Rotary vs. Ultra

[Stinger]

Okay, I have a question to pose here:

I recently got a Deimos mini as a gift, and it got me thinking.  What would be better (ignoring tonnage) 3 Clan Ultra-ACs or 1 Clan Rotary AC.  Let's say we are talking about the Rotary AC-2.

What advantage would 3 CUAC2s have over a single CRAC2?

Edit: Updated to reference Clan versions of the weapons.

[martian]

Okay, I have a question to pose here:

I recently got a Deimos mini as a gift, and it got me thinking.  What would be better (ignoring tonnage) 3 Ultra-ACs or 1 Rotary AC.  Let's say we are talking about the Rotary AC-2.

What advantage would 3 UAC2s have over a single RAC2?

If nothing else, UAC-2 has better range than RAC-2.

[Stinger]

If nothing else, UAC-2 has better range than RAC-2.

Sorry! I was thinking Clan Rotaries.  I will update the original post to specify.  Though the Clan UAC 2 does have a slight advantage.

[martian]

Sorry! I was thinking Clan Rotaries.  I will update the original post to specify.  Though the Clan UAC 2 does have a slight advantage.

That's what I meant.

You can unjam the RAC-2 during a game, but you can't unjam UAC-2.

[Wildonion]

There is also some system redundancy, for if you start taking arm damage or suffer a floating critical. That said, the weight savings gained from the switch is more than enough to convince me that you are better off with a RAC 2 in each arm.

**EDIT** Oh and with the RAC 2 you get the advantage of only having to roll once for each weapon at easy target numbers and the disadvantage of only getting to roll once for each weapon at high target numbers. With six UAC 2's, you are bound to hit something at long range and bound to miss something at short range.

[Top Sergeant]

Logistics are easier for the UAC 2 if you're on a limited ammo budget.

[Arkansas Warrior]

Okay, I have a question to pose here:

I recently got a Deimos mini as a gift, and it got me thinking.  What would be better (ignoring tonnage) 3 Clan Ultra-ACs or 1 Clan Rotary AC.  Let's say we are talking about the Rotary AC-2.

What advantage would 3 CUAC2s have over a single CRAC2?

Edit: Updated to reference Clan versions of the weapons.

Well, a CRAC-2 weighs 8 tons, three CUAC-2s weigh 15 tons.  I'd rather have the extra 7 tons of other stuff.

[Diablo48]

The UAC 2's also provide more damage and reliability at high TNs because you do not want to risk a jam by double tapping.

[Stinger]

Another thing I was thinking was ammo effeciency, at least at short range.  When you are at close range, and you are firing 3UACs, and lets say they all hit, or with the RAC, it also hits.  The UACs firing in standard mode are guaranteed to get 3 hits, and between 3 and 6 for ultra mode, but the RAC is going to need to fire 5 rounds to average 3, and 6 just to average 4, with probabilities being lower.  So would I be correct in saying you need to use 5 rounds to get the same effect as a UAC firing in normal mode?

[Arkansas Warrior]

Assuming no other weapons though, I can use the 7 tons I saved to add a 2 ton TC (making hit probability more likely to begin with), and 5 extra tons of ammo, so I've got plenty to burn.  Of course, the odds of a mech armed only with a CRAC 2 or three CUAC 2s is exceedingly low, and I'd argue the RAC wins there as well, because you can use those saved tons for more armor, a bigger engine, jump jets, back up guns, or any number of other things.

[Stinger]

So, using the deimos as an example, with the Prime config having 6 UAC2s (or other mechs, such as the Jupiter, with 4 UAC5s) the weapon is essentially, completely outclassed but the Rotary autocannon, with the exception of a minor amount of range (at the disadvantage of a minimum range).  Am I right?

[CloaknDagger]

Okay, I have a question to pose here:

I recently got a Deimos mini as a gift, and it got me thinking.  What would be better (ignoring tonnage) 3 Clan Ultra-ACs or 1 Clan Rotary AC.  Let's say we are talking about the Rotary AC-2.

What advantage would 3 CUAC2s have over a single CRAC2?

RAC2, easily.

