157 replies to this topic

[MacKoga]

Not all components in mechs can currently be appropriately destroyed. When the CT gyros and engine are properly vulnerable, and when limb actuators can be destroyed and impair function, etc., the concept of a crit seeker weapon will work far better than they currently do.

In other words, the work needs to be done on making componenets destroyable rather than on the MG, to fix the MG.It could be really fun to have that implemented.

[Tank]

We have wrong MGs in this game right now. We need something like AC-10 have:

Spoiler

Then this will be a real weapon.

[Gevurah]

StalaggtIKE, on 07 March 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

Nice demonstration and you make a good point. However, the AC20 would crit from a sneeze. I'd rather see tests with other weapons, before my opinion is swayed.

Used to be that way, but with 18HP from recent buffs the AC20 hangs pretty tough anymore.

There are other benefits too. Heatsinks - gone. ECM - gone. Stuff that's generally tough to crit (SRM6's or ML's in a torso mount for instance) - gone. All in VERY rapid fashion.


Watch how after the armor is exposed how fast the heatsinks are destroyed. Literally within seconds.

[Terror Teddy]

Tank, on 07 March 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

We have wrong MGs in this game right now. We need something like AC-10 have:

Spoiler

Then this will be a real weapon.

That would be more akin to rotary AC/2

Gevurah, on 07 March 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

Used to be that way, but with 18HP from recent buffs the AC20 hangs pretty tough anymore.

There are other benefits too. Heatsinks - gone. ECM - gone. Stuff that's generally tough to crit (SRM6's or ML's in a torso mount for instance) - gone. All in VERY rapid fashion.


Watch how after the armor is exposed how fast the heatsinks are destroyed. Literally within seconds.

Unfortunately it doesnt help those whose primary weapons are MG's. A spider is almost useless in combat with MG's until the armor is gone.

[StalaggtIKE]

MustrumRidcully, on 07 March 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

The AC/20 will probably take 100 % of all crit damage in this scenario, since there is nothing else in the torso with it. But it also has now 19 hit points, so the AC/20 is getting destroyed about as fast as two items normally would.

I noticed one thing on the testing grounds - MGs destroy items usually in quick succession. The reason is probably simple statistics - the MG spreads its damage across all components, so it's basically evenly distributing the damage. So if you got 3 10 hit points item and a single MG (with an effective "anti-item DPS" of 5), it would take about 3 * 10 / 5 = 6 seconds to destroy the first item - but within a very, very short amount of time, the others will also fall.

It also teaches us the value of crit-padding. For the AC/20, 2 crits occupied by something else in its hit location basically boil down to a DR of 2/12th, basically 3 extra hit points for the AC/20.

True. I'm just thinking from an experienced pilot pov. That is, he would include buffers and hopefully utilize torso twist. That being said, regardless of the health boost, the AC20 still crits very easily due to its 10 slots. It's consuming over 80% of a non-empty RT.

[Josef Nader]

MustrumRidcully, on 07 March 2013 - 10:54 AM, said:

Opportunity Cost. You can partner up with someone that really helps you once the enemies armour is gone. Or you can partner up with someone that helps you take that armour of and keeps helping afterwards.

Let's say an MG instantly destroys all internal components in a section.
Let's say you're enemy is fully armored, that means his armor is twice his internal structure.
If the internal structure points are X, that means it takes 2 X to get to the internals, and 3X to kill also the internals.

A guy dealing Y DPS has the choice between an MG Cicada that deals 1/4th Y DPS, or a Medium Laser Commando that deals 1/2 Y DPS.
So total DPS of the teams is either 1.25 Y or 1.5Y.

