52 replies to this topic

[Mawai]

1) In the TT version of BT ... MGs are effective against battlemechs - they do 2 damage each time they are fired and hit. They are not exclusively an anti-infantry weapon.

2) PGI has decided that having a 1/2 ton, high rate of fire, low heat weapon that did the equivalent damage of a BT MG would be overpowered if used directly in MWO and they are probably correct.

3) So PGI decided that MGs in MWO would do very little damage (0.04/rd) to armor and internals but would have a greater chance to do critical damage once the armor was breached. This means that they should be effective at knocking out equipment stored in a section without armor ... however, since engine and gyro crits do not appear to be in the game they are not that great at killing a mech by crits on the center torso. When crits against these components are implemented, MGs may become overpowerd and they will have to rethink their design ... depends on how many crits machine guns actually get.

[I am]

I'll give you a reason.

IF they were effective, due to their large ammo salvos, low heat gen, and weight, they would be spammed in traditional min/max fashion.

We'd jsut have one more strain of "X" is OP threads, with all the gusy spamming them, in it justify why they arnt OP, assuming they would be, so they could keep exploiting their OPness.

That said they have 3 purposes as of now.

1. They look and sound cool when firing, so they add asthetic value for players like me, that think looking cool/sounding cool is of the utmost importance in weapon selection. (hugs his ac2s)
2. Like the flamer, they are great substance for "silly" builds, when someone wants to just goof around and does not care about winning. Like me, I do this once a day, when I play.
3. They give the guy that is an apex player in this game, a challenge. Sure he can win with 6 PPCs, but when that gets old perhaps he'll go for a silly mg build, and try to make it work for him. Not like me, because im far from super-pro.

Maybe theyre not great reasons, but hey, it's something.

Mawai, on 08 April 2013 - 06:39 PM, said:

1) In the TT version of BT ... MGs are effective against battlemechs - they do 2 damage each time they are fired and hit. They are not exclusively an anti-infantry weapon.

2) PGI has decided that having a 1/2 ton, high rate of fire, low heat weapon that did the equivalent damage of a BT MG would be overpowered if used directly in MWO and they are probably correct.

3) So PGI decided that MGs in MWO would do very little damage (0.04/rd) to armor and internals but would have a greater chance to do critical damage once the armor was breached. This means that they should be effective at knocking out equipment stored in a section without armor ... however, since engine and gyro crits do not appear to be in the game they are not that great at killing a mech by crits on the center torso. When crits against these components are implemented, MGs may become overpowerd and they will have to rethink their design ... depends on how many crits machine guns actually get.

TT based arguments = yawn. Sorry mate.

Edited by I am, 08 April 2013 - 06:44 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

@Ryvuckz

Tried. PGI wouldn't let me.

@Utilyan

If a weapon gives you no realistic chance of success, it should not be in the game, no matter how fun. I will use the Small and Medium Lasers as examples. Both taken from me running my Founders Hunchy. In both cases I was reduced to a single weapon, once the small lasers, once the medium (by this point the small had been swapped for a TAG). in both matches I was able with just that one laser, and a lot of dumb luck to get the final kill and win the match. The small I only had a single opponent left, and he was in a bad way, but somehow after about 3 minutes of circling, I killed him. Medium was better, as there were 2 mwchs left, and me, down to my lefty laser. Good news, was the AWS-8Q was far side of frozen, so le and their hunchie G, get in a circle of death. Somehow, I win (guys aim really sucked, maybe he had the 4fps. He never made any excuses, either way). By that time, along comes mr Awesome in alpha strike glory. Well, the rest of my rt goes bye bye, my head yets stroipped and my left side pretty savaged. Dude overheats like every 2 volley it seeks. I finally get under 90 meters, the whole time tagging his face and ct with my little laser. I lose my leg to reduced PPC damage, but as he shuts down yet again, I plant 2 last medium laser kisses in his face for the kill.

The point? Even when I was left with just ONE tiny weapon, with a lot of luck, patient oiloting and good qim, I had a small chance to win. With Machine Guns, that chance is quite literally nonexistent, even if you have 4-6 of them. If the Enemy has ANY armor, you might as well shut down right there and let him kill you (unless you can realistically cap)

Any weapon I cannot make a last ditch hero stand with and have even a small chance of success, does not belong here.

[Captain Stiffy]

This guy is going in next patch...



...and he is not amused by this thread.

This game is actually an alternate reality metal gear where the people are metal-gears but there is only one actual person.

Edited by Captain Stiffy, 08 April 2013 - 06:54 PM.

