58 replies to this topic

[Stone Wall]

Just add heat and recoil like MechWarrior 3.

[QuantumButler]

xengk, on 28 November 2016 - 01:49 AM, said:

Do you want UAC nojam Macro?
That is how you get UAC nojam Macro.


That sound vaguely similar to "jump jet shake cause motion sickness" reasoning.

How does that cause a nojam macro? Just have the bar not go down until you stop firing them for say, the length of a gauss charge.

[Bandilly]

I say we go full TT on UACs.

1. Double tap shots spread rather than going straight. (TT they use SRM2 spread chart, which is low chance of 2nd shot hitting)

2. Jam chance 1/72, weapon is destroyed. (TT is 1/36, but since structure/armor is doubled we halve the jam chance)


Not following TT behavior is what has made dakka UAC builds popular. If they worked like they did in TT people would question their choice in even taking one.

[Appogee]

An Innocent Urbie, on 27 November 2016 - 12:06 AM, said:

I think it would be better to have more heat than jamming it. people will have more control than weapon jamming RNG.

Nope.

Because: this is a BattleTech game.

(Well, that's what we want it to be, anyway.)

[Karl Streiger]

Appogee, on 28 November 2016 - 06:33 AM, said:

Nope.

Because: this is a BattleTech game.

(Well, that's what we want it to be, anyway.)

the double shot is just a representation of a faster firing gun and it was not a good mechanic and the beginning.
Its a BattleTech Game but that doesn't mean we should copy & paste every mechanic of the table top game.
It's already worse that PGI decided to copy some and to ignore others wich cause a couple of other issues.

But to have a good UAC mechanic in the game should be a no-brainer and the double tap is not a good mechanic. It might be a good mechanic if you make it pure BT - with chance that a jam make the gun unusable for the rest of the game - but you need to switch it manually, not causing a double shot only because you click did last 10ms to long.

[Appogee]

Karl Streiger, on 28 November 2016 - 06:54 AM, said:

the double shot is just a representation of a faster firing gun and it was not a good mechanic and the beginning.
Its a BattleTech Game but that doesn't mean we should copy & paste every mechanic of the table top game.
It's already worse that PGI decided to copy some and to ignore others wich cause a couple of other issues.

But to have a good UAC mechanic in the game should be a no-brainer and the double tap is not a good mechanic. It might be a good mechanic if you make it pure BT - with chance that a jam make the gun unusable for the rest of the game - but you need to switch it manually, not causing a double shot only because you click did last 10ms to long.

I find myself agreeing with you.

They'd have to rebalance ballistics again though, as some Mechs rely on the double/triple/quadruple tap/jam to be competitive.

[Valhallan]

In the first place UAC's should not be balanced against regular ac's, UAC's are supposed to be a direct upgrade over AC's after all, you want Ac's to be viable? then ask for special munitions since that was the drawback of using UAC/RAC, no special munitions. Not all of the special munitions need be translated because some are useless (flak? tracer? eww) just give us Armor piercing, precision and caseless, armor piercing allowing the shot to crit equips through armor (since cockpit/engine critting is not a thing this wont reduce ttk) and precision could be something simple like having 2x velocity. Yea we know about the ammo switching code issue, so just use the same placeholder system that clan lbxes are using, just have another ac with the special munition type in the name.

[QuantumButler]

Valhallan, on 28 November 2016 - 07:34 AM, said:

In the first place UAC's should not be balanced against regular ac's, UAC's are supposed to be a direct upgrade over AC's after all, you want Ac's to be viable? then ask for special munitions since that was the drawback of using UAC/RAC, no special munitions. Not all of the special munitions need be translated because some are useless (flak? tracer? eww) just give us Armor piercing, precision and caseless, armor piercing allowing the shot to crit equips through armor (since cockpit/engine critting is not a thing this wont reduce ttk) and precision could be something simple like having 2x velocity. Yea we know about the ammo switching code issue, so just use the same placeholder system that clan lbxes are using, just have another ac with the special munition type in the name.

I still think the "ammo switching issue" is a bald faced lie, Crysis 1 has ammo switching AND modifying your weapons on the fly.

They just aren't willing to put the time in to do it and use "deep rooted cryengine errors" as an excuse.

[Pjwned]

Karl Streiger, on 28 November 2016 - 02:08 AM, said:

No not really, not to mention that those darn guns tend to jam when you fire even a single shot.
The issue is mainly the UAC20... when you go in you need that damage and you need it fast - maybe you think that the risk of jamming is worth when your corosshair is over the back of that oblivious Warhawk spamming LRMs.
What you don't need is a gun that jams with the first volley.

