Jump to content

Ballistic Hardpoint Readjustments


7 replies to this topic

Poll: Give any mech with 2+ ballistic hardpoints 9 hardpoints instead (12 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you agree with the OPs suggestion?

  1. Yes (2 votes [16.67%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 16.67%

  2. No (9 votes [75.00%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 75.00%

  3. Abstain (1 votes [8.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.33%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Team Leader

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,222 posts
  • LocationUrbanmech and Machine Gun Advocate

Posted 06 March 2013 - 04:52 PM

I suggest that any mech with 2 ballistic hardpoints in a single location be upgraded to having 9 hardpoints instead. This will allow mechs that rely on ballistics more options and flexibility with the added benefit of machine guns as a backup weapon.

Edited by Team Leader, 07 March 2013 - 02:20 PM.


#2 blinkin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,195 posts
  • LocationEquestria

Posted 06 March 2013 - 07:31 PM

at first i thought "OMG this would ruin the game" then i actually thought about it and realised that the tonnage and impotence of the weaker ballistic weapons would keep the balance. worst case scenario is instead of being able to mount 2 AC5 in a side torso now you could mount 3 which would still be worse than 2 UAC5.

AC2 are 6 tons a peice so any mech that tries to boat those is going to have issues with finding enough tonnage for ammo. and as far as machine guns this might bring them to the point that they start to act like a useful weapon.

you might consider some sort of upper limit so that we don't end up with a spider 5k running around with 18 machine guns and cranking out 7.2 dps without producing any heat.

#3 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 06 March 2013 - 09:49 PM

Would this still make mgs useless (with the current MG versions)? :wacko:

Edited by Deathlike, 06 March 2013 - 09:49 PM.


#4 Team Leader

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,222 posts
  • LocationUrbanmech and Machine Gun Advocate

Posted 07 March 2013 - 02:25 PM

To everyone who says no: why not? What could possibly happen? The only way machine guns are viable is through masses of them. Even adding up 12 machine guns, you're only doing 4.2 DPS, from point blank, spraying all over the place at the same weight of an AC 2, which has even higher DPS. And that's sacrificing 12 ballistic hardpoints! The most a spider 5k could mount would become 18, which is 9 tons! 9 tons doesn't leave enough tonnage for ammo, armor and speed! Any heavier mech can mount a much more potent load out, I don't see how a slow moving, giant cataphracht with 18 machine guns + tons and tons of ammo just asking for a crit will be a problem for your... Literally anything else. Come on guys, just say yes, let's make this happen.

#5 blinkin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,195 posts
  • LocationEquestria

Posted 07 March 2013 - 02:31 PM

View PostTeam Leader, on 07 March 2013 - 02:25 PM, said:

To everyone who says no: why not? What could possibly happen? The only way machine guns are viable is through masses of them. Even adding up 12 machine guns, you're only doing 4.2 DPS, from point blank, spraying all over the place at the same weight of an AC 2, which has even higher DPS. And that's sacrificing 12 ballistic hardpoints! The most a spider 5k could mount would become 18, which is 9 tons! 9 tons doesn't leave enough tonnage for ammo, armor and speed! Any heavier mech can mount a much more potent load out, I don't see how a slow moving, giant cataphracht with 18 machine guns + tons and tons of ammo just asking for a crit will be a problem for your... Literally anything else. Come on guys, just say yes, let's make this happen.

actually i have a jenner with an ERPPC and 3 medium lasers plus about 12 heatsinks. i would not rule out the 18machine gun spider as a threat.

#6 DeadlyNerd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,452 posts

Posted 07 March 2013 - 02:46 PM

Hard points need to be reworked overall. People shouldn't be able to place 3 LRM15s into 15 LRM pods, people shouldn't be able to fit gausses and AC20s into MG placements, people shouldn't be able to place LRM20s into SRM6 pods, PPCs into ML placements etc.

Generally any mech that carries a large AC should be able to boat a dozen or more MGs in that same spot, or any mech that has a default PPC placement should be able to place at least 3 MLs into that same placement.

It's pointless to rework only certain parts of the HP system when the whole thing is badly done.

#7 Mechteric

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 7,308 posts
  • LocationRTP, NC

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:01 PM

why not just improve machine guns DPS? This just sounds like a backwards way about trying to accommodate for machine guns lack of punch.

#8 Monky

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 3,219 posts
  • LocationHypothetical Warrior

Posted 07 March 2013 - 05:08 PM

Another option is allowing machineguns to count for half a hardpoint, allowing you to fit 2 MG's for every ballistic hardpoint. Machinegun arrays, implemented later on, could expand this to 3 (yes, a slight deviation from canon/lore). As AC2 pump the same DPS as AC20, however, it's in my opinion null and void, it becomes a style choice.

This would also have the affect of allowing MG heavy mechs like the Juggernaut or Piranha to have large MG loads but not be completely crazy with hardpoints for other ballistics.

Edited by Monky, 07 March 2013 - 05:09 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users