43 replies to this topic

[megoblocks]

stjobe, on 21 May 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

These are the facts:

MGs (with their 12.5x crit damage buff)
36% chance to crit for 1 damage
20% chance to crit for 2 damage
5% chance to crit for 3 damage.
61% total crit chance

Actually, this buff makes them strip out internals pretty fast. 1 mg will do 9.1 damage to internals per second, or on average 1.1 seconds to knock something out. If you have 2 mgs as backups, that's the loss of an internal every .55 seconds. Granted, damage would be evenly applied throughout all the internals due to the high volume and roll distribution, still, not too shabby for a 1/2 ton weapon. They'd really be worth it if the engine could take crits and be destroyed. Then you'd really see them shine. Not sure I'd want to dedicate 3+ (unless it was on something light).

[Tarrasque]

stjobe, on 21 May 2013 - 02:12 PM, said:

Add "...on its own" if it helps explain it. A weapon that cannot damage armour can never *get* to the internal components, so it is useless for 2/3rds of the fight (max armour is double internal structure, or 2/3rds of total health of a section).

And even when some other weapon strips away the armour, allowing the "crit weapon" to go to work, it is in almost every conceivable situation better to continue shooting with the regular weapon and destroy the section than to switch to the "crit weapon" and have some weapons critted out a second or two before the whole section is destroyed.

On the other hand, a weapon that can damage armour is useful for the whole fight, and as pointed out above, only has a slightly lower crit chance than the "crit weapons" - and since most of the regular weapons do much more damage, they are also that more effective in removing sections competely, internal components and all.

That's why "crit weapons" in MWO is a failed concept. It's also a bad idea for other reasons, as I've outlined in several posts above.

Ah, ok. Makes more sense - I can agree with that, on merit that those would be the only weapons damaging a mech. As it stands, 'crit seeking' appears to be a high risk/reward situation. Taking these weapons, you recognize that they are largely useless for the first half of a match, but you're benefitted by a large uptick in damage in the latter portions - something that pilots who find themselves surviving to the end of the match can use to turn the tide.

Again, I do believe that they still need to be adjusted, and maybe in the MG's case its best we have a lightweight damage based ballistic system, but weapons like the LBX (when working correctly) could add a great wrinkle to the meta/game. You'd think twice going one on one at the end of a match when your armor is stripped and you see the opposing mech has fresh magazines of LBX or MG ammo, if it were implemented properly.

/.02

[Deathlike]

I'm pretty sure after seeing many more Spider-5Ks surface is that I felt the same way today as I did yesterday:

MGs still tickle my mech.

[Carrioncrows]

Tarrasque, on 21 May 2013 - 04:44 PM, said:

Ah, ok. Makes more sense - I can agree with that, on merit that those would be the only weapons damaging a mech. As it stands, 'crit seeking' appears to be a high risk/reward situation. Taking these weapons, you recognize that they are largely useless for the first half of a match, but you're benefitted by a large uptick in damage in the latter portions - something that pilots who find themselves surviving to the end of the match can use to turn the tide.

There is no large uptick in damage.

The Damage will always remain the same, however when you crit you do critical damage to a component! It's not more damage to the internal structure of a mech but just the component that may or may not be in that location. If there is no component that critical damage is wasted and goes away.

Even then the time it takes you to kill a component an actual weapon of the same weight / range could kill the entire location destroying all equipment, weapons and components that reside there.

So we ask for a weapon that deals damage as a crit weapon is pointless.

Edited by Carrioncrows, 21 May 2013 - 05:29 PM.

[Monky]

0.1 dmg per bullet, reduce/drop spread.

[Kaeb Odellas]

An interesting effect of doubling the damage means that MGs now have the highest damage per ton of ammo out of all the ballistic weapons.

The problem is that MGs can't dump them out fast enough to make a difference in damage, and the cone of fire makes the range buffs irrelevant. They need to up the fire rate and tighten the cone up on them.

Edited by Kaeb Odellas, 21 May 2013 - 06:04 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

If they keep the crit mechanic as it is the crit multiplier needs to be MUCH higher. Then machines guns can be sprayed and instantly start ripping components out. IFn they take too long to do this all other direct dmage dealign weapons are superior.

A niche weapon has to be POWERFUL in its niche, if not, that niche effect needs to be a supplement to an already viable weapon.

PGI - decide if this is a niche crit finder or a damage ealwer with a side bonus of critting. It fails on both fronts now.

[Keifomofutu]

Asmudius Heng, on 21 May 2013 - 06:28 PM, said:

If they keep the crit mechanic as it is the crit multiplier needs to be MUCH higher. Then machines guns can be sprayed and instantly start ripping components out. IFn they take too long to do this all other direct dmage dealign weapons are superior.

A niche weapon has to be POWERFUL in its niche, if not, that niche effect needs to be a supplement to an already viable weapon.

