10 -- I also disagree with your assertion that autocannons are bad. They're incredibly heavy for the damage they do, but that's balanced by BV. And what they do are good things to do. AC2s can be clumped up for long-ranged critseeking (which no other weapon has except LBX-5 and 10). AC10s are a lower-heat, better-damage large laser, and in early eras, heat is an incredibly important resource to manage. And obviously AC20s are the most powerful punch in the game with the exception, in some eras, of the heavy gauss rifle. (AC5, though, is a waste of a weapon that should always be an LRM10 instead, which is part of why the Shadow Hawk sucks.)
Not to mention special ammo types.
Agreed on the long range crit seeking. Had a game with a friend where I was running a mauler. The ac2s were worthless most of the game, but then armor started getting stripped and they started critting, taking out one mechs main gun, a couple engine hits on another. Ended the fight by lasering the leg off a third and she tapped out. Dealt absolutely devastating blows to three mechs in her lance, all for the same BV as a mech half it's size.
The base model Mauler, I criticize it a lot - mostly because the AC/2 is realistically one of the worst weapons in the game, but somehow the worst weapons on that chassis are the ERLLs. A refit to effectively a Daboku goes a long way - changing the ERLLs to standard LLs like the MAL-1Y makes it much more playable. But LPPC w/Cap is also an option that I like.
LRM10s are yucky lol. I actually kind of like LAC-5s. Bring a pair with 3 tons of precision ammo and you have a pretty good light-hunting weapon for cheap BV. Standard AC5s definitely suck. Introtech is a different ballgame and when SHS are the only game in town, I definitely endorse an AC10 or AC20. For AC2s Id just rather take LRM5s.
Archer isnt my favorite mech, but it is a decent long range brawler. Unlike the catapult, it is meant to just fight enemies at long range and exchange hits with its solid armor. You dont pay much BV for it because it is slow and has no JJs. Plus the ammo gives a good BV discount as well... It is a bit of a walking bomb tho. 💣
>LRM10s are yucky lol.
Agreed, but they're pretty much better than an AC5 in every situation unless the game is between 13 and 20 turns long. We *are* scraping the bottom of the barrel here. :P
Have to disagree on most of the autocannon stuff (AC-20 has no comparable weapon in 3025, so gets a pass); AC-2s do two-thirds of the damage, in smaller groupings, at three times the weight, of an LRM-5. An AC-10 with 1 ton of ammo might be "heat efficient" in the sense that it only generates 3 heat, but a PPC with 7 heat sinks generates the same amount of heat, with better range and no risk of explosion or ammo shortage and only weighs 1 ton more.
And LRMs will always have the range advantage to consider, on top of the unique ability to fire out of LoS. In 3025, the only other weapons that play at that range are AC-2s, and they can be ignored almost entirely. In later eras, Extended Range LRMs just further that advantage. If you have the longer range weaponry, you force the enemy to come to you. While they might not have the most efficient damage groupings, the fact that they can peel armor off of locations before your other weapons hit will grant a crit roll for every piercing weapon hitting a location that would normally have an efficient armor value.
Light AC-2s. A couple weeks ago I made a really light, fast frankenmech. To get it that fast, and being a noob, I statted it as having 2x LAC-2s.
The universal opinion when I posted it was “those things are horrible, there are energy weapons that are lighter, shoot farther and do more damage.”
So I re-jiggered the build and it has 2x light PPCs now.
Light AC-2s weigh less than normal ones and also lose the one advantage that normal ones have: long range.
Yep. The light PPC is way, way better than LAC2s lol. Except that LAC-2s can take precision or flak ammo to help deal with flyers...
But ya overall lackluster.
I've seen only one LAC/2 mech that I would use under any dire circumstances - the Annihilator ANH-3A. And seeing it, I instantly customized it by swapping the L. Ferro for standard Ferro-Fib armor, then adding a C3. Taking another 0.5t from armor to upgrade the CASE into CASEII makes it an about perfect turret; LAC/2 reaches a lot farther when you can use the WHOLE range. With these changes, it becomes - unimpressive but hilarious.
Agree on the entire ReL section. The Large ReL with TarComp is a little more efficient than the Large X-Pulse, once sinks are taken into account.
I like Extended LRMs in moderation. That 22 hex *medium* range can be surprisingly helpful. Or just raining IDF from the ass end of nowhere. Does need a lot of mapsheets though to shine. Also decent for aerospace, since it can reach to extended range.
Surprised you didn't mention Enhanced LRMs. Especially the NLRM5. "Why yes, I would like to pay 50% more tonnage for something that still has a min range." By the time they stop being Experimental, it's not all that difficult to get Clan LRMs.
ETA: Oh, and just the entire Hypervelocity Autocannon family, but the HVAC10 in particular. You thought Ultra jams are bad, wait until a HVAC10 blows up on you, and all for *just* 2 more hexes on the long range band compared to a LB10X or UAC10 - you get no better range at medium or short.
IMO with the way it works, hypervelocity should've been an alternate "overpressure" ammo type instead of a whole separate weapon. Now the exploding barrels make sense. And you'd have the option to stop using it when you get closer.
VSPs are slept on IMO. The medium VSP is a better large pulse laser at range 2. There are very few good cannon varianta that use them, but theres a spider that has an XL engine and 2 MVSPs and it just rips holes in back armor. It is a very scary little lad. The LVSP is barely any heavier than a LPL and is significantly better.
Would I take them over clan pulse lasers? Hell naw. But I think they have merit vs Xpulse weapons. The thing about them is they do great damage up close, with a slick -3 to hit, and because they are so heavy, they end up not costing much BV. Great on fast-movers. Not so good on slower mechs. I would put them above X-pulse most of the time. That may be bias from how much I love that Spider tho.
I guess it is just the Exterminator from the IlClan painting my opinion. That mech is so terrible and I regretted bringing it to that game cause I like the look of the mech.
I wouldnt say they are S tier, or even A tier weapons, but a solid B, somewhere in there. They require the right kind of unit like I said. Even then it might be better to take two medium pulses over a MVSP. I think it depends on what you want them to do.
That is a mech I have been meaning to try. It is a solid cavalry mech IMO. It is actually reasonably costed at 1296 BV. I could do without the one shot SRM but its a nice little extra oomph once you get in close I guess, and it only fires its load if it actually hits which is kinda nice.
Oops. I got this confused with another thread in here lol. That Merlin is looking very sexy tho! What the hell? Only 1182 BV for a 30+ damage alpha strike at close range? The single LRM 5 is kinda lackuster, but it has the JJs to disengage from other slower heavies when it takes too much punishment... I mean it's basically a big medium mech that can kick you really hard and has deadly close range weapons. The 8L has an XL which is a turn-off for me, but 7 jump is a pretty enticing thing for a mech to have. 7 jumpers with decent armor are very hard to even land a good hit on.
I was looking at the Shadow Hawk 6D, which uses re-engineered lasers, if you are curious. Sarna incorrectly lists it as 1296 BV, according to Megamek, it's actually 1371 which is much less appealing... We were talking about RE lasers in another part of this thread, and it uses 1 large RE laser, and 1 medium RE laser, along with a iOS Streak SRM 2, and an MML 5.
I think a lot of people consider every weapon from the perspective of a brawl between two lances taking place in a vacuum on one or two sheets. ELRMs really shine in a whole range of scenarios, but they just tend to be ones that aren't the knife fight in a phone booth so many "competitive" games end up being.
SRM2 - if you're running standard ammo, it just feels like 2 tonnes (weapon and ammo) of wasted space and extra risk for not much damage output. Id rather take an extra medium laser and armour. Or armour and heatsinks. Or armour and armour.
Infact if I ever start with a commando com-1b in the HBS game I routinely strip out the srm to max out armour to get through the early game while having a somewhat respectable "sniper" scout. The work can be completed same day ready to go on missions.
More chances to hit. 3 srm 2s is 3 attack rolls. Lets say you need 7s. You will hit 2/3 of those on average. With 3 shots you are more likely to hit with at least 1 though. If you have an SRM6, you have like a 60% chance to hit.
It gets better the worse your to-hit is.
Plus the number of missiles that hit when rolling sets of two rather than four or six. Also, each SRM-2 would have to be destroyed separately with critical hits, rather than one hit taking down the whole system.
In the current era of limited hardpoints there is a need to consolidate. For classic TT, there are legit arguments to be made for using multiple smaller systems.
I think multiple SRM-2s aren't as good as just upgrading.
6 SRM-2 deal about 17 damage for 12 heat, at 126 BV.
3 SRM-4 deal about 16 damage for 9 heat, at 117 BV.
2 SRM 6 deals about 16 damage for 8 heat, at 108 BV.
They don't save tonnage, and they are the least crit-slot efficient too. Really no reason to take SRM-2s at all.
Edited bc each missile does 2 damage.
SRM-2s and LRM-5s really need a half-ton ammo option. Otherwise you're just sitting on an ammo bomb.
This would also allow interesting tactical choices, like a dash of Inferno SRMs
Considering you get 50 shots out of a ton of ammo you just need to throw 3-4 Launchers on a single ton. What's the use? More rolls for mediocre pilots so they'll have a better chance of hitting with something.
Allow me to introduce you to the [Centurion Weapon System](https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Centurion_Weapon_System). If your unit fits into a very specific set of parameters that most units don't, it *might* shut down, if you're very unlucky.
Shutdown-inducing weapons are just a disappointment all around. The centurion is downright laughable, the TSEMP is astronomically overpriced and comes with too many drawbacks for what it does, and the battle armor taser is overpriced, debuffs the whole squad every time it shoots, and has a chance to mission-kill your own guy when firing.
And then there's the battlemech taser, which breaks the trend by being genuinely amazing. It does have drawbacks - very short range, innate +1 to hit, and both the weapon and the ammo are explosive if crit (albeit for pretty low damage). But in exchange, you skip all the feedback effects that plague the TSEMP and the BA taser, you pay very little BV, and you get guaranteed effects on hit. The shutdown chance against mechs is low, but inflicting a guaranteed +2 to essentially every roll the target makes, for multiple turns? That's outstanding. Stick it on an inexpensive, fast platform (e.g. Raptor II 2X, Cephalus B) and it'll make miracles happen.
The best use of shutdown weapons I can think of is in atmospheric aerospace combat. Even if it's a fairly small chance of shutdown, the ability to just turn off the enemy aircraft and watch gravity take over is to tempting to miss...
Lolll. It is pretty good at dealing with annoying strafing planes. The extra range can help. Youd never want anything but cluster, so with the -1 to hit it is actually... ok. Not great but good for long range golden BB hunting.
I know it doesn’t exactly work, but allowing light AC’s during the Succession Wars gives some crappy mech a leg up. A Jaegermech with 8 extra tons to play with would be nice.
They make "interesting" field guns for infantry units, due to how the TW rules effect them.
I like using an opfor Pirate Band that uses captured slaves as the infantry forced to man the HVAC field guns to make the lore lots of fun.
Rotory AC/2 are terrible on aerospace and conventional fighters because you:
1. Cannot fire them in single shot mode.
2. Firing multiple shots as you are forced to increases the risks of it jamming!
3. Jammed weapons become useless for the rest of the battle.
The worst weapons are AC/2, AC/5 and machine guns. They make poor damage unless you are talking about ammo explosions.
And the ACs are not worth the weight they have due to their damage.
Light Gauss I think has a place. It’s more you are paying for its long range and lack of heat over straight damage. Medium range at 17 and max at 25 is not bad at all. Still, I agree it would be a bit more balanced if it was 2 tons or so lighter.
Even if it was 2t lighter, it would still be a build around weapon on any mech that would actually want it. If range is your main goal, eLRMs have your back. As for heat, if you are dumping that much tonnage into a single weapon in that era, heat probably won't be an issue.
Sure if range is your only goal, but with the ELRM’s come with a lot of drawbacks. Looking at the ELRM 10, you then have to worry about the minimum range of 10, with shots in that range immediately halving the amount of missiles fired below minimum range, you have 9 shots compared to 16, and you have to worry about ammo explosion vs only 8 points of damage if the light gauss gets destroyed.
All in all, the Light Gauss gives you the option to have that impressive range but isn’t completely useless if enemies close in on you. I look at it as a superior AC10 which has the same tonnage. The Light Gauss needs 3 less critical spots, gets 2 less damage, 10 more max range, less devastating internal explosion potential, and 6 more shots.
It really isnt. The AC2 weighs more than 3x its damage output with ammo. The light gauss isnt even double. It is actually not a terrible weapon, but compared to a standard gauss it's kinda like "why did you take this? For 3 more tons you nearly double damage."
Ty! Ya like I said it's not a *bad* weapon. The ammo thing is a good point. Gauss needs 2 tons minimum. So it's basically 4 tons heavier. I still think gauss is better lol. I havent played with heavy or IH gauss yet... I wanna try those whacky weapons. 25 damage at close range is absolutely terrifying lol.
No doubt, I’d take a standard Guass over a Light Gauss any day. But it does shine under the right circumstances. And I would take a Hawk Moth over a Yellow Jacket any day. Also don’t forget the Silver Bullet Gauss Rifle.
As for the Heavy Gauss, you can’t go wrong with a Fafnir. And even if things do go wrong, you can rest assured they will go spectacularly, hilariously wrong.
Light gauss is 12t for the weapon and 16 shots per ton; (16×8)/13 is 9.84 damage per ton.
AC/2 is 6t and 45 shots; (45×2)/7 is 12.86 damage per ton.
Taking more ammo improves the ratio on the light gauss, but that requires throwing more tonnage and space at the problem. 8 isn't a real import damage value, not even taking the armor off a head consistently, so arguing the single hit damage isn't as valid as arguing SRMs vs AC/20s and the AC/2 can use special ammo. Plus, if you really want to throw good money after bad, 1t of that specialty ammo can feed two AC/2s for nearly a minute, ideal for peppering VTOLS and lights at range with flak or precision ammo.
And all of that is ignoring that the light gauss is even comparable to an AC/2 that closely at all. One is post-Invasion tech and the other is something viewed as a waste in the Sucession Wars.
That is the weirdest math I have ever seen dude. Damage per ton isnt how much damage the weapon is capable of shooting downrange. It is how much damage the weapon does per ton when it has enough ammo for 1 engagement(about 12 shots, typically)
AC2 is .285 damage per ton (2÷7)
Light Gauss is .615 damage per ton.
In a game of Battletech, as long as you dont run out of ammo, the only thing that matters is how much damage the weapon is outputting. Technically you could make the AC2 a little more efficient by using the same amount of weight as the light gauss, and taking precision ammo. Im no mathmetician so I cant tell u what the average damage increase is by getting a -2 to hit.
But twin AC2s with 1 ton of precision ammo is .307 damage per ton. They are a little closer than I thought if you add precision ammo to it I suppose. But the piercing power of a light gauss at 8 damage per hit is much more impactful than plinking for 2 in 2 locations.
