LocationFrom a distance in an Urbie with a HAG, delivering righteous fury to heretics.
Posted 18 July 2017 - 05:00 PM
So, what's the verdict with the RACs. Are they powerful? Are they weak? Any Improvements?
Lets talk about RACs here.
EDIT:
The6thMessenger, on 18 July 2017 - 07:20 PM, said:
So having tried it, RAC sucks ***. Never mind the damage output, the slow-*** projectile of the RAC5, i could barely hit moving targets, hell RAC2 could hit fairly well but it barely does any damage.
Add in the spin system. Realistically, we ought to minimize our shooting, so when target is going cover to cover, naturally we cease firing to save ammo, and then continue once our target is out, or when we briefly switch target. But that only fills up the jam bar even more due to it filling the gauge preemptively when just spinning up.
And then the RNG screwing me over, you think i'd get to pepper a target for long to deal adequate, but no I couldn't even do that. As if that's not bad enough, jam dissipation and duration is at 10s - 9s, that means not only my burst could be short, i could only do so rarely.
At 1 tons of ammo + magazine nodes, it's actually enough to last the match but then there's a lot of missed shots out there.
Having tried the RAC at a 12v12, i can pretty much say with confidence that this is a god-damn failure of implementation. We need WAAAY more velocity for the RAC5 and RAC2, 1650 and 2000 respectively, so we can actually hit people at range.
Also remove the RNG aspect, and turn it into fixed 5s shooting, lower the spin-up and spin-down time to 0.5s and just have the bar only fill up when shooting, but will heat up even when just spinning up or spinning down, and finally just 4s of jam dissipation / jam duration.
Please make this happen PGI. Your current implementation sucks.
The6thMessenger, on 20 July 2017 - 09:36 PM, said:
Take a look at the Jamming chance of "0.037" -- i assume that's 3.7%, is it true-random or pseudo random?. Would that mean each shot beyond red would have [1 - (0.963 ^ shots)] of jamming? So if 10 shots were done, then the jam chance just shot-up 33.9475%?
Well, giving it the best chance of actually doing well, lets assume that its a fixed "0.037" or 3.7% chance jam every shot. If we assume other wise, the weapon would actually fare a lot worse. So average shots before jam should be at 27.02702702702703.
As for the "RampDownTime" = 2, does that mean there's 2s of window time you could continue shooting without having to spin-up?
So with 6s of ramp-up time - spinup, x 7.275 shots/sec, that would mean that the RAC5 done 36.375 shots or 54.5625 damage, and the RAC2 did 38.19375 shots or 30.555 damage isn't it?
The RAC5 does 3.41015625 EDPS, but the RAC2 does 1.9096875 EDPS, when shooting responsibly. For comparison, the AC5 does 5 PPFLD for 3.01 DPS, the UAC5 does 3.906249999999999 EDPS -- as it jams at every 6.666667 double-shot at 6.0s jam time. Now including the 15% jam nodes, that pushes the jam time to 5.1s instead, and puts the UAC5's effective DPS to 4.123711340206185.
However since the RACs are operating at the safe level, what about their jam? According to math, there should be 27.027027 with fixed chance jamming right? That meant that the RAC did 21.6216216 extra damage, and the RAC5 dealt 40.5405405 damage yes? Additional 3.715055257731959s each at a total of 19.71505525773196 s.
So take a look, the RAC5 for a 10-tonner could do 4.8238 EDPS, 5.2211 with jam nodes, while the RAC2 for an 8 tonner does 2.6465. For perspective, the UAC5 does average of 3.90624 EDPS, and the AC5 does 3.01 DPS, and an AC2 does 2.78 DPS. At 2.8644, the RAC2 is still below AC2 DPS despite jam nodes.
The RAC5 does SOLID dps right there, even more so with jam nodes, although granted 9.71505525773196s of stare-time at average, still the numbers show that it has an absurd amount of dps considering it's weight.
