20 replies to this topic

[The6thMessenger]

Something i noticed when i used the AC of the clans, is that they double-taps unlike the IS version. Isn't that Clan's version should be more powerful than the IS version as per "flavor"?

Anyways as i played the game, i noticed that UAC is somewhat more used than normal AC, i don't even see any good trait to pick the normal AC over UAC. Is there even good point to pick AC to UAC? they have smaller critical slot requirement, and you can simply just not double-shoot to not jam, then again in emergencies you can choose to doubleshoot if you want to.

Now here's what i think should happen; make it so that C-UAC is to staring-down, while C-AC is for hit-and-run. That means that the C-AC would function like the IS version of shooting only a single slug than multiple ones. And as per "Clan-flavor", what if it has longer range but slower projectile, and higher impulse?

For the C-UAC, to further enhance it's stare-down role, what if it has faster projectile? After all, that multiple projectiles that divides the damage is already somewhat hard to hit.

Lastly, as for the UACs, it would be nice if the UAC2 and UAC5 would rotate every shot, after all it's a gatling gun. Also change the UAC20s model to have like that of the UAC5 but has 5 barrels instead, and also spin, after all it shoots far more than other UACs.

What do you think? is UAC/AC division fine as it is? Could it work as i suggested? Or you have a different idea of how it should work.

Also let's talk about AC20 -- 140 total damage, and with that heavy weapon to begin with it's not going to have lots and lots of ammo. I advocate the ammo/ton to 8 from 7, and damage/ton from 140 to 160, mainly because of the tonnage and crit-slot demanding weapon, its already hard to put ammo in the first place.

Relatively Stock UM-R60L

Look at the Urbanmech for example, yeah AC20 isn't really a good build to begin with, but another shot is a god-send that would allow it to be a bit more useful.

I never found the AC20 that useful, mainly because of it's short range and immense heat, as well as low ammo amount. I actually tried it on my King-Crab since it's the stock loadout, but i found it rather distasteful that you have to get closer, when it's already hard enough to get close.

What i propose is that the maximum range of the ACs, starting at the AC2, to AC20 would have an incrementing multiplier starting from 2x, to 3x of the AC20.

(U)AC2 = 720m - 1440m
(U)AC5 = 620m - 1240m
(U)AC10 = 450m - 900m
(U)AC20 = 270m - 540m

All of the ACs have 2x of minimum range as maximum range, but i propose an adjustment.

(U)AC2 (2x) = 720m - 1440m
(U)AC5 (2.1667x) = 620m - 1343.354m
(U)AC10 (2.4444x) = 450m - 1100m
(U)AC20 (3x) = 270m - 810m

This is so that the ACs aren't that much left out in terms of range, if one can land a shot. Still the AC 10s and 20s are rather short compared to most weapons, and with slow projectile speed of 950 and 650 respectively, in itself already hindered at long range.

What are your thoughts?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 12 September 2016 - 10:14 PM.

[Bohxim]

Clan ballistics are already better in large to their lighter weight, longer range, smaller size on top of having uac options for all calibres. The burst fire vs single slug of the IS is probably as a form of balance to game play.
Don't have a clan mech that let's me see the barrel from my cockpit, but the IS uac 5 gatling gun spins as it fires (visible from the jagermech)
As is, I'd say ballistics are at a decent spot, although often I wish IS ballistics took a slot or two less so I can load my ac20 onto a few other mechs I like running

[martian]

The6thMessenger, on 10 September 2016 - 11:33 PM, said:

Something i noticed when i used the AC of the clans, is that they double-taps unlike the IS version.

Both Clan UACs and IS UACs can doubletap. However, the only IS UAC in the game is UAC-5.

The6thMessenger, on 10 September 2016 - 11:33 PM, said:

Isn't that Clan's version should be more powerful than the IS version as per "flavor"?

No.

