This is pretty much it. Autocannons only need a simple fix, and a falloff boost is what they need. As long as Torpedoes get boosted too 
-Lowest fitting
-Highest tracking
-No capacitor cost per cycle.
-Decent range
These traits alone make ACs the default best option for most ships with turret slots but without bonuses. I’ve seen a lot of Gnosis packing dual 180s and 220 vulcans, they are frankly the best choice, the low fitting allows for the best tank setups on a hull, Prophecies, Myrmidons and other drone ships are hands on best fitted with ACs. You try fitting Blasters or Pulses you lose on multiple traits I’ve stated above there is so much compromise not using ACs, this has been a long standing rule, they are already popular and effective. If you need more falloff, get some Sooth sayer. I think Autocannons are completely fine.
1 Like
Like many said before lowslot and midslot modules can do this.
A midslot tracking computer with range script will increase optimal and falloff ranges.
The lowslot module isn’t as good, but it does also add an increase to tracking.
Interesting how no one has touch med on the rig enhancements.
As for ammo, like all turret weapon, the ammo isn’t solely about damage, its the other effects they offer.
Saying missile do the same damage is just near sighted comment, it fails to take into account things like range, tracking and even multi-damage type capacity ammo has.
Yes the Autocannons as lacking in a sense, but remember its counterpart the artillery, seems some have forgotten these massive alpha strike capable turrets every faction have two turret types, and they are balanced as a whole.
If you compared all turrets, you’d notice a trend between them all.
what kind of argument is this
why should you have to sacrifice tank/damage to have the range you need to have
people always say “but you have this” and “but you have that”, but they never elaborate on what these may entail
“next patch we are nerfing blaster damage by 50%”
“oh no ccp what the hell are you doing you did to blasters what blasters did to ships”
“but you can use magstabs to deal as much damage as before”
“ok then we’re cool”
wait he’s going to cite you a page of uniwiki explaining that tracking computer increase tracking and range.
then tell you “if you don’t agree with me you to and tell it to uniwiki!!”
Well its player choice really when you think about. You don’t have to use them.
Its like me armour tanking with a missile/drone boat, i could mount ballistic modules and drone damage modules, or other drone and missile in lowslots, to get better damage or range, or more tank modules.
And midslots are similar better range/hits vs utility modules.
It depends on what player want out of their ship, you like tanking, so you sacrifice weapon mod modules for better tank, other want more dps, so sacrifice tanking modules.
What possible is just an existing option that does what people say turrets needs. It there, just question of are they willing to use them?
You are saying that a ship with 1 DPs is balanced, because you can increase it with magstab.
That’s a completely dumb idea.
all of your arguments are shots in the dark, yes you can use modules that do things at the expense of other modules that do other things. i’m yet to see you provide any context where an ac platform can fit tracking modules and be able to compete with its counterparts.
itt there is a video, an article and many paragraphs explaining why acs are underperforming in relevant contexts. no viable counter argument to refute them so far.
“b-but minnies have arties too that means it’s balanced”
jesus
2 Likes
I think this is probably the easiest way to visualize the comments in this thread. I’ve made 2 graphs with 4 ships. I chose battlecruisers because they all have the exact same range bonuses (25% optimal and 25% fall-off). So every ship is on equal footing here. I’ve also made fits for each ship that mimic each other to some extent. See below:
Hurricane fit = 425mm autocannons w/ 2 TE and 2 T2 ambit extension rigs
Brutix Fit = Neutron Blasters w/ 2 TE and 2 T2 Locus rigs (null)
Harbinger Fit = Heavy Pulse Lasers with 2 T2 locus rigs (scorch)
Drake fit = Heavy missiles with an application scripted tracking computer and a rigor rig (base range is 78km)
First graph below is with the hurricane using short range ammo (selectable damage type ammo):
In case the colors are hard to read out in the graph:
Green = autocannons
Red = Blasters
Blue = Lasers
Teal = Heavy Missiles
As you can see from the first graph, the autocannon hurricane using EMP/Fusion/Plasma does not out dps the brutix until about 26km. Even though it out dps’ the brutix past 26km, its not like the brutix goes to 0 dps at 26km. At 27km its less than a 30dps difference and at 32km its about a 55 dps difference. Which, in the scheme of things, its pretty negligible. On paper yes, the autocannon does more damage at that range, but the actual damage difference is pretty weak. If you take it to the extreme because of “a/c fall-off” and go to 50km, the cane is doing 46 dps, brutix is 17 dps, so a 30 dps difference. The harb is doing 76 dps as its also deep in fall-off and still out dps’ the hurricane.
The drake/HML does a consistent 256 dps outside of 10km (web range). So autocannons out dps heavy missiles until about 26km, then heavy missiles will continue doing the same damage until ~78km and out dps autocannons everywhere else.
So, where on that graph are autocannons actually “good” at their job as a medium range weapon platform? If you want to compare directly to blasters, it would be inbetween 26km and 60km, but again, the physical difference between them in that range is at worst, about 55 dps, but on average around 30 dps. Not really a huge difference all things considered.
