1386 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Svensken, on 01 November 2013 - 06:32 PM, said:

the biggest isue that noone in their right mind can deny is that we now have mechs ingame that use a weapon apearently not intended as a primary...as their primary


this must be fixed


so ask yourself

is 4x ac2 with 120m effective range and cone of fire op?

OP? NO.

Boring? Yes.

I get what PGI is trying to do, and like it. Give them a unique flavor lacking in previous iterations, much as Beam Weapons and Projectile weapons and missiles all have differing damage mechanics. I like the concept of them being crit seekers.

They just (IMO) need a little more tweaking. But just straight damage, tbh, is boring.

[Svensken]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 November 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

OP? NO.

Boring? Yes.

I get what PGI is trying to do, and like it. Give them a unique flavor lacking in previous iterations, much as Beam Weapons and Projectile weapons and missiles all have differing damage mechanics. I like the concept of them being crit seekers.

They just (IMO) need a little more tweaking. But just straight damage, tbh, is boring.

so its boring to have viable weapons?

Edited by Svensken, 02 November 2013 - 04:16 PM.

[Rhialto]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 November 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

I like the concept of them being crit seekers.

They do awesome damage just like it would if you threw bolts and nuts in a gear mechanism. I roughly translated from an expression we use in french and was not able to find what you use in english but you should catch what I mean.

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 November 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:

OP? NO.

Boring? Yes.

I get what PGI is trying to do, and like it. Give them a unique flavor lacking in previous iterations, much as Beam Weapons and Projectile weapons and missiles all have differing damage mechanics. I like the concept of them being crit seekers.

They just (IMO) need a little more tweaking. But just straight damage, tbh, is boring.

I'd like to see weapon manufacturers settle this issue. Let the Coventry Light Autogun or whatever be PGI's crit-seeking experiment, and give us the Gatling Gun 20mm for pure anti-air power but no critical hit bonuses. At least, this would hold me over until we get the Magshot Gauss Rifle as a pure-damage 0.5 ton ballistic that is... (which may or may not ever make it into the game).

Edited by FupDup, 02 November 2013 - 04:23 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Svensken, on 02 November 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

so its boring to have viable weapons?

not at all. But I think you mean "optimal" weapons. I use the MG on several of my mechs and find them quite "viable", even if they are not by any means perfect. Then again, what do you consider "viable" for a .5 ton weapon with hit scan speed, zero heat, and (effectively) unlimited ammo?

They are, and have always been meant to be a support weapon, from the earliest inception of Battletech, to present. And that is what they are. Just because the MG/Ballistic slots on certain mechs outnumber their other slots does not change the nature of the weapon, anymore than the Shadowhawk's number of missile slots are meant to make it a missile mech first (It's Ballistic IS meant to be primary, the missiles and energy, to support).

Especially since some mechs, like the Spider are not and never were designed as front line combat units. One of the biggest issues I have found with balance is that people assume because the nature of things are limited now, that those are the only roles the game is meant for, and so want everything balanced for perfect use right this moment. Which of course simply means more coding implemented instead of on other stuff (and that takes time as they need to test it too) and then even MORE coding to change it again when the other roles and features are applied.

Simply put, they appear to be not enough on a Locust, even in four, yes? And yet a 4MG spider is a crit destroyer. Same weapon. The only difference is the mech. I use them on both and do fine. I use 4 on my Jager-DD and LOVE what they do in support of my 2 UAC and 2 MLaser. The 2 under the ac20 on my 4G are critical to the success of that build.

That is hardly the case with a weapon that is not viable, such as, say, the Flamer.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 02 November 2013 - 04:32 PM.

[Rhialto]

Bishop Steiner, on 02 November 2013 - 04:31 PM, said:

That is hardly the case with a weapon that is not viable, such as, say, the Flamer.

Same here, I see no use for flamers... I posted about those in ATD50 but didn't get answered.

[John D. Rico]

I recently made a build on my SPDR that includes 4 Machine Guns, it's a big help when trying to keep up in a fight, considering how fragile they are lol. The damage can add up every second, and it can be very effective, in my experiences with the weapon that is.


The Flamer is a decent weapon when it comes to disabling the other team of their heat costing weapons.
It still does damage aside from that I believe, so it can't be all that bad. Just don't use it as your main source of damage lol

Edited by Colonel Johnny Rico, 03 November 2013 - 12:01 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Colonel Johnny Rico, on 02 November 2013 - 11:38 PM, said:

I recently made a build on my SPDR that includes 4 Machine Guns, it's a big help when trying to keep up in a fight, considering how fragile they are lol. The damage can add up every second, and it can be very effective, in my experiences with the weapon that is.


