Jump to content

Uac5 (And 2/10/20) Proper Jam Mechanic


39 replies to this topic

#21 Roland

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:19 AM

View PostGeneral Taskeen, on 25 September 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

I'm not sure why a Clanner would equip a space magic gun that jams by rolling the dice 50%, win or lose!

Well, the UAC's were always simply AC's that were better in that they could be fired in ultra mode... but you wouldn't actually always CHOOSE to fire them in ultra mode. You did so if you wanted to incur the risk of ruining your weapon in exchange for the potentially doubled damage.

#22 Mackman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:34 AM

View Postaniviron, on 25 September 2013 - 05:25 PM, said:

I understand the people who are against the random jam chance; personally, I'm not, as there is a skill to knowing percentages, i.e. on average this works out better, so you can be certain that something is a winning strategy most of the time, even if there is jitter because of the randomness.


You voiced the problem yourself: The possibility of choosing "a winning strategy" and losing anyway. There's nothing that feels so bad as choosing what was statistically the correct choice, and losing anyway... which, with the potential loss of damage being so high, is actually not unlikely in end-of-the-match scenarios.

#23 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:34 AM

View PostGeneral Taskeen, on 25 September 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:


I can like this hard enough.

Getting tired of the BS rolling dice mechanic and the way UAC's are programmed in general. They need to return to how they were in previous Mech titles, just a faster firing AC, spread out in a burst of lower damage shells.

OP, its good that took some time to think this out - but, I also like playing Clan Mechs in previous Mech Warrior games and I'm not sure why a Clanner would equip a space magic gun that jams by rolling the dice 50%, win or lose!

It wasn't that the Gun Jammed 50% of the time, It hardly ever jammed it was that even if you hit you ha to see if you hit with both slugs which is fairly realistic to spray and pray Machine gun fire. MGs are not anywhere near a precision weapon. So second round had to deal with recoil of the gun.

#24 Mackman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:37 AM

View Postfocuspark, on 26 September 2013 - 07:39 AM, said:

this is easy. The goal of balancing the UAC/5 is to make it possible to do burst damage, but control its overall DPS. Therefore the following mechanic is ideal for any size UAC.

UACn cooldown = ACn cooldown
UAC can fire again after 33% of its cooldown has taken place, but takes a "backlog" of cooldown time for any incomplete cooldown
When the UAC reaches 300% of its cooldown, it "jams" and must cooldown to 0% backlog before it can fire again.

In the case of the UAC5 we have a 1.5 second cooldown. A mechwarrior could:
  • Fire the UAC5
  • Wait 33% of 1.5 seconds (0.5 seconds)
  • Fire the UAC5 - now has a backlog of 1.0 seconds
  • Wait 033% of 1.5 seconds (0.5 seconds)
  • Fire the UAC5 - now has a backlog of 2.0 seconds
  • wash rinse repeat
  • Until four shots have been fired and there's a backlock > 300% 1.5 seconds (5.0 seconds > 4.5 seconds)
  • Wait 5.0 seconds for the UAC to "unjam"


This is perfect right here. This is what it should be.

#25 AC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,161 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:38 AM

There is nothing Battletech Ultra about the UAC's. They pretty much operate as a PGI made up weapon right now. They actually feel like Rotary autocannons with their jam chance and their unjamming ability. UAC's need to fire at the regular AC rate when you hold down the trigger, but if you double tap then you can fire at double rate. I don't care how this mechanic is accomplish, by double clicking, a separate button, dual modes, whatever... but that mechanic needs to be present. Without it, UAC's are just fast firing regular autocannons with a random chance to require a longer cool down (ie unjamming). Unjamming shouldn't be automatic, but it also shouldn't be complex. In Battletech it required the pilots input to unjam, and I feel simply having a button to initiate unjamming would be sufficient, rather than making it automatic.

Edited by AC, 26 September 2013 - 09:39 AM.


#26 Almond Brown

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 5,851 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:43 AM

This may be a great "stay with a straight TT translation" unit. Give it a very Low chance to Jam, but if it Jams you lose use of the weapon for the rest of the Match. Just like in TT right? Doesn't get any better in MWO than a direct TT translation right?

TT ftw... :huh:

#27 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:51 AM

View PostAlmond Brown, on 26 September 2013 - 09:43 AM, said:

This may be a great "stay with a straight TT translation" unit. Give it a very Low chance to Jam, but if it Jams you lose use of the weapon for the rest of the Match. Just like in TT right? Doesn't get any better in MWO than a direct TT translation right?

TT ftw... :huh:

I could and would play it that way. However in the Advanced rules there is rules for unjamming an Ultra, so I am ok with it happening in MWO.

