1386 replies to this topic

[Phoenix Branson]

They should double the ammo/ton for machine guns and raise the damage/bullet from 0.10 to 0.16.

[Lord of All]

Maverick01, on 27 June 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:

They should double the ammo/ton for machine guns and raise the damage/bullet from 0.10 to 0.16.

It should also weight a quarter of what it does now and we should be able to mount 2 in each crit location!

[Wolfyop]

the only problem I see is the spread and when you are moving and shotting you have to lead which is mhe when using lasers with it.

[SixBottles]

u dont have to lead. the bullets hit instantly.

[Wolfyop]

SixBottles, on 28 June 2013 - 08:53 AM, said:

u dont have to lead. the bullets hit instantly.

thats not what i feel when I use the 4 MG of my jager on a moving mech.

[stjobe]

Wolfyop, on 28 June 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

thats not what i feel when I use the 4 MG of my jager on a moving mech.

Perhaps it's not what you feel, but it's what's happening. You can check it yourself by doing a simple, 1-minute experiment:
1. Drop with your 4 MG Jager on Training Grounds.
2. Find a target, any target, and position yourself 200m away from it.
3. Fire your MGs at it. As you do so, look at the damage paperdoll in the upper right corner.
4. Does it start flashing the instant you pull the trigger? Yes it does.

Now the reason you feel you have to lead fast moving 'mechs probably have more to do with lag, client/server sync, and/or HSR than anything else - perhaps even hitbox de-synching (an old bug that seem to have resurfaced lately). But the MG "bullets" hit instantly out to their max range.

Edited by stjobe, 28 June 2013 - 11:45 AM.

[Wolfyop]

well what I see is shotting at the center of a moving mech does not hit but it does with laser.

Edited by Wolfyop, 28 June 2013 - 01:00 PM.

[SixBottles]

ok, again. mg's are instant hit weapons.

hits not registering can have multiple reasons, as some of us pointed out.

these include:

ping (lag)
engine (hsr)
desynch (data not updated correctly)
cone of fire (mg's spray alot)
out of maxrange

Edited by SixBottles, 28 June 2013 - 02:22 PM.

[neviu]

dakka dakk

[Leafia Barrett]

Utilyan, on 26 June 2013 - 02:54 AM, said:

Sheeeeeet......I wish it was a .50 caliber. Then i'd be pinging folks from like 2000 -3000m instead of 200m. And that ain't no cone fire neither.


So a fellah has armor missing and he's 2000m away......He's dead if I got 50 caliber machine guns.

If we stick to consitency, then a mech who for example lost its ct armor.....then that ct is now a unarmored target and at the mercy of a completely effective 50 cal.

Now I'm just talking about WWII 50 cals.........we talking about 1000 years into the future.....

current MG I shoot 10 shots a second...........

You want to give us 50 Cals....... hoo hoo hoo hoooo......ha ha haaaaa.....
Rate of fire
485–635 rounds/min (M2HB)^[3][4]
750–850 rounds/min (AN/M2)
1,200 rounds/min (AN/M3)
Muzzle velocity 2,910 ft/s (890 m/s) for M33 ball

Effective range 1,800 m (2,000 yd)^[3]
Maximum range 6,800 m (7,400 yd)


And i'm just giving it regular slugs, but you could look up armor piercing rounds........and then just advance the technology about 1000 years.

I'm down for that. If they make them accurate instead of cone of fire, I wouldn't care if they were still <1 DPS, I'd use them anyways, because that range is just too good to pass up.

[Deathlike]

I've kinda thought about the people that say "MGs are fine", and I think they get the WRONG idea that they are fine because of their damage #s. Damage #s reported in game are generally ONLY show the damage dealt by the weapon AND "crit damage" dealt by the weapon (which inflate the value, since they deal 12.5 times damage than normal) AND ammo explosions (which is why you get more than 15 pts of damage per shot with a Gauss Rifle).

If there was an info screen (a 3rd tab) showing breakdown of damage dealt to your enemy, you would find out that the "filler" damage dealt was PRIMARILY internal damage that was dealt... and really not representative of actual damage you dealt overall (since internal damage doesn't mean you're actually hurting internal armor more... just the components).

