229 replies to this topic

[Severus Baggins Kerensky]

How To Make Machine Guns Viable: make them able to shoot LRMs in flight.

[Team Leader]

Severus Baggins Kerensky, on 09 March 2013 - 06:44 AM, said:

How To Make Machine Guns Viable: make them able to shoot LRMs in flight.

That should be an added bonus

[Deathlike]

Short answer is, not with the current suggestion. MGs need a buff period.

My simple suggestion is to apply the basic logistics of the crit system, and apply it to the MG damage.

Even a simple basic one like 50% chance to do 2x damage, 25% chance to do 3x damage, and 12.5% chance to do 4x damage would probably do it (#s can be tweaked). At least then I could justify the existence of the MG.

Do something similar for flamers in terms of heat given, and we have something.

[Phaesphoros]

@Deathlike: There's currently a crit system o.O See mwowiki and previous patch notes (search for "machine gun"). You can already destroy all (?) internal items (ammo, weapons, BAP, ....) but the engine.

[Deathlike]

You missed the point where I was wanting to apply the crit system bonus, to the mg damage. The mg would effectively be doing variable damage, at an overall higher average DPS, but not actually requiring the base damage value to change.

[MagnumLovin]

Quote

You do know that Machine Guns deal WAY more than they do on TT in this game?

2 damage / 10s per turn = 0.2 DPS
MWO Machine Gun = 0.04 damage * 10 RoF = 0.4 DPS

They basically deal 2x the amount of damage than TT. The issue is that right now, machine guns spread that damage all over the mech because they act like lasers (ray traces). So unless you can keep that machine gun on a single location, they will not deal a whole lot.

And this is partly because weapon convergence is MUCH too accurate in this game. Why wield a machine gun when you can wield 2 small lasers that hit the exact same location, dealing much more DPS? But that is a different issue for another thread.

Hmmm, that's brought me up short. I guess MG's are fine then, LOL! I vote no.

The bad news is that MG's in every other PC game that I played prevously, fired direct focused fire, did more damage. Not only that, I've now discovered that when we played Mechwarrior back with the TT myriad of d6's blurring and knocking over the cardboard mechs and cheesy use of broccoli for trees (though that was really inventive of the GM) we had done it wrong. 2 dps per cycle where you aimed--well as long as the die for that part of the mech ageed. Having it drift for the full fire duration now that's different.

Well, so much for my arguement. Trust me, 0.04 is way better. In MWO, I'll take any other ballistic and be happy for it. For now.

Note: Testing grounds. Try it out and keep targeting in one area. Damage still seems way low. Should be 9 seconds/cycles to get through someone's head, but you'll see..... Commando's (generally) are weak to start in the cranium, pick something bigger. If it's about random drift fire, the MG is in need of an accuracy buff more than anything. They're a point blank weapon.

[Monky]

Actually, i revise my support to a 2.5 second firing phase and 2.5 second 'reload' phase on MG's, it fires a burst, so that it can be used in a firing rotation with other weapons. Make the total damage 1 DPS per firing.

[Team Leader]

Zyllos, on 08 March 2013 - 11:46 AM, said:

You do know that Machine Guns deal WAY more than they do on TT in this game?

2 damage / 10s per turn = 0.2 DPS
MWO Machine Gun = 0.04 damage * 10 RoF = 0.4 DPS

They basically deal 2x the amount of damage than TT. The issue is that right now, machine guns spread that damage all over the mech because they act like lasers (ray traces). So unless you can keep that machine gun on a single location, they will not deal a whole lot.

And this is partly because weapon convergence is MUCH too accurate in this game. Why wield a machine gun when you can wield 2 small lasers that hit the exact same location, dealing much more DPS? But that is a different issue for another thread.

Well, if we are going the route of 10 second rounds, lets compare the AC2, which does the same damage as a machine gun in TT. Do you see AC2s only getting a 2x damage per second buff? Don't have the exact numbers, but it's more like 3 or 4 times more. The MG is THE lowest DPS increase from TT, where everything else got much MORE than a measly 2x.

Monky, on 09 March 2013 - 04:24 PM, said:

Actually, i revise my support to a 2.5 second firing phase and 2.5 second 'reload' phase on MG's, it fires a burst, so that it can be used in a firing rotation with other weapons. Make the total damage 1 DPS per firing.

