37 replies to this topic

[Monkey Lover]

All the hmg haters were boating 7 and coming 8 machine-guns on clan mechs.

What about the 1-4 ballistic light and mediums Russ said heavy machine would "help"

Buff them make them worth taking in lower numbers and put crazy ghost heat or just limit anything over 4(ish)

Edited by Monkey Lover, 01 July 2017 - 01:18 PM.

[Ruar]

Monkey Lover, on 01 July 2017 - 01:16 PM, said:

All the hmg haters were boating 7 and coming 8 machine-guns on clan mechs.

What about the 1-4 ballistic light and mediums Russ said heavy machine would "help"

Buff them make them worth taking in lower numbers and put crazy ghost heat or just limit anything over 4.

Putting a limit would work, but what weapon has a hardcap limit on how many can be equipped? PGI still doesn't have a solid answer for boating and boating HMGs just means you get all that damage with no heat.

I think they have to reduce the critical damage value to 0 or 1 and just leave the regular damage alone. Even then I'm not sure they will be balanced. The range limitation just isn't enough because closing range is pretty easy in the game and almost every fight ends up at point blank range at some point.

[Monkey Lover]

Ruar, on 01 July 2017 - 01:20 PM, said:

Putting a limit would work, but what weapon has a hardcap limit on how many can be equipped? PGI still doesn't have a solid answer for boating and boating HMGs just means you get all that damage with no heat.

I think they have to reduce the critical damage value to 0 or 1 and just leave the regular damage alone. Even then I'm not sure they will be balanced. The range limitation just isn't enough because closing range is pretty easy in the game and almost every fight ends up at point blank range at some point.

Having less to almost none on heavy but lots of damage would be OK with me.

Then you can take the flip side to this and have lots of crit on the light machine-gun and less dmg.

With the middle being the normal mg.

[CJ Daxion]

what mechs are boating 8 of them? Shadow cat can get 7, a couple IS mechs get 6..

80m is is practically on top of the mech. It makes IS SL's seam like long range weapons.




That said, I still think mechs should be limited to 2 flamers, but that is a different thread

[SOL Ranger]

I suggest:

• Remove all the extra critical properties
  
• Increase range to 320m optimal and 980m maximal range
  
• Increase dps to 1.8
  
• Add some ammo efficiency

The weapon is now a fine addition to my collection, viable in the game for multiple roles and usable by all chassis types with ballistics, large and small, not just the dogmatic Jedi.

The weapon has been transformed into:

• A light suppressive weapon to keep enemies pressured with while your other weapons are reloading at moderate and long ranges.
  
• A supplementary weapon to compliment your other weapons with extra dps at short to moderate ranges
  
• A secondary heatless weapon to keep some damage going even at high heat
  
• A general purpose machine gun in a practical and flexible package
  
• An easily applicable medium range ballistics weapon for lighter mechs with poor tonnage resources

It would be all these things instead. Problem solved.

[Ruar]

SOL Ranger, on 01 July 2017 - 02:45 PM, said:

I suggest:

• Remove all the extra critical properties
  
• Increase range to 320m optimal and 980m maximal range
  
• Increase dps to 1.8
  
• Add some ammo efficiency

The weapon is now a fine addition to my collection, viable in the game for multiple roles and usable by all chassis types with ballistics, large and small, not just the dogmatic Jedi.

The weapon has been transformed into:

• A light suppressive weapon to keep enemies pressured with while your other weapons are reloading at moderate and long ranges.
  
• A supplementary weapon to compliment your other weapons with extra dps at short to moderate ranges
  
• A secondary heatless weapon to keep some damage going even at high heat
  
• A general purpose machine gun in a practical and flexible package
  
• An easily applicable medium range ballistics weapon for lighter mechs with poor tonnage resources

It would be all these things instead. Problem solved.

Did you seriously just suggest giving HMGs 380m optimal with 900m falloff? On a hitscan weapon. You don't want much do you.

[SOL Ranger]

Ruar, on 01 July 2017 - 02:56 PM, said:

Did you seriously just suggest giving HMGs 380m optimal with 900m falloff? On a hitscan weapon. You don't want much do you.

No, it says 320m optimal and 980m maximal, but that is an error, it should say 320m and 960m.

If you are worried about increasingly trivial trickle damage from a streamed CoF weapon without any extra crit properties at 500-900m ranges I don't know what to tell you, it's an intended suppressive effect for its role.

You don't seem to grasp that the MG's aren't superweapons and currently only live on their crit seeking capabilities, without that they need properties that actually can be practically applied for other roles such as a secondary role as a general purpose supplementary and suppressive fire ballistics weapon for instance as I am suggesting.

Maybe you shouldn't be so hasty to exaggerate the impact of other people's suggestions when your suggestions about neutering the weapon into a role of DOA or plainly removing it completely are about as far fetched as they come.

[Ruar]

SOL Ranger, on 01 July 2017 - 03:49 PM, said:

No, it says 320m optimal and 980m maximal, but that is an error, it should say 320m and 960m.

If you are worried about increasingly trivial trickle damage from a streamed CoF weapon without any extra crit properties at 500-900m ranges I don't know what to tell you, it's an intended suppressive effect for its role.

