64 replies to this topic

[Roadbeer]

jeffsw6, on 03 May 2013 - 10:22 AM, said:

Roadbeer, what are your thoughts on adding a fourth variant of the Spider as an alternative to ... making MGs remotely useful? The reason I care is that noobs end up buying the CDA-3C, which is completely worthless; and Spider pilots HAVE TO PLAY THE SDR-5K to get Elite in Spiders, which is ridiculous.

I think the MG should be useful, and its DPS figure needs to be at least equal to SL (keeping in mind that MG has no heat) because it has a big cone, is continuous-fire instead of burst-fire, and requires ammo that can be depleted or blown up.

I don't know why you can't agree with that, because it is clearly correct. However, do we both at least agree that something needs to be done for Spider pilots, and the CDA-3C should probably be modified or removed just so noobs won't end up investing a bunch of CB (or worse, MC) in a useless variant when there are several other CDAs that are viable?

Hmm, stock CDA-3C has a PPC and 2 MG. Peel off the armor with the PPC, crit internals with the MG... seems legit. Spider 5K has ricoculous speed and jump ability. ML and some MGs to pick people apart and crit the internals when someone else peels it off. Oh, and with BAP, it's a good counter for the ECM mechs.

Oh noes, not all variants are useful or created equal at this time. boo hoo. Maybe find a role for it rather than expect everything to be Rock, Paper, Scissors... at all times.

Thing I see you completely forget in all your QQing about the woes of the MG is it's crit seeking ability, and with the cone, that means you don't really have to focus fire as it might crit something you weren't even aiming at.

And before all the "What crit seeking?" begins.
1) They've said they're going to expand it to gyros and other internals
2) On my Lulz Jager DD, I have 2 ERPPC and 6 MGs on it. from the stats I keep, it's nearly DOUBLE the component destruction of any of my other mechs. Peel off the armor with the PPCs, unload with MGs when at range. It's a thing of beauty. One of my team mates and I run it and call it the "Thunderstorm" because of all the lightning and hail.

And I don't agree, because not only is it not 'clearly correct' but that it's an opinion on how you feel things should be. Also, I don't agree on your views of the spider, or any chassis. I feel that if you want to strive for elite, you need to suffer in a bad variant. I don't see your cries for the Catapult C4 being the red-headed step-child of the Catapult line.

Oh, and since you have a penchant for mis-representing the facts, as you've admitted to in this post...
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2302717
The credibility you bring to any conversation is highly suspect.

Edited by Roadbeer, 03 May 2013 - 12:18 PM.

[arghmace]

jeffsw6, on 03 May 2013 - 11:38 AM, said:

The mechs must be changed, or the weapons must be changed.

Well the weapons are going to be buffed by over 100%. But I agree that it might not be enough. Especially if MG doesn't shoot 10 shots but more like 7 shots a second like some have said. Of course it should be remembered that even those mechs can weild ECM-countering PAB's in the future which will make them a bit more useful. But would sure be reasonable if they could wield ECM as well.

[BlackBeltJones]

Trauglodyte, on 03 May 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

I don't find your comments inflammatory. You weren't insulting. You were just being slightly unreasonable considering real life mechanics in a futuristic sci-fi game where nothing is balanced according to physics as we know it. This is just one of those things where you enjoy the game for what it is and avoid the brain cramp that is trying to rationalize it against current day reality.

Not that I don't get your point but I feel the logic you present is a slippery slope. To accept the idea that fictional guns are fiction and in an effort to leave the 'brain cramp' out of the discussion I wonder if you would except the same argument when discussing the validity of DHS or 1.4 v 2.0 or if 1 equipped JJ should function the same as 5 or weapons convergence or jamming mechanics etc... and so on. Would you be satisfied to accept an element of the game that seemed 'out of whack' simply because someone else thought it acceptable? If you felt that ECM did not reflect a canon purpose or tactical role or was OP in general would you quiet your criticism because someone said "this is a game, it's not meant to be real"?
Ultimately I just want a fun game to play and I will never scrutinize the 'inches' but I do feel the MG range is far too short based on my experience with modern examples - does this make me right? No! Does this make my question invalid? No!

Edited by BlackBeltJones, 03 May 2013 - 12:17 PM.

