23 replies to this topic

[Side Step]

I keep hearing UAC5 has the benefit to have an optional second shot while it is cooling down with the drawback of possibly jamming the gun.

If it's supposed to be optional, would it not be better to fire at the default cooldown while holding down the fire button. Only by tapping the trigger again during the cooldown would the jam inducing second shot be fired.

I realize the current control scheme might be intentional to keep the gun more skill based.
It just seems to me that it is more optional to fire at the non jamming rate currently, than it is optional to fire a second shot.

[Carrioncrows]

This is one of the changes the dev's had shoehorned as an update for a patch...

no idea what happened to it.

[valrond]

I want this too. I find myself using AC/5s instead of UAC/5 because they don't jam and the rate of fire, despite being slower, it's steadier and I know I can rely on them. UAC/5 should fire at the normal rate of 1.1s and only double fire when pressed during the recycle, as you said.

[Side Step]

Thank you!

I am glad I am not the only one who has thought this.

Never knew it worked this way before. Wonder what happened.

Edit: posted a thread in the suggestion forum

Edited by Side Step, 22 March 2013 - 03:59 PM.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

That is because the UAC5 is completely broken.

With a base rate of fire it has a DPS of 4.5 for 9 tons.
Which means 2 of them are DPS 9, at 18 tons, which is better than 3x AC5 at 8.8 DPS. Instead of asking to make a stupidly powerful weapon even better you should be asking that the the other Autocannons get balanced.

Remember when I said base rate of fire, because if you put some duct tape on your keyboard, it gets even better. If you take advantage of the double-shot the DPS is:
75% x (5 x 2)/1.1s + 25% (5 x 1)/5s = 6.8 + .25 = 7.05 DPS. which means if your DPS is dramatically improved if you hold the key without thinking.

[Side Step]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 22 March 2013 - 04:02 PM, said:

That is because the UAC5 is completely broken.

With a base rate of fire it has a DPS of 4.5 for 9 tons.
Which means 2 of them are DPS 9, at 18 tons, which is better than 3x AC5 at 8.8 DPS. Instead of asking to make a stupidly powerful weapon even better you should be asking that the the other Autocannons get balanced.

Remember when I said base rate of fire, because if you put some duct tape on your keyboard, it gets even better. If you take advantage of the double-shot the DPS is:
75% x (5 x 2)/1.1s + 25% (5 x 1)/5s = 6.8 + .25 = 7.05 DPS. which means if your DPS is dramatically improved if you hold the key without thinking.

Ok, that's a legitimate complaint about the balance of the weapons. Maybe it should be tuned back. I agree that comparably, AC5 for instance is quite lackluster for it's tonnage.

However, my point still stands. The current control scheme isn't promoting doublefire as an optional functionality. A new player like myself didn't even know I could prevent the jamming until I read it on the forum.

Whether single- or doublefire is better is also not what I'm trying to argue.

Edited by Side Step, 22 March 2013 - 04:11 PM.

[Onyx Rain]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 22 March 2013 - 04:02 PM, said:

That is because the UAC5 is completely broken.

With a base rate of fire it has a DPS of 4.5 for 9 tons.
Which means 2 of them are DPS 9, at 18 tons, which is better than 3x AC5 at 8.8 DPS. Instead of asking to make a stupidly powerful weapon even better you should be asking that the the other Autocannons get balanced.

Remember when I said base rate of fire, because if you put some duct tape on your keyboard, it gets even better. If you take advantage of the double-shot the DPS is:
75% x (5 x 2)/1.1s + 25% (5 x 1)/5s = 6.8 + .25 = 7.05 DPS. which means if your DPS is dramatically improved if you hold the key without thinking.

Honestly while the Uac5 numbers on paper are much better then the ac5, in practical use with the rate of jamming I'm only finding them a bit more effective. When they don't jam...they pwn...but they jam so often that it can really get you into trouble unless you have a lot of back up weapons. Frankly I could live with less jamming on them, or make it so the jam rate kicks in after a couple shots, the shoot once jam, shoot once jam...shoot once jam....gets really frustrating. I swear sometimes it jams the very first shot, I mean it doesn't even fire at all...push the fire button and insta jam even when you haven't shot the gun in awhile. Rare, but I swear it has happened to me a few times.

I would say the ac5 could use a bit of a buff though...bit faster refresh, but just a little...maybe shave a ton off it, and/or a crit spot.

Edited by Onyx Rain, 22 March 2013 - 04:12 PM.

[Erasus Magnus]

Side Step, on 22 March 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

I keep hearing UAC5 has the benefit to have an optional second shot while it is cooling down with the drawback of possibly jamming the gun.

If it's supposed to be optional, would it not be better to fire at the default cooldown while holding down the fire button. Only by tapping the trigger again during the cooldown would the jam inducing second shot be fired.

