550 replies to this topic

[AdamBaines]

General Taskeen, on 14 March 2013 - 06:35 AM, said:

Up damage to .6 or .8
Give it a COOL DOWN slighter lower than that of an AC/2
Ammo Between 200 or 600

There ya go Devs. All is right in the universe.

Also, BT MG's weighing Half a Ton, are the equivalent of two GAU-8 cannons

Here is what one looks like



That's right, Mechs ******* die. Twice.



And there is the Piranha mounting 12 Gau-8 sized Clan "machine guns,"

I see that....but you did not give it its context:

From Sarna:

"The Piranha was developed by Clan Diamond Shark shortly before the Battle of Tukayyid to combat Inner Sphere conventional infantry and light vehicles. The sheer speed that the BattleMech is capable of has also made it something of a scout, though it lacks sophisticated electronic equipment."

I still don't get why everyone wants the MG to be some sort of primary weapon and expect it to do heavy damage? I must be missing the point so Ill leave the debate to you guys.

Edit: Formatting. Dang cut and paste from Sarna :-)

Edited by AdamBaines, 14 March 2013 - 07:09 AM.

[FupDup]

AdamBaines, on 14 March 2013 - 07:04 AM, said:

I still don't get why everyone wants the MG to be some sort of primary weapon and expect it to do heavy damage? I must be missing the point so Ill leave the debate to you guys.

Because the Spider 5K, Raven 4X, and Cicada 3C don't have the tonnage to fill all of their ballistic slots without MGs or without gimping themselves (Dakkaraven 4X with 2 AC/2 is fun but slow and not really that great). For the 3C and 5K, MGs are the primary weapon because they take up the most space and are what the mechs use most often (unless you go with something like a 2 AC/2 Cicada 3C, but you've still got redundant hardpoints then).


I don't think anybody here wants MGs to turn into something that cuts an enemy mech in half. We just want those 3 problematic variants to have a fighting chance against other variants of the same chassis.

[Noonan]

MGs should suck and so should those variants. There is a long tradition of crappy mechs and weapons in the BT universe. Not all mechs and weapons have to be equal. They are not supposed to be, so please, move on.

[Pinselborste]

Mg was in TT when it was only mechs, they where an alternative to the small laser.

but in mwo they are totally useless, same with the flamer.
a useless weapon has to be made viable or they could just remove it.

Noonan, on 14 March 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:

MGs should suck and so should those variants. There is a long tradition of crappy mechs and weapons in the BT universe. Not all mechs and weapons have to be equal. They are not supposed to be, so please, move on.

devs want the game to surrive so all the mechs have to be viable, just cause some variants and weapons are weak in some books or in TT doesnt mean they have to be the same way in MWO.

Edited by Pinselborste, 14 March 2013 - 07:22 AM.

[FupDup]

Noonan, on 14 March 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:

MGs should suck and so should those variants.

Why? Who does it benefit?

Noonan, on 14 March 2013 - 07:18 AM, said:

There is a long tradition of crappy mechs and weapons in the BT universe. Not all mechs and weapons have to be equal. They are not supposed to be, so please, move on.

Tradition =/= good. Some traditions are good, some are not. Just being a tradition doesn't mean it has to be continued.

Also, if they suck so bad, they waste hard drive space and therefore slow down game performance. Better to just remove them to speed up game performance and improve gameplay (because not many people like deliberately handicapping themselves). In the world of programming, you don't include code that fulfills no purpose. Code is supposed to be as short and compact as possible while still fulfilling all of the functionality of larger code structures.

Edited by FupDup, 14 March 2013 - 07:24 AM.

[Mavairo]

hashinshin, on 14 March 2013 - 01:56 AM, said:

Ohgodwhyohgodwhy?

Why has it been over a year and still to this day I can't load a mech up with 4 MGs and go to town on anything within 200m of me?

Why are mechs with more than 1 ballistic slot handicapped from MGs being so worthless?

Why is there only a single 3x ballistic slot mech that is competitive?

Why god why can't you just increase the projectile speed of MGs, and triple their DPS?

Why is PGI so opposed to letting people use MGs? They were intended to be used on battlemechs to kill other battlemechs. We aren't asking for anything more than that. 2 DPS per MG is all we want.

Consider:

Q. WHAT, MGS AREN'T MEANT TO KILL MECHS WTF!
A. MGs were in BT before infantry were. As has been stated many times armor in the BT universe chips away rather than trying to deflect shots. There's no way to deflect a 160mm AC20 round so rather the armor was designed to tear away at the point of impact to save the rest of the mech. High grade high caliber MGs can also tear away at mech armor.

Q. But giving them 2 DPS would make them so OP!
A. The average HIT RATE for a MG is fairly low, 50% on average. ADDITIONALLY, due to their crit space requirements (2 medium lasers is 2 crit spaces, 2 MGs is 3+ crit spaces depending on how much ammo you want) and their tendency to blow up (ammo exploded) they actually have big liabilities. ADDITIONALLY the 100% uptime on aim requirement (you can never look away) drastically reduces your survivability while at the same time giving tons of counterplay in that any movement of their torso forces your damage off taret.