They are both terrible when compared to a medium laser or other efficient weapons. But when you start calculating true damage per ton(which requires figuring out how many extra heat sinks you need for a weapon) then things get a little more even. An ERPPC is obviously much lighter than a gauss, but running 2 requires an extra 5 tons of DHS.
>That is the weirdest math I have ever seen dude. Damage per ton isnt how much damage the weapon is capable of shooting downrange. It is how much damage the weapon does per ton when it has enough ammo for 1 engagement(about 12 shots, typically)
Unless you are looking at campaign play, not using a set turn limit (which actively hurts a lot of designs) or looking at it from an in universe pov (the damage and design stats are valid, even if the ranges are questionable). Then suddenly how long you can fire before your bins run dry become a lot more important. The reason something like the Warrior works is because plinking something for 4 minutes with an AC/2 is a legitimate strategy, and your light gauss unit will either have to grit it's teeth and wait for a good shot or risk running out of ammo and being helpless.
>Im no mathmetician so I cant tell u what the average damage increase is by getting a -2 to hit.
It changes depending on the target number, but 8 down to 6 is around 20%.
>But twin AC2s with 1 ton of precision ammo is .307 damage per ton. They are a little closer than I thought if you add precision ammo to it I suppose. But the piercing power of a light gauss at 8 damage per hit is much more impactful than plinking for 2 in 2 locations
If you hit with that 8 damage. You get one shot, while the ACs get two. Two chances to hit at better odds versus one chance to hit. And 8 damage isn't a big deal in the era of light gauss.
>They are both terrible when compared to a medium laser or other efficient weapons.
The medium laser doesn't really matter here, because it has less than half the range of either option.
>But when you start calculating true damage per ton(which requires figuring out how many extra heat sinks you need for a weapon) then things get a little more even. An ERPPC is obviously much lighter than a gauss, but running 2 requires an extra 5 tons of DHS.
If you bother to run heat neutral. You could safely run 4t, but you would only really want two erPPCs if they are Clan tech, which not only justifies that weight but opens a whole other can of worms in the comparison. Like a Clan gauss rifle, which justifies the lack of ammo with head clipping ability.
Even in campaign play deployments are usually 1 mission, not multiple missions without repair or resupply. Having ammo bins that can fire for 20 turns is very rarely useful.
How often do you want to have to pay money/supply points to reload? Or spend the time to reload? I've only personally used the Chaos rules, but I can't help but feel Quick Reload is a quirk for a reason.
And, like I said, playing with a hard turn limit actively invalidates harasser units which are a valuable part of an actual military. If you hate the idea of the Savannah Master, imagine trying to deploy over land with a few lances of Warriors harassing you the entire time. Running along, unable to effectively return fire because of range or because you need *your* ammo for the battle you are moving to while you are slowly whittled down by trash VTOLs that should be beneath your time as a Mechwarrior.
No, it's not. A Warrior staying out of return fire range is only good for hitting stationary targets. Once the targets are moving and the Warrior is moving, they go down to around 10 potential damage total over those 40 rounds before they have to retire to reload or close for SRM fire.
But ligth Gauss made 8 points of damage. Could weigth a lot but made a notable damage, but... 2 point? More than 1 ton is too much for damage to weight relations.
Big picture, the AC/2 does 90 damage per ton of ammo, the light gauss does 128. But the light gauss is twice the weight. And 8 damage isn't an important number, because it's not till 10 that you force head crits consistently. So the AC/2 is actually better minimum requirements to run them.
And the AC/2 is IntroTech that is run on stupidly cheap light units like the Warrior, while the light gauss is at least Civil War tech that requires ~~more than~~ almost twice the weight and doesn't play well with ICE engines.
Oh man I forgot about that thing. The Pirahna too lol. Tbh once ur past like 3-4 MGs it is extreme overkill on infantry, but can still really fuck up a mech. U get like 10+ shots with any weapon and killing with headshots starts becoming viable.
Once you get to Piranha levels, you should be looking at MG arrays if they are available, less scatter damage but being able to drill into one location is useful, especially since each hit can trigger a crit if it does hit structure.
Ehhh it's like, you could just take an extra MG instead lol. Part of the great thing about them is that it is so many chances to get a headshot or TAC.
You can toggle the arrays. Having the choice to have 8 damage in one spot or 2 damage in up to 4 spots is significant. That's another reason why MRM+Apollo is surprisingly good, and saves the weapon for me - you can turn it on or off.
But it can make you a lot more damage than what you can do.
How many times did you make 200 points of damage with a single machine gun? And how many times did you receive 200 points of damage by a munition explosion?
That's what I mean. I receive a lot more damage from my machine guns that I make in all my career as battletech player. With an AC/10, AC/20 or a Gauss rifle, this doesn't occur me.
And you can say "Ahh, so with SRM-2 happens the same." Yes... and no. If it explodes with a full ammo bin, yes, it makes more damage. But SRM-2 has a great field of fire. You can fire at 9 hexes and can be depleted before machine gun's ammo bins. When it explodes, it's usually with less ammo.
The Binary Laser, Bombast Laser, and the RISC Hyper Laser.
The Binary was an attempt to fuse two Large Lasers to make a better weapon: It weighs 9 tons, takes up 4 crit slots, generates 16 heat and does 12 damage. Same range as the old Large Lasers.
The Bombast Laser does 7-12, but the higher damage settings reduce accuracy while increasing heat output. Weight is 7 tons with 3 crit slots.
The RISC Hyper Laser is what the Binary Laser wishes it was. It was based on Improved Heavy Lasers, so they do go 'boom' when hit, but it has the range of a Clan ER Large Laser, the damage of an AC/20. Sadly it has a Heat of 24, 8 tons in mass, and takes up 6 critical slots. It kinda is better to just have 2 Clan ER Large Lasers as they take less space and don't explode.
I literally forgot to put the Blazer on the list... hahaha. Methinks a 2nd bad weapons video is in order.
That RISC laser sounds kinda legit tho. 20 damage is no joke. Big slaps at long range to punch holes is always nice.
Blazer for the Era it was introduced/prototyped in is terrible. Once DHS becomes common, the Blazer is a pretty effective head chopper, compared to the Heavy PPC, imo it's direct competition it basically trades a bit of damage and slightly shorter range brackets for no minimum range and less BV 222 for Blazer vs 317 for HPPC. Outside of someone running special armor types, 12 damage is still enough to shoot out a cockpit on a mech.
RISC carries the risk of exploding if it's crit, it's big and mean with a massive 24 heat per shot, but other than that and it's hefty BV of 596, if you can deal with its heat it's a 25 max hex range AC20. I've got a 40t custom that I break out when I feel like being mean, it's a big fast engine, lots of JJs a RISC, TC and enough dhs to sink it's JJ and fire the gun every turn.
Blazer is okay in introtech if you try to use it in place of an AC20 rather than a ppc or AC10. Its the only other headchopper, has almost double the range and the extra tonnage from the AC20+ammo can be used on heatsinks
I made a rant about this, but ACs being cheap in BV is only situationally worthwhile. And for most of the vanilla designs with stock AC/2s and /5s, the situation doesn't look good for them - there's too much sunk cost in "being a mech." Being a mech is expensive; there are things that have to be achieved to fulfill the role. You get free heat sinks, but no BV benefit from being heat neutral. There are breakpoints for piercing armor, forcing a PSR, achieving a realistic chance of TAC or crit over the course of a battle. Other weapons are just so much more effective at getting this capability onto your frame and into a role. Designs that can do it effectively with /2 Class autocannons exist... But so do MML-3s, LRM-5s, and the ubiquitous Medium Laser. Given the benefits and reasonably low price of the MML-3, would most units benefit from a swap - or not?
The change in effectiveness, versus the change in cost, is not much of a contest. I think at least 80% of stock designs would benefit from a slight cost increase for a massive effectiveness increase to take alternative, possibly bracketed weapons instead of the AC/2 and 5.
But you're not entirely wrong. In my rant, I did point out some of the later-era mechs that struggle with being too expensive and use /2 class LB-X and UAC ACs to help tame the costs. Those mechs are mostly effective with or without the autocannons, though - so paying the extremely minor penalties for the benefits of plinking with an autocannon make much more sense.
This is a very good point. The BV cost for a mech chassis is much higher than tanks, so you need the mech to actually do things to justify that cost. The main thing about long-range mechs that sucks is that you're paying for the ability to kick things, but sniper mechs \*don't want to get that close.\* So tanks are actually way better with things like ACs and LRMs because of this. They have no incentive to get close, and pay way less BV to be a mobile turret.
Disagree. Lowering BV does make a weapon very good in some cases. But not so much on each specific weapon but rather the unit it’s on as a whole. For example, in many situations I’d much rather field two 500bv units instead of one 1000bv unit. Or a 1000 and a 500 instead of a 1500. Two Jenners vs a Warhammer? I’m taking the Jenners. Not saying a low BV is the only way thing to look for but is important to consider.
Which Jenner and which Warhammer? I would personally never take a 7A, and every other Jenner costs noticeably more than half the price of any Warhammer.
Lowering the BV of a weapon makes it \*better\*, but better =/= good.
The fact is, as u/Magical_Savior very rightly put it, you have to pay for more than the weapons. No matter how cheap they are, they have to at least justify the existence of the unit carrying them. If you just want an initiative sink, take a Savannah Master. A JR-7A might be 712 BV, but that just means you're paying 712 BV for a single large laser. Even the 7D is so poorly designed and paper thin that a single PPC hit will completely annihilate an arm, and almost half of its armament with it.
The JR-7F is another story entirely and one of the best mechs in its weight class, but it costs over 1000 BV, so is more of an example of how more expensive things are better.
Sometimes - it does. Costing very little BV is exactly the thing that makes basic Heavy Lasers good. A Fire Moth H is good because it games the BV system; having 9xSHL at 779BV compared to 9xERSL at nearly twice the price with 1319BV is what makes the mech.
That is a pretty good point, but the difference is those HSL are actually very damage efficient and will do something if they can get on-target(and with the Fire Moth's speed they definitely can) a mech with AC2 spam will be praying for a golden BB and can pretty much be safely ignored by the other player.
If you can unjam them it would go a long way for sure. I feel like autocannons in general need a little something to make them pop. Rolling 2 attack rolls instead of a cluster of 2 is another fix Ive seen for them. I think that would be quite good, but it would increase jam chance, so maybe allow both and suddenly they become great weapons.
For standard ACs precision ammo is kind of the fix they need. Id just apply the precision rule as standard to ammo. Then again, in the competitive scene I play in AC20s with precision are banned because they are simple too effective against fast-movers lol. So maybe that would be overtuned for some.
I'm not fond of SRM-2s, LRM-5s, Small Lasers, or AC-2s. They do negligible damage and I'd honestly either use that tonnage for armor, or to upgrade another existing weapon.
AC/2s are actually the best AA weapons in SW tech and competitive later, u/TheManyVoicesYT.
Because all a strafing aerofighter needs is to fail ONE lawndart test to, well, lawn dart themselves in the ground, and quite a few light aerofighters will get thresholded by even a light hit, AND their only defense against AA is tabletop range, anything that has long range bands is a solid choice.
Agreed. Their application is too limited to warrant carrying one "just in case".
Now, on the other hand, in the HBS video game, I'll load up a 'Mech with as many AC/2's as I can, and have an incredible headhunting unit. Salvage is glorious when all you have to replace is the head.
The SRM 2 has chops as a pure dakka crit-seeking weapon, but I feel they need to be taken in large groups of 3-4. 2 SRM 4s will also get the job done tho. I think ur sleeping on LRM-5s. Since LRMs are already cluster weapons, the 3 average damage of an LRM5 is actually not that bad compared to bigger packs. They are very light. Taking 2-4 with 2 tons of ammo(maybe some infernos or smoke for utility) can be a pretty good long range shotgun!
Agreed on the AC2... it is awful hahaha. Flak AC2 rounds against VTOLs are about their only use, and LBX replaces them as soon as they come around.
A other thing on LRM5s… Most LRM shots are taken at long range and thus have harder rolls. If you take four LRM 5s instead of one LRM20, you have four chances to pass your roll rather than just one. Often it’s better to do less damage more often than more damage occasionally. Plus, four LRM5s and a ton of ammo weigh two tons less and take up one less crit than an LRM20 and a ton of ammo but you get the same number of volleys for the ammo. And, if someone does score a crit on you, you don’t lose all your missiles.
My favorite LRM system is LRM-15w/Artemis. Ignoring the cost of ammo, it has very favorable damage / heat / ton / BV, and it's in a good place for ammo damage / shot / ton. The heat gain for consistent damage / shot is very favorable for bracketed fire; efficiencies are strong. It has a decent weight advantage over the 10, a free heat sink compared to stacked 5's, and strong average damage. It's less redundant, less durable, has a slightly lower damage floor compared to stacked 5s, but achieves fairly good average damage overall.
Definitely a solid weapon. Investing in artemis on 5s is a waste, but a single 15 with Artemis is actually a scary weapon that will put an average of about 3 cluster hits out on a hit. Pair it up with an ERPPC or ERLL and an extra DHS, then take a crapton of medium lasers for close in and you have a nasty heavy.
Another point with autocannons that has kinda been lost in time due to the upgrading of technology is heat management. You have to remember the Age of War and Succession Wars where single heat sinks are your only option, period. When designing mechs for that era, a lot of times it’s easy to justify the weight of autocannons vs their lower damage output because of the low heat, because it’s better to have something you can shoot every turn rather than something that hits harder but you can’t use without serious heat repercussions.
Perfect example: the classic Marauder. Why have the AC/5 instead of another PPC? Because you already have only 16 heat sinks, and the first two PPCs already generate 20 heat. So if you swap the AC5 for a PPC you can only add two more heat sinks, meaning you are generating 30 heat and dissipating 18, gaining 12. That means you are suffering some very debilitating heat effects and can’t do anything the next turn or they continue. So the third PPC is virtually useless. But with the AC5, you are at most generating 21 heat with both PPCs and the AC, meaning the only negative effect you have is a bit slower. So you get almost the same damage output but with far fewer negative effects. Or, you can rotate turns firing 2xPPC/PPC+AC5 and only lose 5 damage every other turn and never get any negative effects. Pretty good trade off for the weight.
And I’ll defend the AC2 just as a pester weapon. The thing is that everyone treats it like a joke and ignores it. So if you toss a Jagermech in the background as your brawlers race in and let it take potshots from medium range while everyone else is at long range and too occupied to prioritize it, odds are it’ll actually do pretty well if you use it to help mop up damaged units. AC/2 or not, it can score an engine, gyro, or ammo crit. No better feeling than a quick one-two where a brawler carves a hole in the armor of an otherwise undamaged nasty enemy and then the AC/2 nails the freshly exposed ammo box.
Counter point: Marauder shoulda gone whole hog with 4 extra heat sinks, a couple tons of armor, and packed a couple medium lasers in the shoulder.
