293 replies to this topic

[stjobe]

Hotthedd, on 14 August 2013 - 08:18 AM, said:

So, a single MG might not be massively OP, but 4 of them can spit out one continuous stream of 80 damage vs. armor in 10 seconds or 110 damage vs. I.S.!! Let's say only 50% of the shots hit. How many mechs can withstand 40 damage (spread across their torsos or legs) even if it ONLY hit armor? And that is in 10 seconds!

4 MGs do 40 damage over 10 seconds, not 80, so if 50% hits, that's 20 damage. Oh me oh my, what could possibly withstand such a barrage of damage, spread all over the front of your 'mech? Hide the children, this is too gruesome to contemplate!

I can't take you seriously when you use faulty numbers to state your case.

[Hotthedd]

stjobe, on 14 August 2013 - 08:36 AM, said:

4 MGs do 40 damage over 10 seconds, not 80, so if 50% hits, that's 20 damage. Oh me oh my, what could possibly withstand such a barrage of damage, spread all over the front of your 'mech? Hide the children, this is too gruesome to contemplate!

I can't take you seriously when you use faulty numbers to state your case.

Really? A math error keeps you from taking me seriously? I also was extremely conservative in the 50% hit rate (mine is 92.33%), but I see that you have no problem taking THAT number to heart.

How about the actual POINTS I made? Anything to say about that?

[Kensaisama]

Hotthedd, on 14 August 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Really? A math error keeps you from taking me seriously? I also was extremely conservative in the 50% hit rate (mine is 92.33%), but I see that you have no problem taking THAT number to heart.

How about the actual POINTS I made? Anything to say about that?

WHOA step back now, someone has his serious pants on.

[Abivard]

The people who laughed at how MG's can't scratch paint are crying out because now they actually can do damage, so to them it is OP'd, because they can't laugh and ignore it anymore.

But no weapon should be useless as the anti-MG crowd seems to want the MG to be.

No nerf is needed for MG's. We could really use some kind of anti-stupidity filter better.

[Hotthedd]

Abivard, on 14 August 2013 - 11:32 AM, said:

The people who laughed at how MG's can't scratch paint are crying out because now they actually can do damage, so to them it is OP'd, because they can't laugh and ignore it anymore.

But no weapon should be useless as the anti-MG crowd seems to want the MG to be.

No nerf is needed for MG's. We could really use some kind of anti-stupidity filter better.

Nobody is saying they are OP because they can do damage, I am arguing that the damage buff, and especially the IS damage buff is imbalanced due to the fact that MGs are continuous fire with no heat. MGs are coring through the CTs of undamaged heavy mechs very quickly.

Whatever you believe the intent of MGs are, I can't believe it is this for 0.5 tons and zero heat.

[stjobe]

Hotthedd, on 14 August 2013 - 11:43 AM, said:

Nobody is saying they are OP because they can do damage, I am arguing that the damage buff, and especially the IS damage buff is imbalanced due to the fact that MGs are continuous fire with no heat. MGs are coring through the CTs of undamaged heavy mechs very quickly.

Whatever you believe the intent of MGs are, I can't believe it is this for 0.5 tons and zero heat.

First off, spending 0.5 tons on a MG will get you exactly 0 DPS. Spending the same on Small Lasers will get you 1 DPS.
For the minimum investment in MG plus a ton of ammo you get 1 DPS, whereas you'd get 3 DPS worth of Small Lasers.

Secondly, MGs "core through the CTs of undamaged heavy mechs" at about the same rate a similar number of Small Lasers do; the only difference comes when armour is breached - then the MG indeed is better than the SL. But before that, the continuous-fire mechanic and random spread of the MG place it well below the SL in focused damage.

So, roughly the same DPS as a Small Laser; slower to chew through armour due to continuous-fire and spread as opposed to pin-point beam, and roughly twice as fast to destroy IS compared to the SL.

Sounds like it has both advantages and drawbacks to me.