The thing is, Ultras are bad, and of the ultras, the UAC2 is the worst. Think about it, with a UAC20, you have a significant chance to jam, but you get 20 damage out of it. But with a 2, it's the same chance to jam, but the benefit is literally 1/10th as much.

So RAC2 wins by being able to be unjammed.

And, you know, 3xUAC2s weight 15 tons, and the RAC2 is only 8 tons, so with some good overhauling, you can actually have 2xRAC2s. And have it be a viable main weapon. (Though I must recommend an ERPPC next to it.)

[Col Toda]

The problem I always had with RAC is Ammo consumption .  A RAC 5 uses up an average of 5 shot / turn that means going though a ton of ammo every 4 turns . The RAC2 is a little better with 9 turns but I have seen a model of linebacker that has 2 RAC2s and runs though all its ammo at ruinous rate . As far as I am concerned a light AC / 5 with precision ammo is best and the ultra 10 and 20 is almost as good the RAC just does not give enough return for the ammo use.

[Arkansas Warrior]

Where do you come up with that average?  It seems awfully high to me.

[snewsom2997]

The problem I always had with RAC is Ammo consumption .  A RAC 5 uses up an average of 5 shot / turn that means going though a ton of ammo every 4 turns . The RAC2 is a little better with 9 turns but I have seen a model of linebacker that has 2 RAC2s and runs though all its ammo at ruinous rate . As far as I am concerned a light AC / 5 with precision ammo is best and the ultra 10 and 20 is almost as good the RAC just does not give enough return for the ammo use.

I try to load 3 Tons for RAC/5's and 2 Tons for RAC/2's. When I custom build a mech. I tend to stick to 4 round bursts, so 60 shots lasts 15 Rounds, on the RAC/5's, RAC/2's are less of an issue.

[Col Toda]

I normally see 5 round burst as 6 rounds makes jamming risk too high . Even a 4 round burst that brings the total to 5 Combat Turns  instead of 4  Combat Turns per ton for and AC/5 . I still think you can get more out of 2 light AC 2 s with a targeting computer and precision rounds than I could get out of 1 RAC 2 .  I believe if 2 Light AC 2 hitting 80+% of the time is better than
1 RAC2 hitting 20% of the time or less is better .

[sebster]

In answering a question like this, the first and most important question to ask is, for the given tonnage, how much damage can I expect to do each turn.  Which in this case is built around this little table;

Two shots - 1.42
Three shots - 2.00
Four shots - 2.64
Five shots - 3.17
Six shots - 4.00

That's showing the average number of hits you can expect on the first six columns of the cluster hits table.

This means three UAC2, assuming three hits, will average 4.26 hits.  RAC2, firing the optimum five burst, will average 3.17 hits.  So, basically, for eight tons of RAC you get three hits, while 15 tons of UAC gets you four hits per turn.  Seven more tons for one more hit is a pretty bad deal.

Admittedly, that deal is offset slightly by the slightly longer range of the UAC and the slightly greater risk of jamming suffered by the RAC firing fire rounds a turn (3 times as great as any of the UAC being jammed).  But those advantages can't really justify an extra seven tons in weapons.

[CloaknDagger]

The problem I always had with RAC is Ammo consumption . 

That's the OPPOSITE of a problem.

If you run out of ammo, it mean you shot it all at the enemy.

Remember, it gets the same ammo per ton as regular ACs, about 100 damage. So if you run out faster, than means you would still be firing a regular AC, and thus, the enemy would have less damage right now, and thus, they would be working at closer to full strength, and thus, you would be getting hit harder right now.

[Col Toda]

Your point is taken ; however a RAC/2 averages about 6 pt / hit and say hits 1/2 the time . 3 light AC2 w targeting computer and precision ammo averages 4 and hits almost all the time .  The RAC runs though a ton firing 5/shot about 9 rounds while three
Light AC/2 with precision rounds fire though a ton in 7 rounds in that 7 rounds the RAC does about 24 Pt's of damage and the Light AC/2 s do 28Pt's of damage .  Examine the slim tonnage difference and that same targeting computer could add another
2 ER-Med lasers to the mix. My take is neither Rotary or ultra is as good as the Light/AC with Precision ammo and a targeting computer as weight of RAC are high and the range bracket are a the same as the light . The ultra is not as good as a light AC either .  However when you go above the AC5 to 10 or 20s  I get better results with LBX Cannons or ultras with Targeting computers  or even standard AC with precision Rounds and targeting computers however the effectiveness VS tonnage gets worse.

