102 replies to this topic

[TOGSolid]

Monky, on 11 September 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

I don't really follow your logic there, if you can accomplish higher DPS than single firing while avoiding a jam through a macro, it will always be better to run the macro

You can't macro around the jam chance because it applies to every double shot after the initial normal shot. It's an unavoidable mechanic.

Edited by TOGSolid, 11 September 2013 - 01:45 PM.

[Monky]

I don't even.... here just watch this

[TOGSolid]

The entire point of the UAC macro is to allow the user to hold down the button and not double fire them because the UACs fire much faster than regular ACs allowing for a superior level of DPS. This is why reducing their normal fire rate or buffing the AC/5's fire rate would kill the need for macros because you'd just use an AC/5 instead.

If you watch the ammo counters in that video they decrease steadily instead of having random double shots. You cannot create a macro that allows double firing and not jamming. It's mutually exclusive.

EDIT: Hell, the macro website itself explains that this is exactly what's happening too:

Quote

when piloting a Mech equipped with an Ultra AC/5, if you hold the weapon fire key down, it will fire in “double tap” mode (aka rapid fire). This will likely lead to it jamming. In order to most effectively use the Ultra AC/5 and keep it from jamming, you must independently fire it every 1.1 seconds. However, it is a tedious task to independently press the weapon fire key every 1.1 seconds so that double tap does not trigger. A macro can easily solve this problem

Edited by TOGSolid, 11 September 2013 - 02:36 PM.

[Stoney74]

Why not just make the jam chance apply to every round, and be done with it?

[TOGSolid]

Stoney74, on 11 September 2013 - 02:24 PM, said:

Why not just make the jam chance apply to every round, and be done with it?

Because that would be incredibly ham fisted. There have been some solid, simple suggestions on how UACs should be that utilize current mechanics and require no extra coding so there's no reason not to go in that direction, at least short term.

[Deathsani]

I am both elated and supremely disturbed by the level of complexity weapons dynamics have in this game. Good work on all of the maths though.

[Sprouticus]

I <3 good math.

I am not really a user of Ac's aside from Ac20's as it doesn't fit my playstyle. I honestly thought UAC5's were a bit OP with the 15% but I also am self aware enough to realize that I might have some bias.

This math brings it into some level of rational evaluaiton.

1) I think the UAC5 should be slightly (0.1 or 0.2s) slower recycle Than the AC5. The aforementioned ability to double tap for burst DPS should have an offset balancewise.Use AC5's for sustained DPS (brawls, open field fighting, etc) and UAC'5 for hit and run and burst.

2) I think 20% will turn out to be the sweet spot, or close enough that the difference is negligible.

3) I dislike the idea of a 7.5s cooldown, that is a LONG time in a brawl.

4) I have said a lot that the LBX and UAC weapons should actually show up as two weapons on two different buttons. One for single shot(UAC)/cluster rounds (lbx) and one for doubleshot/slug rounds. You would obviously have to trakc lbx rounds separately, but that is not a huge deal.

[Buso Senshi Zelazny]

Shadey99, on 11 September 2013 - 01:25 PM, said:

True, but how about 1.25 cooldown and a 18% jam chance? Very very close to the DPS @ current with 20% (4.5 vs ~4.53). Ironically it's also pure TT jam chance.

I was actually going to point this out as well. Puts the double fire DPS back about where it was at before the recent buff, while making the single fire DPS identical to the AC/5. Now that I think about it, isn't that the exact definition of the UAC/5? Same damage on normal fire, with a slight boost if you double tap?

Edit: Guess not. Sarna says it just has in increased fire rate http://www.sarna.net/wiki/UAC/5

Edited by Buso Senshi Zelazny, 11 September 2013 - 05:12 PM.

[Shadey99]

Buso Senshi Zelazny, on 11 September 2013 - 05:10 PM, said:

I was actually going to point this out as well. Puts the double fire DPS back about where it was at before the recent buff, while making the single fire DPS identical to the AC/5. Now that I think about it, isn't that the exact definition of the UAC/5? Same damage on normal fire, with a slight boost if you double tap?

Edit: Guess not. Sarna says it just has in increased fire rate http://www.sarna.net/wiki/UAC/5

I seem to recall it originally had no difference except for the 18% jam rate in double mode, though even the TRO 2750 mentions the slightly higher max range and lowered minimum. And double mode allowed 2 rounds to be fired within 10 seconds as opposed to 1 for the AC5. A pure increase in DPS. An AC5 in TT has a DPS of .5 where as a UAC5 matched the AC10 at 1.

Basically one brought a UAC5 in place of an AC10 because it was slightly lighter, slightly smaller, and slightly cooler. The AC10 had the same range (pretty much) and the same amount of ammo if the UAC5 is firing double.

Edited by Shadey99, 11 September 2013 - 05:30 PM.

[Amaris the Usurper]

In TT, the UAC/5 has a jam probability of 1/36, and its average DPS is not quite double, since the second shot has a chance of missing, even when the weapon scores a nominal hit (you roll on the 2 column of the missile hits table).

[nemesis271989]

Buso Senshi Zelazny, on 11 September 2013 - 05:10 PM, said:

I was actually going to point this out as well. Puts the double fire DPS back about where it was at before the recent buff, while making the single fire DPS identical to the AC/5. Now that I think about it, isn't that the exact definition of the UAC/5? Same damage on normal fire, with a slight boost if you double tap?