PGI - decide if this is a niche crit finder or a damage ealwer with a side bonus of critting. It fails on both fronts now.

Option B would be better. There are several mech variants in lower weight classes that require a low weight ballistic to put out a bit of damage.

[Shadowsword8]

Carrioncrows, on 21 May 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

...still useless.

Dear Devs,

Dmg: 0.2 dmg a shot - 0.1 dmg from 90m-200m
ROF: 10 shots a sec
Ammo: 400 rounds for a full ton, 200 rounds for a 1/2 ton.

Are you insane?

You're basically asking for 4 MG to have a DPS equivalent to 2.5 large lasers, for far less weight and no heat. It would completely obsolete every energy-based light mech.

[Asmudius Heng]

Keifomofutu, on 21 May 2013 - 08:54 PM, said:

Option B would be better. There are several mech variants in lower weight classes that require a low weight ballistic to put out a bit of damage.

I agree as well .. i LIKE secondary roles such as crit sekign mechanics and electrifal interuption for PPCs etc. However they should be side effects, not the entire point of the weapon which should be a damage dealer of a certain range and place in the overall arsenal.

NARC and TAG obviously not included in this.

[Carrioncrows]

Shadowsword8, on 21 May 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

Are you insane?

You're basically asking for 4 MG to have a DPS equivalent to 2.5 large lasers, for far less weight and no heat. It would completely obsolete every energy-based light mech.

Do what most of us did.

Think about it.

Process it. Understand it.

Yes you would get 2 DPS per machinegun. That is if you have 100% hit rate and can manage to both stay in range of 90m and hit the same location. You bloop out of 90m and you drop to 1 dps.

Ammo: 400 rounds, 200 rounds of ammo is 20 secs of fire per 1/2 ton. 400 rounds of ammo is 40 Secs of fire per full ton. Just like EVERY other ballistic weapon you'll have to invest in more ammo to sustain a fight. A single ton of MGun ammo will no longer sustain 5 minutes of combat. You have to pick your shots.

Your a 90m-200m weapon. This is true in most games, the closer you get the more damaging the weapons are.

Hardpoint restrictions is the big choke point: What other light/med mechs can run something like this? The cicada? the Spider? and maybe 2 mguns on a Raven? That's it.

So lets investigate some more instead of just knee-jerk reactions:
4 mguns, + 4 tons of ammo = 6 tons total for 40 secs of combat and a total of 8 DPS provided you have 100% uptime and 100% accuracy.

4 Medium lasers + 2 DHS = 6 tons total for a total of 5 DPS at ranges from 270m - 540m with unlimited shots and you only need 25% up time to sustain 5 dps.

No it won't outclass other weapons, but what it will do is provide a alternative light Ballistic weapon worth taking instead of the rubbish we have now.

[MuKen]

Shadowsword8, on 21 May 2013 - 09:10 PM, said:

Are you insane?

You're basically asking for 4 MG to have a DPS equivalent to 2.5 large lasers, for far less weight and no heat. It would completely obsolete every energy-based light mech.

Don't be such a stat warrior. The mgs would put out nowhere near what the on-paper values say due to range, cone of fire, and the fact that they require 100% reticle-on-target time to get full dps. People who actually play the game instead of reading numbers on websites all day understand this intuitively.

Edited by MuKen, 22 May 2013 - 06:43 AM.

[Doelloos Verdwaald]

After running my Spider 5K with a flamer and 4 MG I agree it's a big let down. I had hoped that along with the damage increase and the crit it would have been a formidable but very situational weapon. Sadly after pelting away tons of ammo the best I achieved was 200 odd damage and 7 assists.

If they made the Machinegun the 'go to' weapon on unarmored sections, for any Mech, it would add a whole new dimension to this game. One way would be to increase the crit chance and multiplier to a level where it would pay off to drop an AC in order to get a Machinegun. It's useless in the beginning of the fight but once there is a break in the armor it will pay off.
If done right one should contemplate using a MG in a Misery brawler.

It would also pave the way for niche builds, like the Spider 5K, that roam the battle looking for weak Mechs. Contiguously cycling through targets until they find one with some armor stripped and then jumping in to take advantage.

The best solution would be to make ALL of the Mech internals crit-able. Then the Machinegun would be a form of debuffing. Taking out the actuators, sensors and gyros to add movement penalties and have enemies grind to a halt. (Though I understand that would take extra coding and I doubt there is time before launch.)

Note that still would not make Mechs boating Machineguns overpowered. The whole system is balanced by the low damage vs armor. Machineguns would be a support tool and rarely get you kills.

This would add more depth to the game, another tactic, something to think about when piloting.
"Am I going to switch to MGs to take out that damaged shoulder of should I drill more on his CT instead."
Along with a harsher heat system this will add levels of complexity that will make the game more of a Mech simulator. At the moment it's a FPS where you have to steer your feet and put out moar alpha dmg!