Time to chew through armour is then
Cicada: 2X / (1.25 Y) = 1.6 X/Y
Commando: 2X / (1.5 Y) ) = 1.33 X/Y
Time to chew through internal structure would be:
Cicada: 0.8 X/Y
CommandO: 0.66 X/Y

Total Time:
Cicada: 2.4 X/Y with disabling of items in component at 1.33 X/Y
Commando: 2 X/Y

If your enemy really has all its weapon in the very section you kill him through, congratuations, the Cicada is better (assuming MGs really destroy items instantly.)
But if you just take out a part of the enemies firepower, you now have to deal with 0.4 X/Y more time the enemy can shoot at you, your team mate can overheat, enemies can join the fight...

And these were conservative assumptions on the relationship between damage. In this case, the "partner" mech never contributed more than 50 % that of the primary mech. If the two mechs are of equal weight, the contribution of the partner becomes more critical...

Again, the problem with your scenario is that you're assuming the goal is to punch through CT armor and kill the mech. This is the desired end result, yes, but it's often a good strategy to try to go through side torso armor, which is thinner, and disable their main guns. Machine guns excel for this kind of strategy. Compare:

Atlas Center Torso: 94 armor + 62 internals = 156 damage must be done from the front to kill
Atlas Side Torso: 64 armor + 42 internals = 106 damage to ensure destruction of main gun

This is if you're using raw damage weapons, like lasers. Assuming a heavy hitter and an assisting Raven 3L, the two of you have to put 106 damage into his side torso to cripple him OR 156 damage into his side torsos to kill him. If you go for the latter, he's returning fire the whole time and is very likely to kill you.

Let's say you bring a Raven 4X instead of a 3L, as tricked out as you care to make it and mounting two MGs. Let's reassess.

Atlas Side Torso: 64 armor + 2 second burst of machine gun fire (~5 damage per second to components per gun = ~20 damage in two seconds. AC20s have 18 health) to remove main gun. In other words, for about the same amount of work it would take to blow out ONE side torso with raw damage, you could completely remove the weapons from BOTH of his side torsos if you bring machine guns. Killing the Atlas just got a whole lot easier.

This is in a perfect scenario. We all know that shots go wide and sometimes sections of armor we weren't aiming for open up. If you're tangling with the Atlas, and you open up his side torso while trying to take out his CT, isn't it useful to be able to knock out whatever's in that side torso without wasting the opportunity to lay into his CT with your big gun?

Gevurah, on 07 March 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

Used to be that way, but with 18HP from recent buffs the AC20 hangs pretty tough anymore.

There are other benefits too. Heatsinks - gone. ECM - gone. Stuff that's generally tough to crit (SRM6's or ML's in a torso mount for instance) - gone. All in VERY rapid fashion.


Watch how after the armor is exposed how fast the heatsinks are destroyed. Literally within seconds.

>Destruction of in-engine heat sinks

Holy crap, I didn't know that. That's huge. Guess I need to start laying into CTs again!

[StalaggtIKE]

Gevurah, on 07 March 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

Used to be that way, but with 18HP from recent buffs the AC20 hangs pretty tough anymore.

There are other benefits too. Heatsinks - gone. ECM - gone. Stuff that's generally tough to crit (SRM6's or ML's in a torso mount for instance) - gone. All in VERY rapid fashion.


Watch how after the armor is exposed how fast the heatsinks are destroyed. Literally within seconds.

Thanks. This is an informative video.

So in conclusion, MG are really great at critting. We all know that. However the issue still remains... Why crit someone when you could just as quickly kill them with more conventional weapons?

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 07 March 2013 - 11:50 AM.

[Vermaxx]

Great evidentiary video.

To those who call MGs "non primary weapons:"
if they can't fk ing perform reliably well regardless of the situation, they don't belong in MWO.

EVEN THE LB10 DOES BETTER because every pellet does one full point of damage to point of impact, rather than a point of damage over 2.5 seconds.

A MG with a doubled rate of fire still takes 2.5 seconds to apply 2 damage. Unlike the cycle time on a small laser, for comparison, which does its damage in half a second, and then has a recharge. The MG was needlessly narfsticked. They might as well just banhammer it and get it over with.

[BLUPRNT]

If they could suddenly make MG's knock out incoming LRM fire I can think of a few mechs that would have a better purpose right now. AMS at this point does has more purpose.