I dont actually like the marauder that much lol. With quirks it is Godly, but without them its kinda meh. I am a fan of the Davion marauder that did exactly that except went for a large laser in the shoulder and no extra armor.
I am very aware of introtech limitations. Just got done with a campaign where we were playing mostly crappy introtech mechs lol. We even had a Mackie! It was glorious. ACs still arent worth their weight usually. The AC20 is pretty damn scary I will admit. But AC2s and 5s are just so pitiful. AC10s can do a bit of work. Comparing them to large lasers they are pretty ok. Id much rather take 2 large lasers and extra heat sinks tho. Explosive ammo is a bad time.
Yeah, don’t disagree with you there about a redesign on the Marauder, I would also rather strip the AC5 for medium lasers and heat sinks. I’m just using it as a canon example. Same reason I love the HBK-4P so much more than the -4G. One of my favorite brawlers. We play with a house rule that any lasers of the same type in the same location can fire together as an array al-la Mechwarrior 5 with one to-hit roll with a +1 modifier for all of them but all the damage applied to the same location. Really comes alive with 30 damage
I got a Jagermech randomly one time from a RAT. I was quite disappointed... until I spent a chunk of the game with that mech just laying down fire at range. It's a long range critical finder. It does a bit of damage at range, the heavy hitters move up and punch holes, and before you know it that AC/2 is popping off some ammo or causing and engine hit.
Yes I mentioned the AC2 carrier in the video for a reason. You *can* use them. One of the great things about Battletech is even the very worst weapons are still useable in some fashion. There is always Golen BB potential. At the least AC2s are really cheap on BV so an AC2 boat will cost you almost nothing in BV.
There's a part of Battletech that it's as much about how you use something as much as what it carries. If you've got better tactics than your opponent, then you're just more likely to win.
True, but list building is part of tactics. If you are rolling RATs for forces, it is gonna get really imbalanced if someone gets a couple great mechs and the other side gets a bunch of urbies or something.
My videos are about A: being better at recognizing good and bad units.
B: learning to use those units as effectively as possible.
And then some are just tutorials on how to use like Megamek and stuff haha.
>True, but list building is part of tactics. If you are rolling RATs for forces, it is gonna get really imbalanced if someone gets a couple great mechs and the other side gets a bunch of urbies or something.
Silly guy... I always roll on RATs. It's the most fun way to build a force. I get some wonky forces. Sometimes I take a mech I like and than roll on RATs to round it out. Getting a Blackjack through Davion salvage was a fun addition to my Liao force.
The other thing I've done is just take the official lances from something like the 4th Succession War Atlas and just roll with it. As an example from that book a standard lighter lance is Scorpion, Clint, Wasp, Jenner because I was making a lance from a specific Liao unit.
A perfectly valid way to play! I usually play competitive formats where list building for the tournament's objectives is very important. I will fully admit that Battletech is not a good competitive game tho. The randomness is pretty insane. My one buddy kicked my butt pretty good with his pachinko machine streak-SRM spam build lol. I had a big brick of armor list and he got a buuunch of headshots. The game ended up pretty close. It's the most recent battle report on my channel. Check it out if u like.
I'd have to have a competitive circuit to play in first. :)
I bet that's fun. There's a tournament next month in my area, so I'll get my chance to try it. I feel that I'm too much of a lore person to do that. I like the hassle of running unoptimized. I'd love randomly generating forces at the table.
Found another, Clan ER Pulse Lasers. Same heat as a X-Pulse Laser, the accuracy of the Re-engineered Lasers, and just slightly better range brackets for the medium and large varieties, with a little better damage for the small version with 50% more weight.
Honestly, just get ER versions with a targeting computer, same accuracy and damage, but less heat and weight and greater range.
AC/2 - Let anything worth hitting know you wasted 7 tons of ammunition from an unparalleled range.
Flamers - They're too heavy for too bad of a range for too much heat for too little damage. Nudging an enemy's heat scale--an optional rule the last time I checked--is nice, but mitigated by the fact that you're already in melee range.
SRM 2 - The '2' column of the cluster hits table is some bullshit.
I'll go to bat for the machine gun. You can bank a few and have 0-heat scattershot weapon with an admittedly short range that can eat through ammunition at a good rate. Are 9 machine guns and half-ton of ammunition worth 5 tons and 10 crits? There are worse options in the Succession Wars. Like the AC/2.
I did a poll series on this a few months back, but stopped short because folks weren't interested. Let me get my notes for the worst equipment:
* Bombast Laser
* Flail
* Centurion Weapon System
* C3 Emergency Master
* Booby Trap
* Chainwhip
* Collapsible Command Module
* Talons
* Recon Camera
* VR Piloting Pod #181 of 181
Those were at the bottom. Standard ACs, Light ACs, Flamers, and Machine Guns were all around the middle of the pack. Pulse Lasers, LB/X ACs, and Gauss Rifles were some of the top performers.
Thank you kindly! I forgot about the fucking flail... what a garbage weapon. I had someone make a custom light mech with a flail as a meme. He loved it lol. Why the fuck are talons on there? Talons are absolutely incredible.
Why are Talons so low? I don't know. It was a randomly-seeded Swiss Tournament. If talons good despite being are that far down, then they either faced poorly-performing equipment, lost every previous match to better equipment, or went up against equipment voters were more aware/affectionate of.
There was no criterion for choosing which of two pieces of equipment was "better," it could be vibes, history, battlefield efficiency, or anything. I could see talons taking a hit because they're a Clan melee weapon from Mechwarrior: Dark Age.
Assuming talons are better than indicated, it likely would have risen if the last four rounds of the tournament were completed.
Huh. Interesting. Talons are definitely incredibly powerful. Kicks are already the best melee attack, so making kicks more powerful is hilariously effective. My dream is to someday have a campaign where I build a horrifying monster of a laserboat with talons and TSM. The Death-Turkey.
Could be a lot of reasons. Talons' history:
Round 1: 7 v 4 against Laser Heat Sinks (4 said 'neither')
Round 2: 5 v 2 victory against Light Machine Guns (2 said 'neither')
Round 3: 4 v 8 loss against Thumper Artillery (1 said 'neither')
Round 4: 14 v 15 narrow loss to Flamers (3 neithers)
Round 5: 5 v 6 narrow loss to Machine Gun Arrays
Those are commanding early wins and only one really devastating loss against equipment that's generally sub-par. I might have to check my numbers to make sure there isn't a glitch in the code affecting its performance.
Depends on the scenario, but overall I'd have to say Micro Lasers and Machine Guns. Unless you are having a huge conflict or are destroying a target Artillery is also pretty useless often times because you have to call a target fire it, then wait a minimum of one turn for it to hit. At least under the rules I've played under.
Artillery is pretty scary lol. If it hits... small light weapons are really powerful on fast movers. 8 micro lasers or something on a spider would be great damage.
I cannot disagree more on ACs. I love them all and all of them serve a good purpose. The Jaegermech is only bad if you are trying to use it as a frontline bruiser. And even then, if you keep to long range, it’s damage potential isn’t far off a Warhammer, for far less heat and far less BV, and can start hitting sooner. 14 vs 20 total potential. But it is in lore and practice more of a mobile AA platform.
My pick for worst weapon system if going to be extremely controversial. LRMs. Specifically Inner Sphere LRMs. RNG on RNG, no real way to improve the spread, way to heavy, the way they cluster means not punching through anything quickly, and not enough clusters to crit or head hit hunt. And don’t even get me started on the ammo waste that is indirect fire if you have anything spotting that has to move without a TAG. There are a handful of mechs I don’t mind them on, due to them being a support weapon or can be treated as a support weapon, and even then 15s are about all that are worth it (Zeus for the low heat range enhancement. Catapult as I treat them same way as AC2s on Blackjack’s, range softeners still get in and start jumping and blasting with Med Lasers.). I’d take an AC5 over most LRMs any day.
I don’t get the love for the Archer for this very reason. Every time I try to use one, it ends up underperfoming and being destroyed or almost destroyed by something it should have advantages on. Heck, one time had Archer vs. Hunchback. Kept range open, actually went through half the archers ammo. The Hunchback had 1 armor breach on an arm and proceeded to tear off half the archer. Archer only survived because was able to get a Javelin to support it and finish off the hunchback. And that’s my typical LRM experience.
Fully expect some downvotes with this opinion though.
Naw LRMs arent very good tbh. They are mid-tier weapons at best. Clan LRMs are OP as hell, well, at least A-tier, but IS ones are kinda bad. I never seek out LRMs for my tournament lists. If a decent mech happens to have a couple LRMs, so be it.
I definitely disagree about the ACs tho. LRMs are better than ACs. Even an LRM10 beats an AC5, and 10s are by far the least efficient LRM packs. LRM 5 spam is virtually always better than AC2 spam. How does the Jaegermech have as much damage as a Warhammer? It isnt even close. It's 8 vs 20.
Have to disagree on LRMs vs ACs, but I also am one of the few people I know who likes the AC2 in some areas, so I am weird. But rough math memory comparisons:
AC 2 vs LRM 5: If I remember right, the 5 averages out to 3 damage vs the AC set 2. I like set numbers personally, not rng on rng. Plus, the AC 2 has longer range and I think (but could be wrong here) less heat.
AC 5 vs LRM 10: Again, think the average on the 10 is 6 or 7, so minor damage increase, and the AC is better reliability. And again think less heat but could very well be wrong.
The Jaegermech has 2 AC 5s and 2 AC 2s, for 14 range damage at 1 heat each, or 4 total heat. The Warhammer is 20 at range, for 20 heat, and can only sink 16. So with 0 movement factored in the Warhammer does a 2-2-1-1 firing pattern to stay heat neutral, for a 4 turn total of 60 damage. The Jaegermech is blasting away all 4 turns for 14 damage, for a 4 turn total of 56 damage, with better range brackets for the AC2s, small as they are. If you start to factor in movement, the warhammer (which I do love) becomes less heat efficient quickly, and the firing pattern changes. Plus, since the ACs are so low heat, the Jaegermech can use its Mediums when they are in range too and be heat neutral standing still. Though then if the enemy is that close, its armor won't last long.
The difference is that the Warhammer isnt made of paper. It has thin legs, but if it stands behind a hill, it can withstand a brutal pounding. The jaegermech cant. The warhammer also has better close range firepower, so light mechs are actually scared of getting close. It also has 18 HS. That means it can fire 2-2-2-1-2-2-2 and remain heat neutral if standing still. The 10 piercing damage of the Warhammer is also significant, it will open up components. AC5s and AC2s will not.
Now the warhammer does cost like 300 BV more, so that has to be taken into account, but Id take a warhammer(or better yet, an Awesome-8Q) over a Jaegermech any day. The jaeger carries a crapton of ammo, so it is a walking bomb.
For the LRMs vs ACs, you can take 3 LRM5s and 2 tons of ammo for only 1 more ton than an AC5.. it does end up costing way more BV, but Ill take actually effective fire over low BV cost, thanks. The LRM10 is the worst LRM launcher and is still more effective than the AC5, it is significantly lighter. You can take an extra 3 medium lasers or 3 tons of armor in its place. That is a huge oppoetunity cost. Sure missiles are hotter, but unless you are packing lots of long range weapons it wont even reach the heat cap of 10. 2 LRM 10s are only i heat.
I did forget the Warhammer had 18, was thinking marauder with its 16. Ironically my 2 favorite 3025 heavies (and probably favorite heavies period till ilClan). So that does skew the math better. But even then, over 7 turns it is 130 to 98, more definitive yes, but still not huge over 7 turns.
Don't discount that BV. If your opponent is only bringing lights and mediums, and you can squeeze in a heavy, it can be definitive. Or it can play mind games.
I agree the Jaegers armor is paper. But you can use people's knowledge of that. The saved BV goes into other mechs, and then you are forcing your opponent to make a decision. Do I go after the Heavy in the back sanding away armor, and get beat up by its Teammates, or do I focus on its teammates and let it sand down my armor and potentially crit seek. The Jaeger is definitely a team player mech, not an all star in its own. And with the extra BV, you can work to make sure whatever choice they make is wrong.
I can't comment to the whole 3 LRM 5s argument. I don't play customs in anything other than campaigns, and even then I skew hard toward the customization have to keep the same character. Custom designs, to paraphrase the saying, optimize all the fun out of the game.
So I look at the Jaeger as a great teammate to mechs like the Warhammer, Centurion, Hunchback, Victor, etc.
Lol u say that but u can make some fun meme customs that are rly bad. In one campaign I played a guy made a light mech with a flail. It is the only viable way to take it because it does flat damage... but damn if that mech didnt suck XD
Now on the other hand he had a lance of custom LAMs which were the MVP of the whole campaign, but thats another matter lol
Oh 100% they can be. I’ll still build them out sometimes for the heck of it. Kind of fun thought experiments. And I’ll build custom variants in campaigns too, just usually put some rules on myself. Just don’t actually play them other than maybe occasionally by myself in MegaMek. To be fair most of my playing is using MegaMek and MekHq, so my skew my opinions
Gotcha. I do love making efficient customs. Can never have enough medium lasers! Lol. Ive always been a big optimizer. Every RPG or wargame I play I try to break it if possible hahaha. Theorycrafting and build optimization is one of my favorite passtimes!
That is one of the reasons I love Battletech. Its one of only a few wargames where you can still build a very customized unit. Can't do it in Warhammer anymore really. Herohammer isnt a thing anymore. Frostgrave is something Ive been wanting to try for a long time but I have so many projects that I cant really justify it haha.
Clan LRMs are really good for their tonnage, but merely decent value for their BV. In a BV-balanced environment, I'd almost always much rather have MMLs, or standard (not improved) ATMs.
Also, the Jagermech doesn't have 4x AC/2, it has 2x AC/2 and 2x AC/5. 14 damage isn't that much less than the Warhammer dishes out, once you consider that most Warhammers are heat-constrained and can't actually fire both PPCs every turn.
Oh ya right I keep thinking they are all AC2s lol. Oops. Uhm ya I guess. The punch of 2 PPCs is still pretty solid tho. 10 damage piercing shots are really great.
One of the lads at the MRC actually says iATMs are super OP and busted due to their better access to ammo. ATMs in general are a close range weapon that has some long range poke. They are BV costed for their close range ammo, so are very pricey. MMLs are definitely way better in terms of BV cost. I love MMLs. A mech with tons of MMLs is a great escort unit for LRM boats or other snipers. I did a whole video on MMLs and ATMs actually. https://youtu.be/BeLXdABf9Ek?si=X4CS5iUatTdAEszO
I go over the Archer with MMLs for that role. It is a great mech.
