Hi BlackSodiumIceCreamSC! :)) I Love your videos and your way to describe everything! Always great pleasure to watch your mechmovies! And always it's great pleasure to be with you at the battlefield, espesially by the same side ;) my apologies for my bad english! and God bless you man!
Thank You, Sir, for this very useful information as well as your gameplay style. I have a question for the community. I play the 10's, and I have had good "luck" using 1 AC10 AND 1 LB10x together. (I do not like Ultras. I have been let down by jams and just at the wrong time way too often. I need weapons I can trust.) My thoughts on this are: one is removing armor and seeking crits, the other is punching holes. Yes, this is mid-range plus build, although it works up close as well. Any thoughts will be appreciated.
The regular clan AC10 is worse than the UAC10 in almost every way. I wouldn't recommend mixing cAC10 + LBX but can recommend cUAC10+LBX10 on some builds. LBX would give you reliability whereas UAC10 would give you high burst damage. I don't see a good way of mixing IS AC10 and LBX10 together due to slot requirements but maybe you have a build in mind.
@@BlackhawkSC Ty for your quick response, Sir. I have this (AC10/LB10X) on my King Crab along with 3 SRM6 and 2 Med Lasers. Great Brawler. Every time I use Ultras they jam at just the wrong time. I can not use a weapon I can not depend on. But I will work on using them. Again Thank You!
I'm enjoying the heck out of my RFL-IIC-2 with 6xAC2, and settled on 8xLB2X for the Ultraviolet. Never got the Night Gyr boating 2's to really work for me. edit - and nice survival at 13% in that 2nd game!
The NTG is just an example. The chassis is very average right now but it has that AC2 option, which is viable. Since you shield right with that build and the ammo usage prioritizes the right side over the left, hopefully if your RT gets shot off you'd have spent that ammo already. Another factor is that the NTG takes everything to the CT, and it's horrible at twisting/shielding anyways, so if your RT is destroyed, most likely your CT is about to go soon.
Hehe, well tbh it's really the Rifleman IIC. I saw a lot of people running 6x LB2Xs, including BrioS, and I got curious why You can kind of see my thought process in the comments I wrote here - ruclips.net/video/qRSxJebmIKE/видео.html The advantages of the AC2 were already known, but I never really studied the LB2s closely for about 2 years.
LBX is great on a support fire Mech like a shadowhawk. They can poptart over my head during a push or quickly move around and get a line of sight at 95 KPH I usually play a point Juggernaut. Where as soon as i see a target open CT i switch targets. My 40-65 front-loaded alpha is better as a can opener. While a shadowhawk or piranha finish off the target as i walk past him. No reason putting my guns on a 4 second CD and spending the heat for a kill if the Support mechs can finish the target off in half the time.
This was Clan ballistics, not IS. so a shadowhawk is a moot point. Despite their similarities, the ballistics on both sides are actually quite different. if you don't know already, go to the testing goinds and test a Clan AC20 vs an IS AC20. whole different ball game.
@@Raythe Yes I know the differences... If you read carefully I wasn't addressing how clan ac fire multiple shots or take less space than standard ac or something. That was already covered by Blackhawk. I am specifically referring to the LBX crit vs AC. Where I listed a situation where you can effectively utilize the shotgun like LBX. A situation applicable regardless of faction. Admittedly an absent minded example using the shadowhawk but nowhere near as absent-minded as you failing reading comprehension of a comment.
Correct me if im wrong, but i think you didn't mentioned that C-AC2 is only C-AC weapon that shoots single projectile which makes it way more pinpoint then other C-ACs. Which is a huge part why boating C-AC2s is so efficient even against moving, twisting targets.
I'm not sure I 100% agree with AC2s being more accurate due to their single projectile. The cUAC5 fires 2 projectiles at 2.5 damage each. If the cUAC5 projectiles were the same velocity as the cAC2, you may find the damage applied to be just as accurate as the AC2. Since it takes time for the AC2s to apply their damage, in reality the target will be able to spread that damage somehow if they wanted to. Duration does become a bigger issue at the cUAC10. Even when you're boating 6-8 of them, it's still only 12-16 PPFLD every shot, which is usually not enough to do very much by itself. cACs are still more valued for their DPS and velocity, and not as much for their frontloaded damage.
@@BlackhawkSC What you wrote is very much true when you are shooting big, slow or stationary targets (or if you are really really good shooter). In this case tiny delay between bullets isn't an issue at all. On the other hand when shooting something light, fast or even well twisting medium damage starts to spread due to multiple bullets nature of cUACs. Yes, the bigger the gun, the more bullets per shot, the bigger the spread. Just like you wrote, less of an issue with cUACs 2s and 5s, bigger problem with 10s and huge disadventage with 20s (plus, like you wrote, the smaller the gun the better velocity is). Also again i agree, that AC2 are DPS weapon, not PPFLD. Of course 12 pinpoint per salvo (Rifleman IIC for example) is not amazing, until we factor in that salvos come each 0.72s (-quirks -skill nodes), from up to 900m away, with very good accuracy and that shooter ain't going to stop that bulletfest any time soon due to heat issues... Then it becomes scary AF :) Also i just realised that when talking about "damage spreading" you are thinking more about prolonged firefight when cUAC5s can burst some component (efficient, non spread damage) right at the start by suprise and then they drop off with their efficiency and accuracy as enemy starts twisting. I was thinking more along the line of "Dear Enemy, you can twist all you want, but whenever you turn to face me my ac2's, due to their super low cooldown, will be ready to poke you where you don't want to be poked, and often it would be 2 or even 3 salvos before you turn away again. Also, Dear Enemy, its fun that you are twisting and doing all that fancy stuff, but with AC2s dps and heat efficiency i can shred your shielding side or leg(s) in no time as well and still be ready to punish you when you twish back towards me." Hope i put it in entertaining enough way :)
A big issue with ac2 weapons is the low damage per ton of ammo, their good dps per ton is often ofset by the amount of ammo needed to keep the weapons fed. I would've liked to have seen some discussion on the skill tree regarding ac2 boats. For example how useful are the lbx spread nodes? Would you consider ammo racks a high priority when taking an ac2 boat? etc etc Another thing worth mentioning for such ammo hungry builds is ammo drain order. A lot of maps have teams rotating counter clockwise, exposing the left side to more fire, however it is the CT and RT that drains before the LT, often leading mechs to loose a lot of unused ammo stored in the left side of the mech.
I think you're comparing it to the class 10 autocannons only which received an ammo buff a long time ago. If you look at the 5 and 20, their damage per ton of ammo is the same or lower than the 2. There's a couple of contributing factors to why ammo feels low at times. First is you're ideally boating as many AC2 as you can, so you're left with low free tonnage. Second you're firing early and often, and missing frequently if you're at range. Magazine capacity is a case-by-case basis, but usually you'd like to have them for any ballistic build. It's only two nodes for what's equivalent to a half ton or a ton of ammo, so it's worth it usually. The path way to get to those nodes are usually helpful as well. I might look at the LB spread nodes later, but definitely take them for LB10X and LB20X. Most ballistic builds, except some clan omnis of course, should have 5 slots to put ammo in between the legs and head. Then you have up to another 2 slots in the CT before placing them in the STs. But this is another case-by-case basis. Maybe ammo placement would be a topic for a kind of tutorial type of video.
My point wasn't very strongly tied to any particular comparision. Their good dps per ton is only half the story, with most ac2 boats (like many of those shown in this video) dedicating most of their free tonnage to the ac2's and the large amounts of ammo needed to keep the weapons fed (due principally to things like their low damage per ton). Yeah head, legs and CT being preferable spots to load ammo is common knoledge but many players aren't familiar with the load order. It would also be nice to see a dedicated video that also discusses more advanced concepts like side loading and tips on how you should load mixed ammo types in the mech.
I didn't say that I felt like I needed more ammo. I said that most ac2 boats dedicate most (if not all) of their free tonnage to the weapons and ammo (because of the low damage per ton). It is much like how an energy boat often needs to invest heavily in heat sinks (because otherwise they lack capacity and dissapation to be effective) The damage per ton for just the weapon system is only half of the picture, tonnage also needs to be invested in thngs like heat sinks and ammo, which ultimately does factor into how much dps you can get out of your mech for the tonnage invested (i.e. dps per ton).
