1386 replies to this topic

[stjobe]

Michael Costanza, on 09 April 2013 - 02:32 AM, said:

And again, we're talking about MG. Of all the things the Devs could be working on, would you rather the Devs be focusing on MG balancing or something else like 12v12 or new content or Community Warfare?

We're talking about a whole class of 'mechs - the ballistic lights - being kept non-viable because the devs won't take the time to change the per-projectile damage number from 0.04 to (e.g.) 0.12. It's not a very complicated change, I assure you.

I'd bet good money any of the devs could make the change in less time than it would take them to read this thread.

It's good to take a break from what you're focusing on now and then, why not make the next break a "take the five minutes it takes to buff the MG damage"-break?

Edit: Ah, they also need to change the crit damage modifier from 12.5 to 4.17 if they want to keep the crit damage the same as now. So it's actually two numbers that need changing.

Edited by stjobe, 09 April 2013 - 04:22 AM.

[Kurayami]

stjobe, on 09 April 2013 - 04:12 AM, said:

....

nah assuming amount of bugs etc i think they forgot 1st rule of coding - "always comment **** you are coding" and don't want to change it simply because no one can remember which line actually represent said damage.

Edited by Kurayami, 09 April 2013 - 04:18 AM.

[Harmin]

jeffsw6, on 09 April 2013 - 03:59 AM, said:

It's not just the Machine Gun issue that is a problem. The underlying cause is:

• QA is ineffective
  
• DEVs are clearly either completely burned out / detached from the game, or just not very bright
  
• Community manager & moderators are not doing an effective job of aggregating player feedback

I hope PGI will realize that they have these problems, and work on fixing them. It's not just the Machine Gun. It's the Flamer, too. And well, SSRMs. UAC5 jam. Hitboxes. It goes on and on. For ****'s sake, the backspace key still doesn't work!

I must say that I am very impressed by PGI/IGP's ability to be tolerant in the face of hostile players like you. If I were them, I'd simply lock accounts of beta testers who seem incapable of rationale discourse and who don't constructively, but destructively, contribute to the testing process.

Going round and insulting content creators because they happen to create content in the way you don't fully approve of is in my opinion destructive behaviour.

I think that Machine Guns are fine the way they are. They are filling a very particular niche at the moment which I think they are well suited for.

-Armin

[stjobe]

Harmin, on 09 April 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

I think that Machine Guns are fine the way they are.

How's that 5K working out for you, Harmin?

Edited by stjobe, 09 April 2013 - 04:23 AM.

[Barghest Whelp]

Kurayami, on 09 April 2013 - 04:09 AM, said:

They should just TRY AT LEAST ONCE. Making LRM extremely OP - done, PPC - done, LL - done, ML - done, GAUSS - need i even mention this one? MG - no f u.
This is beta - what harm could be done with simply listening to the community opinion and giving a little boost to the MG's? at least for one patch? or is it THAT hard to comment "//this part of code contains mg buffs - modify\delete if necessary to roll back changes " in some miraculous case of MG's being op after patch? or are devs that afraid of ultrapwnage non ecm 2mg raven?
i mean i dont ask for thing to be giant killer but when i even theoretically cannot kill light mech with it? even when im boating them? all while being one and only low end ballistic available? WORKING AS INTENDED?

Yes, well it's either buff the darn things or speed up time to we can get the half ton short range mini gauss rifle, or the light AC's. And this doesn't only hurt the lighter mechs designed to carry MG's, but also limits builds for bigger mechs.

As it stands, it's either AC20, or 2+ UAC5. Everything else is just a joke. Well, apart from some AC2 builds I guess, but it's not really my cup of tea.

Edit: yeah, AC2 is way too much heat, and smaller mechs don't have room for enough heatsinks to be effective with them.

Edited by Barghest Whelp, 09 April 2013 - 04:26 AM.

[Slanski]

From the heat of the moment:

MGs in their current state are a placebo weapon. You get visual feedback of shells, you hear loud machingun fire, but in terms of damage you do as much as the kid playing next to his dad with a disconnected controller. When the enemy dies you assume you must have done damage to him. Indeed, you have, with your Laser.

Dear Devs, don't try to be original. Just give us MGs that are competative with Small Lasers and give light mechs a viable, non specialized all round ballistic choice.

This gun is a staple, not a playground for niche roles.

[Vassago Rain]

Bad weapon. I quit flamers, machineguns, the smaller ACs, and pulse lasers half a year ago.

Nothing's gonna be done about them now, either.

[Mahws]

They really shouldn't have told us that they only take note of 'trends' of feedback.

Next up on the trend wagon of things nearly everyone thinks are useless but PGI seemingly doesn't:
Flamers
Small Pulse Lasers
Narc
AMS (I think someone fired an LRM5 at me once, might have helped with that)
BAP
CASE
Single Heatsinks

[FupDup]

We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in Forest Colony, we shall fight on the rivers and cities, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the caves, we shall defend our oil rig, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the spawning zones, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender!