Funny thing is when the UAC doesn't jam with the second volley - its complete OP. For the giving weight and crits double damage in the same time frame is maybe ok for CBT but it is total bad for a FPS game.

If you mean UACs jamming without even double tapping then there's still no actual proof of that, months and months later, so don't give me that BS if that's what your point is.

Additionally, this is yet another response proving that players cry & moan about UAC jams without ever asking themselves "is it worth it to double tap if my UAC jams here."

In that example you give me of shooting a Warhawk in the back, it's pretty much presented as a given that you double tap right away even though it's a heavily armored target that probably will not die from just 1 volley to the back, and yet the possibility of it jamming right away is a major concern.

WELL GEE, MAYBE THAT MEANS YOU SHOULDN'T ALWAYS IMMEDIATELY DOUBLE TAP AGAINST A TARGET THAT WON'T DIE FROM IT RIGHT AWAY.

It is also presented as "OP" when it doesn't jam up quickly, but obviously the bigger concern is that if you double tap immediately then it might end up not being so great, WHICH IS NEVER THE FAULT OF THE PILOT NOPE LOL IT'S THE WEAPON'S FAULT LOLOLOL.

FupDup, on 28 November 2016 - 04:29 AM, said:

Saying "I think jamming should be bad, because it should be" doesn't explain anything about the bar-mechanic being "too powerful." Whether something is too powerful or not is based on an analysis of opportunity costs (e.g. tonnage, heat, etc.) versus the rewards you get for paying those costs (e.g. range, DPS, frontloadedness, etc.). OP-ness is not based on opinions of what we think a mechanic "should" be like.

I said that inconsistency makes it balanced and explained why, which is that you need to actually think about when to double tap with the way it is now, and you basically just ignored that completely.

Quote

You are aware that "brainless button mashing" would still jam the bar-based Ultras up, right? People would have to have firing discipline to keep their guns shooting forever, which means their burst DPS will go down. The heat bar works the same way, but I still see a lot of people overheating. If people don't manage their heat, they certainly ain't gonna manage their "jam bar" much better.

I'm also aware that nobody would ever double tap at the point where they know for certain their UAC would jam; the lone exceptions on the fringe like "this last shot will finish the enemy off even though I know for certain it will jam" are hardly even worth thinking about.

Jamming might as well not exist if there's a jam bar, so you just double tap with a complete guarantee of no consequences until the bar fills up enough, and that's dumb.

Quote

I'm also going to have to point out that inconsistent weapon performance is a really garbage balancing philosophy, which is most egregiously displayed by MWO's implementation of both LRMs and SSRMs (in some situations they work okay and in some situations they are 100% useless). Or just critical hits and "crit seeking" weapons in general, really.

The problem with that comparison is that SSRMs & LRMs are always inconsistent, and that's putting aside that they are inconsistent to the point of being completely absurd, which isn't the case with UACs because they're only inconsistent when you double tap and risk a jam.

[FupDup]

Pjwned, on 28 November 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

I said that inconsistency makes it balanced and explained why, which is that you need to actually think about when to double tap with the way it is now, and you basically just ignored that completely.

I ignored that bit because the level of "thinking" required for weapons is generally irrelevant to how powerful or weak that weapon is. How much "thinking" is required to use a Medium Laser, PPC, LB 10-X, or AC/2? Notice that these example guns include both meta and total trash guns.

You're really overestimating the amount of "thinking" involved with double-tapping. It's basically the same level of thinking used for firing any other weapon, because double-tapping is the core part of UACs that gives them a reason to even exist in the first place. It's not some special cherry on top.

It's the ONE thing they were built to do (i.e. if you never double tap the vanilla AC/5 is superior to the UAC/5, you have to double tap to make the weight and slots mean something), and people use them accordingly. There's nothing out of the ordinary or taboo about it. It's pretty much exactly like using LRMs for indirect fire or LBX against unarmored body sections.

In general, the thinking part of MWO comes from broad things like the mechlab, team composition, communication, positioning, reacting to the red team, etc rather than the weapons themselves. Most weapon "thinking" is probably either figuring out how much heat your shot will generate or how much to lead a target with a projectile weapon. Neither of those are really "deep" kind of thoughts like you seem to think that dice roll jamming represents.