[Hotthedd]

So, roughly the same DPS as a Small Laser; faster to chew through armor due to continuous fire and (minimal) spread (at close range) as opposed to hit-scan beam, and roughly twice as fast to destroy IS compared to the SL, which generates heat that the MG does not.

Fixed that for you.

I also like how you mention ammo necessary for the MG, but fail to mention heat sinks necessary for the SL to do comparable DPS without overheating.

sounds like the advantages far out weigh the disadvantages to me.

[xCico]

NERF MACHINE GUNS!
I mean this lol

[Rippthrough]

No heatsinks are necessary for the SL, your engine sinks will take care of more of those than you can fit MG's.

They are NOT faster to chew through armor, I don't know where you get that from. Real world, SL will take the armor off a component twice as fast as the same amount of MG's.
MG's also run out of ammo and can have that ammo critted for an explosion, none of which the SL suffers from.

[Hotthedd]

Rippthrough, on 14 August 2013 - 04:14 PM, said:

No heatsinks are necessary for the SL, your engine sinks will take care of more of those than you can fit MG's.

They are NOT faster to chew through armor, I don't know where you get that from. Real world, SL will take the armor off a component twice as fast as the same amount of MG's.
MG's also run out of ammo and can have that ammo critted for an explosion, none of which the SL suffers from.

SLs add heat. Assuming neither build (MG vs SL) is running ONLY that weapon, additional HS will be needed for the SL build to offset the MG ammo. 1 ton of MG ammo is 1000 rounds, so 2 tons will satisfy most builds for an entire match. If you keep your ammo somewhere that an ammo explosion would be fatal, spend 0.5 ton on CASE.

MGs got an ammo/ton buff, a range buff, and a 5x damage buff vs. armor (14x damage vs IS). All of this with zero heat, and they can be boated to he11.

[Rippthrough]

How many effect builds are running their full capacity of engine heat and then adding a few small lasers on top? I can't think of any, the mechs that SL and MG comparisions most applies to are mainly lights only.

A 4xSL Jenner will blow a 4xMG spider away all day in terms of damage on target. And it won't overheat, and doesn't need case.

Edited by Rippthrough, 14 August 2013 - 04:54 PM.

[Thermidor]

MG's are fine. They only do dmg on cored parts. Otherwise their dmg is diddly

[CGB Behemoth]

I know only 3 mechs that could be some of danger with MG's:
1) SDR-5K
2) CDA-3C
3) JM6-DD
Only Spider can live long enought for being trouble. Fix SDR hitboxes & everything will be alright with MG play.

To Hotthedd - Where are you find MG have 5x damage vs armour?

Edited by Behemothk, 14 August 2013 - 05:52 PM.

[Hotthedd]

Behemothk, on 14 August 2013 - 05:50 PM, said:

I know only 3 mechs that could be some of danger with MG's:
1) SDR-5K
2) CDA-3C
3) JM6-DD
Only Spider can live long enought for being trouble. Fix SDR hitboxes & everything will be alright with MG play.

To Hotthedd - Where are you find MG have 5x damage vs armour?

No, MGs have 5x the damage vs. armor as they do in TT.
TT MGs = 0.2 DPS, MW:O MGs = 1 DPS

[Hotthedd]

Rippthrough, on 14 August 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

How many effect builds are running their full capacity of engine heat and then adding a few small lasers on top? I can't think of any, the mechs that SL and MG comparisions most applies to are mainly lights only.

A 4xSL Jenner will blow a 4xMG spider away all day in terms of damage on target. And it won't overheat, and doesn't need case.

In theory, I am talking about mechs that have a full loadout of weapons, but have the option of adding 2-3 MGs or 2-3 SLs. The extra heat from the SLs would make MGs a better choice given the damage.

Yes, I know that mechs have hardpoints and the straight up choice would never actually have to be made.