The Flamer is a decent weapon when it comes to disabling the other team of their heat costing weapons.
It still does damage aside from that I believe, so it can't be all that bad. Just don't use it as your main source of damage lol

I have yet to have a flamer mech make me overheat. I have had several flamer mechs become easy targets while they tried to keep me bathed in flame and I potted their little faces. Taking advantage of people with bad builds doesn't make the weapon good.

[John D. Rico]

Bishop Steiner, on 03 November 2013 - 06:26 AM, said:

I have yet to have a flamer mech make me overheat. I have had several flamer mechs become easy targets while they tried to keep me bathed in flame and I potted their little faces. Taking advantage of people with bad builds doesn't make the weapon good.

What do bad builds have anything to do with making a "non-viable" weapon good? Some mechs might not fair as great as the ones you use do, like most of the light mechs, and maybe even some of the mediums. Does it necessarily make it bad? Just because YOU couldn't find a use for it, doesn't mean others wont. Not trying to get offensive, or trying to say I'm the all seeing eye, but I am trying to say it's not completely useless lol. It may not be the heat that is as effective in some cases as it is the blinding (for people who use cockpit view anyway). Maybe some people freak out when they see fire.... and as you said, easy targets.... become easy distractions... use the flamer mechs with heavy armor for annoying distractions while lrm support nukes them. Though there is a downside to this, their friends could show up and annihilate the flamer mechs... i guess it's a situational weapon rather than an outright 'good' one.

Edited by Colonel Johnny Rico, 03 November 2013 - 07:39 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Bishop Steiner, on 03 November 2013 - 06:26 AM, said:

I have yet to have a flamer mech make me overheat. I have had several flamer mechs become easy targets while they tried to keep me bathed in flame and I potted their little faces. Taking advantage of people with bad builds doesn't make the weapon good.

That's because a flamer mech is absolutely incapable of making someone overheat.

Flamers will gradually increase an enemy mech's heat to 90%, but no higher. Said enemy mech can then overheat if they fire high-heat weaponry, but otherwise there's no real ill effects except the trivially low damage(even compared to an MG) from the flamer.

However, flamers will eventually cause the firing mech to overheat, which makes them particularly amusing. Since the last change, they initially inflict more heat than they create on the firing mech, but the inflicted heat his capped, the firing heat is not.

Colonel Johnny Rico, on 03 November 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

What do bad builds have anything to do with making a "non-viable" weapon good? Some mechs might not fair as great as the ones you use do, like most of the light mechs, and maybe even some of the mediums. Does it necessarily make it bad? Just because YOU couldn't find a use for it, doesn't mean others wont. Not trying to get offensive, or trying to say I'm the all seeing eye, but I am trying to say it's not completely useless lol. It may not be the heat that is as effective in some cases as it is the blinding (for people who use cockpit view anyway). Maybe some people freak out when they see fire.... and as you said, easy targets.... become easy distractions... use the flamer mechs with heavy armor for annoying distractions while lrm support nukes them. Though there is a downside to this, their friends could show up and annihilate the flamer mechs... i guess it's a situational weapon rather than an outright 'good' one.

You could argue it's situational, but only when that situation is only "Against spectacularly bad pilots".

Not only is it not a good weapon, but it's an objectively bad one. It's effectively a weapon that does nothing, and you're relying on your targets reacting more to a weapon that does nothing than ones that can actually kill them.

There's no other use-case. In every other situation, a Medium Laser is simply better. It actually does damage, can actually kill things. Against pilots who aren't objectively terrible, it'll get more attention than the flamer does because pilot who don't suck react to taking real damage.

Yes, flamer mechs attract attention. Not because it's some magic taunt weapon, but because it screams (and actually means) "This mech is an easier kill than it otherwise would be". You can accomplish the same thing with Small Lasers fired beyond their range too - you're just telling your opponent that you're an easy kill. But at least the small laser mech can do real damage up close.

Flamers absolutely need work. They are, and since at least the start of open beta always have been, the worst weapon in the game. There was a time in closed beta where they could overheat opponents, but then you have stun-lock issues the devs don't want (for good reasons). If we had high-heat penalties, then Flamers could have a decent role, but we don't. A mech at 90% heat suffers no ill effects from it, short of being unable to fire a lot... But accomplishing that requires generating tons of heat on the firing mech too. And while the Flamer generates more heat on the target than the firing mech, if the firing mech doesn't have as much heat capacity/dissipation, it'll still overheat first. Even if that's not the case, the firing mech can't hold it's target at 90% because the heat generation on the firing mech increases exponentially - no matter how many heat sinks, firing one flamer will cause you to overheat.

