Jade Kitsune, on 23 March 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:
just leave the ballistic hardpoints and ignore the weapon... these mechs aren't required to be removed.
though I get the point, why remove content...
Machineguns will never be AC2 level, because if they are, you get a weapon that fires insanely fast that will out-dps the AC2 thus making the AC2 pointless [more so than it already is]
There are ALWAYS weapons in mechwarrior that just don't see use... people barely use small lasers, ac2's, flamers, machine guns, or small pulse lasers. AC5's are only used a bit more over the AC2... but you don't see these weapons used much at all.
it's the nature of the game really, they're just not good to the general percentage of players... though there may be a niche of people that use them in TRO-Esque configs... the overall player base at large will shun these weapons...
unless they get a boost that allows them to be OP, in which case they'll see widespread use because they're suddenly effective and cheese.
As I've said in my first post on this thread, it would take a 'Mech with 12 MGs about 18.5 seconds to destroy an Atlas with 28 points of Rear Center Torso armor from behind and 31.4 seconds to core that Atlas from the front (assuming full armor).
In comparison, a JR7-D with 2x SRM4 + 4 MLAS could core the same Atlas from the rear in 10.3 seconds and it would only take it 18 seconds to core the same Atlas from the front, even with reduced SRM damage as of the latest hotfix.
The Jenner wouldn't even consume one full ton of SRM ammunition to achieve that kill - the MG boat would eat up 1-2 tons of its ammunition, at the very least.
This discussion isn't about making MGs overpowered, it's about making them viable weapons and bringing them in line with other 0.5-1.0 ton weapons.
Naturally, there's no 'Mech with 12 MGs in-game, only a 'Mech with 6 ballistic hardpoints - it would take that 'Mech, a Jagermech variant, about 37 seconds to destroy that Atlas from behind; 63 seconds to perform the same feat from the front.
Such ridiculously low damage can only be compared to a Flamer, or even collision damage.
I'm not talking about making MGs the 0.5 ton, short-ranged equivalent to Gauss Rifles - let us just consider a decent boost to their performance and then make a request of the developers.
Perhaps a 50% boost to damage would be sufficient?
As for boating; if builds like the HBK-4P with 9x SLAS are possible in MWO, why shouldn't players be allowed to use MG boats if they wanted to?
For one thing, the ammo requirements as well as damage spread from the MGs would make such a 'Mech only less effective than another kind of boat - how can that thing ever be considered OP?
Surely, Gauss Rifles, AC/20s, Medium and Large Lasers will always be superior to MGs, if not on grounds of sheer damage potential, then due to their increased range and accuracy.
Even if it were so, people have complained for months about the Splattapult - a short-ranged, spread-fire build - as they considered it to be overpowered, yet a vocal minority in the forums and in-game have always claimed that the Splat was balanced due to its limitations; whomever was right, it took PGI an eternity to nerf it, and the 'Mech was ultimately nerfed not because of its inherent properties, but because of broken splash damage.
A MG boat would be restricted into yet shorter ranges, and would probably suffer even more so from ammo limitations than the Splats did.
How can this seriously be OP? It would be, at best, viable.
That's all we're asking here: for viable low-end ballistics - that is to say, for viable MGs.
Why should we fear 6 or 12 MG boats more than we do the 6 PPC Stalker, for example?
Also...
Are we in K-world yet?
EDIT: revised and redacted due to bad calc.
Edited by Lorcan Lladd, 23 March 2013 - 09:17 AM.
0
