19 replies to this topic

[Cichol Balor]

I was wondering if anyone knew the stats for the damage and fire time before jam chance for the two racs. i found an old post but it seems damage numbers are outdated (showing 2s at .5 per shot rather than 1 per shot) and so idk how much else has changed

[Audacious Aubergine]

Can't give a suggestion on jam chances over time, but for damage maybe you can free-roam in the academy and pot-shot the turrets in the river to see what numbers it gives you

[Cichol Balor]

the damage for a RAC 2 is 1 per shot and i'm not looking for the jam chance over time but rather how long you can shoot it before it starts rolling for the jam chance. how long it takes the yellow bar to fill

[Aidan Crenshaw]

Well, that's what the training grounds is for.

[Acersecomic]

Dunno the numbers but just enter Training Grounds, start the stopwatch on your phone and see how long it takes
What? Do you not have a phone? (insert Cheng face) xD

[Phoenix 72]

I do not know the numbers, but I know that RAC2s have a much lower jam chance than RAC5s. If you take a Bushwacker with 2 RAC5s, you will jam much quicker and produce more heat than using a Bushwacker with 3RAC2s. I use a build on my X1 that will not overheat for a very long time and only on the hottest maps.

Which is why I stopped using RAC5s and instead use RAC2s on my Bushwackers. And some other Mechs.

[Koniving]

There's a bit of a random chance for the jam, but the longer you hold it the more likely it'll happen. Let it cool off periodically.

The more you have firing at once, the faster they will reach that jam chance and the faster it will jam. A single RAC tends to last significantly longer before jamming...and is a lot colder.

[Acersecomic]

Darakor Stormwind, on 22 January 2019 - 12:33 PM, said:

I do not know the numbers, but I know that RAC2s have a much lower jam chance than RAC5s. If you take a Bushwacker with 2 RAC5s, you will jam much quicker and produce more heat than using a Bushwacker with 3RAC2s. I use a build on my X1 that will not overheat for a very long time and only on the hottest maps.

Which is why I stopped using RAC5s and instead use RAC2s on my Bushwackers. And some other Mechs.

Well the difference here is that RAC2s provide sustain but RAC5 is meant for something like a racattack. Hit hard and bail out. I use RAC5 on Urbie so I deal max damage and flee the scene instead of standing there longer with a RAC2. You get me?
I use double RAC5 on my King Crab to absolutely wreck enemy armor and then crit them with a volley of MRM40. If my RACs are hot or on cooldown, I switch to quad Mediums as a support weapon or to finish a mech off.
RAC2 is as sustained fight weapon, while RAC5 is hit them hard and fast with either of two intentions, kill them on the spot or go hot and retreat after doing your bit.
You get me or am I blabbering more than making sense xD

[Daggett]

Koniving, on 22 January 2019 - 12:39 PM, said:

The more you have firing at once, the faster they will reach that jam chance and the faster it will jam. A single RAC tends to last significantly longer before jamming...and is a lot colder.

Do you have a source?
In my experience it does not matter how many RACs you fire at the same time. Jam chance should be independent for each weapon.
Same is true for heat. One RAC2 does 2 heat/s regardless if fired alone or together with other RAC2s, unless you trigger ghost heat of cause. So a single RAC is only colder in terms of "firing less weapons is colder than firing more weapons" which applies to all heat-generating weapons, not just racs.

Acersecomic, on 22 January 2019 - 01:39 PM, said:

Well the difference here is that RAC2s provide sustain but RAC5 is meant for something like a racattack. Hit hard and bail out. I use RAC5 on Urbie so I deal max damage and flee the scene instead of standing there longer with a RAC2. You get me?
I use double RAC5 on my King Crab to absolutely wreck enemy armor and then crit them with a volley of MRM40. If my RACs are hot or on cooldown, I switch to quad Mediums as a support weapon or to finish a mech off.
RAC2 is as sustained fight weapon, while RAC5 is hit them hard and fast with either of two intentions, kill them on the spot or go hot and retreat after doing your bit.
You get me or am I blabbering more than making sense xD

This is true if you can only mount 2 heavy ballistics like with Urbies. But as soon as you factor in ghost heat limits, triple RAC2s only miss 2,17 dps and need a few additional tons against dual RAC5 but get incredibly more sustain both in heat-management and firing-time before jamming as well as more range and much higher velocity.

