LB 10-X vs UAC/5

Pages: 1 | 2 | >> (show all)
KamikazeJohnson
03/30/14 02:00 AM
50.72.218.68

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
On my "Operation: Upgrade" thread, I've had the comment a couple times now that I could, and perhaps should, have upgraded an AC/5 to a LB 10-X rather than a UAC/5, which I had used as it was the direct upgrade and thus more in line with my upgrade philosophy for that project.

It got me thinking though about which weapon is actually better.

First: range.
UAC/5: (2)6/13/20
LB 10-X: 6/12/18

So the LB 10-X has no minimum, so it gains a slight to-hit advantage in close, although the UAC/5's minimum is by no means prohibitive. At range 1 it is no worse than at range 7-13. The UAC/5, however, gains a range bracket at range 13, and has 2 additional hexes at long range. I think we can fairly call that an even trade.

If the UAC/5 is used in Ultra mode, both weapons produce the same heat, and both have the same number of shots/ton. The UAC does have the versatility of being able to choose both heat and ammo consumption by switching between Normal and Ultra.

Damage/shot (average):
LB 10-X (slug): 10
LB 10-X (cluster): 6.47
UAC/5: 7.08

So the UAC/5 does more damage/hit than Cluster, but less than Slug, has slightly better range (at the cost of a small Minimum Range penalty), and weighs 2 tons less. The LB 10-X has improved accuracy with Cluster ammo, plus better crit-seeking ability, and larger single-hit damage with the slug.

Taken as a direct weapon-vs-weapon effectiveness comparison, the LB 10-X clearly has an edge, but much less of an edge than it seems at first glance. Once you factor in the 2-ton weight difference, the UAC/5 may actually be the better option (especially if you spend the 2 tons on a TC).

Any thoughts?
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
03/30/14 04:13 AM
66.27.181.1

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
retry is the min/max person. He could have your tech for answers.

the lesser max range for more damage would depend on the unit it's on. If you have to be within range of another weapon, then the 10 would make sense. It does more damage on a hit, since the five is possible to miss one or entirely. It does offer the extra damage to infantry and is a crit making shot agaisnt the vehicle and even mechs when it hits with cluster rounds.

The ultra 5 is decent because you can use single fire mode and not burn through ammo as fast, plus the extra distance may be a factor.

I would guess the big factor is IF you have the extra weight to use.
KamikazeJohnson
04/01/14 12:12 PM
50.72.218.68

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I wasn't a big fan of the UAC/5 until I ran those numbers...now the 2-ton saving compared to the LB 10-X is very attractive. I still like the 10-point crunch of the LB 10-X, although I find the cluster shot to be a situational tool rather than a primary use...somehow the thought of an 11-ton weapon that averages only 6.5 damage/hit doesn't appeal to me. I would use the cluster for the -1 advantage on low-odds shots, and for crit-seeking once there are armour gaps to exploit.

I think most would agree that a PPC would be preferred over either, but if the default heat dissipation is already met, the low heat output of the ACs means savings in tonnage and (often more importantly) critical space due to not having to install large numbers of additional heat sinks.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
04/01/14 02:52 PM
66.27.181.1

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
the biggest problem with the ultras is if the second shot hits or not. That has always been an issue with me.

I'm not sure how the rac figures if all shots hit, but if you fire it and have to roll for each shot, it can be very annoying.
KamikazeJohnson
04/01/14 05:27 PM
50.72.218.68

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

the biggest problem with the ultras is if the second shot hits or not. That has always been an issue with me.



No worse than the LB-X Cluster roll. And unless you have luck like mine, the second shot hits often enough (41.6% to be precise). It does get frustrating with the larger cannons though, where a single extra hit can be game-changing.

Quote:
I'm not sure how the rac figures if all shots hit, but if you fire it and have to roll for each shot, it can be very annoying.