They're the worst weapons in the game, by an enormous margin.

[John D. Rico]

Wintersdark, on 03 November 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

You could argue it's situational, but only when that situation is only "Against spectacularly bad pilots".

Not only is it not a good weapon, but it's an objectively bad one. It's effectively a weapon that does nothing, and you're relying on your targets reacting more to a weapon that does nothing than ones that can actually kill them.

There's no other use-case. In every other situation, a Medium Laser is simply better. It actually does damage, can actually kill things. Against pilots who aren't objectively terrible, it'll get more attention than the flamer does because pilot who don't suck react to taking real damage.

Yes, flamer mechs attract attention. Not because it's some magic taunt weapon, but because it screams (and actually means) "This mech is an easier kill than it otherwise would be". You can accomplish the same thing with Small Lasers fired beyond their range too - you're just telling your opponent that you're an easy kill. But at least the small laser mech can do real damage up close.

Flamers absolutely need work. They are, and since at least the start of open beta always have been, the worst weapon in the game. There was a time in closed beta where they could overheat opponents, but then you have stun-lock issues the devs don't want (for good reasons). If we had high-heat penalties, then Flamers could have a decent role, but we don't. A mech at 90% heat suffers no ill effects from it, short of being unable to fire a lot... But accomplishing that requires generating tons of heat on the firing mech too. And while the Flamer generates more heat on the target than the firing mech, if the firing mech doesn't have as much heat capacity/dissipation, it'll still overheat first. Even if that's not the case, the firing mech can't hold it's target at 90% because the heat generation on the firing mech increases exponentially - no matter how many heat sinks, firing one flamer will cause you to overheat.

They're the worst weapons in the game, by an enormous margin.

I've kinda figured out that the gun practically doesn't exist compared to the stats of other weapons, but the fact that flamers do indeed suck, still doesn't get rid of the fact that it isn't useless. Which is essentially the point of my whole presence in this thread. It may suck to absolutely no end, but there isn't a weapon in the game that is completely useless.

So in a way I agree with you lol.

Edited by Colonel Johnny Rico, 03 November 2013 - 09:01 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Colonel Johnny Rico, on 03 November 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

What do bad builds have anything to do with making a "non-viable" weapon good? Some mechs might not fair as great as the ones you use do, like most of the light mechs, and maybe even some of the mediums. Does it necessarily make it bad? Just because YOU couldn't find a use for it, doesn't mean others wont. Not trying to get offensive, or trying to say I'm the all seeing eye, but I am trying to say it's not completely useless lol. It may not be the heat that is as effective in some cases as it is the blinding (for people who use cockpit view anyway). Maybe some people freak out when they see fire.... and as you said, easy targets.... become easy distractions... use the flamer mechs with heavy armor for annoying distractions while lrm support nukes them. Though there is a downside to this, their friends could show up and annihilate the flamer mechs... i guess it's a situational weapon rather than an outright 'good' one.

I think Wintersdark pretty well covered it.

The Flamer is bad, and the only time it is "good" is when used against absolutely bad pilots. Anyone else laughs, then shoots your face off. And if the only weapons you have are ones that will shut you down for shooting the Flamer, then it's a bad build.

[Svensken]

from the earliest inception of Battletech,

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Machine_Gun

so 2 dmg to mechs makes it a suport weapon?

supose you consider the AC/2 a suport weapon to then

[Amsro]

Svensken, on 04 November 2013 - 08:18 PM, said:

from the earliest inception of Battletech,

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Machine_Gun

so 2 dmg to mechs makes it a suport weapon?

supose you consider the AC/2 a suport weapon to then

This is truth, give the machine gun (AC/1 if you will) some real damage, with abysmal range.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

I'd really like MG's to work like the other ballistic weapons and be more useful overall.

They don't really need to be full auto or hit scan, and matching AC/2 rate of fire should be fast enough, combined with low damage and the short cooldown to keep DPS at 1.00.