Pjwned, on 28 November 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

I'm also aware that nobody would ever double tap at the point where they know for certain their UAC would jam; the lone exceptions on the fringe like "this last shot will finish the enemy off even though I know for certain it will jam" are hardly even worth thinking about.

Jamming might as well not exist if there's a jam bar, so you just double tap with a complete guarantee of no consequences until the bar fills up enough, and that's dumb.

I'm going to use the heat analogy again. With an obvious heat bar and no penalties until the top, you'd expect for nobody to ever fire at the point where they know for certain that they will overheat shutdown. And yet, overheating is a pretty common occurrence.

Jam bars won't be any different unless the limit was set to absurdly high values, and I do mean really really high (because the high heat threshold doesn't stop overheating from happening either).

Seriously, using that random made-up number of 3 free back-to-back double-taps for a UAC/5, I can already see people peeking around a corner, dakka-ing for a few seconds, and then backpedaling behind the corner after triggering the jam.

You seem to be fixated on the mere idea of the bar rather than the actual balancing numbers involved.

Pjwned, on 28 November 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

The problem with that comparison is that SSRMs & LRMs are always inconsistent, and that's putting aside that they are inconsistent to the point of being completely absurd, which isn't the case with UACs because they're only inconsistent when you double tap and risk a jam.

So, they're only inconsistent when you use them in their primary role. Gotcha.

[Pjwned]

FupDup, on 28 November 2016 - 07:50 PM, said:

I ignored that bit because the level of "thinking" required for weapons is generally irrelevant to how powerful or weak that weapon is. How much "thinking" is required to use a Medium Laser, PPC, LB 10-X, or AC/2? Notice that these example guns include both meta and total trash guns.

You're really overestimating the amount of "thinking" involved with double-tapping. It's basically the same level of thinking used for firing any other weapon, because double-tapping is the core part of UACs that gives them a reason to even exist in the first place. It's not some special cherry on top.

You say it's not unique but it is, no other weapons let you fire twice in the same cooldown period at the risk of potentially jamming.

Quote

It's the ONE thing they were built to do (i.e. if you never double tap the vanilla AC/5 is superior to the UAC/5, you have to double tap to make the weight and slots mean something), and people use them accordingly. There's nothing out of the ordinary or taboo about it. It's pretty much exactly like using LRMs for indirect fire or LBX against unarmored body sections.

I'm obviously not saying "don't ever double tap your UACs period," but what I am saying is that I don't want to hear a bunch of whining from idiots who brainlessly mash the fire button so much that they would be the ones that should use normal ACs to avoid jamming so much--which is contrary to what said idiots believe because to them it's DOUBLE TAP OR NOTHING and then they cry & moan when that doesn't work.

The whole idea is capitulating to plebs because they have a terrible playstyle when it comes to UACs, and instead of thinking about how they can make the weapon more consistent (by playing better) they just cry & moan to change the weapon so that it's dumbed down for them because they want to eat their cake and have it too.

If anything, UACs should jam up twice as much as they do now.

Quote

In general, the thinking part of MWO comes from broad things like the mechlab, team composition, communication, positioning, reacting to the red team, etc rather than the weapons themselves. Most weapon "thinking" is probably either figuring out how much heat your shot will generate or how much to lead a target with a projectile weapon. Neither of those are really "deep" kind of thoughts like you seem to think that dice roll jamming represents.

And yet you want to dumb it down further.

Quote

I'm going to use the heat analogy again. With an obvious heat bar and no penalties until the top, you'd expect for nobody to ever fire at the point where they know for certain that they will overheat shutdown. And yet, overheating is a pretty common occurrence.

Jam bars won't be any different unless the limit was set to absurdly high values, and I do mean really really high (because the high heat threshold doesn't stop overheating from happening either).

Seriously, using that random made-up number of 3 free back-to-back double-taps for a UAC/5, I can already see people peeking around a corner, dakka-ing for a few seconds, and then backpedaling behind the corner after triggering the jam.

The difference is that heat generation is unavoidable (unless you use machine guns or gauss rifles, which have their own drawbacks) if you want to do anything meaningful in battle, whereas double tapping definitely is avoidable while still doing something meaningful.

That is also precisely why a jam bar would be different, the only point to intentionally jam your weapon is in fringe cases and otherwise jamming might as well not exist--which is again dumb when considering that the chance of jamming makes the double taps balanced.

Quote

You seem to be fixated on the mere idea of the bar rather than the actual balancing numbers involved.

That tends to happen when the idea is inherently bad.