RACs work the same way...choose your rate of fire, then roll on the Cluster Hit Table if the shot hit to determine number of hits.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
Retry
04/01/14 06:05 PM
76.7.236.208

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I prefer the LB-X cluster rolls to the UAC ones, usually. A 40% chance to-hit with the second salvo, and ONLY if the first salvo hits at all, is ignorable except in the highest autocannon ratings. On top of that, they generate extra heat, weigh more(in the IS), and don't benefit from the -1 from LB X ACs, and also consume more ammo when using it in ultra mode. Plus, the LB X ACs are just more versatile overall than their UAC equivalents, especially vs. anything that flies.

If given the choice between the IS UAC5 and the IS LB 10X, I will take the latter nearly every single time. I have yet to find a seriously useful niche for the UAC5 that simply finding 2 spare tons to fit the LB 10X or even swapping the weapon for something completely different would be an overall better fit.

I just houserule UACs to fire twice instead of cluster hits table rolling myself. Doesn't make sense to me that the second salvo is dependant on the first salvo. It has the side-effect of actually making the cUACs competitive with everything else.
ghostrider
04/01/14 06:44 PM
66.27.181.1

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
depending in the to hit rolls, firing twice can help or hurt your chances. I believe it is a 7+ for the second shot to hit. If you get alot of chances to roll under that, then great. if its over, well take your chances.

While on this type of subject, how do you handle ultras with targetting computers attached?
KamikazeJohnson
04/01/14 07:12 PM
50.72.218.68

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

depending in the to hit rolls, firing twice can help or hurt your chances. I believe it is a 7+ for the second shot to hit. If you get alot of chances to roll under that, then great. if its over, well take your chances.

While on this type of subject, how do you handle ultras with targetting computers attached?



UACs and RACs are treated the same as missile launchers...a single to-hit roll, and if that hits, you roll on the Cluster Hit Table to determine number of hits. So on a UAC, a Cluster roll of 8+ means both shots hit. A RAC firing at full rate will use the same table as a SRM 6.

TC will only affect the initial to-hit roll, not the Cluster Hit roll...it will increase the frequency of a hit, but not the number of shots that hit, if that's clear.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
04/01/14 09:44 PM
66.27.181.1

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
thought it was 7+ for the second shot. Been a while. I know you roll on the srm 2 hit tables to see if both hit.

Retry was talking about a house rule he uses. Basically look like you roll twice, one for each burst of the ultra cannons. I was wondering how he deals with the multiple fire rates.
I would think it would allow the second burst to hit if they first one did. It is supposed to help with the aim.

Hmm. I can see both sides of that one.
TigerShark
04/01/14 10:41 PM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
If it's my table (and it often is), I refuse to allow UACs to jam during a game. The BV calculation for them has NO factor for the jamming of UAC/RAC type weapons, so I won't penalize them for something that didn't receive a discount in the first place.

A bit like MASC, where I'll give a free turn of success, only beginning the 3,5,7... count on Turn 2 of usage. Just like UAC/RACs, the failure rate has no accounting in the calculation. No sense in penalizing the tech.
Retry
04/01/14 10:49 PM
76.7.236.208

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
MASC did bug me on that regards. Is your mech fresh out off the best factory line in the world? Too bad, you still have a 1/36 chance of catastrophic failure every time you use it!
TigerShark
04/01/14 10:56 PM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
It makes sense that repeated usage would make it fail. Firing a machine gun in a continuous stream of uninterrupted fire will warp and melt the barrel. But firing in short bursts allows it to be "pushed" within safe ranges.

I see MASC as the same type of equipment. It should have a "safe" range of usage. Heck, you could put the same "MASC failure" roll on a UAC and have it make more sense than it permanently jamming.
Retry
04/01/14 11:02 PM
76.7.236.208

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Sure, I'm certain eventually there'd be problems with repeated usage, like twice in a row but when you use it once in an entire scenario just to get to do something like kick some guy while he's down or something, and then it fails spontaneously, despite the first time you've ever used it since you've owned the mech.