Here is autocannons with barrage loaded. Now, they beat the brutix/blasters at about 22.8km. However, using barrage, you no longer have selectable damage, you’re doing explo/kin now at all times, which is terrible against shield ships and amarr T2 ships. Have fun shooting kiting retributions with barrage. The spread between blasters and autocannons is better now, at about 100 dps difference at 30km. However, at 32km, the autocannon dps falls below heavy missile damage and does not even match scorch dps at 0km. So the actual “good or usable” range for 425’s with barrage is 22km to 32km. So 10km of range that another weapon system does not do better. Technically Scorch is still better in that range, so its still doing 445dps all the way till 38km, but an argument can be made for flexibility of damage in that range, even though you’re taking a ~200-250 dps hit compared to scorch.
This is a more realistic look at autocannons when connected to ships with similar bonuses. Its easy to point out that a 425mm stabber does more dps than a null thorax at range, but the thorax doesn’t have a range bonus. With all these ships being the same for range with similar fits, you get a better idea on where an a/c ship’s engagement range is. Which to put it simply, its just not good. 10km of “good” range with barrage is also misleading, since if something burns into you and scrams you, the reload time will kill you, or if some other cruiser tries to brawl you, it will outdps you as well.
You could say a dual TE and Locus rig brutix is not a normal fit, and i’d agree, but i’ve worked it out to still be a competitive combat fit (Brutix Navy is better, but i’m going for comparison reasons here). Its more to show if all things are kept equal/similar, autocannons don’t really maintain their role and aren’t competitive in a realistic sense with other available weapon options.
To touch on hurricane fittings, most canes are going with 220’s for fitting reasons, and 425’s are pretty much used on the old 2012 shield cane fit which isn’t really competitive in the current meta since it lacks a web and its tank is pretty sub-par (~45k EHP). If you go with armor or 220 fits, then you’re going to lose damage/range, which will then bring the blaster dps in closer competition.
5 Likes
I see the real problem with auto cannons being that the hulls that are bonused for them are not bonused well enough for them. Autocannons are certainly the weakest of the gun types but they have a real niche. They need to be properly bonused for that niche. CCP really needs to decide if they want autocannons to be the long range skirmish guns, or the close range easy fitting guns. Currently different missile types really eat into the usefulness of skirmish guns. If you crank up the damage output you end up in the realm of blasters, if you increase the range much more you end up in the long range gun space. Fundamentally the ships that use autocannons need more balance passes so that they have actual places to be used. The Angel ship line is excellent, but the main Minmatar line could use some serious help.
Clear lines of what is a Rifter supposed to do, What is a Firetail supposed to do, and what is a Vargur supposed to do would do a lot to fix the gripes of autocannons.
1 Like
My apologies for my ignorance but would a +10% damage increase help autocannons to be the cool guns again?
Not really. Sure some setups like the ACs + Neut Gnosis would love that because that would stack with its 50% damage bonus. And its going to be essentially hugging its target anyways. But for the guys trying to kite in the sweet spot? They still see fall-off eat most of their damage.
I’d say adjusting the rate at which fall-off curves out for auto-cannons might be a bit more appropriate than either adding damage or extra fall-off directly.
1 Like
Just making a weapon system do the most damage isn’t a sustainable solution really - The problem is that their niche was supposed to be flexibility and they don’t really have that any more.
5 Likes
After giving this a little more thinking I think the best fix would be to change how falloff works for them. A line that goes to 75% damage aft falloff range then hits 0% at double falloff would give much more consistent damage inside falloff range and allow for the last half of falloff range to be where autocannons would shine.
Pros
More consistent damage in falloff
Range is still limited like any other turret platform
Cons
Starts to infringe on missile consistency
To answer the cons of what I am thinking about. Instead of using missile math autocannons would still use turret math which would make transversal equally important to application as it is now.
Obviously I have done no math for how fair this would actually be but I do think it solves the problem of how should autocannons be handled.
I also want to add that I am thinking about this in a way of “Where do I want to see autocannons shine.” Which for me is personally deep into falloff. I am sure other people want them to be easy to fit and operate which would take a different fix.
- turrets
WTF ?
Weapon systems need to be looked at holistically with what other options can be put in each highslot. As a weapon system Missiles have the pro of being very consistent damage at range. My solution would bring up Autocannon consistency to a very similar level. That is WTF I am talking about.
Missile Math is also more consistent because it does not take the direction of both the target and shooter into account.
if you add more “specific case” you work against consistency.
“AC are turrets but actually they don’t use angular” is meh.
Also your idea of “better damage” is easily done : divide falloff by 2, add that reduction into optimal range.
I am sorry but this does not make sense to me, not sure of the point your making. I am sure something is being lost in translation.
Your second point about increase optimal range is very interesting. The reason I did not go with this as the solve is I think it keeps the damage to flat and it punishes high damage weapon types like blasters two heavily. If auto cannons can get 80% of a blasters optimal damage for such a large amount of distance it would be very hard for blasters to mitigate any damage while closing to their optimal. It is a very interesting solve though and I think you would need to test both to see which feels better in the long run.
This is a dumb argument. We already run mag stabs.
They are vastly more flexible than blasters. They pay for it in paper dps and tracking though.