[Trauglodyte]

I'm completely with you, BBJ. What kind of game would we have if we just took real life and applied it appropriately? Then again, you'd probably end up with the same thing because the effective range of the Phalanx system on Navy vessels is pretty weak compared to that of even the M1 Abrahm main guns and those are considered to be the Light ACs that can't even scratch mech armor. Current lasers require an entire 747 to house and cool not to mention that they all require fuel. And missiles of today ALL outrange the afore mentioned weapons.

Like I said, sometimes you've just got to let go and enjoy that we're in big stompy robots (I love when people say that - makes me chuckle) and let the rest slide. Honestly, I'm just happy that they boosted MG damage let alone padded the range.

[jeffsw6]

Trauglodyte, on 03 May 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

This is just one of those things where you enjoy the game for what it is and avoid the brain cramp that is trying to rationalize it against current day reality.

But they need us to stand in these boxes, surrounded by laser-beams, so they can pump the .. whatever it is they pump out of the ground into .. where is it going?

Roadbeer, on 03 May 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

Hmm, stock CDA-3C has a PPC and 2 MG. Peel off the armor with the PPC, crit internals with the MG... seems legit. Spider 5K has ricoculous speed and jump ability. ML and some MGs to pick people apart and crit the internals when someone else peels it off. Oh, and with BAP, it's a good counter for the ECM mechs.

There is no "finding a role" for it. The other Spiders, and other Cicadas, are superior to the SDR-5K and CDA-3C in literally every way. There is zero benefit to those mechs.

Go play a CDA-3C with a PPC and MGs for 200 games and tell me if you are doing anything that you couldn't do far, far better in a different variant. These mechs are not useful at all. They are only there to force players to grind out 8/8.

Your "crit seeking" argument is stupid because you need some actual weapons to remove armor first, and these mechs do not have any substantial weapons. Besides that, the crit mechanic is damage-based; and its cone-of-fire is huge. The MG rounds that land on still-armored sections are doing almost nothing. The rounds landing on a stripped section are spreading crit damage across all the items in that section -- heat sinks, lasers, ammo, etc. When Gyros can be crit it will actually result in the MGs doing LESS component destructions, not more, because the random nature of these tiny amounts of crit damage landing on a larger number of items in that section will cause fewer of them to reach 0 HP and explode.

What you've done in your post is prove that you don't understand how the crit mechanic in the game works.

You've also said that players should be forced to grind out a crappy mech so they can get Elite in SDR. No other chassis forces a player to do that. Everything except Spiders has a minimum of 3 variants that are not worthless.

You keep saying with BAP, they will be able to counter-act enemy ECM. That's stupid. Every other mech will also be able to equip a BAP and counter-act ECM.

You're going on about how the SDR-5K has awesome jumping ability, but it has the LEAST JUMP-JET MOUNTS OF ALL SPIDERS. SDR-5K can mount 6. The SDR-5D can hold 8 and the 5V can mount 12 JJs. How is the 5K amazing in its jumping ability? Oh, it isn't.

Just admit that you are wrong, already. Or post a funny meme. Cat pictures are much more useful than anything in your post.

Edited by jeffsw6, 03 May 2013 - 01:36 PM.

[Roadbeer]

jeffsw6, on 03 May 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

You've also said that players should be forced to grind out a crappy mech so they can get Elite in SDR. No other chassis forces a player to do that. Everything except Spiders has a minimum of 3 variants that are not worthless.

Hi, I'm the Raven. Have we met?

And since you seem to have Oh so much knowledge, how about you explain how the crit system works there Sparky.

BTW...

Roadbeer, on 03 May 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

Oh, and since you have a penchant for mis-representing the facts, as you've admitted to in this post...
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2302717
The credibility you bring to any conversation is highly suspect.

Edited by Roadbeer, 03 May 2013 - 01:45 PM.

[BlackBeltJones]

Trauglodyte, on 03 May 2013 - 01:31 PM, said:

I'm completely with you, BBJ. What kind of game would we have if we just took real life and applied it appropriately? Then again, you'd probably end up with the same thing because the effective range of the Phalanx system on Navy vessels is pretty weak compared to that of even the M1 Abrahm main guns and those are considered to be the Light ACs that can't even scratch mech armor. Current lasers require an entire 747 to house and cool not to mention that they all require fuel. And missiles of today ALL outrange the afore mentioned weapons.