#28 El Death Smurf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 362 posts
  • LocationIdaho

Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:57 AM

View PostAlmond Brown, on 26 September 2013 - 09:43 AM, said:

This may be a great "stay with a straight TT translation" unit. Give it a very Low chance to Jam, but if it Jams you lose use of the weapon for the rest of the Match. Just like in TT right? Doesn't get any better in MWO than a direct TT translation right?

TT ftw... :huh:


1st off, right you are. it was a permanent jam. as in no more auto cannon. (there was no button the pilot pressed to unjam aside from advanced rules) so I think most of the people bltching about the jamming that is currently the closest to TT (with dice rolls) of any previous MechWarrior game need to stop and realize how close to original intent UACs are. a lot of ideas being presented WILL NOT WORK with higher calibers (10s or 20s w/o a proper chance to jam will be so OP they might as well not build them). I just haven't seen any ideas that will be "skill based" as well as "not-going-to-break-the-game."

#29 Calica

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 30 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 10:05 AM

View PostAC, on 26 September 2013 - 09:38 AM, said:

There is nothing Battletech Ultra about the UAC's. They pretty much operate as a PGI made up weapon right now. They actually feel like Rotary autocannons with their jam chance and their unjamming ability. UAC's need to fire at the regular AC rate when you hold down the trigger, but if you double tap then you can fire at double rate. I don't care how this mechanic is accomplish, by double clicking, a separate button, dual modes, whatever... but that mechanic needs to be present. Without it, UAC's are just fast firing regular autocannons with a random chance to require a longer cool down (ie unjamming). Unjamming shouldn't be automatic, but it also shouldn't be complex. In Battletech it required the pilots input to unjam, and I feel simply having a button to initiate unjamming would be sufficient, rather than making it automatic.


Pilot Input? Why not, we can introduce Pilot and Gunnery Skill at the same time so that we have to roll dice every time we use a jumpjet....

Whatever the mechanics that are chosen, they need to be simple, balanced and playable. TT Mechanics just dont stick it.

#30 Joseph Mallan

    ForumWarrior

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 35,216 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationMallanhold, Furillo

Posted 26 September 2013 - 10:15 AM

View PostEl Death Smurf, on 26 September 2013 - 09:57 AM, said:


1st off, right you are. it was a permanent jam. as in no more auto cannon. (there was no button the pilot pressed to unjam aside from advanced rules) so I think most of the people bltching about the jamming that is currently the closest to TT (with dice rolls) of any previous MechWarrior game need to stop and realize how close to original intent UACs are. a lot of ideas being presented WILL NOT WORK with higher calibers (10s or 20s w/o a proper chance to jam will be so OP they might as well not build them). I just haven't seen any ideas that will be "skill based" as well as "not-going-to-break-the-game."

A weapon jamming should not be based on skill... it is a random mechanical failure.

#31 focuspark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Ardent
  • The Ardent
  • 3,180 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 11:11 AM

View PostAlmond Brown, on 26 September 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

It is interesting to read how so many want Random Hit/Spread/CoF damage application vs the Pinpoint, but when a random element is added, the world rails against it like it was Lucifer himself that did the work. Interesting. LOL :huh:

Note that it's the possibility of infinite DPS spike that makes the random nature of the UAC beast a problem. Given that MWO is, at its heart, a competitive game pure randomness should lie only with the players and their skill; not in the mechanics of the game.

Could you imagine a game of Football where players cleats randomly broke? It'd be complete and udder {Scrap}.

#32 Xanquil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 474 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 11:36 AM

I feel sorry for those people that hate random failure chances so much. I can all ready see the crying when MASC is finely put into the game. "Why is my mech limping after running MASC for a few seconds?" As long as the UAC2, 10, and 20 use the same rules as the current UAC5 than I think PGI is on the right track with the weapon. And like I said earlier all it needs is a way to disable/activate the double tap and it is balanced with it's equivalent AC (UAC5 vs AC5)

#33 Mackman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 746 posts
  • LocationCalifornia

Posted 26 September 2013 - 11:55 AM

View PostXanquil, on 26 September 2013 - 11:36 AM, said:

I feel sorry for those people that hate random failure chances so much. I can all ready see the crying when MASC is finely put into the game. "Why is my mech limping after running MASC for a few seconds?" As long as the UAC2, 10, and 20 use the same rules as the current UAC5 than I think PGI is on the right track with the weapon. And like I said earlier all it needs is a way to disable/activate the double tap and it is balanced with it's equivalent AC (UAC5 vs AC5)


Are you serious, dude? With an AC-5, the jam chance can mean you do anywhere from 5 to, say, 25 without jamming. With a UAC 20, it's a chance to do anywhere from 20 to INSTADEATH on any mech. And you really think that's fine? That would be the dumbest thing they could possibly do!

