98 replies to this topic

[Sephlock]

Roland, on 31 January 2014 - 06:37 AM, said:

Sounds like you are effectively doubling the current ROF for the UAC5.

This would make it easily the most overpowered weapon in the game.

For reference, when the UAC5 was exactly as it is now, but with a slightly lower jam chance, it was pretty much the win cannon.

Why do people keep saying that like it was a bad thing?

[Joseph Mallan]

Sephlock, on 31 January 2014 - 09:41 AM, said:

Why do people keep saying that like it was a bad thing?

I never complained about it and did not feel it t be OP at the time.

[BaconTWOfourACTUAL]

Cimarb, on 31 January 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

Autocannons as a whole need to be realigned. Currently, we have four versions of the AC20, since every one of them does roughly 20 damage in the same time period. Here are the stats:

AC2
Damage: 2
Cooldown: 0.52
DPS: 3.85
Damage per 5 seconds: 19.23

AC5
Damage: 5
Cooldown: 1.50
DPS: 3.33
Damage per 5 seconds: 16.65

UAC5
Damage: 5
Cooldown: 1.50 (if only fired at normal rate)
DPS: 3.33 (varies)
Damage per 5 seconds: 16.65 (varies)

AC10
Damage: 10
Cooldown: 2.50
DPS: 4.00
Damage per 5 seconds: 20.00

AC20
Damage: 20
Cooldown: 4.00
DPS: 5.00
Damage per 5 seconds: 25.00

So, in a "normalized" turn of five seconds (since all weapons in MWO can fire at least once in that time), the range of damage between all autocannons is 16.65-25.00. According to the definition of an autocannon in Sarna:

"Autocannons range in caliber from 30mm up to 203mm and are loosely grouped according to their damage versus armor. The exact same caliber of shell fired in a 100 shot burst to do 20 damage will have a shorter effective range than when fired in a 10 shot burst to do 2 damage due to recoil and other factors. Autocannon are grouped into the following loose damage classes: (ac2-ac20)... Caliber is fluff for the size of the barrel that the shell or shells are fired from and no standard caliber has been set for any of the classes of Autocannon. Autocannon in a class vary by manufacturer and model. With the fluffed number of shells and caliber being specified, no Autocannon has been specified to be one shell fired for each 'round' or burst of fire. Probable exceptions are (185mm Demolisher cannon and 203mm Cauldron Born cannon, which is actually a clan mech, btw)"

According to this definition, every autocannon currently in the game would be considered an AC20, as their DPS are all closer to 20 than any other classification.

Side note: Oddly, the AC5/UAC5 are the most common autocannons, yet they are also the lowest DPS of all of them... This means they happen to fit in the sweet spot of weight/space versus firepower that people like most. Anyways...

What should happen is all autocannon need to be normalized to each other. That means, in 5 seconds of time, an AC2 should do roughly 2 damage, an AC5 should do 5 damage, an AC10 should do 20 and an AC20 should do 20. While this would dramatically nerf the lower class ACs in damage potential compared to currently, this can be offset by making the optimum/max ranges actually matter again! An AC2 may not do nearly as much damage, but they are the longest range weapons of the bunch. As the class gets higher, the range gets significantly lower, so on the other end you have the devastating damage of the AC20, but it can only be used at very short ranges, similar to how SRMs are used.

Here would be my proposed adjustments:
AC2 - damage 0.2 - cooldown 0.52 - DP5S 2.0 - range 720 - max range 1440
AC5 - damage 1.5 - cooldown 1.50 - DP5S 5.0 - range 620 - max range 1240
AC10 - damage 5.0 - cooldown 2.50 - DP5S 10.0 - range 450 - max range 900
AC20 - damage 16 - cooldown 4.00 - DP5S 20.0 - range 270 - max range 540

These would be the "standard" versions. Once CW gets implemented, you could then adjust the "damage" and "cooldown" numbers all over the place to represent different manufacturers, as long as the "DP5S" value stays within a small range of that classification. Here are some examples for possible AC20 variants:

185mm ChemJet AC/20 - damage 20 - cooldown 5.00 - DP5S 20.0
Pontiac 100 AC/20 - damage 0.2 - cooldown 0.50 - DP5S 20.0
Imperator Zeta-A - damage 5 - cooldown 1.25 - DP5S 20.0