You wrote "A big issue with ac2 weapons is the low damage per ton of ammo", and the only way you'd consider that to be low is if you compared it to the class 10 ACs. Dmg per ton for class 2 ACs is 174, equivalent to the AC5 (175) and better than the AC20 (160). So neither DPS/T for the ACs themselves nor the damage per ton of ammo are the issues. So I assumed what you really meant was the tonnage dedicated to boating the number of ACs to make face time worthwhile, which I agree is the real cause of the tonnage problem you're pointing to. Heatsinks isn't a problem except for UAC2 boats since the standard and LBX AC2s have the best damage per heat in their categories. Mostly you're talking about having to give up engine size to boat ACs if you have a battlemech, or give up ammo if you're talking about an omni. In either case you can use less ACs.
Hehe, I don't mind the dislikes. RUclips actually prefers to have people react to the video in some way, either a like or dislike, rather than no reaction at all.
Hey blackhawk, just an fyi, when I'm learning information, I tend to need multiple inputs. they say people are auditory, visual, or require learning by action, but im a mix of all three....Just wanted to suggest when you are talking numbers, such as the DPS comparison in the vid with AC10s to 2s, would be nice to see the numbers lined up or highlighted in direct relation to what you are currently saying. ie, highlight the DPS vs the amount of face time, the heat per shot etc....just high light what you are talking about on a huge chart like that so i know where to point my eyes to better absorb what you are talking about. just my two pennies. thanks man.
Thanks for your input. Aren't the values lined up already in the video? You need to do some multiplication to see that 4x AC2 is about 2x AC10 1x AC5 for example, but it's pretty simple since the DPS value per weapon is already shown on the table. Or just trust what i say ;)
@@BlackhawkSC yes but consider this: i have never seen that chart before. it took me watching the opening to the vid 3 times before i looked over to confirm that the ACs were not in asscending order. they're kinda jumbled. so in order to follow along, with an unfimliar chart, there was a LOT of pausing, re-watching, pausing again, etc..... If you highlight the rows, my eyes will go right to those rows / colums / boxes much quicker and easier, thus making lazier watchers more likely to finish the vid and increase your youtube presence. I'm a digger, but i know a lot of people who aren't.
Another thing I was thinking was that since these tables come straight from Smurfys, people can go there after watching if they needed to verify the math. I didn't think people would do that during the video :)
Nice analysis. CAC-2s work well, but deflection shots at or above 900m can be tricky. If the target is stationary, they incur more damage from head on shots. Evidently, even the high velocity isn't enough. Probably will have to compare ER-PPCs versus CAC-2s versus gauss on velocity, and leading the target. At least we aren't gunners on bombers versus fighters. Thanks!
Hey John, I think you're talking about convergence right? As in, a shot on a stationary mech at 1000m doesn't need to be led, but once it starts moving, then you need to led the shot, then the weapons from one side of your mech can miss.
@@BlackhawkSC I just tested the RFL-IIC-2 at distance. From what I can tell, whatever you aim at, the projectiles from either arm hit in the exact point the reticle is on. If you are at 30-45 degree angle to the mech at 800-900m and aim for the CT, it is actually easier to hit the closer side torso, or with a slight correction, the other side torso rather than CT. I suppose that makes sense. Physics is physics after all. The area of the CT will be smaller when viewed from an angle. I was surprised that the guns converge on a point no matter the distance from what I can tell. But, yeah, deflection shots are difficult at rapidly moving targets at far range if they are at an angle. Travel time makes it difficult to correct the lead and get shells on target. Lasers are easier for extreme long range angle shots.
What you're describing seems to be about MWO's instant convergence system. I did a video on this topic and the problems it causes a very long time ago. ruclips.net/video/iwWD90_QJdA/видео.html
Well the LB2 generate 0.4 heat while the AC2 generate 0.5 heat. the additional 25% heat of the AC2 compared to the LB2 could decide if you take more DHS, skill coolrun or more heatgeneration notes the 17 to 20 points in coolrun/heat containment is nearly enough for full speed tweak, making a Direwolf a bit less slow
Neither of the two builds run into heat issues however. My Rifleman 6x AC2 build has no external DHS and no heat problems. I do have speed tweak on it. The DWF-UV comes with 5 fixed external DHS, which is quite enough to handle 2 more AC2s. The skill tree on my AC2 UV is as follows: abf4f1ee636de7491b1efefffff9f8f03c704000000000000000000000000 So as you can see I invested a lot into the torso nodes and none in heat, other than what is necessary to get to the cooldown nodes. Speed tweak is secondary to having better torso maneuverability.
