#61
Posted 17 November 2016 - 06:39 AM
Uacs still jam at the most inconvenient moments.
Tbh I couldn't even notice much of a difference.
#62
Posted 17 November 2016 - 06:46 AM
#63
Posted 18 November 2016 - 02:54 AM
It's still as hilarious as ever..
#64
Posted 18 November 2016 - 03:18 AM
Why does a a single shot weapon needs more space then a weapon thats able to double tap?
At least they should need the same space and wheigt if the jam-chance compensates for the damage-increase if you double tap.
But i dont expect any logics from pig anymore ...
Edited by Galenit, 18 November 2016 - 03:24 AM.
#65
Posted 18 November 2016 - 03:59 AM
The Unstoppable Puggernaut, on 17 November 2016 - 06:46 AM, said:
I couldn't contain my chuckle at 'hard work'.
Now, if you mentioned that you were rolling Quad UAC10, I would've wet my pants of laughter.
#66
Posted 18 November 2016 - 05:05 AM
Galenit, on 18 November 2016 - 03:18 AM, said:
Why does a a single shot weapon needs more space then a weapon thats able to double tap?
At least they should need the same space and wheigt if the jam-chance compensates for the damage-increase if you double tap.
But i dont expect any logics from pig anymore ...
Because CACs were not suppose to be in game. They are suppose to be part of CLBXs, which is why they share the same space and weight as CLBX. Of course, CLBXs themselves suck a lot compared to CUACs, even though CUACs need less slots.
#67
Posted 18 November 2016 - 05:15 AM
Galenit, on 18 November 2016 - 03:18 AM, said:
Why does a a single shot weapon needs more space then a weapon thats able to double tap?
The CAC is actually a CLB-X, a weapon system that derives it's weight savings from endo-steel, and which has it's own targeting computer built in. Both of those technical marvels also increase the space they take up.
#68
Posted 18 November 2016 - 05:41 AM
Or is there any reason to take an cac over a cuac that would justify the bigger investment in a cac?
#69
Posted 18 November 2016 - 05:55 AM
Digous, on 15 November 2016 - 11:44 AM, said:
Heat is almost like laser (edited: Vomit Alpha), you cannot keep DPS, specially on hotter maps.
Great, now DW is officially dead and buried.
Then maybe it's time that you start making builds that just don't boat a single weapon? #Deathtoboating!
#70
Posted 18 November 2016 - 05:56 AM
Goober Gabber v2, on 18 November 2016 - 03:59 AM, said:
Now, if you mentioned that you were rolling Quad UAC10, I would've wet my pants of laughter.
I am glad your first post on the forum was a chuckle. I really doubt anyone uses Quad's any more for the raised heat let alone the jam mechanics thrown in.
If you are implying the kdk3 is an easy ride, UAC's are not the right config to do this any more, the Quad UAC10 without the nerfs melted mechs in seconds sure. Now Guass/PPC's are only way to go
#71
Posted 18 November 2016 - 08:46 AM
#73
Posted 18 November 2016 - 09:02 AM
Frechdachs, on 18 November 2016 - 08:46 AM, said:
Yeonne Greene, on 18 November 2016 - 09:01 AM, said:
I suppose we must now purge Frechdachs for heresy, eh?
Those are the "DPS Pulse Lasers" that PGI had envisioned, except that the GIF actually shows it being done the "right" way.
Edited by FupDup, 18 November 2016 - 09:02 AM.
#75
Posted 18 November 2016 - 11:10 AM
Digous, on 15 November 2016 - 12:20 PM, said:
Such a shame.
Good one dude, good one!
#76
Posted 18 November 2016 - 11:22 AM
Frechdachs, on 18 November 2016 - 08:46 AM, said:
Oh... ah... wow... I have no words. That, just seems wrong on levels...
ANYhow, as far a the topic of dakka viability. My 'phract variants are loaded with both ACs or UACs . So far haven't really noticed much difference honestly. Still lay out plenty of dakka pain...er... love.
As an observation the past year as the nerfs have come and gone you constantly see cries of "now worthless" and "unplayable" or "dead to the game" etc. I mean, really? In spite of that I've yet to see one of these impacted weapon systems or mech's become extinct. Perhaps thinned for a time, never extinct, gone, poof. Instead people simply seem to adapt.
I mean, if you want an easy 'press here button to win and dominate with little or no effort' this isn't your game. And really, why would someone play a game that was a guaranteed win, every time, because of your uber thing? Annyway, each to their own I suppose.
Edited by Morggo, 18 November 2016 - 11:23 AM.
#77
Posted 18 November 2016 - 01:51 PM
2-9dmg = never jams
10dmg = 10% jam chance (2 sec)
For every 2 additional damage points, add 5% jam chance (and 0.5 additional seconds)
Examples:
Single uac5, or up to 4x uac2
never jams
1x uac10 or 2x uac5 or 5 uac2
10% chance to jam for 2 seconds
6x uac2
15% chance to jam for 2.5 seconds
3x uac5
20% chance to jam for 3 seconds
2x uac10 or 4x uac5 or 1x uac20
35 % chance to jam for 5.5 seconds
2x uac20 or 4x uac10
85% chance to jam for 9.5 seconds
Edited by Drenath, 18 November 2016 - 02:00 PM.
#78
Posted 18 November 2016 - 01:56 PM
Vellron2005, on 18 November 2016 - 02:54 AM, said:
It's still as hilarious as ever..
Every time PGI tweaks a weapons system, people come here to declare the ruin of the game. Its like that curse dude in Mummy 2.
11 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 11 guests, 0 anonymous users