236 replies to this topic

[Burktross]

VixNix, on 24 December 2014 - 05:16 AM, said:

I think MG's should do nothing until armor is gone...

**Vomits

[FupDup]

VixNix, on 24 December 2014 - 05:16 AM, said:

I think MG's should do nothing until armor is gone...

I think you should stahp.

[wanderer]

Quote

what is really needed is a weapon in between the MG and the AC2/Cac2 and UAC2

one or two ton weight double the pwr of the MG

Heavy MGs later.

Light/Medium/Heavy Rifles going in would actually be meaningful for IS 'Mechs. They suffer damage reduction vs. armor, but deal full damage to internals and neatly fill the weight gaps between MGs and ACs.

For that matter, mortars. Indirect-fire ballistic weapon, anyone?

[Bhael Fire]

VixNix, on 24 December 2014 - 05:16 AM, said:

I think MG's should do nothing until armor is gone...

I could get behind that, but only if they did at least 2 DPS on exposed internals.

[Cyborne Elemental]

I use MG's on quite a few of my configs, and while they don't seem to be remarkable in any regard, I do notice them knocking out weapons on exposed sections quite nicely.

I'd like them to be a little better, but they work for how cheap they are.

[Foxfire]

Mister D, on 24 December 2014 - 01:36 PM, said:

I use MG's on quite a few of my configs, and while they don't seem to be remarkable in any regard, I do notice them knocking out weapons on exposed sections quite nicely.

I'd like them to be a little better, but they work for how cheap they are.

The problem are for those mechs who can only really use MG's in ballistic slots to run any build other than a troll build.

I know that post MG 'fix', the effectiveness of my Huginn went down(pre quirk madness for SRM4's) by a noticeable degree. It showed up in an average of ~200 average less damage a match. As a secondary 'Eh, I have a little weight left and unused ballistic slot' weapon, they are alright. As a part of a main loadout... they aren't.

I'd rather then go back and revert the 'fix' that they pre-nerfed MG's for than to keep it as is. Especially since the problem that they fixed was in no way noticeable. It really was a fix for a problem that didn't need to be fixed.

[Deathlike]

Foxfire, on 24 December 2014 - 01:42 PM, said:

The problem are for those mechs who can only really use MG's in ballistic slots to run any build other than a troll build.

I know that post MG 'fix', the effectiveness of my Huginn went down(pre quirk madness for SRM4's) by a noticeable degree. It showed up in an average of ~200 average less damage a match. As a secondary 'Eh, I have a little weight left and unused ballistic slot' weapon, they are alright. As a part of a main loadout... they aren't.

I'd rather then go back and revert the 'fix' that they pre-nerfed MG's for than to keep it as is. Especially since the problem that they fixed was in no way noticeable. It really was a fix for a problem that didn't need to be fixed.

We can't let Paul be the HSR guru to make balancing decisions.

Otherwise, we'd still have under 2 damage per missile SRMs.

[Mudhutwarrior]

I just had a lite pilot (a really good one) tear me apart with MG's. If it wasn't for my lites I would have been dead meat. I think they are good.

[Mcgral18]

Mudhutwarrior, on 24 December 2014 - 01:51 PM, said:

I just had a lite pilot (a really good one) tear me apart with MG's. If it wasn't for my lites I would have been dead meat. I think they are good.

I don't suppose you've used them?

I have, and they are just...underwhelming. They took a 20% damage nerf as well as that 15% crit nerf, while gaining nothing.
They were in a decent place before that last nerf. They need one of the nerfs reversed.

I'd need 8 to be anywhere near effective.

[Ovion]

Mech Rifles would be a nice middle ground between MGs and ACs I think.

Have a Mech Rifle do 1 damage a shell reasonable range, middling rate of fire and a slight boost to internals damage.

Say, 3T, ML ranges, 150 rounds per ton.

Now, I know that Mech Rifles are a Canon tabletop thing, I'm just struggling to find the rules for the things, hence my above theory....
Though there's a bit of wiggle room here as to my knowledge no mech has them stock.

Mcgral18, on 24 December 2014 - 02:02 PM, said:

I don't suppose you've used them?

I have, and they are just...underwhelming. They took a 20% damage nerf as well as that 15% crit nerf, while gaining nothing.
They were in a decent place before that last nerf. They need one of the nerfs reversed.

I'd need 8 to be anywhere near effective.

2MGs is OK as a support weapon if you have a spare ton.
4 is really needed to be effective, aswell as a primary weapon to strip armour.

6 is great with LPLs.

Edited by Ovion, 24 December 2014 - 02:04 PM.

[BourbonFaucet]

Here's my proposal based on this thread:

- Return the Machine Gun to 1 DPS
- Buff the Flamer to 1 DPS, effectively make it an energy machine gun
- Reduce AC/2 heat to .6 per round, and return the firing rate to .52
- Remove Ghost Heat from the AC/2
- Increase damage done by LB-X autocannons to internal structure to 1.25 per pellet. (Not as relevant to the thread, but I hear the IS LB-X 10 is rather pitiful outside of the Centurion that can spam the weapon)

Edited by Techorse, 06 January 2015 - 02:11 PM.