Like I said, sometimes you've just got to let go and enjoy that we're in big stompy robots (I love when people say that - makes me chuckle) and let the rest slide. Honestly, I'm just happy that they boosted MG damage let alone padded the range.

I remember 'playing' Janes Longbow back in the 90's and the realism was an annoyance. I swear I read the 200 page manual 50 times before I was competent and even then it was less fun than Tie-Fighter.

[Keifomofutu]

I love how people are trying to argue that the MG doing not as much overall damage as a small laser in a much harder to apply fashion is totally going to be enough to make the weapon not a joke.

Here's the thing. People don't even use small lasers. They aren't a competitive weapon. So arguing that something much worse than the SL in just about every way is going to be useful is a flat out lie.

And arguing that lack of heat on 4 weapons that would never overheat a mech anyway is equally ridiculous. Nobody is going to overheat on 4 small lasers either. And the smalls aren't going to explode and instakill you. DHS killed the smalls. So mgs after the buff will be competing with a weapon that doesn't even see use; and it's still going to be much worse than it.

Edited by Keifomofutu, 03 May 2013 - 08:32 PM.

[BlackYoshi1230]

Roadbeer, on 03 May 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:

Hi, I'm the Raven. Have we met?

Yeah, unfortunately, the 4X (which I can't see much in knife-fights or doing reliable fast mover ops, but that belongs in another thread), if you wanted something decent and not an UrbanMech, then an XL Engine would be one of the only few reliable ways to go (I was broke, so I... didn't. Somehow, I weaseled my way with this up to the point when I was able to unlock Speed Tweak, then quat.)

EDIT: That POS 4X I made was before the April patch. So, um... yeah, since long-range rainbow IR isn't used anymore, I don't have a use for it.

Edited by BlackYoshi1230, 03 May 2013 - 09:13 PM.

[jeffsw6]

Roadbeer, on 03 May 2013 - 01:39 PM, said:

And since you seem to have Oh so much knowledge, how about you explain how the crit system works there Sparky.

You're arguing the merits of the machine gun based on crit-seeking and you don't even understand how it works? I will gladly explain it. Maybe this will clear up why it's not useful.

All damage in the game is quantified. The easiest way to understand this is to compare three weapons that have similar amounts of damage that is applied to opponents in the same way, but the way that damage is broken down into quantums is different.

• AC/10 or PPC deals 10 dmg in a single tiny unit (quantum)
  
• Large Pulse Laser, deals 10 dmg in about 30 quantums ~0.333ea
  
• Large Laser, deals 9 dmg in about 40 quantums ~0.225ea
  
• Machine Gun, deals 0.04 dmg in 1 quantum

Every one of these quantums lands on a target section (or misses) and is applied to the enemy mech. When an un-armored section is struck, there is a small chance to crit a component (weapon, ammo, heat sink) and a very tiny chance to crit multiple components. Those crits, when successful, reduce the HP of the item they hit. For example, a Gauss Rifle has 3 HP while an AC/20 has 18 HP. A crit from one LPL quantum at optimal range will drain a Gauss Rifle's HP from 3 to 2.7.

Which component receives the crit depends on how many critical slots it takes up (this is why they are called "critical" slots.) An AC/2 almost never blows up if you have a bunch of DHS mounted in the same section, because the 10 HP AC/2 only takes up a single slot while the several DHS are using up 3 crit slots each. It is far more likely that all those DHS will be blow up before the AC/2 explodes. An AC/20 that uses up 10 slots, on the other hand, is going to receive virtually all the crit damage that lands on that section.

So the more crit-able items that are in a section, the more that critical damage is spread out. Here is where the difference in damage quantums matters.

An AC/10 or PPC does 10 dmg in one single quantum. If it successfully crits, whatever it strikes will be blown up (if that item has 10HP or less remaining.) That is why AC/20, PPC, and Gauss Rifle blows are so destructive to your weapons; while Lasers, LRMs, and SRMs very rarely blow things up.

The Machine Gun's critical blows are so tiny that they are spread out across every item mounted in an un-armored section. If you aim it at a section that only has an AC/20 mounted there, then it will eventually blow up. However, if you are aiming your MGs at a section that contains 3xSRM6, all you will do is slowly wear down all three of them. It will take forever to blow one of them up.