I realize the current control scheme might be intentional to keep the gun more skill based.
It just seems to me that it is more optional to fire at the non jamming rate currently, than it is optional to fire a second shot.

i asked paul in ask the devs 33 exactly that.
my question wasnt answered.

Onyx Rain, on 22 March 2013 - 04:11 PM, said:

Honestly while the Uac5 numbers on paper are much better then the ac5, in practical use with the rate of jamming I'm only finding them a bit more effective. When they don't jam...they pwn...but they jam so often that it can really get you into trouble unless you have a lot of back up weapons. Frankly I could live with less jamming on them, or make it so the jam rate kicks in after a couple shots, the shoot once jam, shoot once jam...shoot once jam....gets really frustrating. I swear sometimes it jams the very first shot, I mean it doesn't even fire at all...push the fire button and insta jam even when you haven't shot the gun in awhile. Rare, but I swear it has happened to me a few times.

I would say the ac5 could use a bit of a buff though...bit faster refresh, but just a little...maybe shave a ton off it, and/or a crit spot.

actually, if you have more than one uac5, they rarely jam. at 3 uacs the jamming pretty much vanishes completely.

i recently swapped my dual ac10s on my k2 with uac5 and in most matches pretty much dakka all day long with very few jams. it was so totally worth it!

single uac is a nightmare though.

Edited by Erasus Magnus, 22 March 2013 - 04:16 PM.

[DeadlyNerd]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 22 March 2013 - 04:02 PM, said:

That is because the UAC5 is completely broken.

With a base rate of fire it has a DPS of 4.5 for 9 tons.
Which means 2 of them are DPS 9, at 18 tons, which is better than 3x AC5 at 8.8 DPS. Instead of asking to make a stupidly powerful weapon even better you should be asking that the the other Autocannons get balanced.

Remember when I said base rate of fire, because if you put some duct tape on your keyboard, it gets even better. If you take advantage of the double-shot the DPS is:
75% x (5 x 2)/1.1s + 25% (5 x 1)/5s = 6.8 + .25 = 7.05 DPS. which means if your DPS is dramatically improved if you hold the key without thinking.

Oh stow the math. You can't calculate dps with chance involved. That's potential dps, not ensured dps.
For a gun that gets 5 less ammo per ton and weighs 1 ton more, the non double shot dps is perfectly justified.

OP's point is valid and there's no counter argument to it with the current implementation of ACs.

On a side note, you don't nerf a gun cause it's superior to the other one, you buff that other one. In this case that's AC5 and the need to buff the AC5 is pretty much obvious.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

DeadlyNerd, on 22 March 2013 - 04:18 PM, said:

Oh stow the math. You can't calculate dps with chance involved. That's potential dps, not ensured dps.
For a gun that gets 5 less ammo per ton and weighs 1 ton more, the non double shot dps is perfectly justified.

OP's point is valid and there's no counter argument to it with the current implementation of ACs.

On a side note, you don't nerf a gun cause it's superior to the other one, you buff that other one. In this case that's AC5 and the need to buff the AC5 is pretty much obvious.

Actually you can, and I did, the math is included in the original post. And double the damage (200%) is justified by a 12% increase in tonnage? I am going to assume you are from Washington state since they just legalized marijuana and you must be high.

But math aside. I own a Ilya with 3x UAC5 (27 tons + 6 tons ammo = 33 tons) I also own a CTF-4X with 4x AC5 (32 tons + 6 tons ammo = 38 tons). There is no comparison, my ilya absolutely dominates the CTF.-4X in a straight up brawl. It also has more tonnage available for engine, heatsinks, ammo, armor, etc.

So yes I am saying two things. 1) the UAC5 is grossly overpowered and 2) the AC5 is woefully underpowered.

[Grondoval]

I find it a little bit funny that people calculate DPS in a game where the possibility that you hit the exact same area on the target 100% of the time is rather low .... either the enemy will move into cover or you simply miss. As soon as that happens your whole DPS-Calculation goes down the drain. And the UAC5 could jam a couple of times after just 1 shot fired. You could get lucky and pump out alot of damage or it could jam on you time after time.

But its a given that the UAC5 is the only attractive Autocannon out of AC2, AC5 and AC10.

Edited by Grondoval, 22 March 2013 - 04:48 PM.

[MuKen]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 22 March 2013 - 04:28 PM, said:

So yes I am saying two things. 1) the UAC5 is grossly overpowered and 2) the AC5 is woefully underpowered.

Far more powerful than a bunch of other autocannons which happen to be pretty underpowered does not translate to overpowered.

It's a great DPS gun, but a crappy alpha gun. That's quite in line with the general tradeoff and balance system of Mechwarrior weaponry.

If they sped up the AC5/10 and lessened the heat on AC2 to bring them all in balance with each other, I'd be happy with autocannons as a whole.

