42 replies to this topic

[Sayyid]

AC/1, never heard of it, its not in any FASA printed rulebooks, or anything I have looked at recently. Granted I quit reading the Battletech rules after they hit 3067, and I havent bothered with any of the Jihad junk.

[Livewyr]

Something seems very wrong about it..

I can't quite place my finger on it.
-------------
I'd rather they just make MGs do .12 or .24 damage.

Logic: MGs were said to do 2 damage in TT.. and while they seems crazy- so are lasers working in the fog.
Anyways 2 damage in TT, which really accounts for 10 seconds. Since Most weapons in MWO can fire 2-3 times within that 10 seconds.. and therefore do 2-3 times the damage.. I think MGs being able to do a little over 1 damage per second would be good, considering their limited range, but small tonnage.

Edited by Livewyr, 12 March 2013 - 11:47 AM.

[Kraven Kor]

I'd be all for it.

We need Heavy MG's and MG Arrays, too. Yes, yes, "not in the current timeline blah blah blah"

[Kraven Kor]

Although, my recommendation would be:

AC/1
Tons: 3
Crits: 1
Damage / Shot: 1
Cooldown: 0.33 Seconds (3 DPS)
Heat: 1
Range: "Medium" (about 270)
Max Range: x3 as per ballistics
Shots / Ton of Ammo: 50

[sarkun]

There's a huge gap in ballistic weapons between the 0.5 ton MG and 6 ton AC2. Although non-canon, i'd like to see that gap filled. Would have a reason to play my founders hunchback.

[3rdworld]

Kraven Kor, on 12 March 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

Although, my recommendation would be:

AC/1
Tons: 3
Crits: 1
Damage / Shot: 1
Cooldown: 0.33 Seconds (3 DPS)
Heat: 1
Range: "Medium" (about 270)
Max Range: x3 as per ballistics
Shots / Ton of Ammo: 50

I would worry about how much DPS that does. IMO.

we need a light AC that does around 1dps (.25 less that a ML) with no heat and the same range as a ML.

[Pinselborste]

Kraven Kor, on 12 March 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

Although, my recommendation would be:

AC/1
Tons: 3
Crits: 1
Damage / Shot: 1
Cooldown: 0.33 Seconds (3 DPS)
Heat: 1
Range: "Medium" (about 270)
Max Range: x3 as per ballistics
Shots / Ton of Ammo: 50

shots per ton should be at 145, than it would have comparable damage per ton of ammo to the others.
would also change the cooldown to 0.4 and the weight to 2.5

3rdworld, on 12 March 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

I would worry about how much DPS that does. IMO.

we need a light AC that does around 1dps (.25 less that a ML) with no heat and the same range as a ML.

thats what the mg should be here for, would be the same as the ml, except that it needs ammo instead of hs and spreads damage more.

Edited by Pinselborste, 12 March 2013 - 11:58 AM.

[stjobe]

Just fix the MG instead.

Someone at PGI must have misplaced some numbers when they were converting weapons from BattleTech to MWO:
All ballistic weapons got a DPS buff, a bigger buff the lower the BT damage, from x2.5 for the AC/20 to x20 for the AC/2. But the MG only got a x2 buff even though it did the same damage as an AC/2 in BT.

All weapons with ammo got a buff to ammo per ton; for ballistics, it was on the order of +50%. But strangely the MG got a nerf by 90% instead.

With the new numbers in place, all ballistics got about a 50% buff in damage per ton of ammo - except the MG, which got an 80% nerf.

It's the lowest-DPS weapon in MWO
It has the lowest per-projectile damage by a factor of 20
It has the lowest damage per ton of ammo by a factor of 2
It has the second lowest range of all weapons
It has the longest time to empty a ton of ammo of all weapons

It's bad, and it's not just that any scale has to have an endpoint; the MG is so far off the charts it's absolutely silly.

What PGI needs to do is just give the MG the same treatment every other weapon got. The easiest way to do that is to roll back the useless crit buff and instead triple the damage of the MG.

It's such an easy solution it's mind-boggling that they won't even try it.

[Team Leader]

Other: make the machine gun work as it should. Lots mount them because they ONY have so much weight to play with, this wouldn't fit on the flea without some serious sacrifices+addition of XL engine. While its a novel idea the time it would take for them to implement would be monstrous and even worse than MGs

[StalaggtIKE]

Interesting concept. But I rather see machine guns fulfill this role.

[WVAnonymous]

http://mwomercs.com/...3-ammo-per-ton/

To StJobe's point, fixing the damage per ton of ammo is not a fresh idea.

[Terror Teddy]

MG's - REDUX

Damage: 0,075
Recycle: 0,025
DPS: 3
Bullets per Second: 40
Damage per tonne: 150
Time to Emty: 50 Seconds
Crit Chance Bonus: No

Skill Needed: Learn to conserve ammo because you just became a lead hose. 4MG's will emty 1 tonne in 12,5 seconds.