The6thMessenger, on 10 September 2016 - 11:33 PM, said:

Anyways as i played the game, i noticed that UAC is somewhat more used than normal AC, i don't even see any good trait to pick the normal AC over UAC. Is there even good point to pick AC to UAC? they have smaller critical slot requirement, and you can simply just not double-shoot to not jam, then again in emergencies you can choose to doubleshoot if you want to.

Now here's what i think should happen; make it so that C-UAC is to staring-down, while C-AC is for hit-and-run. That means that the C-AC would function like the IS version of shooting only a single slug than multiple ones. And as per "Clan-flavor", what if it has longer range but slower projectile, and higher impulse?

As far as I know, Clan ACs are just a placeholder for Clan LBX Autocannons - that's all. But since PGI has not been capable of programming working LBX ACs with switchable Cluster/Slug ammo, those placeholders have been left in the game.

The Clans phased out standard ACs a long time ago.

The6thMessenger, on 10 September 2016 - 11:33 PM, said:

For the C-UAC, to further enhance it's stare-down role, what if it has faster projectile? After all, that multiple projectiles that divides the damage is already somewhat hard to hit.

Lastly, as for the UACs, it would be nice if the UAC2 and UAC5 would rotate every shot, after all it's a gatling gun. Also change the UAC20s model to have like that of the UAC5 but has 5 barrels instead, and also spin, after all it shoots far more than other UACs.

What do you think? is UAC/AC division fine as it is? Could it work as i suggested? Or you have a different idea of how it should work.

I think that the division is fine as is, since Clan ACs are rarely used anyway, so it doesn't matter too much, how exactly you will change their graphics etc.

Generally speaking, I would say that ACs and UACs are more or less fine.

[762 NATO]

Really, I would like to see all ACs act like the clan ones. Hear me out! This would make for an easy transition to the RAC5 we all want (except some die-hard Clammers). And would be truer to TT that some lore fanatics want. The clans keep all the UAC awesomeness double-tap stuff and the IS gets a RAC one day. Maybe we might even get things like UAC jam chance reduction and LB spread reduction modules! PGI, please note. But yeah, 20 points to a single location is nice if you have trouble aiming or tracking.

Cheers!

[LordNothing]

the only advantage cacs have is lower heat than uacs. you can dual fire cac20s where you cant do that with uac20s without overheating. you can do an cac60 dire that can do a 60 point alpha without overheating, which i think its the highest single volley ballistic alpha possible. lbx are about the same but they spread and the cacs dont. cac2s are far superior to uac2s because of the really long jam time vs short refire rate. lb2s have a slight dps advantage in that they can get a cd module and the others cant and spread stays pretty tight at moderate ranges. the only thing i dont like about cacs is that they get neither quirk representation nor do they get modules. if they are going to stay in the game, they should at least follow the same rules as the other weapons.

[PhoenixFire55]

CUACs weight the same, have same range and same everything but take less crit slots. There isn't even a question what should you bring. If you have double thoughts about jamming nobody is forcing you to double-tap. And double-tapping gives you a potential of twice the alpha damage, which is a great advantage in the current peek-a-boo idiotic warfare.

Balance-wise this is stupid to even have CACs, problem is there were never really any CACs to begin with, they are just useless placeholders in MWO. Same way there were really never LBXs and ACs, it was just a different ammo for the same kind of gun, i.e. you had a C10 and can load it up with pellets to get LBX10 or slugs to get AC10. Nor was there any one way "regular" ACs worked. They simply did 10 damage in whatever manner the manufacturer of the particular model designed them ... i.e. anything from ten projectiles per 1 damage to a single projectile dealing 10.

Current implementation is a fail, however there is no doubt in my mind that they'll never change it.

Edited by PhoenixFire55, 11 September 2016 - 05:40 AM.

[martian]

PhoenixFire55, on 11 September 2016 - 05:27 AM, said:

CUACs weight the same, have same range and same everything but take less crit slots. There isn't even a question what should you bring. If you have double thoughts about jamming nobody is forcing you to double-tap. And double-tapping gives you a potential of twice the alpha damage, which is a great advantage in the current peek-a-boo idiotic warfare.

