Before I delve into quote madness, I have one thing to say regarding MG's not having their proper rate of fire in game. Don't ask the devs to buff MG damage to fix a bug with their rate of fire. Ask them to fix MG's rate of fire first, the buff MG damage so that they're balanced. It's better to fix the core problem rather than slap a patch job overtop of it and pretend it's fine.
stjobe, on 12 April 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:
Hahaha, how did I miss this, priceless!
Let me turn that question right back at you: Are you really okay with one SL doing as much damage as 4 MGs?
Because that's where we are right now. Not on paper, not SpreadsheetWarrior Online, but in-game, where it counts.
1. No, I am not, which is why I suggested a slew of buffs for the MG. (better range, better spread, moderate damage increase)
2. Turning a weapon from super UP to super OP doesn't fix the problem, it just makes a new one.
Esplodin, on 12 April 2013 - 06:23 AM, said:
Lack of knowledge about logical fallacies in debate:
Check.
Small laser: front loaded damage in 0.75 seconds for 3 damage. 2.25 seconds to twist incoming damage spread or cool down behind a building.
MG: To do the same damage as the small laser in the same time is. . .
wait for it. . .
4DPS (3 damage in 0.75 seconds)
The spider in that example would (using 150 damage per ton) go through a ton of ammo in 3.75 seconds of firing, making a ton of ammo go FAST. An Atlas back has 97ish points of armor if smurfy is anything to go by. So given the huge cone you are taking out the ENTIRE back, unless you are insanely close. Ergo, 5-7 seconds of unmolested rear access to an Alas for surprise butsex, costing about 1.25 TONS of ammo at 100% accuracy.
The fear is strong with this one. ALL OTHER BALLISTICS ARE ABOUT 4DPS, and they are NOT scary. Remove the cone of fire and let me use aim, then I'd be for 2DPS.
All other ballistics weigh at least 14x as much as a MG, so their DPS is not really relevant in my opinion. Better to compare it to a weapon with similar range and function, like an SL.
An MG should not do the same damage as an SL in .75 seconds. The reason for this is that the SL has factors that limit it's rate of fire (heat and Cooldown) whereas the MG does not. (technically ammo, but that's not a factor unless you drastically reduce the ammo/ton) If you want to compare things with a straight up 1SL vs 1 MG fight, then you have to use the MG properly.
SL Mech fires for .75 seconds. During this time, the MG mech twists to spread the damage. Result:3 damage spread across nonvital areas)
Now, MG mech fires for 2.25 seconds. (while the SL's are recharging) During this time, the SL mech is twisted to spread damage. Result: 9 damage spread across nonvital areas.
Now, the 3 damage vs. 9 damage is a bit exaggerated, because the MG has spread and needs to maintain the fire for longer, but it is still a very large damage gap. If it were a light vs light fight, you could argue that the MG mech won't have the full time to dump, so I'd be willing to admit that 4dps MG's would probably be okay for balance with faster mechs. However, the crux of the problem comes when you apply 4dps MG's against a slow target. Against an atlas, you're not going to be missing much, and if even 1/4 of your bullets hit the location you're aiming at, you're doing the same focused damage than an SL as well as shredding the surrounding armor with your spread.
At point blank 4MG spider could strip one of the rear armor locations of an atlas in about 2 seconds.(possibly less) The only cost to the spider for such immense power is 3-4 tons of gear. That is a problem.
4DPS MG's would be anti-assault cannons, and would remain mostly ineffective vs lights. I'd rather see spread reductions, range boosts, and moderate damage buffs instead of just multiplying MG's damage by 10 and pretending it's reasonable.
Finally, a strawman is only a strawman if my exageration is close enough to the truth where I can trick people into believing that I am representing your position. If I go to a political debate and jokingly say, "You can't vote for John, because his proposal will have him eat 100 babies a day!" that is not a strawman. Rather, it's such an ineffective strawman that it doesn't really count anymore, because no one will honestly believe that John really eats 100 babies a day. (1-2 sure, but no one has room to pack away 100)
I figured that 10DPS MG's were enough of an exaggeration to where people would understand it was being said with a grin, but if that's not the case I'm sorry. Next time I'll make it more clear that I'm teasing the opposition by exaggerating even further. Perhaps I'll even put a [gross exaggeration] tag around it to help ensure no one takes that portion seriously.
Honestly, I find the suggestion of 2DPS to be significantly too high, and 4 sounded like something a madman would say. Since there is some honest support for 4DPS, I suppose I didn't exaggerate enough when I said 10. Next time, I'll berate you all for suggesting 20 DPS MG's that double as Gauss Rifles.
Edited by LackofCertainty, 14 April 2013 - 07:36 AM.
15