#34 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 11:57 AM

View PostSirLANsalot, on 25 September 2013 - 02:12 PM, said:

This post has been a long time coming.


This isn't the first time it's been posted. Some of us have stated this to them since closed beta, when the unjam was manual and difficult.

The increasing jam rate is actually canon and tabletop. Although jams were also permanent as a MAJOR balancing factor.

As far as fluff, there are various kinds of ACs and UACs. Some single shot -- but these were ultra rare. (Example, the Cauldron Born is one of the few single-shot does 20 damage style UAC/20 carrying mechs. The Hunchback IIC's twin UAC/20s fired 6 shots to deal 20 damage (per gun), and the firing rate simply doubled to do another 20.)

The regular Hunchback's AC/20 is demonstrated in video (by Microprose) as having a 5-shot AC/20. Although official art usually depicts 4 barrels -- a 4-shot AC/20 would be a Chemjet Gun AC/20, though.

Other assorted book-based examples include the 12 shot Deathgiver 120mm AC/20s (King Crab), the 15 shot Deathgiver 100mm AC/20 (Atlas), the Whirlwind triple-shot AC/5, and so many more.

Some ACs, like the one of those found on the MW:LL mod, are fully automatic but low caliber. (The AC/5 I'm specifically mentioning fired 5 shots of "1" damage each at a constant, non-stop rate which totaled 5 damage every 2 seconds or 1 shot every 0.4 seconds).

There's essentially 3 types.
  • The one mentioned above; fully automatic but they are low caliber, low damage per shot, and are measured by a unit of time.
    • (Example: If an AC/2 deals 2 damage every 0.52 seconds, then a 2 shot fully automatic AC/2 would deal 2 shots with each shot being 1 damage every 0.26 seconds. Second example: If an AC/20 requires 4 seconds to fire again, then a 100 shot AC/20 does 20 damage in 100 shots spread out over 4 seconds with no cooldown). You could and should in theory be able to stop firing at any moment in time.
      • Despite a constant rate of fire, this is actually the slowest firing of the multi-shot versions. The higher the caliber, the longer the wait between shots (to an almost AC/2-like wait for weak versions of AC/20 multi-shot versions).
      • Actual ammunition is calculated by how many shots per ton of single shot ammo (6 for an AC/20) as the units of time you'd get to fire (4 seconds), times how many shots per unit of time. So if it's 100 shots per 4 seconds, you'd get 6 units of time, or 600 shots per ton.
  • The kind we 'hear' in MW3, Burst Fire. This is actually the most common sorts in the books. The weapon is rated by how much damage it does per trigger squeeze or burst. The autocannon is loaded by magazines called "cassettes" in lore. When the cassette is loaded and the trigger squeezed, the weapon fires every shot in that cassette until it's dry.
    • An example is the Whirlwind AC/5 which has a 3 shot cassette. The Chemjet Gun is described in a specific book as a 4 shot AC/20 (although we commonly refer to it as a 3 shot as I once believed it was until I read it myself). The Crusher Super Heavy Autocannon/20 burst-fire variant fires a rapid burst of 10 shots per load.
      • After a burst, the 'cooldown' time is a mixture of ejecting and loading the new cassette as well as giving the barrels time to cool.
      • This fires faster than the MG versions, but with significantly longer waits in between bursts.
        • Shot count is measured in trigger squeezes. Example if a single shot AC/20 has 6 shots per ton, then you will always be entitled to 6 trigger pulls or bursts per ton.
  • And then there are the single shot versions. These are the highest caliber feasibly possible for each classification of autocannon.
    • In terms of lore these are the RAREST form of autocannons and not that different from Rifles.
      • The recoil from the AC/10 and AC/20 weapons were such that smaller mechs could not equip them without losing the limb associated with it. As such an AC/20 Jager would either lose its arm or fall on its back trying to use a single shot AC/20; favoring instead smaller caliber multi-shot styles such as the Crusher. Only mechs such as the Cauldron Born could mount single shot does 20 damage-style UAC/20s as the recoil was so strong the Atlas test caused it to lose its balance unless the mech was stationary and braced before use.
    • In terms of mechanics, aside from violent recoil jerks for larger singleshot ACs, they work as shown in MWO.
Interestingly enough, of the UAC fluff to be found in books and on Sarna, only the UAC/5 is specifically mentioned to be of a smaller caliber (as in for my interpretation, UAC/2, 10, and 20 can have single shot versions but the UAC/5 does not). Just food for thought.

What makes a rotary AC different when there's already MG style regular ACs? Rotary cannons can fire them 6 times faster though at much faster heat build up and incredible risk for jams.

(Edit: Correction on the rotary cannon details.)

Edited by Koniving, 27 September 2013 - 12:18 PM.


