54 replies to this topic

[Xelah]

Edited 3/30/2013, edits will be underlined.

It takes 58 seconds to fire about 1968 rounds from four MG's from my spider (in testing grounds). This is without the Fast Fire Elite unlock.

I've tested this repeatedly by shooting the A1 in the legs in testing grounds. It takes 58 seconds to blast a leg off with the machine guns. While this is neither a good or bad thing, I'm using it as a point of data since I was mostly looking into this to see how I could make this spider a viable mech.

58 seconds x 4 machine guns x 10 shots per second = 2,320 shots

Where are my other 352 shots that were supposed to be fired? Did I actually fire this and the Nvidia fairy refils my ammo when I put the spent cartridges under my pillow at night?

I figured this had to be some error on my part, so I started dropping in testing grounds and holding down the trigger from the start to see how fast my ammo ran dry from two tons. The guns go dry between 2:01 and 2:02.


Matches don't actually start until 00:10 due to startup sequence


4000 rounds / 4 guns / (120.5 seconds - 10 seconds for startup) = 9.04.... rounds per second.

9.04 shots per second x 0.04 damage = 0.3619 damage per second


Whether you agree with buffing MG's or not, you should at least agree that they should do the amount of damage/stats they're listed to have, not 90.4% of it. Otherwise, we might as well start loading AC18.08's into our mechs to replace AC20s.

Now for the kicker. I just tested this in a live match. I held down the trigger to my MG's from the point the match started until they went dry. It took 2 minutes and 7 seconds to run out of ammo.

4000 / 4 / 127 = 7.874015748031496 shots per second.

It is even worse in game than even I had thought. 0.314 DPS

For the guy asking me if I've submitted a trouble ticket, yes. The ticket number is 75214

While you're fixing this, could you consider showing the dakka some love and scrapping the failed critseeking thing and let them do some damage... maybe 0.6 or .8 dps?

Edited by Xelah, 29 March 2013 - 09:11 PM.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Good find! I imagine 99% of the sane player community would never even use those pea shooters PGI labeled as machine guns, but that is quite interesting.

Not only do their full damage on paper suck, but their actual damage in game is worse! Never mind the fact you are probably hitting only 30-60% of those rounds consistently, while the shots that do land are spread all over the mech.

Yeah, everything about the Machine Gun apparently just spells worthlessness. There has to be some type of conspiracy against them.

[Cik]

to be honest the real problem with machine guns is that they are bereft of their intended role to start with. machine guns defend you against infantry. in a game with no infantry, they are basically garbage to start with (like they were in the TT unless used against infantry)

and that doesn't mean i don't want them buffed. they probably should be. no weapon should be worthless.

Edited by Cik, 28 March 2013 - 10:57 PM.

[Xelah]

mwhighlander, on 28 March 2013 - 10:50 PM, said:

Good find! I imagine 99% of the sane player community would never even use those pea shooters PGI labeled as machine guns, but that is quite interesting.

Not only do their full damage on paper suck, but their actual damage in game is worse! Never mind the fact you are probably hitting only 30-60% of those rounds consistently, while the shots that do land are spread all over the mech.

Yeah, everything about the Machine Gun apparently just spells worthlessness. There has to be some type of conspiracy against them.

Actually for my tests, I was stationary at point blank range and watching the damage on the target mech. The damage wasn't splashing across the mech. I don't know how much armor/hit points the A1 target dummies have to be able to figure out how many of my shots actually hit the leg, I just know that the rest of the mech was unaffected until the leg was destroyed.

Cik, on 28 March 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:

to be honest the real problem with machine guns is that they are bereft of their intended role to start with. machine guns defend you against infantry. in a game with no infantry, they are basically garbage to start with (like they were in the TT unless used against infantry)

and that doesn't mean i don't want them buffed. they probably should be. no weapon should be worthless.

I'm given to understand that at point blank range, they were comparable to an AC2. Which is right about where a spider pilot would be when circle strafing some assault mech.

