1386 replies to this topic

[stjobe]

Curccu, on 22 May 2013 - 11:08 PM, said:

Can I just start shooting mechs with my AMS its way more powerful than MG, with same tonnage.

The suggestion has been made a few times, by myself and others. I just need a way to trick my targeting computer into thinking enemy 'mechs are LRMs, and I'd have a proper MG in the AMS system.

AMS: 3.5 per bullet
MG: 0.08 per bullet

Does this make sense to anyone but the PGI devs?

[Curccu]

stjobe, on 23 May 2013 - 01:16 AM, said:

The suggestion has been made a few times, by myself and others. I just need a way to trick my targeting computer into thinking enemy 'mechs are LRMs, and I'd have a proper MG in the AMS system.

AMS: 3.5 per bullet
MG: 0.08 per bullet

Does this make sense to anyone but the PGI devs?

Well it does because it can shoot only missiles so that damage number is kinda irrelevant vs other weapons damage numbers.
but yeah +0,04 damage to MGs again and they might be useful.

[stjobe]

Curccu, on 23 May 2013 - 02:40 AM, said:

Well it does because it can shoot only missiles so that damage number is kinda irrelevant vs other weapons damage numbers.
but yeah +0,04 damage to MGs again and they might be useful.

Yeah, it totally makes sense that the weapon designed to shoot down 5.5kg missiles fires rounds that are 43 times more powerful than the rounds for the weapon designed to shoot at 20- to 100-ton armoured death machines

And I think +0.04 again doesn't really cut it. Double it again to 0.16 damage, and we'll see. Personally I think they'll have to get close to 0.2 per round before the MG is really worthwhile, since spread and continuous-fire mechanic reduces the effective DPS by roughly 50%

[Deathlike]

The problem with MGs trying to shoot down missiles at this point is that most mechs simply do not have a high enough torso twist (cannot look high enough) to adjust for the new LRM arc. It is simply not viable.

[shintakie]

stjobe, on 23 May 2013 - 04:23 AM, said:

Yeah, it totally makes sense that the weapon designed to shoot down 5.5kg missiles fires rounds that are 43 times more powerful than the rounds for the weapon designed to shoot at 20- to 100-ton armoured death machines

And I think +0.04 again doesn't really cut it. Double it again to 0.16 damage, and we'll see. Personally I think they'll have to get close to 0.2 per round before the MG is really worthwhile, since spread and continuous-fire mechanic reduces the effective DPS by roughly 50%

I just want 1.2 dps MG's that don't spread all over the friggin place. Is that too much to ask for?

[Deathlike]

shintakie, on 23 May 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

I just want 1.2 dps MG's that don't spread all over the friggin place. Is that too much to ask for?

According to PGI's reluctance to buff a terrible weapon, yes.

Edited by Deathlike, 23 May 2013 - 07:47 AM.

[Doelloos Verdwaald]

In the current setup the Machine gun was designed as a crit seeking weapon. The problem is that there is little to crit.

After some tests the last few days with my Spider 5K I realized that crits do happen and with the current damage of the MG something does break.. IF there is something to break.

The solution to make the Machine gun viable and keep gameplay interesting is to allow crits on all internal components.

The best and most interesting way would be to apply debufs depending on broken components. But the easiest way would just be to transfer the dmg from the crit to the section.

With that in place the current damage of the MG might even have to be reduced as crits would murder anything without armor. A lot like using them in infantry... as they were intended.

Boating would be balanced by the existence of armor and the extremely low normal damage.
But it would make dedicated lights viable and fun to play. Useless until the casing comes off but then a force to be reckoned with.

Teamwork and layers of gameplay, sounds awesome to me!

[Apologies if this has been said before. I have read this monster thread but you need to take notes to keep up ]

[stjobe]

Doelloos Verdwaald, on 24 May 2013 - 12:08 AM, said:

But it would make dedicated lights viable and fun to play.

No, it would only reduce ballistic lights to a pure support role - is that fun?

A weapon that can't damage armour is useless for 2/3rds of the fight - literally wasted tonnage. THAT is the problem with MGs in MWO's implementation of them.

Please note that in BattleTech, MGs were regular damage-dealers; there were no special "crit weapons" in BT.

[PanzerFurrry]

After couple of matches in my Spider-5K chassis, I think I am able to give my opinion of how new machine guns fare.

I don't consider myself anything above the average player. I also play both map modes (which isn't best for general statistics, but will give results comparable to average stats of my other weapons) and my average ping is 150-170. Do also note that all the pilot efficiencies (particularly fire convergence-Pinpoint trait) were present during this time. Yes, I elited all my spiders before it was cool

I haven't used MGs in a while, so those stats are raw stats after May 21st.


