I expect a lot of people will disagree with my opinion here, but that's cool, I want to hear what other people thing, anyway.
It seems to me that putting chainsaws and axes on heavy and assault titans is more or less a waste of slots and weight. These titans are so slow that it takes a long time to get into the same hex as your oppponent. During that long time, your CC weapons are just dead weight, totally useless. Even when you do get in range, your bare fists do almost as much damage (more in the case of axes) and recycle faster. Of course, you do take damage from the physical attacks, but by the time you're that close, it's generally worth it. I realize you can call shots with CC weapons, but to me it doesn't seem worth the cost.
So, what do the rest of you think?
CC Weapons on Heavy and Assault titans.
Moderator: MOD_TitansOfSteel
-
tarendelcymir
- Posts: 673
- Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2001 8:00 am
- Location: Tucson, AZ, USA
- Contact:
CC Weapons on Heavy and Assault titans.
We sometimes catch a window
A glimpse of what's beyond
Was it just imagination
Stringing us along?
More things than are dreamed about
Unseen and unexplained
We suspend our disbelief
And we are entertained
A glimpse of what's beyond
Was it just imagination
Stringing us along?
More things than are dreamed about
Unseen and unexplained
We suspend our disbelief
And we are entertained
I absolutly agree. CC weapon are great for recons, good for lights, usefull for medium, little help for heavies and dead weight for assaults. I once fought a 4 way duel with an assault carrying two chainsaws. As I died in a burning forest I asked myself wether I had them to chop me my own burning funeral.
yep definitly useless, unless you put weapon in your arms... wich with all the place in the Assault torso would not be the case <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">
( BTW I never use my titans arms , except to put Chainsword in it, I didnt think it is a viable position to gather armor and weapn, too easily cut or desactivated, I'd rather put extra torso armor and weaken the arms... ).
( BTW I never use my titans arms , except to put Chainsword in it, I didnt think it is a viable position to gather armor and weapn, too easily cut or desactivated, I'd rather put extra torso armor and weaken the arms... ).
CCs require speed to use. You actually have to be able to move fast enough to get into the opponents hex in one piece to use them. I'd go with Larkin's evaluation, and put power axes on mediums at most, and saws on heavies at most. Even then, saws I would prefer to limit to lights. (Axes on mediums is still good because of the to hit bonus, the time reload, and the ability to do called shots).
I guess the only time when I've really gotten any use for the CS's on Assaults were the ones where they were designed around the principle of hampering enemy actions. You know, a couple of BRG's, NB's, Flamers, NM's, the like.
Especially with Flamer designs, it's no use to blow enemy titans at your own face, but rather keep them shut down and chop them up with CS. While punching is OK, you'll notice the damage returned while hacking your second, third etc opponent.
A bunch of recons with CS, however, has got to be one of the most efficient ways of utilizing tonnage.. Exactly what assaults in general are poor at.
Especially with Flamer designs, it's no use to blow enemy titans at your own face, but rather keep them shut down and chop them up with CS. While punching is OK, you'll notice the damage returned while hacking your second, third etc opponent.
A bunch of recons with CS, however, has got to be one of the most efficient ways of utilizing tonnage.. Exactly what assaults in general are poor at.
--
Jukka Mikkonen a.k.a. Sir Rechet
Jukka Mikkonen a.k.a. Sir Rechet
Uh, the arms are *the* place to put weapons. Torsos are for electronics. Weapons in the arms can fire even when you're prone, and that makes the arms the ideal place for them. The head too, but usually there's electronics there. You can't put anything else in the arms except armor, and even that is limited. What good is having a bunch of free slots? That is something you don't want to have.Originally posted by Ivan GREYWOLF Kerensky:
yep definitly useless, unless you put weapon in your arms... wich with all the place in the Assault torso would not be the case <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">
( BTW I never use my titans arms , except to put Chainsword in it, I didnt think it is a viable position to gather armor and weapn, too easily cut or desactivated, I'd rather put extra torso armor and weaken the arms... ).
