1386 replies to this topic

[ICEFANG13]

Kmieciu, on 18 April 2013 - 11:31 PM, said:

2 PPC + 2 ML + 2 SL is not a great example, because you only have 4 energy hardpoints total on the K2.
But, speaking theoretically, PPC are so ineffective inside 90 meters (linear damage drop), you should not fire PPCs and small lasers at the same time. So you are firing only 2xML+2xSL. Using 16 DHS (+ elite level cool run) it would take over 17 minutes to overheat your mech. Therefore 2xML+2xSL are heat neutral.

Actually humorously

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...a572c8482a1ca57

It is 100% heat neutral. The 14 tons and 6 slots are for the PPCs that could be placed if the MGs were magically energy hardpoints.

[Esplodin]

6.6 DPS vs. 5.8 DPS

When it is understood why the 5.8 DPS mech is way, way, WAY more common then the 6.6DPS mech you will understand that a high DPS machine gun is NOT going to be OP.

Edited by Esplodin, 19 April 2013 - 05:24 AM.

[Foxdie]

Bump bump bump . Seriously fix'm!

[FireSlade]

At this point with 4721 posts, dozens of topics, over several months (even the forum moderators are behind this and consolidated the topic for us) the Devs haven’t even said one thing about looking into this or making anything else to take up the light ballistics role. All we have seen is them saying in Ask the Devs 35 Answers is that the machine gun is at a point where they are happy with its performance and to imagine a 6 mg Spider. How they have the game setup with PUGs being predominant over everything else doesn’t promote teamwork or using niche support weapons to help their team; instead it promotes boating and everyman for himself to get the max damage out. I have even seen WoW thought patterns with people saying things about how horrible that their team is or “WTF how come your damage is so low?” etc. How many of you(Pilots) have seen people using tag to help the LRM support mechs against ECM or scouts tagging the enemy with a NARC to give people a lockable enemy for 20 sec? It’s why we have so much trouble with ECM and why LRM isn’t used much. At the current damage levels with splash damage, LRMs pack a punch (30 missiles: 21dmg – 40 missiles: 28dmg); while not horribly damaging it softens then enemy up to allow a direct fire teammate to get a killing blow with much less damage taken.

With so little teamwork emphasized and with PUG style matches it does not make sense to put support gear on your mech in hopes that someone on your team may be able to utilize them. So how does a 4-6mg (1.6 - 2.4dps) Spider that must give up maneuverability to keep their crosshairs on the enemy make a viable mech when teams don’t work as a team. I’ve used the mgs on the stock K2 (changed to ER to lose the 90meter minimum) to see if they mattered. I had to give up damage to lead the target to get hits with the horribly slow MG bullets and swapping back and forth between the main weapons and the MGs caused me to take more damage and deal less on just the time it took to aim alone. 2 ERPPCs versus 2 MGs taking out an unarmored section the PPCs win out every time. Dumping the 2 med lasers and using flamers makes more sense than keeping the MGs in terms of negative effects against the enemy. But as PGI has ignored this topic and has not even tried to communicate with us that they’ll look into it I doubt that they even care about our thoughts and that we’re wasting our time.

[RealityCheck]

I sincerely hope you are wrong FireSlade. There has been a lot of constructive and intellectual dialog on this forum that has honestly impressed me. Its not a "Oh my favorite weapon of all time sucks, buff it" whine thread. Proof from statistics, in game experience, and good old fashioned math has been laid out as to WHY it should be buffed.

It is my hope that when the answers for "Ask the Devs 36!" comes out, PGI will make a statement (fingers crossed). I would think that in order to research the questions about machine guns (i.e. how the community feels on the subject), they would have to evalute the "trends." Thanks to the moderators, all of the issues pertaining to the machine gun has been funneled here. This is not a bad thing as my paragraph above explains. I know one thread doesn't reflex several "trends", but it containes the summed complaints of players along with this multi paged thread. Maybe I'm too naive, maybe not. Either way, I'll be patient and hope the system shines through.

RealityCheck.

[stjobe]

RealityCheck, on 19 April 2013 - 02:14 PM, said:

It is my hope that when the answers for "Ask the Devs 36!" comes out, PGI will make a statement

I sincerely hope so. Apart from this 27-page, 527-post thread, the first post links to 45 other threads, with 4,196 more posts.

So that's 46 threads and 4,723 posts.

Well, 4,724 now.

How's that for "trend"?

[Deathlike]

PGI and MGs trending downward.

[LackofCertainty]

Kmieciu, on 18 April 2013 - 11:31 PM, said:

2 PPC + 2 ML + 2 SL is not a great example, because you only have 4 energy hardpoints total on the K2.
But, speaking theoretically, PPC are so ineffective inside 90 meters (linear damage drop), you should not fire PPCs and small lasers at the same time. So you are firing only 2xML+2xSL. Using 16 DHS (+ elite level cool run) it would take over 17 minutes to overheat your mech. Therefore 2xML+2xSL are heat neutral.