This is why you shouldn't always install DHS inside the engine of your mech. If you have free slots but no free tons, you can use DHS to absorb critical damage so it doesn't strike your weapons. For example, on my HGN-733C I have STD300 and 14 DHS, but only 1 of the extra DHS is installed in the engine. It will hold 2, but I have enough free slots to install them in the same sections as weapons.

When PGI says MGs have a crit buff, they are non-specific about it for a reason. It doesn't really work. The reason is because a 10 shots/sec weapon can never do enough critical damage to one item in a section with 4 or 5 different things to blow it up unless it would also almost instantly destroy all 4 or 5 -- because the damage spreads out across all of them due to the high RoF and low dmg/quantum. There is literally no way to make it work with a high RoF weapon without it being over-powered unless they make the crit-roll for the MG's strikes also choose which item it strikes, and cause it to choose the one with the lowest current HP. That's not how it works and you can prove it in the Testing Grounds by finding a mech with several weapons in one section that have different base hit-points.

High-quantum, low-ROF weapons like the AC/20, PPCs, and Gauss Rifles will always be the king of critical hits for this reason.

I'm glad you finally admitted you don't understand how crits work. Perhaps now you do.

Keifomofutu, on 03 May 2013 - 08:30 PM, said:

Here's the thing. People don't even use small lasers. They aren't a competitive weapon. So arguing that something much worse than the SL in just about every way is going to be useful is a flat out lie.

Small Lasers do have a role in some mechs, although it is a limited one.

My STK-3F brawler equips 2 LPL, 4 SL, and missiles. The four small lasers give me more dmg/heat and more alpha inside of 90m which is very useful in clutch situations where you really need to finish off an enemy CT, or are fighting a light mech who gives you few opportunities to land any shots on him. I have landed a lot of killing-blows with the 4xSL on this mech.

They heat generated by SLs is not trivial, but the reason I mount them is they are good dmg/heat and more dps/ton than any other weapon in the game by a very significant margin -- when used within their face-hugging 90m range. The 4xSL give me 4 DPS and I can fire them when my mech is sitting at 89% heat without going over 100 and shutting down. I can also land a little damage on an enemy's back or side when he torso-twists away, hopefully making him think I've fired all my lasers and am waiting for cool-down. When he turns his CT toward me again, I will have LPLs ready (assuming my heat is low enough) to possibly finish him off.

There is utility in SLs and while MGs can't fill exactly the same role (because of their continuous-fire nature and the fact that CDA-3C and SDR-5K exist) the MG can be buffed to be useful without destroying the game.

[MustrumRidcully]

jeffsw6, on 03 May 2013 - 11:22 PM, said:

You're arguing the merits of the machine gun based on crit-seeking and you don't even understand how it works? I will gladly explain it. Maybe this will clear up why it's not useful.

All damage in the game is quantified. The easiest way to understand this is to compare three weapons that have similar amounts of damage that is applied to opponents in the same way, but the way that damage is broken down into quantums is different.

• AC/10 or PPC deals 10 dmg in a single tiny unit (quantum)
  
• Large Pulse Laser, deals 10 dmg in about 30 quantums ~0.333ea
  
• Large Laser, deals 9 dmg in about 40 quantums ~0.225ea
  
• Machine Gun, deals 0.04 dmg in 1 quantum

Every one of these quantums lands on a target section (or misses) and is applied to the enemy mech. When an un-armored section is struck, there is a small chance to crit a component (weapon, ammo, heat sink) and a very tiny chance to crit multiple components. Those crits, when successful, reduce the HP of the item they hit. For example, a Gauss Rifle has 3 HP while an AC/20 has 18 HP. A crit from one LPL quantum at optimal range will drain a Gauss Rifle's HP from 3 to 2.7.


Which component receives the crit depends on how many critical slots it takes up (this is why they are called "critical" slots.) An AC/2 almost never blows up if you have a bunch of DHS mounted in the same section, because the 10 HP AC/2 only takes up a single slot while the several DHS are using up 3 crit slots each. It is far more likely that all those DHS will be blow up before the AC/2 explodes. An AC/20 that uses up 10 slots, on the other hand, is going to receive virtually all the crit damage that lands on that section.

So the more crit-able items that are in a section, the more that critical damage is spread out. Here is where the difference in damage quantums matters.