Q. I still think 2 DPS would be OP!
A. In fact, they should probably be at 3 DPS to be balanced. Machine guns are: A. Slow projectile traveling, B. Ammo reliant, C. Require 100% uptime, D. Crit space intensive for a low quality weapon, and lastly E. Have very few mechs that can utilize more than 2 MGs and most of them on the torso which makes it hard to use. Oh also F. The ammo can kaboom.

Q. But that's so unrealistic for a machine gun to hurt a mech!
A. As I have explained above, read that. Additionally, machine guns in BT (mech mounted ones) are not firing tiny little bullets. They're firing these:

As a machine gun. These are MASSIVE mech mounted DOOM cannons. The machine guns found on mechs are ANTI MECH weaponry that just *happens* to be useful against infantry. It is not the other way around. They are NOT anti-infantry weapons that can also hurt mechs.

Q. I still am not convinced because I am hard headed!
A. A car weights about 2 tons. The MG in game weights 0.5 tons. This MG is 1/4 the weight of a freaking car. I don't understand whats not to get here. This is not a 50 pound rifle, this is a 1000 pound anti mech machine gun.

Q. Why not just make it do bonus damage to internals so it kills faster!
A. Because people want to use the machine gun as a weapon, a real weapon. And it's supposed to be. There are 3 variants out there that are DESIGNED to boat MGs and use them as their main weapons. MGs are supposed to be the light ballistics weapon you take on those ballistics slots. You know the Dragon with 3 ballistics in its arm? What sense to those make? They don't unless MGs do good damage.

This god this.

[x4vn]

Machine gun weighing less than 0.5T and a ton of ammo:



Pic from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia....i/GAU-8_Avenger

Yes it's the GAU-8 (already mentioned) and here's what it does to Tanks:

Edited by x4vn, 14 March 2013 - 07:30 AM.

[FupDup]

hashinshin, on 14 March 2013 - 01:56 AM, said:

A. A car weights about 2 tons. The MG in game weights 0.5 tons. This MG is 1/4 the weight of a freaking car. I don't understand whats not to get here. This is not a 50 pound rifle, this is a 1000 pound anti mech machine gun.

Battletech uses metric tons, not english (after all, we use the metric system for distances so why would mass be different?). So, that makes MGs 500kg or 1102.31 pounds.

[AdamBaines]

FupDup, on 14 March 2013 - 07:16 AM, said:

Because the Spider 5K, Raven 4X, and Cicada 3C don't have the tonnage to fill all of their ballistic slots without MGs or without gimping themselves (Dakkaraven 4X with 2 AC/2 is fun but slow and not really that great). For the 3C and 5K, MGs are the primary weapon because they take up the most space and are what the mechs use most often (unless you go with something like a 2 AC/2 Cicada 3C, but you've still got redundant hardpoints then).


I don't think anybody here wants MGs to turn into something that cuts an enemy mech in half. We just want those 3 problematic variants to have a fighting chance against other variants of the same chassis.

You dragged me back into this one :-)

Their primary weapon is speed, sensors, ECM and TAG. That's their role. Find the enemy....ID them so your team can ran the pain on them. The only reason they have weapons is to defend themselves. Not to go on the offensive.

If you want to run in a "light" lance and be an offensive weapon.....head on over to Steiner ;-). They have many an Atli and Awesome waiting for you guys over there :-)

[Joseph Mallan]

x4vn, on 14 March 2013 - 07:25 AM, said:

Machine gun weighing less than 0.5T and a ton of ammo:

the GAU-8 is an Auto Cannon. The military even classifies it as such. it is also a 30mm cannon not 20mm. though your size is correct for a Clan Weapon cause the GAU-8 weighs in around .25 tons sans ammo and feed equipment.

[FupDup]

AdamBaines, on 14 March 2013 - 07:28 AM, said:

You dragged me back into this one :-)

Their primary weapon is speed, sensors, ECM and TAG. That's their role. Find the enemy....ID them so your team can ran the pain on them. The only reason they have weapons is to defend themselves. Not to go on the offensive.

If you want to run in a "light" lance and be an offensive weapon.....head on over to Steiner ;-). They have many an Atli and Awesome waiting for you guys over there :-)

My Raven 2X, armed with 2 LL and 2ML, has the same speed as my Raven 4X and is better at defending itself/killing things on top of that.


Also: The 3C, 4X, and 5K can't equip ECM.

Edited by FupDup, 14 March 2013 - 07:34 AM.

[Xyroc]

Yep OP is right Im down with a buff ... I mean "its beta" why not let us at least try it right? We had to deal with LRMs and a 90 degree drop for a while so small buff to MGs wouldnt kill us

[jay35]

Quote

Why Can't The Mgs Just See A Damage Buff.

Because they are annoying pest weapons that do not need to be encouraged or used more. They're just there to give people with extra Ballistic slots and tonnage something to throw on there to help increase internal crit percentage a bit once their other weapons have cracked through armor. They're not intended to be boated or actually do significant damage on their own.