[sebster]

Your point is taken ; however a RAC/2 averages about 6 pt / hit and say hits 1/2 the time . 3 light AC2 w targeting computer and precision ammo averages 4 and hits almost all the time

The light ac are 4 tons each for 12 tons total, before you account for the targeting computer. So the real comparison is 2 ac2 against a rotary ac2, giving both a targeting computer or neither. Range is identical so the only advantage to the light ac2 is precision ammo... and against that the rotary is averaging 3 hits to the light ac2 getting 2.

Ammo doesn't mean much because it's 45 shots a turn, 2 tons will last a match easy.

[Col Toda]

I just think accuracy even at 2 light AC/2 VS 1 RAC /2  has a little more utility as they do not jam; can use precision ammo ;
and goes through 1 ton of precision ammo in 11 Turns vs 9 turns for the RAC/2 at fire rate of 5 . A previous post had the idea of going thru all your ammo as a good thing ; it is : if you hit with most of it . Say over 9 Turns the RAC is like to hit 5 Times say 30 pts and the light AC / 2 is likely to hit 16 times for about 32 points and more importantly at further range before the enemy hits . Yes it is very little difference however one ton of ammo has more 2 turns of endurance and does not jam . You pay for it in Cost
of ammo Precision ammo Cost 6 X standard about 36pts/ ton VS the RAC of 30pts  20% more damage per ton . Expensive yes but hitting sooner while closing  and hitting later if they are moving to withdrawing is important those 2 extra turns of endurance make a difference if you can reliably hit them at long range both coming and going.  Military hardware has always paid a premium for even the smallest edge over the enemy and a 20% edge for about 600% cost in ammo is representative of this trend.

[Arkansas Warrior]

You're stacking the odds against the RAC, and overestimating the TC bonus.  -1 TH won't take you from "hits 1/2 the time" to "hits almost all the time", and you don't have to fire five RAC rounds all the time.  I increase ROF as TNs drop.  Only one or two shots at TNs of 9-10, but if I somehow end up with a TN of 2-3, let her rip full bore.

[CloaknDagger]

I just think accuracy even at 2 light AC/2 VS 1 RAC /2  has a little more utility as they do not jam; can use precision ammo ;
and goes through 1 ton of precision ammo in 11 Turns vs 9 turns for the RAC/2 at fire rate of 5 . A previous post had the idea of going thru all your ammo as a good thing ; it is : if you hit with most of it . Say over 9 Turns the RAC is like to hit 5 Times say 30 pts and the light AC / 2 is likely to hit 16 times for about 32 points and more importantly at further range before the enemy hits . Yes it is very little difference however one ton of ammo has more 2 turns of endurance and does not jam . You pay for it in Cost
of ammo Precision ammo Cost 6 X standard about 36pts/ ton VS the RAC of 30pts  20% more damage per ton . Expensive yes but hitting sooner while closing  and hitting later if they are moving to withdrawing is important those 2 extra turns of endurance make a difference if you can reliably hit them at long range both coming and going.  Military hardware has always paid a premium for even the smallest edge over the enemy and a 20% edge for about 600% cost in ammo is representative of this trend.

I don't know when we went from CRAC2 vs 3xCUAC2 to ISRAC2 vs 2xLAC2, but okay, I can still do that.

I actually would take 2xLAC2s over a single RAC2. Not because of precision ammo, but because of ALL the ammo. Flechette is nice against infantry. AP is nice against reflective armor. Precision is nice against everything. Flak is nice against VTOLs and Aeros.

LAC2s have much more versatility, and really that's what people use ACs for. That and the ease of repair and production.

