146 replies to this topic

[GingerBang]

They rock. They do tons of damage to internals already. Any more and they will be a small laser without a heat penalty. Machines have always been nothing more than a spare tonnage filler. I think all the CoD players hear the phrase machine gun, and think of the damage they do to human flesh, not tons and tons of steel armor. a machine doesn't do {Richard Cameron} to a solid steel wall. Why do you think the US Army has anti-tank artillery, and not just 6 guys with M249's.

Edited by GingerBang, 06 June 2013 - 07:26 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

A Machine Gun should do almost the same damage in the same amount of time as a Small Laser. I would even be OK with them being completely equal.

I still would not put one on my Mech, but I would be fine with the balancing.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 06 June 2013 - 07:27 AM.

[tenderloving]

What a terribly wrong misuse of this meme.

[GingerBang]

LOL your censor turns the short phrase for Richard (starts with D rhymes with Tick) into Richard Cameron, the militant? Epic. That made my morning.

Joseph Mallan, on 06 June 2013 - 07:27 AM, said:

A Machine Gun should do almost the same damage in the same amount of time as a Small Laser. I would even be OK with them being completely equal.

I still would not put one on my Mech, but I would be fine with the balancing.

I'm automatically going to assume you've never played mechwarrior before in your life. Machines don't come close to laser damage and shouldn't. Bullets suck against steel walls. Be a good pilot, take the armor off first, then use MG's. I'm sick of this game getting nerfed to Call Of Duty levels of simplicity. You might as well just make EVERY ******* WEAPON an ac/20, because it's the only way people like you will be happy. weapons are not supposed to be equal to each other, other wise there is no point to have two different ones.

tenderloving, on 06 June 2013 - 07:27 AM, said:

What a terribly wrong misuse of this meme.

What a terribly wrong misuse of grammar.

Edited by GingerBang, 06 June 2013 - 07:31 AM.

[Eleshod]

Machine gun buffs having nothing to do with CoD it has somthing to do with giving ballistic based mechs SOMTHING to fight with instead of stacking massive alpha builds like dual 20's/gauss.

untill the mini-autocannons are released there is a distinct cap between ballistics compared to lasers, it's about making them viable.

[GingerBang]

Eleshod, on 06 June 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

Machine gun buffs having nothing to do with CoD it has somthing to do with giving ballistic based mechs SOMTHING to fight with instead of stacking massive alpha builds like dual 20's/gauss.

untill the mini-autocannons are released there is a distinct cap between ballistics compared to lasers, it's about making them viable.

ballistic mechs have AC 2's, 5's, 10's, 20's, and Gauss to work with. What game are you playing? Sounds like ****.


Honestly i think ballistics are more powerful than lasers. You get pinpoint damage. Everyone i know who thinks there is a "gap" simply is god awful at aiming, or more importantly, can't hit the same spot on a mech twice to (literally) save their lives. My roommate let me use his AC/2 Dragon, and this thing is GOD TIER. The AC/2's act like BIG machine guns, and DESTROY armor incredibly quick if you actually have the talent to aim it.

Edited by GingerBang, 06 June 2013 - 07:38 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

GingerBang, on 06 June 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

LOL your censor turns the short phrase for Richard (starts with D rhymes with Tick) into Richard Cameron, the militant? Epic. That made my morning.




I'm automatically going to assume you've never played mechwarrior before in your life. Machines don't come close to laser damage and shouldn't. Bullets suck against steel walls. Be a good pilot, take the armor off first, then use MG's. I'm sick of this game getting nerfed to Call Of Duty levels of simplicity. You might as well just make EVERY ******* WEAPON an ac/20, because it's the only way people like you will be happy. weapons are not supposed to be equal to each other, other wise there is no point to have two different ones.

Assume what you want... But I have played plenty of MechWarrior since 2. The difference between a Small laser and a Machine Gun should be negligible. You don't have to try and convince me about Real MGs v 10 inches of sloped armor... but for this game and for the CBT franchise, A Machine Gun is almost as good as a small laser.


FYI: I think Small lasers are a crap weapon even in MWO myself.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 06 June 2013 - 07:40 AM.

[malibu43]

GingerBang, on 06 June 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

ballistic mechs have AC 2's, 5's, 10's, 20's, and Gauss to work with....

And how many AC2's can you realistically fit on the ballistics Spider?

Here's a hint: If that same mech had energy hardpoints, it would be 1/12 the number of small lasers (not counting the weight for AC2 ammo). And the AC2 doesn't do 12 times the damage...

Edited by malibu43, 06 June 2013 - 07:43 AM.

[Eleshod]

GingerBang, on 06 June 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

ballistic mechs have AC 2's, 5's, 10's, 20's, and Gauss to work with. What game are you playing? Sounds like ****.


