108 replies to this topic

[Duke Nedo]

Mech Croissant, on 20 November 2016 - 06:44 AM, said:

Wrong! As a noob, I didn't know how to double tap an uac.....I just assumed they would be ultra......so I solely songle tapped an yet still they jammed.

Having read this thread I thought to myself....mnhh, maybe they changed it, so just two days ago I mostly single tapped and only if I had a 100% clear shot at the enemy did I double tap. Weapon froze no matter what!

There is one more possibility to keep in mind, my mouse was recently broken and left clicking sometimes sent a double-click. It was not noticeable when playing, but really annoying in windows.... another way to test it is if it can cause a jam when you keep the button pressed, then there's no way to accidentally click too early.

[Templar Dane]

El Bandito, on 19 November 2016 - 09:32 PM, said:

Jamming mechanic is what PGI had rolled with, and if we dial it back again, CUACs will become superior than any of its relatives yet again. Since I want to see both sides' tech brought to equal competence, I am with PGI on nerfing the CUACs. The jam duration could be lowered at the expense of even more jam %, but CUAC nerfs were completely justified.

El Bandito, on 19 November 2016 - 09:32 PM, said:

Jamming mechanic is what PGI had rolled with, and if we dial it back again, CUACs will become superior than any of its relatives yet again. Since I want to see both sides' tech brought to equal competence, I am with PGI on nerfing the CUACs. The jam duration could be lowered at the expense of even more jam %, but CUAC nerfs were completely justified.

Duke Nedo, on 20 November 2016 - 06:37 AM, said:

While I am sure that's a fun build, I think that it's an informed decision you make in the mechlab when you make a build with a heavy reliance on a single heavy cUAC.

Then you make another informed decision when you decide to double-tap it.

I see it's attractive to get double dps, but it comes at a cost. We can't expect double dps and then become angry when it jams 17% of the time. The 8 secs is excessive, I agree. Something like 20% jam chance and 6 seconds would have been easier to cope with... but in any case, this is what UACs are. Feast or famine. When you famine 17% of the shots, don't forget you feast the other 83% and take double alpha for granted.

Sure, PPC/Gauss is better and more reliable, but that is not really the fault of the UACs imo. They are pretty nicely balanced towards different flavors of cUACs (and cUAC2's were unbroken), towards ACs, lasers and SRMs imo. If PPC and/or Gauss is too strong, just give it some extra CD and be done with it.



I also have some rare memory of something like that happening, though very rare. I am totally open towards that there may be a bug where for example the server has not cleared your gun status and thinks that you double-tap when you in fact did not...

Why even bother with an UAC20 + a few lasers, when you can do SRMS + a few lasers or just laser vomit in general? 4x CSRM6 is lighter, does more damage than a double tap, while having no chance to jam, for 2 more heat than a double tap.

Why fit a single UAC5 when you can slap a couple more medium lasers and a ton more heat sinks, if you're having to go back into cover and wait to unjam............when that plays EXACTLY like laser vomit anyway?

Why fit a single UAC10 when you can just fit a couple LPL?

Autocannons were already at a disavantage, and then because of a mech that can boat them with high mounts......every mech all the way down to the adder is left wondering why it should have an autocannon instead of one of the alternatives. Why sit there with a DPS-based weapon that requires you to stare down the enemy when you can poke with lasers or use an SRM build that is more suited to torso twisting [ergo more healthy in a brawl].

[El Bandito]

Templar Dane, on 20 November 2016 - 07:23 AM, said:

Why even bother with an UAC20 + a few lasers, when you can do SRMS + a few lasers or just laser vomit in general? 4x CSRM6 is lighter, does more damage than a double tap, while having no chance to jam, for 2 more heat than a double tap.

Why fit a single UAC5 when you can slap a couple more medium lasers and a ton more heat sinks, if you're having to go back into cover and wait to unjam............when that plays EXACTLY like laser vomit anyway?

Why fit a single UAC10 when you can just fit a couple LPL?

Autocannons were already at a disavantage, and then because of a mech that can boat them with high mounts......every mech all the way down to the adder is left wondering why it should have an autocannon instead of one of the alternatives. Why sit there with a DPS-based weapon that requires you to stare down the enemy when you can poke with lasers or use an SRM build that is more suited to torso twisting [ergo more healthy in a brawl].

