550 replies to this topic

[KuruptU4Fun]

Sifright, on 17 March 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:

no they haven't and your post is a lie.

The AC/2 was buffed to 40x its table top damage over a 10 second period

the Mg was only given double it's table top damage over a 10 second period

Stop lieing you charlatan mountebank.

Please remember that Armor Values were DOUBLED back when the servers were only accessible to Friends/Family of PGI.

BT is nearly 30 years old as a published game, MW is not far behind it at 24.

Gaan Cathal, on 17 March 2013 - 09:00 AM, said:

Er, no. It does not do more damage to Internal Structure. It does more damage to critted components. Difference.

It's also ****. The crit-seeking buff has not made them viable, and 'in the realm of possibilities offered under the BT franchise' mech-mounted machine guns can damage mech armour. Technically, we could use that to excuse them doing the same colossal 4dps as an AC/2, since they have the same damage in TT. No-one is suggesting that, however we are suggesting that, since it's a mech-damaging weapon, it be made able to damage mechs.

At what rate can an MG punch thru mech armor in the BT lore?

Edited by KuruptU4Fun, 17 March 2013 - 09:03 AM.

[Xando Parapasu]

Dr Warp Effect, on 17 March 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

If you have played this game for even a few hours and compare MGs to all other weapons systems you can see they need a damage buff. If you cannot, you should not post on this forum except to ask questions from those that understand the game better than you. Most obvious problem weapon in game.

It's a 0.5 ton weapon... the only folks who want it buffed are probably light pilots. Not that it doesn't need it, but for so small a weapon it should not be doing equal damage to a ballistic weapon 12 times it's size. Make it equal to an SRM2, due to the weight ammo balance and it should be just fine.

Edited by Xando Parapasu, 17 March 2013 - 09:03 AM.

[Dr Warp Effect]

I am not saying it should be equal to heavier weapons, just that it should be equally powerful in proportion.

[Yokaiko]

KuruptU4Fun, on 17 March 2013 - 09:01 AM, said:

Please remember that Armor Values were DOUBLED back when the servers were only accessible to Friends/Family of PGI.

BT is nearly 30 years old as a published game, MW is not far behind it at 24.


At what rate can an MG punch thru mech armor in the BT lore?

Against half armor? faster than it can here.

[Gaan Cathal]

Xando Parapasu, on 17 March 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:

It's a 0.5 ton weapon... the only folks who want it buffed are probably light pilots. Not that it doesn't need it, but for so small a weapon it should not be doing equal damage to a ballistic weapon 12 times it's size. Make it equal to an SRM2, due to the weight ammo balance and it should be just fine.

People are talking about giving it damage comparable to a Small Laser, with the inherent weight (ammo) and continuous fire disadvantages maintained. A Small Laser weighs 0.5 tons, not 6. The only reason the AC/2 is raised in the argument is as a counterargument to the 'derp, MGs can't hurt mechs in BTech' trolls.

[Treckin]

Looks like the general consensus for modern weapons is that a cannon is any un-powered projectile based barrel fired weapon with a caliber > 15MM. Machine guns < 15MM and ACs > 15 MM can both be equipped with multiple barrels, rotary or not, and they can both fire HE rounds, or not. They can both fire tracers, or not. They can each be gas, piston, or externally cycled.

Therefor, by modern convention, the MWO MGs ARE autocannons. Suck it.

Edited by Treckin, 17 March 2013 - 09:13 AM.

[KuruptU4Fun]

Yokaiko, on 17 March 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

Against half armor? faster than it can here.

You guys' arguments are not going to get any real foothold if you continually compare a fictional game to real life.

Any more than my argument that cockpits should have seats that heat/cool my bum because we have them IRL today...

BTW, I'm still waiting on an estimate to have my comp chair changed into a temperature controlled chair from PGI and others... LOL

[Sifright]

KuruptU4Fun, on 17 March 2013 - 09:10 AM, said:

You guys' arguments are not going to get any real foothold if you continually compare a fictional game to real life.

Any more than my argument that cockpits should have seats that heat/cool my bum because we have them IRL today...

BTW, I'm still waiting on an estimate to have my comp chair changed into a temperature controlled chair from PGI and others... LOL

....

Well if you say so.