Edited by Deathlike, 29 June 2013 - 09:22 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Leafia Barrett, on 28 June 2013 - 06:33 PM, said:

I'm down for that. If they make them accurate instead of cone of fire, I wouldn't care if they were still <1 DPS, I'd use them anyways, because that range is just too good to pass up.

remember "effective range" in military jargon for machine guns is for suppression fire with chance to kill, not accurate directed fire on a target. The bullet is effective to that range, but it is not at full auto particularly accurate past the first shot. (Comparing what a 50 cal sniper rifle can do accurately, with a single shot is totally incorrect when dealing with a full auto anti material/vehicle weapon)

But still it's range is a HECK of a lot further than the TT or MWO version. I say give it the max effective range, just with a wicked cone of fire issue after 250 meters......

[Phoenix Branson]

The Machine Gun is almost there!

The developers should buff the damage from 0.10 to 0.16/bullet and significantly reduce the cone of fire.

[Thumper3]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 June 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

remember "effective range" in military jargon for machine guns is for suppression fire with chance to kill, not accurate directed fire on a target. The bullet is effective to that range, but it is not at full auto particularly accurate past the first shot. (Comparing what a 50 cal sniper rifle can do accurately, with a single shot is totally incorrect when dealing with a full auto anti material/vehicle weapon)

However, there is a BIG difference between the spray of a hand held, bipod, or even swivel vehicle mount and a weapon BOLTED to a stationary hardpoint on a 60 ton mech. The .50 cals mounted on a P-51 from 1944 certainly were accurate and lethal at farther than 120m. Watch gun camera footage sometime......sure, they coned a bit......but that was from thousands of feet away......from an airborne platform that was bouncing around in the air.........and 1944 technology. And are we firing lead bullets here? LOL We're sitting on nuclear reactors in our mechs.......where's the depleted uranium rounds that punch through armor and start fires and stuff!!!!!

In a game with freaking gauss, PPCs, and, oh yeah, the walking battle mechs they are attached to.....I have to believe they would have made some advancements in rifling and recoil control (recoil is what causes the bullets to spray obviously).

They can make an AC2 that can rapid fire with pinpoint accuracy to 2000m (with severely reduced damage dealing ability to armor at that range but would pop a watermelon easily and accurately LOL)......but when it came to MG they just pulled some old ones from the 19th century museum?

I don't buy it, it's not 'reality' based, it's game balance the reason they do what they do.

I agree with others. Up the damage, increase range and accuracy, reduce the crit chances and it's golden. Damage to .15, range to 270m, tighten the cone by at least half. Assign crit chance to a span of fire not per projectile. An AC2 fires every 1/2 second. So that is 2 projectiles per second, two crit chances. MGs are continuous fire, what, 50+ per second? So make it 3 crits per second of firing not 50. That would go a long way to balance and usefulness.

Or we could find ourselves with even more sextuplet MG Jager's spraying their loads all over the map.........

[Schattenwolf]

My oppinnion is: MGs are intendet as anti Personal weapons. they have a great bullet spread because if you sit in a mech cockpit you dont want to aim for each indiviual soldier. You aim roughly i their direction, press the fire button to get rid of a lot of tiny problems. And for this purpose you use the cheapest ammunition (lead, steel, brass, etc.).
Why put much efford in the developement of new weapons if the old MG works fine.

By the way the knifes and bayonets modern soldiers use funktion in the same way a 2000 year old roman sword does.
Use the right weapon for each purpose.

You can shoot at a mech with a MG but don't expect to much. For this purpose use an AK.


MGs should do only significant damage to bodyparts with low Armor

If you want to use mgs effectively take this mech: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Piranha

Edited by Schattenwolf, 30 June 2013 - 03:22 AM.

[SixBottles]

Schattenwolf, on 30 June 2013 - 02:53 AM, said:

My oppinnion is: MGs are intendet as anti Personal weapons.

yeah nice oppinion... just doesnt really reflect reality nor the game itself.

[stjobe]

Thumper3, on 29 June 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:

MGs are continuous fire, what, 50+ per second?

10 rounds per second, nominal rate. Lag and/or other effects often make this less in practice.

Schattenwolf, on 30 June 2013 - 02:53 AM, said:

My oppinnion is: MGs are intendet as anti Personal weapons.

Well, not to put too fine a point on it but your opinion is unfounded. In harsher language; it's wrong.

MGs were always a general-purpose weapon in BattleTech; 2 damage to 'mechs, 2-12 damage to infantry. Besides, there is no, nor will there ever be, infantry in MWO.

[Lord of All]

stjobe, on 30 June 2013 - 05:19 AM, said:

...MGs were always a general-purpose weapon in BattleTech; 2 damage to 'mechs, 2-12 damage to infantry. Besides, there is no, nor will there ever be, infantry in MWO.