Edit: Guess not. Sarna says it just has in increased fire rate http://www.sarna.net/wiki/UAC/5

Introduced in 2640 by the Terran Hegemony^[4] The Ultra Autocannon/5 is an upgraded version of the standard Autocannon/5. Utilizing a different loading mechanism, the Ultra Autocannons are capable of maintaining a substantially increased rate of fire over traditional or LB-X autocannons at the cost of HIGHER HEAT and the risk of jamming. Of course, the rapid-fire autocannons require a much larger supply of ammunition to maintain their rate of fire. This high dependence on ammunition limits the effectiveness of the weapon. Being of a lower caliber, the Ultra Autocannon/5 has an increased range at the cost of reduced damage over higher-caliber versions.



I just found an answer!!!!!
Make UAC/5 hotter?!

Edited by nemesis271989, 11 September 2013 - 05:36 PM.

[Shadey99]

nemesis271989, on 11 September 2013 - 05:34 PM, said:

I just found an answer!!!!!
Make UAC/5 hotter?!

It's talking about doubling the heat of the AC5, each UAC5 round fired is 1 heat. This btw means the UAC5 in double fire mode generated 2 heat versus the AC10 with 3 per shot and matched the LB-10X at 2.

[TOGSolid]

Bumping because this thread conclusively shows the double fire mechanic has problems yet people are still making new topics about this.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Amaris the Usurper, on 11 September 2013 - 09:27 AM, said:

TL;DR: With a 25% jam probability, the UAC/5 dealt 3.95 DPS on double-shot mode, which was lower than the single-shot value of 4.55. Now, with a 15% probability, it deals 5.23.

Based on experience fighting with and against the UAC/5, it seems to me that it is now moderately overpowered.

Honestly it seems you have just proved that it is working correctly. I mean it just seems common sense that the whole point of having a double shot mode as you call it, is to increase DPS.

By the figures above, you state that at the 25% jam rate, the UAC/5 actually did less DPS when used in automatic (double-shot) mode, than it would have in single shot mode. That is definately counterintuitive and makes it pretty obvious why PGI buffed the weapon. Additionally the 15% Jam rate DPS is only a 0.68 DPS increase over the single shot DPS value which isn't all that much.

Lastly, I would absolutely expect a UAC/5 to have better DPS than a AC/5 because it is heavier and requires more crit slots than an AC/5. I mean what is the point of having the UAC/5 doing exactly the same damage as the AC/5? Oh I forgot, "BALANCE" where every weapon should be exactly the same, doing the same damage at the same heat for the same weight.

Seriously, lets just get rid of all weapons except the medium laser, that way we would have perfect weapon balance. Of Course then the posts would be His Jenner has 4 Energy Slots verses my Kintaro having only 2 Energy Slots...nerf Jenners.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 12 September 2013 - 12:13 PM.

[TOGSolid]

Your assessment is incredibly wrong Victor. The whole point of the double fire mode is to do as much damage as possible in a short time with the risk of weapon jam. Overall DPS should be lower than single firing since you're giving up consistency to do a damage dump in one moment with the risk of jamming. If your DPS in double fire mode with jam time included is higher than it is in single (which it is right now) then that means there is zero risk to just holding down the button and you'd be silly not to just mash it out. Double fire DPS should be lower than single to provide a risk/reward opportunity versus slow firing the UAC.

As for your assumption that the UAC should do more DPS than an AC/5 that is also incorrect. The functional purpose of the UAC is the double fire mechanic. That's it. It shouldn't also outstrip the AC/5 in single fire mode otherwise there is no point for the AC/5 to exist. Buffing the AC/5 or nerfing the UAC/5's single fire to be even is exactly what needs to happen so that there are blatant tradeoffs for each weapon. The AC/5 is lighter but lacks the ability to do a fast damage dump. The UAC/5 is slightly heavier but gets the added ability to rapidly dump a bunch of damage in a short time with the risk of a jam. This tweak would also make the macro for the UAC/5 completely pointless.

Edited by TOGSolid, 12 September 2013 - 12:50 PM.

[VXJaeger]

I just had 3 games w/ Muromets, and in everyone all 3 cannons got jammed immediatelly after first shot several times. And probability should be 15%?
If dev***** are gonna again nerf those UACs into ****, I ******* want my money back from Muro. This ******* nerf*****hit is ******* whole game to arcade {Scrap}.

Edited by VXJaeger, 12 September 2013 - 12:56 PM.

[TOGSolid]

VXJaeger, on 12 September 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

I just had 3 games w/ Muromets, and in everyone all 3 cannons got jammed immediatelly after first shot several times. And probability should be 15%?
If dev***** are gonna again nerf those UACs into ****, I ******* want my money back from Muro. This ******* nerf*****hit is ******* whole game to arcade {Scrap}.

"This coin is OBVIOUSLY flawed, it flipped heads three times in a row for me! God damnit PGI!"

Also, if you bought the Ilya just to abuse the current meta then that's your own damn fault.

[VXJaeger]

TOGSolid, on 12 September 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

Also, if you bought the Ilya just to abuse the current meta then that's your own damn fault.

I have had it since the day it came available nitwit. It was several months unused 'cause UACs were unuseable ****.
You should remember the "1st shot bug", after all you are Founder.

[TOGSolid]

VXJaeger, on 12 September 2013 - 01:01 PM, said:

I have had it since the day it came available nitwit. It was several months unused 'cause UACs were unuseable ****.
You should remember the "1st shot bug", after all you are Founder.

Lulz, if you think UACs were unusable even with that bug then you're a complete chucklefuck. Stay mad bro.

Edited by TOGSolid, 12 September 2013 - 01:04 PM.

[Roland]

Heh, I bought the Illya to exploit tripple UAC5... but I did it months ago, because even earlier in beta the tripple UAC was a meat grinder.

In its current state, it's just crazy, because there's really no reason to ever NOT just hold down the trigger.