44 replies to this topic

[Xyroc]

Hate this anti infantry thing people keep talking about ... MGs in MWO are not small caliber ... when you think MG your thinking of what we have IRL and this is not the case.

Edited by Beliall, 12 January 2014 - 12:10 PM.

[SamsungNinja]

Sandpit, on 12 January 2014 - 12:01 PM, said:

Ahhh ok, I think that would be worth looking at least then. See what it does. I don't know that it would make much change but it could be interesting to up the max range a bit


Do you have any idea how fast a mech would die if its armor were ignored, not to mention the sheer number of rounds multiple MGs put out. That would just be a bad idea

It's not a change that would really buff them in any significant way, it just widens the damage falloff over distance and makes them consistent with the rest of the ballistics. I have a Jager I like to put MGs on, and I don't think this would be a huge change or cause anyone to start screaming OMFG NERF MGs.

It's more of a "one of these things is not like the others" fix request. I made the thread after it struck me that the least powerful ballistic has the added negative of not conforming to the range formula.

Edited by SamsungNinja, 12 January 2014 - 12:14 PM.

[Sandpit]

I was referring to the armor piercing ignoring armor .5 damage bullets as far as being a bad idea

[No Guts No Glory]

SirLANsalot, on 12 January 2014 - 01:14 AM, said:

People want them to be the OMG I CAN SHRED YOU that they were in MW4. That game had the MG array, which was mutli MG's for .5 tons, not just 1 (which is what we have).

Clearly you didn't play MW4. Machine gun arrays weighed 2 tons in that game and consisted of 3 machine guns for IS and 4 for Clan. Also, the only time they were able to shred mechs was when you outfitted a Loki with 10. So essentially, it took 30-40 machine guns to shred mechs in MW4.

Also, I would rather they get rid of the whole extended range bollocks and just have the listed effective range as max range on all weapons.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

LoneMaverick, on 12 January 2014 - 07:36 AM, said:

If you're going to go for realistic as far as the Battletech universe is concerned, Autocannons fired in a stream of bullets, not one big round.

Not entirely true. Different models of AC fired with different behaviors. Some were large-caliber single shells (think howitzer), others were super-high RoF burst weapons (think Avenger cannon), some fired from fixed cassettes (each "round" is a single cassette of x number of shells and each trigger pull empties a cassette, ejects the spent one, and inserts a fresh one). In short, it varied considerably. Single-shot ACs are fine from a lore standpoint.

[Sandpit]

No Guts No Glory, on 12 January 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:

Clearly you didn't play MW4. Machine gun arrays weighed 2 tons in that game and consisted of 3 machine guns for IS and 4 for Clan. Also, the only time they were able to shred mechs was when you outfitted a Loki with 10. So essentially, it took 30-40 machine guns to shred mechs in MW4.

Which has nothing to do with MWO and the MGs here

[Varent]

Not that I wouldn't mind seeing machine gun arrays eventually. That said I do love my machine gun.

[Mcgral18]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 12 January 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

Not entirely true. Different models of AC fired with different behaviors. Some were large-caliber single shells (think howitzer), others were super-high RoF burst weapons (think Avenger cannon), some fired from fixed cassettes (each "round" is a single cassette of x number of shells and each trigger pull empties a cassette, ejects the spent one, and inserts a fresh one). In short, it varied considerably. Single-shot ACs are fine from a lore standpoint.

Yes, but they all have the same DPS. That means a single shot AC20 would have a 10 second cooldown in a direct TT port...which translates to 5 seconds in this game with doubled armor. An AC that fires a 5 damage shot every 2.5 seconds is also an AC20 (20 damage in 10 seconds) by the TT classification. There are very few single shot ACs.

If we go with lore, the atlas will also be knocked to the ground when firing it if it doesn't brace itself.

[Varent]

Mcgral18, on 12 January 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

Yes, but they all have the same DPS. That means a single shot AC20 would have a 10 second cooldown in a direct TT port...which translates to 5 seconds in this game with doubled armor. An AC that fires a 5 damage shot every 2.5 seconds is also an AC20 (20 damage in 10 seconds) by the TT classification. There are very few single shot ACs.

If we go with lore, the atlas will also be knocked to the ground when firing it if it doesn't brace itself.

All of wich is a good reason to stop quoting lore since it will just create bad non player friendly mechanics within the game. That said DPS is a bad stat to judge weapons by. Its better to judge things in accordance with there versatility in any given situation.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Mcgral18, on 12 January 2014 - 01:12 PM, said:

Yes, but they all have the same DPS. That means a single shot AC20 would have a 10 second cooldown in a direct TT port...which translates to 5 seconds in this game with doubled armor. An AC that fires a 5 damage shot every 2.5 seconds is also an AC20 (20 damage in 10 seconds) by the TT classification. There are very few single shot ACs.