MG's can lose or reduce their Crit seeking values, but I'd really like to be able to test out some changes for them such as this, for example:

• Keep the current range (120-240) or reduce back to previous range (whatever works best really)
  
• DMG: 0.50
  
• Cooldown: 0.50
  
• DPS: 1.00
  
• Projectile Speed: 900 to 1000
  
• Ammo: 300 (150 damage a ton) - can be raised as needed, but potential damage matches other ballistics at least
  
• Ammo Explosion Dmg: 0.50 a round (total 150 damage on a full ton)

or instead, match the BT damage value and make them tiny, short range auto cannons:

• The range can either stay 120-240 or be reduced (again, whatever works best to balance them)
  
• DMG: 2.00
  
• Cooldown: 2.00
  
• DPS: 1.00
  
• Projectile Speed: 900 to 1000
  
• Ammo: 75 (150 damage a ton) - can be raised as needed, but potential damage matches other ballistics at least
  
• Ammo Explosion Dmg: 2.00 a round (total 150 damage on a full ton)

MG's still seem too situational with how they work as hit scan that need to be kept on target to do 1.00 DPS per MG.

And the lights that can carry them, like Locusts in particular, seem too disadvantaged when having to deal with armor or facing off againt other lights.

Then with larger mechs like the Jagers, having a short range, limiting ammo matching other ballistics, 1.00 DPS per MG, and the potential explosion damage can help be balancing factors if MG's are used on them.

[Corvus Antaka]

machine guns are OP.

Be happy with what you have.

[Tahribator]

I think they're pretty good at the moment. You just have to shoot at open internals.

[Victor Morson]

Wintersdark, on 26 August 2013 - 02:40 PM, said:

Your source is a random and incorrect forum post. Citing sources for these things requires TT rules showing machine guns being somehow ineffective against mechs; not random forum posters spewing bull****.

In tabletop, machine guns existed before infantry did. They didn't have non-mech targets at all in the beginning.
In tabletop, machine guns do exactly the same damage to armor as AC/2's, just at very close ranges.
In tabletop, there's even a mech specifically designed to hunt enemy mechs.... With machine guns.
Books all vary, and are not appropriate sources of balance information for anything. "Artistic license".


There shouldn't even be a discussion about this >.<

This man speaks the truth. The fact is if you use the construction rules in the game, the MG is one of the most lethal light mech weapons to exist.

Yes, I'm serious. Ever see one of those gimmick designs with 8+ MGs? 8 MGs = only 4 tons, and the ammo can sustain 4 guns EASILY off of 0.5-1 tons worth of ammo. So for 5 tons, you've got what amounts to 8 unlimited free-fire small lasers!

The only reason MGs are thought of as {Scrap} in TableTop is that they were put on 'mechs they weren't needed on in small (1-2 weapons) clusters, leaving that ton of ammo unable to be utilized and giving the 'mech a huge explosion-risk hazard. That's right: Most of the time MGs were used to nerf 'mechs on purpose.

The actual weapon is very, very good in TT, it's just poorly utilized in stock designs.

[stjobe]

Victor Morson, on 06 November 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

Yes, I'm serious. Ever see one of those gimmick designs with 8+ MGs? 8 MGs = only 4 tons, and the ammo can sustain 4 guns EASILY off of 0.5-1 tons worth of ammo. So for 5 tons, you've got what amounts to 8 unlimited free-fire small lasers!

Not to mention eight heat-less extra crit chances every turn - in a rule system where one lucky crit could instantly kill the target. Remember, every snake-eyes you roll to hit gives a roll on the crit table, and if you roll boxcars there it's game over for the target - and any result 8+ is a crit.

Victor Morson, on 06 November 2013 - 06:25 AM, said:

The actual weapon is very, very good in TT

Absolutely agree. It's damage is devastating against lights, and the heat-free crit chances are well worth the trade-off of increasing your own chance to get an ammo explosion.

[Bishop Steiner]

stjobe, on 06 November 2013 - 06:55 AM, said:

Not to mention eight heat-less extra crit chances every turn - in a rule system where one lucky crit could instantly kill the target. Remember, every snake-eyes you roll to hit gives a roll on the crit table, and if you roll boxcars there it's game over for the target - and any result 8+ is a crit.


Absolutely agree. It's damage is devastating against lights, and the heat-free crit chances are well worth the trade-off of increasing your own chance to get an ammo explosion.

i DID always rather like running a Piranha in TT.


Infantry, even Elementals were DOA. And able to crank out 36 damage from a 30 ton chassis, with zero waste heat, still go well over 120 kph and fit max armor and JJs? (As for the flamer, well, it sounded cooler if it breathed fire). I also used a version without the flamer (or sometimes halved the MG ammo. That was still 15 bursts per gun) with ECM.

If I could have fit claws and TSM, I would have, lol. Maybe I'll make one without the ER LaRGe. Problem is it would never make enough heat to activate the tsm.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 06 November 2013 - 07:12 AM.