In my opinion that's a very good trade and the way to go for mechs that have the needed hardpoints and tonnage like the Bushwacker or Shadow Hawk. You can easily compare both RACs in testing grounds, and i promise the results will be eye-opening.

Edited by Daggett, 22 January 2019 - 02:30 PM.

[Bloodwitch]

Well here is the deal, i tell you but you must promise not to use it ingame, allright? cool.

Spoiler

RACS have defined time window before they will jam, what RACS don't have is a defined shellcount in that time window.
It purely depends on how fast you can click, a macro set to 1ms doubles and triples the damage output.
I assume it to be fixed within the next few days.

[Koniving]

Daggett, on 22 January 2019 - 02:29 PM, said:

Do you have a source?
In my experience it does not matter how many RACs you fire at the same time. Jam chance should be independent for each weapon.
Same is true for heat. One RAC2 does 2 heat/s regardless if fired alone or together with other RAC2s, unless you trigger ghost heat of cause. So a single RAC is only colder in terms of "firing less weapons is colder than firing more weapons" which applies to all heat-generating weapons, not just racs.

Do a match with rac/5 or 2.
Now use 2 of them. As for the jam rate the civil war weapon expansion patch detailing the weapons.
I use a number of builds with a single rac 5 or 2 accompanying an a.c./10.
Its so much colder than a uac/2 and the a.c./2 and gives a better punch over time.

Edited by Koniving, 22 January 2019 - 06:58 PM.

[Phoenix 72]

Acersecomic, on 22 January 2019 - 01:39 PM, said:

You get me or am I blabbering more than making sense xD

No worries, I know what you mean. But Daggett described the advantages of triple Rac2s quite well. You get incredible sustain and an optimal range of 600m. I tried it out twice and instantly retired all my double Rac5 Mechs.

[Ruccus]

Darakor Stormwind, on 22 January 2019 - 10:42 PM, said:

No worries, I know what you mean. But Daggett described the advantages of triple Rac2s quite well. You get incredible sustain and an optimal range of 600m. I tried it out twice and instantly retired all my double Rac5 Mechs.

Personally I still like RAC5s over RAC2s on the Bushwacker. You can run dual RAC5s and a 265LFE engine while with triple RAC2s I have to either go with an XL engine making it more fragile or a 225LFE which I think is too slow for a Bushwacker. For mechs that have all their ballistic hardpoints in one torso though (Shadowhawk 2H, Champion 2N and 1NB, Marauder 3R, etc.) triple RAC2s offer a nice benefit over RAC5s because they allow an XL or LFE engine to be used over a standard engine and have the increased staying power at the cost of not that much dps.

I agree it is a different playstyle for the RAC5 over the RAC2. RAC5s are great when you're alongside your team and can provide a significant initial punch and peel off to cool down while your teammates are still engaging, then return to the fight after the RACs have cooled off. RAC2s provide a sustained damage output during a push against a group of mechs, and can be very annoying to an enemy. That's where heavier mechs like the Marauder 3R can use them to very good effect.

[Acersecomic]

Daggett, on 22 January 2019 - 02:29 PM, said:

Do you have a source?
In my experience it does not matter how many RACs you fire at the same time. Jam chance should be independent for each weapon.
Same is true for heat. One RAC2 does 2 heat/s regardless if fired alone or together with other RAC2s, unless you trigger ghost heat of cause. So a single RAC is only colder in terms of "firing less weapons is colder than firing more weapons" which applies to all heat-generating weapons, not just racs.


This is true if you can only mount 2 heavy ballistics like with Urbies. But as soon as you factor in ghost heat limits, triple RAC2s only miss 2,17 dps and need a few additional tons against dual RAC5 but get incredibly more sustain both in heat-management and firing-time before jamming as well as more range and much higher velocity.