I never use MASC so that's never actually happened to me, but the point is made.
KamikazeJohnson
04/01/14 11:26 PM
50.72.218.68

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

Retry was talking about a house rule he uses. Basically look like you roll twice, one for each burst of the ultra cannons. I was wondering how he deals with the multiple fire rates.



Sorry...damn Smart Phones, make it hard to track the thread of a conversation lol.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
04/02/14 12:52 AM
66.27.181.1

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I did have a masc failure on the first turn of the game. It ruined the session. Instead of being able to assault the target we needed to, it turned out to be stand and protect the immobile mech.

Had the same issues with having an ultra lock on the first turn.
TigerShark
04/02/14 12:54 AM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Yeah. And for being a "technological advancement," these two systems actually hurt your game play. I don't buy that the SLDF would have moved either past the developmental stage with constant failure rates so I don't play them that way.
ghostrider
04/02/14 01:11 AM
66.27.181.1

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
sad thing is the ultra lock was an ac 20. yeah, that was about the time we moved onto other games.
TigerShark
04/02/14 01:15 AM
68.190.197.104

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
The Clans can create a battle fleet which could flatten the Inner Sphere from orbit. But a firing mechanism that doesn't blow up in one try? Whoah... slow down. They're not miracle workers. ;-)
ghostrider
04/02/14 01:18 AM
66.27.181.1

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
the warships were created by the star league. The clans just made them deadlier.

But I do agree. The clan ultras should not have the firing problems. Even after all this time, they made weapons lighter, more powerful, and could fire at longer ranges, but not fix a simple arming issue?
I would think they would not use an inferior weapon that does this.
KitK
07/03/14 02:32 AM
69.11.32.247

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
OK, I cheated and didn't read everything. But I will blurt in anyway!

I use a stat I call Combat Cycle Damage Production for just this kind of comparison where the assumption is that weight, crits and heat are not so much of a factor as actual damage output. It does a nice job of accounting for range differences and all the plinks and plunks of the lb-shot. It assumes ultra mode all of the time, which of course we all know will result in a jam sooner or later (it's not if, it is when). But you have to ultra all the time to get the full benefit (else it is just a AC5 with a bit of extra range).

uAC5 - 26.2
LB-10x slug 37.8
LB-10x shot 32.9

The uAC5 fails this particular test because:
one of its extra hexes of range is in the low damage production bracket.
the extra 1 hex of range in middle bracket can't make up enough difference by itself
It get's cut short on damage in the high production bracket with its minimum range
The LBx shot's -1 to hit makes a huge difference in damage production for this comparison
The LBx slug just out muscles the uAC5 with such little difference in the range brackets (That includes automatic misses at 19 and 20 hexes)

Nix the minimum range and stretch the short and medium range by 1 instead of the medium and long and you get 30.8. So still under par.

But going from an AC5 to and LB10X could be a pretty tall order for a light or medium mech, depending on how invasive of an upgrade we are talking about.
KamikazeJohnson
07/03/14 02:40 AM
50.72.218.68

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
So the LB 10-X is clearly the better weapon. What happens when you factor in the 2-ton difference? Assume you use those tons on a TC, so -1 to-hit across the board. How much effect would that have?
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
KitK
07/04/14 01:52 AM
69.11.32.247

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Interesting option.

37.6, so basically on par with the LB10x slug.
KamikazeJohnson
07/04/14 04:46 PM
50.72.218.68

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
KitK writes:

Interesting option.

37.6, so basically on par with the LB10x slug.



I picked the TC since it spends the 2 tons to specifically improve the weapon, as opposed to tying to evaluate adding 2 MLs, or more ammo, or any other use for 2 extra tons. So you can say that if one 'Mech is carrying a UAC/5, and the other is carrying a LB 10-X (other things being equal), then the LB 10-X has it better by a reasonable margin. But when it comes to choosing which to put on a 'Mech, it's kinda like choosing PPC vs Large Laser. The two even out quite nicely.