Balance-wise this is stupid to even have CACs, problem is there were never really any CACs to begin with, they are just useless placeholders in MWO.

That's true.

PhoenixFire55, on 11 September 2016 - 05:27 AM, said:

Same way there were really never LBXs and ACs, it was just a different ammo for the same kind of gun, i.e. you had a C10 and can load it up with pellets to get LBX10 or slugs to get AC10.

That's totally not true. Standard ACs and LBX ACs are completely different weapons.

[The6thMessenger]

PhoenixFire55, on 11 September 2016 - 05:27 AM, said:

CUACs weight the same, have same range and same everything but take less crit slots. There isn't even a question what should you bring. If you have double thoughts about jamming nobody is forcing you to double-tap. And double-tapping gives you a potential of twice the alpha damage, which is a great advantage in the current peek-a-boo idiotic warfare.

Balance-wise this is stupid to even have CACs, problem is there were never really any CACs to begin with, they are just useless placeholders in MWO. Same way there were really never LBXs and ACs, it was just a different ammo for the same kind of gun, i.e. you had a C10 and can load it up with pellets to get LBX10 or slugs to get AC10. Nor was there any one way "regular" ACs worked. They simply did 10 damage in whatever manner the manufacturer of the particular model designed them ... i.e. anything from ten projectiles per 1 damage to a single projectile dealing 10.

Current implementation is a fail, however there is no doubt in my mind that they'll never change it.

Yeah, but you know during the Energy Draw, PGI is kind of pushing the normal AC over UAC by nerfing it. That means they are kind of getting attention, that they aren't just place holder but they would want them to be a legitimate choice.

Also let's talk about AC20 -- 140 total damage, and with that heavy weapon to begin with it's not going to have lots and lots of ammo. I advocate the ammo/ton to 8 from 7, and damage/ton from 140 to 160, mainly because of the tonnage and crit-slot demanding weapon, its already hard to put ammo in the first place.

I never found the AC20 that useful, mainly because of it's short range and immense heat, as well as low ammo amount. I actually tried it on my King-Crab since it's the stock loadout, but i found it rather distasteful that you have to get closer, when it's already hard enough to get close.

What i propose is that the maximum range of the ACs, starting at the AC2, to AC20 would have an incrementing multiplier starting from 2x, to 3x of the AC20.

(U)AC2 = 720m - 1440m
(U)AC5 = 620m - 1240m
(U)AC10 = 450m - 900m
(U)AC20 = 270m - 540m

All of the ACs have 2x of minimum range as maximum range, but i propose an adjustment.

(U)AC2 (2x) = 720m - 1440m
(U)AC5 (2.1667x) = 620m - 1343.354m
(U)AC10 (2.4444x) = 450m - 1100m
(U)AC20 (3x) = 270m - 810m

This is so that the ACs aren't that much left out in terms of range, if one can land a shot. Still the AC 10s and 20s are rather short compared to most weapons, and with slow projectile speed of 950 and 650 respectively, in itself already hindered at long range.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 12 September 2016 - 10:03 PM.

[LordNothing]

im not a huge fan of the double tap mechanic. feels like button mashing to me. and the single shot guns dont really feel like autocannons. id keep them around (as rifle), but i think all auto cannons need to be burst fire.

id actually give all autocannons bursts in even number increments 2,4,6,8. ultras have an extended clip and can fire up to 50% more rounds, so the max burst length would be 3, 6, 9,12, however they can only fire safely for the first 2,4,6,8 rounds like the standard version, additional rounds can jam. you can hold and fire the entire burst, or tap to only fire the safe burst (same would apply to chain fire, holding fires the round in ultra mode and alternates, tapping through the weapons causes safe bursts). who equips an ultra to run in safe mode anyway and why should it be the default mode? people who play mechwarrior are too old to mash buttons.

ultras really shouldn't be double damage weapons. it marginalizes the standard versions a little too much. maxing out at 150% damage, and giving less severe jam chance and reset times would be better, because i think autos are a little bit too jam happy. ever get into a brawl and all your guns stop working for several seconds, yea i hate that. penalties would be somewhere between 1 and 4 seconds (depending on class), jam chance no higher than 10%.

you might play around on the is side to make the weapons distinct, like have the uac5 fire 3 rounds, and up to 5 rounds, but give it slightly more severe jam chance and time to compensate for the 167% extra damage. standards is autos might fire 2,3,4,5 round bursts (is ac2 would essentially be a continuous fire weapon at that point, further distinctions).