[Lefty Lucy]

Bishop Steiner, on 08 April 2013 - 06:49 PM, said:

@Ryvuckz

Tried. PGI wouldn't let me.

@Utilyan

If a weapon gives you no realistic chance of success, it should not be in the game, no matter how fun. I will use the Small and Medium Lasers as examples. Both taken from me running my Founders Hunchy. In both cases I was reduced to a single weapon, once the small lasers, once the medium (by this point the small had been swapped for a TAG). in both matches I was able with just that one laser, and a lot of dumb luck to get the final kill and win the match. The small I only had a single opponent left, and he was in a bad way, but somehow after about 3 minutes of circling, I killed him. Medium was better, as there were 2 mwchs left, and me, down to my lefty laser. Good news, was the AWS-8Q was far side of frozen, so le and their hunchie G, get in a circle of death. Somehow, I win (guys aim really sucked, maybe he had the 4fps. He never made any excuses, either way). By that time, along comes mr Awesome in alpha strike glory. Well, the rest of my rt goes bye bye, my head yets stroipped and my left side pretty savaged. Dude overheats like every 2 volley it seeks. I finally get under 90 meters, the whole time tagging his face and ct with my little laser. I lose my leg to reduced PPC damage, but as he shuts down yet again, I plant 2 last medium laser kisses in his face for the kill.

The point? Even when I was left with just ONE tiny weapon, with a lot of luck, patient oiloting and good qim, I had a small chance to win. With Machine Guns, that chance is quite literally nonexistent, even if you have 4-6 of them. If the Enemy has ANY armor, you might as well shut down right there and let him kill you (unless you can realistically cap)

Any weapon I cannot make a last ditch hero stand with and have even a small chance of success, does not belong here.

Yep. At 1/2 ton, and a ton of ammo required, a MG should be at least as useful as a SL. Hell, with DHS small lasers have virtually disappeared. Can't we at least have MGs be as good as a weapon that's not really considered good enough to use any more anyways?

[OneEyed Jack]

Team Leader, on 08 April 2013 - 06:01 PM, said:

That's actually a common miss perception. PPCs (er and regular) are capable of spreading their damage around. In a mech with only PPCs, you will notice your damage is almost never in even 10s. You will also notice that sometimes shooting a PPC will damage multiple parts of a mech. So in this way the PPC isn't pinpoint.

The only reason you'll see damage spread is because of convergence. Even as close as the weapons are on a K2 (especially if they're in your arms, as they should be, instead of the torso) there is some convergence. Fire delay, travel time, and leading targets all contribute to a moving target almost never being at the exact distance of the convergence point, so the shots will usually be slightly spread from trying to converge on a further point, or slightly spread from already having crossed and beginning to separate. This alone can lead to impacting separate locations and is only exacerbated by impacting at oblique angles, which angles could cause the damage to spread even on a stationary target.

This is simply a case of spread impacts, not splash damage from individual impacts. Hell, I've seen the same effects on dual AC20's. A single PPC shot will never damage multiple locations except in the case of damage transfer when a location is destroyed.

[Signal27]

Tennex, on 08 April 2013 - 05:52 PM, said:

battletech had MGs before they ever had infantry or vehicles.

so its not really a anti infantry weapon when its conception predates that of infantry.

This.
MGs are canon no matter how useless they were in any previous version of BattleTech. And lord knows that we've got to stick to the BattleTech canon as closely as we possibly can. Otherwise we would all drown in the tears flooding into the forums.

[Davers]

We should just petition PGI to remove all mechs that use Flamers and Machine guns in a stock load out and remove them from the game. Sure that would mean that there would be zero chance of ever seeing any form of Warhammer, Phoenix Hawk, Locust, Wasp. Stinger, Falcon, Crusader, Thunderbolts, and Battlemasters, but the game wouldn't be filled with useless weapons.

[Bishop Steiner]

@One Eyed Jack

How can I have Convergence issues with a Trebuchet K, when it only mounts a single PPC?

[Tickdoff Tank]

OneEyed Jack, on 08 April 2013 - 06:55 PM, said:

The only reason you'll see damage spread is because of convergence. Even as close as the weapons are on a K2 (especially if they're in your arms, as they should be, instead of the torso) there is some convergence. Fire delay, travel time, and leading targets all contribute to a moving target almost never being at the exact distance of the convergence point, so the shots will usually be slightly spread from trying to converge on a further point, or slightly spread from already having crossed and beginning to separate. This alone can lead to impacting separate locations and is only exacerbated by impacting at oblique angles, which angles could cause the damage to spread even on a stationary target.