An AC/10 or PPC does 10 dmg in one single quantum. If it successfully crits, whatever it strikes will be blown up (if that item has 10HP or less remaining.) That is why AC/20, PPC, and Gauss Rifle blows are so destructive to your weapons; while Lasers, LRMs, and SRMs very rarely blow things up.

The Machine Gun's critical blows are so tiny that they are spread out across every item mounted in an un-armored section. If you aim it at a section that only has an AC/20 mounted there, then it will eventually blow up. However, if you are aiming your MGs at a section that contains 3xSRM6, all you will do is slowly wear down all three of them. It will take forever to blow one of them up.

This is why you shouldn't always install DHS inside the engine of your mech. If you have free slots but no free tons, you can use DHS to absorb critical damage so it doesn't strike your weapons. For example, on my HGN-733C I have STD300 and 14 DHS, but only 1 of the extra DHS is installed in the engine. It will hold 2, but I have enough free slots to install them in the same sections as weapons.

Excellent overview of the system.

Quote

When PGI says MGs have a crit buff, they are non-specific about it for a reason. It doesn't really work. .

My only caveat - I believe they were specific on what the MG cirt-seeking buff does. It raises the chance for a critical hit somewhat, and they raised the damage dealt to items. I am not sure how much the crit chance buff was, but I am fairly certain the item damage was 12.5.

That means instead of 0.04 damage quantums, you get 0.5 damage quantums.

That would mean to destroy a single item with 10 hit points, you need 2 seconds with a Machine Gun. If every hit was a crit. I believe the average crit rate is something like 50 % (maybe a bit higher), so 4 seconds perhaps? If there are two items with 10 hit points, about 8 seconds for both to be destroyed. If there are 3, 12 seconds... and so on.

The crit buff is certainly substantial, but unfortuantely, getting into a situation no your own where you can start scoring trick will take pretty much forver with the Machine Gun.

But let's say we apply teamwork. We have a Spider with 1 ML and 4 Machine Guns and a Jenner with 4 Medium Laser working together. The Jenner serves as opener of armour, the Spider destroys the internals.

Let's say they are hunting down a Hunchback 4P with 4 Medium Lasers and 2 DHS in its Right Torso, with 38 armour on the front.

The Jenner delivers approximately 5 DPS, the Spider 2.05 DPS.
So they need 5.4* seconds to destroy the armour together.
The Hunchback 4P has 24 internal structure on the right torso, so to chew through that, they need 3.4 seconds.
The items inside the 4P have 70 hit points together. The effective critical damage of the Spider is 21.5 DPS and that of the Jenner is 5 DPS. So they need 2.64 seconds to destroy all internal items.

So about 1 second after all items are destroyed, the Hunchback loses its hunch.

Now let's say we'd have a Jenner and a Death Knell. Together they have 10 DPS.
So they chew through the external armour in 3.8 seconds and through the internals in 2.4 seconds.

*Of course, this is all actually simplified, since I used DPS, not calculate the actual firing patterns.
We know that the time these two need will be no more than 5.4 seconds for the armour. But if we look closely, we'll realize that both Spider and Jenner can fire their Mediums twice in 5 seconds, so the Jenner delivers 40 damage and the Spider 10, plus 8 damage from the MGs, so we're at 58 damage, meaning only 4 points of internal structure are left at this point on the Hunchback. So the actual time, if we start counting the time the shooting begins, will probably be lower thant he figures I used above...

[jeffsw6]

MustrumRidcully, on 04 May 2013 - 01:13 AM, said:

But let's say we apply teamwork. We have a Spider with 1 ML and 4 Machine Guns and a Jenner with 4 Medium Laser working together. The Jenner serves as opener of armour, the Spider destroys the internals.

They won't kill it faster than two Jenners could kill it because of armor. Also, I know we all understand that your example basically has all damage going to 1 target section, and the HBK not destroying either opponent. Finally, if it was a 2v2 battle, not a 2v1, the Jenner would be mopped up quickly by the 2 enemies, and the SDR-5K would .. do what they do, and run away or get killed.

There is just no practical utility in the MG's crit-seeking, especially because of its large cone-of-fire.

Just make an SDR-5K with 1 LL and 4 MGs and drop into the Testing Grounds. Use the LL to strip armor and then compare the effect of continuing to fire only the LL until you destroy a whole section (arm, torso, etc) with the effect of using the MG to disable the enemy weapons. You'll find that the LL takes about 50% longer to destroy a typical Atlas torso than it does to blow up a couple of missile launchers. When the torso is destroyed, all those weapons are gone anyway; and the mech might be dead too. That's 4 machine guns compared to just one large-laser that has far greater effective range, no ammo, etc.