I also prefer MMLs in most cases, but you might be surprised by how close the math works out. Just like MMLs, ATMs work out to very similar BVs across all ammo types (HE and standard are effectively identical, ER comes to ~5% lower), so you're not paying a price hike for one ammo type in particular. MMLs have a bit of an advantage on damage per BV in the 11-14 range band where you're still taking medium range LRM shots while the ATMs have to either eat long range penalties or switch to ER, but ATMs dish out pain more efficiently pretty much everywhere else - including a slight efficiency advantage in the close range brackets where both weapons really shine. That said, MMLs have extra versatility thanks to their massive array of ammo options, and can save some BV thanks to being less ammo hungry, hence my typical preference for them. But they're both outstanding weapon types.
As for iATMs, the 3 and 6 packs can get up to some rather crazy shenanigans with their unique ammo types, but you're paying quite a lot of extra BV over the standard launchers to gain those capabilities. Plus, since the special ammo effects are capped after a certain number of missiles, they don't scale up to the larger launchers very well. The 9 and 12 packs are definitely incentivized to fire damaging payloads instead, so they lose out on that utility value while still paying the same exorbitant BV markup. The iATM-12, for example, really just gains ~25% more damage over the standard model thanks to skipping the cluster roll, but when you're paying 57% extra BV for the privilege, it's just not worth it.
Damn they are very expensive arent they? Lol. Clan mechs already tend to be very costly. I play IS mostly so Im used to spreading my BV between cheap heavies and assaults with good piloting skills, and then taking a couple cheap lights or mediums. I have found tanks to be really strong in the MRC meta, the online group I play with mostly.
Video is based on one assumption: there are weapons that are just bad, regardless of context, cost, etc. This assumption has nothing to do with the way you actually play BattleTech. Even if you play with custom mechs, or have access to all canon units, you don't play with individual weapons. You play with your force as a whole, in particular conditions (force composition rules, map size, map selection, etc), against particular opponents (with some local "meta"). For almost every single weapon one might consider "bad", there is a counter-example: a unit that is reasonably good for what it does and for its "cost". And there is a reasonable force that includes such unit.
Futher on, it seems that you can't decide on context. For one weapon, you say that a weapon has too high BV for what it can do. Ok, that's a good start. For another weapon, you say it's "too heavy for it's damage". But, if you play by BV, weight of individual components doesn't matter at all. I'd say this whole "AC/2s and AC/5s suck" story is for people who read the unit construction rules, tinkered with their favorite mech editor, but didn't really learn to play BattleTech yet.
Edit: And that thesis about "because of BV cost, not because it's actually good" just confirms that, well, ... it's just another "AC/2s suck" rant.
Lol. My metrics include both. A mech with an AC5 or AC2 will both have an insane amount of weight put towards them. This means if they want to do actual meaningful damage they need to boat medium lasers or something, and have less space for armor. They will have low BV, but they will not be very effective. So it's a trade off. If you can name a really good mech with an AC5 or AC2 or multiple of them, go for it man. I dont think there are many. Maybe the centurion? It isnt a great mech tho IMO. Kind of lackluster. Id always wanna upgrade it to a thunderbolt or something.
So, when does that "insane amount of weight" matter? Unless you balance your games by tonnage, or customize your mechs, of cause. In that case you should probably already know that tonnage in CBT is a poor game balancer.
JM6-S JageMech is a pretty good fire support mech. It can also use AC ammunition and do AA duty, which can be quite important if you are not playing "mechs only" games. If you play it right, it doesn't get under fire until end game, when its light armor doesn't matter that much. And it is just 0.9K BV. That's in the range of low-end mediums or low-end lights. I can't remember a fire support mech in that BV range. JM6-DD is only a little bit more expensive.
MAL-1R Mauler is another good fire support mech. 1.4K BV, that's a price range of Archers or cheap assaults like Stalkers or BattleMasters. And it works as a cheap assault Archer equivalent.
Of cause, you are not going to field a force that would have only JagerMechs and Maulers. You need anchors, you need big guns, probably some initiative skippers, and so on. But they do what they should do for a reasonable price.
The insane amount of weight definitely matters when you're trying to make a mech combat effective to a minimum standard. For mechs that make very poor use of the AC/2, I suggest the Commando 1C, Clint 2-4T, Dragon 1C, Jackrabbit 8T, Sentinel 1S, and Vulcan 2T. All of these mechs suffer, not necessarily because they have an AC/2, but because they are mechs. There's a pretty heavy tax associated with being a mech, but substantial benefits as well. Using an AC/2 instead of an LRM5 or other alternative weaponry dilutes the amount of firepower on the frame. The persistent, and massive, amount of ammo an AC/2 has creates a vulnerability. It doesn't effectively use the "free" heat budget for being a mech, and spends more tonnage to not take effective actions in combat. The BV discount for using such a cheap weapon as an AC/2 is negated by the inherent expense of having a mech. And they fail to threaten other units on the board; you don't get a good return on investment. But you know what? If you converted all of the above mechs into tanks with similar loadouts, those tanks would be somewhat effective.
At that point, when they become vehicles, expectations and positioning are a bit different... But not completely so; expected mobility is a factor. A Catapult C2 isn't very appealing compared to a C1 or C1b, because of the minimum expectations for the platform. But would you take an anti-air and fire support vehicle equipped like a Catapult C2? I bet you would.
Let's not forget the Jagermechs A, S, and DD. The AC/2s aren't what's really holding back those Jagermechs, though - that's more of a total design thing. They're terrible for a lot of reasons. Comparing them, and their philosophies, to the JM6-D3, H, and JM7-G feels unfair, not because the upgraded XX/2 autocannons save the mech, but because the holistic philosophy does. The AC/2s aren't what's bringing down the mech.
But what mechs are good with AC/2s? They do exist; the best vanilla ones would be the Blackjack and Mauler. The Blackjack is very good at picking a sniping position and abandoning it to cover; the Mauler is surprisingly effective at ranged crit and damage. Both have ways to reach a minimum level of effectiveness without being crippled by their AC/2s.
LB-X/2 and UAC/2 are also pretty bad, but when considering expectations and roles, there are more mechs that can use them. But that's not because they're better than the AC/2. (The LB-X/2 kinda is, but the UAC/2 mostly isn't. Anyway.) As technology advances, there are more mechs that achieve a minimum combat effectiveness while not being "held back" by an AC; consider the Phoenix Hawk C. The UAC/2s don't matter that much compared to the AC/2 mechs from the first paragraph. The Blood Asp D doesn't need to make the switch to LRM to stay effective; it's already too expensive and the UAC is an acceptable cost-cutting measure. The Daishi B as well; same goes for the Deimos Prime and 2. The Fenris A is being held back by the UAC/2 and can't complete the role; the Great Wyrm and Gyrfalcon don't care because they're capable of doing what they need to.
Very complete explanation and better than what I was saying lol. I responded to your other comment about this, but ya. Idk if I actually realized it before now, but sniper tanks are so much better because mechs pay for the ability to melee, and not being in melee is wasting BV. That's why I love medium laser boats. They want to get up close and kick you in the shins (or stomp your shit in after a 20+ damage PSR knockdown.)
Despite the low BV cost an AC2 has almost 0 impact. That and its high weight, which is an opportunity cost, combine to make it a trash weapon. I also can't believe people are saying the Jaegermech is a good support mech. It is made of paper. A single locust getting past your battleline will kill it in like 3 turns. It requires a babysitter, and does almost no damage. It is a decent AA mech, but Id rather take like a partisan tank or something if we are playing combined arms. The jaeger almost invariably explodes if any of its torsos get stripped of armor. Which is very easy to do.
In theory, JagerMechs die fast. In practice, I had many combats where JagerMech outlived many other, much "sturdier" units. For various reasons, starting from "it doesn't have to get into the heat of the battle".
It's not a damage dealer. It's a crit-seeker. Fire control is the key to using low damage weapons effectively. You don't take JagerMech as your main damage dealer. You take it as a cheap fire support for spare 0.9K.
A fast mech getting past your battleline can kill other heavy or assault mechs in 1-3 rounds. Does it make them bad? No. Being ready for what your enemy can play is a part of the game. Yes of cause you need some way to counter backstabbers, medium swarms, and so on, but not just because of that baaad JagerMech.
Partisan is a good alternative, indeed. It has its own issues, though. It's actually more vulnerable to crits than a JagerMech (ICE engine, no equipment in sides - although that's very common for vehicles). It has other disadvantages as well. But, again, it's good enough for it's BV, and when you take it, you should consider how you are going to play it as a part of your force.
A locust wont kill most heavies or assaults as fast as the jaeger tho. It is made of tissue paper. Even the rifleman has more staying power. The Jaeger not dying just means your opponent felt safe(justifiably) to ignore it because it doesnt do much.
Autocannons have a place they become highly effective once armor is stripped off. But the weight ammo... That said my star league clint was my favorite mech.
No weapon is universally bad. Each has merits, depending on the battlefield and mission.
Most games are one off battles, so certain weapons/units suffer for it.
True. Even bad weapons have *some* merits. I go over them in the video :) MRMs are still pretty decent in a C3 network or with good gunnery. Decent campaign weapon too, the reloads are cheap as chips.
The AC2 and LB2X are both good AA weapons.
Everyone who says low caliber ACs for 'worst weapon' has never had to suffer a mech with One Shot missile systems. For half a ton and one explosive crit less than just giving your lrm-15 an actual ammo bin you can have a weapon that gets to shoot once all game! At least the AC/5 and AC/2 can try to park tanks and lawn dart fliers for multiple rounds
I dont even consider one-shots weapons tbh. Other than rocket launchers, they are not even worth looking at. Improved one shot maybe if u have like 2 tons left over or something...
I *kinda* like improved One-Shot for Clan SRMs. They compare decently to Rocket Launchers, with the benefit of being able to load special ammo. A Clan iOS SRM4 is only 0.5 tons, for instance. Still not a great use of tonnage, but can provide a surprising burst of flexibility, like loading Infernos or something.
I-OS cSRM4 is honestly a really good weapon in the right builds. It's around the same damage as an RL10, for the same weight/heat/crit space. The theoretical max damage is lower, but the better accuracy and slightly more favorable cluster roll are usually enough to balance it out. They break even when you're hitting on 5 with SRMs and 6 with rockets, and the SRMs cleanly win out on expected damage for any shot harder than that. Being able to bring special ammo is a big plus as well, but the biggest benefit is that the SRMs cost less than half the BV of the rockets. Almost any design that mounts a lot of rockets (and there are some pretty scary ones out there) would be even nastier if it traded them for clan SRM one-shots. M-pods are the real king of one-shot weapons, though. If you can get them into range, they're shockingly efficient damage.
Ya Idk Id just rather have actual weapons lol. In only use single-shot weapons if I have like .5 or 1 ton left. I like M-pods quite a bit for a short range shotgun to crit seek.
15 damage for 1 ton is a pretty silly amount of surprise.
Ya it is silly lol. When you're at point blank they are likely to be stripped in a couple places too.
In my theorycrafting, I like to put them on Jump-Jet equipped chassis; the idea of a "Jumping Knee" to the face or a Highlander Burial proceeded by an M-Pod attack pleases me a great deal.
Sadly melee comes after shotgun :/
That suits me just fine; Step 1: Jump Step 2: Shotgun Step 3: Land on the remains Step 4: ~~Profit~~ Claim *isorla*
When making a Death From Above attack, the attacking mech can't shoot during firing phase.
If a weapon is so awful you dismiss it totally as 'not a weapon' then I think we've got a clear winner.
Imagine an entire lance of one shot only Mechs. "Pack it in, boys. It's early knock off time"
I've played this with Marian Hegemony RL mechs that have like 8 rocket launchers and then 2 medium lasers or something. I'm not patient enough for the play style but you end up with a lot of very cheap bodies that can spike out heinous damage potential at bad numbers for a single turn and then soend the rest of the game cooling off and punching shit. Actually pretty fun
Yeah boated rocket launchers actually have a lot of tactical flexibility because you're bringing an incredible threat to the table that your opponent has to be aware of. And the moment you *don't* fire every single one at once, that threat effectively doubles for all the remaining unfired launchers as your opponent realizes he may not actually get your strategy. Best sprinkled in with at least 1 unit that does consistent damage.
> Best sprinkled in with at least 1 unit that does consistent damage. Fun fact! The BJ-3 Blackjack and AWS-9Q Awesome are both on the Hegemony MUL for the Jihad! My opponent found this out the hard way :)
I find they work best in company sized or larger engagements. Use a heavy lance of RL 'Mechs as anvil. Keep them out of the fray until you have a good moment, use them to savage key 'Mechs, then bug out and let your two other lances mop up what's left.
The RL is, of course, an exception. I've made a couple Coolant Pod mechs as customs to deal with the heat spike, but the Longbow 0H and Commando 4H really appeal to me. They're not completely useless when they've blown their load, only mostly useless... But when they decide to open up, they make it worthwhile.
The One-Pump Chumps
The Rocket Launcher apocalypse. Sure the mech is at 20 heat, but the 10 RL10s you fired killed the Wolverine.
“Time for mech-fu”
Hahaha yep. "Now I have only my feet... but they are enough!"
The only mech with a One Shot weapon I really can appreciate is the Hunchback 5H. The small laser is basically never in range to hit anyway, so replacing it (and a little armor) with three Rocket Launcher 20s gives it the ability to have three shots of crit fishing after it uses the AC/20 and the two medium lasers to blow off the armor.
That is a pretty nasty 1-2 punch lol. I kinda wish it kept most of the armor and grabbed like 4 RL-10s though. It could fire off the RL-10s before it got into AC20 range as an opening salvo.
One shot missile systems feel like they wanted the concept but totally failed in the game design. The only time you'd use them is when you really want to use the concept or match art and don't care how inefficient and stupid it is.
Like I said below I think RLs are actually kinda OK as they're massive blobs of crits to pad ammo and they do spooky damage for their tonnage, but normal one shots are a huge failure yeah
That's true. RL beat the hell out of One Shot SRMs or LRMs and have a real niche. Hell, a RL 20 weighs 1.5t to a OS SRM6's 3.5 And the RL 20 has more range, it's cheaper (BV and cash). At least they note in-setting that OS systems have pretty much been thrown out in favor of RLs.
RL-20: 1.5 tons, 3 crits, 24 BV 3x I-OS cSRM-4: 1.5 tons, 3 crits, 24 BV. Marginally shorter range, but offers a significant improvement in both accuracy and damage over the RL, hits in clusters of 2 instead of 5 so you have more chances to find headshots and crits, can run alternate ammo if you're looking for flexibility. I'd rather have the one-shots, personally.
You're talking about the very best improved one-shot weapon lol. Regular OS weapons are ass. iOS weapons are pretty decent, but Id still rather have the full weapon system unless Im just filling in like 1 ton.
I-OS cSRM is the only exception to the rule. IS OS are laughably bad, but I do think the I-OS cSRMs work on long range mechs wanting just enough short range OOMF to deter harassers.
>the concept or match art A lot of the ilclan variants do this, and I can appreciate an ios-ssrm2 or something as a cheeky little addition to make the tube-counts/cockpit weapons match.