Honestly i think ballistics are more powerful than lasers. You get pinpoint damage. Everyone i know who thinks there is a "gap" simply is god awful at aiming, or more importantly, can't hit the same spot on a mech twice to (literally) save their lives. My roommate let me use his AC/2 Dragon, and this thing is GOD TIER. The AC/2's act like BIG machine guns, and DESTROY armor incredibly quick if you actually have the talent to aim it.

The AC2 hits 2 damage and weighs 6 tons, how does that work for a build not wanting to dump a ****** amount of tonnage into a weapon that does less damage to a medium laser?

There IS a gap, as I said before mini-autocannons would bridge this gap, but at the moment ballistic based mechs are at a disadvantage to ANYTHING that can use a laser.

Not to mention internal structure has a TINY amount of hitpoints, why use a machine gun when ONE good burst from 2 medium lasers does the job and doesn't gimp me with a broken weapon system while everyones armor is still up?

[TexAce]

1. All other Ballistics are at least 6 tons heavy and need at least 2 tons of ammo = 8 tons = too much for nearly all lights and some mediums
2. Since you have to keep LOS to your enemy when using MGs, they sure should have a similar DPS as small lasers. Because small lasers don't need LOS for more than a second.
3. Mech MGs are not M249's, they are half a ton heavy and one bullet is weighting 1 pound! Shoot one pound of compressed metal with 1000m/s into any wall and see what happens.
4. You got no idea of anything. Think before you post.

Edited by TexAss, 06 June 2013 - 07:47 AM.

[MekShred]

@ OP (GingerBang)

Here are the main issues I see and probably the underlying problem with the weapons in this game. MG's have always been an effective weapon in Mechwarrior games. Thinking back to Mechwarrior 2 Mercenaries, 3, 4, and 4 mercenaries. However they have never been overly damaging. So why did we use them? they are excellent for taking out infantry (Mech Assault) and great for taking out light armour, such as APC's, and Hummers. That is their intended purpose.

Now if we flip over to Mechwarrior Online, we have a bit of a jam. There is no infantry, no light vehicles. So I ask what is their purpose? Why include them in a game for which their intended purpose has been removed or not yet implemented? Maybe just for canon reasons, or maybe because they wanted them to be a viable weapon.

I say if they are not buffed to the point of being viable then they should be removed from the game. At the moment they are still beyond useless. My Jagger DD runs 6 of them. This is the only build that comes close to having a chance at using them effectively. For the weight of the ammo and and fact that you need to be facing the target 100% of the time to get even close to its rated damage I say they need to be looked at. They either make them viable as a weapon or it slips into the shadows never to be touched by any competent mechwarrior.

I hope they have been left in because they plan on making an campaign expansion with co-op mode.... I think I just had an orgasm!

Anywho, in the grand scheme of things to complain about a machine gun while most of us get killed by excessive use of PPC and Guass boating mechs seems silly.

[Joseph Mallan]

TexAss, on 06 June 2013 - 07:45 AM, said:

1. All other Ballistics are at least 6 tons heavy and need at least 2 tons of ammo = 8 tons = too much for nearly all lights and some mediums
2. Since you have to keep LOS to your enemy when using MGs, they sure should have a similar DPS as small lasers. Because small lasers don't need LOS for more than a second.
3. Mech MGs are not M249's, they are half a ton heavy and one bullet is weighting 1 pound!

To expand on TexAss post, A Machine gun should also be fired in bursts damaging exactly like a laser. Short stream of bullets, rest, short stream of bullets rest. very other weapon has a cool down, fix this, up he damage to be on par with a Small Laser, Balance!

[Eleshod]

TexAss, on 06 June 2013 - 07:45 AM, said:

1. All other Ballistics are at least 6 tons heavy and need at least 2 tons of ammo = 8 tons = too much for nearly all lights and some mediums
2. Since you have to keep LOS to your enemy when using MGs, they sure should have a similar DPS as small lasers. Because small lasers don't need LOS for more than a second.
3. Mech MGs are not M249's, they are half a ton heavy and one bullet is weighting 1 pound! Shoot one pound of compressed metal with 1000m/s into any wall and see what happens.
4. You got no idea of anything. Think before you post.

The machine gun in lore also carries ARMOR pericing rounds which still give it effectiveness against ARMOR.

[Coralld]

I'd like to point out that Machine guns in TT did 2 points of damage per round, very similar to AC/2s. Now I don't think MGs should do 2 points of damage as they would be spitting out stupid amounts of DPS in a mech shooter like MWO. I'd say they should do at most 1.0 damage per round and have their ammo amount cut by more then half and have the whole crit bonus that MGs have to be thrown out the window. Lighter mechs that are ballistic oriented are gimped because the weapons they should be using are ballistics, but the only viable weapon of the category they can mount is an AC/2 which weighs six tons and only does 2 points of damage. These mech are WAY to light and are not capable of mounting more then 1 or 2 which leaves them very gimped in not just damage but also in the fact that that tonnage could be better spent.

