14 replies to this topic

[MadBomberMan]

Q: How many shells have to hit the target to score 5 damage?
If no set amount of shells, how many seconds of sustained fire to score 5 damage?

Thanks

[Void Angel]

50 shells, at 10 shells per second. In other words, the weapon has a dps of 1.0, so you'd need to get 5 seconds of sustained fire to do 5 damage.

Use this excellent resource to get accurate weapon stats - Smurfy pulls directly from the game files, so his site is accurate within hours or minutes of a new patch.

[Victor Morson]

Avoid Machine Guns. They're horrendous atm.

If you want to run fast firing ballistics, look at AC/5 or UAC/5.

Edited by Victor Morson, 09 November 2013 - 06:25 PM.

[Wintersdark]

10 shots per second, .1 damage per shot, 5 seconds then does 5 damage.

However, keep in mind that while the machine gun is a hitscan weapon (ignore the visual "bullets", they're just a graphical effect) it has a cone of fire, and thus doesn't necessarily hit exactly what the reticule is pointing at. With that said, because it IS hitscan, you don't need to lead your targets. Just point and pull the trigger, the bullets hit instantly.

Edit: For a visual explanation of how it works, think of a combination of a small laser and LB-X AC10.

Edited by Wintersdark, 09 November 2013 - 06:50 PM.

[Satan n stuff]

Wintersdark, on 09 November 2013 - 06:49 PM, said:

10 shots per second, .1 damage per shot, 5 seconds then does 5 damage.

However, keep in mind that while the machine gun is a hitscan weapon (ignore the visual "bullets", they're just a graphical effect) it has a cone of fire, and thus doesn't necessarily hit exactly what the reticule is pointing at. With that said, because it IS hitscan, you don't need to lead your targets. Just point and pull the trigger, the bullets hit instantly.

Edit: For a visual explanation of how it works, think of a combination of a small laser and LB-X AC10.

Also because it's hitscan and doesn't generate heat, it's a good addition to lasers on lighter mechs.

[stjobe]

The MG has 1 DPS versus armour.
It has 2 DPS vs internal structure.
And about 7 DPS vs internal components.

The MG has short range (120m effective range), a spread that totally covers a Commando (i.e. roughly 10m in diameter) at that range, and a firing mechanic (continuous fire) that forces you to stay face-on to your target at all times (i.e. no twisting away to take damage on your side torso and arms)

It's not useful as a single weapon at all, nor in dual mounts. If you can mount 3-4 it starts to become semi-useful, and if you can mount 6 you're good to go (but then you're in a Jager and have 2 ERPPCs/Large Lasers, so perhaps it's not the MG...).

A light 'mech with MGs needs to be close to its target (bad thing #1), continuously presenting its CT to its target (bad thing #2), won't do much damage to its target (bad thing #3), and will spread what small damage it does all over its target (bad thing #4).

And it'll take 5 seconds to do the damage a ML does in 1. Or, perhaps more relevant, that a Small Laser does in 3.

[RLBell]

Victor Morson, on 09 November 2013 - 06:24 PM, said:

Avoid Machine Guns. They're horrendous atm.

If you want to run fast firing ballistics, look at AC/5 or UAC/5.

If your target has no exposed sections, MG's are next to useless. If your target has exposed areas that are vital, it is going down.

[Nick Makiaveli]

RLBell, on 10 November 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

If your target has no exposed sections, MG's are next to useless. If your target has exposed areas that are vital, it is going down.

This. It's a lousy main gun, but an excellent follow up one.

Now if I can just convince myself that the ML is a good main gun, I could learn to love my Locust-1V(P)

[Mercer Skye]

MGuns are great finishers. Anything I run with multiple ballistic points or just a couple and a boat load (punny) of energy points I use one.

Personal favorites at the moment are a Jager DD and S that sport a quad and pair, respectively. Allows you to forgo the insta-death of a XL engine by running fewer heavy autocannons with less ammunition (but only on the notion that you hit considerably more often than you miss), and with the obscene amounts of ammo per ton and the fact that they're naturally heat neutral, they provide exceptionally light and useful 'heat dump' while continuing to maintain some dps for your energy boats.

[Koniving]

Victor Morson, on 09 November 2013 - 06:24 PM, said:

Avoid Machine Guns. They're horrendous atm.

If you want to run fast firing ballistics, look at AC/5 or UAC/5.

stjobe, on 10 November 2013 - 04:31 AM, said:

The MG has 1 DPS versus armour.
It has 2 DPS vs internal structure.
And about 7 DPS vs internal components.

Fun fact: MG in tabletop has a DPS of 0.2, which is 2 damage in 10 seconds.
So MGs are 500% more effective in MWO against armor.
1,000% more effective against internal structure than TT.
And I can't exactly comment as to bonus damage for components as I don't remember if MGs did bonus damage against components in Tabletop or not. But if there wasn't, then that's a lot. O.o;

But I thought it was interesting to point out.

stjobe, on 10 November 2013 - 04:31 AM, said:

And it'll take 5 seconds to do the damage a ML does in 1 (but the medium laser can't repeat that damage for 3 additional seconds, so the ML really does it every 4 seconds if you count the 'recharge'). Or, perhaps more relevant, it takes 3 seconds for an MG to do the damage that a Small Laser does in 0.75 seconds (with a 2.25 second recharge, thus the damage it does every 3 seconds), the MG's energy equivalent with identical DPS.

