42 replies to this topic

[Amsro]

PGI does not want your input we know nothing about the game, the devs are infallible and will most certainly have all the best ideas.

We are not worthy of critical thought.

[Navid A1]

MacKJames, on 07 May 2016 - 10:14 AM, said:

That's true. It's been a long time since I've used the MGs so I've forgotten a lot about how they work. I read another discussion talking about them and I heard that the MGs have hitscan. Is that true? I thought I remembered them working like the ACs and the rounds had travel time.

As far as i remember, MGs were hitscan always... I did not use them in 2012, so don't know about that particular time.

In the pre-HSR era, people used MG to find the hitbox in front of a moving target, up close.

[Mcgral18]

MacKJames, on 07 May 2016 - 10:14 AM, said:

That's true. It's been a long time since I've used the MGs so I've forgotten a lot about how they work. I read another discussion talking about them and I heard that the MGs have hitscan. Is that true? I thought I remembered them working like the ACs and the rounds had travel time.

They're hitscan

Take SRMs (400M/s) or an AC20 (650M/s) and compare it to MGs and Lasers

Testing Grounds, any mech, shoot it sequentially with the above weapon systems


Projectile weapons don't cause the paperdoll to flash until the projectile hits, while the 100M/s MG flashes instantly, same as the Lasers.


MGs and Flamers are the only two constant fire weapons, and work in an identical way, damage wise.

[Navid A1]

Amsro, on 07 May 2016 - 10:17 AM, said:

PGI does not want your input we know nothing about the game, the devs are infallible and will most certainly have all the best ideas.

We are not worthy of critical thought.

I don't know what is up with machine guns and this kinda resistance from PGI... its been 2 years.

They even did something to flamers... why not machine guns?

MG OP it seems.
I wish the balance master could understand more things than just mere DPS... things like: Face time, Range and CoF

Edited by Navid A1, 07 May 2016 - 10:25 AM.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

DAYLEET, on 07 May 2016 - 09:15 AM, said:

Dev 1: Light queue is really low. How can we get more people to pilot lights?

Dev2: NEED MORE CHEESE!!!

back in 2013 there was no need to increase lights on the battlefield and the insane powercreep had not happened

To be fair... lights (ECM lights in particular) were damn near impossible to hit. The introduction of HSR cost us all the try hard elite pro types of piloted them for the advantage and drove the less skilled light jocks to other chassis.

Navid A1, on 07 May 2016 - 10:25 AM, said:

I don't know what is up with machine guns and this kinda resistance from PGI... its been 2 years.

They even did something to flamers... why not machine guns?

MG OP it seems.
I wish the balance master could understand more things than just mere DPS... things like: Face time, Range and CoF

I'd settle for basic statistics knowledge at this point.

Edited by Narcissistic Martyr, 07 May 2016 - 12:06 PM.

[DAYLEET]

Narcissistic Martyr, on 07 May 2016 - 12:05 PM, said:

The introduction of HSR cost us all the try hard elite pro types of piloted them for the advantage and drove the less skilled light jocks to other chassis.

And my answer to that is don't buff light but nerf a certain weight class IF you must(a little bit). We dont want parity, it's fine that lights stays for those who enjoy that and same for assault. All games need an easy easier-mode class, let it not be the lights or assaults. Don't the join queue fix that anyways?(it would if tier were per team and not per player) Still, wait 3minutes on a heavy or 1 on a light, ive made my choice.

Edited by DAYLEET, 07 May 2016 - 12:18 PM.

[Narcissistic Martyr]

DAYLEET, on 07 May 2016 - 12:17 PM, said:

And my answer to that is don't buff light but nerf a certain weight class IF you must(a little bit). We dont want parity, it's fine that lights stays for those who enjoy that and same for assault. All games need an easy easier-mode class, let it not be the lights or assaults. Don't the join queue fix that anyways?(it would if tier were per team and not per player) Still, wait 3minutes on a heavy or 1 on a light, ive made my choice.

Ah... I was a bit ambiguous in my intent there. I was trying to explain why low light numbers is an issue now but wasn't in the past.

[Yosharian]

Satan n stuff, on 07 May 2016 - 08:39 AM, said:

So buffing MGs would make those mechs more valuable and more of them would be sold.

And are those mechs buyable only with MC, like the Oxide?

[D1SC0 LEM0NADE]

If they bumped MG damage up and put out a Piranha pack I would throw money at PGI. 12 MGs is trollpacalypse awesomeness!

[Gyrok]

Navid A1, on 06 May 2016 - 11:30 PM, said:

I start off this thread with this famous quote from APR 2013:


In this example, Bryan says that bumping up the MG damage is like turning those into a continous firing laser that only turns off when it is out of ammo.
Considering the MG stats before the 2013 nerf... that laser would have been like a small laser that deals 0.75 damage and can be fired with no cooldown.

A spider with 6 of those machine guns would have been able to output 6 dps up to the optimum range of 120m (with cof).
Now imagine the said spider going for the back of that unsuspecting atlas sitting over there. The spider would need about 10 second of constant MG fire from point blank directly to the rear CT.