[Corwin Vickers]

I ran a Spider K last night. 6 kills, ~350 damage
Jenner F 6 kills, ~750 damage

Who wouldn't rather have lasers? You don't have to kill steal with lasers.

Yet all you "Mgs are for infantry!" and "spiders are unkillable!" tards are all *********.

Mgs aren't overpowered and fix your ping.

[stjobe]

Hotthedd, on 14 August 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

So, roughly the same DPS as a Small Laser; faster to chew through armor due to continuous fire and (minimal) spread (at close range) as opposed to hit-scan beam, and roughly twice as fast to destroy IS compared to the SL, which generates heat that the MG does not.

Fixed that for you.

Continuous fire is a drawback, not an advantage, and it surely won't make the MG go through armour faster if it keeps spreading its damage out.

The MG is SLOWER at penetrating armour than a SL due to:
1. The SL is a beam weapon that only needs to be held on-target for 25% of the time (beam 0.75s, cooldown 2.25s). The MG is a continuous-fire weapon that need to be held on-target for 100% of the time (3s of holding the MG steady on target to match the 0.75s beam damage of the SL). Which do you think is easier in a match, holding steady on a side torso for 0.75 seconds, or holding steady on a side torso for 3 seconds? Hitting the same side torso with three separate beams or trying to hold the MG on it for nine seconds straight?
2. The SL has a beam duration, but the MG has spread. Beam duration can be compensated by skill, spread cannot be compensated by anything but keeping still (and getting the target to keep still) and being really close.

Hotthedd, on 14 August 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

I also like how you mention ammo necessary for the MG, but fail to mention heat sinks necessary for the SL to do comparable DPS without overheating.

That's because they're really not needed; your 'mech already comes equipped with enough SHS to run a SL heat-neutral, and should you upgrade to DHS you can run three SLs heat-neutral:

A single SL generates 0.67 heat/second, and 10 SHS (which is the minimum you can drop with) dissipates 1.0 heat/second.

With 10 DHS, three SL is heat neutral with a 250 rated engine or better; 2.0 HPS vs 2.0 dissipation. With smaller engines you may have to unlock Cool Run or Elite the 'mech before it's heat neutral, but it will be.

And those three SL incidentally is the same weight as a single MG with a ton of ammo.

Hotthedd, on 14 August 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

sounds like the advantages far out weigh the disadvantages to me.

That's because you focus solely on the advantages and ignore and/or gloss over the disadvantages.

Edited by stjobe, 14 August 2013 - 09:53 PM.

[Deathlike]

MG ammo is still a deathtrap.

At least now when there's a hole in your armor, the 2 MGs in my HBK-4G will graciously pour "MG Salt" into that wound.

It makes a lot more sense to "conserve" MG ammo in a Spider-5K, until it is time to go full blast. MGs vs external armor is generally a wasted effort and frankly more time for someone to pound you.

Edited by Deathlike, 14 August 2013 - 10:59 PM.

[Rippthrough]

Nah, I just fire at fresh mechs with it too, then you end up with 4 guys chasing you around the map because all they have heard for the last minute is the plink of bullets off their armour. It generates so much rage, it's wonderful.

Then they come on here and complain. Whilst a Jenner murders half their team with lasers.

[Nebelfeuer]

Are builds relying heavyly on MGs currently able to do Top Scores concerning kills and dmg? -yes
Should builds around a weapon that exploits the 2 main balancing factors(heat + tonnage) in BT do that? -no
Does MG ammunition create as much of a weakness for the carrier as it does in TT? -no
Does the fact that half of the possible MG boats are top speed mechs further help to unbalance MGs since enemys are not able to escape them while the MGslinger can easiely pick occupied or weakened targets negating the drawbacks of a continiousfire weapon? -yes

Undo the latest crit-dmg-transfere-thrash, half the base DPS of MGs and keep the hightened critchance would be one option.
Remove all critrelated buffs from MGs while keeping the current base DPS would be another one.