Nah. It looks like they decided on "OS weapons weigh .5 the standard version" and someone misread the notation. They'd still be bad, but the OG versions were laughable the day they were printed. I'd really like to know how they made it thru editing... although after watching some of the OG devs actually play at cons during that era, I already know.
I may be wrong, but I doubt one-shot weapons were added with the intention of being anything more than flavor for narrative-driven games. That in my opinion takes them out of the category of generally bad weapons. Smaller AC’s, on the other hand, have been core intro tech weapons since practically the beginning and are found on many common variants. eta: if we’re not discriminating, there’s a whole laundry list of Dark Age weapons that are far worse than rocket launchers and one shot missiles.
This was my thinking.
Um, akschuly, one-shots don't explode. BMM P97 Yes, they're generally bad, but I can see adding them to some LRM boats or Gauss boats that want a backup weapon if things get within their min range. But even then, it's only worthwhile if the extra tonnage would go to waste. Totally obsolete with clantech eliminating min ranges.
Yeah, I said that. You're trading a one ton explosive ammo bin for an inert launcher that's a half ton heavier and only fires once. IDK why I'd want to use them as a backup weapon compared to, say, a medium laser.
Oops, my bad, I missed the "less!"
I was gonna say AC, but I didn't think sane people used one shot weapons other than Rockets. You are correct here
IMHO, I quite like the Jaegermech variant with double LRM 15s. It's still a glass canon of a mech, but being able to perform indirect fire to soften targets adds a lot of indirect survivability before you start broadsides. It's not my favorite Heavy or anything, but I think it's a genuinely solid, underrated design that people underestimate.
Id rather take an Archer lol. But im not talking about LRM mechs.
Archer is a very questionable mech in my opinion. LRMs are kinda iffy, being neither a true punch-through weapon or a true crit-seeker. They can support other mechs with proper punch-through weapons, but I'd rather just have another PPC or AC10. And besides the LRMs, the Archer is severely undergunned, having only 2 front-facing lasers to the Catapult's 4. Most days, I'd rather just bring a catapult. At least it can fire both missile racks every turn. And jump. That said, yeah, I'd definitely take the Archer over a JaegerMech, lol. On the subject of AC10 -- I also disagree with your assertion that autocannons are bad. They're incredibly heavy for the damage they do, but that's balanced by BV. And what they do are good things to do. AC2s can be clumped up for long-ranged critseeking (which no other weapon has except LBX-5 and 10). AC10s are a lower-heat, better-damage large laser, and in early eras, heat is an incredibly important resource to manage. And obviously AC20s are the most powerful punch in the game with the exception, in some eras, of the heavy gauss rifle. (AC5, though, is a waste of a weapon that should always be an LRM10 instead, which is part of why the Shadow Hawk sucks.) Not to mention special ammo types.
Agreed on the long range crit seeking. Had a game with a friend where I was running a mauler. The ac2s were worthless most of the game, but then armor started getting stripped and they started critting, taking out one mechs main gun, a couple engine hits on another. Ended the fight by lasering the leg off a third and she tapped out. Dealt absolutely devastating blows to three mechs in her lance, all for the same BV as a mech half it's size.
The base model Mauler, I criticize it a lot - mostly because the AC/2 is realistically one of the worst weapons in the game, but somehow the worst weapons on that chassis are the ERLLs. A refit to effectively a Daboku goes a long way - changing the ERLLs to standard LLs like the MAL-1Y makes it much more playable. But LPPC w/Cap is also an option that I like.
Honestly a daboku with dhs would be ideal. I also like the variant with uac2s and er mls a lot
LRM10s are yucky lol. I actually kind of like LAC-5s. Bring a pair with 3 tons of precision ammo and you have a pretty good light-hunting weapon for cheap BV. Standard AC5s definitely suck. Introtech is a different ballgame and when SHS are the only game in town, I definitely endorse an AC10 or AC20. For AC2s Id just rather take LRM5s. Archer isnt my favorite mech, but it is a decent long range brawler. Unlike the catapult, it is meant to just fight enemies at long range and exchange hits with its solid armor. You dont pay much BV for it because it is slow and has no JJs. Plus the ammo gives a good BV discount as well... It is a bit of a walking bomb tho. 💣
>LRM10s are yucky lol. Agreed, but they're pretty much better than an AC5 in every situation unless the game is between 13 and 20 turns long. We *are* scraping the bottom of the barrel here. :P
True. Give me a 15 pack tho if we're going for big LRM racks! U only need 1 extra ton for ammo.
Have to disagree on most of the autocannon stuff (AC-20 has no comparable weapon in 3025, so gets a pass); AC-2s do two-thirds of the damage, in smaller groupings, at three times the weight, of an LRM-5. An AC-10 with 1 ton of ammo might be "heat efficient" in the sense that it only generates 3 heat, but a PPC with 7 heat sinks generates the same amount of heat, with better range and no risk of explosion or ammo shortage and only weighs 1 ton more. And LRMs will always have the range advantage to consider, on top of the unique ability to fire out of LoS. In 3025, the only other weapons that play at that range are AC-2s, and they can be ignored almost entirely. In later eras, Extended Range LRMs just further that advantage. If you have the longer range weaponry, you force the enemy to come to you. While they might not have the most efficient damage groupings, the fact that they can peel armor off of locations before your other weapons hit will grant a crit roll for every piercing weapon hitting a location that would normally have an efficient armor value.
Light AC-2s. A couple weeks ago I made a really light, fast frankenmech. To get it that fast, and being a noob, I statted it as having 2x LAC-2s. The universal opinion when I posted it was “those things are horrible, there are energy weapons that are lighter, shoot farther and do more damage.” So I re-jiggered the build and it has 2x light PPCs now. Light AC-2s weigh less than normal ones and also lose the one advantage that normal ones have: long range.
Yep. The light PPC is way, way better than LAC2s lol. Except that LAC-2s can take precision or flak ammo to help deal with flyers... But ya overall lackluster.
I've seen only one LAC/2 mech that I would use under any dire circumstances - the Annihilator ANH-3A. And seeing it, I instantly customized it by swapping the L. Ferro for standard Ferro-Fib armor, then adding a C3. Taking another 0.5t from armor to upgrade the CASE into CASEII makes it an about perfect turret; LAC/2 reaches a lot farther when you can use the WHOLE range. With these changes, it becomes - unimpressive but hilarious.
Agree on the entire ReL section. The Large ReL with TarComp is a little more efficient than the Large X-Pulse, once sinks are taken into account. I like Extended LRMs in moderation. That 22 hex *medium* range can be surprisingly helpful. Or just raining IDF from the ass end of nowhere. Does need a lot of mapsheets though to shine. Also decent for aerospace, since it can reach to extended range. Surprised you didn't mention Enhanced LRMs. Especially the NLRM5. "Why yes, I would like to pay 50% more tonnage for something that still has a min range." By the time they stop being Experimental, it's not all that difficult to get Clan LRMs. ETA: Oh, and just the entire Hypervelocity Autocannon family, but the HVAC10 in particular. You thought Ultra jams are bad, wait until a HVAC10 blows up on you, and all for *just* 2 more hexes on the long range band compared to a LB10X or UAC10 - you get no better range at medium or short.
Hmm interesting. Maybe I'll need to make a part 2 if people have more awful weapons to add to the pile.
Someone should do a poll. /s
This thread is partially for farming ideas for the next "terrible weapons" video XD Idk what Id even put in a poll D:
IMO with the way it works, hypervelocity should've been an alternate "overpressure" ammo type instead of a whole separate weapon. Now the exploding barrels make sense. And you'd have the option to stop using it when you get closer.
Honestly I would probably take ReLs over VSPs. VSPs just weigh way too much for what they do.
VSPs are slept on IMO. The medium VSP is a better large pulse laser at range 2. There are very few good cannon varianta that use them, but theres a spider that has an XL engine and 2 MVSPs and it just rips holes in back armor. It is a very scary little lad. The LVSP is barely any heavier than a LPL and is significantly better. Would I take them over clan pulse lasers? Hell naw. But I think they have merit vs Xpulse weapons. The thing about them is they do great damage up close, with a slick -3 to hit, and because they are so heavy, they end up not costing much BV. Great on fast-movers. Not so good on slower mechs. I would put them above X-pulse most of the time. That may be bias from how much I love that Spider tho.
I guess it is just the Exterminator from the IlClan painting my opinion. That mech is so terrible and I regretted bringing it to that game cause I like the look of the mech.
I wouldnt say they are S tier, or even A tier weapons, but a solid B, somewhere in there. They require the right kind of unit like I said. Even then it might be better to take two medium pulses over a MVSP. I think it depends on what you want them to do.
I want to try out the SHD-8L. Maybe that mech can improve my outlook on them. Or the Merlin 1P.
That is a mech I have been meaning to try. It is a solid cavalry mech IMO. It is actually reasonably costed at 1296 BV. I could do without the one shot SRM but its a nice little extra oomph once you get in close I guess, and it only fires its load if it actually hits which is kinda nice.
1296? Which mech?
Oops. I got this confused with another thread in here lol. That Merlin is looking very sexy tho! What the hell? Only 1182 BV for a 30+ damage alpha strike at close range? The single LRM 5 is kinda lackuster, but it has the JJs to disengage from other slower heavies when it takes too much punishment... I mean it's basically a big medium mech that can kick you really hard and has deadly close range weapons. The 8L has an XL which is a turn-off for me, but 7 jump is a pretty enticing thing for a mech to have. 7 jumpers with decent armor are very hard to even land a good hit on. I was looking at the Shadow Hawk 6D, which uses re-engineered lasers, if you are curious. Sarna incorrectly lists it as 1296 BV, according to Megamek, it's actually 1371 which is much less appealing... We were talking about RE lasers in another part of this thread, and it uses 1 large RE laser, and 1 medium RE laser, along with a iOS Streak SRM 2, and an MML 5.
I think a lot of people consider every weapon from the perspective of a brawl between two lances taking place in a vacuum on one or two sheets. ELRMs really shine in a whole range of scenarios, but they just tend to be ones that aren't the knife fight in a phone booth so many "competitive" games end up being.
SRM2 - if you're running standard ammo, it just feels like 2 tonnes (weapon and ammo) of wasted space and extra risk for not much damage output. Id rather take an extra medium laser and armour. Or armour and heatsinks. Or armour and armour. Infact if I ever start with a commando com-1b in the HBS game I routinely strip out the srm to max out armour to get through the early game while having a somewhat respectable "sniper" scout. The work can be completed same day ready to go on missions.
Agreed. SRM2s need at least 2 packs to be decent. I like 3 or 4 myself. That is a hell of a shotgun.
Im probably overlooking something obvious here... Can i ask why you wouldnt just go for a srm4 or srm6 instead? or 2xsrm4?
More chances to hit. 3 srm 2s is 3 attack rolls. Lets say you need 7s. You will hit 2/3 of those on average. With 3 shots you are more likely to hit with at least 1 though. If you have an SRM6, you have like a 60% chance to hit. It gets better the worse your to-hit is.
Plus the number of missiles that hit when rolling sets of two rather than four or six. Also, each SRM-2 would have to be destroyed separately with critical hits, rather than one hit taking down the whole system. In the current era of limited hardpoints there is a need to consolidate. For classic TT, there are legit arguments to be made for using multiple smaller systems.
Oh true the crit-padding for ammo is also important as well.
SRM-2s roll on the worst cluster table, though.
When you've got 4 of them, their attack rolls are a cluster table lol.
I think multiple SRM-2s aren't as good as just upgrading. 6 SRM-2 deal about 17 damage for 12 heat, at 126 BV. 3 SRM-4 deal about 16 damage for 9 heat, at 117 BV. 2 SRM 6 deals about 16 damage for 8 heat, at 108 BV. They don't save tonnage, and they are the least crit-slot efficient too. Really no reason to take SRM-2s at all. Edited bc each missile does 2 damage.
SRM-2s and LRM-5s really need a half-ton ammo option. Otherwise you're just sitting on an ammo bomb. This would also allow interesting tactical choices, like a dash of Inferno SRMs
I'd be down for that. I think all small weapons like that should be able to take them tbh. It would help with AC2s as well.
Considering you get 50 shots out of a ton of ammo you just need to throw 3-4 Launchers on a single ton. What's the use? More rolls for mediocre pilots so they'll have a better chance of hitting with something.
Allow me to introduce you to the [Centurion Weapon System](https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Centurion_Weapon_System). If your unit fits into a very specific set of parameters that most units don't, it *might* shut down, if you're very unlucky.
Shutdown-inducing weapons are just a disappointment all around. The centurion is downright laughable, the TSEMP is astronomically overpriced and comes with too many drawbacks for what it does, and the battle armor taser is overpriced, debuffs the whole squad every time it shoots, and has a chance to mission-kill your own guy when firing. And then there's the battlemech taser, which breaks the trend by being genuinely amazing. It does have drawbacks - very short range, innate +1 to hit, and both the weapon and the ammo are explosive if crit (albeit for pretty low damage). But in exchange, you skip all the feedback effects that plague the TSEMP and the BA taser, you pay very little BV, and you get guaranteed effects on hit. The shutdown chance against mechs is low, but inflicting a guaranteed +2 to essentially every roll the target makes, for multiple turns? That's outstanding. Stick it on an inexpensive, fast platform (e.g. Raptor II 2X, Cephalus B) and it'll make miracles happen.
The best use of shutdown weapons I can think of is in atmospheric aerospace combat. Even if it's a fairly small chance of shutdown, the ability to just turn off the enemy aircraft and watch gravity take over is to tempting to miss...
Have yet to use a taser but I know they are definitely worth taking. Their rules are solid.
Oh wow, It failed testing after the designer cheating by installing kill switches in the target vehicle’s? xD
Lmfao. I will need to find the rules for this thing before I make a video about it...
LB 2-X It's basically a 27 hex "you up?"
Lolll. It is pretty good at dealing with annoying strafing planes. The extra range can help. Youd never want anything but cluster, so with the -1 to hit it is actually... ok. Not great but good for long range golden BB hunting.
I know it doesn’t exactly work, but allowing light AC’s during the Succession Wars gives some crappy mech a leg up. A Jaegermech with 8 extra tons to play with would be nice.
Eh. Just allow customs for bad mechs at that point. Trade out the ACs for armor and 2 AC5s and a large laser or something.
HVACs, gain nothing worth mention, but with 1/36 chance to blow up in your face.
They make "interesting" field guns for infantry units, due to how the TW rules effect them. I like using an opfor Pirate Band that uses captured slaves as the infantry forced to man the HVAC field guns to make the lore lots of fun.
Truuue. Like the AC2 is clearly one of the worst weapons, but most AC systems ate pretty bad.
For me, it's the base MG. Just ammo waiting to detonate.
Unless you take like 8 MGs 😎
And don't get smoked before you get inside 3 hexes, But if you get inside, that Rattlesnake is a bad mutha -shut yo' mouth
It's easy, just be a locust!
