90 replies to this topic

[stjobe]

pbiggz, on 27 July 2015 - 04:49 PM, said:

Better Idea: Give us machine gun arrays instead.

Without working MGs, MGA's are just as useless. So no, that was not a "better idea".

You know what the MG is in TT? A short-ranged, heat-less AC/2.

Now the AC/2 got a serious buff in the translation from TT, and most people are happy with that because they say "the AC/2 sucked in TT". Among other things, it's DPS was increased by a factor of 20 (yes, twenty. The largest DPS buff any weapon got. It has since been toned down a bit).

The MG, on the other hand, got treated rather step-motherly in comparison, with a DPS buff of 2.0 (the least they gave any weapon) and unlike all other ammo-dependent weapons, who got roughly 50% more ammo per ton, the MG got a 90% reduction. It got a cone of fire (unlike any other weapon in the game), and a continuous-fire mechanic (also unlike any other weapon in the game).

It was then left to linger in that state, at 0.4 DPS, for almost a year before they even deigned to look at it.

And, inveterate schmucks as they are, they thought MGs should be ineffective versus armour - when the TT MG is exactly as effective against armour as the AC/2! I swear, if Paul has ever even been near a BT rulebook I'd be amazed... Putting a guy that freely admits to never having played BattleTech in charge of balancing "a BattleTech game" is ... well, it borders on the insane.

Yes, the MG has a massive bonus against infantry in TT. That does not in any way, shape, or form stop it from doing exactly as much damage to 'mechs as the AC/2. It just does so at very much shorter ranges.

So, these two weapons, with their 0.2 DPS in TT, how do they compare in MWO? Like this:

MG: Continuous-fire CoF 0.8 DPS
AC/2: 0.5 CD pin-point accurate 2.78 DPS

So yeah. The MG could use a buff. It could use several actually, and it still wouldn't be OP.

[Spleenslitta]

I use 3-4 of them. Try using them at the pratice grounds against exposed internals.
The MG's barrelly need to touch big weapons to destroy them. Smaller weapons doesn't take long either.

Then try seeing how long it takes to destroy big and small weapons with small lasers. Takes much longer.

[Mcgral18]

Spleenslitta, on 27 July 2015 - 10:41 PM, said:

I use 3-4 of them. Try using them at the pratice grounds against exposed internals.
The MG's barrelly need to touch big weapons to destroy them. Smaller weapons doesn't take long either.

Then try seeing how long it takes to destroy big and small weapons with small lasers. Takes much longer.

The wonders of crit padding, and small applications of damage.



Note the LT heatsink; no crit padding, a full 100% chance to crit.

[aniviron]

ScoutMaster, on 27 July 2015 - 01:26 PM, said:

Has anyone ever considered them OP? I just don't understand why they were nerfed in the first place.

Paul has considered MGs OP. Other than that, well, no.

Gotta keep that 6MG Spider in check though.

[stjobe]

aniviron, on 28 July 2015 - 12:17 AM, said:

Paul has considered MGs OP. Other than that, well, no.

Well, Paul is an... Hm. Last time I expressed what I think of him I got a forced forum vacation, so I'd better not.

aniviron, on 28 July 2015 - 12:17 AM, said:

Gotta keep that 6MG Spider in check though.

Yeah. Which makes it rather funny (funny because it's sad) that the SHC-P (correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the P signify a non-lore PGI variant?) comes stock with no less than 6 Clan MGs.

Wonder if they forgot to imagine the devastating effects that could do to the back of an Atlas?

Edited by stjobe, 28 July 2015 - 12:31 AM.

[Kmieciu]

Machineguns are so useless that even though you can put 4 on a Nova, which costs you only 1.5 tonnes with ammo, people just skip them for a heatsink or two.

On a Kitfox, you can have ECM, LPL, 2ERML and 4xMG. But It's actually better to skip the MGs for 2 DHS. Less face time means you will live longer. LPL+2ERML gives you 27 damage alpha that simply kills instead of critting.

If I could swap mechineguns for IS small lasers, on a Spider-5K or Locust-1V, I would do so in a heartbeat.

"Firing machineguns while cooling down" is a myth. Fast mechs just run away to cool down. And heavy mechs have (U)AC5s that are cool as ice.

Edited by Kmieciu, 28 July 2015 - 01:38 AM.

[Deathlike]

Spleenslitta, on 27 July 2015 - 10:41 PM, said:

I use 3-4 of them. Try using them at the pratice grounds against exposed internals.
The MG's barrelly need to touch big weapons to destroy them. Smaller weapons doesn't take long either.

Then try seeing how long it takes to destroy big and small weapons with small lasers. Takes much longer.

While technically kinda/true, no competent target would allow you to give it that much facetime.

While numbers suggest one thing, reality and practicality says another.

[Joseph Mallan]

ScoutMaster, on 27 July 2015 - 01:26 PM, said:

Absolute garbage. Seriously, give them 1 dps again.

Has anyone ever considered them OP? I just don't understand why they were nerfed in the first place.

For 1 ton you can get 2 small lasers that easily outdps a few of them, with negligible heat.

So I guess I'll wait in a corner all game until the enemy is armorless just to come out and do mediocre dps with my machine guns...

Why are they so hardheaded about this? Everyone wants mgs buffed.

And yes, the shadowcat is underwhelming, and yes I do want my 6 MG build to shine.

Not in 30+ years of having MGs as an Option. When there are masses of them they do well, but we don't have the Piranha to get cries of MGs are OP!!!