Edited by Xelah, 28 March 2013 - 11:02 PM.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Cik, on 28 March 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:

to be honest the real problem with machine guns is that they are bereft of their intended role to start with. machine guns defend you against infantry. in a game with no infantry, they are basically garbage to start with (like they were in the TT unless used against infantry)

and that doesn't mean i don't want them buffed. they probably should be. no weapon should be worthless.

Interestingly enough, Mgun in TT appeared some time before the rules for Infantry did. So they are meant to be used against other mechs.

Yeah, when you look at the range, tonnage, damage spread, abysmal damage, etc. there is simply no reason to EVER use them in this game. The ammo is more likely do to more damage to you than the other mech. Same with the Flamer. It generates more heat to you than the other guy. Its quite pathetic, actually.

[Cik]

mwhighlander, on 28 March 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

Interestingly enough, Mgun in TT appeared some time before the rules for Infantry did. So they are meant to be used against other mechs.

Yeah, when you look at the range, tonnage, damage spread, abysmal damage, etc. there is simply no reason to EVER use them in this game. The ammo is more likely do to more damage to you than the other mech. Same with the Flamer. It generates more heat to you than the other guy. Its quite pathetic, actually.

well yes, but to be quite honest they aren't great against anything BUT infantry. unless it's a specialist machine for hunting very light vehicles or infantry or elementals, being so close with the MG ammo loaded is likely to be a disaster. you won't see them on line 'mechs often. they aren't 'bad' weapons all around, but you don't just slap them on for no reason.

[Ralgas]

i noticed the same when coming to my own theory they should be upped to ~.1 to put them on par with a light las over 10 secs. It's closer to 90 rounds than 100, but i just chalked it up to reaction time.

Mayhaps it's the same issue as the ac/2?

Edited by Ralgas, 28 March 2013 - 11:40 PM.

[Corwin Vickers]

Cik, on 28 March 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:

to be honest the real problem with machine guns is that they are bereft of their intended role to start with. machine guns defend you against infantry. in a game with no infantry, they are basically garbage to start with (like they were in the TT unless used against infantry)

From Sarna
BattleMech machine guns are perfectly capable of stripping the armor off any BattleMech.

They do 2 damage in the TT. There is nothing in the TT that says it only does 2 damage to infantry.

It does 2 damage

IT DOES 2 DAMAGE

An AC5 does 5 damage.

In MWO and AC5 does 5 damage, a machine gun does .04

In 10 seconds (1 turn in the TT) an AC5 does 29 damage in MWO
In 10 seconds a machine gun does .4 damage in MWO


Next person who says "infantry weapon" or "support weapon" is going to hell.

The reason to carry machine guns is that they generate no heat.

A 2 damage weapon that does not generate heat is a good weapon in a lot of situations.... Unless you change it from a 2 damage weapon to a .04 damage weapon.

[xhrit]

Cik, on 28 March 2013 - 11:09 PM, said:

well yes, but to be quite honest they aren't great against anything BUT infantry. unless it's a specialist machine for hunting very light vehicles or infantry or elementals, being so close with the MG ammo loaded is likely to be a disaster. you won't see them on line 'mechs often. they aren't 'bad' weapons all around, but you don't just slap them on for no reason.

Here is where I point out the fact that machinegun boats are the highest DPS build in mechwarrior 2, mechwarrior 3, and would be in mw4 too, if not for the hardpoint system that prevents you from effectively boating them.

Here is an example of how hard machineguns own; the 14 machinegun Mad Dog build.

It carries 17 tons of ammo, 6800 total damage, and can empty it all in 80 seconds, with zero heat buildup.

It has 84 DPS, and can core an atlas through the center torso in under 3 seconds.

Edited by xhrit, 29 March 2013 - 12:25 AM.