In my opinion that's a very good trade and the way to go for mechs that have the needed hardpoints and tonnage like the Bushwacker or Shadow Hawk. You can easily compare both RACs in testing grounds, and i promise the results will be eye-opening.

RAC2 vs RAC5 stacking is similar to stacking regular ACs due to rate of fire advantages. I know it all, I like unorthodox builds and spend quite a bit of time making them and smoothing them out so tonnage vs rate of fire and such stuff are well known to me

[Daggett]

Koniving, on 22 January 2019 - 06:57 PM, said:

Do a match with rac/5 or 2. Now use 2 of them. As for the jam rate the civil war weapon expansion patch detailing the weapons.

I just read the civil war patch notes and i found nothing that refers to differences in how many RACs you fire at the same time.

In my experience triple RAC2 do already fire for a very long time, very often even one of those three RACs just refuses to jam despite being in the red zone for an eternity. So why should i reduce my DPS by 66% using only one RAC when i can fire three of which one already barely jams before i disengage?

Ruccus, on 22 January 2019 - 11:50 PM, said:

Personally I still like RAC5s over RAC2s on the Bushwacker. You can run dual RAC5s and a 265LFE engine while with triple RAC2s I have to either go with an XL engine making it more fragile or a 225LFE which I think is too slow for a Bushwacker.

True, but the secret is that the Bushwacker is very XL-friendly with proper positioning and target selection. I almost never die by a premature ST-destruction, you just need to ensure that no big-alpha mechs get a clear shot at your side profile. And even then it's relatively easy to protect a cored ST.

[Phoenix 72]

Ruccus, on 22 January 2019 - 11:50 PM, said:

Personally I still like RAC5s over RAC2s on the Bushwacker. You can run dual RAC5s and a 265LFE engine while with triple RAC2s I have to either go with an XL engine making it more fragile or a 225LFE which I think is too slow for a Bushwacker.

Actually, this is my build.

https://mwo.smurfy-n...f2f45caa14e72c9

It uses a Light 250 engine. 4 1/2 tons of ammo (with skills) translate into 1100-1200 damage in normal quick play, which is quite enough. I think I have run out of ammo only 3 or so times in a lot of games. The speed is okay. I would like a bit more, but I have not really had many situations where I was way too slow.

I tried the Marauder for that build, but felt it was not as tanky as the Bushwacker and the loss of the wrong side torso cripples the Mech. While I can still shoot with the Bushie after a side torso loss. I just overheat a lot afterwards. ;-)

[Cichol Balor]

I want to point out that my Kcrab uses 6 rac/2s and I fire anywhere from 1-6 at a time ofc only up to 4 can be fired long enough to fill the jam bar. the racs do not seem to jam any quicker if i'm firing 1 or if I am firing 4.

[Ruccus]

Yes, if you go only with RAC2s you can fit an 'okay' speed light engine, but one of my build principles is to try to avoid only going with ammo based weaponry unless you're sure you have enough to last the match (with the range of the RAC2s and my eagerness to waste shots at far away enemies early in the match I found 5 tons is minimum for me) and avoid only having jammable weapons (again, fire control is not a strong point for me - I'll pray to the Jam God constantly and be shocked when he lets me down).

I agree that for people with a modest amount of fire control it's a perfectly fine build, just not for me. My dual RAC5 build fits my play style better. My main problem with running RAC5s on the BSW-X1 isn't the RAC2 build, it's that I really like my AC20+SNPPC build for the X1. FLPPD and weapon mounts so close you can lead a target and still hit it with both weapons.

[Phoenix 72]

BTW, that RAC5 build works better on the X2 because of the superior maneuverability of the Mech. It has a boost over the X1. The only advantage of the X1 over the X2 is the third ballistic hardpoint in the side torsos.

I used to play a similar build to what you use, except I had 2 ML in the Center...

[Ruccus]

The X1 has a ballistic range quirk that allows me to get the RAC5s out past 500m with nodes, though yes the build does fine on the X2 too (on the X2 I'd use 2 SLs instead of 1 ML - I found 2 RAC5s and 2 MLs was too hot for me).

I think my X2 is currently running a dual LB10X build (though it might still have a triple ASRM6 loadout).