Edited by FupDup, 09 April 2013 - 04:34 AM.

[Barghest Whelp]

Mahws, on 09 April 2013 - 04:27 AM, said:

They really shouldn't have told us that they only take note of 'trends' of feedback.

Next up on the trend wagon of things nearly everyone thinks are useless but PGI seemingly doesn't:
Flamers
Small Pulse Lasers
Narc
AMS (I think someone fired an LRM5 at me once, might have helped with that)
BAP
CASE
Single Heatsinks

Yes, that's why I put it in my signature. Hopefully they'll listen now.

[Vassago Rain]

Mahws, on 09 April 2013 - 04:27 AM, said:

They really shouldn't have told us that they only take note of 'trends' of feedback.

Next up on the trend wagon of things nearly everyone thinks are useless but PGI seemingly doesn't:
Flamers
Small Pulse Lasers
Narc
AMS (I think someone fired an LRM5 at me once, might have helped with that)
BAP
CASE
Single Heatsinks

I don't think anyone is under the impression NARC is anything but a waste of time. In fact, if you can find a single player who uses it regularly, and believes it has some kind of influence on the game, I'll drop in a 6 NARC A1 for a whole day.

[Harmin]

stjobe, on 09 April 2013 - 04:23 AM, said:

How's that 5K working out for you, Harmin?

It's a bit meh. I built it, then I have done 4 games last night before an opportunity for some 8 manning arose.

In those 4 games I was trying to stay out of trouble initially and just sniped at the opposition with the ER Laser. I used an Advanced Sensor and Target Info Gathering module to have a small edge identifying weak spots.

Once I found an opportune target I closed in at max speed (a measly 133kph due to no elites unlocked) and then machine gunned the weak spot. For example I took down a yellow-back cored atlas within a second or so sitting its back. Annoyingly I didn't get the kill shot.

The problem to me is that the spider is just not a very resilient platform. Out of the 4 games I got killed twice, once one-shotted from a 4 ppc stalker, second had a 150kph raven just not letting go and in a 133kph spider you're just minced meat.

I ended up with a kill-shot in some wild brawl at one point but I couldn't tell if that was MG or ERL fire.

So for now, 0.5 K/d ratio after 4 games.

I will probably do another handful of games tonight and if I get the chance do a screen shot of stats afterwards.

-Armin

[MadPanda]

Harmin, on 09 April 2013 - 04:32 AM, said:

Once I found an opportune target I closed in at max speed (a measly 133kph due to no elites unlocked) and then machine gunned the weak spot. For example I took down a yellow-back cored atlas within a second or so sitting its back. Annoyingly I didn't get the kill shot.

In one second your 4xMG's did 1.6dmg. I don't think you understand anything about this game.

[Kekkone]

I threw together some light builds in smurfys. I was trying to maximize max sustainable DPS at short range, because that's the category the MG falls in imo. I left heavier mechs out because 2 - 3 t of weapons on anything heavier than a light can't really be considered primary weapon systems (and also i'm lazy). Here's what i came up with:

JR7-F 4.26 DPS
JR7-D 4.18 DPS
RVN-3L 3.79 DPS
MG Variants:
RVN-4X 5.05 DPS (0.8 DPS from MG's)
SDR-5K 3.72 DPS (1.6 DPS from MG's)

So on paper it seems as MG's are fine as is. That is not the case. This is where 100% uptime and ridiculously low flight speed comes in.

Suggestion:
- Buff the MG damage to 0.08 / shot
- Increase bullet velocity to 500
- Increase max range to 270 (optimal at 90 still)
- Reduce ammo to 1800? (more in line with other ballistics)
- Halve the critical damage multiplier

This would bump the 4x to 5.85 DPS, the 5K to 5.32 DPS, and make targeting a single component easier.

Problem:
Even with this buff in damage, a 5K could cockpit a mech in a bit over 10 seconds with MG's alone. However i don't think that would become an issue, as a mech shooting at anothers cockpit is bound to get shot back.

The cockpitting issue has to be taken into consideration though, as asking for too high DPS on fast firing weapons will result in cockpit-warrior.

Edited by Kekkone, 09 April 2013 - 05:03 AM.

[stjobe]

Harmin, on 09 April 2013 - 04:32 AM, said:

The problem to me is that the spider is just not a very resilient platform.

You've just discovered another of the many, many reasons why having the MG be a "crit weapon" is a bad, bad idea.

Ballistic lights aren't very resilient. Yet they are forced, by the nature of the MG they have no choice but to use, to get in close (inside 90m) to have any chance of getting some use out of those MGs.

Not only do they need to get in close where they're easier to hit, they also need to face their enemy at all times in order for the stream of bullets to do any appreciable damage. Which of course means their enemy - who probably uses non-useless weapons - has little trouble dispatching the "not very resilient" light.

Looking forward to more reports from your 5K adventures. It'll be interesting to see if it'll be as painful as mine were.

[Eric darkstar Marr]

Okay so you all want a buff to MG I take it. Now aside from those that are sheepish bandwagon hopping I would really like to know why.

