8 replies to this topic

[stinkypuppy]

I know this may be a little late but thanks for the UAC/5 nerf. ever since the nerf im finding battles to be more enjoyable as they are lasting longer from intense laser and missile battles as well as the occasional Ballistic AC weapon. i know that the UAC/5 might have been nerfed to the point of uselessness but for right now game play is very enjoyable as you get to see many people in the battlefield using their own unique mech. and you don't see the same mech more than 3 times now (except for if a organized group of people come in using something like 4 spiders.) unlike before when one time my team consisted of 8 jagermechs all of which armed to the teeth in UAC/5.

now i do suggest giving the UAC/5 a little bit of a buff because its more practical to bring a AC/5 because the double fire is almost a sure jam but just remember to those who hate the nerf.

you can hate all you want on the changes of the UAC/5 but remember that before it was completely unfair and that it was basically a grind fest. i do admit that at one point i got a super dakka jagermech during the UAC/5 buff but after seeing the unfair armor ripping capability's that even 2 UAC/5's caused to other mechs i traded it off for 2 AC/2's with a AC/20 for ripping the armor off lighter mechs easily and using the AC/2's to finish them off basically making my jagermech a anti-light mech and if i get lucky and hit their leg i just crippled them for easy prey.

one last thing i want to say about weapon balancing is that if there is a error with them that you need to fix don't just fix it at the preset patch time but just release a quick hot-fix to patch up anything wrong quickly. currently when there is a op weapon it makes it so the rest of us need to endure the pain for 2 weeks and that it gives the weapon abusers the time to grind a lot of C-bills and when they get 2 weeks to abuse the weapon it gives them time to love it more and more and eventually when its fixed because they were enjoying it for so long it makes them super pissed off. for a example of people getting pissed off when something they abuse is finally patched take a look at how people got pissed in battlefield 3 when they fixed the UAV drone elevator that allowed you to lift yourself to areas of the level that were previously unable to be reached.

[Gaan Cathal]

stinkypuppy, on 19 September 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

now i do suggest giving the UAC/5 a little bit of a buff because its more practical to bring a AC/5 because the double fire is almost a sure jam but just remember to those who hate the nerf.

Really, it's not. 20% =/= 100%, dunno if you covered that in maths. It's been shown elsewhere that the UAC/5 (including jamming) is superior in engagements less than 5.5s, after which the AC/5 takes over. Given the short TTKs that characterise this game, that's definitely worth a ton.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gaan Cathal, on 19 September 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Really, it's not. 20% =/= 100%, dunno if you covered that in maths. It's been shown elsewhere that the UAC/5 (including jamming) is superior in engagements less than 5.5s, after which the AC/5 takes over. Given the short TTKs that characterise this game, that's definitely worth a ton.

which is odd, since given just a little trigger control, I can keep from jamming, while usually maintaining a better rate of fire in my UACs,
(my math is simple, I burn through 3 tons more ammo per match with 2 UAC than I do with 2 AC5. Yes UACs get 25 per ton vs 30 for an AC5. 6 tons ac5 ammo= 180, 9 tons UAC ammo = 225).

And UAcs allow me to easily an regularly get a double. even triple shot off. Or go full auto til it jams.

If I had a bone to pick, is that it seems that if the RNG jams you on 1 shot at the beginning of a match, it does so for the rest of the match, like it develops a bias.

[Gaan Cathal]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 September 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

which is odd, since given just a little trigger control, I can keep from jamming, while usually maintaining a better rate of fire in my UACs,

Then something's clearly wrong, since the non-doublefire ROF should be identical, and there's no relationship between the number of doubleshots fired and their individual chance to jam (that is, the 1^st shot has the same 1-in-5 chance to jam as the n^th shot) so manual trigger control shouldn't be able to give you an ROF better than the AC/5 with no jamchance.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gaan Cathal, on 19 September 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

[/size]

Then something's clearly wrong, since the non-doublefire ROF should be identical, and there's no relationship between the number of doubleshots fired and their individual chance to jam (that is, the 1^st shot has the same 1-in-5 chance to jam as the n^th shot) so manual trigger control shouldn't be able to give you an ROF better than the AC/5 with no jamchance.

would disagree.

The more you roll the dice, probabilities say, the more the numbers will catch up to you. You roll the dice once, you get a 1 in 5 chance of a jam. You roll it 5 times, it is not a 100% chance no, but you now have 5 chances to get that 1 in 5. Most people simply mash their finger UNTIL they do get that probability, or load the dice as it were. Since most people also seem to "walk their fire" they waste a lot of those dice rolls before doing anything effective.

Manual fire control doesn't change the per shot probability, but if I have a one shot window, I tap the trigger one time, and go. Most people still keep firing. If I can squeeze off more, I do. I not so much that I can sit there and will it not to jam, as I simply don't take "practice sessions" playing Russian roulette.

