178 replies to this topic

[PropagandaWar]

Johnny Reb, on 11 September 2013 - 10:18 PM, said:

Only thing I can think of is, now random for streaks, focused for non. I am sure it will be changed, especially when better streaks are available.

See thats my argument lol. Why increase a Streaks damage now only to descrease it later? Its stupid. A SRM2 hits random places or misses all together if you think about it. So why increase one without the other. I would like weapon consistancy. I want them to figure out what the base damage is going to be and leave it the hell alone from there. I bet you anything when Streak 6's come out that damage will Drop back to 1.5. otherwise four of those things will be doing 60 points a shot. Which will be easy as hell to manage.

[Strum Wealh]

Joseph Mallan, on 12 September 2013 - 04:27 AM, said:

If you go off the TT there are (advanced) rules for unjamming that can still allow the simple cool down we have now. So I can still go there. The second shot should have a chance to miss due to the first shots recoil. Higher rates of fire are usually less accurate. If you fired Machine guns you'd know this.

Also, UACs still don't unjam in the advanced rules (as published in Tactical Operations).
However:

• "Ultra and Rotary Autocannon Field Guns are immune to jamming or fire control failure effects, and LB-X Autocannon Field Guns must always use cluster munitions. Gauss-based Field Guns are immune to weapon explosion effects." (TacOps, pg. 311)
  
• on Hyper-Velocity Autocannons: "On a to-hit roll result of 2, the chambered round’s propellant ignites within the barrel, inflicting internal explosion damage equal to that of a single round from the HVAC and destroying all the HVAC’s critical slots (in addition to any other critical hits rolled up from the explosion)." (TacOps, pg. 285)
  
• "Any standard or light autocannon (not LB-X, Ultra or Rotary models) can be fired at double the standard rate as though it were an Ultra AC... The weapon’s arming circuitry fails on a To-Hit Roll result of 4 or less (rather than 2 or less). On a To-Hit Roll result of 2, the ammo feed jams, causing the rounds in the chamber to explode inside the barrel. This causes an effect similar to an ammunition explosion, but inflicts only the amount of damage the autocannon would normally inflict in one shot and does not cause any other ammo to explode." (TacOps, pg. 100)

Ultra (and Rotary) ACs are wholly immune to failure/jamming when and only when modified to serve as infantry-operated Field Guns (see pgs. 310 and 311 of TacOps).
Though, Standard (and Light) ACs set into "faux-Ultra" rapid-fire mode has a 16.7% chance of being disabled (with a 2.8% chance of self-destructing) and HVACs always have a 2.8% chance of self-destructing.
(For the origin of the percentages, see here.)

Personally, I wouldn't take umbrage with PGI re-implementing the UACs as permanently-jamming but having only a ~3% likelihood of doing so on each double-shot...

[Joseph Mallan]

Mmmmm... I don't have TacOps. Thanks for that!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 12 September 2013 - 08:03 AM.

[One Medic Army]

Alex Warden, on 12 September 2013 - 04:12 AM, said:

that´s the main problem with UAC´s imho...all those cheaters who still think that using macros is okay... you can reach close to 0% jamming, tell me how that´s not cheating...

i use 2 UAC´s on different mechs currently( without macros... i don´t cheat),and yes, it´s powerful, but certainly not overpowered.

Macros are not cheating.
Macros should not be required, however, to use a weapon to it's peak effectiveness.

[Lykaon]

MadCat02, on 11 September 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

Yes i bet many of you got killed by 3 UAC Jaggermech (i pilot one myself )

You must run XL235 to have 3 UACS(175 ammo) and one medium laser .

Trading speed and normal engines gives you huge dps . You didn't know that ?

If you die to 58 miles jaggermech its probably your fault for standing still .

You know how much armor Jagger has on shoulder? 50 . Thats less than my alpha strike on Misery

I can honestly say that jagger with xl engine and 58 speed can die just as quickly as he can kill .

Not to mentions that UAC5 isn't ideal weapon to defend vs light mechs .

If you run UAC5 on assault mechs you will have hard time aiming it because of their low arms . Once again don't stay still and trade with assault mech who runs a dps weapon !



What PGU really needs to do is to buff useless weapons like AC2,AC10 and LB10

Do you guys really want pgu to nerf a perfectly balanced weapon .

This is a post on a three UAC5 Jaegermech's weaknesses not about how the UAC5 isn't overpowered.

Is the UAC5 still OK when compared as a distinctly seperated weapon system?

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Lykaon, on 12 September 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

This is a post on a three UAC5 Jaegermech's weaknesses not about how the UAC5 isn't overpowered.

Is the UAC5 still OK when compared as a distinctly seperated weapon system?

Agreed and signed. Additionally the XL engine weakness can be be circumvented with a standard engine or using a CTF-IM or CTF-4X

[East Indy]

Ultra Autocannon: so well-balanced, everyone's using it!

[Kernfeuer]

MadCat02, on 11 September 2013 - 03:42 PM, said:

Yes i bet many of you got killed by 3 UAC Jaggermech (i pilot one myself )

You must run XL235 to have 3 UACS(175 ammo) and one medium laser .