I think the RAC2 is more comparable to the UAC5 than the AC10. AC10 is a hybrid DPS and alpha weapon whereas the UAC5 and RAC2 have similar DPS and playstyles.
@@BlackhawkSC I would like to see an evaluation of the effectiveness of four clan AC10s vs dual UAC10 and 5s as the normal AC10s have almost zero ghost heat.
@@Kozenger even with the jams accounted for, the 2xUAC5 2xUAC10 have better sustained DPS than quad cAC10s and certainly better max DPS. Heat isn't a big problem. Considering that there are only two mechs in the game that can take 4x cAC10s, they both have enough heatsinks to keep the UAC option cool. The only reason why someone may consider quad cAC10 is that they don't like jams, but I don't think it's a really good reason if they know how to play UACs.
@@BlackhawkSC the uac5's i can fire like they areca macro controlled. Uac 10's not so much bec of frequent jam and heat issue. The 2' s almost i need a macro for to get any use and i hate any software not in game specifically. One of reasons i have bad rep in game
For the AC2s you just need to click the mouse button as fast as possible. I was thinking you're talking about positioning because the way you choose positions and how you time your peeks for the midrange high burst dmg UAC5/10s and the long range high sustained dmg of the ACs is different. But the mouse action is actually the same. If you're playing any kind of standard ACs, you can simply hold down the mouse button and it'll keep firing at its max rate. For ultras you just click as fast as you can. Don't worry about the ultras jamming. If you need to know how to deal with UAC jams, check the tutorial video I did some time back - ruclips.net/video/q0F7ZFzxX4I/видео.html
I hate to say it, but I think your efforts and insightful analysis should be better spent on a game with more appeal. Like maybe elite dangerous or anything else that can garner more player base. Mwo seems to be dying
MWO is losing players and they just announced that the game was pretty much going into maintenance mode. I've gotten suggestions in the past for which game to do videos on. I like analytical games and from what I saw in Elite Dangerous, it seems like it would appeal to me. I saw this game is like 5 years old now too. Does it still have a strong base?
@@BlackhawkSC yeah, it has the most players out of all the space games I believe. Do some research on that, but I believe your amazing analytical skills would be amazing for a game like elite dangerous.
Hi BlackSodiumIceCreamSC! :)) I Love your videos and your way to describe everything! Always great pleasure to watch your mechmovies! And always it's great pleasure to be with you at the battlefield, espesially by the same side ;) my apologies for my bad english! and God bless you man!
Haha, thanks man!
@@BlackhawkSC , thank YOU! Very Much!
Man, you ended that second match with 13% left on that DWF! You rode that thing into the ground. That, was, amazing!
Great insight. Thank you for putting in the effort to make such a solid video
Nice to see an assault front lining it & tanking damage instead of hiding. Thanks for the insight.
i started playing MWO just a couple months ago and so glad i found your channel!! this was a *great* video, thanks for the info!
Thank You, Sir, for this very useful information as well as your gameplay style.
I have a question for the community. I play the 10's, and I have had good "luck" using 1 AC10 AND 1 LB10x together. (I do not like Ultras. I have been let down by jams and just at the wrong time way too often. I need weapons I can trust.)
My thoughts on this are: one is removing armor and seeking crits, the other is punching holes.
Yes, this is mid-range plus build, although it works up close as well.
Any thoughts will be appreciated.
The regular clan AC10 is worse than the UAC10 in almost every way. I wouldn't recommend mixing cAC10 + LBX but can recommend cUAC10+LBX10 on some builds. LBX would give you reliability whereas UAC10 would give you high burst damage.
I don't see a good way of mixing IS AC10 and LBX10 together due to slot requirements but maybe you have a build in mind.