Now these are all decisions you make while designing a game. So I wonder if they were so pressed for time / money that they couldn't put it in or if they want to build a clunky FPS with robots. If the latter is true we're wasting our breath with this discussion and write off weapons that hitched a ride with canon but are not part of the design for the game.

EDIT: forum ate the layout.

Edited by Doelloos Verdwaald, 22 May 2013 - 12:22 AM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Doelloos Verdwaald, on 22 May 2013 - 12:10 AM, said:

Internal-killing MGs

The problem is, anything with more lasers or missiles will still have far more utility in a fight than an MG light mech, since they will actually be useful for the entirety of a match, while a Spider 5K will be useless against anything that still has armor, and thus useless in a fight for most of the match.

And once you do find an armor-stripped component, you would be far better off destroying it outright than just critting all of the things inside it.

[Tombstoner]

i love my 4x mg spider.... got my first lrm boat kill last night.... it was fantastic ripping into his armor as he ran away desperately trying to find the assistance of friends.

if i'm out in the open however i'm dead in 3-4 seconds. seriously need to pick when you attack and hug the terrain that you know can block lrms.

[Fate 6]

MasterErrant, on 21 May 2013 - 03:52 PM, said:

according to smurfy's the mg does .8dps the SL 1.0 the MG does 2/3 the damage of the SL in TT so it is already buffed beyond the original scale. it is a minor thirdline weapon. if S's is right then mg x4 gives you comparable damage to an ac5 for 1/3 the weight. what's wrong with that?

MG also has spread and has to be kept on target continuously. It only does that DPS if it never stops doing damage. The AC/5 does 5 damage in one hit, then you can turn away or what have you. The AC/5 is also on the low end of the AC spectrum right now. Not to mention to have 4 MGs you have to have 4 ballistic hardpoints. So, when you look at a mech like a BJ for example you can't have any sort of decent damage with MGs as your main ballistic weapon. My BJ-1 actually has dual AC/5s right now because I got tired of having to use a weapon that required my to stand in the open facing a target for an extended period of time.

[Tickdoff Tank]

The SL has a beam duration of 0.75 seconds, during that 3/4 of a second the SL does 3 damage, then the SL has a cooldown time of 2.25 seconds in which it cannot fire. This gives the SL 1.0 DPS. In an actual game-play situation it is not very difficult to keep the SL beam on target for 3/4ths of a second (even if you do spread the damage a little bit you should be able to concentrate most of the damage)

In comparison the MG has an effective beam duration of 3.0 seconds. During which time the MG has a total damage potential of 2.4 damage, or 0.8 DPS. In the time that it takes a SL to do 3 damage the MG does a whopping 0.6 damage. The MG must stay on target for just under 4 seconds to do 3 damage. In TT the MG did 2 damage compared to the SL's 3, but in TT both weapons did that damage instantly, with no spread. In a real game-play scenario, the MG must remain on target much longer than the SL. While it is not difficult to stay on target for a second, keeping your reticule on your target constantly, while remaining within 90m at all times is quite difficult, if not completely impractical.

That is why, IMO, the MG needs to have a higher base damage than the SL. I would like to try out the MGs at a base of 0.12 damage per bullet, 1.2 DPS. In a perfect situation the MG would do more damage than the SL, which *is* another departure from TT values, but in actual practice I think the MG will still be doing MUCH less than full damage. If the MG user is able to do that full DPS then I think he deserves it!

(Note: In all honesty I think that 1.2 DPS will still be too low for the MG, 1.6 is probably a better place, but I am perfectly willing to increase the damage slowly so that we do not make the MGs too powerful. If that is even possible, lol)

[General Taskeen]

The Flea, in general, is really going to suffer when it enters in-game and it will really make these issues of weapons more evident:

• The lol tracking of streaks will kill it in 1-2 salvo's (138 maximum armor)
  
• The Flea-15 with 2 MG's and 1 Flamer won't be able to use either effectively. They can't even be used effectively on a Mech now (evidence - need 4-6 MG's or 4 to 9 Flamers, which lol whut?)
  
• For 20 tons it needs speed and short range weaponry to deal sufficient damage, in a short time a frame, and escape. Short range weaponry is in a terrible spot already for Lighter Mechs.

Edited by General Taskeen, 23 May 2013 - 05:30 AM.

[Carrioncrows]

Here is the thing, even with 2 DPS under 90m and 1 DPS at 90m-200m you still only have 40 secs of fire per ton of ammo and 20 secs of fire per 1/2 ton of ammo. Yes you should be able to buy 1/2 ton's of ammo just like in Btech.

That's only 80 dmg per ton of ammo, all the other ballistic weapons do 150 per ton (cept the AC20 it does 140)

It will make a nice low weight ballistic option but honestly people are still going to take Guass, AC's and LB10-x's when they have the weight, it's just light mechs don't have the weight.

[Kanjejou]

one ton of ammunition is enought for 2 to 4 machine gun if you arent trigger happy