This is simply a case of spread impacts, not splash damage from individual impacts. Hell, I've seen the same effects on dual AC20's. A single PPC shot will never damage multiple locations except in the case of damage transfer when a location is destroyed.

Jack is correct.

To test it yourself, go to the training grounds with just 1 PPC and fire it repeatedly. It will only do damage to 1 spot at a time.

Edit: It is remotely possible to hit the "seam" between 2 locations and do spread damage. *I think*. I am not positive about that, but even if it is possible it will be a rare occurrence.

Edited by Tickdoff Tank, 08 April 2013 - 07:04 PM.

[Roland]

Captain Stiffy, on 08 April 2013 - 06:52 PM, said:

This game is actually an alternate reality metal gear where the people are metal-gears but there is only one actual person.

For some stupid reason, this made me laugh my *** off.

[Scratx]

Poor horse.

And MGs need a buff, not a nerf. They actually need to deal damage to armor, not just tickle it.

[FrostCollar]

I am, on 08 April 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

I'll give you a reason.

IF they were effective, due to their large ammo salvos, low heat gen, and weight, they would be spammed in traditional min/max fashion.

All the bullets in the world don't mean a thing if they don't do much damage all together. Some mechs would equip a lot of MGs, true, but that's because they can't fill their ballistic slots any other way. Boating isn't a problem for balanced weapons - no one calls out the 6 ML Cicada 2A as overpowered, yet it is many times more powerful than the mythical 6 MG spider even if MG damage was increased greatly.

I am, on 08 April 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

We'd jsut have one more strain of "X" is OP threads, with all the gusy spamming them, in it justify why they arnt OP, assuming they would be, so they could keep exploiting their OPness.

So a weapon should remain underpowered so people don't complain? Why not do that for every weapon then? Anyways, this argument doesn't hold water. PGI's confirmed that they see the simultaneous existence of "X is underpowered" and "X is overpowered" threads as a sign of balance. This is the internet anyways, if we let a few naysayers stop us nothing would ever get done.

I am, on 08 April 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

1. They look and sound cool when firing, so they add asthetic value for players like me, that think looking cool/sounding cool is of the utmost importance in weapon selection. (hugs his ac2s)

Irrelevant to game balance and good game design.

I am, on 08 April 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

2. Like the flamer, they are great substance for "silly" builds, when someone wants to just goof around and does not care about winning. Like me, I do this once a day, when I play.

Irrelevant to game balance and good game design.

I am, on 08 April 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

3. They give the guy that is an apex player in this game, a challenge. Sure he can win with 6 PPCs, but when that gets old perhaps he'll go for a silly mg build, and try to make it work for him. Not like me, because im far from super-pro.

Just because someone wants to wear a hair shirt doesn't mean that's the only type of shirt the store should stock. Also, want a challenge? Take less weapons.

I am, on 08 April 2013 - 06:43 PM, said:

TT based arguments = yawn. Sorry mate.

How about balance based arguments? If a weapon in game isn't good at anything then it should be changed.

[Aim64C]

Lefty Lucy, on 08 April 2013 - 06:23 PM, said:

Take PPCs into training grounds. Try to damage multiple parts with single PPC hits. It doesn't happen.

If PPCs were pinpoint damage - a lot of the 6x PPC boats would be doing absolutely horrid damage. I've seen hunchbacks 'tank' two full 6x PPC alphas to the CT during a match.

I saw where the PPCs hit, often have the lowest lag on a drop (50 milliseconds is getting into the higher end), and probably have the best true-to-server view possible in practice. A 60-point pinpoint alpha should pretty much remove the armor of any torso instantly.

Even if we accept that two of those PPCs hit other hitboxes because of parallax on convergence, the fact remains that the 'theoretical' damage those weapons should have been doing were not at all stacking up to the fact that the damage indicators of the hunchback were not changing nearly as radically as they should have - even if the hunchback was maxed on armor.

There again - I've had a duo of PPCs hit my center torso and take my armor with them (and only received damage in that section)... so I'm not sure if that indicates damage detection bugs, collision detection (with projectile) bugs, or what.

I'm inclined to believe that PPCs have a wonky projectile that the collision detection system likes to have issues with - failing to register some hits (perhaps multiple simultaneous hits) and possibly has some kind of 'bloom' that spreads to nearby hitboxes. On mechs with large singular hitboxes - PPCs deal all of that damage to that hitbox. On mechs with smaller single hitboxes, the trend is to bloom.