Iceman
SORRY I say Chainsword for the same reason I say 'Mach, because I used this term since more than 15 years and AT and Chainsaw from somemonth on..
Why I dont like putting weapons on arms ?
- they get damaged in hand to hand.
- this force you to put heavy armor in 2 other places.
- If you lost your torso you lost the weapons in the arms too... so why not put therm here in the first place ?
The only place I will conceivly put weapons are legs ( but they often lake place ), because if they are gone then I wont cry I lost my weapons...
I agree that sometimes I am forced to add weapons in arms, but that is only for my munition dependant design ( like the NM ), otherwise I just can put as many items as I want everywhere, even if sometimes I have to be creative ( hint dont expect to find my engine and/or Battlecomp in sensible place ). If I rack too many tons then it is always a layer of armor you can add or an electronic items you can raise 1 level or 2 ( even your HR or Engine ).
Why I dont like putting weapons on arms ?
- they get damaged in hand to hand.
- this force you to put heavy armor in 2 other places.
- If you lost your torso you lost the weapons in the arms too... so why not put therm here in the first place ?
The only place I will conceivly put weapons are legs ( but they often lake place ), because if they are gone then I wont cry I lost my weapons...
I agree that sometimes I am forced to add weapons in arms, but that is only for my munition dependant design ( like the NM ), otherwise I just can put as many items as I want everywhere, even if sometimes I have to be creative ( hint dont expect to find my engine and/or Battlecomp in sensible place ). If I rack too many tons then it is always a layer of armor you can add or an electronic items you can raise 1 level or 2 ( even your HR or Engine ).
Hey, I've been playing BT since the game came out and I don't say PPC in ToS. <img src="smile.gif" border="0">Originally posted by Ivan GREYWOLF Kerensky:
SORRY I say Chainsword for the same reason I say 'Mach, because I used this term since more than 15 years and AT and Chainsaw from somemonth on..
Why I dont like putting weapons on arms ?
- they get damaged in hand to hand.
- this force you to put heavy armor in 2 other places.
- If you lost your torso you lost the weapons in the arms too... so why not put therm here in the first place ?
The only place I will conceivly put weapons are legs ( but they often lake place ), because if they are gone then I wont cry I lost my weapons...
I agree that sometimes I am forced to add weapons in arms, but that is only for my munition dependant design ( like the NM ), otherwise I just can put as many items as I want everywhere, even if sometimes I have to be creative ( hint dont expect to find my engine and/or Battlecomp in sensible place ). If I rack too many tons then it is always a layer of armor you can add or an electronic items you can raise 1 level or 2 ( even your HR or Engine ).
You're not really serious about this 'no weapons in arms' are you? If you're playing this game for months you can't be...
You talk about arms as if they weren't important. They are, almost as important as legs.
What do you mean by 'sensible places'? They usually are in the CT which is (should be) the most armored location or in the CBT which is (should be) the location which is least likely to take damage. Side torsos ot LOT are for small engines, and usually are already filled with electronics. You can get creative, but an active scan will kill your little charade. Besides, a titan with an engine but without a gyro is of little use...
Iceman
Actually I didnt say PPC either... BTW is the Plasma Gun that s supposed to be the CPP ( yep I play Battletech since 2edition so I used french acronyms <img src="tongue.gif" border="0"> ) <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
I doesnt feel that arms are really unimportant but I just dont really care about them. Firing when prone is nice, but right know I far more prefer not getting prone at all.
Actually I checked all my design and can only find one that use weapon ( other than CS ) in the arms.
I totally overshooted the gyro in the CT and the green scan. BTW It is true that the CT are the more probable hit location , but my battle experience told me hit are nicely dispatched in all and every parts ( actually it is a lie, my battel experiment told me that AI only hit in 2 parts : 1 leg and the head, seems that 2 parts make 70% of hit <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> ).
