67 replies to this topic

[Widowmaker1981]

davoodoo, on 16 July 2017 - 03:10 AM, said:

Yeah thats why i included ebj laservomit in edit.

and its not like ive put worst ballistic weapon we have...

And the worst bit is that PGI thinks that even that would be OP and has set GH on RAC5s to 2, meaning you cant even use them for the theoretical high burst in 5s... they are just simply useless. You could fire them in pairs to do 160 dmg in 9s... woopdiedo. 5UAC5 not even double tapping would do 175 dmg in that time.. with a possible 350 if double tapping.

And for the inevitable "dont boat them" comment... someone please tell me the weapon loadout that would synergise better with RACs than an equivalent mixed build with UACs. You cant do it, because there isnt one. RACs are only ever AT ALL useful when boated.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 16 July 2017 - 03:22 AM.

[Tyroki]

Widowmaker1981, on 16 July 2017 - 02:57 AM, said:

4 RAC5s fired together, if there was no ghost heat, for their 5 second duration (inc spin up) does ~160 damage and then has a 10 second downtime. It has 450m range, inherent spread and requires constant staring.

6xAC5 (which is the same slots, although 8 tons heavier) with 12% CD does 30 at 0s, 60 at 1.5s, 90 at 3s, 120 at 4.5s.. and then keeps firing with no downtime. It has a 600m range, can be snapfired and is fully pinpoint.

That seems like it might be close to balanced, though with the ACs still slightly on top due to ease of use. Remind me again why the hell RAC5s have ghost heat? And given (assuming) that they do, tell me why i would ever use them on big mechs?

RAC2s are just terrible. Half the DPS of the 5 for 80% of the tonnage? Yeah.. no.

No one is asking for four RAC 5's (though your damage calculation assumes keeping on target with that projectile speed, and that damage is going to be spread something fierce.)
Outside of the damage still being FAR too low per RAC 5, a ghost heat of 2 is fine.

It's the RAC2's that make no bloody sense for ghost heat. They just don't do nearly enough to warrant a ghost heat of 2.
4 I could understand, but 2? Ridiculous.

The problem with both RAC2's and RAC5's is that they're still completely outclassed by their UAC equivalent, and are utterly worthless ton/slots-wise compared to their ton/slot equivalents (5's and 10's)

Edit: OH! And PGI? That doesn't mean nerf everything else. It's RAC's that suck, not everything else that's overpowered. They aren't. RACs just suck that much.

Edited by Tyroki, 16 July 2017 - 03:26 AM.

[davoodoo]

Im asking for decent quad rac5...

i might actually consider reinforcement for nightstar if i can fit 4 rac5 on 9p.

also its not like annihilator could use them for some actual build variety.

[Widowmaker1981]

Tyroki, on 16 July 2017 - 03:21 AM, said:

No one is asking for four RAC 5's (though your damage calculation assumes keeping on target with that projectile speed, and that damage is going to be spread something fierce.)
Outside of the damage still being FAR too low per RAC 5, a ghost heat of 2 is fine.

It's the RAC2's that make no bloody sense for ghost heat. They just don't do nearly enough to warrant a ghost heat of 2.
4 I could understand, but 2? Ridiculous.

The problem with both RAC2's and RAC5's is that they're still completely outclassed by their UAC equivalent, and are utterly worthless ton/slots-wise compared to their ton/slot equivalents (5's and 10's)

*I* AM asking for 4 RAC5s. Because maybe, just maybe, id use them on some assaults under that paradigm. (and buffing them individually to the point id consider a pair of them on an assault mixed with other weapons would make the Bushwacker with 2 of them pretty disgusting)

Ill never, ever use RAC2s without a gigabuff to them regardless of ghost heat. 50% of the DPS of RAC5 for 80% of the tonnage? Hahaha. No thank you.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 16 July 2017 - 03:30 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

kapusta11, on 16 July 2017 - 03:10 AM, said:

Fire 2 RAC5s for 2 seconds - paint your enemy with 40 damage. Fire 3 LPL + 2 ERML - deal 40 damage exactly where you want it. RACs are very bad.

Not to mention the equivalent 6 seconds of down-time to clear the gauge, just to do 43.64 damage, that's just 4.848888888888889 EDPS for 20 tons worth of RAC5.