[Ovion]

While I would love to have the LBX10 buffed...
That'd make it an LBX12.5

It's already the only cannon with trip-range, and it's a really, really solid weapon if you know what you're doing.

Flamer is easily fixed by removing the exponential heat growth.

[FupDup]

Ovion, on 24 December 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:

While I would love to have the LBX10 buffed...
That'd make it an LBX12.5

It's already the only cannon with trip-range, and it's a really, really solid weapon if you know what you're doing.

Flamer is easily fixed by removing the exponential heat growth.

That's a pretty narrow way of interpreting weapon names.

For the LBX series specifically, we can just use the total number of pellets to correspond to the name, i.e. 10 pellets for the LB 10-X. Also, I could argue that when they roll a critical hit, MWO's system already allows them to do more than 10.000000 damage for a full shot (because 15% of crit damage gets added to internal structure, and LB-X currently have increased crit damage as well).


As for range, its on paper range isn't the same as "effective" range. The pellet spread makes it horribad outside of a few hundred meters. More pellets will generally hit the terrain than your actual target at longer distances.

[Mcgral18]

Ovion, on 24 December 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:

While I would love to have the LBX10 buffed...
That'd make it an LBX12.5

What if I told you...the Hunch 4G has a AC100?

It fires ~5 times in 10 seconds. It deals 100 damage over 10 seconds; it's a AC100.

[Mudhutwarrior]

Mcgral18, on 24 December 2014 - 02:02 PM, said:

I don't suppose you've used them?

I have, and they are just...underwhelming. They took a 20% damage nerf as well as that 15% crit nerf, while gaining nothing.
They were in a decent place before that last nerf. They need one of the nerfs reversed.

I'd need 8 to be anywhere near effective.

Your right, I will defer as i haven't much experince with them past maybe the yeager and they were pointless. You really have to move to be effective with them. Now I am thinking of a six AC2 crab......

[Burktross]

Mcgral18, on 24 December 2014 - 02:38 PM, said:

What if I told you...the Hunch 4G has a AC100?

It fires ~5 times in 10 seconds. It deals 100 damage over 10 seconds; it's a AC100.

Just realized this is true.
RIP tabletop.

[wanderer]

Quote

Now, I know that Mech Rifles are a Canon tabletop thing, I'm just struggling to find the rules for the things, hence my above theory....
Though there's a bit of wiggle room here as to my knowledge no mech has them stock.

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

Also see Medium and Heavy Rifles.

They're "retrotech"- a weapon system common before the Battlemech, much like rocket launchers were. RL's were much more widely adopted, but rifles still show up in Periphery designs like the Arbiter and more frequently as a cheap low-tech vehicle weapon where modern armor is rarer.

In MWO terms, they'd suffer a lesser version of how MGs do reduced damage vs. armor and inflict full damage to internals.

[kosmos1214]

Burktross, on 24 December 2014 - 02:48 PM, said:

Just realized this is true.
RIP tabletop.

well in TT there are rules for 2.5 second turns and ever weapon still did full damage and could be fired every turn

[Tincan Nightmare]

I honestly hated the direction they originally went in with MG's, making them some crit seeking weapon instead of a damage dealer. Give them a straight damage rate and DPS, say equal to a small laser. Yes it generates no heat, but has the downside of needing to be kept on target and forcing the firer to stay facing the target. If 6 SL's or SPL's are not overpowered, then 6 MG's done this way should not be either. Leave enhanced critical ability to LBX's, so they have their niche in weapons.

And please don't trot out the arguement of 'but its a machine gun, it can't hurt armor'. BT tech just doesn't equate to real life expectancies (otherwise lasers would have nearly unlimited range and gauss rifles would just one shot everything). In the TT MG's were a weapon that did comparable damage to mechs to a small laser, no reason not to give them that ability in MWO. Maybe if they introduce the Pirranha people will have reason to fear the 12 MG light mech, nothing currently available would be an issue.

[wanderer]

Quote

well in TT there are rules for 2.5 second turns and ever weapon still did full damage and could be fired every turn

Incorrect. Weapons had a reload cycle of 0-3- that is, zero to 7.5 seconds. AC/20's fell on the far end, MG's however could.

As for MGs being able to damage armor....er, yes definitely. 'Mech armor gains it's flexibility vs. damage types by being ablative vs. the more deflective effects of tank armor. A 'Mech can be killed by a platoon of infantry men armed with assault rifles given enough time- though a single 'Mech anti-infantry weapon can obliterate one such unit well before it threatens anything but damaged or very poorly armored targets.

Consider that machinegun can obliterate dozens of men in a single burst. Versus 'Mech armor, it's papercutting the armor dozens of times, and that armor is designed to get rid of damaging energy by crumbling away.

And don't even get me started on firing a 'Mech sized MG on rapid (heat-generating) mode. It's a less-controlled, ammo-hogging but effective close-range damage generator.