@@BlackhawkSC Ty for your quick response, Sir. I have this (AC10/LB10X) on my King Crab along with 3 SRM6 and 2 Med Lasers. Great Brawler.
Every time I use Ultras they jam at just the wrong time. I can not use a weapon I can not depend on.
But I will work on using them.
Again Thank You!
@@imichael2411 have you seen my UAC tutorial? It won't necessarily change your mind, but it will help understand the math/stats part of it.
@@BlackhawkSC Will watch it asap. Always up for info.
I'm enjoying the heck out of my RFL-IIC-2 with 6xAC2, and settled on 8xLB2X for the Ultraviolet. Never got the Night Gyr boating 2's to really work for me.
edit - and nice survival at 13% in that 2nd game!
Hehe yeah, I was like don't shoot me, don't shoot me...
Night Gyr, get your right side shoot of and you loss your ammo boating side, get the left side blown off and you are left with 1/3 firepower.
The NTG is just an example. The chassis is very average right now but it has that AC2 option, which is viable. Since you shield right with that build and the ammo usage prioritizes the right side over the left, hopefully if your RT gets shot off you'd have spent that ammo already. Another factor is that the NTG takes everything to the CT, and it's horrible at twisting/shielding anyways, so if your RT is destroyed, most likely your CT is about to go soon.
Now i feel like i inspired you to look at ac2s more closely due to our nice discussion a few days back :D Great vid thx
Hehe, well tbh it's really the Rifleman IIC. I saw a lot of people running 6x LB2Xs, including BrioS, and I got curious why
You can kind of see my thought process in the comments I wrote here - ruclips.net/video/qRSxJebmIKE/видео.html
The advantages of the AC2 were already known, but I never really studied the LB2s closely for about 2 years.
LBX is great on a support fire Mech like a shadowhawk. They can poptart over my head during a push or quickly move around and get a line of sight at 95 KPH
I usually play a point Juggernaut. Where as soon as i see a target open CT i switch targets. My 40-65 front-loaded alpha is better as a can opener. While a shadowhawk or piranha finish off the target as i walk past him.
No reason putting my guns on a 4 second CD and spending the heat for a kill if the Support mechs can finish the target off in half the time.
This was Clan ballistics, not IS. so a shadowhawk is a moot point. Despite their similarities, the ballistics on both sides are actually quite different. if you don't know already, go to the testing goinds and test a Clan AC20 vs an IS AC20. whole different ball game.
@@Raythe Yes I know the differences... If you read carefully I wasn't addressing how clan ac fire multiple shots or take less space than standard ac or something. That was already covered by Blackhawk.
I am specifically referring to the LBX crit vs AC. Where I listed a situation where you can effectively utilize the shotgun like LBX. A situation applicable regardless of faction.
Admittedly an absent minded example using the shadowhawk but nowhere near as absent-minded as you failing reading comprehension of a comment.
Interesting analysis. To be honest, I hadn't actually noticed the spread on the LBX. Feels kinda silly now.
Correct me if im wrong, but i think you didn't mentioned that C-AC2 is only C-AC weapon that shoots single projectile which makes it way more pinpoint then other C-ACs. Which is a huge part why boating C-AC2s is so efficient even against moving, twisting targets.
I'm not sure I 100% agree with AC2s being more accurate due to their single projectile. The cUAC5 fires 2 projectiles at 2.5 damage each. If the cUAC5 projectiles were the same velocity as the cAC2, you may find the damage applied to be just as accurate as the AC2. Since it takes time for the AC2s to apply their damage, in reality the target will be able to spread that damage somehow if they wanted to. Duration does become a bigger issue at the cUAC10.
Even when you're boating 6-8 of them, it's still only 12-16 PPFLD every shot, which is usually not enough to do very much by itself. cACs are still more valued for their DPS and velocity, and not as much for their frontloaded damage.
@@BlackhawkSC What you wrote is very much true when you are shooting big, slow or stationary targets (or if you are really really good shooter). In this case tiny delay between bullets isn't an issue at all. On the other hand when shooting something light, fast or even well twisting medium damage starts to spread due to multiple bullets nature of cUACs. Yes, the bigger the gun, the more bullets per shot, the bigger the spread. Just like you wrote, less of an issue with cUACs 2s and 5s, bigger problem with 10s and huge disadventage with 20s (plus, like you wrote, the smaller the gun the better velocity is).