[One Medic Army]

MGs weren't actually bad as an anti-mech weapon in TT, they were arguably better than small lasers which they were the ballistic equivalent of.
2dmg, no heat, could allocate ammo in 1/2 ton or 1ton lots (100 or 200 rounds for 400dmg/ton of ammo!, the highest of any TT weapon)
Gained a bonus against infantry (2d6 dmg vs 2dmg).

Same dmg/tonnage ratio as an SRM launcher, but with no heat, better ammo efficiency, and less range.

[The Silent Protagonist]

Corwin Vickers, on 29 March 2013 - 12:04 AM, said:

From Sarna
BattleMech machine guns are perfectly capable of stripping the armor off any BattleMech.

They do 2 damage in the TT. There is nothing in the TT that says it only does 2 damage to infantry.

It does 2 damage

IT DOES 2 DAMAGE

An AC5 does 5 damage.

In MWO and AC5 does 5 damage, a machine gun does .04

In 10 seconds (1 turn in the TT) an AC5 does 29 damage in MWO
In 10 seconds a machine gun does .4 damage in MWO


Next person who says "infantry weapon" or "support weapon" is going to hell.

The reason to carry machine guns is that they generate no heat.

A 2 damage weapon that does not generate heat is a good weapon in a lot of situations.... Unless you change it from a 2 damage weapon to a .04 damage weapon.

I agree with this man, you ever seen "ma deuce"?

The GAU8?


Machine guns even today are not just for infantry!

[shabowie]

Yeah somewhere between sucking completely where it is now, and being OP like in that video is where they ought to put it in MWO.

[xhrit]

shabowie, on 29 March 2013 - 12:19 AM, said:

Yeah somewhere between sucking completely where it is now, and being OP like in that video is where they ought to put it in MWO.

Actually they would not be too OP if they were like in that video - because of the hardpoint system, the most anyone would be able to boat would be 6.

However, anyone with an extra ballistic hardpoint would be packing a mg, which is far from the case as it is now.

I personally use machineguns on the mech I pilot most - they suck pretty bad, but I am absolutely amazing, so it evens out. I would not be against a buff though.

[Ralgas]

shabowie, on 29 March 2013 - 12:19 AM, said:

Yeah somewhere between sucking completely where it is now, and being OP like in that video is where they ought to put it in MWO.

problem is you have to balance around 5k's and dd's. putting them somewhere in the ballpark of between a slas and mlas would be the ideal

Edit: although we will hve to wait and see what state rewind and lag or lack of does to rof

Edited by Ralgas, 29 March 2013 - 12:39 AM.

[Terror Teddy]

Cik, on 28 March 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:

to be honest the real problem with machine guns is that they are bereft of their intended role to start with. machine guns defend you against infantry. in a game with no infantry, they are basically garbage to start with (like they were in the TT unless used against infantry)

and that doesn't mean i don't want them buffed. they probably should be. no weapon should be worthless.

1: They do the same damage as AC/2 in the source material.
2: Their damage is the BASE damage and THEN they geta BONUS damage against power armored infantry PLATOONS.
3: 500 kilogram machinegun = 20mm oerliker AA guns X2.
4: Vehicle mounted non-man-portable weapons - it is not a .50MG

They are even MORE powerful against infantry.

Edited by Terror Teddy, 29 March 2013 - 12:51 AM.

[MacKoga]

I would really like to see the crit system actually working how one would expect:

• CT engine damage should cause problems; destruction should destroy the mech.
  
• CT gyros should make a make prone to knockdown and have trouble moving fast.
  
• Leg limb actuators' destruction should progressively slow down a mech, make it harder to turn, and easier to knock over.
  
• Arm limb actuators' destruction should restrict arm motion based on what's destroyed, like how a YLW's AC/20 arm cant turn right or left, due to the actuator that it is missing.
  
• Electronics / cockpit criticals should cause HUD, targeting time, and other kinds of issues.
  
• And, in general, "critseeker" weapons should be a bit more effective at actually being able to destroy things, compared to what can be done with a high damage, single-hit weapon.