If they are buffed it will just be the next thing that people complain about on a epic level, I mean really if it did 1 dps a second the entire game would change but for such a negative way.

You all think min/max is bad right now really thing for a minute every patch or so its OMG nerf this nerf that OMG snipefest OMG missile.

I stand behind the current state of MGs, I know its painful to ask people to use common sense on a forum but really do you want to see fields of spiders only for like 2 weeks straight because drr... DAKKA.

[MadPanda]

Eric darkstar Marr, on 09 April 2013 - 05:01 AM, said:

Okay so you all want a buff to MG I take it. Now aside from those that are sheepish bandwagon hopping I would really like to know why.

If they are buffed it will just be the next thing that people complain about on a epic level, I mean really if it did 1 dps a second the entire game would change but for such a negative way.

You all think min/max is bad right now really thing for a minute every patch or so its OMG nerf this nerf that OMG snipefest OMG missile.

I stand behind the current state of MGs, I know its painful to ask people to use common sense on a forum but really do you want to see fields of spiders only for like 2 weeks straight because drr... DAKKA.

Have you heard about lasers? Do you know how much dps they do? Do you know that light mechs can already equip multiple lasers? Have you heard about the jenner that can equip 6 lasers? Have you heard about whining about the 6 laser jenner? Please explain in great detail how MG's that are buffed to do less damage than a small laser will suddenly be OMFG SO OP MG WARRIOR SPIDER ONLINE!

And just to add that heat is not a valid complaint. Nobody wants a copy of small laser. They should be different and the difference is small laser generates heat and the MG has to cope with ammo.

Edited by MadPanda, 09 April 2013 - 05:07 AM.

[Esplodin]

Closing all the MG threads is a crap move, but the so was spamming MG topics. I think I'm done making suggestions to this game, since feedback has just been confirmed to be not wanted. I'd bet the mod that closed the threads is yet another heavy/assault driver with an agenda to nerf lights into the ground because they don't want them to be viable. I have half a mind to report all the closure messages, since it is just bad form mods. Way to promote community.

Last time I'm posting, and PGI: fix your broken weapon. I'm generally supportive and sympathetic to your plight. This is a well established title with a passionate fan base whom have been starved for content for 10 or so years. Mouths are going to foam. It is a monumental undertaking. I get that, but for frapping hecks sake have a full time community manager who's sole job is to be a liaison between the community and the core team. No, twitter posts and occasional forum hit and runs do not count. I only skim the ask the Devs because "In the works" "Maybe" etc. tells me nothing of substance. Monthly creative director update is nice 50,000km view, but you can't test off of it.

This is a Beta that has no beta feel, other then bugs. There should be at a minimum weekly communication on direction, upcoming changes, areas you are working on SO WE CAN TEST THEM AND PROVIDE FEEDBACK. So far it has been schmit storm after schmitstorm, controversy after controversy because the community here is usually the last to find out about upcoming changes. Beyond the game bugs, management needs to evaluate their communications plan with the community. I have ideas. If management wants them, you know how to contact me. I passionately want this title to succeed, as do many here.

Last thing I'm posting about machine guns:

A 6MG Jager would not be scary. Even at 4 DPS per gun. Yes, even boating 24 DPS with 0 heat. Even with 150 pts damage per ton ammo buff.

1) Cone of fire way worse then an LBX. At 90m you'd be hard pressed to hit even 50% of the time, and what did hit would spray all sections.
2) LOLtastic, facehugging range, and gimped max range.
3) Cockpit forward 100% of weapon on target time to achieve DPS. No torso twist damage spread for you! Can you say headshot FTW?

Face ripping damage you can't ignore up close, easily mitigated by not humping the other mechs leg. No other weapons have this many negatives associated with their damage profile. What MG should do:

Rate of fire: 10 shots per second, constant stream of fire
Points per shot: 0.4 ( 4 DPS )
Ammo per ton: 375 (150 pts of damage per ton)
Heat: 0
Range: 90m
Max range: 270m
Cone of fire: 10m diameter @ 90m
Sound: keep - they are the only thing that IS right
Animation: Tone down the burst animation to 50% size. They are just comically gigantic, and are bright enough to dim some maps.

Anything less then this level of buff is not worth mounting. Period. I'm willing to bet those who disagree are mainly assault/heavy pilots who deep down just want lights removed from the game. And yes, lights should be able to clean your clock - it is a game where EVERY metric is based off of damage and kills.

/rant off

[Nicholas Carlyle]

The mods and devs here crack me up.

Like I've been saying to all the people that want me to be positive, and give constructive criticism and such.

PGI DOES NOT RESPOND TO NICE. At all. Period.

Garth acts like a complete putz every time he posts now.

No one from this company is interested in what we have to say.

[Viper69]

Hayashi, on 09 April 2013 - 02:17 AM, said:

So, please continue all Machine Gun discussions here. A 200-page reply train would probably invoke more than a bit of attention.

it also makes it easy to ignore as well since they are all in one place.