131 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

*********, on 26 February 2013 - 02:25 PM, said:

If I remember correctly the a signal "Machine Gun" on a mech is actually 4 .50 caliber machine guns that are linked and fire together. At lest thats what I remember from MW4 and some of the books. So yeah I could see 4 .50 cals being half a ton. The ammo on the other hand...... even if it was 4000 rounds (1000 for each gun) I don't see that being a ton.

MW4 only said that MG Arrays are a group of 3 or 4 MGs linked together, it doesn't mention caliber. Also, a .50 cal gun IRL weighs about 38KG (M2 Browning)...that multiplied by 4 equals 152 KG...which is barely more than a quarter of the weight of a Battletech MG.

[Liquidx]

Vermaxx, on 26 February 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

I wasn't allowed to use "teamwork" as the solution to streaks. You aren't allowed to cite teamwork as the way to make machine guns worthwhile.

... This isn't a single player campaign, it is a (questionably)massively multiplayer game. Of course team work comes into play in every discussion.

Vermaxx, on 26 February 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

Every other single weapon in the game functions appreciably on its own. Sinking an entire mech as a distraction does not make the weapons viable. He could do the same thing with four tags, or srm2s, or get ignored with small lasers and actually put up some damage.

Ok, so what difference does it make what weapon he uses then? If he is able to occupy one or more targets and cause them to chase him with 4 machine guns, then how is that less valuable than him doing the same thing with srms or lasers? His job isn't to stand toe to toe with anything. The game isn't about damage done at all - you do less damage when you target a single location and kill the target. The game is about numbers. How can you keep X enemy busy with only Y mechs so that our remaing Z mechs can overwhelm those not distracted.

It just so happens that a 30 ton mech with a big engine and 4 machine guns is pretty damned effective in that role.

Vermaxx, on 26 February 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

This is a game about damage and kills and winning. You get more damage, which increases the likelihood of kills and winning, by not using machine guns. They are not viable. Your friend does not contribute to the kills in any mathematical way, he is a decoy. A pink mech with no guns might do the same thing.

See above.
it is about concentrating fire on targets, and killing them before they kill you. There are three obvious ways I can think of right now to accomplish this.
1) bring bigger mechs than they have *(usually works).
2) stand there and hope your team has better aim than the enemy
3) introduce an extremely valuable diversion that allows you to fight 4 mechs instead of 8.

How you say he is a waste of a mech and would be better served by lasers/etc on is nonsense.

I would say machine guns play a large role in his ability to "agro" the enemy - they're nearly instant hit, they make all kinds of noise, and they're easy to strafe a line of enemy mechs with and get the hell out of there once they all turn around.

Also, machine guns tear the hell out of internals right now, so you lose components (ammo explosions too) extremely quickly. They have a very nice niche. But for only 1/2 a ton each, I wouldn't expect them to be multifaceted.

[LogicSol]

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 02:31 PM, said:

MW4 only said that MG Arrays are a group of 3 or 4 MGs linked together, it doesn't mention caliber. Also, a .50 cal gun IRL weighs about 38KG (M2 Browning)...that multiplied by 4 equals 152 KG...which is barely more than a quarter of the weight of a Battletech MG.

mounting, armor and ammo feed.
Or just make it up. It's pigeon holed to fit into a pnp gaming system. It's not reality.

[Liquidx]

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 02:31 PM, said:

MW4 only said that MG Arrays are a group of 3 or 4 MGs linked together, it doesn't mention caliber. Also, a .50 cal gun IRL weighs about 38KG (M2 Browning)...that multiplied by 4 equals 152 KG...which is barely more than a quarter of the weight of a Battletech MG.

I'd be willing to chalk up a large portion of the weight to mounting brackets.

Then again, I also wouldn't be bothered to work out the math on video game and old board game logic.

[Bren McGuire]

PGI should invent a new weapon:

Heavy machine gun. Designate it as 'HMG'.

Works like a MG but:

4x MG damage
takes HMG ammo (1/4 of regular MG ammo but same tonnage).

It provides a useful sidegrade option that doesn't mess with the standard loadout.

What PGI are dealing with is: It's broken and we can't fix it.

Facing this, if you can't buff something for lore/technical reasons it's better to provide a useful alternative rather than break other things by trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole.

Edited by Bren McGuire, 26 February 2013 - 03:10 PM.

[Vermaxx]

Liquid, seriously. I'm not insulting your friend. His performance doesn't prove anything regardless, and he would do better with any other gun. I'm glad he has fun, I'm glad it works in a team, but having fun and contributing to a team are not measurable stats to quote how viable one gun is.