SRMs have 270 max range, that is why. CUAC10 on the other hand, has four times the maximum range. Not every mech variant can have multiple missiles. Also, as I said many, many, many times, one does not have to double tap until he is in a favorable situation--such as where the enemy is not focusing on you. Even without double tapping, the DPS of CUAC10/CUAC20 are respectable.

Edited by El Bandito, 20 November 2016 - 08:30 AM.

[FupDup]

Ultimax, on 19 November 2016 - 10:11 PM, said:

...
1) The AC is an inferior weapon vs. many other weapons for many reasons. It simply has zero ability to fill in for how UACs were actually used.
...

I think this is caused by the fact that both ACs and UACs currently fill the exact same role/niche (relatively low-heat DPS at mid to short ranges). The difference is just that UACs are slightly heavier on the IS side (and not heavier at all on the Clan side) but shoot twice as fast and have to deal with RNGesus. When two things have pretty much the same role, one of those things will inevitably be better at it.

I'd kind of thinking that normal ACs should have a faster velocity than UACs, so that their role is at least marginally different (better at long range poking but still lower DPS). Maybe even throw in a range increase to accompany this.

Clan normal ACs (except CAC/2) having a slower cooldown than other comparable ACs is also really sad. They don't have any advantages to justify this.


Also, the class-5 normal ACs (and LBX) really didn't need that heat increase. I guess that the UAC/5 heat can be kind of rationalized by the fact that normal/LBX 5 were outclassed, but the weaker ACs of the 5 class did NOT need to get the same nerf because they already sucked. Excluding the AC/5 and LB 5-X from the nerf would have been a very easy way for PGI to give these guns a slight advantage over the UAC/5.

Indiscriminate normalization is bad and Paul should feel bad.

Edited by FupDup, 20 November 2016 - 09:55 AM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Rampage, on 16 November 2016 - 09:51 PM, said:

Pulled the 2xUAC2/cLPL/cERML off of the Stromcrow hero and replaced with 2 x UAC5s/2cERML. Then I went to Terra Therma again to test. I double tapped 240 rounds of ammo. The result was 12 jam notifications with all but two of them being both autocannons at the same time. So that is 22 weapon jams out of 4 tons of UAC5 ammo and the longer jam duration is agonizing. I will not be double tapping UAC5s unless it is a killing blow and no one else is close by to jump me. For the Hero, I may just go back to the stock load-out with the LBX5s.

Yeah this is my point. 22 jams is 176 seconds where your guns aren't firing (when you count the fact you also get an automatic cooldown imposed the second your guns come off jam). That is almost 3 minute of the match where you can't fire you UAC/5s and when you consider that your probably only actually firing at a target maybe 5-6 minutes of any given match (the other time devoted to moving or hiding), that weapon is useless 50% of the time.

Then move up to a UAC/10 which has the same jam chance but with a longer jam duration and you have your weapon unusable for 231 seconds or almost 4 minutes out of a match.

When you start putting things into perspective like that it isn't hard to see how fricken broken the UAC's are now.

[Duke Nedo]

Templar Dane, on 20 November 2016 - 07:23 AM, said:

Why even bother with an UAC20 + a few lasers, when you can do SRMS + a few lasers or just laser vomit in general? 4x CSRM6 is lighter, does more damage than a double tap, while having no chance to jam, for 2 more heat than a double tap.

Why fit a single UAC5 when you can slap a couple more medium lasers and a ton more heat sinks, if you're having to go back into cover and wait to unjam............when that plays EXACTLY like laser vomit anyway?

Why fit a single UAC10 when you can just fit a couple LPL?

Autocannons were already at a disavantage, and then because of a mech that can boat them with high mounts......every mech all the way down to the adder is left wondering why it should have an autocannon instead of one of the alternatives. Why sit there with a DPS-based weapon that requires you to stare down the enemy when you can poke with lasers or use an SRM build that is more suited to torso twisting [ergo more healthy in a brawl].

Point is, a UAC allows you to deal almost twice the damage when you don't jam. That is like having two weapons for the same ton/space and one. There has to be a counter to that, and that's mr. RNG jesus in the sky. That pulls down the average gain to ~25% instead of ~100%.

You know, it's not a human right to wield double dps and never jam...

The only reason this is not completely game breaking is that the stream fire and relatively slow velocity of clan UACs make them bad weapons to start with. PGI really needs to look over the whole UAC mechanism, until they do that they could never ever introduce IS UAC10 and IS UAC20.... Imagine 2x IS AC20 for 15 tons with single shells, oh the tears...