On top of this, to give some real variety, you could also have burst-fire versions, such as:

Kali Yama Big Bore AC/20 - damage 5.0/tick - 1.0 second burst with 4 ticks - cooldown 4.0 - DP5S 20.0
Armstrong Requiem AC/20 - damage 1.0/tick - 4.0 second burst with 20 ticks - cooldown 1.0 - DP5S 20.0

You now have balanced autocannons (both compared to other weapons and also compared to each other), enough variety for every person imaginable, and a reason to own certain manufactory plants, as you could limit ammo supplies/cost for certain weapons based upon the current ownership and faction difference.

Edit: Now, for all Ultra versions (I got off topic), you can then have a toggle to double the rate of fire, but with an increasing chance to jam based upon how long you hold the trigger. The chance starts at 5%, then increases every second by another 5%, until it jams. Once the weapon jams, it is unusable for 5-10 seconds, but then the jam rate resets to 5%.

I see your hold up, in the fact that the AC 2 has a higher recycle rate so its capable of putting more rounds down range and outputting the same amount of damage as an AC20 during its 4 second recycle.

There is no other way to say it, but that's ballistics. The AC2 is a lighter round, with a shorter distance to travel inside the firing mechanism, with minimal recoil so its capable of a fast recycle.
The AC20 is a very large round, with a longer distance to travel in the firing mechanism with a much larger recoil.

Think of a revolver.
a .22 caliber revolver can fire more rounds faster than say a .454 casull because the rounds themselves are smaller, roughly 5.7mm in diameter, they can fit more of them(10 rounds) into the cylinder, there is less distance between the primer of 1 .22 round to the next.
The .454 on the other hand is very large round, roughly 11.5mm in diameter, which obviously can fit less (6 rounds) with more distance between primers.

Same goes for these auto cannons. The smaller the round the faster the rate of fire but the less damage it does per round.

Put it in perspective a bit more...

A 30mm AC2 round... would probably weigh approx 725g... (1.5lbs)
A 203mm AC20 round... would probably weight approx 99.79kg... (220lbs)


Size is key.

Edited by BaconTWOfourACTUAL, 31 January 2014 - 11:22 AM.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

SuckyJack, on 31 January 2014 - 08:31 AM, said:

Actually, what I want is simple.

I want my UACs to be UACs and not the RACs that they have given us under that name.

UACs should be firing two projectiles with a spread pattern when in a double tap mode with a jam chance.

RACs would be the the more automatic weapon response that we have got, the ability to straight up boost fire rate at the cost of a jam chance.

This exactly


Follow the MW4 route on UACs. Force them to double tap every time with mild accuracy issues (so it always eats up two shots per trigger, which leads to accuracy and limited ammo) for the trade off of extra heat (2 heat in the UAC5's case) and higher burst damage assuming you can get both shots to land on the same location.

In MW4 this doube fire delay was ALWAYS 0.25 seconds. This number should vary from AC rating. UAC2 would be say a 0.1 second delay. A UAC5 would keep the MW4 0.25 second delay. The UAC10 would have a 0.45 second delay, and finally the UAC20 would have say a 0.75 second delay. (Also, the UAC5 would also only have 3.5 [7/ton div by 2 ] shots per ton, so you better damn well sure you make those shots count!)

The weapon jam thing is bad / poor design.

Edited by mwhighlander, 31 January 2014 - 11:31 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Soldiers never know when their weapon will jam or misfire

By that logic all weapons in MWO should jam.

But quite frankly jamming is not a fun mechanic and should not be in the game in its current form.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 31 January 2014 - 11:38 AM, said:

By that logic all weapons in MWO should jam.

But quite frankly jamming is not a fun mechanic and should not be in the game in its current form.

Dude... Remember who you are saying that too, then think about it again before offering me a chance to agree with the logic!

Jamming may no be a fun Mechanic but it is the price o be paid for pushing your luck. Take MASC. You had t roll dice to see if it failed on TT, If it did. Paralyzed legs you could not move the rest of the game. Super charger failure role cause a chance to crit your engine and leave you generating extra heat for the remainder of the game.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 31 January 2014 - 12:16 PM.