Of course, that doesn't factor in the UAC Jamming rule. Slightly less than 50% of the time, the UAC will jam before using up 2 full tons of ammo (20 shots in Ultra mode, 40 total). Not sure how to calculate the effect of your average damage...
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
KitK
07/05/14 12:46 AM
69.11.32.247

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I had never worked out the jam. It seemed too daunting. So, I hope I did this right.

Every instance of firing the weapon has a 1 in 36 chance of a jam. So, I divided the combat cycle by 36 to see how many jams I would get.

Then I assumed 1 ton of ammo and that the jam always occurred on the first shot, leaving 18 in the bin. Divide by 2 for what would have been ultra mode and apply my average damage per shot. Then I discounted the automatic misses (necessary to account for range between weapons) in the combat cycle (otherwise too much not-produced damage gets subtracted). Then I got the new number.

So, attempting to account for jams my Combat Cycle Damage Production for the uAC5 falls to 15.7. This is ever so slightly less than the standard AC5 at

Put the TC back on and it comes out .

Just to put some context on the CCDP stat, a pilot with gunnery 4 walking while shooting at a target with a +2 modifier will on average produce damage equal to the CCDP with the given weapon in a 20 turn duel. Actual player behavior will render the number completely meaningless, thus it is theoretical. The number is meant compare different weapons while accounting for range, and it reflects long-term, dedicated use of a weapon, not just one combat engagement.


Edited by KitK (07/05/14 12:11 PM)
KamikazeJohnson
07/05/14 11:41 AM
50.72.218.68

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
My approach to handle the jam would be to calculate average number of non-jamming shots out of a given series. I believe the standard of comparison was 20 rounds, which would be 40 rounds in Ultra mode.

So over 20 rounds, that should amount to:
(35/36) + (35/36)^2 + (35/36)^3...+ (35/56)^20.

That sum should give you your damage multiplier. Naturally, for a single ton of ammo, you'd end the series at 10 rather than 20.

First thing that's apparent: the value of the UAC/5 decreases relative to the LB 10-X as the ammo supply rises (risk of ammo explosion is identical for both weapons)

I'm working from my phone right now...anyone care to sum that series for me? Or if there's a shortcut to sum the series, that would be helpful...my Calculus is way too far behind me. (Should be a straight Integral, shouldn't it?)
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
KitK
07/05/14 12:14 PM
69.11.32.247

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I pulled my numbers out of the post. I was sitting on the crapper this morning and realized the numbers were s...

I used the wrong number of rounds in the bin.

I'll work out a fix soon as I have a chance.
ghostrider
07/06/14 09:58 AM
24.30.130.113

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
I thought the ultras only jammed when firing double fire mode.
If that is true, then how do you figure out the numbers unless you consider all shots fired as double fire?
Karagin
07/06/14 11:13 AM
70.118.139.48

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
They do only jam during ULTRA fire mode.
Karagin

Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
KamikazeJohnson
07/06/14 12:37 PM
24.114.41.73

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Quote:
ghostrider writes:

I thought the ultras only jammed when firing double fire mode.
If that is true, then how do you figure out the numbers unless you consider all shots fired as double fire?



Since we're doing a direct effectiveness comparison, I think we pretty much have to assume Ultra mode, since the LB 10-X is clearly superior vs Songle-shot mode.
Peace is that glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.
--Thomas Jefferson
ghostrider
07/07/14 03:30 AM
24.30.130.113

Edit Reply Quote Quick Reply
Ok. I was under the idea that you were doing a full comparising, that might included ammunition as part of the evaluation. Yes the 10 does more damage, but runs out of shots faster then the 5 on single fire mode, and the lesser range does play a part of the accuracies. The ultra has the same shots if only fired in double fire modes.
Was curious on the perimeters of the evaluation.
Pages: 1 | 2 | >> (show all)
Extra information
0 registered and 43 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie 

Print Topic

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled

Topic views: 20170


Contact Admins Sarna.net