69 replies to this topic

[LordKnightFandragon]

Id vote for increased critical chance, though I personally never use MGs on mechs...just seems like a waste of space...

MG+ammo or another DHS? MG+Ammo or use the extra ton to upgrade a ML to a LL? Idk, always seems to be a better use for space...maybe extra armor...but MG? lol...

[Foxfire]

LordKnightFandragon, on 31 October 2014 - 06:56 AM, said:

Id vote for increased critical chance, though I personally never use MGs on mechs...just seems like a waste of space...

MG+ammo or another DHS? MG+Ammo or use the extra ton to upgrade a ML to a LL? Idk, always seems to be a better use for space...maybe extra armor...but MG? lol...

Honestly, I'd take a reduction in the CoF. The reduction in damage effectively halved the effective range of MG's(Let's see if I can squeeze in any more effective's into that sentence) due to the spread(lower number of hits due to the spread coupled with lower damage on a weapon that relies on crits, which in ttself is random concerning what component receives the crit). This is why those who tend to play a more 'in your face' style really don't see any change in effectiveness.. while those of us who played a more hit and run style have seen a significant reduction in effectiveness.

[Foxfire]

I take it all back. It turns out that even when I am face planting into the back of a Jagermech that has exposed back internals, it still takes a significant amount of time to down one using MG's. It took a good 30 seconds of sub 20m distance MG burn to finally down a Gauss Jagermech that had set up shop on the island on Crimson Straits(which had his back torso armor already stripped away before I started in on him). I was running around 54 Ping so that couldn't have been an issue.

Edited by Foxfire, 31 October 2014 - 12:49 PM.

[Lord de Seis]

Alek Ituin, on 31 October 2014 - 06:13 AM, said:

I respect your opinion, but I disagree with it almost entirely. MG's do a fine job of shredding internals, true... But for Mechs with minimal (or no) alternate weapons, getting to internals is a challenge.

Lol and what mechs would those be? A Spider-5k? You have 11 team mates to bring enemies down to internals, that is when you jump in and use your weapons, when they will be effective.

[Foxfire]

Lord de Seis, on 31 October 2014 - 02:14 PM, said:

Lol and what mechs would those be? A Spider-5k? You have 11 team mates to bring enemies down to internals, that is when you jump in and use your weapons, when they will be effective.

Then what is the point of bringing such a mech that is so dependant upon team mates to have even marginal effectiveness?

[Y E O N N E]

Foxfire, on 31 October 2014 - 12:41 PM, said:

I take it all back. It turns out that even when I am face planting into the back of a Jagermech that has exposed back internals, it still takes a significant amount of time to down one using MG's. It took a good 30 seconds of sub 20m distance MG burn to finally down a Gauss Jagermech that had set up shop on the island on Crimson Straits(which had his back torso armor already stripped away before I started in on him). I was running around 54 Ping so that couldn't have been an issue.

Strip away the back armor of a Catapult in the Testing Grounds and then try it. Be careful not to overpenetrate the armor and damage the squishy bits with the lasers. Let me know what you find. It took me 6 seconds to kill the Catapult. Going to the Atlas, it took me 10 seconds.

It's definitely not the Machine Guns causing the problem.

Edit: this was with four MGs on the LCT-1V.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 31 October 2014 - 03:31 PM.

[Foxfire]

Training grounds is a joke. I can sit there against a mech that is doing nothing but standing there and make pretty much anything look like it works.. but fact of the matter is you need a live game to actually be able to assess the effectiveness.

MG's, as someone who has low ping in the majority of situations, is simply a joke as implemented in this game. Nothing more than a waste of time. It doesn't matter what situation you use them in, you will always be better served by taking a bigger version of another hardpoint or more heat disappation than wasting the tonnage and space it takes for MG's.

[Y E O N N E]

A live game has hit-reg issues, which are a function of your target's connection quality as much as yours, to say nothing of the server's own computations. Training grounds has none of that.

Ergo, if you want to see how long it takes a weapon to do its job on a target with no other factors getting in the way, then the Training grounds is literally perfect. That is a fact. There is no arguing that. Machine Guns do their damage quickly when you eliminate the problems associated with the network and server load, to say nothing of the enemy moving around.

Machine guns are fine. Hit registration is not fine. It has never been fine. It has never been completely fixed. That is where your issue is, and that is what you should be complaining about.

[Foxfire]

Yeonne Greene, on 31 October 2014 - 04:59 PM, said:

A live game has hit-reg issues, which are a function of your target's connection quality as much as yours, to say nothing of the server's own computations. Training grounds has none of that.

Ergo, if you want to see how long it takes a weapon to do its job on a target with no other factors getting in the way, then the Training grounds is literally perfect. That is a fact. There is no arguing that. Machine Guns do their damage quickly when you eliminate the problems associated with the network and server load, to say nothing of the enemy moving around.

Machine guns are fine. Hit registration is not fine. It has never been fine. It has never been completely fixed. That is where your issue is, and that is what you should be complaining about.

At which point, the only conclusion is that the fix to 'hit detection' actually made hit detection worse.

Either way, a complete reversion of the 'fix' and associated nerf from the June 17th patch would be completely preferable to what we have now.

*edits*

Those who didn't see a change shouldn't care because they wouldn't be affected either way.

Edited by Foxfire, 31 October 2014 - 05:03 PM.

[Lord de Seis]

Foxfire, on 31 October 2014 - 02:17 PM, said:

Then what is the point of bringing such a mech that is so dependant upon team mates to have even marginal effectiveness?

You can still scout with it, UAV then make a big difference late game.

Is it the most effective mech out there? No, but it is not useless.

Edited by Lord de Seis, 31 October 2014 - 08:17 PM.