[Deathlike]

Khobai, on 31 January 2014 - 11:38 AM, said:

But quite frankly jamming is not a fun mechanic and should not be in the game in its current form.

Jamming is not a fun mechanic, but with proper regulation, it would be fine. The RACs in MW4 Mercs were exceptional and fun, and still had a reasonable jamming mechanism.

It's all about how you go about balancing it.

[Roland]

SI The Joker, on 31 January 2014 - 07:52 AM, said:

The UAC5 jamming mechanic in its current state at least, should be disabled.

You can just macro around it... so why even have it in the first place?

You can't macro around UAC jamming.
You can make a macro to fire it only on recycle.. at which point you are using an AC5, but one that weighs more and takes more space.

[Cyborne Elemental]

Roland, on 31 January 2014 - 12:19 PM, said:

You can't macro around UAC jamming.
You can make a macro to fire it only on recycle.. at which point you are using an AC5, but one that weighs more and takes more space.

winner!

Granted, the UAC-5 now is somewhat balanced as is, and it kinda works, but it could be much better and less frustrating.

So together lets figure out a way to get this jamming mechanic fixed in a way that works, like I tried to talk about in my OP.

Or talk about what changes are really needed to remove jams without destroying the usefulness of the UAC-5.

All this discussion about how Tabletop works is fascinating with rolling dice and all, but in a realtime 3d shooter where there are so many variables, alot of it doesn't apply in a way that makes sense or that work the same.

Things need to be adjusted more by feel and experience over time and through testing, than by raw numbers and equations.

Edited by Mister D, 31 January 2014 - 12:50 PM.

[Prezimonto]

Joseph Mallan, on 31 January 2014 - 07:43 AM, said:

Why do you want our hand held in combat Kho? Soldiers never know when their weapon will jam or misfire and I realize this is a game, But that idea is just spoon feeding players. Sometimes skill is knowing when to take a risk taking a risk and when to play it safe. Having a indicator lessens the skill not raise it.

Do we have a indicator on TT when we might roll a 2 and jam out Ultra? Man that would be awesome!

So bring back the "clear a jam" mini game. That was popular.
*edit*

I wouldn't actually mind if the "mini-game" was more of the order of "mash the clear button every few seconds until it clears".

In essence... give the weapon a meter that follows just the barrel heat of the UAC weapon. Give it a hard limit... 3 double taps maybe... then the weapon is jammed for a non-random amount of time(each "clearing cycle last 4 seconds, and the "heat meter" is a representation of odds to clear). Or control your fire so you space double taps out.

So you can use it a lot. The more you use it the hotter it gets(or call it wear and let it build slowly... so early in the match the weapon is fine, late in the match it take forever to clear), and the more successful double taps you pull off the more the meter increases. Keep using it.... but if you ever double tap 3 in a row, it jams... and the heat meter for the weapons (not the mech) determines how long it'll take to cool off.

Edited by Prezimonto, 31 January 2014 - 12:43 PM.

[Roland]

mwhighlander, on 31 January 2014 - 11:30 AM, said:

Follow the MW4 route on UACs.

The double shot mechanic in MW4 is the reason why virtually no one ever used them in competitive play.

Honestly, in multiple years of league play, I can count on one hand the number of times I ever saw someone actually use UAC's.... They were effectively useless weapons.

[Cimarb]

Mister D, on 31 January 2014 - 09:39 AM, said:

Nice.
Only 2 guys actually responded to my suggested list
out of 15 posts.
rest is infighting and arguments, thx guys.

I prefer option 1 myself, its very close to how the jamming system currently is, just a little more refined and still counters macro quite well.

Opt 2, would be my second runner up, if the UAC5 is going to take 1 more slot and 1 more ton, being slightly faster is ok if its going to use fixed ROF mode, maybe my numbers are off a little, but straight math doesn't always apply when it comes to ingame application, ballistics are still hard to lead on moving targets, and odds are you're going to miss alot of shots anyways.

Staying on topic is difficult, especially when every one of us has some level of ADHD just from being gamers. Making it a poll would help a lot, though, because at least they see the options and pick one before reading through tons of posts, on topic or not. It also makes it a lot more obvious which one is preferred. As I said in my (lengthy) post, I think the jam chance should scale up with use, not be a flat percent. Having the same chance of it failing on the first shot as the fiftieth is just silly, and with my luck it makes the UAC pretty pointless.