In other words, DPS, even in these weapons, is a useless measure, especially when one compares over simple time blocks, because the difference is DPW, or Damage per Window of Oppurtunity. If I can nail 2-3 seconds off in the time you fire one, I am moving and twisting and such that the 5 second jam window is probably used relocating anyhow. If a player is good and wants to live, they are doing the same thing after firing their AC5, but have only gotten 1 shot off in that same window. Yes, I might also jam after that one shot, but if so, I did as much as the guy with the AC5 anyhow.

Your numbers really only count if both units could sit, in a bubble, firing nonstop, side by sided. What a lot of statisticians overlook is probabilities are really all about windows, and the convergence of situations (Aka the number of times an opportunity to fire appear factored by how long each opportunity is, and how far apart those opportunities average). You take an average 5 second window out of any MWO match, and the guy with 2 UAC5 will put more lead down range, real world, than the guy with 2 AC5, 90% of the time (Not really the 20% as explained). And then there will be the times the numbers catch you, and you jam first shot, meaning your UACs get off 2 shots in that window to the 4 the other guy gets. Yet even when I do jam, it's seldom both at once, (unless just mashing the triggers nonstop)and that second UAC will fill in the gap most times for that window.

[DarkDevilDancer]

Just today i stripped an atlas down to salvage with my Illya, the adjustment was needed and i think ultras are now in a good place.

Now if they'd tweek ppc's so they didnt over heat you in two shots we'd be good, cause at the moment i dont see anyone using ppc's at all.

[Gaan Cathal]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 September 2013 - 09:44 AM, said:

The more you roll the dice, probabilities say, the more the numbers will catch up to you. You roll the dice once, you get a 1 in 5 chance of a jam. You roll it 5 times, it is not a 100% chance no, but you now have 5 chances to get that 1 in 5. Most people simply mash their finger UNTIL they do get that probability, or load the dice as it were. Since most people also seem to "walk their fire" they waste a lot of those dice rolls before doing anything effective.

Manual fire control doesn't change the per shot probability, but if I have a one shot window, I tap the trigger one time, and go. Most people still keep firing. If I can squeeze off more, I do. I not so much that I can sit there and will it not to jam, as I simply don't take "practice sessions" playing Russian roulette.

Ah, I misunderstood your original reply, it read to me as if you were maintaining a jamless higher-than-1.5 ROF (as was possible before the ROF was patched to match the AC/5). You're quite right that the pure damage-over-time graphs don't reflect a live situation - infact, since these are weapons that do identical per-shot damage I prefer to think about it as ROF fluctuation, since that's easier to mentally translate into a live-fire situation.

That said, I think you've probably hit the nail on the head as far as most of the complaints about the nerf go. The UAC/5's nerf has mostly hit those who were:

a: Only ever using the macro to utilise the higher base ROF, which I personally think it never should've had.
b: Rolling in and facemelting with the full doublefire ROF, relying on weight of firepower to get the kill.

Both of those techniques are probably (certainly in the case of the former) dead as of this nerf, whilst those who use show some tactical use of the weapon are likely noticing very little substantive difference in play.

Edited by Gaan Cathal, 19 September 2013 - 11:29 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gaan Cathal, on 19 September 2013 - 11:29 AM, said:

Ah, I misunderstood your original reply, it read to me as if you were maintaining a jamless higher-than-1.5 ROF (as was possible before the ROF was patched to match the AC/5). You're quite right that the pure damage-over-time graphs don't reflect a live situation - infact, since these are weapons that do identical per-shot damage I prefer to think about it as ROF fluctuation, since that's easier to mentally translate into a live-fire situation.

That said, I think you've probably hit the nail on the head as far as most of the complaints about the nerf go. The UAC/5's nerf has mostly hit those who were:

a: Only ever using the macro to utilise the higher base ROF, which I personally think it never should've had.
b: Rolling in and facemelting with the full doublefire ROF, relying on weight of firepower to get the kill.

Both of those techniques are probably (certainly in the case of the former) dead as of this nerf, whilst those who use show some tactical use of the weapon are likely noticing very little substantive difference in play.

yup, exactly. I didn't really elucidate my point very clearly originally, (well, it was clear in my mind, but not really in my typing, lol). But yeah, Chaingun EZmoders and Macro-Lovers are not too happy, as someone who never used the easy switch (in part because I never bothered to learn how to make a macro..in part because I would rather use skill in those places. I'm fine with macros for TAGs and stuff that should simply have a bloody toggle ANYHOW , but disdain their use for actual combat functions), and has always fought in the Hit and Fade art of the MediuM Mech, I find that UAC a great weapon still.

[The Platypus]

I think they're in a pretty good place right now. The new firing method seems more in line with what I've read about UACs and it paves the way for the RAC in the future (which in Mercenaries seemed to be like a pre-patch UAC5 but faster). My only gripe is that I sometimes double-fire after a single click even when I don't mean to.