If these changes are made, I could see it possible that MG's don't need too much fixing (aside from the OP-listed bug). But most likely they'd still need to do significantly more DPS.

[Terror Teddy]

MacKoga, on 29 March 2013 - 01:06 AM, said:

I would really like to see the crit system actually working how one would expect:

• CT engine damage should cause problems; destruction should destroy the mech.
  
• CT gyros should make a make prone to knockdown and have trouble moving fast.
  
• Leg limb actuators' destruction should progressively slow down a mech, make it harder to turn, and easier to knock over.
  
• Arm limb actuators' destruction should restrict arm motion based on what's destroyed, like how a YLW's AC/20 arm cant turn right or left, due to the actuator that it is missing.
  
• Electronics / cockpit criticals should cause HUD, targeting time, and other kinds of issues.
  
• And, in general, "critseeker" weapons should be a bit more effective at actually being able to destroy things, compared to what can be done with a high damage, single-hit weapon.

If these changes are made, I could see it possible that MG's don't need too much fixing (aside from the OP-listed bug). But most likely they'd still need to do significantly more DPS.

I had some post about how we could have a looong scale of damages a mech could sustain that impacted almost every aspect of a mech - I'd like to see that.

Even with crit the MG's suck due to their abysmal chance of crit AND abysmal actual damage.

Since it's the ONLY viable ballistic weapon for light mechs without crippling the builds they NEED a buff to be equivalent of small lasers at least - and ballistics usually do MORE damage than their heat counterpart due to their need of ammo.

[Terror Teddy]

shabowie, on 29 March 2013 - 12:19 AM, said:

Yeah somewhere between sucking completely where it is now, and being OP like in that video is where they ought to put it in MWO.

You mean a BALANCED weapon in MWO? That's dangerous talk sir.

We have a lot of FUN things we can use instead:

-ERPPC cancelling ECM - instead of making a GOOD ECM.
-MG's doing crits...if someone removes the armour first...

We can add more things like:
-SRM's to hit enemy missiles
-SSRM that can intercept AC bullets
-Lasers that can make grafitti [ATLAS WAS HERE]
-AMS that can do more DPS than MG's...oh, they already do...
-etc...

Edited by Terror Teddy, 29 March 2013 - 02:15 AM.

[Sephlock]

[Utilyan]

I use Machine guns all the time.

Machine guns doesn't set off ammo explosions.

This last "BUFF" ........was a NERF. It was a better gun before.

The best buff MGs ever had happened on the trebuchet release I think it was feb 19th. That day with 4mgs I was doing like 250 damage a round. It was going through internals like hot knife through butter. The very next patch they shut it down along with flamers.

It was the best vs unarmored GO FIGURE!

If your getting machine gun fire and/or flamer fire where its unarmored.......your sopose to be in trouble.

Folks actually complained that it was killing people who lost thier armor................NO SHT! you lost your armor prepare to die.


It doesn't do anything to armor......fine......head armor is gone your getting machine gun fire = DEAD PILOT.


If you get in a car that is not an armored car..........and someone shoots thier 20mm machine gun at you.......your not going to have great day.

If your engine protected by a sheet of paper, glass, even plywood unarmored is shot by a machine gun its going to be GONE.



It other words we say machine gun is not good vs armored great vs unarmored......fine......BUT ITS NOT EVEN GOOD VS UNARMORED. Not even mediocre....not even decent......IT flat out sucks vs unarmored.

I'm to the point its best we don't even ask for a buff that just gives them an excuse to nerf it again.

I'm pretty sure its going to get nerfed again. The highest its ever done happened in febuary and they took it away.

It almost feels like two developers are at it.....

There is a class of uppity elitist who got thier butt handed by machine guns and flamers, Same guys who hate urbie.


TL;DR

Legend is Urbanmech with MGs and flamers spanked the elitist's ancestors a very long time ago......... To this day they are still ticked off. Mgs and flamers are in perpetual nerfing.