Quote

So, they're only inconsistent when you use them in their primary role. Gotcha.

You have the choice to not double tap constantly at all times in order to not risk a jam when it would be bad to have a jam, so if it's inconsistent all the time then that's on you, not the weapon.

Edited by Pjwned, 28 November 2016 - 11:40 PM.

[Jingseng]

Or just move kdk 3 ballistic points to the arms.

[Kaeb Odellas]

I'd like to see UACs get a bit of inaccuracy on the second shot, with reduced jam penalties. It would reliably have more DPS at the cost of accuracy.

[Bombast]

Jingseng, on 28 November 2016 - 11:38 PM, said:

Or just move kdk 3 ballistic points to the arms.

But... my lore! My precious, precious fluff!

[Jingseng]

Bombast, on 28 November 2016 - 11:43 PM, said:

But... my lore! My precious, precious fluff!

Pretty sure we can fit those in the arms too.

[Karl Streiger]

Pjwned, on 28 November 2016 - 03:32 PM, said:

If you mean UACs jamming without even double tapping then there's still no actual proof of that, months and months later, so don't give me that BS if that's what your point is.

Additionally, this is yet another response proving that players cry & moan about UAC jams without ever asking themselves "is it worth it to double tap if my UAC jams here."

In that example you give me of shooting a Warhawk in the back, it's pretty much presented as a given that you double tap right away even though it's a heavily armored target that probably will not die from just 1 volley to the back, and yet the possibility of it jamming right away is a major concern.

WELL GEE, MAYBE THAT MEANS YOU SHOULDN'T ALWAYS IMMEDIATELY DOUBLE TAP AGAINST A TARGET THAT WON'T DIE FROM IT RIGHT AWAY.

It is also presented as "OP" when it doesn't jam up quickly, but obviously the bigger concern is that if you double tap immediately then it might end up not being so great, WHICH IS NEVER THE FAULT OF THE PILOT NOPE LOL IT'S THE WEAPON'S FAULT LOLOLOL.

Well I thought that i have not adequate game practice.
Seriously? When you move into the rear of almost any Mech with every Mech that might be able to sport a UAC20 then this Warhawk is about to die.
In this case a Stormcrow - UAC20 . 6 ER Small Laser.... Even when the first blast is not enough the increased mobility grant me the initiative to follow the turning warhawk and place a second volley - but most important is the first second.

When the UAC20 is not reliable I won't use it. Just switching to 12 SPLAS on the crow rather than fidling with the gun. Or maybe take the LB20X - at least the sound is much better. (would not bother with the CAC because they were, are and always will be crap)

And its all about reliabilty I could live with the gun when i get my 40dmg and have to wait 12seconds - always, 4sec single mode, press Button XYZ Ultra mode - double burst lenght but 12sec cooldown... would work perfectly fine for me. (also grants inaccuravy by the HSR Random God, and the increased "burn duration")


About the always double tap.... of course you double tap always... this is not a thinking man's shooter its a twitch shooter. You simple don't consider to double tap as in TT (where you take the double tap indeed only in grave danger - but the UAC5s range is enough to take its additional ton.
But in MWO? It's about to nail that son in your crosshair. As fast as possible. 40dmg is better than 20. Jam Chance or not. I would like to have it with slower pace - but 12 vs 12 - the climax of battle is always very very short.
And it's in the very nature of the UAC20 or UAC10 that you hardly have the luxury to fade - when you commence your attack run you are committed.

Edited by Karl Streiger, 29 November 2016 - 12:08 AM.

[FupDup]

Pjwned, on 28 November 2016 - 11:37 PM, said:

You say it's not unique but it is, no other weapons let you fire twice in the same cooldown period at the risk of potentially jamming.

No other weapons have their role centered around such an ability. They complete their role with normal firing. That's not a fair comparison.

Pjwned, on 28 November 2016 - 11:37 PM, said:

I'm obviously not saying "don't ever double tap your UACs period," but what I am saying is that I don't want to hear a bunch of whining from idiots who brainlessly mash the fire button so much that they would be the ones that should use normal ACs to avoid jamming so much--which is contrary to what said idiots believe because to them it's DOUBLE TAP OR NOTHING and then they cry & moan when that doesn't work.

The whole idea is capitulating to plebs because they have a terrible playstyle when it comes to UACs, and instead of thinking about how they can make the weapon more consistent (by playing better) they just cry & moan to change the weapon so that it's dumbed down for them because they want to eat their cake and have it too.

