6 replies to this topic

[General Taskeen]

It seems the "UAC/5" is a hot button issue again, but let's keep in mind - for those of us that have played since Closed Beta, it has always been an issue of its functionality in MWO. I often stated it would continue to be a problem later on and posted ideas back then.

While many posts now may come off as "whining" to some readers, there have been generally good idea's that are not just shouting since Closed Beta.

In reference to this post by Paul Inouye, the Devs are currently "looking into revisiting the Flamer and UAC/5." Russ Bullock also posted a tweet regarding a potential "fix," which I honestly don't think addresses core issues.

Going forward with weapon balance - it seems some effort has been made to make certain weapons unique (good) (the "charge up" mechanic of the Gauss, for instance). Mechanics like that are ok for a real-time game based on Battle Tech (no random element involved, except for the gauss exploding itself), even though weapons did straight up damage in a turn, within TT.

I'm bringing this up again in an effort to produce idea's.

The Core Issues with UAC/5 (and introduction of future Ultra variants)

• Adhering to strict Table Top damage values for Ultra Autocannon's is more difficult to balance compared to regular single-shot Autocannon's.
  
• Related - Keeping current mechanics will make UAC/2, UAC/10, and UAC/20 even more difficult to balance (along with a RAC/5 doing "5" damage, but firing six 5 damage shells).
  
• The random chance of "jamming" from TT being implemented in a real-time game (the random element in a real-time game for something to be "better" by chance = rolling dice is not fun in real-time Mech Warrior and never has been, which is why random chance has never applied to UAC's in Mech Warrior games).

The Current UAC Mechanics with core issues

• "Double-Shot" or "Double-Tap" is difficult to balance in combination by adhering to strict TT damage values - Current UAC/5 by keeping damage values will always do 2x more damage than AC/5 totaling 10 damage. This still makes it better, always than an AC/5, and even an AC/10, and often doing more damage in a short time compared to an AC/20.
  
• The "random" jamming of the UAC/5 takes control away from the user in a real-time game - by chance your weapon is better or worse, the equivalent of your Level 80 Paladin's Mythril Sword of Smiting doing 500 damage with a chance of critical to do 1,000 damage and a chance for your weapon to break. (you attack a player using the same weapon, they by chance did more damage, while your weapon by chance broke).

Altering the current damage mechanics

• One idea is to keep the concept of the UAC "burst" or "double shell shot," but alter its damage per shell.
  
• Example: 3 to 3.5 Damage Per Shell - Each "double shell" practically shoots directly after the first ensuring the best possibility of both shells landing in the same spot - This ensures its damage is somewhere around 6 to 7, but not 2x more damage than an AC5.
  
• UAC/5 - (3.5 Damage) (1.1 Cool Down) (40 to 60 ammo per ton) Lowers "DPS" closer to AC/5, but still more damaging if more time on target than a single shell up front damage of a regular Autocannon (two shells on same spot would be 7 damage, instead of 10 as it is now)

Changing the Jam Mechanic

• Like the "Gauss" charge, it is possible for the weapon itself to have a 'bar' applied to it.
  
• Basics: Remove "percentage chance to jam" and replace with "Ultra Autocannon Barrel Overheat"

• The "charge bar" mechanic reversed to be barrel overheat - the longer you fire, the quicker the Ultra cannon overheats. Once it reaches critical overheat, the gun jams. Thus "skill" is applied to avoiding jams, equilavent to the MW3 "pulse laser overcharge" of old.

Edited by General Taskeen, 14 September 2013 - 11:56 AM.

[Raso]

I'm all for the jam bar. I think it should be further expanded, though, with the chance to jam increased as it fills up. Empty it would have less than a 5% chance to jam (maybe even 0%) and full it would have a 100% chance to jam. The bar could be color coded, too, going from green to red as it fills.

I'm not against random chance but it does irk me that some times I'll jam on the first double tap and some times I can get off, like, 20 shots in row with no consequences. Having some more consistence would be much appreciated but there still needs to be an immediate and apparent risk to using the double tap feature.

I think that having the jam be partly out of your control is a good thing but I think that being able to mitigate and manage that risk is a must.

[Livewyr]

I'm liking where Raso is going.

I think a random chance needs to be there, lest the mechanic be macro'd to abuse. (Macro'ing the best possible ratio of firing/idle time to optimize the DPS.. where the computer is fighting and not the pilot)

(In addition to slowing the single shot RoF to 1.5 like the AC5)
0 shots 5% chance to jam.
2 shots 10% chance to jam (1 doubleshot)
4 shots 20% chance to jam (2 DS)
6 shots 40% chance to jam (3 DS)
8 shots 50% chance to jam (4 DS)
10 shots 70% chance to jam (5 DS)
12+ shots 90% chance to jam (6+ DS)

Successive [double]shots conclude at 3.5 - 4 seconds after previous double shot.

This allows the player to monitor the amount of risk they want to take. (Can use a macro to maximize but optimize for personal, but chance still involved.)


Numbers subject to "tweak" but placeholders for concept.

Edited by Livewyr, 14 September 2013 - 11:52 AM.

[General Taskeen]

^I think the issue of the "workaround" of a macro is easily mitigated by the following:

Simply having a small delay built into the "bar barrel overheat" idea -> You hold down the trigger for constant fire, but let's say you want to control it so it well never jam (macro), but instead letting off the trigger causes a very small delay before you can fire again.

So you either fire constantly to maintain lots of damage (where it will quickly overheat and jam if not being careful to watch it), or you fire off in bursts (controlling fire without jamming), but at the cost of DPS, essentially making dps still only a little better than a regular AC counter part.

something like this: http://www.youtube.c...uOfN6Bc9A#t=942

[Corvus Antaka]

yeah i'd like to see ultras be burst shot only, with much more heat.

[Tomman]

People complain about ghost heat being convoluted, and you want to float this idea?

even if what you are saying would work... I am not convinced on that. It would add a further level of complexity to the game.

Right now solutions need to be KISS, and ghost heat is an example of what happens when you violate that rule.

[xenoglyph]

Get rid of the double shot entirely. Keep the lighter weight and increased range. Lower the cooldown a tiny bit compared to AC/5, raise the shots per ton to AC/5 levels, and keep the price. There you go, a balanced UAC/5.