131 replies to this topic

[Utilyan]

In TT according to sarna machine gun did 2 damage per "round" of shot, and you had 200 rounds.

1 ton of ammo is 400 damage. Right now 1 ton ammo is 80 damage. They'd have to give you 10000 bullets per ton, doing .04 damage just to get close to TT.


There was a time long long long ago about 15 years ago when mechwarrior online first came out in msn gaming zone. where people would boat mgs and flamers. These things pretty much instant kill things. flamers would let you paralyze a mech. It was silly. Strategies revolved around mgs being the main thing it was stupid. So they nerfed it with the idea of it being a "filler" just a fun dakka thing. by then it was 200 rounds doing .4, switched to 2000 rounds .04. Current range is 200.


The whole higher damage was tried and failed a long long time ago. For the sake of keeping this game fun you don't want mg buff. This direction of it being good vs unarmored I think is a better idea.

In fact theres alot of play room that could be added here that wasn't found in previous games.

Currently if you got a center torso armor gone, the mgs might do little more damage, but you can't crit hit a engine(so i've heard). There needs to be more destructable components. Like a torso twist actuator or something( could be a sub piece of the gyro). So when you start getting shot up with MGs your mech starts TO FAIL. Or where the engine is open to performance damage from mg fire.

Have actual DAMAGE. Mech is turning slower one way, it turns 15% less to the left, its shot.....I can't aim upwards.... Same thing for the arms, where the actuators get knocked out.

[Rahnu]

Utilyan, on 02 March 2013 - 03:09 PM, said:

The whole higher damage was tried and failed a long long time ago. For the sake of keeping this game fun you don't want mg buff.

I find this entire post funny. Why, oh why, can't you consider the idea that a value in-between would actually work better?

Why does it have to jump around from .4 to .04 (that's a TENFOLD decrease, btw)? Why is it inconcievable to increase the damage in small increments until you hit a sweet spot? Why does it have to be an either-or thing?

And wtf doesn't it follow the same '150 damage-per-ton' ammo rule that other ballistics follow?

[Wintersdark]

Zyrusticae, on 02 March 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

I find this entire post funny. Why, oh why, can't you consider the idea that a value in-between would actually work better?

Why does it have to jump around from .4 to .04 (that's a TENFOLD decrease, btw)? Why is it inconcievable to increase the damage in small increments until you hit a sweet spot? Why does it have to be an either-or thing?

And wtf doesn't it follow the same '150 damage-per-ton' ammo rule that other ballistics follow?

Also, the MW4 Machine Gun Apocalypse was entirely due to a lack of hardpoints: You could mount a lot of machine guns.

Here, I think the most you could mount on any mech is 4, and doing so would severely limit the other weaponry available.

At .4 damage (thus 4dps) they'd be somewhat OP for being an (effective) ton and a half/two crit weapon, albiet at a 90m range. However, as you said, some middle ground (lets just say 1dps for giggles) nobody is going to scream that machine guns are op.

They'd do comparable dps to the one ton/one slot Medium laser, which sports many times the maximum range, and doesn't require 100% uptime. Even if this were somewhat high, the game impact would be minor overall. Nobody would suddenly be jumping into 4 ballistic hardpoint mechs just to load up on machine guns.

It would make a couple lighter ballistics-heavy mechs better - and that certainly wouldn't hurt. Nobody feels the 3C Cicada, or the 5K Trebuchet, or the MG Spider are anything close to overpowered and having that Spider sport 4 1dps machine guns and, say, a medium laser isn't going to turn them into monsterous killing machines. They'll still fall over dead if looked at sternly, and only be able to push out that punishing 5 dps at point blank range... with 100% "time on target", and thus 100% OMG THEY CAN SHOOT ME TOO time.

[Royalewithcheese]

Wintersdark, on 02 March 2013 - 03:32 PM, said:

They'll still fall over dead if looked at sternly, and only be able to push out that punishing 5 dps at point blank range... with 100% "time on target", and thus 100% OMG THEY CAN SHOOT ME TOO time.