You have the choice to not double tap constantly at all times in order to not risk a jam when it would be bad to have a jam, so if it's inconsistent all the time then that's on you, not the weapon.

You can't "play better" to get rid of jamming. That's the problem. Randomness inherently cannot be compensated for. The only way to "get around" it is to simply not trigger the condition where the randomness occurs. That isn't a real counter though.

That reminds me of RTS games where people say that the "counter" to an overpowered unit is to not let your enemy ever build that unit. That's a cop out. It's basically the same line of logic. Other examples include "Don't try to shoot your weapons at any target while the Genji is deflecting" or "Don't shoot Zarya or her teammates who are bubbled."

For example, something like recoil can be compensated for by adjusting your aim to account for it, allowing you to potentially still land your shots where you want even while still being kicked around by the recoil. Likewise, bullet drop is another thing that can be adapted to by figuring out how much your bullet is going to drop at a given target distance.

No, slashing down your DPS is not "playing better." That's just playing weaker and having less impact on winning the match than other builds.

Pjwned, on 28 November 2016 - 11:37 PM, said:

If anything, UACs should jam up twice as much as they do now.

Do you really hate UACs or something? Did UACs kill your family and dog in front of you when you were a young child? That would pretty much kill them outright.

And don't say "BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO BRAINLESSLY DOUBLE TAP BRO ITS ONLY UR OWN FAULT!!!11!" because I'm going to point out that single-tap UACs are inferior to the Gauss Rifle/PPC PPFLD. Frankly, even double-tapping has a hard time competing against PPFLD right now. And arguably laser vomit, despite LV being out-of-meta for a long time now.

Pjwned, on 28 November 2016 - 11:37 PM, said:

And yet you want to dumb it down further.

Dumb it down? One of this game's primary drawbacks on the gaming market is that it has a significant learning curve to pick up. NPE is one of the things that MWO has failed at for a long time.

It's pretty hilarious when people claim that MWO is too easy. Why do many people suck at a game that's so easy? Why would such an "easy" game have a hard time attracting players that aren't veterans of the Mechwarrior franchise and/or BT/TT? Maybe because it's actually not easy after all?

It's kind of like when people claim that MWO aiming is too easy, and yet they have accuracy lower than 50%. If it's too easy, I'd expect them to be experts at it.

Pjwned, on 28 November 2016 - 11:37 PM, said:

The difference is that heat generation is unavoidable (unless you use machine guns or gauss rifles, which have their own drawbacks) if you want to do anything meaningful in battle, whereas double tapping definitely is avoidable while still doing something meaningful.

That is also precisely why a jam bar would be different, the only point to intentionally jam your weapon is in fringe cases and otherwise jamming might as well not exist--which is again dumb when considering that the chance of jamming makes the double taps balanced.

Depends on how we define something "meaningful." If by meaningful we mean dealing a bit of damage, sure. If by meaningful we mean having a competitive role against other weapon loadouts like SRMs, PPFLD, lasers, etc. then no. Double-tapping is what sets them apart and lets them fight on even ground against other builds.

Pjwned, on 28 November 2016 - 11:37 PM, said:

That tends to happen when the idea is inherently bad.

That's ********. We could easily make UACs underpowered and useless in a jam-bar world by putting the jam limit at just 1 or 2 double taps. Do you truly think either of those values would be too strong?

Your idea that a bar would always be overpowered no matter the circumstances has no proof to back it up. You're rejecting the idea based purely on idealism, not on the actual gameplay impact.

[Pjwned]

FupDup, on 29 November 2016 - 10:35 AM, said:

No other weapons have their role centered around such an ability. They complete their role with normal firing. That's not a fair comparison.

UACs also complete their role without constantly double tapping at all times, as I've been saying.

I'm tired of repeating this same idea over and over, and I'm not going to respond again to "if I don't brainlessly mash the UAC firing button then..." because I obviously think that's a load of ****.

Quote

You can't "play better" to get rid of jamming. That's the problem. Randomness inherently cannot be compensated for. The only way to "get around" it is to simply not trigger the condition where the randomness occurs. That isn't a real counter though.

That reminds me of RTS games where people say that the "counter" to an overpowered unit is to not let your enemy ever build that unit. That's a cop out. It's basically the same line of logic. Other examples include "Don't try to shoot your weapons at any target while the Genji is deflecting" or "Don't shoot Zarya or her teammates who are bubbled."