[DegeneratePervert]

I'd much rather see the Machine Gun fill this role. 0.5 Tons, equal DPS of a small laser. Keep the crit seeking abilities of it, make it actually worth taking.

[Magik0012]

I'd rather have the MG have 1 dps, some heat and less ammo per ton.

[ReissTC]

I was thinking about the 'Rifle' family of weapons:

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Light_Rifle

3 tons, 3 damage, 1 heat, 360m range, 18 shots per ton

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Medium_Rifle

5 tons, 6 damage, 2 heat, 450m range, 9 shots per ton

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Heavy_Rifle

8 tons, 9 damage, 4 heat, 540m range, 6 shots per ton

Though in the original rules, they do 3 less damage to 'modern' armour (aka, BattleMechs). Perhaps if they were to lose that - do their full damage - they'd be viable in MWO. Maybe. Have them have a lower rate of fire than the autocannons, so they're not 'better'. Light rifle would be a nice alternative to the med laser for ballistics toting light mechs. Others could work for heavier mechs as support weaps - good for a higher alpha, but lower rate of fire puts them at a large DPS disadvantage vs autocannons. Ammunition can be handled as it is now (aka, increase ammo/ton).

There is a 'mech that uses one of these, though it's just a light one used for security.

Just a thought, anyway. Or, y'know, make MGs usable vs armour.

Edited by ReissTC, 12 March 2013 - 12:11 PM.

[Zyllos]

Livewyr, on 12 March 2013 - 11:46 AM, said:

Something seems very wrong about it..

I can't quite place my finger on it.
-------------
I'd rather they just make MGs do .12 or .24 damage.

Logic: MGs were said to do 2 damage in TT.. and while they seems crazy- so are lasers working in the fog.
Anyways 2 damage in TT, which really accounts for 10 seconds. Since Most weapons in MWO can fire 2-3 times within that 10 seconds.. and therefore do 2-3 times the damage.. I think MGs being able to do a little over 1 damage per second would be good, considering their limited range, but small tonnage.

Just an FYI, MWO Machine Guns deals more damage than the TT version:

CBT:
2.0 damage per 10s (0.2 DPS)

MWO:
0.04 per bullet
10 bullets per second
0.04 * 10 = 0.4
0.4 * 10s = 4.0 damage per 10s (0.4 DPS)

The only reason why they feel bad is because in TT, they place all their damage onto a single location when fired. While in MWO, all of that fire over 10s is spread across the mech due to spray. Also, a single critical to a weapon or equipment destroys the weapon. In this game, you have to an amount of damage to destroy a weapon or equipment.

I see nothing wrong with the current implementation of Machine Guns.

It also doesn't help that all other weapons in the game can just converge all of it's damage onto a single point, but I guess that is for another thread.

Edited by Zyllos, 12 March 2013 - 12:41 PM.

[stjobe]

Zyllos, on 12 March 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

Just an FYI, MWO Machine Guns deals more damage than the TT version:

Oh boy...

Just as an FYI, every single MWO weapon deals more damage than the TT version, only the MG got the short end of the stick when PGI decided just how big a buff the weapon should get in the translation. The AC/20 does 2.5 times more DPS than its TT counterpart, the AC/2 does 20 times more. The MG got stuck with just 2 times more, even though it does the exact same damage as the AC/2 in TT.

Edited by stjobe, 12 March 2013 - 12:49 PM.

[Terror Teddy]

Zyllos, on 12 March 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

Just an FYI, MWO Machine Guns deals more damage than the TT version:

CBT:
2.0 damage per 10s (0.2 DPS)

MWO:
0.04 per bullet
10 bullets per second
0.04 * 10 = 0.4
0.4 * 10s = 4.0 damage per 10s (0.4)

I see nothing wrong with the current implementation of Machine Guns.

The AC/2 did 2 damage in TT and got buffed to 4DPS -both weapons did the same damage.

MWO - AC2 VS MG

DPS: 4 vs 0,4
Damage per tonne: 150 vs 80
Time to Damage per tonne: 37,5s VS 200 s

1/10 the DPS
5 times longer to deliver damage
40% damage per tonne

And you see nothing odd with weapons that had the same damage from the rules they based it on?

[Alex Warden]

call it "machine gun array" and i´m down with it

[stjobe]

Terror Teddy, on 12 March 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

MWO - AC2 VS MG

DPS: 4 vs 0,4
Damage per tonne: 150 vs 80
Time to Damage per tonne: 37,5s VS 200 s

BT - AC/2 vs MG

DPS: 0.2 vs 0.2
Damage per ton of ammo: 90 vs 400
Time to damage per ton: 45 vs 200 turns

It is flabbergasting how they've mangled the MG in the conversion from BT.