You're stacking the odds against the RAC, and overestimating the TC bonus.  -1 TH won't take you from "hits 1/2 the time" to "hits almost all the time", and you don't have to fire five RAC rounds all the time.  I increase ROF as TNs drop.  Only one or two shots at TNs of 9-10, but if I somehow end up with a TN of 2-3, let her rip full bore.

It's actually -2 to hit with precision.

[Arkansas Warrior]

Even so, considering the bell curve nature of to-hit rolls, that could be as little as an ~8% increase, and I don't think it's ever going to be near 50%.  Though to be fair, there are times when a shot that would be impossible on RACs is possible on LAC2s+TC+precision.

[CloaknDagger]

Even so, considering the bell curve nature of to-hit rolls, that could be as little as an ~8% increase, and I don't think it's ever going to be near 50%.  Though to be fair, there are times when a shot that would be impossible on RACs is possible on LAC2s+TC+precision.

If your chance to hit is 1/11, that is, you need to roll 12 to hit, then -1 to hit is a 100% bonus, because it moves it from 1 possibility, 12, to two, 12 and 11.

If your chance to hit is 2/11, that is, you need to roll 12 or 11 to hit, then -1 to hit is a 50% bonus, because it moves it from 2 possibilities, 12 and 11, to three, 12, 11, and 10.

Also, it should be noted that tracer ammo gets you -1 to hit at night, pretty much for free.

Goes well with stealth armor.

[Arkansas Warrior]

If your chance to hit is 1/11, that is, you need to roll 12 to hit, then -1 to hit is a 100% bonus, because it moves it from 1 possibility, 12, to two, 12 and 11.

If your chance to hit is 2/11, that is, you need to roll 12 or 11 to hit, then -1 to hit is a 50% bonus, because it moves it from 2 possibilities, 12 and 11, to three, 12, 11, and 10.

Also, it should be noted that tracer ammo gets you -1 to hit at night, pretty much for free.

Goes well with stealth armor.

Yes, but the poster I was responding to said  "a RAC/2 averages about 6 pt / hit and say hits 1/2 the time . 3 light AC2 w targeting computer and precision ammo averages 4 and hits almost all the time"

That's not the case.


It should also be noted that precision only helps against a target generating a TMM (yes, most of them will be, but it's still a situational rather than absolute bonus).

[CloaknDagger]

Yes, but the poster I was responding to said  "a RAC/2 averages about 6 pt / hit and say hits 1/2 the time . 3 light AC2 w targeting computer and precision ammo averages 4 and hits almost all the time"

That's not the case.

Maybe. I'm not getting any deeper into the math than that.

It should also be noted that precision only helps against a target generating a TMM (yes, most of them will be, but it's still a situational rather than absolute bonus).

Yep. But if you're firing an AC2 against an assault mech, you can probably kill them with your courage alone.

[Paul]

If your chance to hit is 1/11, that is, you need to roll 12 to hit, then -1 to hit is a 100% bonus, because it moves it from 1 possibility, 12, to two, 12 and 11.

If your chance to hit is 2/11, that is, you need to roll 12 or 11 to hit, then -1 to hit is a 50% bonus, because it moves it from 2 possibilities, 12 and 11, to three, 12, 11, and 10.

2d6 probability doesn't work that way at all.

There are 36 different dice combinations possible with two 1D6 dice. To visualize this, imagine two dice, each with a different color. (Blue and red) To get, say, an 11, you have 2 options: Blue 6, Red5, or Blue 5, Red 6.
To get a 12, you must get Blue 6, Red 6. Nothing else works.
So, there's 1 combination that gives you a 12, two combinations that give you an 11.

Here's the whole list of possibilities:

2 - 1 Combination
3 - 2 Combinations
4 - 3 Combinations
5 - 4 Combinations
6 - 5 Combinations
7 - 6 Combinations
8 - 5 Combinations
9 - 4 Combinations
10 - 3 Combinations
11 - 2 Combinations
12 - 1 Combination

You'll note that's a curve; that's what's referred to as the bellcurve of rolling 2d6.

This also means that the effect of a -1 bonus changes based on where you are on that curve. Going from a TN of 8 to 7 means you're to hit goes from 41.6% to 58.3% chance to hit.
Going from 12 to 11 is a change from 2.8% to 8.3% chance to hit.

