88 replies to this topic

[PyckenZot]

Dual RAC5s in any fast medium are a thorn in any slower mechs side. Get in someone's back and core him in no time, wait for a push and use the confusion to drop ungodly amounts of DPS on targets busy with less important issues. Otherwise take potshots while spinning up the guns under cover.

[The6thMessenger]

sigh*

I wanna love it, but the RAC just needs to lose the RNG and gain velocity.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 20 July 2017 - 02:49 PM.

[LordBraxton]

They nerfed the screen shake on the AC2 like 4 years ago because the suppression was 'bad gameplay' and too much like a 'stunlock.'

RACs are mediocre, but their ability to literally blind you if they are hitting your chest is dumb. Nerf the particle effects, leave the weapon the same.

[Baulven]

Would removing spool up time help the RAC? The reason I ask is because the weapon doesn't mirror table top stats so I dont think it would be an issue.

[The6thMessenger]

Baulven, on 20 July 2017 - 02:55 PM, said:

Would removing spool up time help the RAC? The reason I ask is because the weapon doesn't mirror table top stats so I dont think it would be an issue.

Spool up time is problematic, but it's because it's too long. We could work with gauss charge yeah?

The problem is that the weapon is balanced on firing the weapon waaaay past the jam gauge to do decent damage. If it works like the archetypal over-heating MG, it should work a lot more smoothly.

[Punk Oblivion]

I think the spool up time is ok. It's the RE-spooling that is the issue. It makes it so your ONLY option to use it, is to mash the fire button till they jam... Which will make for a boring weapon once the shine wears off,

[Tyroki]

Getting sick of being blinded by every Uziel I see -.-

[Joshua Obrien]

Tyroki, on 20 July 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:

Getting sick of being blinded by every Uziel I see -.-

I think they should remove the blinding effect, just like they did with ac2s

[Mystere]

LordBraxton, on 20 July 2017 - 02:37 PM, said:

They nerfed the screen shake on the AC2 like 4 years ago because the suppression was 'bad gameplay' and too much like a 'stunlock.'

RACs are mediocre, but their ability to literally blind you if they are hitting your chest is dumb. Nerf the particle effects, leave the weapon the same.

In war games, "stun locks" are called "fire suppression". I love them.

Joshua Obrien, on 20 July 2017 - 06:58 PM, said:

I think they should remove the blinding effect, just like they did with ac2s

No! Just say no!

Edited by Mystere, 20 July 2017 - 07:15 PM.

[Joshua Obrien]

Mystere, on 20 July 2017 - 07:13 PM, said:

In war games, "stun locks" are called "fire suppression". I love them.





No! Just say no!

As it currently stands RAC5's are too oppressive and not in the nature of the damage they do or the rof but the ammo explosion effect in your cockpit. It makes retaliating extremely difficult and borderline impossible. I got a massive migraine from the god damn thing and if it doesn't stop I will literally have to stop playing until it's either A. Gone or B. Let nightvision/ thermal ignore the blinding effect.

[Joshua Obrien]

Mystere, on 20 July 2017 - 07:13 PM, said:

In war games, "stun locks" are called "fire suppression". I love them.





No! Just say no!

Plus, if they don't add an epilepsy warning to the game and someone winds up having one from the near constant flashes PGI opens themselves up to a lawsuit. Just sayin.

[Khobai]

Quote

B. Let nightvision/ thermal ignore the blinding effect.

I think this is a better option. vision modes could use a buff.

they could have three vision modes
thermal
nightvision
filters out crap that explodes in my face mode

Edited by Khobai, 20 July 2017 - 08:35 PM.

[Dragoon20005]

RGH-1A (Heavyarms Gundam)

Just for the sh*t and giggles since the introduction of the RAC 2 and 5s and HMG along with the light engine.

I just sort of recreated the Heavyarms Gundam from my childhood anime Gundam Wing

Close quarter brawler type and pretty much the Heavy which will rain lead over any heavy and below class mech.

The only thing prob lacking in the mech is Jump Jets as the Heavyarms Gundam has the Damselfly booster backpack


Link to the original Heavyarms Gundam design
http://gundam.wikia....undam_Heavyarms

The RAC isn't a long range weapon but can be useful to scare potential pilots who want to take a peak shot when they receive a face full of lead flying into their face. The effective range where the damage is viable is around 300 meters, where you are facing the enemy most of the time. So hence the thicker front armor. But yea lights will be able to take out out if they run to your rear and take you out with ER Med Laser builds. The Streak 4s and HMG serve as backup weapons when the RAC jams or gets taken out

Combined with
Armor Hardening skill +15%
Reinforced casing -8%
Skeletal Density 30%
Missile Rack +2
Magazine Capacity +2
Heat Gen -9%
Range +15%
Velocity of bullets 10%
RAC jam reduction 15%

It should still be an interesting build to run

Edited by Dragoon20005, 20 July 2017 - 08:51 PM.

[l33tworks]

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.....

...

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

Khobai, on 18 July 2017 - 07:22 PM, said:

I havent had problems hitting anyone with RACs. The problem is it doesnt do enough damage to justify the face time.

lmfao that you guys dont realise if your pings are different you are using a different class of weapon to each other, even if you both equiped rac5s on the same mech with the same skills...

The "velocity" of racs is dependant on your ping.

Try hit moving targets at 20 ping or the testing grounds and then go drop on a server you get over 250 ping to and do the same thing..You will see unlike other weapons how good racs are is dependant on your ping.

[Khobai]

well if the velocity is an issue for other people im not opposed to increasing it

its just not an issue ive experienced. I tend to avoid servers where I have bad pings.

my biggest issue with RACs has been that the reward of RACs isnt worth the facetime. the weapon just doesnt do enough consistent damage even when I hit the target with everything it puts out. It just doesnt hurt them enough for me to expose myself as much as I need to in order to use it.

whether or not you have a good run with the weapon is still entirely based way too much on RNG and depends on it not jamming too early.

but yeah if more velocity and less RNG gets RACs to where they need to be, im fine with that.

Edited by Khobai, 20 July 2017 - 09:25 PM.

[El Bandito]

Khobai, on 20 July 2017 - 08:34 PM, said:

filters out crap that explodes in my face mode

Enhanced Imaging pls!

[Khobai]

mwo enhanced imaging



lol best mwo bug ever

Edited by Khobai, 20 July 2017 - 09:46 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 20 July 2017 - 09:36 PM, said:

mwo enhanced imaging

http://i508.photobuc...obai/hudbug.jpg

aww photobucket wont let you post links anymore

Photobucket kicked the bucket. Join the dark side. https://imgur.com/

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 20 July 2017 - 08:34 PM, said:

filters out crap that explodes in my face mode

I'll call that the welder's mask.

[KageRyuu]

The main issue with the RACs is that PGI refuses to allow older equipment to become obsolete. It's why SHS remove 1.2 HPS, why DHS outside of the engine remove 1.5, and why a weapon that should be 3 times more powerful than it's UAC counterpart is only marginally better in someways, (RAC2 vs UAC2) 5.82 DPS vs 5.56, 2 HPS vs 2.22, and overwhelmingly bad in others, 10s Unjam vs 3.5.

Frankly the balancing mechanic of RACs shouldn't be damage or unjam speed, it should be heat, after all if you're firing your weapon over 3 times faster than the equivalent UAC, one would expect 3 times the HPS, not under half as much damage per shot.

Personally, they should rename the RAC5 to the RAC2, and get on with making an actual RAC5, rather than trying to "fix" a system that has worked for far longer than most of them have likely been alive.

Edited by KageRyuu, 22 September 2017 - 01:50 PM.