Also if you test the cone-of-fire at 120m you will find that you can't focus the MG fire on one section of an enemy. The cone is way too big. Even if you are shooting an Atlas directly in the CT (from front or rear) you will also be damaging both of his torsos with the MG. Try aiming at a side torso and you'll be hitting it, the CT, and the arm. It's ridiculous. And this is what is supposed to be the weapon's new optimal range.

The crit buff is ineffective because you will more quickly just destroy the whole enemy section with a laser, or a real gun, than with an MG. That's even if the enemy is a stationary, pilot-less target in the Testing Grounds; not a real opponent with real teammates on an actual match!

PGI should just admit this and fix the stupid MG, or else change the CDA-3C and SDR-5K hard-points so they can mount more lasers or missiles.

[jeffsw6]

Oh, also, they should fix the rate-of-fire. The actual MG RoF is 6.9 rounds/second even though the item description claims it is 10. Another forum poster discovered this weeks ago, but I am mentioning it again in this thread, with specifics, since there was a question about it.

To test this, just make an SDR-5K with 4xMG and 4000 rounds ammo (2 tons) and drop in Testing Grounds. It takes me 145 seconds to use all 4000 rounds. That is 6.9 shots/second per gun, not 10.

[Huntsman]

Keifomofutu, on 03 May 2013 - 08:21 AM, said:

Zilch x 2 = pretty much zilch still. And the range increase without a spread decrease is just wasting more ammo.

While I've been a constant critic of how machine guns have been handled thus far, to be fair, if you take 2 mechs, one with 4 SL and 2 DHS while the other uses 4 machine guns and 2 tons of ammo, and both use the same engine, a 255 XL (so both mechs are using the same tonnage) the DPS for the machine guns will be 3.2 while the SL mech is dealing out 3.24. This is actually a bit scary since the machine guns get the crits, but in favor of the small lasers is that more DHS improve the DPS quite a bit more which is something the machine guns can't take advantage of, and the SLs are a more "bursty" weapon, so even at close range the machine guns will spread their damage more than a SL will.

I'm not suggesting that these new improvements to the machine gun will put the weapon where it needs to be, but I do think it's a sizable step in the right direction.

Edited by Huntsman, 04 May 2013 - 04:15 AM.

[jeffsw6]

Huntsman, on 04 May 2013 - 04:14 AM, said:

I'm not suggesting that these new improvements to the machine gun will put the weapon where it needs to be, but I do think it's a sizable step in the right direction.

Have you made a 4 MG mech and gone to the Testing Grounds yet? The cone-of-fire is so huge that you can't even focus on a single component of an Atlas, the largest mech in the game. Not only is your fire spread out because of the MG's continuous-fire nature, but also, because at 90m you still can't strike only the CT. You can't leg anyone at all, because if you try to aim at an opponent's leg (even an Atlas leg) many of your rounds will out-right miss.

[Roadbeer]

jeffsw6, on 03 May 2013 - 11:22 PM, said:

You're arguing the merits of the machine gun based on crit-seeking and you don't even understand how it works? I will gladly explain it. Maybe this will clear up why it's not useful.

All damage in the game is quantified. The easiest way to understand this is to compare three weapons that have similar amounts of damage that is applied to opponents in the same way, but the way that damage is broken down into quantums is different.

• AC/10 or PPC deals 10 dmg in a single tiny unit (quantum)
  
• Large Pulse Laser, deals 10 dmg in about 30 quantums ~0.333ea
  
• Large Laser, deals 9 dmg in about 40 quantums ~0.225ea
  
• Machine Gun, deals 0.04 dmg in 1 quantum

Every one of these quantums lands on a target section (or misses) and is applied to the enemy mech. When an un-armored section is struck, there is a small chance to crit a component (weapon, ammo, heat sink) and a very tiny chance to crit multiple components. Those crits, when successful, reduce the HP of the item they hit. For example, a Gauss Rifle has 3 HP while an AC/20 has 18 HP. A crit from one LPL quantum at optimal range will drain a Gauss Rifle's HP from 3 to 2.7.