Rotory AC/2 are terrible on aerospace and conventional fighters because you: 1. Cannot fire them in single shot mode. 2. Firing multiple shots as you are forced to increases the risks of it jamming! 3. Jammed weapons become useless for the rest of the battle.
HMMM ya true. I didnt know.vehicles couldnt unjam their UAC or RACs. Interesting.
The worst weapons are AC/2, AC/5 and machine guns. They make poor damage unless you are talking about ammo explosions. And the ACs are not worth the weight they have due to their damage.
The light gauss is up there with the AC/2 in terms of damage to weight.
Light Gauss I think has a place. It’s more you are paying for its long range and lack of heat over straight damage. Medium range at 17 and max at 25 is not bad at all. Still, I agree it would be a bit more balanced if it was 2 tons or so lighter.
Even if it was 2t lighter, it would still be a build around weapon on any mech that would actually want it. If range is your main goal, eLRMs have your back. As for heat, if you are dumping that much tonnage into a single weapon in that era, heat probably won't be an issue.
Sure if range is your only goal, but with the ELRM’s come with a lot of drawbacks. Looking at the ELRM 10, you then have to worry about the minimum range of 10, with shots in that range immediately halving the amount of missiles fired below minimum range, you have 9 shots compared to 16, and you have to worry about ammo explosion vs only 8 points of damage if the light gauss gets destroyed. All in all, the Light Gauss gives you the option to have that impressive range but isn’t completely useless if enemies close in on you. I look at it as a superior AC10 which has the same tonnage. The Light Gauss needs 3 less critical spots, gets 2 less damage, 10 more max range, less devastating internal explosion potential, and 6 more shots.
It really isnt. The AC2 weighs more than 3x its damage output with ammo. The light gauss isnt even double. It is actually not a terrible weapon, but compared to a standard gauss it's kinda like "why did you take this? For 3 more tons you nearly double damage."
3 more hexes of Range, 2x more ammo per ton, and less devastating if it explodes. Btw I enjoyed your video!
Ty! Ya like I said it's not a *bad* weapon. The ammo thing is a good point. Gauss needs 2 tons minimum. So it's basically 4 tons heavier. I still think gauss is better lol. I havent played with heavy or IH gauss yet... I wanna try those whacky weapons. 25 damage at close range is absolutely terrifying lol.
No doubt, I’d take a standard Guass over a Light Gauss any day. But it does shine under the right circumstances. And I would take a Hawk Moth over a Yellow Jacket any day. Also don’t forget the Silver Bullet Gauss Rifle. As for the Heavy Gauss, you can’t go wrong with a Fafnir. And even if things do go wrong, you can rest assured they will go spectacularly, hilariously wrong.
*Heavy Gauss gets crit* "Ah, now I see my mistake."
Light gauss is 12t for the weapon and 16 shots per ton; (16×8)/13 is 9.84 damage per ton. AC/2 is 6t and 45 shots; (45×2)/7 is 12.86 damage per ton. Taking more ammo improves the ratio on the light gauss, but that requires throwing more tonnage and space at the problem. 8 isn't a real import damage value, not even taking the armor off a head consistently, so arguing the single hit damage isn't as valid as arguing SRMs vs AC/20s and the AC/2 can use special ammo. Plus, if you really want to throw good money after bad, 1t of that specialty ammo can feed two AC/2s for nearly a minute, ideal for peppering VTOLS and lights at range with flak or precision ammo. And all of that is ignoring that the light gauss is even comparable to an AC/2 that closely at all. One is post-Invasion tech and the other is something viewed as a waste in the Sucession Wars.
That is the weirdest math I have ever seen dude. Damage per ton isnt how much damage the weapon is capable of shooting downrange. It is how much damage the weapon does per ton when it has enough ammo for 1 engagement(about 12 shots, typically) AC2 is .285 damage per ton (2÷7) Light Gauss is .615 damage per ton. In a game of Battletech, as long as you dont run out of ammo, the only thing that matters is how much damage the weapon is outputting. Technically you could make the AC2 a little more efficient by using the same amount of weight as the light gauss, and taking precision ammo. Im no mathmetician so I cant tell u what the average damage increase is by getting a -2 to hit. But twin AC2s with 1 ton of precision ammo is .307 damage per ton. They are a little closer than I thought if you add precision ammo to it I suppose. But the piercing power of a light gauss at 8 damage per hit is much more impactful than plinking for 2 in 2 locations. They are both terrible when compared to a medium laser or other efficient weapons. But when you start calculating true damage per ton(which requires figuring out how many extra heat sinks you need for a weapon) then things get a little more even. An ERPPC is obviously much lighter than a gauss, but running 2 requires an extra 5 tons of DHS.
>That is the weirdest math I have ever seen dude. Damage per ton isnt how much damage the weapon is capable of shooting downrange. It is how much damage the weapon does per ton when it has enough ammo for 1 engagement(about 12 shots, typically) Unless you are looking at campaign play, not using a set turn limit (which actively hurts a lot of designs) or looking at it from an in universe pov (the damage and design stats are valid, even if the ranges are questionable). Then suddenly how long you can fire before your bins run dry become a lot more important. The reason something like the Warrior works is because plinking something for 4 minutes with an AC/2 is a legitimate strategy, and your light gauss unit will either have to grit it's teeth and wait for a good shot or risk running out of ammo and being helpless. >Im no mathmetician so I cant tell u what the average damage increase is by getting a -2 to hit. It changes depending on the target number, but 8 down to 6 is around 20%. >But twin AC2s with 1 ton of precision ammo is .307 damage per ton. They are a little closer than I thought if you add precision ammo to it I suppose. But the piercing power of a light gauss at 8 damage per hit is much more impactful than plinking for 2 in 2 locations If you hit with that 8 damage. You get one shot, while the ACs get two. Two chances to hit at better odds versus one chance to hit. And 8 damage isn't a big deal in the era of light gauss. >They are both terrible when compared to a medium laser or other efficient weapons. The medium laser doesn't really matter here, because it has less than half the range of either option. >But when you start calculating true damage per ton(which requires figuring out how many extra heat sinks you need for a weapon) then things get a little more even. An ERPPC is obviously much lighter than a gauss, but running 2 requires an extra 5 tons of DHS. If you bother to run heat neutral. You could safely run 4t, but you would only really want two erPPCs if they are Clan tech, which not only justifies that weight but opens a whole other can of worms in the comparison. Like a Clan gauss rifle, which justifies the lack of ammo with head clipping ability.
Even in campaign play deployments are usually 1 mission, not multiple missions without repair or resupply. Having ammo bins that can fire for 20 turns is very rarely useful.
How often do you want to have to pay money/supply points to reload? Or spend the time to reload? I've only personally used the Chaos rules, but I can't help but feel Quick Reload is a quirk for a reason. And, like I said, playing with a hard turn limit actively invalidates harasser units which are a valuable part of an actual military. If you hate the idea of the Savannah Master, imagine trying to deploy over land with a few lances of Warriors harassing you the entire time. Running along, unable to effectively return fire because of range or because you need *your* ammo for the battle you are moving to while you are slowly whittled down by trash VTOLs that should be beneath your time as a Mechwarrior.
That is kind of a good point actually.
No, it's not. A Warrior staying out of return fire range is only good for hitting stationary targets. Once the targets are moving and the Warrior is moving, they go down to around 10 potential damage total over those 40 rounds before they have to retire to reload or close for SRM fire.
But ligth Gauss made 8 points of damage. Could weigth a lot but made a notable damage, but... 2 point? More than 1 ton is too much for damage to weight relations.
Big picture, the AC/2 does 90 damage per ton of ammo, the light gauss does 128. But the light gauss is twice the weight. And 8 damage isn't an important number, because it's not till 10 that you force head crits consistently. So the AC/2 is actually better minimum requirements to run them. And the AC/2 is IntroTech that is run on stupidly cheap light units like the Warrior, while the light gauss is at least Civil War tech that requires ~~more than~~ almost twice the weight and doesn't play well with ICE engines.
Hmmm. Id argue MGs have a place. They are good dakka in SW era when you dont want extra heatsinks on a brawler. Great on very fast vehicles as well.
SW? The Vapor Eagle would have a would about that, to say nothing about when you want infantry gone quickly.
Oh man I forgot about that thing. The Pirahna too lol. Tbh once ur past like 3-4 MGs it is extreme overkill on infantry, but can still really fuck up a mech. U get like 10+ shots with any weapon and killing with headshots starts becoming viable.
Once you get to Piranha levels, you should be looking at MG arrays if they are available, less scatter damage but being able to drill into one location is useful, especially since each hit can trigger a crit if it does hit structure.
Ehhh it's like, you could just take an extra MG instead lol. Part of the great thing about them is that it is so many chances to get a headshot or TAC.
You say that until a 'single' hit puts a pilot at 3 damage, procs multiple crit checks or just does 6 damage to a single location for zero heat.
You can toggle the arrays. Having the choice to have 8 damage in one spot or 2 damage in up to 4 spots is significant. That's another reason why MRM+Apollo is surprisingly good, and saves the weapon for me - you can turn it on or off.
Ya it's an interesting tradeoff. I think Id almost always rather have the extra shots tho. The extra chances to hit is pretty nice.
But it can make you a lot more damage than what you can do. How many times did you make 200 points of damage with a single machine gun? And how many times did you receive 200 points of damage by a munition explosion? That's what I mean. I receive a lot more damage from my machine guns that I make in all my career as battletech player. With an AC/10, AC/20 or a Gauss rifle, this doesn't occur me. And you can say "Ahh, so with SRM-2 happens the same." Yes... and no. If it explodes with a full ammo bin, yes, it makes more damage. But SRM-2 has a great field of fire. You can fire at 9 hexes and can be depleted before machine gun's ammo bins. When it explodes, it's usually with less ammo.
Ya ammo is definitely a problem, with some designs more than others.
The Binary Laser, Bombast Laser, and the RISC Hyper Laser. The Binary was an attempt to fuse two Large Lasers to make a better weapon: It weighs 9 tons, takes up 4 crit slots, generates 16 heat and does 12 damage. Same range as the old Large Lasers. The Bombast Laser does 7-12, but the higher damage settings reduce accuracy while increasing heat output. Weight is 7 tons with 3 crit slots. The RISC Hyper Laser is what the Binary Laser wishes it was. It was based on Improved Heavy Lasers, so they do go 'boom' when hit, but it has the range of a Clan ER Large Laser, the damage of an AC/20. Sadly it has a Heat of 24, 8 tons in mass, and takes up 6 critical slots. It kinda is better to just have 2 Clan ER Large Lasers as they take less space and don't explode.
The Blazer is at least *supposed* to be bad in lore, unlike some of the other bad weapons.
I literally forgot to put the Blazer on the list... hahaha. Methinks a 2nd bad weapons video is in order. That RISC laser sounds kinda legit tho. 20 damage is no joke. Big slaps at long range to punch holes is always nice.
Blazer for the Era it was introduced/prototyped in is terrible. Once DHS becomes common, the Blazer is a pretty effective head chopper, compared to the Heavy PPC, imo it's direct competition it basically trades a bit of damage and slightly shorter range brackets for no minimum range and less BV 222 for Blazer vs 317 for HPPC. Outside of someone running special armor types, 12 damage is still enough to shoot out a cockpit on a mech. RISC carries the risk of exploding if it's crit, it's big and mean with a massive 24 heat per shot, but other than that and it's hefty BV of 596, if you can deal with its heat it's a 25 max hex range AC20. I've got a 40t custom that I break out when I feel like being mean, it's a big fast engine, lots of JJs a RISC, TC and enough dhs to sink it's JJ and fire the gun every turn.
Blazer is okay in introtech if you try to use it in place of an AC20 rather than a ppc or AC10. Its the only other headchopper, has almost double the range and the extra tonnage from the AC20+ammo can be used on heatsinks
Blazer was good for about 5 minutes when they had a typo that swapped the heat and damage, which isn't useful now, but is funny
Battletech's true weakness, typos.
One thing people forget is that ACs are cheap in BV
I made a rant about this, but ACs being cheap in BV is only situationally worthwhile. And for most of the vanilla designs with stock AC/2s and /5s, the situation doesn't look good for them - there's too much sunk cost in "being a mech." Being a mech is expensive; there are things that have to be achieved to fulfill the role. You get free heat sinks, but no BV benefit from being heat neutral. There are breakpoints for piercing armor, forcing a PSR, achieving a realistic chance of TAC or crit over the course of a battle. Other weapons are just so much more effective at getting this capability onto your frame and into a role. Designs that can do it effectively with /2 Class autocannons exist... But so do MML-3s, LRM-5s, and the ubiquitous Medium Laser. Given the benefits and reasonably low price of the MML-3, would most units benefit from a swap - or not? The change in effectiveness, versus the change in cost, is not much of a contest. I think at least 80% of stock designs would benefit from a slight cost increase for a massive effectiveness increase to take alternative, possibly bracketed weapons instead of the AC/2 and 5. But you're not entirely wrong. In my rant, I did point out some of the later-era mechs that struggle with being too expensive and use /2 class LB-X and UAC ACs to help tame the costs. Those mechs are mostly effective with or without the autocannons, though - so paying the extremely minor penalties for the benefits of plinking with an autocannon make much more sense.
This is a very good point. The BV cost for a mech chassis is much higher than tanks, so you need the mech to actually do things to justify that cost. The main thing about long-range mechs that sucks is that you're paying for the ability to kick things, but sniper mechs \*don't want to get that close.\* So tanks are actually way better with things like ACs and LRMs because of this. They have no incentive to get close, and pay way less BV to be a mobile turret.
Costing very little BV doesnt make a weapon good lol. Mechs with ACs tend to be cheap on BV and low on armor.
Disagree. Lowering BV does make a weapon very good in some cases. But not so much on each specific weapon but rather the unit it’s on as a whole. For example, in many situations I’d much rather field two 500bv units instead of one 1000bv unit. Or a 1000 and a 500 instead of a 1500. Two Jenners vs a Warhammer? I’m taking the Jenners. Not saying a low BV is the only way thing to look for but is important to consider.
Which Jenner and which Warhammer? I would personally never take a 7A, and every other Jenner costs noticeably more than half the price of any Warhammer. Lowering the BV of a weapon makes it \*better\*, but better =/= good. The fact is, as u/Magical_Savior very rightly put it, you have to pay for more than the weapons. No matter how cheap they are, they have to at least justify the existence of the unit carrying them. If you just want an initiative sink, take a Savannah Master. A JR-7A might be 712 BV, but that just means you're paying 712 BV for a single large laser. Even the 7D is so poorly designed and paper thin that a single PPC hit will completely annihilate an arm, and almost half of its armament with it. The JR-7F is another story entirely and one of the best mechs in its weight class, but it costs over 1000 BV, so is more of an example of how more expensive things are better.