Do you prehaps have anything relevant to say or should i just ignore your ramblings? :|

[Critical Fumble]

Xando Parapasu, on 17 March 2013 - 09:02 AM, said:

It's a 0.5 ton weapon... the only folks who want it buffed are probably light pilots. Not that it doesn't need it, but for so small a weapon it should not be doing equal damage to a ballistic weapon 12 times it's size. Make it equal to an SRM2, due to the weight ammo balance and it should be just fine.

Its only 1:12 when you ignore ammo. Add a single ton of ammo for the MG bringing it to 1.5 tons, it reaches 1:12 with an AC/2 after loading TWELVE tons of ammo for the thing. Then factor in range and engagement times to determine the risk of using the thing.

And your guess about it only being light pilots waning better MGs, unless ~70% of people who go to the suggestion boards are light pilots. http://mwomercs.com/...etween-1-2-dps/

[Sifright]

I pilot every mech class except mediums extensively.

Mgs need a buff light mechs that are supposed to use mgs are rubbish.

Hell the dragon is supposed to use mgs and it can't which is hilarious.

[KuruptU4Fun]

Sifright, on 17 March 2013 - 09:11 AM, said:

....

Well if you say so.

Do you prehaps have anything relevant to say or should i just ignore your ramblings? :|

Honestly I've read some of these pages and have gone back and forth on the subject.

BUT I've noticed that a whelming set of proof the BT technical readouts has yet to be presented in support of the argument this thread discusses. Let alone that supported argument be posted in the suggestions thread and not here in the general discussion one. It should have been moved quite some time ago...

[Xando Parapasu]

No people are asking for 2DPS or double the Damage of a Small lasers. More so cause the Small Lasers fires every 2.25 seconds. It delivers 3 damage in .75 seconds. So 4 shots in 10 seconds is 12 damage. An SRM 2 does a bit better at 14 damage in 10 seconds. So a continuous stream of bullets over 10 seconds should be right on par with between 12-14 damage per MG in 10 seconds. However are we trying to balance the weapons or keep them on par with TT. Because if we want Par, a MG does less damage than a Small laser(2/3) and SRM2(1/2 average). So keeping it on par it should do 1 damage per second or 10 damage over 10 seconds. Just a touch weaker than a small laser.

[Sifright]

KuruptU4Fun, on 17 March 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

Honestly I've read some of these pages and have gone back and forth on the subject.

BUT I've noticed that a whelming set of proof the BT technical readouts has yet to be presented in support of the argument this thread discusses. Let alone that supported argument be posted in the suggestions thread and not here in the general discussion one. It should have been moved quite some time ago...

Ac/2 2 damage a round
MG 2 damage a round

Ac/2 is an effective anti mech weapon in mwo.
MG is completely useless in MWO.

Explain why there is such a disparity given that light mechs use mgs to shred enemy mechs?

[Xando Parapasu]

Treckin, on 17 March 2013 - 09:09 AM, said:

Looks like the general consensus for modern weapons is that a cannon is any un-powered projectile based barrel fired weapon with a caliber > 15MM. Machine guns < 15MM and ACs > 15 MM can both be equipped with multiple barrels, rotary or not, and they can both fire HE rounds, or not. They can both fire tracers, or not. They can each be gas, piston, or externally cycled.

Therefor, by modern convention, the MWO MGs ARE autocannons. Suck it.

A modern AC is any rapid firing gun over 20mm firing shells (not bullets).

[Yokaiko]

Xando Parapasu, on 17 March 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

No people are asking for 2DPS or double the Damage of a Small lasers. More so cause the Small Lasers fires every 2.25 seconds. It delivers 3 damage in .75 seconds. So 4 shots in 10 seconds is 12 damage. An SRM 2 does a bit better at 14 damage in 10 seconds. So a continuous stream of bullets over 10 seconds should be right on par with between 12-14 damage per MG in 10 seconds. However are we trying to balance the weapons or keep them on par with TT. Because if we want Par, a MG does less damage than a Small laser(2/3) and SRM2(1/2 average). So keeping it on par it should do 1 damage per second or 10 damage over 10 seconds. Just a touch weaker than a small laser.

IF we went par a MG does the same damage as an AC2.....no one is begging 4DPS.....like an AC2.
Oddly AC2s aren't OP, go figure.