Which component receives the crit depends on how many critical slots it takes up (this is why they are called "critical" slots.) An AC/2 almost never blows up if you have a bunch of DHS mounted in the same section, because the 10 HP AC/2 only takes up a single slot while the several DHS are using up 3 crit slots each. It is far more likely that all those DHS will be blow up before the AC/2 explodes. An AC/20 that uses up 10 slots, on the other hand, is going to receive virtually all the crit damage that lands on that section.

So the more crit-able items that are in a section, the more that critical damage is spread out. Here is where the difference in damage quantums matters.

An AC/10 or PPC does 10 dmg in one single quantum. If it successfully crits, whatever it strikes will be blown up (if that item has 10HP or less remaining.) That is why AC/20, PPC, and Gauss Rifle blows are so destructive to your weapons; while Lasers, LRMs, and SRMs very rarely blow things up.

The Machine Gun's critical blows are so tiny that they are spread out across every item mounted in an un-armored section. If you aim it at a section that only has an AC/20 mounted there, then it will eventually blow up. However, if you are aiming your MGs at a section that contains 3xSRM6, all you will do is slowly wear down all three of them. It will take forever to blow one of them up.

This is why you shouldn't always install DHS inside the engine of your mech. If you have free slots but no free tons, you can use DHS to absorb critical damage so it doesn't strike your weapons. For example, on my HGN-733C I have STD300 and 14 DHS, but only 1 of the extra DHS is installed in the engine. It will hold 2, but I have enough free slots to install them in the same sections as weapons.

When PGI says MGs have a crit buff, they are non-specific about it for a reason. It doesn't really work. The reason is because a 10 shots/sec weapon can never do enough critical damage to one item in a section with 4 or 5 different things to blow it up unless it would also almost instantly destroy all 4 or 5 -- because the damage spreads out across all of them due to the high RoF and low dmg/quantum. There is literally no way to make it work with a high RoF weapon without it being over-powered unless they make the crit-roll for the MG's strikes also choose which item it strikes, and cause it to choose the one with the lowest current HP. That's not how it works and you can prove it in the Testing Grounds by finding a mech with several weapons in one section that have different base hit-points.

High-quantum, low-ROF weapons like the AC/20, PPCs, and Gauss Rifles will always be the king of critical hits for this reason.

I'm glad you finally admitted you don't understand how crits work. Perhaps now you do.

[Citation Needed]
http://en.wikipedia....Citation_needed

As I keep pointing out, you have a propensity for stating "facts", without providing source material.

Edited by Roadbeer, 04 May 2013 - 08:08 AM.

[Keifomofutu]

Roadbeer, on 04 May 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

[Citation Needed]
http://en.wikipedia....Citation_needed

As I keep pointing out, you have a propensity for stating "facts", without providing source material.

Onus is on you this time. Pgi has posted how crits work several times. If you missed it that's on you. The above is completely correct with the exception that PGI gave MGs a 12.5x damage boost to crit damage recently. The weapons that fire in pulses like lasers and machine guns will always spread their damage over multiple internal items. Zero chance of a lucky one-shot crit.

Edited by Keifomofutu, 04 May 2013 - 08:25 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Roadbeer, on 04 May 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

[Citation Needed]
http://en.wikipedia....Citation_needed

As I keep pointing out, you have a propensity for stating "facts", without providing source material.

Believe it or not, Mechwarrior Online actually does not have a manual that contains all this information so that it can be easily recited. If you want to know about the inner workings of the game, you need to pretty much slavishly follow the devs (try the Dev Tracker Thread for dev post searches), follow community member experiments and your own, and generally, pay attention.

Considering that jeffsw6 apparently started playing MW:O in March 2013, I find it impressive enough that he caught up with all the stuff that was reported since Closed Beta, but he might also rely on other posters that carried together information (like the critical hit system guide from Selfish: http://mwomercs.com/...-a-brief-guide/).

But hey, I don't want to be like that - Here's an official post on the topic:
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__1474814

Quote

1) Double heat sinks internal to the engine are set to increase the heat scale by 2 points and provide -0.2 heat/sec cooling. Double heat sinks that you add to your Mech increase the heat scale by 1.4 points and provide -0.14 heat/sec cooling. (For reference, single heat sinks increase the scale by 1 and cool -0.1 heat/sec. The heat scale starts at 30 and is then is increased based on the heat sinks in your Mech.)