But I do love the DAKA!

[jay35]

Terror Teddy, on 07 March 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

That would be more akin to rotary AC/2

mmmm RACs.... those and the bigger UACs were fun in MekTek MW4.

[DegeneratePervert]

IMO, MGs should be equal in DPS to medium lasers. They produce no heat, but to compensate for that, you can't ever look away from your opponent without killing your deeeps.

[General Taskeen]

Vermaxx, on 07 March 2013 - 12:01 PM, said:

They might as well just banhammer it and get it over with.

I hearby Banhammer all MG Lovers to the MG Gulag for weak evidence of Meta and crimes against the great Soviet Mech Warrior Union. You will be assigned to the penal battalion. You will be given a Cicada-3C and use it against the enemy. You will charge the enemy first. Not one step back or you will be shot.

Enjoy your stay at General Taskeen's Gulag of Tears.

[Phoenix Gray]

FupDup, on 07 March 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

There are a few issues with this quote:

1. Infantry don't magically make MGs useful. It's called use a f*cking Medium Laser to click-and-drag over a whole squad of them and murder them all instantly. Why does nobody actually try to picture this playing out before they say that infantry make MGs useful?

2. If a 500kg weapon is only capable of damaging infantry, the people who designed it ride the short bus to work every day. This is especially true because other weapons of similar tonnage can damage EVERYTHING (Medium Laser, Small Laser, Small Pulse Laser).

3. Why not just strap an M4 to your mech's arm for anti-infantry-only work if a 500kg weapon magically can't hurt anything bigger? Again, it makes no sense. It's a waste of weight.

I was going to strap an AsTech with a handheld SRM2 launcher to the top deck of my Cicada for a cheap X-5 knock-off but he whined like a little girl.

[Phoenix Gray]

Terror Teddy, on 07 March 2013 - 11:18 AM, said:

THIS.

Most mechs armed with MG's will be lighter mechs that can't survive a straight combat - You need to get CLOSE and that is dangerous if you are fragile.

That's kind of the definition of the light mech, unless you get crazy w/oddball builds like ER's and LL's and AC's, where you risk trading off so much speed and armor you die even at a distance.

[Heeden]

Fun Fact:- Machine Guns have the best damage-per-second-per-ton of all ballistic weapons.

[MustrumRidcully]

Josef Nader, on 07 March 2013 - 11:45 AM, said:

Again, the problem with your scenario is that you're assuming the goal is to punch through CT armor and kill the mech. This is the desired end result, yes, but it's often a good strategy to try to go through side torso armor, which is thinner, and disable their main guns. Machine guns excel for this kind of strategy. Compare:

Atlas Center Torso: 94 armor + 62 internals = 156 damage must be done from the front to kill
Atlas Side Torso: 64 armor + 42 internals = 106 damage to ensure destruction of main gun

This is if you're using raw damage weapons, like lasers. Assuming a heavy hitter and an assisting Raven 3L, the two of you have to put 106 damage into his side torso to cripple him OR 156 damage into his side torsos to kill him. If you go for the latter, he's returning fire the whole time and is very likely to kill you.

Let's say you bring a Raven 4X instead of a 3L, as tricked out as you care to make it and mounting two MGs. Let's reassess.

Atlas Side Torso: 64 armor + 2 second burst of machine gun fire (~5 damage per second to components per gun = ~20 damage in two seconds. AC20s have 18 health) to remove main gun. In other words, for about the same amount of work it would take to blow out ONE side torso with raw damage, you could completely remove the weapons from BOTH of his side torsos if you bring machine guns. Killing the Atlas just got a whole lot easier.

This is in a perfect scenario. We all know that shots go wide and sometimes sections of armor we weren't aiming for open up. If you're tangling with the Atlas, and you open up his side torso while trying to take out his CT, isn't it useful to be able to knock out whatever's in that side torso without wasting the opportunity to lay into his CT with your big gun?