#35 Roland

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,260 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 12:37 PM

View PostAC, on 26 September 2013 - 09:38 AM, said:

Unjamming shouldn't be automatic, but it also shouldn't be complex. In Battletech it required the pilots input to unjam, and I feel simply having a button to initiate unjamming would be sufficient, rather than making it automatic.

In Battletech, you couldn't unjam UAC's at all. When they jammed, they were done. Only RAC's could be un-jammed through pilot skill.

They used to have a lower jam chance, but unjamming effectively required a sequence of key presses. The problem was that it could be macroed such that folks with better input devices could just unjam by pressing a button.

One way to get around this would be for them to require some randomized sequence of key presses in order to unjam, then they could avoid macros, while giving a low enough jam chance that it wouldn't generally affect the guns as much... but when a jam occurred, it was much more problematic.

They already said they are reworking the UAC"s though, so we'll see what the next incarnation is.

#36 Xanquil

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 474 posts

Posted 26 September 2013 - 06:02 PM

View PostMackman, on 26 September 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:


Are you serious, dude? With an AC-5, the jam chance can mean you do anywhere from 5 to, say, 25 without jamming. With a UAC 20, it's a chance to do anywhere from 20 to INSTADEATH on any mech. And you really think that's fine? That would be the dumbest thing they could possibly do!


Yes I am, as long as those 2 ac20 rounds don't hit the same spot automagicaly I have no problem with an UAC20 being able to double tap in the same amount of time it would take a normal AC20 to fire.

#37 Cimarb

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Caladbolg
  • Caladbolg
  • 3,912 posts
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationA hop, skip and jump from Terra

Posted 27 September 2013 - 11:41 AM

View PostKoniving, on 26 September 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

There's essentially 3 types.
  • The one mentioned above; fully automatic but they are low caliber, low damage per shot, and are measured by a unit of time. <snip>
[/list][*]The kind we 'hear' in MW3, Burst Fire. This is actually the most common sorts in the books. The weapon is rated by how much damage it does per trigger squeeze or burst. The autocannon is loaded by magazines called &quot;cassettes&quot; in lore. When the cassette is loaded and the trigger squeezed, the weapon fires every shot in that cassette until it's dry.
[/list]<snip>
[/list][*]And then there are the single shot versions. These are the highest caliber feasibly possible for each classification of autocannon.<snip>
[/list]


I think either of these two alternatives are by far better implementations than the existing single shot. There is far too much similarity between AC/UAC, and these would give a very distinct and meaningful difference between them. I in NO WAY support a permanent jam, as that would absolutely erase any chance anyone would ever equip one again.

#38 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 11:50 AM

View PostCimarb, on 27 September 2013 - 11:41 AM, said:

I think either of these two alternatives are by far better implementations than the existing single shot. There is far too much similarity between AC/UAC, and these would give a very distinct and meaningful difference between them. I in NO WAY support a permanent jam, as that would absolutely erase any chance anyone would ever equip one again.


I agree. Although a permanent jam is feasible, if the percentage were very low. Say it starts out at 1%, and grows in 1% increases until either it jams or you let go of the trigger on MG-style ones. Ties in with the CW posts I've been doing here. However, temporary jams are fine enough. The increasing percentage the OP was calling for (in whatever increments) is a pretty solid idea.

But yes. I agree with you whole heartedly. The UAC/5 bullets are 3 times larger than the barrel, and with so many barrels it's wasted to not have a dual or triple shot system. Here's to hoping for weapon variants (also mentioned on that link.)

The rotation bug is gone but this is still a good way of demonstrating that bullet size.

Edited by Koniving, 27 September 2013 - 03:58 PM.


#39 SirLANsalot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,540 posts
  • LocationWashington State

Posted 27 September 2013 - 04:42 PM

What you are mentioning there is the different manufacturers of the Auto-cannons. Each planet produced different AC's and such they were classified as AC2/5/10/20. PGI has mentioned doing the manufactures at a later date, and tieing them into CW (aka fight for XX planet to get/cheapen the cost of XX list of guns). Different planets produced different colored lasers too, the only thing that stayed the same throughout the IS were the LRM's, as they all were pretty much the same.

As for my OP, I was writing a system for what we have NOW, not for something that might come in the next 2 years.

#40 RandomLurker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 393 posts

Posted 27 September 2013 - 04:50 PM

Honestly, I'm fully in favor of never bringing out UAC/20s ever. I don't see any way for them to be balanced.

As for the jam mechanic, the TT method isn't any good because it's not under the pilot's control. Neither is the current PGI mechanic. A rotary-style increasing jam chance (the game art DOES show a rotating barrel), or a clip-based burst damage mechanic are the best options I can see. Not that either of those are especially good, but I'm not aware of better alternatives.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users