It's quite literally 3 times easier to hit, though the chances of success are still only 1 in 12.

Paul

[CloaknDagger]

I'll admit it, I derped.

[sebster]

I just think accuracy even at 2 light AC/2 VS 1 RAC /2  has a little more utility as they do not jam; can use precision ammo ;
and goes through 1 ton of precision ammo in 11 Turns vs 9 turns for the RAC/2 at fire rate of 5 .

Yes, and for those advantages you are accepting a 50% drop in effectiveness, with two hits vs three.  Which is a fairly nice trade-off with no clear winner, and both types being optimal in slightly different roles (the light ac-2 being ideal for a support unit hunting high speed, low armour enemy, while the rac-2 would be preferred for crit hunting on heavy and assault mechs where you'd happily accept a slightly higher tgt number in order to score 3 hits and an extra chance of sneaking a crit.

I mean, both are sub-optimal in those roles compared to lb autocannons, but, well, we're talking about ac2 here, in order to use them you have to accept its going to be sub-optimal.

You pay for it in Cost of ammo Precision ammo Cost 6 X standard about 36pts/ ton VS the RAC of 30pts  20% more damage per ton .

Cost is actually very misleading when it comes to comparing weapons, and really misleading when it comes to ammo.  This is because the cost of individual weapons is completely dwarfed by the cost of the mech that's carrying them - once you've paid for the fusion engine, internal, gyro and all the rest (and really mostly just the engine) then you're already looking at a few million c-bills.  The difference for pair of light ac2 or a rotary ac/2 (200,000 vs 175,000) is fairly close to irrelevant.  And the difference of 1,000 for standard ammo and 6,000 for precision is simply irrelevant.

[Stinger]

Back on the UAC vs RAC issue.  Assuming Identical to hit numbers, 3 UACs do have the advantage of single firing.  From all the numbers I see, 3 UACs firing in single mode will get 3 hits, where an RAC needs to fire 5 shots and still has a chance of jamming on 3 or lower...  I know that isn't worth 8 tons, but it is something to think about...

[WarGod]

you also need what a 8+ to get both ultra shots to hit?  versus if you fire a 3 or 4 round burst with a rotary?    math just works out a bit better.  Plus when a RAC "Jams" its not out of the fight unless you roll crappy on the ammo lost.  where as a single snake eyes with the ultra makes a paper weight. 

[Col Toda]

The whole point of using a RAC is to fire as many shots over as little time as possible taking in mind that shooting 6 brings the jam number to 5 a little too high so most fire at the 5 rate. Shooting at 4 does not further lower the jam number over 5 so there is no point in shooting less than 5/round . The Ultra is meant for a player for a discreet choice of on or two shots . The early Clan mechs had very limited ammo capacity sometimes only one ton for an Ultra or a LB Cannon a serious design flaw . Using a RAC with that kind of Combat Philosophy in which only in later designs they fix and address the previous design flaws and replace them with other ones. I do not think that the Clans have the mindset to really use the system in which they would be better off with the better average speed of their mechs to install streak launchers or lasers for the tonnage. Clans lose if they use ballistic weapons as the  slim advantages of Clan ballistic weapons are dwarfed by the advantages of the better energy weapons . The Clans strength are it faster mechs and better energy weapons the innersphere strength is better heat balance and higher use of ballistic and missile weapons and combined arms combat with C3 to off set the Clan advantages .

[stoicfaux]

Numbers comparing RAC5 versus UAC5:  http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,15277.0

You can multiply the damage values by 0.4 to get the RAC2/UAC2 numbers.  For UACs look for "unjam_opportunity: 0.000" at the bottom of the the first block of stats.