Anything that'll make it 1 DPS. Why are people so against this? Don't they want all weapons to be viable? Seriously why the heck would they say no to my suggestion

[CrazyPenguin]

Team Leader, on 09 March 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

Why are people so against this?

Probably because they think that machine guns are anti-infantry weapons. Which is erroneous. Machine guns had rules in the tabletop before infantry had rules. They've always been anti-mech weapons in Battletech. Three machine guns with a ton of ammo deals just as much damage as two small lasers with two heat sinks to keep them neutral, for just as many critical slots (four) and a ton less (with a half ton of ammo, which you currently can't do in MWO). They also had the same range.Their biggest disadvantage is that machine gun ammunition explosions are the highest single source of damage in the tabletop excluding naval weapons, with one full ton of ammo dealing 400 damage to the mech.

In MWO, small lasers have double the range(admittedly with a damage drop off) and a firing rate much more than once per ten seconds, while machine gun damage is still based on 10 second rounds. I haven't tested to see if they deal any damage past 90 meters. Nothing like poking someone for 0.01 damage, eh?

An interesting note: In the tabletop, it takes 1 point of damage to kill a human being. It would take 25 rounds from MWO's machine gun at 0.04 damage/shot to kill a human. Even a .22 short cartridge, which is perhaps the smallest commercially sold firearm ammunition today and which is primarily used for indoor shooting galleries and is barely adequate for squirrel hunting is more lethal than MWO's machine gun!

Edited by CrazyPenguin, 10 March 2013 - 01:58 AM.

[unMourned]

CrazyPenguin, on 10 March 2013 - 01:50 AM, said:

An interesting note: In the tabletop, it takes 1 point of damage to kill a human being. It would take 25 rounds from MWO's machine gun at 0.04 damage/shot to kill a human. Even a .22 short cartridge, which is perhaps the smallest commercially sold firearm ammunition today and which is primarily used for indoor shooting galleries and is barely adequate for squirrel hunting is more lethal than MWO's machine gun!

BAM!

And we're using the machine gun to hunt mechs? INSANITY!

Please fix this!

-Paul

Edited by unMourned, 10 March 2013 - 08:00 AM.

[Team Leader]

CrazyPenguin, on 10 March 2013 - 01:50 AM, said:

Probably because they think that machine guns are anti-infantry weapons. Which is erroneous. Machine guns had rules in the tabletop before infantry had rules. They've always been anti-mech weapons in Battletech. Three machine guns with a ton of ammo deals just as much damage as two small lasers with two heat sinks to keep them neutral, for just as many critical slots (four) and a ton less (with a half ton of ammo, which you currently can't do in MWO). They also had the same range.Their biggest disadvantage is that machine gun ammunition explosions are the highest single source of damage in the tabletop excluding naval weapons, with one full ton of ammo dealing 400 damage to the mech.

In MWO, small lasers have double the range(admittedly with a damage drop off) and a firing rate much more than once per ten seconds, while machine gun damage is still based on 10 second rounds. I haven't tested to see if they deal any damage past 90 meters. Nothing like poking someone for 0.01 damage, eh?

An interesting note: In the tabletop, it takes 1 point of damage to kill a human being. It would take 25 rounds from MWO's machine gun at 0.04 damage/shot to kill a human. Even a .22 short cartridge, which is perhaps the smallest commercially sold firearm ammunition today and which is primarily used for indoor shooting galleries and is barely adequate for squirrel hunting is more lethal than MWO's machine gun!

That might be part of it. I think maybe there are few people who irrationally fear lights with tiny load outs actually being effective. I'm forced to assume everyone who says no is just a bad player unless they explain otherwise.

[WarWrecker]

Yeah please I like the MGs they're fun

[jay35]

I hope they don't do ANYTHING to increase machinegun damage. A Spider with a bunch of machine guns is already an obnoxious little pest of no real value other than to annoy people. Justifying such a build and encouraging more people to use it, which is what increasing machinegun damage would do, would make the game experience that much poorer.