2) Each time the internal structure of a Mech takes damage, there is a chance that the hit will cause at least 1 critical hit. There is a 25% chance of causing 1 critical hit, a 14% chance of causing 2 critical hits, and a 3% chance of causing 3 critical hits (for a total of a 42% chance of any sort of critical hit). Each critical hit will randomly hit a weapon or piece of equipment in that location; the chance of a particular piece of equipment being hit is proportional to how many critical slots it occupies. Each critical hit damages the weapon/equipment an amount equal to the damage that caused the critical hit.

For example, an Atlas AS7-D is hit with an AC/5, for 5 damage to its left torso’s internal structure. The attacker gets lucky and this results in 3 critical hits. Two of the crits hit the LRM 20 and 1 hits the heat sink. The heat sink will take 5 damage and the LRM 20 will take 10 (5 x 2 = 10).

Currently, all engines have 15 points of health while all other items have 10. One of the changes going through QA right now, and that will be applied to an upcoming patch, is lowering the health of the Gauss rifle to 3 points. And, sometime soon, we plan on doing a full pass on the health of all the items.

Critical damage to the side torso hit boxes of XL engines deals damage to the engine as a whole. However, it should be noted that, currently, critical damage to your engine will not disable it, but simply add to your repair bill. This is likely to change when we do the pass on the health values.

3) This has not been implemented.

4) First, Gauss ammo does not explode, but the Gauss rifle does (for 20 points of damage). However, it was discovered that the Gauss rifle explosion was not working properly. The fix has been completed and will be implemented in an upcoming patch.

When ammo (or a Gauss rifle) explodes, it can cause large amounts of damage. If the explosion destroys the internal structure of a location, any remaining damage is transferred inward, to the internal structure of the next location. Arms and legs transfer to the appropriate side torso, side torsos transfer to the center torso. CASE prevents the explosion from transferring past the location in which it is installed.

For example, if you have CASE installed in your left torso, any explosion that starts in, or transfers into, your left torso will never transfer any damage into your center torso.

Some of you may notice that this doesn’t do anything for Mechs with XL engines, and yet many of the canon default loadouts include XL engines and CASE in the side torsos. We are currently considering some additional tweaks that would ensure that this is not a completely useless combination.

I don't know where the damage quantums are explained (the term is not official, AFAIK, but the description fits). This comprehenisve guide contains a quote, but I am not sure where that quote is from, it doesn't seem to come from the above post, unless my short attention span is making me stop reading before the sentence.

Mustrum "We rely on the kindness of strangers" Ridcully

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 04 May 2013 - 08:31 AM.

[jeffsw6]

MustrumRidcully, on 04 May 2013 - 08:30 AM, said:

Considering that jeffsw6 apparently started playing MW:O in March 2013, I find it impressive enough that he caught up with all the stuff that was reported since Closed Beta

I wanted to understand the crit system specifically because I did not understand why I was losing so many weapons to AC/20 hits when the Jagermech came out, and that weapon became very popular. So I did a lot of reading.

Unlike most posters on the forum, I have spent the time to think through my opinion on all the various weapons in the game, and play many different mechs in different roles. I think we need more whole-game thinking around here, and less "omg nerf this thing that keeps killing me!!!"

It bothers me that PGI reversed their position on MGs but obviously hasn't actually thought it through in whole-game terms. Otherwise, they would be buffing the weapon more, or modifying the hard-points on some mechs.

It's like ECM -- players gripe about it, so now they are doing this idiotic BAP thing. If the "ECM bubble" was 40m instead of 180m it would be much more reasonable. Now we have an ECM arms-race instead. FFS.

MustrumRidcully, on 04 May 2013 - 08:30 AM, said:

I don't know where the damage quantums are explained (the term is not official, AFAIK, but the description fits).

PGI doesn't use the word "quantums," this is just a general vocabulary term. Various dictionaries define quantum as "a quantity or amount," "the amount of energy regarded as a unit," "share or portion," etc.

You could read "unit of damage" everywhere I wrote "quantum" and it has the same meaning; but I thought a unique term for the damage-units would make my explanation easier to follow.

[MustrumRidcully]

I often used the term damage package, but ... I am not satisfied with any of the choices yet. I wonder how the devs call it.

Maybe pulses? but that only really works for lasers, it doesn't make sense for an MG, does it?