Edited by LordNothing, 12 September 2016 - 10:42 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

What if we just drop the jam-chance altogether and just make the CD longer should the player decides to doubletap?

[Karl Streiger]

The6thMessenger, on 12 September 2016 - 11:06 PM, said:

What if we just drop the jam-chance altogether and just make the CD longer should the player decides to doubletap?

Why double tap at all - i would just increase the rate of fire for UACs...by 50%

OK but using LordNothings proposal - there could be a beautiful alternative:
keep the cool down equal, increase the number of bullets per burst for the UAC

So instead of firing 2 bullets the UAC 5 fires 3 bullets per burst

I would not increase the number of bullets - keep it 2-3 bullets at maximum - so that the UAC might fire 3-4 bullets but increase the duration between the shots
(0.05sec AC2; 0.1se AC5: 0.15sec AC10, 0.225sec AC20)

[The6thMessenger]

Karl Streiger, on 12 September 2016 - 11:48 PM, said:

Why double tap at all - i would just increase the rate of fire for UACs...by 50%

OK but using LordNothings proposal - there could be a beautiful alternative:
keep the cool down equal, increase the number of bullets per burst for the UAC

So instead of firing 2 bullets the UAC 5 fires 3 bullets per burst

I would not increase the number of bullets - keep it 2-3 bullets at maximum - so that the UAC might fire 3-4 bullets but increase the duration between the shots
(0.05sec AC2; 0.1se AC5: 0.15sec AC10, 0.225sec AC20)

Yeah i would like that.

[Karl Streiger]

The6thMessenger, on 12 September 2016 - 11:55 PM, said:

Yeah i would like that.

just quick in a table:

typ	shots	dmg pellet	duration	cooldown
AC5	1	5	0	1.7
UAC5	2	3.75	0.15	1.7
CAC2	2	1	0.1	0.8
CUAC2	3	1	0.12	0.8
CAC5	2	2.5	0.12	1.8
CUAC5	3	2.5	0.14	1.8
CAC10	2	5	0.14	2.5
CUAC10	3	5	0.17	2.5
CAC20	2	10	0.17	4.2
CUAC20	3	10	0.2	4.2

Edited by Karl Streiger, 13 September 2016 - 12:08 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

Karl Streiger, on 13 September 2016 - 12:04 AM, said:

just quick in a table:

typ	shots	dmg pellet	duration	cooldown
AC5	1	5	0	1.7
UAC5	2	3.75	0.15	1.7
CAC2	2	1	0.1	0.8
CUAC2	3	1	0.12	0.8
CAC5	2	2.5	0.12	1.8
CUAC5	3	2.5	0.14	1.8
CAC10	2	5	0.14	2.5
CUAC10	3	5	0.17	2.5
CAC20	2	10	0.17	4.2
CUAC20	3	10	0.2	4.2

What about 2/3/4/5 pellets with UAC2/5/10/20? and have 1/2/3/4 pellets with normal AC? At 0.10s interval? that would put the Duration at 0.0/0.1/0.2/0.3/0.4. It plays with the Clan's flavor that though they deal heavier damage, they do so with a longer duration.

Or what about the C-AC just shoots once like IS? That would simplify things. Think of it as the "U" in the AC is the "ER" of Lasers.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 13 September 2016 - 12:17 AM.

[RestosIII]

I'm still a fan of no double tapping, just increased ROF. To keep jams, just make it either a ℅ chance after every shot, or give it a flamer-style bar that fills as you fire. Fill the bar, and jam chances pop up.