Fixed.

Side note for the original poster, remember that MGs "hitscan" like lasers. Damage is instant, there is no travel time. No leading. Aim directly at the target. Ignore the particle light show of bullets.

Edited by Koniving, 10 November 2013 - 12:44 PM.

[Unnatural Growth]

Even a pair of MG's, coupled with say an LB10X, is a crit damage monster up close on an enemy with stripped armor sections.

Very satisfying.

[Koniving]

OldOrgandonor, on 10 November 2013 - 12:50 PM, said:

Even a pair of MG's, coupled with say an LB10X, is a crit damage monster up close on an enemy with stripped armor sections.

Very satisfying.

'Tis why my Victor runs an AC/2 (for rapid pinpoint damage and constant hammering), LB-10x (spread heavy damage, super crit-seeking) and MG (semi-spread light damage, super crit-seeking). It kicks butt. Only thing I could hope for more of is either a second arm with the same weapons or an extra ballistic slot for another MG.

[stjobe]

Koniving, on 10 November 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

Fun fact: MG in tabletop has a DPS of 0.2, which is 2 damage in 10 seconds.

Fun fact: MG in tabletop does not have a DPS value at all, it has a DPT (Turn), which is 2. The turn is the smallest unit of time in TT, not the second. DPS values are meaningless in TT.

Koniving, on 10 November 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

So MGs are 500% more effective in MWO against armor.

Against double the armour values of TT, so that would be 250%, but as I pointed out above it's a meaningless comparison. The TT MG was an effective and at times fearful weapon; in MWO it's a pea-shooter of little worth.

An AC/10 and a PPC both had a "DPS" of 1 in TT if you make that comparison, but in MWO they have 4 and 2.5 respectively - and the one with the 2.5 DPS is widely considered the better weapon.

There are more measures of a weapon's worth than its DPS value, and the MG falls way short on most other metrics.

Koniving, on 10 November 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

And I can't exactly comment as to bonus damage for components as I don't remember if MGs did bonus damage against components in Tabletop or not. But if there wasn't, then that's a lot.

No special damage versus components in TT, they could only be destroyed by crits (one crit would do it), or by the location they were in being destroyed (internal structure removed).

Koniving, on 10 November 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

But I thought it was interesting to point out.

Interesting, but ultimately flawed.

Koniving, on 10 November 2013 - 12:37 PM, said:

Fixed.

3 damage over 0.75 seconds is vastly preferable than 3 damage over 3 seconds, and the ML still does 5 damage in 1 second, which is vastly preferable to 5 damage over 5 seconds.

The continuous-fire mechanic of the MG is a detriment, not a boon.

[Koniving]

More weapons could use DPS methods. >.> Sadly flamers, MGs, and to some extent lasers are the only DPS weapons in the game.

And yes, per turn which is a period of 10 seconds. And since akin to lore descriptions of autocannons, MGs fire constantly (much like various ACs of the MG-style), one could safely toss that notion in there. Of course, there are also 10 shot AC/2s and as I recently learned a 50 shot AC/2. I've read a list of about 18 different MGs (most of them not mech mounted but I did enjoy the descriptions of some. Among my favorites is one that describes a couple of 15mm machine guns that automatically pivot at 45 degree arcs in a fixed sweeping motion powered by channeling the MG's recoil. Basically they repeat a movement pattern when fired that sweeps side to side and stops at any point when the impulsive/concussive/explosive energy from the last round expended is finally dissipated).

Of course with so many varieties, some might need to fire the full 10 seconds. Some might need to fire for 3 seconds. Some could fire for only 1 second. Who really knows? But if you take the summary as a base line, then what I said is fairly accurate. In 10 seconds of tabletop (a turn), the MG does 2 damage. In MWO, we do 500% of that damage against double armor which is yes, 250%. Of course you can now look at the AC/2. 2 damage in 10 seconds on TT. 38 on MWO against only double that armor. Comparing the heat though, we're generating 1 heat in TT and 19 heat in MWO in that same time frame so it is somewhat offset.

But when we start going through the weapon systems I hate to say it, but it's no wonder we needed double armor and not surprising we're looking at the possibility of 'doubling the double armor' depending on data "after HSR is fixed to a stable and reliable point." Just an opinion of someone going into game design.

[Koniving]

Just thought of part of the description which sort of explains the MG's 90 meter range in tabletop, based on that paragraph describing the mech's MGs. They were on fixed mounts that only pivoted left and right, and also aimed 30 degrees downward from the nose, thusly unable to aim forward where the mech's nose is actually looking. This was so that she could spray infantry and vehicles that were getting too close but still within her lower line of sight from the cockpit without having to take much of her focus away from much more serious threats such as the inbound Barghest.

Edited by Koniving, 10 November 2013 - 02:35 PM.