BaconTWOfourACTUAL, on 31 January 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

I see your hold up, in the fact that the AC 2 has a higher recycle rate so its capable of putting more rounds down range and outputting the same amount of damage as an AC20 during its 4 second recycle.

There is no other way to say it, but that's ballistics. The AC2 is a lighter round, with a shorter distance to travel inside the firing mechanism, with minimal recoil so its capable of a fast recycle.
The AC20 is a very large round, with a longer distance to travel in the firing mechanism with a much larger recoil.
(examples)
Size is key.

No, that's not. I understand where you are coming from, but I am not talking about caliber size, I am talking about the classifications of autocannons in MW, which if you will re-read my post and the quote inside of it specifically, has nothing to do with caliber or rate of fire - it is completely dependent on the amount of armor damage it does within a certain time period. Whether your revolver shoots five little bullets and does 4 points of damage per bullet, or shoots one huge bullet that does twenty, they would both be a class/20 revolver. Size means nothing. Size and rate of fire both determine the amount of damage during the time, but it is their combined value that makes the classification.

Roland, on 31 January 2014 - 12:19 PM, said:

You can't macro around UAC jamming.
You can make a macro to fire it only on recycle.. at which point you are using an AC5, but one that weighs more and takes more space.

It does also have a slightly longer range...

[Bhael Fire]

Why isn't this obvious to people?

UAC "burst fire" mode needs to be optional and come with the risk of jamming.

Double Click = double fire, risk of jamming.

Single Click or Hold the trigger down = single shot or continuous fire ala a normal AC. No risk of jamming.

Simple.

Edited by Bhael Fire, 31 January 2014 - 12:57 PM.

[Roland]

Cimarb, on 31 January 2014 - 12:53 PM, said:

It does also have a slightly longer range...

Is this still true?
It used to be, but I thought the extended the AC5's range to match that of the UAC now.

[Cimarb]

Prezimonto, on 31 January 2014 - 12:34 PM, said:

So bring back the "clear a jam" mini game. That was popular.
*edit*

I wouldn't actually mind if the "mini-game" was more of the order of "mash the clear button every few seconds until it clears".

In essence... give the weapon a meter that follows just the barrel heat of the UAC weapon. Give it a hard limit... 3 double taps maybe... then the weapon is jammed for a non-random amount of time(each "clearing cycle last 4 seconds, and the "heat meter" is a representation of odds to clear). Or control your fire so you space double taps out.

So you can use it a lot. The more you use it the hotter it gets(or call it wear and let it build slowly... so early in the match the weapon is fine, late in the match it take forever to clear), and the more successful double taps you pull off the more the meter increases. Keep using it.... but if you ever double tap 3 in a row, it jams... and the heat meter for the weapons (not the mech) determines how long it'll take to cool off.

I really, really like making the jam a meta-game. On top of what you suggest, mashing the button could actually have a cost, where you eject a round every time it is mashed, until the jam actually clears and you can return to firing.

Roland, on 31 January 2014 - 12:55 PM, said:

Is this still true?
It used to be, but I thought the extended the AC5's range to match that of the UAC now.

The AC5 is 620/1700, while the UAC5 is 600/1800. So, not as long of a full power range, but slightly longer max range.

[Prezimonto]

Cimarb, on 31 January 2014 - 12:59 PM, said:

I really, really like making the jam a meta-game. On top of what you suggest, mashing the button could actually have a cost, where you eject a round every time it is mashed, until the jam actually clears and you can return to firing.


The AC5 is 620/1700, while the UAC5 is 600/1800. So, not as long of a full power range, but slightly longer max range.

I really like the idea that, in addition, you hit a button to jam clear... and it costs you a round. If your weapon is "hot" odds are you spend a bunch of ammo trying to force a clearance. Makes players carry more ammo for UACs.

Add that all ammo needs to have the explosion chance increased by a LOT, and that's a win.

It would be a good trade off for a specific hard limit on jamming. Play carefully, or get a jam, once it's jammed, keep your head, or lose your ammo slowly.

