50 replies to this topic

[stjobe]

5LeafClover, on 29 December 2015 - 04:08 PM, said:

Thought i read somewhere that PGI don't want us to use MGs due to load on the server. (60 individual shots per second with this infamous KCrab). But this could easily be solved with fewer but punchier bullets.

The problem is, PGI cheated (*gasp*) when they implemented the MG. It's NOT a ballistic weapon, it is implemented as a hit-scan weapon (just like a laser) with bullet graphics and sound (which incidentally has nothing to do with actual hit registration, so don't rely on those if you're using MGs, just point straight at your target and fire away)

If you want to test this yourself, it's very easy to do; just drop on a Training Ground map with a MG-equipped 'mech, stand at max range for your MGs from a target, aim at it, look at its paperdoll, and pull the trigger. The paperdoll immediately lights up, it doesn't take 2.4 seconds for the allegedly 100 m/s "projectile" to reach out to 240 m.

So the solution to the MG's woes could to re-implement it as a proper ballistic weapon.

Heck, just make it a shorter-ranged AC/2 like it should properly be. Max effective range 90m, damage drop-off to 0 at 120m.

Wouldn't you assault pilots just love having two of those to stop those pesky lights from knee-hugging you?

Not that it's very likely to happen, seeing as weapon balance is in the hands of the guy who thought specialized "crit weapons" would be a good idea in a game where every weapon already critted at a rate of 42%,

I mean, these are the guys that said the MG couldn't be buffed because of the damage a 6 MG Spider would do to the back of an Atlas, then turned around and gave us the 4 MG + 4 ML Firestarter without batting an eye.

Edited by stjobe, 30 December 2015 - 02:30 AM.

[Wrathful Scythe]

Ah, I remember the days where the Ember was considered to be one of the best lights. Haven't seen one in ages. Or an Arrow that actually uses the ballistic slots.

If the range wasn't so god damn awful then they would be somewhat usable but in a brawler unfriendly environment where facetanking means certain death, I can see why a 90m weapon is never used by anything.

Screw the crit system, buff the dps to 1 and increase the range to 270m or something with the spread adjusted accordingly.

[5LeafClover]

stjobe, on 30 December 2015 - 02:29 AM, said:

The problem is, PGI cheated (*gasp*) when they implemented the MG. It's NOT a ballistic weapon, it is implemented as a hit-scan weapon (just like a laser) with bullet graphics and sound (which incidentally has nothing to do with actual hit registration, so don't rely on those if you're using MGs, just point straight at your target and fire away)

Ah, makes sense. Not a bad decision really.

But in this case, i really cant understand why they've been nerfed so heavily from such an underwhelming starting point too.

Then again, i guess its not an isolated "issue".

[The Amazing Spider Man]

stjobe, on 30 December 2015 - 02:29 AM, said:

because of the damage a 6 MG Spider would do to the back of an Atlas

Where is my 6 MG variant PGI?! I must have one post haste!

[cazidin]

The Amazing Spider Man, on 30 December 2015 - 06:31 AM, said:

Where is my 6 MG variant PGI?! I must have one post haste!

6 MGs is OP. PGI, please nerf MGs.They're the real meta. (I'm joking. Please, don't nerf them PGI! I WAS ONLY JOKING!)

[stjobe]

5LeafClover, on 30 December 2015 - 05:29 AM, said:

Ah, makes sense. Not a bad decision really.

It probably was faster, but it also puts the lie to the "too many projectiles" argument, since there are no projectiles.

5LeafClover, on 30 December 2015 - 05:29 AM, said:

But in this case, i really cant understand why they've been nerfed so heavily from such an underwhelming starting point too.

You, me, everyone else; nobody understands the hate PGI has for the MG. At this point I'm pretty sure it's just ego; they don't want to admit they misinterpreted the MG from the get-go, so they tried to cover that up by making them "crit weapons" - which is a completely useless mechanic, but they came up with it so they can't admit that either.

Their reasons for keeping the MG "useless against armor" (wait, what? 2 damage vs armor, just like the AC/2 and a single SRM is "useless"?) is just them not having the first clue about BattleTech, and the "crit weapon" mechanic is just them not having the first clue about how their own crit system actually works.

So they kept the MG useless because it would be too powerful when boated by lights - never mind that it could already be boated by heavies - and then they ignore that and put out 4 MG + 4 ML Firestarters, and 6 MG + 2 ML + LPL Hero Blackjacks.

It's mindboggling.

You'd think a dev studio named "Piranha" making "a BattleTech game" would embrace the MG, not make it utterly useless.

The Amazing Spider Man, on 30 December 2015 - 06:31 AM, said:

Where is my 6 MG variant PGI?! I must have one post haste!

Wanna know what's even funnier? They later put out a 6 MG, 2 ML, LPL Hero Blackjack, the Arrow. I guess 6 MG on that one didn't do the unimaginable things to the back of an Atlas that a 6 MG Spider would do.

[The Amazing Spider Man]

stjobe, on 30 December 2015 - 08:50 AM, said:

Wanna know what's even funnier? They later put out a 6 MG, 2 ML, LPL Hero Blackjack, the Arrow. I guess 6 MG on that one didn't do the unimaginable things to the back of an Atlas that a 6 MG Spider would do.

Blackjack is another name for target, right?!

[Y E O N N E]

I still think they ought to upgrade the LCT-1V to 6xMG and the LCT-3V to 4x MG. I could comfortably fit both builds.

PGI, pls.

[VorpalAnvil]

PerfectDuck, on 29 December 2015 - 02:20 AM, said:

Just to put things in perspective, the Gau-8 Avenger, one of modern technology's most powerful machine guns weighs less than half a ton, and the A-10 plane carries 1.5 tons of ammo or 1150 bullets. It has an effective range of over 1000m.

Yeah, but the guys who built that gun and the A-10 actually knew what the hell they were doing.

[Greyhart]

I think there are a couple of things to remember with battletech:

1. It's the rule of cool
2. the stats are designed for a 10 sec per turn board game
3. after a thousand years the terminology is a bit off i.e. a machine gun is not what we would call a machine gun.
4. See rule 1 with people who had no idea of what they are talking about

[DrxAbstract]

Mcgral18, on 28 December 2015 - 08:05 PM, said:

Name in the lance box?



I will wager: A large STD engine.
I prefer Dual Gauss when doing the STD though...so I guess the question still isn't answered.

5+ tons of MG ammo

Wait, we could check the engine because that's full reverse speed. I won't, but someone can.

You could easily fit a 350STD, 6 Mguns, 2 large pulse and 2 ASRM6s with ample ammo and heat sinks while the KGC in that picture is using 7 less tons on weapons alone. Best guess:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...746303ea16fa290

I'd prefer this, if going with the roflcrab:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...1fe3cca9959c89e

/shrug