If you are paying very close attention to details:
I was under the impression that damage drops linearly under 90m for ppc, and linearly for weapons beyond their optimum range. Unless that isn't the case, firing a ppc at 80m or an SL at 100m (or MG, if they're given the accuracy buff I want) isn't the end of the world. I know I routinely fire ML's at targets up to 350m or so, and I'll chuck a LL at targets out to 600m. Ballistics are even more lenient with range since they have twice the sub-optimal range. (Though since they're tied to ammo maybe not so much)

If you care more about the idea than the specifics:
Replace PPC with ERPPC , and my point remains valid. If you have other weapons that generate enough heat to allow your mech to overheat, then you can't ignore the additional heat an SL generates over an MG.

Edit:
Apparently we aren't allowed to use the word a.n.a.l., so I replaced it.

Edited by LackofCertainty, 19 April 2013 - 03:07 PM.

[Kairae]

LackofCertainty, on 19 April 2013 - 03:04 PM, said:

If you are paying very close attention to details:
I was under the impression that damage drops linearly under 90m for ppc, and linearly for weapons beyond their optimum range. Unless that isn't the case, firing a ppc at 80m or an SL at 100m (or MG, if they're given the accuracy buff I want) isn't the end of the world. I know I routinely fire ML's at targets up to 350m or so, and I'll chuck a LL at targets out to 600m. Ballistics are even more lenient with range since they have twice the sub-optimal range. (Though since they're tied to ammo maybe not so much)

If you care more about the idea than the specifics:
Replace PPC with ERPPC , and my point remains valid. If you have other weapons that generate enough heat to allow your mech to overheat, then you can't ignore the additional heat an SL generates over an MG.

Edit:
Apparently we aren't allowed to use the word a.n.a.l., so I replaced it.

Your point is valid. But it (in itself) isn't enough to invalidate the points that MGs suck.

Heat vs Ammo, Alpha vs DPS are balancing points. A 2 DPS MG will probably outshine a SL (2/3 damage within 1 second exposure for no heat) whereas a 1-1.5 DPS MG will probably be balanced against each other.

[shintakie]

stjobe, on 19 April 2013 - 02:27 PM, said:

I sincerely hope so. Apart from this 27-page, 527-post thread, the first post links to 45 other threads, with 4,196 more posts.

So that's 46 threads and 4,723 posts.

Well, 4,724 now.

How's that for "trend"?

You got your wish! They responded.

Quote

CCQ2 (as described by stjobe):
Q: Would you please reconsider buffing the MG's damage?
A: We are always looking at weapons. No plans to buff damage specifically.

Guess PGI really does live in a fantasy land where MG's actually work and 6 MG Spiders hang out with 3 second Jenners.

edit -

My new plan is to ask over and over and over again in every ask the devs until I quit why the 3C, 5K, and 4X are the only mechs in the entire game now and for the foreseeable future that are relegated to support when every single other mech variant can actually do damage.

Edited by shintakie, 19 April 2013 - 04:06 PM.

[Red3]

Had an Idea a few minutes ago, its probably already been suggested somewhere, but Im not going to go through all the different threads to try to find it. So here it goes.

Make MG buffs a quirk, for those mechs that that rely on ballistic hardpoints but lack the weight to equip the larger weapons to fill the slots. Especially the Spider 5k and the Cicada 3c, but possibly including Mechs whose stock loadouts include machine guns such as the Raven 4x or even the Catapult K2 (heck even the Jagermech 5s could make use of it) with a lesser multiplier.

I'd suggest a x2 multiplier for the Spider and Cicada, and a x1.5 for the others.

But again, its probably already been suggested somewhere, I just dont want to spend hours going through all the flotsam to find the fish.

[Nihtgenga]

The interpretation for "We are always looking at weapons. No plans to buff damage specifically." is clear for me - it's a polite way of expressing: "We are balancing - but nothing on the MG, because we think it is fine, and therefore just have decided to ignore you." They have ignored a ton of constructive feedback last time, they have ignored it this time again, and chances are that they will not care about in the future; regardless how often we try or how elaborate and striking our arguments are. They do not even think it is worth to give any more explanation, why they disagree with us.

So the devs will do something with the LRMs ("...over the next patches"), implement clan weapons even now (shouldn't they show up only MUCH later in the timeline? Aw, f...orget the promised timeline, the dumb beta players will for sure throw with buckets of Mech Credits for getting them...), spend considerable amount on decoration objects for mech cockpits, but MG will stay wasted tonnage and crippling some of the lights built around ballistic hardpoints (hooray for the Flea with both!) - like the heat management is not about to appear ever, the flamer will just be there for optical purposes, and so on. Love it, or leave it.

This treatment does not feel like we would be real, valuable beta-testers - but rather considered naive cash-cows that can be used for raising money by MCs already on a nowhere to finished product, on which we do not have any of the influence usually connected with beta-testing at all.
My2Cents (no, not Centurions this time): I do regret less and less to have tempered myself not to spend real money on MWO, until it is in a state of being close to release quality.