If we go with lore, the atlas will also be knocked to the ground when firing it if it doesn't brace itself.

Considering how much dps was boosted across the board for MWO I think we can safely throw the whole TT-equivalent dps argument out the window.

[Mcgral18]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 12 January 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

Considering how much dps was boosted across the board for MWO I think we can safely throw the whole TT-equivalent dps argument out the window.

Which is a shame really, had PGI put some thought into the reduced cooldown and same heat/damage, we could have mitigated some of the current game issues. Largely the heat system, and massed high alpha. Useable SHS would be pretty nifty.

[Varent]

Mcgral18, on 12 January 2014 - 01:28 PM, said:

Which is a shame really, had PGI put some thought into the reduced cooldown and same heat/damage, we could have mitigated some of the current game issues. Largely the heat system, and massed high alpha. Useable SHS would be pretty nifty.

Perhaps, but it also would have made the game rather stagnant which is I think what they were trying to avoid. Though that is just an assumption admittedly.

[A banana in the tailpipe]

Sandpit, on 12 January 2014 - 12:01 PM, said:

Do you have any idea how fast a mech would die if its armor were ignored, not to mention the sheer number of rounds multiple MGs put out. That would just be a bad idea

If we're comparing this to how many posts you put out then yes, Mguns are clearly underpowered.

[Bront]

The only buff to MGs I'd like to see is an ammo increase to 3000 rounds.

Remember folks, MGs are .5 ton weapons, you shouldn't be expecting something awe inspiring. That said, I find you generally need 1 ton of ammo per 2 MGs, and sometimes that isn't enough, so they're closer to 1 ton weapons (that do minimal damage, but generate no heat). Their range is slightly better than the SL, and their DPS is better. I don't see them as being imbalanced where they are now.

As for balistics getting 3x range vs 2x, balistics generally already have a better range than energy weapons (AC10 and LL have the same range, AC5 and 2 are better), with 3x making it even worse. Rolling balistics back to 2X would reign in the sniper meta a bit (AC10s and 20s wouldn't be the long range weapons they are, AC5 range gets reigned in a bit over the AC2, AC2 still is effective at around LRM range, but no longer another half km beyond). That said, I think the AC2 and AC5 (and UAC5) need a slight ROF nerf as well.

[18 Inches of Hard Steel]

Just add machine gun arrays so we can maximize hardpoint efficiency. It wouldnt make machine guns better than they are now and would add diversity to the game.

[MustrumRidcully]

SamsungNinja, on 12 January 2014 - 05:52 AM, said:

A directed energy weapon would have a shorter range than a projectile. A beam or pulse weapon diffuses over distance...

So what, a projectile loses energy due to friction over distance. Why is diffusion worse than friction?

A Laser can go through the entire Earth atmosphere and be visible on the moon:

Spoiler

Compare that to the effort of shooting a projectile to the moon!

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 13 January 2014 - 04:01 AM.

[wanderer]

SirLANsalot, on 12 January 2014 - 01:14 AM, said:

MGs are anti Infantry weapons, not anti mech. People want them to be the OMG I CAN SHRED YOU that they were in MW4. That game had the MG array, which was mutli MG's for .5 tons, not just 1 (which is what we have).

If you want a high RoF Damage dealing gun, look no further then the AC2, as that IS the Anti Mech MG.
(getting all of that out of the way since thats where this thread will head)

In TT, the MG inflicts the exact same damage as the AC/2, only with much shorter ranges. They -also- happen to be lethal to infantry.

[Rino88ex]

I think the damage from MGs are negligible. And they have many disadvantages:

- Very little damage
- Much spread.
- To produce considerable damage requires a lot of time shooting at the same point.
- Very short range
- Little ammunition per tonne.

GPs need at least to reduce the spread and increase the optimal range. And above all increase the damage of 0.1 to 0.2!

AC2 in 1 second causes 6 damage, MG causes 1 damage. Besides the AC2 has more range and greater impact force.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sandpit, on 12 January 2014 - 01:13 AM, said:

Flamers could use some love but MGs are really in a good spot right now in my opinion.

As in on everyone else's mechs but yours?

[stjobe]

Rino88ex, on 14 January 2014 - 04:40 AM, said:

AC2 in 1 second causes 6 damage, MG causes 1 damage. Besides the AC2 has more range and greater impact force.

AC/2 has 3.85 DPS, not 6.
MG has 1 DPS vs armour, 2 DPS vs internal structure, and 7.something DPS vs internal components.

I'm not against a MG buff, far from it, but there's no need to overstate the case with exaggerated numbers.