69 replies to this topic

[Sarlic]

Press J to unjam your UAC.

God, that was one thing that could piss you off the entire match.

[Bishop Steiner]

Squarebasher, on 02 September 2015 - 02:52 AM, said:

Come on PGI do something about this, make it a mechanic we can game, and run two ACs for the price of one, and not a dice throw.

FTFY

[Lugh]

Namouche, on 02 September 2015 - 05:38 AM, said:

I miss that small timeframe when jamming was reduced (to I believe 6%) ....
Anyway, jamming does occur in the first shot - maybe the jamming code should only apply to the second burst.
I only use UACs when I can boat them (like 3 in the jagger, 4 in the crab). If they were real, UACs would have no place in any weapons platform because of their unreliability.

There is no call for a weapon that jams at this rate. And I dare say that if the designers of said weapon lived in the world of MechWarrior's Battle tech, they'd be hauled before the Khans and Heads of State and EXECUTED for their failure to deliver a reliable weapons platform.

[Bishop Steiner]

Lugh, on 02 September 2015 - 05:52 AM, said:

There is no call for a weapon that jams at this rate. And I dare say that if the designers of said weapon lived in the world of MechWarrior's Battle tech, they'd be hauled before the Khans and Heads of State and EXECUTED for their failure to deliver a reliable weapons platform.

But it is reliable...when used as it's designed.

It was never meant to be a permanent double RoF replacement for std ACs. It's meant to operate at normal RoF, and have the ability to go into "overdrive" for emergency scenarios. What everyone wants is an AC that they can sustainably maintain double RoF, with essentially no tradeoffs (boohoo one whole tone heavier!! woot!), thus totally obsoleting the AC.

The only issue is that jamming on the first shot garbage. Should NEVER happen. You want a higher (more gamable) RoF mechanism, but nobody want's to have to pay a legit tradeoff. All the "skill" mechanics allow you to run the weapon at double tap nonstop, then for "cool off" normal rate. Where's the downside?

Even for a reduced jam rate, IMO, the second "shot" should incur a mild CoF or other mechanic. But that's because of concepts like "balance".

[Bilbo]

The easiest way to cure UAC jamming is to use AC's instead. I know it's a radical concept but there it is.

[Lugh]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 September 2015 - 06:14 AM, said:

But it is reliable...when used as it's designed.

It was never meant to be a permanent double RoF replacement for std ACs. It's meant to operate at normal RoF, and have the ability to go into "overdrive" for emergency scenarios. What everyone wants is an AC that they can sustainably maintain double RoF, with essentially no tradeoffs (boohoo one whole tone heavier!! woot!), thus totally obsoleting the AC.

The only issue is that jamming on the first shot garbage. Should NEVER happen. You want a higher (more gamable) RoF mechanism, but nobody want's to have to pay a legit tradeoff. All the "skill" mechanics allow you to run the weapon at double tap nonstop, then for "cool off" normal rate. Where's the downside?

Even for a reduced jam rate, IMO, the second "shot" should incur a mild CoF or other mechanic. But that's because of concepts like "balance".

Bishop you know that isn't what I have ever advocated, I am all for the 3% Jam chance and lockout happening for longer periods.

The Jam chance is simply TOO DAMN HIGH.

The Jam on the first Shot nonsense just adds insult to injury. I'd be comfortable with losing the weapon for the whole match IF it had a properly LOW chance to jam and didn't Jam when it shouldn't (on the first shot) ALL THE TIME.

[Rhaythe]

Lugh, on 02 September 2015 - 06:26 AM, said:

I'd be comfortable with losing the weapon for the whole match IF it had a properly LOW chance to jam and didn't Jam when it shouldn't (on the first shot) ALL THE TIME.

Hm. There's an interesting thought.

[Bishop Steiner]

Rhaythe, on 02 September 2015 - 06:27 AM, said:

Hm. There's an interesting thought.

that's the TT mechanic. Thing is, more people would rage over 9 ton paperweights, even with only a 3% chance (per trigger pull). Removing mechs with ridiculous cooldown quirks, last I checked (been a while) even with jams included, the UAC still maintained a higher DPS than the AC5.