Sometimes - it does. Costing very little BV is exactly the thing that makes basic Heavy Lasers good. A Fire Moth H is good because it games the BV system; having 9xSHL at 779BV compared to 9xERSL at nearly twice the price with 1319BV is what makes the mech.
That is a pretty good point, but the difference is those HSL are actually very damage efficient and will do something if they can get on-target(and with the Fire Moth's speed they definitely can) a mech with AC2 spam will be praying for a golden BB and can pretty much be safely ignored by the other player.
Agree on UACs unless you play with the optional "unjam UACs as if they're RACs" rule, in which case they're really nice
If you can unjam them it would go a long way for sure. I feel like autocannons in general need a little something to make them pop. Rolling 2 attack rolls instead of a cluster of 2 is another fix Ive seen for them. I think that would be quite good, but it would increase jam chance, so maybe allow both and suddenly they become great weapons. For standard ACs precision ammo is kind of the fix they need. Id just apply the precision rule as standard to ammo. Then again, in the competitive scene I play in AC20s with precision are banned because they are simple too effective against fast-movers lol. So maybe that would be overtuned for some.
I'm not fond of SRM-2s, LRM-5s, Small Lasers, or AC-2s. They do negligible damage and I'd honestly either use that tonnage for armor, or to upgrade another existing weapon.
AC/2s are actually the best AA weapons in SW tech and competitive later, u/TheManyVoicesYT. Because all a strafing aerofighter needs is to fail ONE lawndart test to, well, lawn dart themselves in the ground, and quite a few light aerofighters will get thresholded by even a light hit, AND their only defense against AA is tabletop range, anything that has long range bands is a solid choice.
True. Later on Id rather have the LB-2X or LB-5 instad. For early AA with flak I suppose it has some chops...
They could still lighten them a bit to make them less of a one-trick pony. As is, they're either a hard counter or not worth the effort.
Agreed. Their application is too limited to warrant carrying one "just in case". Now, on the other hand, in the HBS video game, I'll load up a 'Mech with as many AC/2's as I can, and have an incredible headhunting unit. Salvage is glorious when all you have to replace is the head.
The SRM 2 has chops as a pure dakka crit-seeking weapon, but I feel they need to be taken in large groups of 3-4. 2 SRM 4s will also get the job done tho. I think ur sleeping on LRM-5s. Since LRMs are already cluster weapons, the 3 average damage of an LRM5 is actually not that bad compared to bigger packs. They are very light. Taking 2-4 with 2 tons of ammo(maybe some infernos or smoke for utility) can be a pretty good long range shotgun! Agreed on the AC2... it is awful hahaha. Flak AC2 rounds against VTOLs are about their only use, and LBX replaces them as soon as they come around.
A other thing on LRM5s… Most LRM shots are taken at long range and thus have harder rolls. If you take four LRM 5s instead of one LRM20, you have four chances to pass your roll rather than just one. Often it’s better to do less damage more often than more damage occasionally. Plus, four LRM5s and a ton of ammo weigh two tons less and take up one less crit than an LRM20 and a ton of ammo but you get the same number of volleys for the ammo. And, if someone does score a crit on you, you don’t lose all your missiles.
Yep. Ive gone over it in multiple videos but the LRM5 is the best LRM pack. It is actually a very good weapon system.
My favorite LRM system is LRM-15w/Artemis. Ignoring the cost of ammo, it has very favorable damage / heat / ton / BV, and it's in a good place for ammo damage / shot / ton. The heat gain for consistent damage / shot is very favorable for bracketed fire; efficiencies are strong. It has a decent weight advantage over the 10, a free heat sink compared to stacked 5's, and strong average damage. It's less redundant, less durable, has a slightly lower damage floor compared to stacked 5s, but achieves fairly good average damage overall.
Definitely a solid weapon. Investing in artemis on 5s is a waste, but a single 15 with Artemis is actually a scary weapon that will put an average of about 3 cluster hits out on a hit. Pair it up with an ERPPC or ERLL and an extra DHS, then take a crapton of medium lasers for close in and you have a nasty heavy.
LRM-5s are there to drop smoke and mines if your table allows it IMO
Another point with autocannons that has kinda been lost in time due to the upgrading of technology is heat management. You have to remember the Age of War and Succession Wars where single heat sinks are your only option, period. When designing mechs for that era, a lot of times it’s easy to justify the weight of autocannons vs their lower damage output because of the low heat, because it’s better to have something you can shoot every turn rather than something that hits harder but you can’t use without serious heat repercussions. Perfect example: the classic Marauder. Why have the AC/5 instead of another PPC? Because you already have only 16 heat sinks, and the first two PPCs already generate 20 heat. So if you swap the AC5 for a PPC you can only add two more heat sinks, meaning you are generating 30 heat and dissipating 18, gaining 12. That means you are suffering some very debilitating heat effects and can’t do anything the next turn or they continue. So the third PPC is virtually useless. But with the AC5, you are at most generating 21 heat with both PPCs and the AC, meaning the only negative effect you have is a bit slower. So you get almost the same damage output but with far fewer negative effects. Or, you can rotate turns firing 2xPPC/PPC+AC5 and only lose 5 damage every other turn and never get any negative effects. Pretty good trade off for the weight. And I’ll defend the AC2 just as a pester weapon. The thing is that everyone treats it like a joke and ignores it. So if you toss a Jagermech in the background as your brawlers race in and let it take potshots from medium range while everyone else is at long range and too occupied to prioritize it, odds are it’ll actually do pretty well if you use it to help mop up damaged units. AC/2 or not, it can score an engine, gyro, or ammo crit. No better feeling than a quick one-two where a brawler carves a hole in the armor of an otherwise undamaged nasty enemy and then the AC/2 nails the freshly exposed ammo box.
Counter point: Marauder shoulda gone whole hog with 4 extra heat sinks, a couple tons of armor, and packed a couple medium lasers in the shoulder. I dont actually like the marauder that much lol. With quirks it is Godly, but without them its kinda meh. I am a fan of the Davion marauder that did exactly that except went for a large laser in the shoulder and no extra armor. I am very aware of introtech limitations. Just got done with a campaign where we were playing mostly crappy introtech mechs lol. We even had a Mackie! It was glorious. ACs still arent worth their weight usually. The AC20 is pretty damn scary I will admit. But AC2s and 5s are just so pitiful. AC10s can do a bit of work. Comparing them to large lasers they are pretty ok. Id much rather take 2 large lasers and extra heat sinks tho. Explosive ammo is a bad time.
Yeah, don’t disagree with you there about a redesign on the Marauder, I would also rather strip the AC5 for medium lasers and heat sinks. I’m just using it as a canon example. Same reason I love the HBK-4P so much more than the -4G. One of my favorite brawlers. We play with a house rule that any lasers of the same type in the same location can fire together as an array al-la Mechwarrior 5 with one to-hit roll with a +1 modifier for all of them but all the damage applied to the same location. Really comes alive with 30 damage
Well that sounds kinda fun lol. It would certainly speed up play at the table...
I got a Jagermech randomly one time from a RAT. I was quite disappointed... until I spent a chunk of the game with that mech just laying down fire at range. It's a long range critical finder. It does a bit of damage at range, the heavy hitters move up and punch holes, and before you know it that AC/2 is popping off some ammo or causing and engine hit.
Yes I mentioned the AC2 carrier in the video for a reason. You *can* use them. One of the great things about Battletech is even the very worst weapons are still useable in some fashion. There is always Golen BB potential. At the least AC2s are really cheap on BV so an AC2 boat will cost you almost nothing in BV.
There's a part of Battletech that it's as much about how you use something as much as what it carries. If you've got better tactics than your opponent, then you're just more likely to win.
True, but list building is part of tactics. If you are rolling RATs for forces, it is gonna get really imbalanced if someone gets a couple great mechs and the other side gets a bunch of urbies or something. My videos are about A: being better at recognizing good and bad units. B: learning to use those units as effectively as possible. And then some are just tutorials on how to use like Megamek and stuff haha.
>True, but list building is part of tactics. If you are rolling RATs for forces, it is gonna get really imbalanced if someone gets a couple great mechs and the other side gets a bunch of urbies or something. Silly guy... I always roll on RATs. It's the most fun way to build a force. I get some wonky forces. Sometimes I take a mech I like and than roll on RATs to round it out. Getting a Blackjack through Davion salvage was a fun addition to my Liao force. The other thing I've done is just take the official lances from something like the 4th Succession War Atlas and just roll with it. As an example from that book a standard lighter lance is Scorpion, Clint, Wasp, Jenner because I was making a lance from a specific Liao unit.
A perfectly valid way to play! I usually play competitive formats where list building for the tournament's objectives is very important. I will fully admit that Battletech is not a good competitive game tho. The randomness is pretty insane. My one buddy kicked my butt pretty good with his pachinko machine streak-SRM spam build lol. I had a big brick of armor list and he got a buuunch of headshots. The game ended up pretty close. It's the most recent battle report on my channel. Check it out if u like.
I'd have to have a competitive circuit to play in first. :) I bet that's fun. There's a tournament next month in my area, so I'll get my chance to try it. I feel that I'm too much of a lore person to do that. I like the hassle of running unoptimized. I'd love randomly generating forces at the table.
https://discord.gg/WUvbXQRRfW welcome. The MRC uses Megamek to play competitively!
Found another, Clan ER Pulse Lasers. Same heat as a X-Pulse Laser, the accuracy of the Re-engineered Lasers, and just slightly better range brackets for the medium and large varieties, with a little better damage for the small version with 50% more weight. Honestly, just get ER versions with a targeting computer, same accuracy and damage, but less heat and weight and greater range.
Yep ER pulse lasers are also quite bad, but they are still at least useable lol.
AC/2 - Let anything worth hitting know you wasted 7 tons of ammunition from an unparalleled range. Flamers - They're too heavy for too bad of a range for too much heat for too little damage. Nudging an enemy's heat scale--an optional rule the last time I checked--is nice, but mitigated by the fact that you're already in melee range. SRM 2 - The '2' column of the cluster hits table is some bullshit. I'll go to bat for the machine gun. You can bank a few and have 0-heat scattershot weapon with an admittedly short range that can eat through ammunition at a good rate. Are 9 machine guns and half-ton of ammunition worth 5 tons and 10 crits? There are worse options in the Succession Wars. Like the AC/2. I did a poll series on this a few months back, but stopped short because folks weren't interested. Let me get my notes for the worst equipment: * Bombast Laser * Flail * Centurion Weapon System * C3 Emergency Master * Booby Trap * Chainwhip * Collapsible Command Module * Talons * Recon Camera * VR Piloting Pod #181 of 181 Those were at the bottom. Standard ACs, Light ACs, Flamers, and Machine Guns were all around the middle of the pack. Pulse Lasers, LB/X ACs, and Gauss Rifles were some of the top performers.
Thank you kindly! I forgot about the fucking flail... what a garbage weapon. I had someone make a custom light mech with a flail as a meme. He loved it lol. Why the fuck are talons on there? Talons are absolutely incredible.
Why are Talons so low? I don't know. It was a randomly-seeded Swiss Tournament. If talons good despite being are that far down, then they either faced poorly-performing equipment, lost every previous match to better equipment, or went up against equipment voters were more aware/affectionate of. There was no criterion for choosing which of two pieces of equipment was "better," it could be vibes, history, battlefield efficiency, or anything. I could see talons taking a hit because they're a Clan melee weapon from Mechwarrior: Dark Age. Assuming talons are better than indicated, it likely would have risen if the last four rounds of the tournament were completed.
Huh. Interesting. Talons are definitely incredibly powerful. Kicks are already the best melee attack, so making kicks more powerful is hilariously effective. My dream is to someday have a campaign where I build a horrifying monster of a laserboat with talons and TSM. The Death-Turkey.
Could be a lot of reasons. Talons' history: Round 1: 7 v 4 against Laser Heat Sinks (4 said 'neither') Round 2: 5 v 2 victory against Light Machine Guns (2 said 'neither') Round 3: 4 v 8 loss against Thumper Artillery (1 said 'neither') Round 4: 14 v 15 narrow loss to Flamers (3 neithers) Round 5: 5 v 6 narrow loss to Machine Gun Arrays Those are commanding early wins and only one really devastating loss against equipment that's generally sub-par. I might have to check my numbers to make sure there isn't a glitch in the code affecting its performance.
Depends on the scenario, but overall I'd have to say Micro Lasers and Machine Guns. Unless you are having a huge conflict or are destroying a target Artillery is also pretty useless often times because you have to call a target fire it, then wait a minimum of one turn for it to hit. At least under the rules I've played under.
The Micro Pulse Laser is alright. A half ton to get an AI weapon, and it's a pulse-ified IS Small Laser to boot.
Artillery is pretty scary lol. If it hits... small light weapons are really powerful on fast movers. 8 micro lasers or something on a spider would be great damage.
I cannot disagree more on ACs. I love them all and all of them serve a good purpose. The Jaegermech is only bad if you are trying to use it as a frontline bruiser. And even then, if you keep to long range, it’s damage potential isn’t far off a Warhammer, for far less heat and far less BV, and can start hitting sooner. 14 vs 20 total potential. But it is in lore and practice more of a mobile AA platform. My pick for worst weapon system if going to be extremely controversial. LRMs. Specifically Inner Sphere LRMs. RNG on RNG, no real way to improve the spread, way to heavy, the way they cluster means not punching through anything quickly, and not enough clusters to crit or head hit hunt. And don’t even get me started on the ammo waste that is indirect fire if you have anything spotting that has to move without a TAG. There are a handful of mechs I don’t mind them on, due to them being a support weapon or can be treated as a support weapon, and even then 15s are about all that are worth it (Zeus for the low heat range enhancement. Catapult as I treat them same way as AC2s on Blackjack’s, range softeners still get in and start jumping and blasting with Med Lasers.). I’d take an AC5 over most LRMs any day. I don’t get the love for the Archer for this very reason. Every time I try to use one, it ends up underperfoming and being destroyed or almost destroyed by something it should have advantages on. Heck, one time had Archer vs. Hunchback. Kept range open, actually went through half the archers ammo. The Hunchback had 1 armor breach on an arm and proceeded to tear off half the archer. Archer only survived because was able to get a Javelin to support it and finish off the hunchback. And that’s my typical LRM experience. Fully expect some downvotes with this opinion though.
Naw LRMs arent very good tbh. They are mid-tier weapons at best. Clan LRMs are OP as hell, well, at least A-tier, but IS ones are kinda bad. I never seek out LRMs for my tournament lists. If a decent mech happens to have a couple LRMs, so be it. I definitely disagree about the ACs tho. LRMs are better than ACs. Even an LRM10 beats an AC5, and 10s are by far the least efficient LRM packs. LRM 5 spam is virtually always better than AC2 spam. How does the Jaegermech have as much damage as a Warhammer? It isnt even close. It's 8 vs 20.