[Templar Dane]

El Bandito, on 20 November 2016 - 08:29 AM, said:

SRMs have 270 max range, that is why. CUAC10 on the other hand, has four times the maximum range. Not every mech variant can have multiple missiles. Also, as I said many, many, many times, one does not have to double tap until he is in a favorable situation--such as where the enemy is not focusing on you. Even without double tapping, the DPS of CUAC10/CUAC20 are respectable.

There was nothing wrong with UACs. If they were OP then why wasn't the whale seen as a problem? Where were/are the whines to nerf the whale?

[FupDup]

Templar Dane, on 20 November 2016 - 09:52 AM, said:

There was nothing wrong with UACs. If they were OP then why wasn't the whale seen as a problem? Where were/are the whines to nerf the whale?

I'm not disagreeing about UACs, but I want to point out that the Dire Whale hasn't been the best UAC platform for a while now.

[Templar Dane]

Duke Nedo, on 20 November 2016 - 09:03 AM, said:

Point is, a UAC allows you to deal almost twice the damage when you don't jam. That is like having two weapons for the same ton/space and one. There has to be a counter to that, and that's mr. RNG jesus in the sky. That pulls down the average gain to ~25% instead of ~100%.

You know, it's not a human right to wield double dps and never jam...

The only reason this is not completely game breaking is that the stream fire and relatively slow velocity of clan UACs make them bad weapons to start with. PGI really needs to look over the whole UAC mechanism, until they do that they could never ever introduce IS UAC10 and IS UAC20.... Imagine 2x IS AC20 for 15 tons with single shells, oh the tears...

But they did jam........and always have. They are the most difficult weapon in the game to keep on target because they practically have a duration like lasers but also aren't hitscan like lasers. That's the disadvantage.

I mean sure they're ******* OP as hell in the testing grounds, or against a ****** that gets caught stationary.

[Ultimax]

El Bandito, on 19 November 2016 - 11:54 PM, said:

Funny how before Clans hit, the AC5 was a perfectly viable weapon to use.

Nonsense.

There were no competitive builds that were built around AC 5s alone.

The builds that used them were also loading PPCs and were builds that either couldn't slot UAC 5s due to locations or tonnage requirements.

The reason for that was the goal of an alpha of 30, while working around ghost heat and because the Autocannon version of the build let you be more aggressive at mid-range to support & receive pushes (sound familiar?) - The gauss version was typically taken on maps where mid-range was simply not going to happen.

That's why the DS took 1 AC 5 + 1 UAC 5, it couldn't fit 2x UACs in the arm.

The CTF-3D could, and frequently did take 2x UACs.

The old Banshee took 3x AC 5s because it couldn't take 3x UAC 5s (won't fit in one torso) and because they also had energy weapons to supplement.

FupDup, on 20 November 2016 - 08:45 AM, said:

I think this is caused by the fact that both ACs and UACs currently fill the exact same role/niche (relatively low-heat DPS at mid to short ranges).

It's because "DPS" has always been a bad build, standing there and "DPSing" with just AC 5s is no less bad than standing there and DPSing with AC 2s. (Outliers like Maulers with 5 of them or Dragon super quirked versions are in their own special category)

Neither of those are capable of burst damage like UACs are.

So yes, the UACs are DPS focused but due to their design are capable of burst damage that doesn't require as much raw facetime to put out a lot of damage.

Edited by Ultimax, 20 November 2016 - 10:12 AM.

[DrxAbstract]

Never was a fan of the UAC Jam mechanic, which hasn't stopped me from using 4xUAC5 on my KGC, but that's the only time I've used UACs in my legitimate IS builds. They're too unreliable at 2 or less to be considered an 'upgrade', which they are technically supposed to be, to a standard AC5... Which isn't that great of a weapon to begin with. Even worse that they're the only valid choice for Clans outside of a couple purpose-built LBX designs.

The jamming is one thing ported over from TT (Partially - They don't perma-jam) that I consider to be a detriment to gameplay and am all for removing it in favor of re-working the slot and tonnage requirements for Standard and LBX ACs for both factions to make them viable choices... Not just for Heavies/Assaults but Mediums, and even Lights, as well. To the point Gauss/PPC isnt the only valid choice and certain builds arent getting disproportionately boned while the ones intended to have their effectiveness reduced remain largely unscathed, such as how the most recent changes have played out.