>Destruction of in-engine heat sinks

Holy crap, I didn't know that. That's huge. Guess I need to start laying into CTs again!

No, I am not missing that you consider disarming it just as viable. I don't even disagree there. But very few mechs have all their crucial weaponry and components just in one hit location. So yes, you can destroy that AC/20, but there are still 3 SRM6s and a Medium Laser left against you, and if you use MGs instead of "real" weapons, these weapons will keep firing for longer than if you took a build that focused on the actual destruction of the mech, not just 1/2 of its firepower.

Ideally, the armour on mechs should be distributed in a manner that shooting off arms and side torsos would be faster way to disable them then going for a direct kill. But that's now hot the game works, because they didn't change the relative armour ratings from the table top, a game that did generally not give you a high precision regarding hit locations.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 07 March 2013 - 12:58 PM.

[Rippthrough]

Heeden, on 07 March 2013 - 12:42 PM, said:

Fun Fact:- Machine Guns have the best damage-per-second-per-ton of all ballistic weapons.

Including equivelent ammo loadouts? Since a ballistic is no good with no ammo....

[Hamm3r]

MustrumRidcully, on 07 March 2013 - 12:56 PM, said:

No, I am not missing that you consider disarming it just as viable. I don't even disagree there. But very few mechs have all their crucial weaponry and components just in one hit location. So yes, you can destroy that AC/20, but there are still 3 SRM6s and a Medium Laser left against you, and if you use MGs instead of "real" weapons, these weapons will keep firing for longer than if you took a build that focused on the actual destruction of the mech, not just 1/2 of its firepower.

Ideally, the armour on mechs should be distributed in a manner that shooting off arms and side torsos would be faster way to disable them then going for a direct kill. But that's now hot the game works, because they didn't change the relative armour ratings from the table top, a game that did generally not give you a high precision regarding hit locations.

I just wanna throw this out there, your assuming a 1 on 1 scenario in which you would be right. But in actuality, there are other people in the fire fight usually. I have been having fun running around in a 5K, I just sprint around through the fire fight, raking anything red with MG fire hoping to crit something, if I take out that AC20 or SRM rack, might make the difference in my teammate getting the kill or getting killed. I did get one lucky kill earlier today on a Treb when I cooked off his ammo load, probably one of the more satisfying kills I've had!

[Esplodin]

Phoenix Gray, on 07 March 2013 - 12:40 PM, said:

That's kind of the definition of the light mech, unless you get crazy w/oddball builds like ER's and LL's and AC's, where you risk trading off so much speed and armor you die even at a distance.

Are you arguing that lights have a choice of being stupid easy to kill or just being ineffective in combat? Really?

Heeden, on 07 March 2013 - 12:42 PM, said:

Fun Fact:- Machine Guns have the best damage-per-second-per-ton of all ballistic weapons.

Fun Fact: Swinging a wet sock has more damage per ton then an M1 Abrams. Scale matters.

1/2 ton weapon with the next Ballistic an increase of 12X the weigh - not a good comparison. Light mechs with ballistic slots need light weight ballistics to put there. The one that is light is only effective in a very narrow set of circumstances (no armor, within 150m, something left to crit) and mounting ANYTHING else is VASTLY superior. Heck, even a TAG is a better choice since you don't have ammo explosion concerns and you can be useful to the other mechs on your team.

[stjobe]

Heeden, on 07 March 2013 - 12:42 PM, said:

Fun Fact:- Machine Guns have the best damage-per-second-per-ton of all ballistic weapons.

Here's some more fun facts:
MGs have the lowest DPS of all weapons in MWO, at 0.4 DPS.
MGs have the lowest damage-per-ton-of-ammo in MWO, at 80 damage per ton of ammo.
MGs are the lightest ballistic weapon, but curiously bucks the trend that lighter weapons got progressively higher DPS buffs, from the AC/20s 2.5x buff to the AC/2s 20x buff. The MG only got a 2x buff.