[SpartanFiredog317]

Mister D, on 31 January 2014 - 06:33 AM, said:

Lots of discussion about the current state of the UAC-5. Thought I'd start my own. Uac-5 seems to be in a state where it doesn't really work very well, and is less than reliable at best. Had a brainstorm and would like to share my thoughts. If it were possible to get the UAC changed, which of these would you guys prefer. I came up with 6 reasonable alternatives, so please say which # you like or if you prefer it how it is. 1. Give UAC-5 its own internal heat regulation per weapon, allow it to fire a minimum of 2 shots before internal heat starts to roll the dice on jamming mechanic. Start at 0% chance for jam on first 2 shots, each shot after the first 2 adds 8-10% chance to jam with a maximum of 25% chance to jam. On a jam, C2J is reset to 0%, and 4 second cooldown before you can fire again. 2. Give UAC-5 a toggle mode via keybind, or as alternative code when its set to chainfire. MODE 1 = Fixed rate of fire 1 shot every 1.2 - 1.3 seconds (slightly faster than AC-5) MODE 2 = Burst fire (similar to suggestion 1) Allow first 2 shots always, every shot after that increases chance to jam by 8-10% with a maximum 25% chance to jam. On jam, reset C2J, 4 second cooldown to clear jam. 3. Give UAC-5 a full auto spindown mechanic, remove jam mechanic, start off at 0.8 shots per second (midpoint between AC-2 and AC-5), and on a curve, slow down the rate of fire until its at 1 shot every 5 seconds, give it a 5 second cooldown before its at fullspeed again. 4. Give UAC-5 a full-auto spinup, remove jam mechanic, starting at 1 shot every 2.5 seconds, and on a curve, speed up its ROF and multiply its heat to match over the course of say.. 4-5 seconds? Each time you let go of the firebutton, the ROF resets to 1 shot per 2.5seconds and starts the spinup fresh. 5. Give UAC-5 Fixed rate of fire, remove jam mechanic, midpoint between AC-2 and AC-5, say 1 second per shot, with heat at 1.5ish? to start? 6. Give UAC-5 its old stats back, remove jam mechanic, 3 shot burst with cone of fire spread slightly at 2 heat per shot, with 5 second cooldown. (similar in function to LBX mechanic) (dps will match Gauss roughly, but with inaccuracy because of spread)

If you don't think UAC-5 is one of the BEST weapons in the current game you are a terrible shot, extremely laggy, or only using one....

Chain fired they almost never jam, and the RoF is still better than AC5... even if you fire all at once you will still more than likely get AC10 dmg in an AC5 pkg.

if anything they need MORE jamming or more heat.

I love teh dakka, but UAC5 x2, or x3 is just plain redonkulously good right now.

A triple UAC5 Jag or 'Mets will, almost without fail get two kills and probably mangle a third before it goes down... and thats if it just walks straight to the enemy's front door... if you it uses some tactics it'll have 2.5-3.5 before the enemy even knows they are being shot at.

[Thejuggla]

I like #1 give it 2 shots then start the jam chance. Also the ability to hold down fire at an ac5 rate and not jam would be good.

[Cyborne Elemental]

Yeah, I have used the UAC5 on my jag, even found a way to do 4x UAC-5, with 180 rounds and near full armor too.
I found it to be fun as hell but didn't help my team much when they go click click instead of BOOM BOOM.

Dual UAC5 redundancy is 9 extra tons just so you can do what 1 of them should have been doing in the first place.
Dual AC-5 is nice reliable damage, but I may as well just carry an AC-10 with extra ammo.

Everytime I carry a UAC-5 into battle, it fails me when I need it most.

Its not so bad to be missing 10 damage, but when it jams after the very first slug flies on a tap and I miss out on 30 damage during that 5 second cooldown, it hurts.. alot.

[Roland]

Cimarb, on 31 January 2014 - 12:59 PM, said:

I really, really like making the jam a meta-game. On top of what you suggest, mashing the button could actually have a cost, where you eject a round every time it is mashed, until the jam actually clears and you can return to firing.

I think the trick here would be to make whatever little game they end up making to unjam the gun not be some totally fixed thing that could easily be macro'ed.

Make it something which actually requires you do use some intelligence to unjam it, like move your gun in certain directions or something, rather than just pushing buttons.