[ICEFANG13]

jay35, on 10 March 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

I hope they don't do ANYTHING to increase machinegun damage. A Spider with a bunch of machine guns is already an obnoxious little pest of no real value other than to annoy people. Justifying such a build and encouraging more people to use it, which is what increasing machinegun damage would do, would make the game experience that much poorer.

Why do you hope they don't do anything for it? You didn't really say anything to justify it.

[CrazyPenguin]

jay35, on 10 March 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

A Spider with a bunch of machine guns is already an obnoxious little pest of no real value other than to annoy people.

Exactly. All they can do right now is annoy people with the *dink dink dink* of teeny tiny bullets bouncing around. They could also cap, I suppose. Other than that, they can't do anything. Pit them against a Commando with one leg and one small laser, and the Commando would win. Let's let them actually do something, eh?

I would also like to point out that several of the people I play with are annoyed by machinegun Spiders, not because the Spiders themselves are annoying, but because it effectively reduces the enemy team by 1 and turns the match into an 8v7. Fair games are more fun.

Edited by CrazyPenguin, 10 March 2013 - 04:55 PM.

[Team Leader]

jay35, on 10 March 2013 - 03:25 PM, said:

I hope they don't do ANYTHING to increase machinegun damage. A Spider with a bunch of machine guns is already an obnoxious little pest of no real value other than to annoy people. Justifying such a build and encouraging more people to use it, which is what increasing machinegun damage would do, would make the game experience that much poorer.

Youre joking right? Because having a viable light mech ballistic would make the game worse. Yeah. No.

[Zyllos]

Team Leader, on 09 March 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

Well, if we are going the route of 10 second rounds, lets compare the AC2, which does the same damage as a machine gun in TT. Do you see AC2s only getting a 2x damage per second buff? Don't have the exact numbers, but it's more like 3 or 4 times more. The MG is THE lowest DPS increase from TT, where everything else got much MORE than a measly 2x.
...

I agree with you. All the other weapons, especially the AC/2's example, got a much bigger buff. But I think that is fine. Machine Guns should never replace a weapon, but try this.

In the training ground, try using a single Machine Gun in place of a single Small Pulse Laser. The Small Pulse Laser, while pretty accurate for it's 0.5 beam duration, just doesn't kill anything quickly. It also doesn't deal enough damage to knock out internal equipment. But the Machine Gun will usually destroy internal equipment fairly quickly, it's just worthless on armor.

The way I see it, the Machine Gun is used for those situations where "Is it better to add a Small Laser (and more added heat) or a Machine Gun?" It will only be used in a few situations, but least it will be used. And multiple Machine Guns will just destroy engines once engine criticals are in the game.

Edited by Zyllos, 10 March 2013 - 07:47 PM.

[Mahws]

Right, except for the fact that:
1) The SPL is a joke weapon that's arguably the worst weapon in the game so comparing it for balance makes no sense. At one tonne and a single slot the ML has better range, lower heat per second/heat per damage and better damage. A ML is neither worthless on armor or internals.
2) The fairer comparison is three small lasers, or a small laser and an extra heatsink for the same weight/slots.
3) Machine guns aren't used singularly and neither are small lasers, so the better comparison would be two machine guns (2 tonnes with ammo) vs. four small lasers, two medium lasers or a MPL or considering the specialized 4xballistic mechs four machine guns (3 tonnes with ammo) vs. six small lasers, three medium lasers or a MPL with extra heatsink.

If the only time you'd EVER consider using a machine gun is that you had 1.5 tonnes and two slots to spare and could fit absolutely nothing else on your mech (including a bigger engine, another heatsink, more armor, even a BAP is better use) then it's not balanced. Especially not for the spiders and cicadas that the devs saw fit to need to take them to get any use out of their weapon slots.

Edited by Mahws, 10 March 2013 - 11:12 PM.

[General Taskeen]

Zyllos, on 10 March 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

when engine criticals are in the game.

I doubt Engine Criticals will ever be made possible. It will just frustrate people when they die instantly because someone rolled the dice and won. It creates an unfun factor. They may have enhanced criticals on gyro's but that is it.

Edited by General Taskeen, 11 March 2013 - 06:50 AM.

[Kmieciu]

Hate to break it to you guys, but the machineguns are going to get nerfed on 19th.
There is a bug that increases the MG crit rate by 80%, right now.
It is going to get fixed to 8%.