In Fact I have plenty of place because I entirely disregard Ammunition using weaponary ( except the NM ) so I always have plenty of place in the Torso to put all the weapon I want. The only weapon that trick me is the BRG but I still manage to put 2 on my light, and I will eventually put more in my medium and heavy.
I dont believe in a AT covered with weaponnary, I believe in a good scan, a good computer, HR big enough to take as much heat as needed and even more, just as many gun to fire them repetedly and effectively without heat problems, and a NICE armor, and of course some CS if I fancy this design to go HtH. Of course not using JJ either freee me a lot of place , tons and heat.
I guess the Arms take more importance when you use more ammo consuming weaponnary , like the ugly AC20 ( that I despise now ( and was really fond of 5 years ago )). Also my play is more use the range to hurt them then charge them when they close than the charge them , burst as many AC20 round close than you can then get them or at least explode on them.
Perhaps also I am becoming a bit too much cautious with the Heat management too...
Anyway I fully understand people that found arms and JJ to be vital part in their AT design, variety is the life salt and the game fun.
I doesnt feel that arms are really unimportant but I just dont really care about them. Firing when prone is nice, but right know I far more prefer not getting prone at all.
Actually I checked all my design and can only find one that use weapon ( other than CS ) in the arms.
I totally overshooted the gyro in the CT and the green scan. BTW It is true that the CT are the more probable hit location , but my battle experience told me hit are nicely dispatched in all and every parts ( actually it is a lie, my battel experiment told me that AI only hit in 2 parts : 1 leg and the head, seems that 2 parts make 70% of hit <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> ).
In Fact I have plenty of place because I entirely disregard Ammunition using weaponary ( except the NM ) so I always have plenty of place in the Torso to put all the weapon I want. The only weapon that trick me is the BRG but I still manage to put 2 on my light, and I will eventually put more in my medium and heavy.
I dont believe in a AT covered with weaponnary, I believe in a good scan, a good computer, HR big enough to take as much heat as needed and even more, just as many gun to fire them repetedly and effectively without heat problems, and a NICE armor, and of course some CS if I fancy this design to go HtH. Of course not using JJ either freee me a lot of place , tons and heat.
I guess the Arms take more importance when you use more ammo consuming weaponnary , like the ugly AC20 ( that I despise now ( and was really fond of 5 years ago )). Also my play is more use the range to hurt them then charge them when they close than the charge them , burst as many AC20 round close than you can then get them or at least explode on them.
Perhaps also I am becoming a bit too much cautious with the Heat management too...
Anyway I fully understand people that found arms and JJ to be vital part in their AT design, variety is the life salt and the game fun.
The point of CC weapons on an assault Titan-AT is not to always to gain the enemies hex but to have a few extra options when they rush to yours. A chainsaw on a missile TOS is a good addition. Enemies hate missiles so much that they will do everything in their power to close range with you. The chainsaw, poweraxe, Flamethrower, MG, small laser are good additions when you don't want enemies in your hex. Add these and you'll welcome enemies.
My 1.5 cents, I've built a few ToS that didn't have weapons in the arms, they were maxed out in weigh before I got there...but to refuse to put weapons in the arms, that's crazy...
As for assaults with CC, definitely on my flamers, but they rarely suit anything else.
As for assaults with CC, definitely on my flamers, but they rarely suit anything else.
When in doubt, roll in a grenade and come in firing...
A few remarks:Originally posted by Ivan GREYWOLF Kerensky:
I doesnt feel that arms are really unimportant but I just dont really care about them. Firing when prone is nice, but right know I far more prefer not getting prone at all.
I totally overshooted the gyro in the CT and the green scan. BTW It is true that the CT are the more probable hit location , but my battle experience told me hit are nicely dispatched in all and every parts ( actually it is a lie, my battel experiment told me that AI only hit in 2 parts : 1 leg and the head, seems that 2 parts make 70% of hit <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> ).
In Fact I have plenty of place because I entirely disregard Ammunition using weaponary ( except the NM ) so I always have plenty of place in the Torso to put all the weapon I want. The only weapon that trick me is the BRG but I still manage to put 2 on my light, and I will eventually put more in my medium and heavy.
I dont believe in a AT covered with weaponnary, I believe in a good scan, a good computer, HR big enough to take as much heat as needed and even more, just as many gun to fire them repetedly and effectively without heat problems, and a NICE armor, and of course some CS if I fancy this design to go HtH. Of course not using JJ either freee me a lot of place , tons and heat.
I guess the Arms take more importance when you use more ammo consuming weaponnary , like the ugly AC20 ( that I despise now ( and was really fond of 5 years ago )). Also my play is more use the range to hurt them then charge them when they close than the charge them , burst as many AC20 round close than you can then get them or at least explode on them.
Perhaps also I am becoming a bit too much cautious with the Heat management too...
You will care about firing when prone in time <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Your battle experience with the AI will not help you against a human player.
Energy weapons are nice, but they're limited not only by your heat reg but also by your engine. That's more tonnage and slots.
Not having JPs frees slots in the legs and LOT, which can't be used for electronics (LOT can have a shield or a small engine - useless for an energy titan) or big weapons, and usually have slots to spare. Heat for JPs is not really factored in when designing titans...
Range is perhaps the most important factor in ToS, and range means missiles and cannons...
Iceman
Err , yes my experience versus AI is not valuable and I fairly well know it, but I am sorry but I only like playing cooperativly with humans <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
I dont think the extra Engine and HR requirement for energy weapon is really as much a burden in terms of weight and especially space. Anyway you need the better HR and engine for many other uses.
And for the Canon and Missile to get the long range I partially disagree. Yes missile got the long range , and especially the GM you seems so fond of. But canon are worst ranging weapon than energy ones. Most EW deal more damage at long range than their canon counterpart. Also EW are far more precise at long range ( neat + at start , then added + for being energy weapons ).
The only thing more precise at long range than a PG is a GM or perhaps an AC4 ( but the poor damage and extra ammo dont value that much, and it is less precise ).
In range combat I set the GM first , than the PG, then the LRM, then Canon. In average Canon range further that standard Laser but I dont think that the impact was that much as they are harder to hit.
Of course shield are a big problem for energy weapons, but I am not dumb enough to rely on a single team design, I let my NB, NM, MG team in charge of the shielded ones.
Also I want to say that not all the fight come from the flat land with no cover that enable all the weapons to use their furthest range, ( and the limited scanner view dont help too ). So in general you can expect engagement to start within 13 to 15 for the further , and sometimes even just 10 or less hexs.
here is the extract from the manual I use to support my preference for long range fight:
Cannons and Energy weapons (except the Neutron Blaster) have the ability to make called shots. Energy weapons have a +5% modifier when making called shots. Called shots are modified by -2% per hex distance for Cannons, -1% per hex for Energy weapons.
Regular Lasers (all except the Pulse variant) lower the target’s defensive speed modifier (speed/8 instead of the normal speed/5).
All Energy weapons, except the Cold Light Gun and the Neutron Blaster, can overload Shields and have a chance of burning woods hexes and creating steam screens in water/swamp hexes, which depend on the damage of the weapon.
[side effect but nice ]
and all the part about exploding.
I guess we will never agree on our approach on teh AT design/fight and the use of ToS , but that is a good thing that 2 people can enjoy the same game while using it with opposite opinion. ALso perhaps than in a few years we will see we have changed our mind to the other idea ( but keeping opposite of course <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> ).
I dont think the extra Engine and HR requirement for energy weapon is really as much a burden in terms of weight and especially space. Anyway you need the better HR and engine for many other uses.
And for the Canon and Missile to get the long range I partially disagree. Yes missile got the long range , and especially the GM you seems so fond of. But canon are worst ranging weapon than energy ones. Most EW deal more damage at long range than their canon counterpart. Also EW are far more precise at long range ( neat + at start , then added + for being energy weapons ).