The "turns jam" column (turns spent jammed) is probably the most informative number...


edit:  Helps to include the actual link. =P

[Arkansas Warrior]

The whole point of using a RAC is to fire as many shots over as little time as possible taking in mind that shooting 6 brings the jam number to 5 a little too high so most fire at the 5 rate. Shooting at 4 does not further lower the jam number over 5 so there is no point in shooting less than 5/round . The Ultra is meant for a player for a discreet choice of on or two shots . The early Clan mechs had very limited ammo capacity sometimes only one ton for an Ultra or a LB Cannon a serious design flaw . Using a RAC with that kind of Combat Philosophy in which only in later designs they fix and address the previous design flaws and replace them with other ones. I do not think that the Clans have the mindset to really use the system in which they would be better off with the better average speed of their mechs to install streak launchers or lasers for the tonnage. Clans lose if they use ballistic weapons as the  slim advantages of Clan ballistic weapons are dwarfed by the advantages of the better energy weapons . The Clans strength are it faster mechs and better energy weapons the innersphere strength is better heat balance and higher use of ballistic and missile weapons and combined arms combat with C3 to off set the Clan advantages .

If that were the case, RACs would only be capable of firing at 4+ rounds/turn.  The very fact that they can fire anything from 1-6 means they were designed solely to put out a large volume of fire.  It's just sill to be firing off 4-5 rounds/turn at high TNs where odds are none are going to hit.  Take a speculative shot or two?  Sure.  But don't fire 4-6 rounds on, say, 11s.

[Akalabeth]

RAC2, easily.

The thing is, Ultras are bad, and of the ultras, the UAC2 is the worst. Think about it, with a UAC20, you have a significant chance to jam, but you get 20 damage out of it. But with a 2, it's the same chance to jam, but the benefit is literally 1/10th as much.

So RAC2 wins by being able to be unjammed.

That's not necessarily as big a benefit as it seems.
In order to unjam an RAC, you need to go a turn without firing any weapons, and even then unjamming your gun is not guarenteed. Point is if you have a mech with multiple weapons that are still viable, why stop firing all of them just so you can get a single gun on line?

[Arkansas Warrior]

It's better than not being able to, therefore having to dump any remaining ammo, and hope you don't get shot in the back while doing so.

[Diablo48]

That's not necessarily as big a benefit as it seems.
In order to unjam an RAC, you need to go a turn without firing any weapons, and even then unjamming your gun is not guarenteed. Point is if you have a mech with multiple weapons that are still viable, why stop firing all of them just so you can get a single gun on line?

Really the biggest benefit of the unjamming is logistics in a campaign.  Being able to unjam it on your way back to base saves the techs a lot of trouble compared to fixing UACs.

[sebster]

If that were the case, RACs would only be capable of firing at 4+ rounds/turn.  The very fact that they can fire anything from 1-6 means they were designed solely to put out a large volume of fire.  It's just sill to be firing off 4-5 rounds/turn at high TNs where odds are none are going to hit.  Take a speculative shot or two?  Sure.  But don't fire 4-6 rounds on, say, 11s.

Yeah, its kind of mad to accept a high risk of jamming if you're hitting on an 11 or 12.

That said, if you drill down further in to how the mechanics operate, there's a bit more to it.  Basically there's no point to either 2 shots or 4 - 2 shots is delivering less expected damage than 3 shots at the same chance of jamming, and 4 shots is delivering less expected damage than 5 shots at the same chance of jamming.

So that gives us the options of 1 shot, 3 shots, 5 shots or 6 shots.

1 shot is an okay option if it's a long shot and you're being very conservative on jamming, or if you're running low on ammo (as you lose no shots on the cluster hits table it's the most efficient method firing)... but you shouldn't be doing this very often, or you might as well just take a light autocannon.

3 shots is basically the default for long shots - the risk of jamming is very low (1/36) and you can still expect about two hits.

5 shots is the standard basically.  The risk of jamming is much higher (3/36), but you can now expect about 3.17 hits a turn.  This is basically how the RAC should work - get to decent target numbers and just grind out 5 shots every turn until you jam, run out of ammo, or your opponent explodes.

6 shots adds only more damage still, jumping to an expected four hits, but the risk of jamming jumps considerably, doubling to 6/36.  It's an option if you've got a near certain hit and you're looking to max out damage ASAP, no matter the risk.

[Scotty]

There's another factor to consider besides risk of jamming when determining rate of fire, however, and that's ammo consumption.  Sometimes you want to conserve ammunition, and at those points it makes perfect sense to fire less shots, even if the jamming risk doesn't noticeably decrease.