If you disagree with me, stop posting. Machine guns are too low to be useful. Nothing in a game like this should exist singularly for distraction value. Nothing in a game like this should REQUIRE teamwork unless we are going to throw out this pug group system and REQUIRE premade teams.

And no, machine guns do not tear up internals. Even critting more often, and for higher bonus, they are still tiny hits that have to shoot through around ten hit points per item. ANY OTHER GUN crit kills items faster by sheer base damage.

Machine guns would be better (not viable, but HUGELY BETTER) if their crits instantly disabled items, bypassing the hit point system.

[Impyrium]

Uh... has it occured to anyone, maybe, possibly, that MGs aren't A HIGH POWERED SUPER WEAPON? Perhaps they're MEANT to be low powered, intended for lighter 'Mechs. Perhaps, just maybe, they're actually designed to deliver the killing blow, even if that 'Mech didn't tear the armor off its target beforehand.

Really, if you don't like the "balance" of the MGs, don't use them. Stop complaining, others obviously have had success with them. I for one care very little about the smaller balance details. The main point is though... if you don't like them, stop using them. Let others with some skill use them instead.

[LogicSol]

Vermaxx, on 26 February 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

but having fun and contributing to a team are not measurable stats to quote how viable one gun is.

Yes they are. Okay, so fun not so much but team contribution? enemies distracted/baited, internals destroyed, formations disrupted etc. There are tons a fast mgunner can do.

Vermaxx, on 26 February 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

Machine guns are too low to be useful.

If you feel that way don't use them, other find them useful/fun.

Vermaxx, on 26 February 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

Nothing in a game like this should exist singularly for distraction value.

two counts here.
One - yes things should exist solely for distraction value. distraction value is HUGE.
Two - the mg is good for more than just distraction, it can kill components fast, and mechs too once engine crits are implemented.

Vermaxx, on 26 February 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

Nothing in a game like this should REQUIRE teamwork unless we are going to throw out this pug group system and REQUIRE premade teams.

you mean like winning? I seem to remember winning requiring teamwork. anyway this is a stupid stance to take.

Vermaxx, on 26 February 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

And no, machine guns do not tear up internals. Even critting more often, and for higher bonus, they are still tiny hits that have to shoot through around ten hit points per item. ANY OTHER GUN crit kills items faster by sheer base damage.

Not true, not all hits effect components, while all crits do. Mgs have the highest crit rate of any weapon in the game, netting an average 2.5 dps against components.

Vermaxx, on 26 February 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

Machine guns would be better (not viable, but HUGELY BETTER) if their crits instantly disabled items, bypassing the hit point system.

Now that's just downright gamey. terrible idea. Plus it would overpower mgs. At 25% crit rate(lower than reality) they would disable 1-4 components in a section per second per gun.

[FupDup]

AUSwarrior24, on 26 February 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

Uh... has it occured to anyone, maybe, possibly, that MGs aren't A HIGH POWERED SUPER WEAPON? Perhaps they're MEANT to be low powered, intended for lighter 'Mechs. Perhaps, just maybe, they're actually designed to deliver the killing blow, even if that 'Mech didn't tear the armor off its target beforehand.

Every weapon can deliver the killing blow. Most weapons (excluding MGs and Flamers) can even deliver the blows that lead up to the killing blow. Also, MGs suck on light mechs. MG Spiders and Ravens don't last long...

AUSwarrior24, on 26 February 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

Really, if you don't like the "balance" of the MGs, don't use them.

Just because somebody doesn't want to use something due to not liking the balance of it, they're not allowed to talk about how to improve the balance of it?

AUSwarrior24, on 26 February 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

Stop complaining, others obviously have had success with them.

Anyone who can have success with MGs would have exponentially higher success with quite literally any other weapon in the game (except maybe Flamers).

AUSwarrior24, on 26 February 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

The main point is though... if you don't like them, stop using them.

Don't have to tell me twice (you don't even have to tell me once). I only used them when grinding my Raven 4x to Elite...*shudders.* I only kept my sanity from that experience because I had a 4-man premade featuring a pet-3L to bodyguard me for all of my matches in it.

AUSwarrior24, on 26 February 2013 - 03:35 PM, said:

Let others with some skill use them instead.

A paper clip can kill an Atlas if the user is skilled enough. Does that make paper clips a good weapon?

Edited by FupDup, 26 February 2013 - 03:57 PM.

[Nihils]

I put in a suggestion that they allow 1/2 ton lots of MG ammo, which I think you could do in TT. Unless MG boating nobody needs 1000 rounds anyway..