Also again i agree, that AC2 are DPS weapon, not PPFLD. Of course 12 pinpoint per salvo (Rifleman IIC for example) is not amazing, until we factor in that salvos come each 0.72s (-quirks -skill nodes), from up to 900m away, with very good accuracy and that shooter ain't going to stop that bulletfest any time soon due to heat issues... Then it becomes scary AF :)
Also i just realised that when talking about "damage spreading" you are thinking more about prolonged firefight when cUAC5s can burst some component (efficient, non spread damage) right at the start by suprise and then they drop off with their efficiency and accuracy as enemy starts twisting. I was thinking more along the line of "Dear Enemy, you can twist all you want, but whenever you turn to face me my ac2's, due to their super low cooldown, will be ready to poke you where you don't want to be poked, and often it would be 2 or even 3 salvos before you turn away again. Also, Dear Enemy, its fun that you are twisting and doing all that fancy stuff, but with AC2s dps and heat efficiency i can shred your shielding side or leg(s) in no time as well and still be ready to punish you when you twish back towards me." Hope i put it in entertaining enough way :)
Well put, this is pretty much what I had in mind as well.
Thanks for your video!
Keep on going with good job like this
A big issue with ac2 weapons is the low damage per ton of ammo, their good dps per ton is often ofset by the amount of ammo needed to keep the weapons fed.
I would've liked to have seen some discussion on the skill tree regarding ac2 boats. For example how useful are the lbx spread nodes? Would you consider ammo racks a high priority when taking an ac2 boat? etc etc
Another thing worth mentioning for such ammo hungry builds is ammo drain order. A lot of maps have teams rotating counter clockwise, exposing the left side to more fire, however it is the CT and RT that drains before the LT, often leading mechs to loose a lot of unused ammo stored in the left side of the mech.
I think you're comparing it to the class 10 autocannons only which received an ammo buff a long time ago. If you look at the 5 and 20, their damage per ton of ammo is the same or lower than the 2. There's a couple of contributing factors to why ammo feels low at times. First is you're ideally boating as many AC2 as you can, so you're left with low free tonnage. Second you're firing early and often, and missing frequently if you're at range.
Magazine capacity is a case-by-case basis, but usually you'd like to have them for any ballistic build. It's only two nodes for what's equivalent to a half ton or a ton of ammo, so it's worth it usually. The path way to get to those nodes are usually helpful as well.
I might look at the LB spread nodes later, but definitely take them for LB10X and LB20X.
Most ballistic builds, except some clan omnis of course, should have 5 slots to put ammo in between the legs and head. Then you have up to another 2 slots in the CT before placing them in the STs. But this is another case-by-case basis. Maybe ammo placement would be a topic for a kind of tutorial type of video.
My point wasn't very strongly tied to any particular comparision. Their good dps per ton is only half the story, with most ac2 boats (like many of those shown in this video) dedicating most of their free tonnage to the ac2's and the large amounts of ammo needed to keep the weapons fed (due principally to things like their low damage per ton).
Yeah head, legs and CT being preferable spots to load ammo is common knoledge but many players aren't familiar with the load order. It would also be nice to see a dedicated video that also discusses more advanced concepts like side loading and tips on how you should load mixed ammo types in the mech.
If you feel like you need more ammo, then take off an AC2 and add more ammo. The problem isn't low damage per ton of ammo as you originally stated.
I didn't say that I felt like I needed more ammo.
I said that most ac2 boats dedicate most (if not all) of their free tonnage to the weapons and ammo (because of the low damage per ton).
It is much like how an energy boat often needs to invest heavily in heat sinks (because otherwise they lack capacity and dissapation to be effective)
The damage per ton for just the weapon system is only half of the picture, tonnage also needs to be invested in thngs like heat sinks and ammo, which ultimately does factor into how much dps you can get out of your mech for the tonnage invested (i.e. dps per ton).