The only thing more precise at long range than a PG is a GM or perhaps an AC4 ( but the poor damage and extra ammo dont value that much, and it is less precise ).
In range combat I set the GM first , than the PG, then the LRM, then Canon. In average Canon range further that standard Laser but I dont think that the impact was that much as they are harder to hit.
Of course shield are a big problem for energy weapons, but I am not dumb enough to rely on a single team design, I let my NB, NM, MG team in charge of the shielded ones.
Also I want to say that not all the fight come from the flat land with no cover that enable all the weapons to use their furthest range, ( and the limited scanner view dont help too ). So in general you can expect engagement to start within 13 to 15 for the further , and sometimes even just 10 or less hexs.
here is the extract from the manual I use to support my preference for long range fight:
Cannons and Energy weapons (except the Neutron Blaster) have the ability to make called shots. Energy weapons have a +5% modifier when making called shots. Called shots are modified by -2% per hex distance for Cannons, -1% per hex for Energy weapons.
Regular Lasers (all except the Pulse variant) lower the target’s defensive speed modifier (speed/8 instead of the normal speed/5).
All Energy weapons, except the Cold Light Gun and the Neutron Blaster, can overload Shields and have a chance of burning woods hexes and creating steam screens in water/swamp hexes, which depend on the damage of the weapon.
[side effect but nice ]
and all the part about exploding.
I guess we will never agree on our approach on teh AT design/fight and the use of ToS , but that is a good thing that 2 people can enjoy the same game while using it with opposite opinion. ALso perhaps than in a few years we will see we have changed our mind to the other idea ( but keeping opposite of course <img src="smile.gif" border="0"> ).
I don't particularly favor GMs, I don't know where you got that idea. As for cannons being worst ranged weapons then energy, are you sure you're playing ToS?! There's only *one* long range energy weapon, the PG. How can they be more precise at long range?!Originally posted by Ivan GREYWOLF Kerensky:
And for the Canon and Missile to get the long range I partially disagree. Yes missile got the long range , and especially the GM you seems so fond of. But canon are worst ranging weapon than energy ones. Most EW deal more damage at long range than their canon counterpart. Also EW are far more precise at long range ( neat + at start , then added + for being energy weapons ).
The only thing more precise at long range than a PG is a GM or perhaps an AC4 ( but the poor damage and extra ammo dont value that much, and it is less precise ).
In range combat I set the GM first , than the PG, then the LRM, then Canon. In average Canon range further that standard Laser but I dont think that the impact was that much as they are harder to hit.
Of course shield are a big problem for energy weapons, but I am not dumb enough to rely on a single team design, I let my NB, NM, MG team in charge of the shielded ones.
Also I want to say that not all the fight come from the flat land with no cover that enable all the weapons to use their furthest range, ( and the limited scanner view dont help too ). So in general you can expect engagement to start within 13 to 15 for the further , and sometimes even just 10 or less hexs.
here is the extract from the manual I use to support my preference for long range fight:
...
You're forgetting about the GC for precision/sniper ability. It matches the PG except in range. It is superior to the LL. Cannons harder to hit with than standard lasers?! Way too many assumptions there. LRMs range is higher than PG's BTW.
NB *is* an energy weapon, NMs are affected by shields, MG is close combat. Hope you have better than that in your team.
About terrain, yes not all maps are flat, and that's why there's this thing called tactical advantage you can get by climbing a hill. Very useful for any long range titan. JPs help a great deal there, but then you don't use them so maybe that's what's clouding your judgement <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
About the manual excert, I know about that, I wrote/reworked it <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
Iceman
oups sorry typo, MG mean Meson Gun and not Machine gun.
And yes in basic range cannon under 7 damage beat Laser. But laser got precision bonus , especially against moving target so I favor EW.