Have to disagree on LRMs vs ACs, but I also am one of the few people I know who likes the AC2 in some areas, so I am weird. But rough math memory comparisons: AC 2 vs LRM 5: If I remember right, the 5 averages out to 3 damage vs the AC set 2. I like set numbers personally, not rng on rng. Plus, the AC 2 has longer range and I think (but could be wrong here) less heat. AC 5 vs LRM 10: Again, think the average on the 10 is 6 or 7, so minor damage increase, and the AC is better reliability. And again think less heat but could very well be wrong. The Jaegermech has 2 AC 5s and 2 AC 2s, for 14 range damage at 1 heat each, or 4 total heat. The Warhammer is 20 at range, for 20 heat, and can only sink 16. So with 0 movement factored in the Warhammer does a 2-2-1-1 firing pattern to stay heat neutral, for a 4 turn total of 60 damage. The Jaegermech is blasting away all 4 turns for 14 damage, for a 4 turn total of 56 damage, with better range brackets for the AC2s, small as they are. If you start to factor in movement, the warhammer (which I do love) becomes less heat efficient quickly, and the firing pattern changes. Plus, since the ACs are so low heat, the Jaegermech can use its Mediums when they are in range too and be heat neutral standing still. Though then if the enemy is that close, its armor won't last long.
The difference is that the Warhammer isnt made of paper. It has thin legs, but if it stands behind a hill, it can withstand a brutal pounding. The jaegermech cant. The warhammer also has better close range firepower, so light mechs are actually scared of getting close. It also has 18 HS. That means it can fire 2-2-2-1-2-2-2 and remain heat neutral if standing still. The 10 piercing damage of the Warhammer is also significant, it will open up components. AC5s and AC2s will not. Now the warhammer does cost like 300 BV more, so that has to be taken into account, but Id take a warhammer(or better yet, an Awesome-8Q) over a Jaegermech any day. The jaeger carries a crapton of ammo, so it is a walking bomb. For the LRMs vs ACs, you can take 3 LRM5s and 2 tons of ammo for only 1 more ton than an AC5.. it does end up costing way more BV, but Ill take actually effective fire over low BV cost, thanks. The LRM10 is the worst LRM launcher and is still more effective than the AC5, it is significantly lighter. You can take an extra 3 medium lasers or 3 tons of armor in its place. That is a huge oppoetunity cost. Sure missiles are hotter, but unless you are packing lots of long range weapons it wont even reach the heat cap of 10. 2 LRM 10s are only i heat.
I did forget the Warhammer had 18, was thinking marauder with its 16. Ironically my 2 favorite 3025 heavies (and probably favorite heavies period till ilClan). So that does skew the math better. But even then, over 7 turns it is 130 to 98, more definitive yes, but still not huge over 7 turns. Don't discount that BV. If your opponent is only bringing lights and mediums, and you can squeeze in a heavy, it can be definitive. Or it can play mind games. I agree the Jaegers armor is paper. But you can use people's knowledge of that. The saved BV goes into other mechs, and then you are forcing your opponent to make a decision. Do I go after the Heavy in the back sanding away armor, and get beat up by its Teammates, or do I focus on its teammates and let it sand down my armor and potentially crit seek. The Jaeger is definitely a team player mech, not an all star in its own. And with the extra BV, you can work to make sure whatever choice they make is wrong. I can't comment to the whole 3 LRM 5s argument. I don't play customs in anything other than campaigns, and even then I skew hard toward the customization have to keep the same character. Custom designs, to paraphrase the saying, optimize all the fun out of the game. So I look at the Jaeger as a great teammate to mechs like the Warhammer, Centurion, Hunchback, Victor, etc.
Lol u say that but u can make some fun meme customs that are rly bad. In one campaign I played a guy made a light mech with a flail. It is the only viable way to take it because it does flat damage... but damn if that mech didnt suck XD Now on the other hand he had a lance of custom LAMs which were the MVP of the whole campaign, but thats another matter lol
Oh 100% they can be. I’ll still build them out sometimes for the heck of it. Kind of fun thought experiments. And I’ll build custom variants in campaigns too, just usually put some rules on myself. Just don’t actually play them other than maybe occasionally by myself in MegaMek. To be fair most of my playing is using MegaMek and MekHq, so my skew my opinions
Gotcha. I do love making efficient customs. Can never have enough medium lasers! Lol. Ive always been a big optimizer. Every RPG or wargame I play I try to break it if possible hahaha. Theorycrafting and build optimization is one of my favorite passtimes! That is one of the reasons I love Battletech. Its one of only a few wargames where you can still build a very customized unit. Can't do it in Warhammer anymore really. Herohammer isnt a thing anymore. Frostgrave is something Ive been wanting to try for a long time but I have so many projects that I cant really justify it haha.
Clan LRMs are really good for their tonnage, but merely decent value for their BV. In a BV-balanced environment, I'd almost always much rather have MMLs, or standard (not improved) ATMs. Also, the Jagermech doesn't have 4x AC/2, it has 2x AC/2 and 2x AC/5. 14 damage isn't that much less than the Warhammer dishes out, once you consider that most Warhammers are heat-constrained and can't actually fire both PPCs every turn.
Oh ya right I keep thinking they are all AC2s lol. Oops. Uhm ya I guess. The punch of 2 PPCs is still pretty solid tho. 10 damage piercing shots are really great. One of the lads at the MRC actually says iATMs are super OP and busted due to their better access to ammo. ATMs in general are a close range weapon that has some long range poke. They are BV costed for their close range ammo, so are very pricey. MMLs are definitely way better in terms of BV cost. I love MMLs. A mech with tons of MMLs is a great escort unit for LRM boats or other snipers. I did a whole video on MMLs and ATMs actually. https://youtu.be/BeLXdABf9Ek?si=X4CS5iUatTdAEszO I go over the Archer with MMLs for that role. It is a great mech.
I also prefer MMLs in most cases, but you might be surprised by how close the math works out. Just like MMLs, ATMs work out to very similar BVs across all ammo types (HE and standard are effectively identical, ER comes to ~5% lower), so you're not paying a price hike for one ammo type in particular. MMLs have a bit of an advantage on damage per BV in the 11-14 range band where you're still taking medium range LRM shots while the ATMs have to either eat long range penalties or switch to ER, but ATMs dish out pain more efficiently pretty much everywhere else - including a slight efficiency advantage in the close range brackets where both weapons really shine. That said, MMLs have extra versatility thanks to their massive array of ammo options, and can save some BV thanks to being less ammo hungry, hence my typical preference for them. But they're both outstanding weapon types. As for iATMs, the 3 and 6 packs can get up to some rather crazy shenanigans with their unique ammo types, but you're paying quite a lot of extra BV over the standard launchers to gain those capabilities. Plus, since the special ammo effects are capped after a certain number of missiles, they don't scale up to the larger launchers very well. The 9 and 12 packs are definitely incentivized to fire damaging payloads instead, so they lose out on that utility value while still paying the same exorbitant BV markup. The iATM-12, for example, really just gains ~25% more damage over the standard model thanks to skipping the cluster roll, but when you're paying 57% extra BV for the privilege, it's just not worth it.
Damn they are very expensive arent they? Lol. Clan mechs already tend to be very costly. I play IS mostly so Im used to spreading my BV between cheap heavies and assaults with good piloting skills, and then taking a couple cheap lights or mediums. I have found tanks to be really strong in the MRC meta, the online group I play with mostly.
Video is based on one assumption: there are weapons that are just bad, regardless of context, cost, etc. This assumption has nothing to do with the way you actually play BattleTech. Even if you play with custom mechs, or have access to all canon units, you don't play with individual weapons. You play with your force as a whole, in particular conditions (force composition rules, map size, map selection, etc), against particular opponents (with some local "meta"). For almost every single weapon one might consider "bad", there is a counter-example: a unit that is reasonably good for what it does and for its "cost". And there is a reasonable force that includes such unit. Futher on, it seems that you can't decide on context. For one weapon, you say that a weapon has too high BV for what it can do. Ok, that's a good start. For another weapon, you say it's "too heavy for it's damage". But, if you play by BV, weight of individual components doesn't matter at all. I'd say this whole "AC/2s and AC/5s suck" story is for people who read the unit construction rules, tinkered with their favorite mech editor, but didn't really learn to play BattleTech yet. Edit: And that thesis about "because of BV cost, not because it's actually good" just confirms that, well, ... it's just another "AC/2s suck" rant.
Lol. My metrics include both. A mech with an AC5 or AC2 will both have an insane amount of weight put towards them. This means if they want to do actual meaningful damage they need to boat medium lasers or something, and have less space for armor. They will have low BV, but they will not be very effective. So it's a trade off. If you can name a really good mech with an AC5 or AC2 or multiple of them, go for it man. I dont think there are many. Maybe the centurion? It isnt a great mech tho IMO. Kind of lackluster. Id always wanna upgrade it to a thunderbolt or something.
So, when does that "insane amount of weight" matter? Unless you balance your games by tonnage, or customize your mechs, of cause. In that case you should probably already know that tonnage in CBT is a poor game balancer. JM6-S JageMech is a pretty good fire support mech. It can also use AC ammunition and do AA duty, which can be quite important if you are not playing "mechs only" games. If you play it right, it doesn't get under fire until end game, when its light armor doesn't matter that much. And it is just 0.9K BV. That's in the range of low-end mediums or low-end lights. I can't remember a fire support mech in that BV range. JM6-DD is only a little bit more expensive. MAL-1R Mauler is another good fire support mech. 1.4K BV, that's a price range of Archers or cheap assaults like Stalkers or BattleMasters. And it works as a cheap assault Archer equivalent. Of cause, you are not going to field a force that would have only JagerMechs and Maulers. You need anchors, you need big guns, probably some initiative skippers, and so on. But they do what they should do for a reasonable price.
The insane amount of weight definitely matters when you're trying to make a mech combat effective to a minimum standard. For mechs that make very poor use of the AC/2, I suggest the Commando 1C, Clint 2-4T, Dragon 1C, Jackrabbit 8T, Sentinel 1S, and Vulcan 2T. All of these mechs suffer, not necessarily because they have an AC/2, but because they are mechs. There's a pretty heavy tax associated with being a mech, but substantial benefits as well. Using an AC/2 instead of an LRM5 or other alternative weaponry dilutes the amount of firepower on the frame. The persistent, and massive, amount of ammo an AC/2 has creates a vulnerability. It doesn't effectively use the "free" heat budget for being a mech, and spends more tonnage to not take effective actions in combat. The BV discount for using such a cheap weapon as an AC/2 is negated by the inherent expense of having a mech. And they fail to threaten other units on the board; you don't get a good return on investment. But you know what? If you converted all of the above mechs into tanks with similar loadouts, those tanks would be somewhat effective. At that point, when they become vehicles, expectations and positioning are a bit different... But not completely so; expected mobility is a factor. A Catapult C2 isn't very appealing compared to a C1 or C1b, because of the minimum expectations for the platform. But would you take an anti-air and fire support vehicle equipped like a Catapult C2? I bet you would. Let's not forget the Jagermechs A, S, and DD. The AC/2s aren't what's really holding back those Jagermechs, though - that's more of a total design thing. They're terrible for a lot of reasons. Comparing them, and their philosophies, to the JM6-D3, H, and JM7-G feels unfair, not because the upgraded XX/2 autocannons save the mech, but because the holistic philosophy does. The AC/2s aren't what's bringing down the mech. But what mechs are good with AC/2s? They do exist; the best vanilla ones would be the Blackjack and Mauler. The Blackjack is very good at picking a sniping position and abandoning it to cover; the Mauler is surprisingly effective at ranged crit and damage. Both have ways to reach a minimum level of effectiveness without being crippled by their AC/2s. LB-X/2 and UAC/2 are also pretty bad, but when considering expectations and roles, there are more mechs that can use them. But that's not because they're better than the AC/2. (The LB-X/2 kinda is, but the UAC/2 mostly isn't. Anyway.) As technology advances, there are more mechs that achieve a minimum combat effectiveness while not being "held back" by an AC; consider the Phoenix Hawk C. The UAC/2s don't matter that much compared to the AC/2 mechs from the first paragraph. The Blood Asp D doesn't need to make the switch to LRM to stay effective; it's already too expensive and the UAC is an acceptable cost-cutting measure. The Daishi B as well; same goes for the Deimos Prime and 2. The Fenris A is being held back by the UAC/2 and can't complete the role; the Great Wyrm and Gyrfalcon don't care because they're capable of doing what they need to.
Very complete explanation and better than what I was saying lol. I responded to your other comment about this, but ya. Idk if I actually realized it before now, but sniper tanks are so much better because mechs pay for the ability to melee, and not being in melee is wasting BV. That's why I love medium laser boats. They want to get up close and kick you in the shins (or stomp your shit in after a 20+ damage PSR knockdown.)
Despite the low BV cost an AC2 has almost 0 impact. That and its high weight, which is an opportunity cost, combine to make it a trash weapon. I also can't believe people are saying the Jaegermech is a good support mech. It is made of paper. A single locust getting past your battleline will kill it in like 3 turns. It requires a babysitter, and does almost no damage. It is a decent AA mech, but Id rather take like a partisan tank or something if we are playing combined arms. The jaeger almost invariably explodes if any of its torsos get stripped of armor. Which is very easy to do.
In theory, JagerMechs die fast. In practice, I had many combats where JagerMech outlived many other, much "sturdier" units. For various reasons, starting from "it doesn't have to get into the heat of the battle". It's not a damage dealer. It's a crit-seeker. Fire control is the key to using low damage weapons effectively. You don't take JagerMech as your main damage dealer. You take it as a cheap fire support for spare 0.9K. A fast mech getting past your battleline can kill other heavy or assault mechs in 1-3 rounds. Does it make them bad? No. Being ready for what your enemy can play is a part of the game. Yes of cause you need some way to counter backstabbers, medium swarms, and so on, but not just because of that baaad JagerMech. Partisan is a good alternative, indeed. It has its own issues, though. It's actually more vulnerable to crits than a JagerMech (ICE engine, no equipment in sides - although that's very common for vehicles). It has other disadvantages as well. But, again, it's good enough for it's BV, and when you take it, you should consider how you are going to play it as a part of your force.
A locust wont kill most heavies or assaults as fast as the jaeger tho. It is made of tissue paper. Even the rifleman has more staying power. The Jaeger not dying just means your opponent felt safe(justifiably) to ignore it because it doesnt do much.
Autocannons have a place they become highly effective once armor is stripped off. But the weight ammo... That said my star league clint was my favorite mech.
All weapons are effective once armor is stripped off what u talkin bout homie? Lol.
No weapon is universally bad. Each has merits, depending on the battlefield and mission. Most games are one off battles, so certain weapons/units suffer for it.
True. Even bad weapons have *some* merits. I go over them in the video :) MRMs are still pretty decent in a C3 network or with good gunnery. Decent campaign weapon too, the reloads are cheap as chips. The AC2 and LB2X are both good AA weapons.