And fix Machine Guns.

[Templar Dane]

FupDup, on 20 November 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I'm not disagreeing about UACs, but I want to point out that the Dire Whale hasn't been the best UAC platform for a while now.

That was my point. If the 'problem' was that UACs were too good, then why wasn't the whale seen as a problem? Carried more dakka than a KDK3.

Why wasn't clan dakka the meta? I'm talking past tense, before the kodiak.

[El Bandito]

Templar Dane, on 20 November 2016 - 10:18 AM, said:

That was my point. If the 'problem' was that UACs were too good, then why wasn't the whale seen as a problem? Carried more dakka than a KDK3.

Why wasn't clan dakka the meta? I'm talking past tense, before the kodiak.

The Whale was actually seen as problem until it got hit with CUAC5 Ghost Heat, and global skill tree nerf. Clan dakka wasn't meta because Clan lasers back then were too good. Also, Clan dakka had to shoot one extra pellet, so even AC2 was not FLD.

Edited by El Bandito, 21 November 2016 - 05:46 AM.

[Cy Mitchell]

My only problem with this jam chance percentage is that the jam chances seem to be much higher than the 17%. I fired 4 tons of cUAC5 ammo which is 240 shoots and I double tapped it all away. I got 12 weapon jam notifications with 10 of them being both weapons jamming at the same time. That is 22 weapon jams. The cUAC fires 3 shells per tap so that is a total of 80 shots out of 4 tons. 22 jams out of 80 shots equals a jam rate of 27.5%. That is awful high for a Mech that is only carrying 2 cUAC5 and two medium lasers.

Maybe my calculations are wrong? If so then someone can straighten me out and point out my mistake. Maybe my RNG luck is rotten? Or maybe the 17% jam chance is not working right?

I wish they would have either increased jam chances as you stack weapons or increased cooldown as you stacked weapons of the same base type type ie. ballistics.

[Mcgral18]

Rampage, on 20 November 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

My only problem with this jam chance percentage is that the jam chances seem to be much higher than the 17%. I fired 4 tons of cUAC5 ammo which is 240 shoots and I double tapped it all away. I got 12 weapon jam notifications with 10 of them being both weapons jamming at the same time. That is 22 weapon jams. The cUAC fires 3 shells per tap so that is a total of 80 shots out of 4 tons. 22 jams out of 80 shots equals a jam rate of 27.5%. That is awful high for a Mech that is only carrying 2 cUAC5 and two medium lasers.

Maybe my calculations are wrong? If so then someone can straighten me out and point out my mistake. Maybe my RNG luck is rotten? Or maybe the 17% jam chance is not working right?

I wish they would have either increased jam chances as you stack weapons or increased cooldown as you stacked weapons of the same base type type ie. ballistics.

It is just straight up RNGeesus

I fired 10 tons
280 shells, or 70 bursts, of UAC20 ammo with a single jam, on one fateful trial run
With two guns, mind you


I was upset, because I wanted to see what the jam duration was like, being roughly 12 seconds.

[DrxAbstract]

Rampage, on 20 November 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

My only problem with this jam chance percentage is that the jam chances seem to be much higher than the 17%. I fired 4 tons of cUAC5 ammo which is 240 shoots and I double tapped it all away. I got 12 weapon jam notifications with 10 of them being both weapons jamming at the same time. That is 22 weapon jams. The cUAC fires 3 shells per tap so that is a total of 80 shots out of 4 tons. 22 jams out of 80 shots equals a jam rate of 27.5%. That is awful high for a Mech that is only carrying 2 cUAC5 and two medium lasers.

Maybe my calculations are wrong? If so then someone can straighten me out and point out my mistake. Maybe my RNG luck is rotten? Or maybe the 17% jam chance is not working right?

I wish they would have either increased jam chances as you stack weapons or increased cooldown as you stacked weapons of the same base type type ie. ballistics.

Unfortunately that's percentage chance at work - You could play an entire match with 0 jams and the very next match will jam every other shot.