Trading speed and normal engines gives you huge dps . You didn't know that ?

If you die to 58 miles jaggermech its probably your fault for standing still .

You know how much armor Jagger has on shoulder? 50 . Thats less than my alpha strike on Misery

I can honestly say that jagger with xl engine and 58 speed can die just as quickly as he can kill .

Not to mentions that UAC5 isn't ideal weapon to defend vs light mechs .

If you run UAC5 on assault mechs you will have hard time aiming it because of their low arms . Once again don't stay still and trade with assault mech who runs a dps weapon !



What PGU really needs to do is to buff useless weapons like AC2,AC10 and LB10

Do you guys really want pgu to nerf a perfectly balanced weapon .

ohhh Yes..that is what i waiting for...an senseless state from an {Noble MechWarrior} who dont want to see his favorite kill everyone weapon gets nerfed...pls spare us in future post like this...or at least give me some popkorn and coke to enjoy this ****

[blinkin]

Trauglodyte, on 12 September 2013 - 07:36 AM, said:

More senseless rambling by MadCat02. The sad part is that people actually "liked" this post.

many more are taking time out to pee all over this thread because of how ignorant it is (see my previous post about my hunchback 4G)

Lykaon, on 12 September 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

This is a post on a three UAC5 Jaegermech's weaknesses not about how the UAC5 isn't overpowered.

Is the UAC5 still OK when compared as a distinctly seperated weapon system?

i think this is a thread about the incompetence of MadCat02. the tripple UAC5 build jager seems to be a pretty solid build, if a bit risky from jamming. i have considered doing a 2x UAC5 / 2x AC2 jager several times (inspired by my hunchback 4G build. with the extra 9ish tons i would get i think i could reduce the ammo issues drastically, although it would lose much of the pinpoint precision that my HBK-4G has) with the jager i could even manage to use an XL instead of the massively heavy standard.

[Joseph Mallan]

East Indy, on 12 September 2013 - 10:06 AM, said:

Ultra Autocannon: so well-balanced, everyone's using it!

A faulty generalization as I don't use UACs.

[SmurfOff]

I actually think that the UAC/5's are under balanced. Lore states that the UAC/5 has twice the fire rate of a normal AC/5. If we wanted to fix the system "fairly" the answer is simple.

1 - Simplify the UAC/5 to have a recycle time half of an AC/5. Maintain the jam ratio in the ~12% range once a minimum set of rounds pass through (2-4?). Monitor and adjust over one week with hotfixes (yes, this would require an aggressive fix mentality we have yet to see). Tweak jam percentages, clean shot counter, etc...

2 - Elicit feedback. This may be difficult, since the only formal communication method is forum based, and generates a LOT of noise. But it will give an indication whether your hitting the right balance.

3 - Play testing. Invite founders / phoenix's to private test servers and observe. We do it on the public servers, why not make us feel worthy

This would give us a relitively fair system, without exploits.

[SynAck]

How about eliminating the double shot and leave the rate of fire alone (maybe make it an even 1 sec)? This makes it by definition a faster firing AC 5 with a chance to jam.

[DocBach]

SynAck, on 12 September 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

How about eliminating the double shot and leave the rate of fire alone (maybe make it an even 1 sec)? This makes it by definition a faster firing AC 5 with a chance to jam.

The balancing mechanic the source material used to keep Ultra autocannons in line was simulated recoil; when firing a burst of Ultra AC, the pilot had to determine first if both shots hit the target, and then where they hit the target - the damage wasn't concentrated in one spot like it is in MWO.

Recoil affecting point of impact is a hugely important factor if you take in account the upcoming Clan Ultra AC's which come in all the calibers of the standard AC, including the Ultra AC/20 - if the Ultra AC/20 makes it in game with the mechanic of the current Ultra AC/5, it will be game breakingly unbalanced.

[Trauglodyte]

Here is the thing: The UAC5 started out broken. Yes, the jam rate and the procedure required to unjam it was rediculous. But, that it started out with a faster rate of fire then the normal AC5 is just unsound. Why offer double the firing rate with a slight chance of jamming when it already fires faster then the weapon it is replacing? Its like dumping your "ok" looking girlfriend and dating a set of Playboy model twins.

Now, we're in a situation where the jam rate is lessened which makes multiple UAC5s (does this sound familiar to anyone?) extremely dead but only makes singular UACs usable. I drive a BJ-1 with an ERPPC and a UAC5 and it works. What people are doing with Ilya's is bastardizing what is intended to make the BJ build effective. People using macros just makes it that much worse which will, as we've seen by past fix concepts on the part of PGI, essentially make the single UAC broken beyond use but still make multiples semi-effective as long as you use them by way of chain fire.