The6thMessenger, on 13 September 2016 - 12:15 AM, said:

What about 2/3/4/5 pellets with UAC2/5/10/20? and have 1/2/3/4 pellets with normal AC? At 0.10s interval? that would put the Duration at 0.0/0.1/0.2/0.3/0.4. It plays with the Clan's flavor that though they deal heavier damage, they do so with a longer duration.

Or what about the C-AC just shoots once like IS? That would simplify things. Think of it as the "U" in the AC is the "ER" of Lasers.

I still personally believe how the IS and Clan ACs should be burst fire, personally, and I would definately hate for Clan ACs to lose their bursts. Just make C-AC and CLBX the same weapon with ammo switching already, PGI. It shouldn't take this long to replace the placeholder weaponry.

Edited by RestosIII, 13 September 2016 - 12:45 AM.

[Karl Streiger]

The6thMessenger, on 13 September 2016 - 12:15 AM, said:

What about 2/3/4/5 pellets with UAC2/5/10/20? and have 1/2/3/4 pellets with normal AC? At 0.10s interval? that would put the Duration at 0.0/0.1/0.2/0.3/0.4. It plays with the Clan's flavor that though they deal heavier damage, they do so with a longer duration.

Or what about the C-AC just shoots once like IS? That would simplify things. Think of it as the "U" in the AC is the "ER" of Lasers.

I want to keep the number of bullets limited to reduce the stress for the server.
As you should have read about there are 23 checks per bullet to forecast if it hit to reduce the lag.
With 5 bullets per rifle you might have a single mech blasting 20 bullets - each calculated on its own. To max out the number of bullets at 3 might keep the stress at low level.

If not for the server of cause i would like to have bursts of 20 heck even 100 pellest per burst

Edited by Karl Streiger, 13 September 2016 - 01:03 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

Karl Streiger, on 13 September 2016 - 01:02 AM, said:

I want to keep the number of bullets limited to reduce the stress for the server.
As you should have read about there are 23 checks per bullet to forecast if it hit to reduce the lag.
With 5 bullets per rifle you might have a single mech blasting 20 bullets - each calculated on its own. To max out the number of bullets at 3 might keep the stress at low level.

If not for the server of cause i would like to have bursts of 20 heck even 100 pellest per burst

To be fair, C-AC20 and C-UAC20 already does 4 salvos.

[Karl Streiger]

The6thMessenger, on 13 September 2016 - 05:24 PM, said:

To be fair, C-AC20 and C-UAC20 already does 4 salvos.

And were 5 before, but in the end the number of bullets doesn't matter - because if you fire 5 bullets with 0.15sec break between (like it was at the beginning) or now 4 shells with 0.11sec between the shots - what matters is the time between the first and the last bullet. I feel that 3 bullets would be at a perfect spot - with 2 for the CACs - of course you would need to test it and collect server data to see the impact

[RestosIII]

Karl Streiger, on 13 September 2016 - 11:13 PM, said:

And were 5 before, but in the end the number of bullets doesn't matter - because if you fire 5 bullets with 0.15sec break between (like it was at the beginning) or now 4 shells with 0.11sec between the shots - what matters is the time between the first and the last bullet. I feel that 3 bullets would be at a perfect spot - with 2 for the CACs - of course you would need to test it and collect server data to see the impact

The other our current hitreg, the number of shells is very important. Could mean the difference between you doing full damage, or losing some because one of your shells out of the salvo phased through the target. Still, I have a bad feeling PGI has completely given up on making C-ACs anything more than the worthless placeholders they are.

[The6thMessenger]

RestosIII, on 13 September 2016 - 11:17 PM, said:

The other our current hitreg, the number of shells is very important. Could mean the difference between you doing full damage, or losing some because one of your shells out of the salvo phased through the target. Still, I have a bad feeling PGI has completely given up on making C-ACs anything more than the worthless placeholders they are.

In the ED, they are kind of nerfing UACs with a longer jam time, and altered jam chance.