The RAC2 however, what the **** is that ****? 2.6465 EDPS at maximum firing time? really? The AC2 of 6 tons does 2.78 DPS, with 2000 projectile speed, at 700m. The AC5 at 8 tons, does 3.01 DPS, at 1150 velocity, at 600m. Not even Jam nodes help the poor RAC2. Sincerely, the RAC2 is a down-grade from the AC5, you are literally better off with an AC2 per-ton.
With 2000/1650 velocity for the RAC2/RAC5 respectively, they are now easier to hit. At 0.5s of spin-up spin-down time, they are at least easier to shoot if still hindered.
At 100% jam on the filled gauge, it no longer hinges on RNG, at an absurd time of average 9.71505525773196s stare-time, and the reduced 4s jam duration/dissipation should maintain good DPS despite guaranteed short shoot time.
Recalculating that, at 0.5s of spin-up time, the RACs jam 100% at 5.4 / 5.375 shot respectively, that means they have shot 50 / 40 times before jamming, for FIXED 5s of shoot time, and would have dealt 32 / 40 damage respectively.
Now calculating the DPS, the RAC2 have 3.404255319148936 EDPS, the RAC5 have 4.266666666666667 EDPS -- this kind of nerfs the RAC5 to be just a small nudge away from the AC10's 4 DPS, while the RAC2 received a good DPS buff that puts it between the AC5's 3.01 DPS and the UAC5's 3.90 EDPS, and the best part is that you achieve that with only at 5s of face time. And then adjusting the ammo values to 375/240 respectively to somewhat fit with old damage value.
Taking account of Enchanced UAC/RAC jam-nodes of 15%, the new Jam-Dissipation would sit at 3.4 jam time. The new DPS would have been 3.636363636363636 for the RAC2, and 4.558404558404558 for the RAC5. For perspective, the UAC5's EDPS with jam nodes is 4.123711340206185.
Better, more consistent damage in weapons of the similar tonage.
Requires too much face-time to do any damage worth a damn.
You have to push them in to the red zone and keep them there to make them worthwhile, where they're likely to jam. Arguments for the RAC fall apart, as they they have the same problems as UACs. Personally? I'd rather use the UACs. At least they do their damage per projectile, allowing you to pull away if needed (before or after jam.)
Weight is horrible for the damage it 'puts out'.
Slots are also horrible for the same reason.
RAC5's at least do SOME damage for their massive amounts of negatives.
RAC2's have the same negatives, do next to no damage for the time spent firing, and you can only ever fire 2 at once. You want to fire 3 at once in a King Crab? Tough. 4? Tough.
Better, more consistent damage in weapons of the similar tonage.
Requires too much face-time to do any damage worth a damn.
You have to push them in to the red zone and keep them there to make them worthwhile, where they're likely to jam. Arguments for the RAC fall apart, as they they have the same problems as UACs. Personally? I'd rather use the UACs. At least they do their damage per projectile, allowing you to pull away if needed (before or after jam.)
Weight is horrible for the damage it 'puts out'.
Slots are also horrible for the same reason.
"Proper" implementation to lore would make them way OP. Around 16-18 DPS per RAC when adjusting "lore" to MWO stats. And thanks to CCT, they were reduced heavily from that on initial release on the PTS. Even buffing the current ~10 DPS of the RAC/5 is decent on paper, and very powerful for a single weapon. However, that doesn't take into account its drawbacks, tactics, counters, and other.
Well, I suppose the game rewarding the least amount of facetime contributes to the RACs being less than great.
Out of the, I don't know, 10 games or so I played this night, 8 or 9 of them were nothing but ridgeline poking. Brawling only started happening once the score was already 9 vs 3 and the brawl was really only people rushing in to get the kill or at least some extra damage.
LocationFrom a distance in an Urbie with a HAG, delivering righteous fury to heretics.
Posted 18 July 2017 - 05:38 PM
Tyroki, on 18 July 2017 - 05:22 PM, said:
Better, more consistent damage in weapons of the similar tonage.
Requires too much face-time to do any damage worth a damn.
You have to push them in to the red zone and keep them there to make them worthwhile, where they're likely to jam. Arguments for the RAC fall apart, as they they have the same problems as UACs. Personally? I'd rather use the UACs. At least they do their damage per projectile, allowing you to pull away if needed (before or after jam.)