I stripped down a KGC-000 to 4xUAC5, 900 rounds, a STD280 Engine and 11 DHS, dropped in Frozen City via Testing Grounds a couple weeks ago (Pre-patch) to test out the 'Percentage Jam Average' and the mythical Insta-Jam by visually counting the number of jams (Took video of it to double-check numbers). Some of that data:

Jam Percentage Test- [20drops-900rnds(18,000 shots)-4xUAC5]
Lowest: 13.7%
Highest: 17.52%
Drops above 15%: 9
Drops below 15%: 11

(Rounded)
Single Jams: 22%
Double Jams: 38%
Triple Jams: 16%
Quad Jams: 24%

Something to note is I perceived periods of low jamming early in the test were typically met with higher jam periods at either the halfway point or towards the end and vice versa. Which suggests the game keeps track of your jamming and adjusts the percent chance on the fly to maintain the 'average' by the time your ammo is gone... But that's just how it felt, because between that and the relative proximity to the average, it looks a little too perfect... As in manipulated. Then again it's probably within the margin of fluctuation so I could just be paranoid.

[Kmieciu]

DrxAbstract, on 21 November 2016 - 12:02 AM, said:

But that's just how it felt, because between that and the relative proximity to the average, it looks a little too perfect... As in manipulated. Then again it's probably within the margin of fluctuation so I could just be paranoid.

There was a time, when the jam chance was affected by the period between shots. The longer you waited before firing the second time, the lower the chance for a jam.
Players exploited that with a macro that fired the second shot at the very end of the cooldown and basically got double DPS with close to 0 chance of jam.

That has been fixed long before clan invasion, though.

[Duke Nedo]

Templar Dane, on 20 November 2016 - 10:10 AM, said:

But they did jam........and always have. They are the most difficult weapon in the game to keep on target because they practically have a duration like lasers but also aren't hitscan like lasers. That's the disadvantage.

Yes, cUACs have received one large drawback compared to IS (U)ACs, they have a duration, but No, they did not get that because they jam less or whatever you imply there. They got that disadvantage because an IS UAC5 weighs 9 tons and takes 5 slots while a clan UAC5 weighs 7 tons and takes 3 slots. Without it they are strictly superior, with the stream of bullets I'd say the IS version of the UAC5 is better also when comparing ton for ton. The low weight + clan XLs + clan endo/ff makes them more boatable though, which makes up for some of it on the heavier mechs.

The real advantage clans had in the UAC-department was the huge dps-gains from double-tapping cUAC10 and cUAC20 (45% and 60% respectively, including jam chances). This was to more or less normalized so that double-tap results in more moderate ~25% dps gain on average. That's pretty reasonable tbh. It also puts the UAC5 a little closer to AC5s in power per ton, which is also a good thing. The UAC5 is still superior to the AC5 imo, but it's closer. Not an issue for clans at the moment, but one can always hope that it become a thing soon, the cAC's have been placeholders for too long... if double-tap is too powerful there is no place for ACs in this game.

Quote

I mean sure they're ******* OP as hell in the testing grounds, or against a ****** that gets caught stationary.

Oh, ****! I better go figure out how to lead targets then!

[PhoenixFire55]

Meanwhile I'm just standing here doing twelve 6SPL alphas in a row in a 20t mech with 10 heat sinks and nobody bats an eye ...

Honestly, this is what happens when you bandaid ... bandaids upon bandaids and bandaids within bandaids. And just like the house of bandaids cards, all it takes is to remove one ...

Yet another patch that so clearly illustrates how clueless devs are. Nothing new.

[Kmieciu]

Duke Nedo, on 21 November 2016 - 02:47 AM, said:

They got that disadvantage because an IS UAC5 weighs 9 tons and takes 5 slots while a clan UAC5 weighs 7 tons and takes 3 slots. Without it they are strictly superior, with the stream of bullets I'd say the IS version of the UAC5 is better also when comparing ton for ton.

In this case "stream of bullets" means two projectiles fired with a 0.11 second delay. IS version might be a little better at legging lights, but if you target the C-UAC5 torso, it's almost as pinpoint.

The small size makes it a winner, though. You can have 2 of them in the side torso together with an XL engine, or in one arm.

PhoenixFire55, on 21 November 2016 - 04:20 AM, said:

Meanwhile I'm just standing here doing twelve 6SPL alphas in a row in a 20t mech with 10 heat sinks and nobody bats an eye ...

LCT-1E has been nerfed into oblivion. It has 0 torso structure quirks.
You can have your 24 damage @ 127 meters. You'll be dead before you can overheat.

Edited by Kmieciu, 21 November 2016 - 04:39 AM.