AC/20 = 5 DPS. Just sayin'

[Wintersdark]

KumoriMyou, on 26 February 2013 - 06:26 AM, said:

feel free to complain about working weapons that work great for me
i killed many people with the machine gun and on my one hunchback i can go head to head with an atlas and win cause my ONE flamer easily overheats it

No, no you can't, and no it doesn't.

You can't overheat a mech with flamers, period. Proof: Have a friend get into a Hunchback 4P with 9 flamers. 9. Get into any mech you want, join him in a group. Have him open up on you with all 9 flamers, and watch the result.

He'll overheat before you. You will never overheat, barring constant weapon firing on your part. All it will do is raise your base-line heat somewhat. You won't actually continuously gain heat...

And that's with 9 of them.


If you're beating an Atlas because he's overheating, it's not because of your flamer, it's because the Atlas pilot has either an atrocious build and aim (4 PPC's at point blank range?) and/or he's just really, really bad.


It drives me nuts how so many people come into these threads and make such absurd claims, when they are so utterly wrong on how the weapon works.

[Utilyan]

Zyrusticae, on 02 March 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

I find this entire post funny. Why, oh why, can't you consider the idea that a value in-between would actually work better?

Why does it have to jump around from .4 to .04 (that's a TENFOLD decrease, btw)? Why is it inconcievable to increase the damage in small increments until you hit a sweet spot? Why does it have to be an either-or thing?

And wtf doesn't it follow the same '150 damage-per-ton' ammo rule that other ballistics follow?

I think quick math was involved with the original 200. Wanted more mg fire during round 200 to 2000, so .4 to .04.


I always thought about what would happen if they worked off the small laser. When you shoot a small laser its a burst that lasts .75 seconds. From beginning to end of that burst you do 3 damage. Small laser you got 3 damage, you can get like 4 shots off in 10 secs. 12 damage in 10secs. So mg should do 1/3 less damage, 8 damage in 10 secs. A MG if should do 2 damage if continous shot of .75 seconds. But you'd prob want to nerf the damage to make up for cooldown a laser goes through. So how much shooting time?

Currently one machine gun shoots like 50 bullets in 10 secs, thats 2 damage in 10 secs (its the only weapon actually doing TT damage)


Maybe they just need someone who knows math cause I dont.

You fire a small laser bam .75 seconds long, when it finishes you got 2.25. in 3 seconds, 3 damage, DPS 1.

MG should be continuous no cool down, 3 seconds of shooting, 2 damage, dps .6666666666(whatever)

If we keep the 80 damage per ton, one ton of ammo lasts 120 secs of shooting, 2 minutes of shooting.




As is 50 shots in 10 secs = 2 damage in 10 secs. So with 2000 ammo thats 40, ten second shots, 400 secs of shooting.

100 shots takes 20 secs, 200 shots takes, 40 secs, 2000 shots takes 400 secs

I'm no good at math.....they need math wizard to fix this.

[Smudge504]

i'd love to see MGs set at 1 DPS I think that would be all the balance they would need

[General Taskeen]

PGI please return the cool down MG and Flamer from MW3 to this game that were effective.

Nau.

[Viper69]

Silfrit is at it again...

Edited by Viper69, 09 April 2013 - 05:55 AM.

[Voivode]

Vermaxx, on 25 February 2013 - 08:31 PM, said:

And, by extension, why buy a mech that relies on ballistic slots but is too light to to use anything worthwhile? Bad MGs/flamers makes a lot of mechs bad by association.

Dead on. This is 100% right and the heart of the problem with MG.

[Accursed Richards]

Corbon Zackery, on 27 February 2013 - 11:33 PM, said:

You have to remember that MechWarrior simply opens the door on the world of battletech. In the real battletech universe there are infantry, tanks, v-tols, Hovercraft. So a 4mg flamer spider would be in a lace for infantry support. Thus it would be a viable build for attacks against soft targets. Your not going waste a AC 20 round on a platoon of infantry.

Okay, so....what?

I mean, if any of those existed in this game, that argument would mean something. Since we're only shooting mechs, MG's need to be viable against mechs.

[Dakkath]

Please see this thread.
Closing
http://mwomercs.com/...77#entry2210077