Edited by jay35, 14 March 2013 - 07:32 AM.

[Noonan]

Some mechs are stronger and some are weaker. Nothing is going to change that. All mechs are not going to be equal or even good. If a weapon is not great, than it should be removed? Another ridiculous concept. Take it out of the game because it is a waste of drive space? Maybe if I was playing the game on a zip drive lol. I have friends who use MGs as a filler or a for fun weapon for the record.

[Mavairo]

A 20mm weapon is still plenty capable of beating up on armor.

There's a reason we use them on Planes.

An Auto cannon in this game is more like a tank turret.
Not a fully automatic high rate of fire death dealer.

MGs on TT do 2 damage, just like an AC2 does. Infact there's even a heavier machine gun that does 5 damage. Making it > an AC2.

I find it humorous that everyone accepts TT values for damage #s on everything -but- the machine gun.

MGs in battletech are as much anti armor as they anti infantry. What makes the AC2 better is it's far superior range.

As it stands right now, we have several lights, and one heavy that frankly blow because of how bad MGs are. All you have to do to have a Death Machine, is to buy the same mech in a different variant. (like a 3L raven instead of a 4x, or a 1N or 1C instead of a 5N dragon) and not only is your damage capability through the roof by comparison, it is also every bit as capable as a scout.

Right now, any mech I see with MGs I just ignore and move onto shoot something that is -actually dangerous-. That's a huge problem with the weapon system right there. If my choices are shoot up a Spider loaded up on energy weapons and Srms, or the silly 4 MG variant guess which one I'm picking.

Same deal with a 3L vs a 4X

Here's a hint, it's not the one with MGs.

Edited by Mavairo, 14 March 2013 - 07:44 AM.

[Xyroc]

jay35, on 14 March 2013 - 07:31 AM, said:

Because they are annoying pest weapons that do not need to be encouraged or used more. They're just there to give people with extra Ballistic slots and tonnage something to throw on there to help increase internal crit percentage a bit once their other weapons have cracked through armor. They're not intended to be boated or actually do significant damage on their own.

Noonan, on 14 March 2013 - 07:37 AM, said:

Some mechs are stronger and some are weaker. Nothing is going to change that. All mechs are not going to be equal or even good. If a weapon is not great, than it should be removed? Another ridiculous concept. Take it out of the game because it is a waste of drive space? Maybe if I was playing the game on a zip drive lol. I have friends who use MGs as a filler or a for fun weapon for the record.

SO where is the logic behind this ... the OP clearly displays how a 20mm "cannon" is only slightly less powerful than the AC 2 ... and really saying its a pest weapon and shouldnt be encouraged why?

[Dr Killinger]

Real life examples just can't be translated into Battletech. Nothing scales correctly, ranges are complete nonsense, weights are totally off...

That said, if they made the MG viable, doing it by simply upping DPS to be on par with other weapons of similar weights isn't the way to do it. They're trying to find a niche for it by doing the crit seeking tweaks. I don't think it's working, but it's better than every weapon having the same DPS. I'm sure they'll come up with something eventually.

[Noobzorz]

AlexEss, on 14 March 2013 - 02:48 AM, said:

To be honest they should not have been in at all.

But to use them smart is to use them at exposed areas. They are still very weak but there at least they do some good.

Using them on mechs is like attacking a modern tank with a 50 cal... sure you migh get lucky and if you can shoot at a place without armour you might stop it. but beyond that it is mostly annoying.

It's amazing. It's like you. . . didn't read a single word he wrote.

Dr Killinger, on 14 March 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

Real life examples just can't be translated into Battletech. Nothing scales correctly, ranges are complete nonsense, weights are totally off...

That said, if they made the MG viable, doing it by simply upping DPS to be on par with other weapons of similar weights isn't the way to do it. They're trying to find a niche for it by doing the crit seeking tweaks. I don't think it's working, but it's better than every weapon having the same DPS. I'm sure they'll come up with something eventually.

Irrelevant. In the lore, the MG is a powerful anti-battlemech weapon that just happens to be good at killing infantry and armored vehicles. This isn't a Call of Duty weapon, nor was it ever envisaged as such.

Now when Lore and Gameplay are at odds, I get that, but in this case, making the weapon effective is good for both, and that makes it an automatic must-change.

Edited by Noobzorz, 14 March 2013 - 07:47 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Mavairo, on 14 March 2013 - 07:37 AM, said:

I find it humorous that everyone accepts TT values for damage #s on everything -but- the machine gun.

Yes but the AC2 doesn't do 2 damage per turn in MWO it does up to 40 per turn. With a much larger shell than the 20 mm bullet that a Machine gun fires.

[K0M3D14N]

I'm just going to throw this out there.

For everyone saying the MGs are balanced as they weigh the same as a small laser? No they don't. The small laser effectively weighs .5 tons. The MG effectively weighs 1.5 tons as it's worthless without ammunition.

Edited by K0M3D14N, 14 March 2013 - 07:50 AM.