EDIT2, May 24th:


In 20 matches, whole damage done was 1247, that's 15.6 dmg per weapon per match, but it also should be noted that some conquest maps were finished bellow 50 dmg and once I got stuck on Tourmaline with 0 damage. However, compared to my other weapons (Small laser: 38.5 dmg per weapon per match, Medium laser: ~42 dmg per weapon per match), the overall damage of machine guns, considered that they were boated and mounted in the arms, is fairly low.

EDIT2: After 40 matches, average damage per weapon is 17.8.

However, in my honest opinion, damage per bullet is close to what I think it should be in the first place. I've completed several matches with 350 or 380 damage done, last man standing and out of ammo. Since maximum damage from 2 tons of ammo is 320, that is similar damage I can achieve piloting spiders with small or medium lasers.

The part that surprised me the most was weapon accuracy, which in my case was 46.9%. That is abysmally low for a close range weapon. Granted that we spider pilots defy gravity and jump all over the place like we are on meth (google "spiders on drugs"), but small and medium lasers do not seem to be affected (89 and 91% accuracy). I'll have to try machine guns on a more stable mech, but currently is feels like "spray and pray", since bullets have the lowest speed of all the weapons in the game (100, compared to LRM: 120, SRM:300 and SSRM:200). Even at optimum range, its is a bit tricky to target the part of the mech you want (damaged one), if the target isn't stationary. If my napkin math is correct, for a light mech, distanced 200m, moving with 41.95 m/s (150 km/h) perpendicular to you view, you will need to lead the target for a 91 m, that is 2.19 seconds of projectile speed, not considering latency.
This is not a problem solely for accuracy, but also for weapon convergence. Firing at a moving mech with lasers requires zero leading, but firing with machine guns often requires leading for several lengths of the mech, producing two different weapon convergences and inability to use both types of weapons at the same time.


Having a crit-seeking weapons is OK with me, I kind of like it, it adds thrill to the game. If you can land those shots on a part of the mech that is exposed, the internals will melt in a blink of an eye. Currently, there is a problem with critical slots, since engines and gyros cannot be crited, therefore devalues machine guns greatly. I also don't remember to see any destroyed jump jet, do jump jets even have hitpoints? I don't believe I ever heard Betty saying "jump jet destroyed".
But those bullets need to land and need to land reliably. Everybody is complaining about damage, but in my eyes, the real problem lies in projectile speed. If you can't target a damaged part with 'damage-over-time' weapon, then there is no point of having a crit seeking weapon with that particular mechanic.


How I think Machine Guns should be:

Damage per bullet: 0.1
Damage per second: 1 DPS
Projectile speed: 400 m/s
Lower crit stats accordingly (-25% ?)

I wouldn't really increase the damage any further, one tone of ammo will have a potential of 200 dmg, which is good. But the advantage lies in the fact, that shots could be landed reliably under optimal range (120m) though still tricky above optimal range and/or moving target.

EDIT: Also my observation about machine guns is, that they should fire 10 rounds per second, but currently they don't do that. On Spider 5K every second should consume 40 rounds of ammo, however that number is slightly lower, around 30. I've noticed this due to recycle time of medium laser (1+3), in the time medium laser should recycle, machine guns should consume 160 bullets. The real number is around 115. That means machine guns only fire 7 rounds per second instead of 10.

I'll be checking this in next matches.

EDIT2: Added new picture with new stats after 40 matches.

Edited by PanzerFurrry, 24 May 2013 - 01:22 PM.

[Doelloos Verdwaald]

stjobe, on 24 May 2013 - 01:07 AM, said:

No, it would only reduce ballistic lights to a pure support role - is that fun?

A weapon that can't damage armour is useless for 2/3rds of the fight - literally wasted tonnage. THAT is the problem with MGs in MWO's implementation of them.

Please note that in BattleTech, MGs were regular damage-dealers; there were no special "crit weapons" in BT.

I usually play a support role, so for me yes.

But that aside I agree that all types should have damage potential and it's something we're seriously lacking in light ballistics. But I would hate to see MGs retooled to fill that void at the expense of an interesting game mechanic.

Thinking it through, a damage increase would not negate this mechanic and keep us useful on all targets.
I see your point sir.

[Lord of All]

stjobe, on 24 May 2013 - 01:07 AM, said:

No, it would only reduce ballistic lights to a pure support role - is that fun?

Nope, Lights have always been front line brawlers.

Quote

A weapon that can't damage armour is useless for 2/3rds of the fight - literally wasted tonnage. THAT is the problem with MGs in MWO's implementation of them.
Please note that in BattleTech, MGs were regular damage-dealers; there were no special "crit weapons" in BT.