Edited by Coralld, 08 June 2013 - 03:49 PM.

[Skyfaller]

GingerBang, on 06 June 2013 - 07:24 AM, said:

They rock. They do tons of damage to internals already.

Key word: Internals.

If the armor has been blown off, you are still much better off using a small laser to inflict 3 damage instantly and quickly pop the engine or section off.

Quote

Any more and they will be a small laser without a heat penalty. Machines have always been nothing more than a spare tonnage filler.

The thing is.. the small laser does not require ammo to be slotted. .5 ton 1 slot weapon vs .5 ton weapon + 1~3 tons of ammo and 1~3 slot cost. MGs were never just a tonnage filler... BT used MGs for anti mech duty and had a BONUS to kill infantry. It never was an anti-infantry weapon.

Quote

I think all the CoD players hear the phrase machine gun, and think of the damage they do to human flesh, not tons and tons of steel armor. a machine doesn't do {Richard Cameron} to a solid steel wall. Why do you think the US Army has anti-tank artillery, and not just 6 guys with M249's.

You do realize the machine guns in the mech weigh half a ton right? A 20mm vulcan cannon today weights just under 0.2 tons. In comparison, the AC2 is 6 tons.. that is the equivalent of a very heavy, large artillery piece. Heck, a 150mm artillery piece today weights about 3 tons only.

The mechwarrior machine guns are very likely firing 40mm rounds and the AC2 is likely firing the equivalent of an 88mm artillery shell (in WW2 the 88mm AT gun weighed 5 to 6 tons..and BT stuff is largely based on WW2 to cold war tech).

The MG needs to be effective in this game vs mechs. The current damage increase is good but it would be perfect if the MG was given 1km range and convergence. The weapon is neigh useless in a close quarter fight when the other side can dump 20dmg or more in one hit on you while you plink away at 24 damage per 3 seconds spread all over their chest.

[Eleshod]

To add a bit more to Skyfaller's post, the A-10 thunderbolt is nicknamed the tank buster and was LITERALLY built around the GAU-8 gattling gun. It's nicknamed the "Tankbust" because that GAU-8 tears through all modern tank armor like tissue paper...

https://en.wikipedia...i/GAU-8_Avenger

Machine guns are effective against armor =P just not in mechwarrior it seems.

Edited by Eleshod, 06 June 2013 - 08:09 AM.

[Matthew Ace]

First, many people do not understand that the MGs here are not 5.56mm, not 7.62mm, maybe not .50 caliber but more along the lines of 20mm-ish.

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

Scroll to Models to understand where I'm getting at.

Next, I believe Mech Armor is Ablative.

http://www.sarna.net...hs_%26_Vehicles

Lastly, refer to Eleshod's post, right above mine.

Edited by Matthew Ace, 06 June 2013 - 08:09 AM.

[Monky]

I honestly don't get why you have a hard on for hating MG's, but here's the real tru facts ™

A: Machineguns have been in the game since battletech originally was produced. There were no infantry rules, just mech on mech action, and they were useful. They had the same effectiveness as a small laser, but did a little less damage in exchange for not building up heat (and having to have ammo). Later, infantry bonuses were placed on the machinegun.

B: In mechwarrior games, machineguns have been effective in the past. Mechwarrior 1, 3, and 4, all had capable machineguns in close range. Having actually played all the mechwarrior titles it makes me think perhaps you are the one who hasn't played mechwarrior games.

C: In MWO, lights need machineguns to be effective; indeed, arguing that lights should just use another weapon is ridiculous, as lights need speed to survive, which means a big engine is necessary - making even a single AC2 is too much weight considering the heatsinks and ammo needed to make it fire effectively for a practically long time, compared to literally any other energy/missile build.

So in short, buff MG's.

Edited by Monky, 06 June 2013 - 08:11 AM.

[InRev]

You really couldn't put this in the existing MG thread that's about 10 threads down?

Really?

[tenderloving]

Matthew Ace, on 06 June 2013 - 08:07 AM, said:

First, many people do not understand that the MGs here are not 5.56mm, not 7.62mm, maybe not .50 caliber but more along the lines of 20mm-ish.

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

Scroll to Models to understand where I'm getting at.

Next, I believe Mech Armor is Ablative.

http://www.sarna.net...hs_%26_Vehicles

Lastly, refer to Eleshod's post, right above mine.

Yeah the armor is ablative. There is no hope in stopping something like a Gauss Round or PPC blast, so you make the armor something that gets chipped away/blasted off to protect what's behind it.