Edited by Nihtgenga, 20 April 2013 - 02:03 AM.

[Geistmd]

Sad patch didnt change nothing... Next patch last chance. Over and out.

[General Taskeen]

FireSlade, on 19 April 2013 - 08:44 AM, said:

With so little teamwork emphasized and with PUG style matches it does not make sense to put support gear on your mech in hopes that someone on your team may be able to utilize them.

That's basically the balance that this game has become. "HOPE," that someone has something, like "hard" BIG FISH counters to ECM.

MG's suck and PGI should feel bad.

[stjobe]

I paid $120 in August, that's eight months ago. Just the other day I thought to myself "self, 120/8 is 15, so you've basically pre-paid eight months of sub with those $120. Time to buy some more MC to show your support".

But after that non-answer in ATD36A, I'm not going to bother.

Frankly, if they can't even *try* what is a very simple change, I have little hope that this game will ever have functional MGs - and it also doesn't bode well for the game ever being balanced.

Sorry for the negativity, but that sh!tty non-answer by Garth really got to me.

[ICEFANG13]

It should have been expected, personal opinions on it aside, I'm sure everyone remembers how a lot of people disliked ECM, and had a lot of feedback, and it was "working as intended", and it took what 4 months for that command chair post which kinda said the same thing?

The only thing PGI has been quick to change is LRMs, has anyone noticed that? LRMs get hotfixed more than anything (which is now in April 2nd patch, actually May, actually no ETA).

I'm not surprised that they think MGs are worthwhile. Do you know how dumb this sounds, but in this case, I think it's appropriate.

PGI you do not know, and you are wrong, I don't care that you are making the game, MGs, and Flamers, and to a lesser degree NARC and LBX10 are all worthless. No one would say that they are worthy weapon systems, of course you haven't said that (working as intended=/=good), which makes me think that you want it to be terrible.

[Critical Fumble]

ICEFANG13, on 20 April 2013 - 06:15 AM, said:

Spoiler

It should have been expected, personal opinions on it aside, I'm sure everyone remembers how a lot of people disliked ECM, and had a lot of feedback, and it was "working as intended", and it took what 4 months for that command chair post which kinda said the same thing?
The only thing PGI has been quick to change is LRMs, has anyone noticed that? LRMs get hotfixed more than anything (which is now in April 2nd patch, actually May, actually no ETA).
I'm not surprised that they think MGs are worthwhile. Do you know how dumb this sounds, but in this case, I think it's appropriate.
PGI you do not know, and you are wrong, I don't care that you are making the game, MGs, and Flamers, and to a lesser degree NARC and LBX10 are all worthless. No one would say that they are worthy weapon systems, of course you haven't said that (working as intended=/=good), which makes me think that you want it to be terrible.

Personal, somewhat editorialized, perception of the issue: Their design philosophy is feature oriented, not purpose oriented. In a more wordy form, they seem to start with a feature for the game and then try to make it fit in the game, rather than starting with the purpose they want something to have and creating a feature or feature set that fulfills that.

With ECM, the two big posts are more or less feature lists. Informative, certainly, but not a word in there about what the effect they were trying to create. There's also no real after the fact analysis of how the game changed for the better, just "adapt" and "polarize". Brings a new light to the "working as intended" statements too, essentially, "It's not bugged".

In the case of the poor MG, its a feature without a solid purpose. Theoretically, its good for killing components, but I've yet to be convinced that that idea is useful at all in this game, much less that the MG is any better at it than any other item. If that actually is its purpose, they need to work on that mechanic; however, I see no way to make it worth having without adding in lame through-armor crits. They could even theoretically make it passable by condensing its damage into a ~0.5 second window with 2-3 seconds of cooldown; but it would mean removing the continuous fire feature.

Somewhat trollish note:

Spoiler

I took a rabbit trail on Sarna and discovered that MGs are listed as "Ballistic (Anti-Infantry). Then I discovered a comment that .50 cal rounds could damage 'mech armor. Then I discovered another "Anti-Infantry" weapon - the Plasma Rifle, crit seeking, right xD

[Geistmd]

Could a mod (maybe the trainee on duty) just tell us that at least someone is reading this stuff?!

[Nihtgenga]

The mods are volunteers. So they are doing the same like we do, unpaid work for PGI (well, some of us are not just unpaid but even pay for the honour of being allowed to give feedback on a game that they later on have to pay for for a second time), because we like what MWO could be. But essentially, they do not have 2 glimpses more of insight than us.

@Critical Fumble: Even "feature first!" wouldn't be completely bad, if they would at least take feedback from people that they want to sell those features (and their implementation) to.

[RealityCheck]

Can' wait for the massive forum angry rage fires to start when the clan machine gun comes out and its either overpowered (Inner Sphere die hard fans light the fires) or underpowered (Clan die hard fans light the fires). I'll bring the marshmellows

RealityCheck