Racs
#1
Posted 04 May 2018 - 02:35 PM
They tend to be quite good if the target is not looking, so damage buff is probably out of question.
#2
Posted 04 May 2018 - 02:53 PM
#3
Posted 04 May 2018 - 02:56 PM
Grus, on 04 May 2018 - 02:53 PM, said:
Well a Bushwacker has the armor and profile to keep on target long enough.
#4
Posted 04 May 2018 - 03:12 PM
At least that's what happened in practice whenever I use my Annihilator, it just deletes poor clan mechs trying to win with high alphas and my annihilator just shrugs off 100 point alphas because great hitboxes and super high health pools.
All this said, the RAC2s are 100% worthless trash and the RAC5s are pretty much only useful for assault mechs built to kill other assault mechs, and I guess slower heavies, though they do excellent in that role.
#5
Posted 04 May 2018 - 03:20 PM
Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood, on 04 May 2018 - 03:12 PM, said:
Yeah, that's my experience too, armor/struct quirked mech (Bush, Roughneck, Catapult, Anni...) and try to duke it out.
But then I'm told left and right that RACs are crap :/ Maybe, but they just feel so good :>
Edited by Destabilizator, 04 May 2018 - 03:22 PM.
#6
Posted 04 May 2018 - 03:31 PM
Destabilizator, on 04 May 2018 - 03:20 PM, said:
Yeah, that's my experience too, armor/struct quirked mech (Bush, Roughneck, Catapult, Anni...) and try to duke it out.
But then I'm told left and right that RACs are crap :/ Maybe, but they just feel so good :>
Well, they are crap... at certain things, then they're godly at others. So I can see why people would have conflicting ideas. Like if someone is running RACs on some paper Uziel trying to duke it out with brawler mediums they're going to have a terrible time as the enemy spreads damage and they get demolished due to a lack of sustain. That or they're using RAC2s.
#7
Posted 04 May 2018 - 03:54 PM
#8
Posted 04 May 2018 - 03:55 PM
#9
Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:14 PM
#10
Posted 04 May 2018 - 04:20 PM
#11
Posted 04 May 2018 - 05:09 PM
#12
Posted 04 May 2018 - 05:55 PM
If anything I think they should have more recoil/shake when fired. The longer you shoot the more shake there should be.
#13
Posted 04 May 2018 - 06:22 PM
#14
Posted 04 May 2018 - 07:05 PM
I still prefer them over the other ACs just because I like to fight on the front line and they are great for breaking enemy fire lines.
Edited by Phlynn, 04 May 2018 - 07:06 PM.
#15
Posted 04 May 2018 - 07:35 PM
But do this - take an ultra-ac5 and a RAC5 into testing grounds and then start to time how quickly it takes to destroy a mech. Do it several times and have a look. Compare. You may not be so wildly impressed with the RAC afterward.
#16
Posted 04 May 2018 - 08:18 PM
RAC5s are kind of decent to ****, that completely depends on whether the bar doesn't jam on you, and whether you can put a lot of shells at a specific target and of the specific location -- which is very hard especially with the RAC5's slow projectie, and the stream-fire and spread of RACs in general, and it's something also dependent on the target -- obviously it's easier to beat down assaults with it and lights generally harder.
That being said, while RAC5s are workable, the RAC system is an overkill of risks with disproportionately small reward, much of the weapon despite being indirect-fire are aspects out of the player's control to be good such as dependent on shooting a lot of the stream at a single target as opposed just one heavy-damaged that makes it hard to reliably focus damage due to possible return fire and reaction to your stream that torso-twisting and efficient cover would fix, and the constant lead which the target moving can completely hamper the effectiveness, while at the same time the jam-bar hindering what arguably is the thing that gives RAC it's heavy damage making it worth to be used at all.
Making it much more reliable would be completely better, such as 100% jam-chance on-redline and balance the damage-output from there, make the velocity a lot faster too. Until PGI does those changes, RAC5 would always range between somewhere decent and total **** cause it's too situational.
Edited by The6thMessenger, 04 May 2018 - 08:25 PM.
#17
Posted 04 May 2018 - 09:19 PM
#18
Posted 04 May 2018 - 10:41 PM
#19
Posted 04 May 2018 - 10:43 PM
RAC5s should receive a drastic reduction or complete elimination of their spread, along with reductions to spin-up time, jam time, stuff like that.
RAC2s need all that along with a damage buff.
Ideally, the RACs should be in a niche where they have the best burst damage/ton ratio of all ballistic weapons, but worst DPS/ton.
They might even have that niche right now, but the spread and spin time makes them just terrible compared to ACs and UACs; even LBX10 is better.
Edited by Zergling, 04 May 2018 - 10:46 PM.
#20
Posted 04 May 2018 - 11:52 PM
Zergling, on 04 May 2018 - 10:43 PM, said:
Shouldn't it be the opposite? Chaingun and "burst" is kinda contradictory, it should imo have the best DPS/ton - validating the required facetime, but also requiring you to survive the enemy alpha.
What if we take inspiration from Crossout - every eg. 10th shot penetrates armor?
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users