I put GC out of the discussion because I dont consider them real cannon , after all their ammo dont explode and they consume PU to fire. Also I just dont see why I would use GC and not PG 'cause tehy are real close.
And I put LRM after PG not for range but for efficiency at range, PG hit more easily and with more constant damage so it is more efficient.
The other fact about hill that I learn with not using JJ to jump on it is that they can easily conceal your movement to close on the ennemy and negating his range bonus. Even if you need to cross his LOS for 1 hex sometimes ou can usually close near 10-12 hex to engage.
And my apologies for my allusion to GM , I obviously msitake you for another people.
Also I am fairly aware I didnt have the truth, cause nobody have it except the Lord. So all my opinions are just my opinions that I share ther with you. They are not dogma, they can be false , I dont care they are jsut my opinions and my feelings.
And yes in basic range cannon under 7 damage beat Laser. But laser got precision bonus , especially against moving target so I favor EW.
I put GC out of the discussion because I dont consider them real cannon , after all their ammo dont explode and they consume PU to fire. Also I just dont see why I would use GC and not PG 'cause tehy are real close.
And I put LRM after PG not for range but for efficiency at range, PG hit more easily and with more constant damage so it is more efficient.
The other fact about hill that I learn with not using JJ to jump on it is that they can easily conceal your movement to close on the ennemy and negating his range bonus. Even if you need to cross his LOS for 1 hex sometimes ou can usually close near 10-12 hex to engage.
And my apologies for my allusion to GM , I obviously msitake you for another people.
Also I am fairly aware I didnt have the truth, cause nobody have it except the Lord. So all my opinions are just my opinions that I share ther with you. They are not dogma, they can be false , I dont care they are jsut my opinions and my feelings.
You are not making sense with the 'cannon under 7 damage' argument, but hey. Read the stats again. The bonus of regular lasers is only really a bonus against fast moving targets. They do however have a -5% penalty for accuracy, and the inherent penalty due to shorter ranges.Originally posted by Ivan GREYWOLF Kerensky:
And yes in basic range cannon under 7 damage beat Laser. But laser got precision bonus , especially against moving target so I favor EW.
I put GC out of the discussion because I dont consider them real cannon , after all their ammo dont explode and they consume PU to fire. Also I just dont see why I would use GC and not PG 'cause tehy are real close.
And I put LRM after PG not for range but for efficiency at range, PG hit more easily and with more constant damage so it is more efficient.
The other fact about hill that I learn with not using JJ to jump on it is that they can easily conceal your movement to close on the ennemy and negating his range bonus. Even if you need to cross his LOS for 1 hex sometimes ou can usually close near 10-12 hex to engage.
GCs *are* cannons, just like FTs are energy and NMs are missiles. Their non exploding ammo, their higher accuracy, their lower min range are nice advantages. Requiring PUs to fire will only hamper you (maybe) if you want to fire them when moving. As it is basically a sniper weapon, I don't see a problem with this. Anyways, the PG needs PUs to recharge, doesn't it?! It also creates less heat BTW.
LRMs are more efficient than the PG at 19+ hexes <img src="smile.gif" border="0">
With the JPs argument I was countering *exactly* what you said up there...
In my previous post I meant wrote the excerpt and reworked the manual, so there's no confusion...
And Mike, Larkin saw for himself the power of GMs, which I had already told him about way back. *I* didn't change a thing. I see it as my obligation to report whatever I think is unbalanced. Is this wrong in your oppinion?
Iceman
Seems like this calls for that old post of mine pitting cannons and energy weapons.. Some figures have changed, so let's see!
Option A : Long range w/decent damage. Propably PG/LL vs GC/AC7. Say we want to have 20+ pts alpha strike capability to keep things equal. You'll need 2PG, 3LL, 2GC or 3AC7, and the ability to use them all to their fullest potential. Average damages per second equal to 1.5/2.7/1.1/1.3, respectively.
Energy weapons use 6/6 slots for the weapons themselves and weigh 15/12 tons. They create a heat dissipation need of 4/6.3 C/sec, and require 6/6 extra PU's to use. Heat reg 9/A must be installed, netting 9/9 slots and 16/20 tons. Engine 7 is minimum, yet another 5 slots and 22 tons. With ECM and shield 1, Engine 9 is needed, 6 slots and 32 tons. Totals : PG, 20/21 slots and 53(63) tons. LL, 20(21) slots and 54(64) tons. (Numbers in parentheses are with a shield and ECM)
Cannons require 8/9 slots for the weapons and 2-6/3-9 slots for ammo and weigh 21-23/19.5-22.5 tons, depending on ammo. They create 2.1/2.1 C/sec, both requiring heat reg 3, 3 slots and 5 tons. Engine may be level 1, with ECM and Shield 1 it rises to level 3. Another 2/3 slots and 5/9 tons. Totals : GC, 15-19(16-20) slots and 31-33(35-37) tons. AC7, 17-23(18-24) slots and 29.5-32.5(33.5-36.5) tons.
Here, cannons win both 'slots' and 'tonnage' competition with quite a margin. Energy naturally excels at dishing out damage faster, if you can stand the heat.
Option B :Short Range with heavy damage. Propably Tesla/CLG vs AC20/AC12. Let's use 2TB, 3CLG, 2AC20 and 3AC12 in comparison, as they are about 'equal', cannons with range and energy weapons with faster damage output. Average damages per second are 3.3/3.5/1.8/1.9, respectively.
Energy weapons use 8/12 slots, weigh 20/28.5 tons, create 4.7/4.1 C/sec of heat and require 6/9 PU's to use. CLG's period at 3PU/sec is considerably short, so I'll assume 7PU average usage is enough. Heat reg A/9 is required, 9/9 slots and 20/16 tons. Engine 7/8 (9/10 w/shield1 and ECM) is also needed, netting 5/6 (6/7) slots and 22/27 (32/38) tons. Totals : TB, 22(23) slots and 62(72) tons. CLG, 27(28) slots and 71.5(82.5) tons.
Cannons use 10/12 slots for the weapons and 2-6/3-9 slots for ammo, weighing at 25-27/28.5-31.5 tons, depending on ammo. They create 2.3/2.5 C/sec, thus heat 4 is OK, netting 3 slots and 6 tons. Engine may be left at level 1, and if shield and ECM are required, level 3. They net another 2/3 slots and 5/9 tons. Totals : AC20, 17-21(18-22) slots and 36-38(40-42) tons. AC12, 20-26(21-27) slots and 39.5-42.5(43.5-46.5) tons.
Here again, cannons win 'slots' and 'tonnage' competitions quite clearly, while energy weapons dish out their damage out faster.
Now, what happens if we're to go beyond the damage ranges posed here? Very simple answer : Energy weapons have pretty much reached their upper limits, as there's no way you can have enough energy for more weapons, and HEAT is your worst enemy of them all. Cannons here are just about to begin the heat ramp-up, with lots of room to spare for better heat regs available.
As if that wasn't the final insult on energy weapons, they still have one extra worry : SHIELDS. Ammo explosions for cannons are very much a rarity, unless you play very recklessly. (Or your enemy has Mesons and a rabbit's luck <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> ) Besides, your chances to hit at critical heat levels are getting so low, that sometimes you're better of waiting to cool down first.
There is one thing that allows the energy weapons not to be a complete waste. Unparalled damage output ratio. In some cases it doesn't really matter if your heat skyrockets, if you manage to cut off that one final screw holding your enemy titan's LoT together.. But in general, cannons work everywhere with the same certainty. That's why I love them.
Option A : Long range w/decent damage. Propably PG/LL vs GC/AC7. Say we want to have 20+ pts alpha strike capability to keep things equal. You'll need 2PG, 3LL, 2GC or 3AC7, and the ability to use them all to their fullest potential. Average damages per second equal to 1.5/2.7/1.1/1.3, respectively.
Energy weapons use 6/6 slots for the weapons themselves and weigh 15/12 tons. They create a heat dissipation need of 4/6.3 C/sec, and require 6/6 extra PU's to use. Heat reg 9/A must be installed, netting 9/9 slots and 16/20 tons. Engine 7 is minimum, yet another 5 slots and 22 tons. With ECM and shield 1, Engine 9 is needed, 6 slots and 32 tons. Totals : PG, 20/21 slots and 53(63) tons. LL, 20(21) slots and 54(64) tons. (Numbers in parentheses are with a shield and ECM)
Cannons require 8/9 slots for the weapons and 2-6/3-9 slots for ammo and weigh 21-23/19.5-22.5 tons, depending on ammo. They create 2.1/2.1 C/sec, both requiring heat reg 3, 3 slots and 5 tons. Engine may be level 1, with ECM and Shield 1 it rises to level 3. Another 2/3 slots and 5/9 tons. Totals : GC, 15-19(16-20) slots and 31-33(35-37) tons. AC7, 17-23(18-24) slots and 29.5-32.5(33.5-36.5) tons.
Here, cannons win both 'slots' and 'tonnage' competition with quite a margin. Energy naturally excels at dishing out damage faster, if you can stand the heat.
Option B :Short Range with heavy damage. Propably Tesla/CLG vs AC20/AC12. Let's use 2TB, 3CLG, 2AC20 and 3AC12 in comparison, as they are about 'equal', cannons with range and energy weapons with faster damage output. Average damages per second are 3.3/3.5/1.8/1.9, respectively.
Energy weapons use 8/12 slots, weigh 20/28.5 tons, create 4.7/4.1 C/sec of heat and require 6/9 PU's to use. CLG's period at 3PU/sec is considerably short, so I'll assume 7PU average usage is enough. Heat reg A/9 is required, 9/9 slots and 20/16 tons. Engine 7/8 (9/10 w/shield1 and ECM) is also needed, netting 5/6 (6/7) slots and 22/27 (32/38) tons. Totals : TB, 22(23) slots and 62(72) tons. CLG, 27(28) slots and 71.5(82.5) tons.
Cannons use 10/12 slots for the weapons and 2-6/3-9 slots for ammo, weighing at 25-27/28.5-31.5 tons, depending on ammo. They create 2.3/2.5 C/sec, thus heat 4 is OK, netting 3 slots and 6 tons. Engine may be left at level 1, and if shield and ECM are required, level 3. They net another 2/3 slots and 5/9 tons. Totals : AC20, 17-21(18-22) slots and 36-38(40-42) tons. AC12, 20-26(21-27) slots and 39.5-42.5(43.5-46.5) tons.
Here again, cannons win 'slots' and 'tonnage' competitions quite clearly, while energy weapons dish out their damage out faster.
Now, what happens if we're to go beyond the damage ranges posed here? Very simple answer : Energy weapons have pretty much reached their upper limits, as there's no way you can have enough energy for more weapons, and HEAT is your worst enemy of them all. Cannons here are just about to begin the heat ramp-up, with lots of room to spare for better heat regs available.
As if that wasn't the final insult on energy weapons, they still have one extra worry : SHIELDS. Ammo explosions for cannons are very much a rarity, unless you play very recklessly. (Or your enemy has Mesons and a rabbit's luck <img src="biggrin.gif" border="0"> ) Besides, your chances to hit at critical heat levels are getting so low, that sometimes you're better of waiting to cool down first.
There is one thing that allows the energy weapons not to be a complete waste. Unparalled damage output ratio. In some cases it doesn't really matter if your heat skyrockets, if you manage to cut off that one final screw holding your enemy titan's LoT together.. But in general, cannons work everywhere with the same certainty. That's why I love them.
--
Jukka Mikkonen a.k.a. Sir Rechet
Jukka Mikkonen a.k.a. Sir Rechet