I could be wrong about that, but part of the issue is the Mechs like the the DRG-1N with their better than than UAC rof, making the jam on the UACV magnify more.

Lugh, on 02 September 2015 - 06:26 AM, said:

Bishop you know that isn't what I have ever advocated

Perhaps not, but that IS what 99% of the people crying about Jam ARE saying.

I'm just the guy keeping it real, and pointing out all the logic flaws in the complaint threads. The ONLY legit undeniable complaint, is the first shot jam. Event the jam rate, is debatable. As I said, if it get's reduced, what is the tradeoff being offered/suggested?

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 02 September 2015 - 06:36 AM.

[Kotzi]

Dont wanna be a sitting duck when all your UACs jam? Secondary weapons.

[Rhaythe]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 September 2015 - 06:32 AM, said:

that's the TT mechanic. Thing is, more people would rage over 9 ton paperweights, even with only a 3% chance (per trigger pull).

I'm aware, I'm just very curious as to how that would affect MWO.

Edit: Alternative idea is that if you are afflicted by that 3% jam rate, require the mech to shut down and Press J to Pay Respects Unjam Weapon to repair it.

I'm all for trying out things that make the weapons behave differently from one another. Give this game more flavor.

Edited by Rhaythe, 02 September 2015 - 06:37 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Rhaythe, on 02 September 2015 - 06:35 AM, said:

I'm aware, I'm just very curious as to how that would affect MWO.

if I recall correctly, they had it in the very beginning of CB.....and much rage ensued, which led to a unjam minigame, then to the jam cooldown period. Don't recall if it was a 3% jam rate, though. Actual happening was pre Me in MWO by a month or two.... but the forum rage and tooth gnashing was stil pretty hot at the time.

[Hotthedd]

The fact that UACs un-jam by themselves is something people should be thankful for.
It seems fewer and fewer people want any sort of "sim" in their dakka dakka pew pew shooter.

[Cyborne Elemental]

I'm still waiting to hear from Russ about the UAC-Heatbar system I presented to him, its a refined alternative to the random fixed diceroll we're using now.

He seems reluctant to say anything one way or another if he and his team even are taking it seriously.

Maybe some of you guys want to Tweet to him and ask what the status on it is, cause I can't seem to get an answer if its even viable through the flood of messages he probably has to dig through.

Edited by Mister D, 02 September 2015 - 06:48 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mister D, on 02 September 2015 - 06:48 AM, said:

I'm still waiting to hear from Russ about the UAC-Heatbar system I presented to him, its a refined alternative to the random fixed diceroll we're using now.

He seems reluctant to say anything one way or another if he and his team even are taking it seriously.

Maybe some of you guys want to Tweet to him and ask what the status on it is, cause I can't seem to get an answer if its even viable through the flood of messages he probably has to dig through.

That's because it's still gamable, with little trade off. It's a better than average offering, but still IMO, obsoletes standard ACs.

[Sarlic]

Mister D, on 02 September 2015 - 06:48 AM, said:

I'm still waiting to hear from Russ about the UAC-Heatbar system I presented to him, its a refined alternative to the random fixed diceroll we're using now.

He seems reluctant to say anything one way or another if he and his team even are taking it seriously.

Maybe some of you guys want to Tweet to him and ask what the status on it is, cause I can't seem to get an answer if its even viable through the flood of messages he probably has to dig through.

Which is a common thing when he doesn't answer.

But money related questions does.

Edited by Sarlic, 02 September 2015 - 06:53 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mister D, on 02 September 2015 - 06:48 AM, said:

I'm still waiting to hear from Russ about the UAC-Heatbar system I presented to him, its a refined alternative to the random fixed diceroll we're using now.

He seems reluctant to say anything one way or another if he and his team even are taking it seriously.

Maybe some of you guys want to Tweet to him and ask what the status on it is, cause I can't seem to get an answer if its even viable through the flood of messages he probably has to dig through.