Weight is horrible for the damage it 'puts out'.
Slots are also horrible for the same reason.
RAC5's at least do SOME damage for their massive amounts of negatives.
RAC2's have the same negatives, do next to no damage for the time spent firing, and you can only ever fire 2 at once. You want to fire 3 at once in a King Crab? Tough. 4? Tough.
I'm still unimpressed :\
I have yet to try it out cause I'm still updating.
Although i figure as much, cause all that stare-time is quite unhealthy. And with the good DPS hinging on burning the weapon way beyond the jam-meter, I'm pretty sure it fails cause it's so unreliable that way. Hell even just not shooting beyond red and maintaining space for the gauge, it has even lesser EDPS than the weapons with equivalent tonnage.
Why would anyone even replace AC5s with RAC2s?
Athom83, on 18 July 2017 - 05:27 PM, said:
"Proper" implementation to lore would make them way OP. Around 16-18 DPS per RAC when adjusting "lore" to MWO stats. And thanks to CCT, they were reduced heavily from that on initial release on the PTS. Even buffing the current ~10 DPS of the RAC/5 is decent on paper, and very powerful for a single weapon. However, that doesn't take into account its drawbacks, tactics, counters, and other.
Yeah, lore iteration is ridiculously powerful, and at the same time would need to be even more unreliable. It's also unreliable already.
PGI should have just stuck with basic archetypal MG that guaranteed jam/stalling on the filled gauge, then balanced the effective damage/second there. It's so much easier that way both to balance, and for the user to use than going out of our way to extend our stare on the chance that we do even more damage, while we ourselves are gravely endanger by staring and we have to do it for a prolonged time.
Supposed that we get lucky, even with the UAC, imagine not jamming for around 10 double shots, now imagine not jamming for a whole 10 seconds. Now that's 109.1 damage for a single RAC. As if long periods of UAC not jamming wasn't already ridiculously lucky enough, but then being lucky with RAC is even more ridiculous.
What should have happened is 5s firing for 40/50 damage, 4s jam duration/dissipation, and 0.5s for spin-up + 0.5s spin down, that would have consistent 4/5 EDPS, then just tweak the damage/shot and rate of fire, like 0.8 damage/shot 10 RPS for RAC2, and 1.25 damage/shot 8 RPS for the RAC5. It's just way way mathematically feasible.
But not having tried this yet, it's all math for me so far.
Edited by The6thMessenger, 18 July 2017 - 05:48 PM.
Too unreliable for brawling due to jams, and at medium range people usually will just take cover after shooting while the rac spins up, not to mention not so stellar accuracy.
So imo in their current state racs would only be good on some fast mediums that provide fire support to friendly assaults and run at the first sign of trouble. But then almost any weapon would do in such situation.
LocationFrom a distance in an Urbie with a HAG, delivering righteous fury to heretics.
Posted 18 July 2017 - 07:03 PM
Khobai, on 18 July 2017 - 07:00 PM, said:
better than letting comp players balance the game
then wed only have 3 different weapons
I want you to consider what you just said. It's okay to balance by idiot pilots, versus what-i-assume-to-be-one-trick pony pilots that chances are knows how to play the game better even non-meta builds over potatos.
I want you to consider what you just said. It's okay to balance by idiot pilots, versus what-i-assume-to-be-one-trick pony pilots that chances are knows how to play the game better even non-meta builds over potatos.
yes. remember when PGI had all their secret meetings with top comp players on how to balance the game? remember how that turned out? lol... comp players arnt any better at balancing this game than potatos. because it turned out comp players had their own agendas for balancing. go figure.
potato balancing is the way to go. its funny as hell seeing all the comp players cry about their toys getting taken away to make the game more potato friendly. and potatos dont have agendas other than being potatos. they just want to brawl other potatos all day long using whatever weapons they feel like. they dont want to turn the game into a metasniping cesspool where only a few weapons and builds are viable.
4
The6thMessenger, on 18 July 2017 - 07:20 PM, said:
