57 replies to this topic

[MadIrish]

While the chance of an IS UAC5 Jam is 15% each shot, the probability of a Jam given a number of shots is not 15%. For this we have to calculate the probability of a Jam as this will depend on shots fired. Whether you equipped 1 or 10 UAC5s the probability will be the same. Since you can fire more shots with more UAC5s the probability of a jam will increase much faster and so you will jam more often in time but the probability in shots fired will not have changed.

So let us calculate the probability of a Jam 10 UAC5 shots with a 15% jam rate. This would be 1 – (.85)e10 which equals .197 and 1 - .197 = .803 which means that the probability that “You” will experience a jam over 10 UAC5 shots is 80.3% not 15%. So if you take an assault and put 4 IS UAC5s in it, what is the “probability” that one will Jam if all 4 UAC5s are shot at 1 time using 1 click to shoot all 4. The equation for this is 1 – (.85)e4 = .522 and then 1 - .522 = .478 which means that the probability of one of “your” UAC5s jamming is 47.8%. So to test this I went to the training grounds 4 times and fired all 4 once to see how often 1 would jam and here are the results.

Test 1 = 52 Jams out of 100 times fired that would be an observed rate of 52%
Test 2 = 39 Jams out of 100 times fired that would be an observed rate of 39%
Test 3 = 28 Jams out of 100 times fired that would be an observed rate of 28%
Test 4 = 41 Jams out of 100 times fired that would be an observed rate of 41%

Based on the results I would say that a 47.8% probability is a pretty good estimate of how often you will experience a Jam of 1 UAC5 if you have 4 and click 1 time to fire all 4. This is like saying that 52.2% of the time you’ll be able to do the 20 damage per shot for tonnage you are carry. But this not why you want 4 UAC5s, I could fire 100% of the time on all 4 with less tonnage if I just used 4 AC5s. I want to take advantage of the increased rate of fire by using weapon grouping in a 1,2,3,4 configuration and go to town. Lets see what happens.

Now they don’t all jam simultaneously but they do all become jammed where their jam cooldowns overlap, and this is the UAC5s undoing, and defeats the whole purpose of carrying the extra tonnage of 4 UAC5s. Testing this to fire 400 rounds of UAC5 by spamming clicking in 1,2,3,4 setup it took on average 5 minutes because of heat and jams.

All 4 only fired for less than a total of 20 seconds. (not 20 continuous seconds)
3 out of the 4 fired also for a total of less than 20 seconds. (not 20 continuous seconds)
2 out of the 4 fired for a total of aprox 3 minutes. (not 3 continuous minutes)
1 out of the 4 was firing for a total aprox 1 minute.

It is here when we try to take advantage of the UAC5s rate of fire over the AC5 that it fails and I can say that it is not the 15% Jam rate that kills the usefulness of the UAC5 it is actually the Jam Cooldown.

Edited by MadIrish, 19 December 2016 - 11:32 AM.

[El Bandito]

My eyes...

[RestosIII]

I ain't bothering to read a post with already smaller and thinner text than the forums have already for the entire post. Can't be bothered to stick my face to the screen and stare for that long.

[Snowbluff]

Clans are better off using their LBX, IMO. Regular cAC burst fire, and cUAC burst fire and jam.
Restos, the TLDR is UAC5 has a higher jam chance than expected, and the long jam duration makes it hardly worth the extra jam chance.

El Bandito, on 19 December 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

My eyes...

Didn't you used to use obnoxiously large text? >:l

Edited by Snowbluff, 19 December 2016 - 11:27 AM.

[Tristan Winter]

I think the whole x% chance of weapon not working for an extended period of time is a terrible way of balancing the UACs. It's almost as bad as balancing the gauss by increasing the chance of a catastrophic explosion that rips your mech apart. If you're going to give RNGeesus that much power, then you may as well introduce Cone of Fire. The difference between vomiting 500 damage in a few seconds and all guns jamming within the first few shots is just dumb luck.

It would be nice if the UAC jammed based on how hot your mech is, or based on a cooldown bar such as the one used for the flamer. This makes skill a greater factor and limits the importance of luck. In my mind, that's a good thing.

[RoadblockXL]

The problem with these tests is that they look at jam chances over long periods of time (5 minutes in your case). However, in an actual match, engagements occur in much smaller windows, like 1 to 5 seconds, before you or your target moves into cover. In small windows of time, it's far more likely that a mech with UACs, let's say a Jager Mech with 4xUAC5, will do more damage than the same Jager Mech with 4xAC5s.

So, you're conclusion that there is no purpose to taking UACs over ACs is based on a single scenario that you rarely encounter in game.

Edited by RoadblockXL, 19 December 2016 - 11:41 AM.

[SuomiWarder]

I read the post but am not willing to do the research required to verify the math. At the very least however, a 15% chance of a jam when fired is always a 15% chance when you pull the trigger. After you log 5 or 10 or 20 shots one can look at the odds of a jam having happened when it did. But of you flip the same quarter 100 times and get heads 75 times and tails 25 times, if it was just beating the odds by luck and not some other influence - that 101st flip is still a 50-50 head/tails and not higher towards tails just because you got too many heads already.

[Snowbluff]

Tristan Winter, on 19 December 2016 - 11:37 AM, said:

It would be nice if the UAC jammed based on how hot your mech is, or based on a cooldown bar such as the one used for the flamer. This makes skill a greater factor and limits the importance of luck. In my mind, that's a good thing.

Not really. That would just nerf guys who carry guns and lasers at the same time. :l

[Tristan Winter]

Snowbluff, on 19 December 2016 - 11:40 AM, said:

Not really. That would just nerf guys who carry guns and lasers at the same time. :l

"Not really."

One of the most frustrating things about discussing balance on this forum, is when people act like there's only 2 variables for PGI to manipulate. And then brush off any alternatives with dismissive phrases like "not really".

Alright, guy.

[Snowbluff]

Tristan Winter, on 19 December 2016 - 11:52 AM, said:

"Not really."

One of the most frustrating things about discussing balance on this forum, is when people act like there's only 2 variables for PGI to manipulate. And then brush off any alternatives with dismissive phrases like "not really".

Alright, guy.

Here's your problem: You want to nerf UAC5 when used in mixed builds. In a game where one of the reasons why PD was shouted down because some people thought it would hurt mixed builds.

UAC5 don't even need balancing. They work as intended, as far as I can tell, as far as balance is concerned (scripting I am not so sure). RNGs has always been apart of BT, and crits use it anyway so it's unlikely it will be eliminated.

Edited by Snowbluff, 19 December 2016 - 12:06 PM.

[RoadblockXL]

Tristan Winter, on 19 December 2016 - 11:52 AM, said:

One of the most frustrating things about discussing balance on this forum, is when people act like there's only 2 variables for PGI to manipulate. And then brush off any alternatives with dismissive phrases like "not really".

Sorry to say, I agree with Snowbluff.

Tying jam chance to heat would make mechs that use a mix of lasers and ballistics worse than mechs that boat purely ballistics, since a mech with lasers and ballistics most likely runs hotter.

A cooldown bar, like the flamer has, might work. However, I'm afraid that people would simply fire the 2nd shots only when they have no chance of jamming while firing normally at all other times. If you take away the risk of firing that second shot sometimes, the UAC5 becomes a pure upgrade over the AC5.

[MadIrish]

SuomiWarder, on 19 December 2016 - 11:39 AM, said:

I read the post but am not willing to do the research required to verify the math. At the very least however, a 15% chance of a jam when fired is always a 15% chance when you pull the trigger. After you log 5 or 10 or 20 shots one can look at the odds of a jam having happened when it did. But of you flip the same quarter 100 times and get heads 75 times and tails 25 times, if it was just beating the odds by luck and not some other influence - that 101st flip is still a 50-50 head/tails and not higher towards tails just because you got too many heads already.

Your confusing the 15% chance per shot with the Probability of a Jam based on a 15% jam per shot, they're not the same thing. Flipping a two sided coin 40 times what is the probability that 10 will be head and 30 will be tails, its not 50%.

Edited by MadIrish, 19 December 2016 - 12:20 PM.

[Tristan Winter]

Snowbluff, on 19 December 2016 - 12:06 PM, said:

Here's your problem: You want to nerf UAC5 when used in mixed builds.

No, I don't.

RoadblockXL, on 19 December 2016 - 12:16 PM, said:

A cooldown bar, like the flamer has, might work. However, I'm afraid that people would simply fire the 2nd shots only when they have no chance of jamming while firing normally at all other times. If you take away the risk of firing that second shot sometimes, the UAC5 becomes a pure upgrade over the AC5.

Which brings us back to my point about how many variables PGI could actually adjust to make the AC5 a viable alternative to the UAC5. There are several variables in play.

[Y E O N N E]

RoadblockXL, on 19 December 2016 - 12:16 PM, said:

A cooldown bar, like the flamer has, might work. However, I'm afraid that people would simply fire the 2nd shots only when they have no chance of jamming while firing normally at all other times. If you take away the risk of firing that second shot sometimes, the UAC5 becomes a pure upgrade over the AC5.

The reset rate could be made long enough such that doing as you describe results in DPS only as good as firing single shots, forcing you to take the gamble if you want to surge.

The AC/5 can also be made to have a faster base rate of fire. That would make the difference between them a matter of surge vs. average output.

[NRP]

Thanks to the OP for running the probabilities (and explaining the results). I'll remember this thread angrily next time my UACs jam in the middle of a brawl, LOL.

[MadIrish]

Yeonne Greene, on 19 December 2016 - 12:20 PM, said:

The reset rate could be made long enough such that doing as you describe results in DPS only as good as firing single shots, forcing you to take the gamble if you want to surge.

The AC/5 can also be made to have a faster base rate of fire. That would make the difference between them a matter of surge vs. average output.

You make my point, the UAC5 takes away the players ability to control a surge because of its random jam and overlapping cooldown. You should be managing your heat not rolling the dice.

[Y E O N N E]

MadIrish, on 19 December 2016 - 12:35 PM, said:

You make my point, the UAC5 takes away the players ability to control a surge because of its random jam and overlapping cooldown. You should be managing your heat not rolling the dice.

Dice are fine, you need to manage your situational awareness. You know the capability is unreliable, so use your brain to avoid situations where you'll be SOL if your gun jams up.

It isn't like you can't fire the UAC with perfect 100% reliability if you need it.

[Snazzy Dragon]

All I know is that I'm getting real sick of some pro in a clan ballistic boat dumping dozens of rounds and making my screen shake all over the place and not jamming at all because RNG just so happens to be favoring them. Nothing like 120 damage double taps in under 6 seconds.

Edited by Snazzy Dragon, 19 December 2016 - 12:59 PM.

[MadIrish]

RoadblockXL, on 19 December 2016 - 11:38 AM, said:

The problem with these tests is that they look at jam chances over long periods of time (5 minutes in your case). However, in an actual match, engagements occur in much smaller windows, like 1 to 5 seconds, before you or your target moves into cover. In small windows of time, it's far more likely that a mech with UACs, let's say a Jager Mech with 4xUAC5, will do more damage than the same Jager Mech with 4xAC5s.

So, you're conclusion that there is no purpose to taking UACs over ACs is based on a single scenario that you rarely encounter in game.

I disagree, so many times I spam 1,2,3,4 given a 5-10 sec window to do damage and 2 of the 4 jam, now given sometimes they don't jam but more often then not 1 or more of them are jammed. I also use laser boats that never jam, 5 ERLs spammed in the same way I can get off 9 pulses in under 9 seconds without overheating. That's 9x9 = 81 = mostlydead and I can do this at a range of 800 meters with my modules and quirks and never worry about a random jam. With ballistic's you have ammo limitations, still have heat (sometimes I think people forget that ballistics produce heat as well), and then add in that it gets much harder when the enemy is moving, remember once the bullet has left the barrel its gone you can't rake that bullet over them for a portion of the damage like you can with a laser so that heat and ammo is wasted, now add a jam on top of it, this is UAC5s problem. It is the sucker bet while the ERL becomes the sure thing but the dakka dakka of a UAC5 is a much more exciting experience then the pew pew or buzz of a laser. I still use the 4xUAC5 to get my dakka dakka fix, however I turn to 5 ERLs in your face at 800m for more consistent play. But why can't I have fun & be consistent, seems counter intuitive.

Edited by MadIrish, 19 December 2016 - 01:10 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

UAC/5 aren't supposed to be as good at 800 meters as the ERLL. That is kind of the point.