For example, something like recoil can be compensated for by adjusting your aim to account for it, allowing you to potentially still land your shots where you want even while still being kicked around by the recoil. Likewise, bullet drop is another thing that can be adapted to by figuring out how much your bullet is going to drop at a given target distance.

No, slashing down your DPS is not "playing better." That's just playing weaker and having less impact on winning the match than other builds.

Mitigating the consequences of jamming by not risking a jam in a bad situation is "playing better" actually, and considering the complaints about UACs when everybody complaining simply brainlessly mashes the firing button all the time I think it's a pretty relevant point to bring up.

You also seem to think that there's no possible situation where you end up doing more DPS by not immediately risking a jam, even though that's wrong.

Quote

Do you really hate UACs or something? Did UACs kill your family and dog in front of you when you were a young child? That would pretty much kill them outright.

Notice how I'm not actually campaigning for that to happen? Because it wasn't a very serious remark and it was mostly meant to rile people up to emphasize my point, which seems to have worked.

I wouldn't mind too much if UACs actually did start jamming up twice as much though.

Quote

And don't say "BUT YOU DON'T HAVE TO BRAINLESSLY DOUBLE TAP BRO ITS ONLY UR OWN FAULT!!!11!" because I'm going to point out that single-tap UACs are inferior to the Gauss Rifle/PPC PPFLD. Frankly, even double-tapping has a hard time competing against PPFLD right now. And arguably laser vomit, despite LV being out-of-meta for a long time now.

If that's what your concern is then here's a thought.

Buff UACs (in other ways) and/or nerf other weapons so that UACs (and everything else) are better balanced.

And then keep double tapping the way it is now without adding some ridiculous jam bar BS because you want another band-aid fix for balance.

Wow, best of both worlds!

Quote

Dumb it down? One of this game's primary drawbacks on the gaming market is that it has a significant learning curve to pick up. NPE is one of the things that MWO has failed at for a long time.

It's pretty hilarious when people claim that MWO is too easy. Why do many people suck at a game that's so easy? Why would such an "easy" game have a hard time attracting players that aren't veterans of the Mechwarrior franchise and/or BT/TT? Maybe because it's actually not easy after all?

It's kind of like when people claim that MWO aiming is too easy, and yet they have accuracy lower than 50%. If it's too easy, I'd expect them to be experts at it.

Unless you're claiming that current UAC mechanics have a significant negative impact on new players, while ignoring the dozens of other major (and far worse) problems that still exist for new players and have existed for years, then I'm not going to take that argument very seriously.

Quote

Depends on how we define something "meaningful." If by meaningful we mean dealing a bit of damage, sure. If by meaningful we mean having a competitive role against other weapon loadouts like SRMs, PPFLD, lasers, etc. then no. Double-tapping is what sets them apart and lets them fight on even ground against other builds.

So what about the role of non-ultra ACs then, do they not do anything meaningful because it's impossible for them to double tap?

I'm not buying it if you claim that ACs are fine but UACs are only meaningful if you spam double taps as much as possible.

Or is there something more to this issue like you seem to have hinted at up above?

Quote

That's ********. We could easily make UACs underpowered and useless in a jam-bar world by putting the jam limit at just 1 or 2 double taps. Do you truly think either of those values would be too strong?

Your idea that a bar would always be overpowered no matter the circumstances has no proof to back it up. You're rejecting the idea based purely on idealism, not on the actual gameplay impact.

I don't recall saying "no matter the circumstances" actually, the assumption was that any values proposed for a jam bar would be overpowered because there would be no advantage in proposing a jam bar that severely limited your double tapping potential. For reference, allowing 3 consecutive shots before a jam is too good while limiting it to 2 consecutive shots or less sounds like it wouldn't be good enough.

If you want to show me some values that were good enough to satisfy the brainless mashers, while at the same time not being too good, then you can go ahead and try and I would maybe even partially retract what I said, but I'm still going to criticize the idea itself for being ****--because it is.

Meanwhile I can just point to the current system and justifiably say "this works fine."

[Dirus Nigh]

RestosIII, on 27 November 2016 - 12:09 AM, said:

I still wish ACs had recoil. Even without CoF or a convergence system, it would help balance things out. I'd also enjoy the (probably) controversial option of giving Gauss rifles recoil as.well.

I would also like to have a recoil feature that would effect convergance. However it should be predictable. The right arm always sways to the right just a bit when firing the AC, the left torso lasers always pull up and to the left when the beam is firing with ACs. that sort of thing. that way the mech is effected but the player can compensate.