[FupDup]

Nihils, on 26 February 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:

I put in a suggestion that they allow 1/2 ton lots of MG ammo, which I think you could do in TT. Unless MG boating nobody needs 1000 rounds anyway..

Nobody even needs 1 round.

[Impyrium]

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

Every weapon can deliver the killing blow. Most weapons (excluding MGs and Flamers) can even deliver the blows that lead up to the killing blow. Also, MGs suck on light mechs. MG Spiders and Ravens don't last long...

Perhaps. But this game, in some ways, has become too... I'm not sure what the word is, but instead of people piloting 'Mechs they like to pilot, they require to pilot "missile boats" and other odd terms simply because balance and efficiency seems to be all people care about.

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

Just because somebody doesn't want to use something due to not liking the balance of it, they're not allowed to talk about how to improve the balance of it?

No, they can. But, when every second post is about balancing something, it gets tiring. Maybe just play the game, how the developers intended it? If it needs fixing, they will fix it. Keep in mind they know far more about how the game "works" than any simply player.

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

A paper clip can kill an Atlas if the user is skilled enough. Does that make paper clips a good weapon?

I don't remember talking about an Atlas. However, a paper clip gun would be welcome. The point is, if a paper clip could really kill an Atlas, does that make it a bad weapon?

[Vermaxx]

Winning is not a reason to use a gun. Winning is not a gun. Winning is a concept and its very definition implies teamwork. Clearly I'm not one of those slavering idiots who think this game should be balanced on the mouth breathing solo players who can't hack it in a group. That still doesn't support the weight of a machine gun versus two heat sinks.

Anyone worth their salt will ignore a mech carrying machine guns. They might try to kill someone carrying a tag, yes, but machine guns are only dangerous in that tiny period between "really forked" and dead. In that period, every single weapon is dangerous to internals. They don't have a bonus to hitting boxes, yes they crit more but they still have to shoot through the item. Anything can do that, or, more specifically, blow out the entire location. A machine gun might do more dps to components, but most guns only need to crit once to blow something out. Even if they don't, they will probably just separate out the entire area before a machine gun finishes killing everything in it.

Engine crits would be the ONLY thing to make machine guns shine, but again, a big hit just kills the mech too.

Machine guns being instant disables wouldn't make them overpowered - it would give them a very clear reason to be slotted. it would also make the mechs capable of carrying them very desirable. Right now, the only time they're at all worthwhile is if you tend to follow someone else around, in a small mech, shooting the same thing they do. You could just take a different mech and use energy the same way.

This thread has lost its value. It started as an opinion, one many share, it is now an argument by two stubborn people who are largely using opinion. The machine gun needs work, it needs to stand on its own as a weapon capable of first cracking armor to GET INTO its crit function. If it didn't need work, they wouldn't keep changing it.

If ammo could break down into half ton blocks, that would help. Even still, I see no reason why it couldn't function as an AC2, or a lead laser with a cool down. Both of those would make it a really valid swap for a ballistic point if one wanted to be a brawler.

I'll concede that you make valid points. I won't agree the weapon is fine as is. It isn't worth using as part of a primary weapons load, and there are a number of small mechs that use ballistic points as their primary load. It makes those mechs just something annoying you have to do on the way to Master.

[FupDup]

AUSwarrior24, on 26 February 2013 - 03:58 PM, said:

I don't remember talking about an Atlas. However, a paper clip gun would be welcome. The point is, if a paper clip could really kill an Atlas, does that make it a bad weapon?

The Atlas was just a random example off the top of my head to demonstrate a very tough unit being taken down by presumably weak equipment (the paperclip). It was a David vs. Goliath type situation.

Regarding the third sentence, a weapon's value (at least to me) lies in how it compares to the other options available. If the only alternatives were rubber bands and foam-dart launchers, then paperclips would be potentially OP (although staplers would be game breaking). When we compare the paperclip to, say, a Medium Laser, it doesn't stack up so well. Of course a paperclip would be astronomically weaker than an MG, but you get the idea. There are a multitude of better options for the weight and critical space occupied by an MG.

Edited by FupDup, 26 February 2013 - 04:04 PM.

[Impyrium]

Vermaxx, on 26 February 2013 - 04:00 PM, said:

Winning is not a reason to use a gun. Winning is not a gun. Winning is a concept and its very definition implies teamwork. Clearly I'm not one of those slavering idiots who think this game should be balanced on the mouth breathing solo players who can't hack it in a group. That still doesn't support the weight of a machine gun versus two heat sinks.