Also, I can all but promise he has seen your idea....but he is VERY selective as to what he responds to. So for whatever reason, I would have to assume he doesn't see the issue. Because he seldom comments on ANY UAC proposals, or LB-X, etc. And there have been some pretty good ones tossed out.

Sarlic, on 02 September 2015 - 06:53 AM, said:

Which is a common thing when he doesn't answer.

But money related questions does.

I think it goes a little deeper than that. But I do feel that if he doesn't feel there is a problem, likes how something is done, fears teh dialogue for some reason, etc, then his response is to not respond.

[Bilbo]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 September 2015 - 06:54 AM, said:

Also, I can all but promise he has seen your idea....but he is VERY selective as to what he responds to. So for whatever reason, I would have to assume he doesn't see the issue. Because he seldom comments on ANY UAC proposals, or LB-X, etc. And there have been some pretty good ones tossed out.

Well there is a reason most people take UAC's when they have room for more than one. They are simply better than AC's despite the jam chance.

[Bishop Steiner]

Bilbo, on 02 September 2015 - 07:00 AM, said:

Well there is a reason most people take UAC's when they have room for more than one. They are simply better than AC's despite the jam chance.

and this is the truth.

I think if we see a reduction to jamming, it needs trade offs. MAke the jame rate increase for every UAC being used, GH, style. The extra vibrations play merry cob with each mechanism or some such fluff. Also, especially for IS UACs, if they are going to stay PP-FLD, the second shot NEEDS to have a CoF to represent the lower control, recoil, etc involved, especially with 10s and 20s.

Or other ideas. I admit, a SINGLE UAC5, is usually underwhelming. But then, so is a single std AC5. So how much "buff" does the gun need for it's 1 ton tax? But Clan UAC10s and 20s are pretty boss now, singly or in pairs. Even with their current jam rates.

Remove that first shot jam, and we are gold (aka, those times you single tap, instead of double tap, and it jams anyhow, which DOES happen). It should never, ever have a chance to jam until AFTER the second shot has left the barrel, IMO. Other than that? I'm fine in their current state, and just worry how IS UAC10s and 20s will be hadled (afraid they will simply get higher jam rates, as a balancer, which is boring)

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 02 September 2015 - 07:09 AM.

[Poisoner]

UAC jam rate is good where it is. Leave my dakka be.

[Lugh]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 September 2015 - 06:37 AM, said:

if I recall correctly, they had it in the very beginning of CB.....and much rage ensued, which led to a unjam minigame, then to the jam cooldown period. Don't recall if it was a 3% jam rate, though. Actual happening was pre Me in MWO by a month or two.... but the forum rage and tooth gnashing was stil pretty hot at the time.

It was never the 3% jam rate. It's always hovered around 25%, which no military would ever purchase.

The forum rage was due to the UAC5 being able to perform as well as the Gauss Rifle and the AC20, and fans of those being upset that wee little Dragon, or hunchback could match them for extended periods of time, resulting in their death.

And why shouldn't the better Cannon obsolete the older ones, what you are asking for is static never changing tech, that has never happened in warfare on this planet ever.

To draw a parrallel, The German short 75mm had marginal penetration values and began failing to easily defeat armor early in the war. German engineers lengthened the Barrel, increased the rifling amount, and slightly increased the powder load to give you the long 75's of the later war that were Excellent at penetrating armor. The short 75mm didn't disappear. It just never had more of them made. And they passed from relevance.

It is the very nature of evolving and IMPROVING weapon systems for the better ones to obsolesce the poorer ones.

That the argument can be made that for certain quirked mechs the Old snub nosed 75 (AC5) is BETTER than the newer and more advanced 75 (UAC5 ) is abhorrently against progress.

Let's not even talk about how quickly tank cannons went from the dominance of the 88m to 90mm then 105mm, then 120mm and on and on, or Russia's Bigger is Better 152mms

Poisoner, on 02 September 2015 - 07:07 AM, said:

UAC jam rate is good where it is. Leave my dakka be.

It needs to be lower.