Are they forgetting to include the burst duration and spin-up spin-down time with the cooldown? Cause i get why they would think that DPS is high as 7.273333333333333.

[Tyroki]

Widowmaker1981, on 16 July 2017 - 03:27 AM, said:

*I* AM asking for 4 RAC5s. Because maybe, just maybe, id use them on some assaults under that paradigm. (and buffing them individually to the point id consider a pair of them on an assault mixed with other weapons would make the Bushwacker with 2 of them pretty disgusting)

Ill never, ever use RAC2s without a gigabuff to them regardless of ghost heat. 50% of the DPS of RAC5 for 80% of the tonnage? Hahaha. No thank you.

Don't get me wrong. I'd 4 RAC5's on a few mechs if I could.
I just don't see them allowing it with their mega hard-on for ghost heat as if it fixes every problem and gaping hole in this game (Hint for PGI: It doesn't. It's a half-assed 'fix' for problems that arise in the crappy heat system you created by deviating harshly from a well designed and fan-approved system that was cultivated over multiple previous Mechwarrior games. All you had to do was take a good long look at the system in Mechwarrior 3 and run with it. You didn't have to keep the EXACT values, maybe making a few deviations here and there... but at least that system WORKED! And it didn't need something as crap and unfun as Ghost Heat.)

[davoodoo]

tyroki, mwo got a pretty faithful adaptation of tt rules, but with 1.5hs, engine slots and not being adjusted for lower cooldowns.

basically stopgap between solaris 7 and regular rules.

Edited by davoodoo, 16 July 2017 - 03:58 AM.

[HGAK47]

Well after testing them in the PTS and personally having somewhat mixed reactions at them - I saw the Ani with 2x RAC2 and 2x RAC5 PLUS a whole host of energy weapons.... man the pilot is going to cook himself alive in that build.

[davoodoo]

thats the other thing.

in tt rac5 is ac5 which can fire 6 times per cycle, regular stats apply so 1 heat per 5 dmg.

so why does mwo rac do 10 dmg per second with 4 heat(double the tt value) giving us 8 heat on 20 dmg, 33% more than ac20 despite ridiculous facetime required.

Edited by davoodoo, 16 July 2017 - 05:33 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

davoodoo, on 16 July 2017 - 05:31 AM, said:

so why does mwo rac do 10 dmg per second with 4 heat, giving us 8 heat on 20 dmg, 33% more than ac20 despite ridiculous facetime required.

"Balance"

[davoodoo]

The6thMessenger, on 16 July 2017 - 05:34 AM, said:

"Balance"

[SOL Ranger]

There is a major factor involved concerning effective dps vs. theoretical dps that seems to not be taken seriously by many as if it didn't even matter.

The RAC suffers immensely in terms of poor effective dps just like any long duration or CoF weapon does, but it can display decent theoretical dps and that's what the defenders of the weapon keep repeating. When in reality it lacks any kind of practical or effective application and overlaps with UAC's role to the point of questionable existence.

Once you try to apply that theoretical dps you will get beat by anything else with alpha and half a brain, a simple torso twist will cause your streamed long duration damage to become at least 66% less effective if the CoF didn't already ensure that. Whereas anything pinpoint like UAC's has already landed an alpha burst with near 100% effective damage on you before you even start firing and they can torso twist freely and get to safety, this well before the RAC boat can stop staring or finish applying his ineffectual burst damage.

That is the current burst role of the RAC, an utterly failed role that overlaps the UAC without any redeeming qualities as I see it especially when taking into account the meta gameplay, it's an overgrown machine gun that randomly jams with even more drawbacks and doesn't stand a chance against the well established alpha meta that exists.

Also if for some reason the RAC's have to stop and start firing again they keep generating extra jam chance during the spin sequence especially in the peek meta when trying to time and train the guns on target. The utterly silly spin up jam gauge mechanic guarantees long term dysfunctional behaviour even beyond jamming and reduces your effective fire duration even when doing effectively nothing at all but try to prepare to fight, why is that considered even remotely reasonable to happen?

This then to account for the more difficult fitting requirements and all the other drawbacks it has, right now I feel the impractical nature of the weapon is bordering the bizarre, as in it suffers quite literally from every possible drawback in the game I can think of except minimum range, maybe that too will be added in a subsequent hotfix?