If the atlas pilot possess half a brain and starts turning and twisting, that time will go even higher than 20 or even 30 seconds and that is assuming the atlas not firing back. It should also be noted that firing your MGs that close to the atlas means constant face time and danger of being insta-fcked by that scary AC20+SRM combo.

Appearantly, that kind of situation is a "Devastaing Effect" according to Bryan.



Now... Can anyone here tell me, by what standard the same devs at PGI think the devastation a single oxide or jenner-IIC or a cheetah can do to THE FACE OF the said atlas is OK?
I mean... currently we have lights that can finish off assault mechs in a few salvos without needing face time ore sneaking, and sometimes even head-on!.

By what standard PGI thinks bumping the MG damage from 0.08 to 0.1 or 0.12 is somehow more dangerous than the giga-alpha jenner-iic that is running around?

The Piranha would be hilarious with 12 MGs...I might actually drive a 20T mech if it makes it into the game.

[Satan n stuff]

Yosharian, on 07 May 2016 - 12:27 PM, said:

And are those mechs buyable only with MC, like the Oxide?

Don't know, don't care. Paul can nerf them later if he needs to, he's good at that.

Edited by Satan n stuff, 07 May 2016 - 02:01 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Removal of the CoF would be a wonderful buff.

except its a machine gun it SHOULD have CoF

but it needs to do more damage.

it just needs to go back to 1dps instead of 0.8dps

[Juodas Varnas]

Khobai, on 07 May 2016 - 02:03 PM, said:

except its a machine gun it SHOULD have CoF

but it needs to do more damage.

it just needs to go back to 1dps instead of 0.8dps

Why SHOULD it have CoF?
Then maybe ACs should too?

But yeah, MGs do need more damage. 1 dps at the minimum (i'd actually argue for even more, maybe >1.2 dps)

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Quote

Bumping MG damage

From the dev quote in the OP.

The 6 MG Spider in question is not running 6 0.1 damage MGs, it's running damage bumped MGs (presumably 0.2 at least). 2 dps with 6 MGs is 12 dps, which is actually a pretty nasty output.

That said, it'd be sprayed all over the target, at point blank range only, which would significantly reduce the efficacy of that 12 damage each second.

If MGs had their cone of fire removed and their damage bumped back up to 0.1, I think they'd be in a minimally viable place. 0.12, 0.15, or some other higher damage value might even be worth moving toward eventually, but I suspect that removing the cone and bumping MGs up to 0.2 would be a bit much.

[Deathlike]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 07 May 2016 - 10:41 PM, said:

From the dev quote in the OP.

The 6 MG Spider in question is not running 6 0.1 damage MGs, it's running damage bumped MGs (presumably 0.2 at least). 2 dps with 6 MGs is 12 dps, which is actually a pretty nasty output.

That said, it'd be sprayed all over the target, at point blank range only, which would significantly reduce the efficacy of that 12 damage each second.

If MGs had their cone of fire removed and their damage bumped back up to 0.1, I think they'd be in a minimally viable place. 0.12, 0.15, or some other higher damage value might even be worth moving toward eventually, but I suspect that removing the cone and bumping MGs up to 0.2 would be a bit much.

The problem is that facetime is the MG's weakness, and doing so little damage when the Small Laser "seems viable" comparatively speaking is insane.

[Gas Guzzler]

They are leaving them this way in preparation for the Piranha. 12 sustainable DPS is too much for a light!

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Gas Guzzler, on 07 May 2016 - 11:11 PM, said:

They are leaving them this way in preparation for the Piranha. 12 sustainable DPS is too much for a light!

24 dps if you set them at 0.2 damage...

[Navid A1]

Gas Guzzler, on 07 May 2016 - 11:11 PM, said:

They are leaving them this way in preparation for the Piranha. 12 sustainable DPS is too much for a light!

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 08 May 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

24 dps if you set them at 0.2 damage...

And how much ammo you think that mech can pack?
3.5 tons max?
that is 560 total damage... IF we assume ALL the fire is point blank at target.


See guys... this is the problem... numbers and numbers and numbers with zero clue about a real world case.

[Lily from animove]

Juodas Varnas, on 06 May 2016 - 11:33 PM, said:

It's just PGI being PGI.

how else should they be, read the "feedback" some palyers give and how far from reality they are and how most only have issues by seriously doing nonsense. Hard for PGI to figure out the reality at all and the true problems to attemping to fix. .

Edited by Lily from animove, 08 May 2016 - 11:02 AM.

[Juodas Varnas]

Lily from animove, on 08 May 2016 - 11:02 AM, said:

how else should they be, read the "feedback" some palyers give and how far from reality they are and how most only have issues by seriously doing nonsense. Hard for PGI to figure out the reality at all and the true problems to attemping to fix. .

Hey now, i'm under no illusions that most of the "feedback" we give them is absolute garbage, however, i do think that they SHOULD'VE noticed how useless machine guns are and taken steps to rectify it, by now.