You wrote "A big issue with ac2 weapons is the low damage per ton of ammo", and the only way you'd consider that to be low is if you compared it to the class 10 ACs. Dmg per ton for class 2 ACs is 174, equivalent to the AC5 (175) and better than the AC20 (160). So neither DPS/T for the ACs themselves nor the damage per ton of ammo are the issues. So I assumed what you really meant was the tonnage dedicated to boating the number of ACs to make face time worthwhile, which I agree is the real cause of the tonnage problem you're pointing to. Heatsinks isn't a problem except for UAC2 boats since the standard and LBX AC2s have the best damage per heat in their categories. Mostly you're talking about having to give up engine size to boat ACs if you have a battlemech, or give up ammo if you're talking about an omni. In either case you can use less ACs.
It's awesome to see 137 likes and no dislikes on the video, great work as always @BlackhawkSC o7 :)
Hehe, I don't mind the dislikes. RUclips actually prefers to have people react to the video in some way, either a like or dislike, rather than no reaction at all.
Great vid. To borrow a phrase..... “knowledge is power....”
Possibly really stupid question--where did you find the jam probability and duration numbers?
Go to smurfy's, then click Equipment, find your UAC, and hover over the "i" in the cooldown column.
Is it a good idea to use a targeting computer for AC2 or Ultra AC2?
IMO no, you need all the tonnage you can spare for ammo or the ACs themselves.
Hey blackhawk, just an fyi, when I'm learning information, I tend to need multiple inputs. they say people are auditory, visual, or require learning by action, but im a mix of all three....Just wanted to suggest when you are talking numbers, such as the DPS comparison in the vid with AC10s to 2s, would be nice to see the numbers lined up or highlighted in direct relation to what you are currently saying. ie, highlight the DPS vs the amount of face time, the heat per shot etc....just high light what you are talking about on a huge chart like that so i know where to point my eyes to better absorb what you are talking about. just my two pennies. thanks man.
Thanks for your input. Aren't the values lined up already in the video? You need to do some multiplication to see that 4x AC2 is about 2x AC10 1x AC5 for example, but it's pretty simple since the DPS value per weapon is already shown on the table. Or just trust what i say ;)
@@BlackhawkSC yes but consider this: i have never seen that chart before. it took me watching the opening to the vid 3 times before i looked over to confirm that the ACs were not in asscending order. they're kinda jumbled. so in order to follow along, with an unfimliar chart, there was a LOT of pausing, re-watching, pausing again, etc..... If you highlight the rows, my eyes will go right to those rows / colums / boxes much quicker and easier, thus making lazier watchers more likely to finish the vid and increase your youtube presence. I'm a digger, but i know a lot of people who aren't.
OK I see what you're saying. I'll think about how to highlight things more clearly in the future.
@@BlackhawkSC thank you!! i know animation can be a bitch, but just a bit goes a long ways sometimes.
Another thing I was thinking was that since these tables come straight from Smurfys, people can go there after watching if they needed to verify the math. I didn't think people would do that during the video :)
Good stuff, thanks BH.
Good video, man. I like your style.
Doesn't Ellenai or Papa Whiskey or Blood Countess run the same thing but IS on an Annihilator? 6xAC2...nvmd
Nice analysis. CAC-2s work well, but deflection shots at or above 900m can be tricky. If the target is stationary, they incur more damage from head on shots. Evidently, even the high velocity isn't enough. Probably will have to compare ER-PPCs versus CAC-2s versus gauss on velocity, and leading the target. At least we aren't gunners on bombers versus fighters. Thanks!
Hey John, I think you're talking about convergence right? As in, a shot on a stationary mech at 1000m doesn't need to be led, but once it starts moving, then you need to led the shot, then the weapons from one side of your mech can miss.
@@BlackhawkSC I just tested the RFL-IIC-2 at distance. From what I can tell, whatever you aim at, the projectiles from either arm hit in the exact point the reticle is on. If you are at 30-45 degree angle to the mech at 800-900m and aim for the CT, it is actually easier to hit the closer side torso, or with a slight correction, the other side torso rather than CT. I suppose that makes sense. Physics is physics after all. The area of the CT will be smaller when viewed from an angle. I was surprised that the guns converge on a point no matter the distance from what I can tell. But, yeah, deflection shots are difficult at rapidly moving targets at far range if they are at an angle. Travel time makes it difficult to correct the lead and get shells on target. Lasers are easier for extreme long range angle shots.