But no one can be sure except for PGI.

[Bishop Steiner]

Tickdoff Tank, on 08 April 2013 - 07:02 PM, said:

Jack is correct.

To test it yourself, go to the training grounds with just 1 PPC and fire it repeatedly. It will only do damage to 1 spot at a time.

Edit: It is remotely possible to hit the "seam" between 2 locations and do spread damage. *I think*. I am not positive about that, but even if it is possible it will be a rare occurrence.

try it on a moving mech in game, if you can, Tank. A single ballistic should confine it's damage to one location. I am still not convinced on PPCs doing this unless they have significantly improved their hit detection in the last month since I was able to get on regularly.

[General Taskeen]

Davers, on 08 April 2013 - 07:00 PM, said:

We should just petition PGI to remove all mechs that use Flamers and Machine guns in a stock load out and remove them from the game. Sure that would mean that there would be zero chance of ever seeing any form of Warhammer, Phoenix Hawk, Locust, Wasp. Stinger, Falcon, Crusader, Thunderbolts, and Battlemasters, but the game wouldn't be filled with useless weapons.

It would also mean zero chance of Piranha Mech.

[Bishop Steiner]

Aim64C, on 08 April 2013 - 07:22 PM, said:

If PPCs were pinpoint damage - a lot of the 6x PPC boats would be doing absolutely horrid damage. I've seen hunchbacks 'tank' two full 6x PPC alphas to the CT during a match.

I saw where the PPCs hit, often have the lowest lag on a drop (50 milliseconds is getting into the higher end), and probably have the best true-to-server view possible in practice. A 60-point pinpoint alpha should pretty much remove the armor of any torso instantly.

Even if we accept that two of those PPCs hit other hitboxes because of parallax on convergence, the fact remains that the 'theoretical' damage those weapons should have been doing were not at all stacking up to the fact that the damage indicators of the hunchback were not changing nearly as radically as they should have - even if the hunchback was maxed on armor.

There again - I've had a duo of PPCs hit my center torso and take my armor with them (and only received damage in that section)... so I'm not sure if that indicates damage detection bugs, collision detection (with projectile) bugs, or what.

I'm inclined to believe that PPCs have a wonky projectile that the collision detection system likes to have issues with - failing to register some hits (perhaps multiple simultaneous hits) and possibly has some kind of 'bloom' that spreads to nearby hitboxes. On mechs with large singular hitboxes - PPCs deal all of that damage to that hitbox. On mechs with smaller single hitboxes, the trend is to bloom.

But no one can be sure except for PGI.

I'm not sure PGI even knows. I'll tell you one thing the Training Grounds need is moving targets.

[Davers]

General Taskeen, on 08 April 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

It would also mean zero chance of Piranha Mech.

PGI has complete control over what mechs are in game. Try running a Jagermech with ONLY 6 machine guns and see if your fear of the Piranha is justified.

[I am]

FrostCollar, on 08 April 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

All the bullets in the world don't mean a thing if they don't do much damage all together. Some mechs would equip a lot of MGs, true, but that's because they can't fill their ballistic slots any other way. Boating isn't a problem for balanced weapons - no one calls out the 6 ML Cicada 2A as overpowered, yet it is many times more powerful than the mythical 6 MG spider even if MG damage was increased greatly.


So a weapon should remain underpowered so people don't complain? Why not do that for every weapon then? Anyways, this argument doesn't hold water. PGI's confirmed that they see the simultaneous existence of "X is underpowered" and "X is overpowered" threads as a sign of balance. This is the internet anyways, if we let a few naysayers stop us nothing would ever get done.


Irrelevant to game balance and good game design.

Irrelevant to game balance and good game design.

Just because someone wants to wear a hair shirt doesn't mean that's the only type of shirt the store should stock. Also, want a challenge? Take less weapons.


How about balance based arguments? If a weapon in game isn't good at anything then it should be changed.

Oh frost, you showed me. Never said they were good reasons, rather I was grasping at straws to come up with "something". Who cares really I say.. youve got 19 + bigger balance related issues suffocating this game, and you guys are in here QQing at each other over MGs. Kinda funny.

I call that a great example of why everyone not playing this game, says balance in this game, is a joke. But no no, keep arguing about the 20th issue down the list of game killing issues. I am sure it will result in you getting exactly what you want, and will completely turn this nose dive right around. Honest.

Everyone thank our hero frost for saving MWO!

[FrostCollar]

You're welcome.