Actually this is patently false. MG's were crit seakers just bye there rate of fire. Every bullet had a chance of a crit.

[ICEFANG13]

What about their damage, it was 2 wasn't it? Like an A/C-2 was?

[FupDup]

Lord of All, on 24 May 2013 - 08:16 AM, said:

Actually this is patently false. MG's were crit seakers just by there rate of fire. Every bullet had a chance of a crit.

MGs worked like Autocannons in TT: in fluff you shot a bunch of rounds per turn, but in mechanics you only damaged a single hit location and could only fire once per turn (unless using UACs or RACs). You used up one round of ammo per shot, so a TT MG could fire 200 times. High rate of fire doesn't mean anything beyond fluff until you get into Mechwarrior videogames.

As for crit-seekers, every weapon had equal probability of getting a crit. All you could do is use multiple projectiles per shot like LBX cluster rounds to stack the probability of each individual projectile (which had the same individual probability as a normal round but you shot more rounds, therefore increasing the overall likelihood of at least one getting a crit). "Crit seeking" is an invention of PGI's.

Edited by FupDup, 24 May 2013 - 08:58 AM.

[Lord of All]

FupDup, on 24 May 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:

MGs worked like Autocannons in TT: in fluff you shot a bunch of rounds per turn, but in mechanics you only damaged a single hit location and could only fire once per turn (unless using UACs or RACs). You used up one round of ammo per shot, so a TT MG could fire 200 times. High rate of fire doesn't mean anything beyond fluff until you get into Mechwarrior videogames.

As for crit-seekers, every weapon had equal probability of getting a crit. All you could do is use multiple projectiles per shot like LBX cluster rounds to stack the probability of each individual projectile (which had the same individual probability as a normal round but you shot more rounds, therefore increasing the overall likelihood of at least one getting a crit). "Crit seeking" is an invention of PGI's.

Maybe my memory is fading after 20 years. I seem to remeber rolling muliple times when a MG got internal shots. Bites when you can't rely on your memory anymore.

I only used them when forced to so all I remeber is they were worthless and I wouldn't carry a full load of ammo if I was forced to use them.

[stjobe]

Lord of All, on 24 May 2013 - 09:38 AM, said:

I seem to remeber rolling muliple times when a MG got internal shots.

Any weapon could get multiple crits: A to-hit roll of '2' was a crit chance, and then you rolled on the crit table:
2-7 no crit
8-9 1 crit
10-11 2 crits
12 head/limb blown off, or 3 crits if RT/CT/LT

FupDup is right that the MG didn't have any special crit chance - if anything, LBX and missiles were the "crit weapons" since they got multiple to-hit rolls, and therefore multiple crit chances.

Lord of All, on 24 May 2013 - 09:38 AM, said:

I only used them when forced to so all I remeber is they were worthless and I wouldn't carry a full load of ammo if I was forced to use them.

They were extremely dangerous to light 'mechs, and added no-heat damage and extra crit chances against heavier 'mechs.

[CateranEnforcer]

PanzerFurrry, on 24 May 2013 - 01:36 AM, said:

The part that surprised me the most was weapon accuracy, which in my case was 46.9%.

Probably not as bad as you think, compared to lasers. Lasers count as scoring a hit even if you only graze the traget for a tick or two of damage. MGs fire like a laser, but its as if each tick of damage counts as it's own attack. I bet you'd see much lower accuracy numbers for lasers if they showed you how many ticks of damage you missed.

[BlackIronTarkus]

Im new to this game and I support this thread. BUFF MACHINE GUNS!

[Sir Ratburger]

Sorry if its a bit late

The update to buff the damage and range of the machine guns although a good step forward (it shows the devs are at least reading the topics on the forums... but not the content)

The damage is still not enough, making the range of the weapon better also means the spread is more and the bullets are so damned slow you either end up missing or just pepper the target with lots of low damage shots... lowering the crits is also a terrible idea.

so essentially in a nutshell we still have a short range,wide spread/inaccurate, ammo chewing, low damage useless weapon that still doesn't even compare to a small laser <---- which has better accuracy,tight shots, range,damage and the added benefit of unlimited ammo which means lower tonnage.

Does it make sense?! I love the look and sound of the machine gun but its just useless. I really wouldnt mind if the accuracy and spread was so bad if the damage was at least decent.

[Phoenix Branson]

Buff damage per bullet to no less than 0.12.

Edited by Maverick01, 25 May 2013 - 07:28 PM.

[Lord of All]

This thread should be locked and a new one started as the MG is no longer the same as it was when this thread originated and therefore those jumping in now will not be current.