Edited by MuKen, 22 March 2013 - 04:43 PM.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

Grondoval, on 22 March 2013 - 04:37 PM, said:

I find it a little bit funny that people calculate DPS in a game where the possibility that you hit the exact same area on the target 100% of the time is rather low .... either the enemy will move into cover or you simply miss. As soon as that happens your whole DPS-Calculation goes down the drain.

But its a given that the UAC5 is the only attractive Autocannon out of AC2, AC5 and AC10.

That is a valid point. the AC2 has great DPS but I consider it a sub-par weapon. However in this instance we are comparing two weapons with the exact same burst damage (AC5 and UAC5) so DPS is a fair measure.

I think the AC10 definitely needs a boost as well. but how do your boost it? more damage, maybe, but I would look at decreasing cooldown, which is just another way of saying "increase DPS".

[Zyllos]

The UAC/5 needs the jamming mechanic modified a bit.

It should be reduced in jamming chance while making the jam last longer. Also the cooldown needs to be normalized with the AC/5 (it shouldn't be faster than a AC/5 overall).

I am not sure why everybody keeps saying the AC/10 needs help. It's got a similar range as a PPC, much lower heat, and only a bit heavier than a PPC. I feel that weapon is pretty spot on.

Edited by Zyllos, 22 March 2013 - 04:49 PM.

[Grondoval]

Zyllos, on 22 March 2013 - 04:48 PM, said:

I am not sure why everybody keeps saying the AC/10 needs help. It's got a similar range as a PPC, much lower heat, and only a bit heavier than a PPC. I feel that weapon is pretty spot on.

I would get a PPC over an AC10 anytime:

- AC10 is WAY more heavy: 12 Ton Gun + at least 2 tons of Ammunition is 14 Tons vs 7 tons for the PPC. You could mount two PPCs for double the damage, Stun-Effect, no ammunition cook-off hazard, unlimited ammo and (AFAIK) higher projectile velocity. Heat and the min-range are the only factors but you could cope with that.

Edited by Grondoval, 22 March 2013 - 05:02 PM.

[kuangmk11]

Bryan Ekman, on 22 March 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

Ask the Devs #34

Weaselball: Any changes for the UAC5 coming soon? I remember a discussion about it a month or so ago where some Dev's mentioned ideas were being kicked around. Anything come out of that that you can share with us?

A: Not currently, but we always revisit each weapon from time to time.

Viterbi said:

Q: My mouse/keyboard came with macro software that lets me emulate a series of clicks or helps me with some process. Is this allowed?

A: Yes, using macros as provided by 3rd party hardware vendors is allowed. Though the use of any modifications to assist with aiming, aimbots, wall hacks, or any attempt to give information or tactical assistance that other players would not have by default, is a serious violation of our Terms of Use and any account found to be using such software will likely be suspended or banned.

[TehSBGX]

MuKen, on 22 March 2013 - 04:41 PM, said:

Far more powerful than a bunch of other autocannons which happen to be pretty underpowered does not translate to overpowered.

It's a great DPS gun, but a crappy alpha gun. That's quite in line with the general tradeoff and balance system of Mechwarrior weaponry.

If they sped up the AC5/10 and lessened the heat on AC2 to bring them all in balance with each other, I'd be happy with autocannons as a whole.

QTF Also the LBX needs love too. Tigher grouping and slightly faster firing rate, I wanna get all shotgun Joe on people :3

[Major Derps]

Side Step, on 22 March 2013 - 04:09 PM, said:

Ok, that's a legitimate complaint about the balance of the weapons. Maybe it should be tuned back. I agree that comparably, AC5 for instance is quite lackluster for it's tonnage.

However, my point still stands. The current control scheme isn't promoting doublefire as an optional functionality. A new player like myself didn't even know I could prevent the jamming until I read it on the forum.

Whether single- or doublefire is better is also not what I'm trying to argue.

So how is that the fault of the weapon/PGI? That's your ignorance causing you problems, not game mechanic faults. Yes, the weapon has too high of a recycle without double fire, and yes should be on par with the AC5, but the current control scheme/firing system is fine.

[StandingInFire]

Terrible Idea, I use and love UAC5s.

When I hold down the button I expect a weapon to fire at its fastest possible rate of fire.

Think about it to double shoot UAC5 like described here I would have to spam the button every 0.5 seconds, and god forbid I have multiple in chain fire, you can kiss that key/mouse goodbye after short usage.

Is it so hard for people who want to fire AT A SLOWER RATE to not hold down the button? If anything there should be an argument for increasing the delay between first and second shot so accidental double fire from taping a key doesn't occur (I haven't had a problem with this however).

[kuangmk11]

As it is now the second shot really isn't "optional", its the default behavior. Spamming the button for fast fire and holding for regular would make it optional. That way you could precisely control how you wanted it to fire instead of the try and press the button every 1100ms + ping fluctuation (its server authoritive remember) to not jam minigame.