(snip)

You make a good point, and I'll shut up now. But first...

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:

The Atlas was just a random example off the top of my head to demonstrate a very tough unit being taken down by presumably weak equipment (the paperclip). It was a David vs. Goliath type situation.

Regarding the third sentence, a weapon's value (at least to me) lies in how it compares to the other options available. If the only alternatives were rubber bands and foam-dart launchers, then paperclips would be potentially OP (although staplers would be game breaking). When we compare the paperclip to, say, a Medium Laser, it doesn't stack up so well. Of course a paperclip would be astronomically weaker than an MG, but you get the idea. There are a multitude of better options for the weight and critical space occupied by an MG.

Yes, there is better weapons. Yes, a machine gun is not a powerful weapon, and could technically be considered a bit of a waste of space. But it's not meant to be a balanced, stong weapon. You obviously don't use them, so why complain about them?

Anyway, we both have points, at least I think I do, so I'll leave it up to the devs to decide on what needs to happen.

[Deamhan]

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 02:31 PM, said:

MW4 only said that MG Arrays are a group of 3 or 4 MGs linked together, it doesn't mention caliber. Also, a .50 cal gun IRL weighs about 38KG (M2 Browning)...that multiplied by 4 equals 152 KG...which is barely more than a quarter of the weight of a Battletech MG.

And a flamethrower is something that is carried by people, so it too is comparable to a .50 cal minus the recoil. Which brings me to an unlikely buff...

IMO they seem to be supplementary weapons. The problem is that they use up tonnage and crit space. If they didn't do these things, they could become something you can bring along if you run out of free tonnage or crit space.

[FupDup]

AUSwarrior24, on 26 February 2013 - 04:10 PM, said:

Yes, there is better weapons. Yes, a machine gun is not a powerful weapon, and could technically be considered a bit of a waste of space. But it's not meant to be a balanced, stong weapon. You obviously don't use them, so why complain about them?

I tend to be a bit of an idealist when it comes to equipment I don't use. I just have the philosophy that any item in a game should be competitive with the other stuff. From a programming viewpoint, you want to minimize the amount of code used to as small and streamlined as possible without removing functionality. Right now, I view MGs as redundant code and graphical assets that make the game take longer to load...but then again, MG-totting lights and mediums do also serve as good target practice for mah lazors and magic mizziles.

So, given the idea above, a chunk of code should either fulfill a worthwhile function or be deleted to optimize the program's performance. I also have sympathy for those who either are uninformed of how MGs function or choose to use them despite knowing how the handle (except when they have a red triangle over their head...).

Edited by FupDup, 26 February 2013 - 04:21 PM.

[Vermaxx]

I'm also not grognarding because I like seeing my own text, OR because I use machine guns and I can't figure out how to save myself. I don't use them, I can't validate it. I WANT to use them, I want a mech with three pulse and three machine guns, and I want it to be competitive. By all rights it should be, but it isn't. I want machine guns to have the same clear worth I can see in EVERY OTHER WEAPON IN MWO. They just don't, even with the crit bonus.

I'm not asking for much, I just want machine guns and flamers to be clearly worth using. Small lasers were almost completely worthless in tabletop due to their range. They're incredible here due to accuracy and ranges of confrontation. This game am everything in tabletop better, generally speaking. Machine guns and flamers got worse, and they were already very situational to begin with.

[urmamasllama]

i'd be fine with the way they are if we could crit the engine

[LogicSol]

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

Every weapon can deliver the killing blow. Most weapons (excluding MGs and Flamers) can even deliver the blows that lead up to the killing blow. Also, MGs suck on light mechs. MG Spiders and Ravens don't last long...

so can machine guns, just not right now. hello giant elephant in the room! Engine crits aren't in yet. Once they are a 4x mg spider can kill a mech with an exposed torso in under a second crits willing.

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

Just because somebody doesn't want to use something due to not liking the balance of it, they're not allowed to talk about how to improve the balance of it?

They can talk about it all they want, but they are certain to annoy the heck out of people when they whine about how broken and useless it is.

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

Anyone who can have success with MGs would have exponentially higher success with quite literally any other weapon in the game (except maybe Flamers).

Yep, until engine crits are in, and some mechs can really only fit a mg in the ballistics slot.

FupDup, on 26 February 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

A paper clip can kill an Atlas if the user is skilled enough. Does that make paper clips a good weapon?

It makes it a good backup weapon, like a mg. But it's not something you carry around as your primary in a mech.

Edited by LogicSol, 26 February 2013 - 04:35 PM.