[Coralld]

I think we have the sliding jam mechanic (As I like to call it) to blame here for the UAC5. The way UACs work is that once you fire you can fire a second shot I do believe at .15 or .20 sec during its cycle time. At this point the UAC is at its highest jam %, and as the weapon continues to cycle, the jam % decreases to about 5% at its lowest point, another words, its almost never going to jam, especially if you use a macro. This is why I say we do away with the sliding jam mechanic and replace it with an incremental one. As well as increasing its base cycle time to that of an AC5.

It will work like this (assuming the jam % is still at 15% and all shots fired after the first are double tapped shots)...
First shot, 0% chance to jam
Second shot, 5% chance to jam
Third shot, 10% chance to jam
Fourth shot and all shots fired after, 15% chance to jam

This incremental jam mechanic would work better then the current slider jam mechanic.

Edited by Coralld, 12 September 2013 - 02:29 PM.

[TOGSolid]

Coralld, on 12 September 2013 - 12:41 PM, said:

I think we have the sliding jam mechanic to blame here for the UAC5. The way UACs work is that once you fire you can fire a second shot I do believe at .15 or .20 sec during its cycle time. At this point the UAC is at its highest jam %, and as the weapon continues to cycle, the jam % decreases to about 5% at its lowest point, another words, its almost never going to jam, especially if you use a macro. This is why I say we do away with the sliding jam mechanic and replace it with an incremental one. As well as increasing its base cycle time to that of an AC5.

It will work like this (assuming the jam % is still at 15% and all shots fired after the first are double tapped shots)...
First shot, 0% chance to jam
Second shot, 5% chance to jam
Third shot, 10% chance to jam
Fourth shot and all shots fired after, 15% chance to jam

This incremental jam mechanic would work better then the current slider jam mechanic.

What you just described is a Rotary Autocannon, not an Ultra. I'd love to see a source for that "sliding jam" mechanic you claim exists.

[Coralld]

TOGSolid, on 12 September 2013 - 12:54 PM, said:

What you just described is a Rotary Autocannon, not an Ultra. I'd love to see a source for that "sliding jam" mechanic you claim exists.

Perhaps. Also, there is no sliding jam mechanic in any TT source I can assure you, the sliding jam mechanic was made up by PGI for UACs.

In TT, RACs and UACs operate exactly the same, the difference being is that RACs can put more rounds down range then UACs but at the cost of increase jam rate.
Just so you and every one else know that I do understand...
When you double shot a UAC weapon, it has a 10% chance to jam.
RACs, unlike UACs, have several burst fire modes. There is the single shot just like a regular AC, there is the double shot just like a UAC, there is a quadruple shot, and there is a sextuple shot burst. Each higher level burst increasing jam rate.

If you don't like that idea then fine. Then how about we make it so that UACs can fire the double shot once which restarts the UAC cycle time but have to wait for the weapon to fully cycle again, because as it stands right now UAC are working like RACs, and if your using macros, or are just very very very skilled in your timing, then the UACs are RACs that don't jam.

Edited by Coralld, 12 September 2013 - 01:40 PM.

[TOGSolid]

I think you misunderstood me. I meant the sliding jam mechanic as it works in game. I've never heard of it at all until just now.

I know it doesn't exist in TT and how RACs/Ultras work. I actually bought the TT books just so that I could understand the original rules and have a baseline to argue off. Prior to that I only had previous Mechwarrior games to use as a knowledge base.

Quote

Then how about we make it so that UACs can fire the double shot once which restarts the UAC cycle time but have to wait for the weapon to fully cycle again, because as it stands right now UAC are working like RACs, and if your using macros, or are just very very very skilled in your timing, then the UACs are RACs that don't jam.

This is a complaint I've had since they very start and I really wish it would get fixed.

Edited by TOGSolid, 12 September 2013 - 01:52 PM.

[Coralld]

TOGSolid, on 12 September 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

I think you misunderstood me. I meant the sliding jam mechanic as it works in game. I've never heard of it at all until just now.

I know it doesn't exist in TT and how RACs/Ultras work. I actually bought the TT books just so that I could understand the original rules and have a baseline to argue off. Prior to that I only had previous Mechwarrior games to use as a knowledge base.


This is a complaint I've had since they very start and I really wish it would get fixed.

That's cool and all, just know that I to know the rules as well.

PGI may call it something else but here is a rough rundown of how PGIs "Sliding jam" mechanic works in a nut shell for those that don't know.

I-----------------------------------I <- This is the UAC weapons cycle gauge.

I-----------------------------/-----I <- Here is where you are able to fire your double tap, at this point its at its max jam rate of 15%

I-----------------/-----------------I <- Here, at this point of firing your double tap, the % to jam is lower, say 8%, instead of 15%

I couldn't agree more, UACs need to be fixed.

Edited by Coralld, 12 September 2013 - 02:23 PM.

[TOGSolid]

I'm just curious where that sliding jam mechanic got sourced from or if it's just a forum rumor (which does happen and I'm totally not trying to accuse you of anything). I'm a fan of learning new things about the games I'm playing, I just like to have concrete sources/evidence that I can point to for future arguments/discussions/etc.

Edited by TOGSolid, 12 September 2013 - 02:19 PM.