What you're describing seems to be about MWO's instant convergence system. I did a video on this topic and the problems it causes a very long time ago. ruclips.net/video/iwWD90_QJdA/видео.html
Well the LB2 generate 0.4 heat while the AC2 generate 0.5 heat.
the additional 25% heat of the AC2 compared to the LB2 could decide if you take more DHS, skill coolrun or more heatgeneration notes
the 17 to 20 points in coolrun/heat containment is nearly enough for full speed tweak, making a Direwolf a bit less slow
Neither of the two builds run into heat issues however. My Rifleman 6x AC2 build has no external DHS and no heat problems. I do have speed tweak on it. The DWF-UV comes with 5 fixed external DHS, which is quite enough to handle 2 more AC2s. The skill tree on my AC2 UV is as follows: abf4f1ee636de7491b1efefffff9f8f03c704000000000000000000000000
So as you can see I invested a lot into the torso nodes and none in heat, other than what is necessary to get to the cooldown nodes. Speed tweak is secondary to having better torso maneuverability.
please do more, next can you compare the ac 10's to the OP rac 2?
I think the RAC2 is more comparable to the UAC5 than the AC10. AC10 is a hybrid DPS and alpha weapon whereas the UAC5 and RAC2 have similar DPS and playstyles.
@@BlackhawkSC I would like to see an evaluation of the effectiveness of four clan AC10s vs dual UAC10 and 5s as the normal AC10s have almost zero ghost heat.
@@Kozenger even with the jams accounted for, the 2xUAC5 2xUAC10 have better sustained DPS than quad cAC10s and certainly better max DPS. Heat isn't a big problem. Considering that there are only two mechs in the game that can take 4x cAC10s, they both have enough heatsinks to keep the UAC option cool. The only reason why someone may consider quad cAC10 is that they don't like jams, but I don't think it's a really good reason if they know how to play UACs.
Man, you really need something like a HBKIIc to do it well, low mounts sting too much with sustained dps weapons.
My DW uses 4 Ac2 4 lbx 2 for component event.
Do you think that all these values with current weapons in MWO will be the same in MW5...?
I don't think so since MW5 is a PvE game. The balance requirements will be different if balance is needed at all.
DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA!!!!!
I have always had crappy damage from the 2's
I used to also. I'm assuming you do fine with UAC5/10s. If you're used to playing those, the AC2s and even the UAC2s are a little different.
@@BlackhawkSC the uac5's i can fire like they areca macro controlled. Uac 10's not so much bec of frequent jam and heat issue. The 2' s almost i need a macro for to get any use and i hate any software not in game specifically. One of reasons i have bad rep in game
For the AC2s you just need to click the mouse button as fast as possible. I was thinking you're talking about positioning because the way you choose positions and how you time your peeks for the midrange high burst dmg UAC5/10s and the long range high sustained dmg of the ACs is different. But the mouse action is actually the same. If you're playing any kind of standard ACs, you can simply hold down the mouse button and it'll keep firing at its max rate. For ultras you just click as fast as you can. Don't worry about the ultras jamming. If you need to know how to deal with UAC jams, check the tutorial video I did some time back - ruclips.net/video/q0F7ZFzxX4I/видео.html
lol RQ
I hate to say it, but I think your efforts and insightful analysis should be better spent on a game with more appeal. Like maybe elite dangerous or anything else that can garner more player base. Mwo seems to be dying
MWO is losing players and they just announced that the game was pretty much going into maintenance mode. I've gotten suggestions in the past for which game to do videos on. I like analytical games and from what I saw in Elite Dangerous, it seems like it would appeal to me. I saw this game is like 5 years old now too. Does it still have a strong base?
@@BlackhawkSC haha i know the feel. If i can't make an excel sheet to compare pros and cons and come up with play styles i am unhappy :)
Your username is so appropriate...
@@BlackhawkSC yeah, it has the most players out of all the space games I believe. Do some research on that, but I believe your amazing analytical skills would be amazing for a game like elite dangerous.