[LordNothing]

Praetor Knight, on 27 July 2015 - 03:19 PM, said:

I'd scrap (or reduce) the extra crit damage and make them an actual ballistic weapon.

So if we keep its 0.80 DPS, for starters:

0.58 Damage per projectile
0.72 Cooldown
650 m/s
345 rounds for 200.1 damage per ton (or more)
120 M range (240 max)

And if it's still needs a boost, then either increase damage or lower the cooldown to hit 1.00 DPS per MG. I'd even trade the boosted 120 M range to get MG's to deal better damage.

id rather they do it like a clan ac2 before they made it single shot, except with continuous fire.

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 28 July 2015 - 12:31 AM, said:

Well, Paul is an... Hm. Last time I expressed what I think of him I got a forced forum vacation, so I'd better not.


Yeah. Which makes it rather funny (funny because it's sad) that the SHC-P (correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the P signify a non-lore PGI variant?) comes stock with no less than 6 Clan MGs.

Wonder if they forgot to imagine the devastating effects that could do to the back of an Atlas?

That had to be some "interesting" language you used Buddy. Cause I haven't known you to to be over critical/insulting of anyone. You and I disagree pretty hard, and I have not seen anything but respectful disagreement with occasional exasperation at my,

Quote

pigheaded, stiff-necked, iron-pated, wonderful hradani stubbornness

(FYI. My daughter says the author based that hero after yours truly.)

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 28 July 2015 - 02:17 AM.

[stjobe]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 July 2015 - 02:14 AM, said:

That had to be some "interesting" language you used Buddy. Cause I haven't known you to to be over critical/insulting of anyone. You and I disagree pretty hard, and I have not seen anything but respectful disagreement with occasional exasperation at my [pigheaded, stiff-necked, iron-pated, wonderful hradani stubbornness]

It wasn't anything you'd blush at, but they don't like it when people criticize the management - even though the management are the ones that are ultimately responsible.

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 28 July 2015 - 04:17 AM, said:

It wasn't anything you'd blush at, but they don't like it when people criticize the management - even though the management are the ones that are ultimately responsible.

I can understand this IF and Only IF you draw a paycheck from PGI. But you are right The Buck stops at the top.

[Lugh]

stjobe, on 28 July 2015 - 12:31 AM, said:

Well, Paul is an... Hm. Last time I expressed what I think of him I got a forced forum vacation, so I'd better not.


Yeah. Which makes it rather funny (funny because it's sad) that the SHC-P (correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the P signify a non-lore PGI variant?) comes stock with no less than 6 Clan MGs.

Wonder if they forgot to imagine the devastating effects that could do to the back of an Atlas?

two LPL Back is now open. FEAST open the internals.

That is the beauty of the 6mg SHC.

[Joseph Mallan]

Lugh, on 28 July 2015 - 05:20 AM, said:

two LPL Back is now open. FEAST open the internals.

That is the beauty of the 6mg SHC.

...
...
...
Id rather just nuke it with an AC20 and end it quickly.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 28 July 2015 - 05:24 AM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

LordNothing, on 28 July 2015 - 02:02 AM, said:

id rather they do it like a clan ac2 before they made it single shot, except with continuous fire.

That works for me!

However it's done, as long as it can do a better job of damaging armor, it would be an improvement.

[xWiredx]

I like my 6 MG SHC. A lot. Like, a lot a lot. Same with my BJ Arrow (it's still stock). I don't know why I like them, but I do. I wouldn't mind a tiny readjustment (read that, tiny buff) to them considering they have fallen way off the cart compared to other weapons, canon, etc. I don't think they need a huge buff, just something to put them in a slightly better position than "facetank that nearly dead thing or these are worthless".

I'm thinking maybe a very small boost to range (125m instead of 120m, practically nothing, though I understand from TT its max range is like 90m and I am a heretic for wanting this boost), and maybe a slight boost to rate of fire (5% would again be near-negligible, but something). Combined, these two very tiny boosts would make it a little more viable, but not to the point of people all of a sudden boating MGs. It would still be relegated to situations where you can't do much else with that spare tonnage and open ballistics slots.

I'd like to think that putting 3 million into technology to boost its range (read that, range module) would give it more than 12 extra meters, too. Maybe we could get a full 15% boost with that module instead? I mean, these things aren't powerful enough that the extra few meters is going to make a real difference.

Now, adding these buffs to 6 MGs with a TC3 behind them... I think I could really get behind that.

[nehebkau]

They just need to put the crit back up on them.

[TheStrider]

Agreed. Bring us back up to Mark VI MG stats. They were reasonable. They're *just* lower than they should be now.

[DONTOR]

While I agree, 6 MGs is working quite well for me, especially for 4.5 tons. Killed a Kitfox yesterday from fresh to dead with Just my MGs, it was sooo much fun blazing away for a minute or so.

[TheCharlatan]

I have 4 MGs on my Cicada 3C, just for fun and to troll people.
A few days ago, my team shot off the armor from a spider's legs, so i started chasing him. The poor guy started fleeing, with me, MGs blazing, at his heels.
After something like 15 seconds of me shooting him in the legs with MGs, nothing had happened.
I have lots of stories like this.

MGs are good only to make people fear for their open components. In truth, they do almost nothing, as they do low damage that gets sprayed everywhere. I did get a few kills with MGs here and there, but truth is i could have killed those mechs by slamming into them.
MGs really need a buff. A HUGE buff.