[Col Toda]

Aerospace units have no choice the MUST fire in ultra mode and rate of fire 6 for a RAC . The damage is averaged . This is another reason I do not like either system .  For bullistic  I prefer Light AC / 2s and 5s ; LB 10 X and 20 ; and lastly Gauss Rifles The standard one the Light Gauss has it's niche for Aerospace and the heavy is a little too clumsy weapon with only 4 shots a ton . I never experimented with an Improved Gauss never had ready access to either  Heavy or Improved Heavy Gauss as my logistical supply train had enough demands that yet another system that needed support and supply for a rare system was not worth my while. Gauss Rifle ; LB 10 X ; ER-Large ; ER - Med laser ; Med X -Pulse  ; LRM  15s ;  Light AC /5s  and 2s ;  light  machine guns with arrays ; C3 and ECM ; and lastly Arrow IV systems with huge variant ammo supply is enough of a burden . That and fielding Battle Armor and conventional infantry made me shy from adding anything that do not field enough of it to make it worth my while.

[sebster]

There's another factor to consider besides risk of jamming when determining rate of fire, however, and that's ammo consumption.  Sometimes you want to conserve ammunition, and at those points it makes perfect sense to fire less shots, even if the jamming risk doesn't noticeably decrease.

Not really. In terms of ammo efficiency the cluster hits table is very consistent - about 65% of shots hit. The 2 column bucks the trend a little and is a little over 70% but the rest stick around 65%... and what movement there is isn't the pattern you'd expect - the % hits on the 6 column is higher then the five.

So shooting smaller numbers of rounds doesn't make you more ammo efficient, unless you fire just one round.

[Scotty]

I didn't say more efficient, I said more conservative.  If you fire less shots, you by definition have more shots to fire out of your reserve at an opportune time.

People always crunch the numbers hard for something like this, but sometimes the difficult to quantify concept of biding your time can be the difference between a full burst at low TNs and a piddly one or two shots as your magazines run out.

[sebster]

I didn't say more efficient, I said more conservative.  If you fire less shots, you by definition have more shots to fire out of your reserve at an opportune time.

People always crunch the numbers hard for something like this, but sometimes the difficult to quantify concept of biding your time can be the difference between a full burst at low TNs and a piddly one or two shots as your magazines run out.

I mentioned the role of ammo, I just mentioned in a substantial way in which it makes sense (because if your concern is maintaining fire while keep ammo, then the only option is single shot).

[Scotty]

(because if your concern is maintaining fire while keep ammo, then the only option is single shot).

Reducto ad absurdum.  I've mentioned the utility of not shooting the maximum number of shots at a given jam chance.  If you disagree, fine, but don't twist it like that.

[sebster]

Reducto ad absurdum.  I've mentioned the utility of not shooting the maximum number of shots at a given jam chance.  If you disagree, fine, but don't twist it like that.

So that's your personal theory and you're sticking to it, and whatever.  It isn't really my place to explain to you why it doesn't make sense over and over again.

But you responded to my post, to point out something that apparently I had missed.  I hadn't missed the concept, instead I had mentioned the concept in the ways in which it makes sense, and not mentioned the ways in which it does not.

[Charlie Tango]

 [copper]

OK folks, we're getting awfully close to Rule #1 violations in here.  Let's all ratchet down the tone in here and get back to discussing the topic.

/  [copper]

[Col Toda]

Have you lost my point . A whole level of the game the Aerospace aspect does not give you a choice about ammo conservation it is all or nothing an Ultra must fire in ultra mode and a RAC must fire 6 round bursts ( No Option of firing less ) . That is an aspect that makes my point the most about ammo usage  being high .  They will always be players that see them as new toys to use and have no ammo discipline anyway .

[Arkansas Warrior]

The fact that some players go new toy crazy isn't really a strong reason not to use a RAC.  And really, one could make the same argument about UACs or any other weapon.

As for aero, I'm admittedly not terribly familiar with he aero rules, but it seems to me that a RAC firing at max rate is still going to be lighter than two UAC-5s, and the greater ammo usage is more than offset by the greater damage done.