[Gaan Cathal]

Xando Parapasu, on 17 March 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

No people are asking for 2DPS or double the Damage of a Small lasers. More so cause the Small Lasers fires every 2.25 seconds. It delivers 3 damage in .75 seconds. So 4 shots in 10 seconds is 12 damage. An SRM 2 does a bit better at 14 damage in 10 seconds. So a continuous stream of bullets over 10 seconds should be right on par with between 12-14 damage per MG in 10 seconds. However are we trying to balance the weapons or keep them on par with TT. Because if we want Par, a MG does less damage than a Small laser(2/3) and SRM2(1/2 average). So keeping it on par it should do 1 damage per second or 10 damage over 10 seconds. Just a touch weaker than a small laser.

Most people I see in these threads are arguing for ~1dps, considering that the MG has other disadvantages over the SLAS, and this would only be a starting point. They're also not directly comparable because of the hardpoint situation. You can't replace an MG with an SLAS, or vica versa. The fact is, we're asking for it to be buffed to SLAS levels when SLAS are so bad they're barely used anyway.

[Sifright]

Xando Parapasu, on 17 March 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

No people are asking for 2DPS or double the Damage of a Small lasers. More so cause the Small Lasers fires every 2.25 seconds. It delivers 3 damage in .75 seconds. So 4 shots in 10 seconds is 12 damage. An SRM 2 does a bit better at 14 damage in 10 seconds. So a continuous stream of bullets over 10 seconds should be right on par with between 12-14 damage per MG in 10 seconds. However are we trying to balance the weapons or keep them on par with TT. Because if we want Par, a MG does less damage than a Small laser(2/3) and SRM2(1/2 average). So keeping it on par it should do 1 damage per second or 10 damage over 10 seconds. Just a touch weaker than a small laser.

SL does 10 damage in 10 seconds in mwo (technically 9 due to the way burst damage works)
mg does 4 damage in 10 seconds in mwo

MG must spend all ten seconds with the reticle on the enemy whilst costing a minimum of 1 and half tonnes or three times the weight of the SL

the SL spends 2.25 seconds with target reticle on the enemy mech.

The MG risks ammo explosions

The Small laser has infinite ammo

Double heat sinks allows for 3 SL with infinite ammo firing at max dps constantly at no tonnage cost.

3 mgs weigh at a minimum two and half tones which is a tonne more than the 3 sls whilst doing vastly less damage.

There is no reason for this it makes no sense and is poor game design.

The mg doing less damage than the SL in TT is also poor game design if we are being brutally honest as heat is far less of an issue in TT vs MWO and in TT the mg is far more effective that it is here compared to other weapon systems.

Xando Parapasu, on 17 March 2013 - 09:22 AM, said:

A modern AC is any rapid firing gun over 20mm firing shells (not bullets).

this distinction is utterly arbitrary. There exists 50 caliber machine guns which fire high explosive bullets.

The Gau-8 has an ammunition round which is basically a 30mm bullet.

The type of ammo being fired is utterly irrelevant because as long the projectile is machined to fit the bore of the weapon correctly you could basically fire any type of ammo you wanted to out of it including discarding sabot.

[Xando Parapasu]

Critical Fumble, on 17 March 2013 - 09:14 AM, said:

Its only 1:12 when you ignore ammo. Add a single ton of ammo for the MG bringing it to 1.5 tons, it reaches 1:12 with an AC/2 after loading TWELVE tons of ammo for the thing. Then factor in range and engagement times to determine the risk of using the thing.

And your guess about it only being light pilots waning better MGs, unless ~70% of people who go to the suggestion boards are light pilots. http://mwomercs.com/...etween-1-2-dps/

Which is why I don't include ammo in my matching. You don't want to match the MG to an AC2 which is why I keep saying it must be balanced with the small arms. I haven't visited the suggestion boards so I didn't know.

0.5 ton weapons should be balanced to each other and nothing more. Anything else is just being a Munchkin!

[KuruptU4Fun]

Sifright, on 17 March 2013 - 09:22 AM, said:

Ac/2 2 damage a round
MG 2 damage a round

Ac/2 is an effective anti mech weapon in mwo.
MG is completely useless in MWO.

Explain why there is such a disparity given that light mechs use mgs to shred enemy mechs?

Ok, then since you so desire, we'll take this discussion back to the basics.

A weapon that shoots a round that is designed to penetrate weapons grade armor: A/C 2.
A weapon that is designed to shoot a round against unarmored targets: MG's.

An AC round will atomize a soft target if hit with one directly.
A MG round will bounce off an armored target.

[Yokaiko]

So we really have to get into the auto-cannon machine gun thing again.

Lets not, they are the same thing.