The weapon mechanics design is like someone wanted to troll everyone who want to use it, it's that bad. It is extremely polarised and unreliable well beyond what could be considered reasonable mechanics for such a weapon.

It doesn't need more dps, it doesn't even need that high dps that it has currently, but it does need to be practically applicable in some manner especially in terms of duration and reliability to distinguish itself from the more unreliable but already effective bursty nature of UAC's more and become a proper assault weapon with which to apply pressure, again reliably.

The only reason to use this weapon when it comes is if you like miniguns and even then the sound effects aren't good.

I have no idea why PGI keeps adding these dysfunctional non-fun mechanics into the game like they do when there is no inherent need to do so.

[davoodoo]

SOL Ranger, on 16 July 2017 - 06:10 AM, said:

I have no idea why PGI keeps adding these dysfunctional non-fun mechanics into the game like they do when there is no inherent need to do so.

that i can answer.

Because community wants staring matches and despises alphas in any form.

[J0anna]

People who didn't get on PTS will try RACs for the first time and quickly realize how poor they are. Then they won't be used and PGI will notice (to Chris's credit he does look at the data). Then (and only then) will they be modified. I actually like 6th's idea for them, and Khobai hits the nail on the head.

They are supposed to be DPS weapons. If used responsibly they should have higher than their current DPS. Cone of fire - fine, but if used responsibly they should break that mythical DPS cap of 5 that ballistics seem to be limited to....But PGI is worried about a significant drop in TTK (the 4 v 4 on PTS would never give them enough data), so the weapons come out heavily nerfed.

Maybe next time they want to test a major weapon change, they will offer an incentive for people to play on the test server (like rewards on the live server).

[Angel of Annihilation]

SOL Ranger, on 16 July 2017 - 06:10 AM, said:

There is a major factor involved concerning effective dps vs. theoretical dps that seems to not be taken seriously by many as if it didn't even matter.

The RAC suffers immensely in terms of poor effective dps just like any long duration or CoF weapon does, but it can display decent theoretical dps and that's what the defenders of the weapon keep repeating. When in reality it lacks any kind of practical or effective application and overlaps with UAC's role to the point of questionable existence.

Once you try to apply that theoretical dps you will get beat by anything else with alpha and half a brain, a simple torso twist will cause your streamed long duration damage to become at least 66% less effective if the CoF didn't already ensure that. Whereas anything pinpoint like UAC's has already landed an alpha burst with near 100% effective damage on you before you even start firing and they can torso twist freely and get to safety, this well before the RAC boat can stop staring or finish applying his ineffectual burst damage.

That is the current burst role of the RAC, an utterly failed role that overlaps the UAC without any redeeming qualities as I see it especially when taking into account the meta gameplay, it's an overgrown machine gun that randomly jams with even more drawbacks and doesn't stand a chance against the well established alpha meta that exists.

Also if for some reason the RAC's have to stop and start firing again they keep generating extra jam chance during the spin sequence especially in the peek meta when trying to time and train the guns on target. The utterly silly spin up jam gauge mechanic guarantees long term dysfunctional behaviour even beyond jamming and reduces your effective fire duration even when doing effectively nothing at all but try to prepare to fight, why is that considered even remotely reasonable to happen?

This then to account for the more difficult fitting requirements and all the other drawbacks it has, right now I feel the impractical nature of the weapon is bordering the bizarre, as in it suffers quite literally from every possible drawback in the game I can think of except minimum range, maybe that too will be added in a subsequent hotfix?

The weapon mechanics design is like someone wanted to troll everyone who want to use it, it's that bad. It is extremely polarised and unreliable well beyond what could be considered reasonable mechanics for such a weapon.

It doesn't need more dps, it doesn't even need that high dps that it has currently, but it does need to be practically applicable in some manner especially in terms of duration and reliability to distinguish itself from the more unreliable but already effective bursty nature of UAC's more and become a proper assault weapon with which to apply pressure, again reliably.

The only reason to use this weapon when it comes is if you like miniguns and even then the sound effects aren't good.

I have no idea why PGI keeps adding these dysfunctional non-fun mechanics into the game like they do when there is no inherent need to do so.