History rewrite much? 2 damage at 90 max range was a joke and no-one used it in competitive TT. Even if we had to use a mech with Mg's we didn't take ammo as the liability outweighed the benefit.

Now if you want to argue that it should be different in MWO go right ahead but stop spreading ********.

[stjobe]

Lord of All, on 30 June 2013 - 07:46 AM, said:

History rewrite much? 2 damage at 90 max range was a joke and no-one used it in competitive TT. Even if we had to use a mech with Mg's we didn't take ammo as the liability outweighed the benefit.

Now if you want to argue that it should be different in MWO go right ahead but stop spreading ********.

I'm not the one trying to rewrite history here. If you want to refute any of the facts I've stated - 2 damage to 'mechs, 2-12 to infantry - go right ahead, I think you'll find the rules are on my side of the argument.

The MG as currently implemented is not the MG of BattleTech. Perhaps it shouldn't be, but I don't think it should mindlessly be put into a category of weapons that simply have no use in the infantry-less MWO either.

What I am fighting for, and have been fighting for since closed beta, is a MG that more closely resembles the MG from BattleTech, a weapon that's not useless against armour - low damage, yes sure, but not pointless damage - and that can be mounted on light 'mechs to make them have at least some use for their ballistic hard points.

In BattleTech, 2 damage is a lot when you only have 3-8 damage per location (like the TT Commando, just to take an example). Getting hit by a MG then actually strips you of 25-66% of your armour on that location. So the MG was a potent weapon for and against light 'mechs.

On heavier 'mechs, the MG damage wasn't what was important for them; they carried enough other weapons for that. No, what the MG brought for them was heat-less crit-chances. If you don't understand the importance of that I seriously doubt you ever played BattleTech, much less "competitive TT".

So please, I'd appreciate it if you stopped spreading your bovine manure. The MG was a viable weapon for any 'mech in BattleTech, and a real threat to lights.

[Bishop Steiner]

stjobe, on 30 June 2013 - 08:39 AM, said:

I'm not the one trying to rewrite history here. If you want to refute any of the facts I've stated - 2 damage to 'mechs, 2-12 to infantry - go right ahead, I think you'll find the rules are on my side of the argument.

The MG as currently implemented is not the MG of BattleTech. Perhaps it shouldn't be, but I don't think it should mindlessly be put into a category of weapons that simply have no use in the infantry-less MWO either.

What I am fighting for, and have been fighting for since closed beta, is a MG that more closely resembles the MG from BattleTech, a weapon that's not useless against armour - low damage, yes sure, but not pointless damage - and that can be mounted on light 'mechs to make them have at least some use for their ballistic hard points.

In BattleTech, 2 damage is a lot when you only have 3-8 damage per location (like the TT Commando, just to take an example). Getting hit by a MG then actually strips you of 25-66% of your armour on that location. So the MG was a potent weapon for and against light 'mechs.

On heavier 'mechs, the MG damage wasn't what was important for them; they carried enough other weapons for that. No, what the MG brought for them was heat-less crit-chances. If you don't understand the importance of that I seriously doubt you ever played BattleTech, much less "competitive TT".

So please, I'd appreciate it if you stopped spreading your bovine manure. The MG was a viable weapon for any 'mech in BattleTech, and a real threat to lights.

I played in Battletech Tournaments at conventions all around California for over a decade, and was a referee for MW:DA (I was desperate for an "official" Btech fix..... but glad it flopped, TBH), and you are so totally right.

One of the terrors of "Competitive TT"? The Clan Piranha. Those 12 Machine Guns, combined with it's speed made it a serious threat to even an Atlas. And there was a reason so many of the Solaris 7 box set mechs used them (no infantry on Solaris (well, not til later when they added a Power Armor, and post Jihad, infantry matches...). Individually, or in a pair, useful as a low heat light mech deterrent, and a decent CQB addition to a light mech. In mass, they were very potent, but kept in check by their short range.

The MGs are better in MWO now. I don't mind slapping a pair on some of my Mechs that carry REAL guns, as they do help with crits once my other weapons have toasted the armor. But in and of themselves, still largely useless. I am in the "Double their damage, halve their ammo load" crowd. Between the low DPS, and cone of fire, it is impossible to hold them on one location long enough to consider them a real threat at all. Even doubled, they will only hit the realm of "usable" as they still have crap for range and a horrendous CoF.

But then, at least the Lights that (and low end mediums) will have a viable weapon for ballistic hardpoints, so people on here quit crying for a useful non-canon light ballistic.

It's asinine, when that weapon already exists in canon and is just being ignored and or tweaked in all the wrong places.