I don't agree. The RAC can be very effective on a situational basis. People keep focusing on the peek and poke meta and boating but that isn't all you will face and some weapons just aren't made to boat and that is a good thing. Where the RAC excels is as a suppression weapon or when you have an enemy in the open or crazy as it sounds, a brawl when you have maybe a single RAC backed up by lasers or SRMs or something at least these are the times I found it effective on the PTS.

This is a great video that showcases part of what I mean. Don't get me wrong, I don't necessarily think the conclusions in the video are correct but watch the part that begins at 1:50.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9drtI4xAsOM

This part of the video shows him using a Mauler armed with two RAC/5s verses a Mauler armed with two UAC/5s. The just stand there and fire at each other but in virtually all the tests, the RACs easily beat the UAC/5s and in the one where the UAC/5 wins, it is by the narrowest margins.

Now of course the UACs would be superior for Peek and Poke due to spin up and face time but what this illustrates is that RAC/s have a nice, stead and reliable DPS and can put out some serious DPS with them as well. You just have to be in the situations or create the situations that allow them to be effective.

You know I could try to explain it more but the reality is your either going to get it or your not. If all you can see when you see any type of AC is "Dakka, Dakka, give me more", then it is going to be underwhelming. If you can see past that then they aren't too bad or at least have a niche usefulness. Niche kind of sucks but the good news is, the IS are now the Ballistic Kings with so many Ballistic options it isn't funny. If you can't find something you like out of the massive selection of Light Gauss, Heavy Gauss, Reg Gauss, Standard ACs, UACs, LBXs and RACs, your never going to be satisfied. There are so many option now, everything is going to be Niche.

[davoodoo]

J0anna, on 16 July 2017 - 07:16 AM, said:

People who didn't get on PTS will try RACs for the first time and quickly realize how poor they are. Then they won't be used and PGI will notice (to Chris's credit he does look at the data). Then (and only then) will they be modified. I actually like 6th's idea for them, and Khobai hits the nail on the head.

They are supposed to be DPS weapons. If used responsibly they should have higher than their current DPS. Cone of fire - fine, but if used responsibly they should break that mythical DPS cap of 5 that ballistics seem to be limited to....But PGI is worried about a significant drop in TTK (the 4 v 4 on PTS would never give them enough data), so the weapons come out heavily nerfed.

Maybe next time they want to test a major weapon change, they will offer an incentive for people to play on the test server (like rewards on the live server).

Im not sure if they just wont fall off to irrelevance.

Look at cataphract, i remember it being pretty popular with 3 uac5 ilya and 4 ac5 ctf4x
i havent seen ilya or 4x for years now...

Edited by davoodoo, 16 July 2017 - 07:56 AM.

[JC Daxion]

IMO they are just a very heavy machine gun.. Perhaps they need a little buff, but the way i see it, they are not the big OP, heavy slug destroy a mech instantly that people thought they would.


I am looking forward to the roughneck, and a bushwacker. Pair it up with some heavy machine guns and i really think you will wreck stuff. Then carry an AC10 or UAC10.


So, UAC10+ Rotary 5, and 4 heavy machine guns for example. though i do wonder about those long range light machine guns, i think they will be pretty great on some mechs.

Edited by JC Daxion, 16 July 2017 - 08:22 AM.

[MischiefSC]

JC Daxion, on 16 July 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

IMO they are just a very heavy machine gun.. Perhaps they need a little buff, but the way i see it, they are not the big OP, heavy slug destroy a mech instantly that people thought they would.


I am looking forward to the roughneck, and a bushwacker. Pair it up with some heavy machine guns and i really think you will wreck stuff. Then carry an AC10 or UAC10.


So, UAC10+ Rotary 5, and 4 heavy machine guns for example. though i do wonder about those long range light machine guns, i think they will be pretty great on some mechs.

Except same mech, same build with a uac5 instead of RAC will perform better.

Edited by MischiefSC, 16 July 2017 - 08:48 AM.

[Reno Blade]

I will get one of my Meds and put on a RAC5, MRM20 and have a blast at all the fireworks... sometimes it's just more fun to wear someone down than to insta-kill core them.

[JC Daxion]

MischiefSC, on 16 July 2017 - 08:42 AM, said:

Except same mech, same build with a uac5 instead of RAC will perform better.

will it be as fun?

More often than not i choose fun factor over that Slight % better. Certain mechs are all about a style right?