You don't seem to grasp that the MG's aren't superweapons and currently only live on their crit seeking capabilities, without that they need properties that actually can be practically applied for other roles such as a secondary role as a general purpose supplementary and suppressive fire ballistics weapon for instance as I am suggesting.

Maybe you shouldn't be so hasty to exaggerate the impact of other people's suggestions when your suggestions about neutering the weapon into a role of DOA or plainly removing it completely are about as far fetched as they come.

If my math is right having 7 HMG is slightly less dps than a RAC 5. Even if you only run 4 HMG they are doing dps than an AC5. Which means your suggestion would have a zero heat, hit scan weapon that is lighter than similar weapons able to do better damage at 300m. And somehow immediately the one with far fetched ideas.

When you add the pros and cons is there a better weapon inside of 100m than the HMG? 1.4 dps per gun with no heat and a 60% critical boost.

Edited by Ruar, 01 July 2017 - 04:57 PM.

[LordNothing]

doing well in a 6mg arrow, or 7 mg scat or an 8mg dire (why?) should not be representative of the entire weapons system. in almost all these cases taking that many machine guns is less effective than what the chassis is capable of (arrow might be an exception as you can get 3 lls on there without sacrificing mgs). 4 is a more realistic loadout on most builds. if the 7 mg scat cant do as well as an dual lpl scat, tripple erll, or a dual ppc scat, then maybe the mgs arent as good as you think they are.

im not against the machine gun classes having different roles. like if the lmg is a pure crit seeker, the standard mg can do structure and some armor damage, and the hmg is more about damage and less about finding crits. id dont need all 3 systems doing the same job. hmg in particular needs to be the prime light ballistic so being good at general damage is a plus. if boating mgs becomes a major issue, and i doubt that, give it a tiny amount of heat and have it ramp up rapidly at around gun number 6.

Edited by LordNothing, 01 July 2017 - 04:51 PM.

[SOL Ranger]

Ruar, on 01 July 2017 - 04:47 PM, said:

If my math is right having 7 HMG is slightly less dps than a RAC 5. Even if you only run 4 HMG they are doing dps than an AC5. Which means your suggestion would have a zero heat, hit scan weapon that is lighter than similar weapons able to do better damage at 300m. And somehow immediately the one with far fetched ideas.

When you add the pros and cons is there a better weapon inside of 100m than the HMG? 1.4 dps per gun with no heat and a 60% critical boost.

Especially the HMG has a giant CoF, almost double the CoF of the regular MG and over five times greater than the LMG, firing at 320m will spread that damage all over the mech like micro lrms.

At 160metres it already hits CT/LT/RT in a perfect split against an atlas and ofers a majority of fluff damage only, it cannot be focused unless approached closer.

At 320m the damage will be spread around the whole mech reducing dps by a factor of ~10, that is reducing effective damage by a magnitude where the majority as is with LRM's is fluff damage, and that is against a staitonary target with perfect aim,

Beyond 320m the fluff damage even becomes less because the CoF will cause more and more misses essentially just offering fragment damage.

At 500-900 metres... right? Suppressive effect only.

That is longer range suppressive fire and medium range supplemental fire as the role I am suggesting warrants.

You are completely wrong in your fears about this. Furthermore machine guns are not some magical superweapon, all of the MG's are some of the most dysfunctional weapon systems in the game right after the flamer, they just work well for critting out internals and structure when amassed but once you remove that property they become utter trash unless properly conventionally improved, and that is what I am trying to do here.

[Ruar]

SOL Ranger, on 01 July 2017 - 06:33 PM, said:

Especially the HMG has a giant CoF, almost double the CoF of the regular MG and over five times greater than the LMG, firing at 320m will spread that damage all over the mech like micro lrms.

At 160metres it already hits CT/LT/RT in a perfect split against an atlas and ofers a majority of fluff damage only, it cannot be focused unless approached closer.

At 320m the damage will be spread around the whole mech reducing dps by a factor of ~10, that is reducing effective damage by a magnitude where the majority as is with LRM's is fluff damage, and that is against a staitonary target with perfect aim,

Beyond 320m the fluff damage even becomes less because the CoF will cause more and more misses essentially just offering fragment damage.

At 500-900 metres... right? Suppressive effect only.

That is longer range suppressive fire and medium range supplemental fire as the role I am suggesting warrants.

You are completely wrong in your fears about this. Furthermore machine guns are not some magical superweapon, all of the MG's are some of the most dysfunctional weapon systems in the game right after the flamer, they just work well for critting out internals and structure when amassed but once you remove that property they become utter trash unless properly conventionally improved, and that is what I am trying to do here.

Do you honestly think people would be fine with HMGs having spread larger than an LBX? They will insist the spread be reduced so the weapon can be effective.

The best way to balance is what has been said earlier... LMGs do crit damage, MGs do some crit and some armor, HMGs do armor damage. Then the optimal could be pushed to 125 and the maximum up to 250m.

[SOL Ranger]

Ruar, on 01 July 2017 - 06:36 PM, said:

Do you honestly think people would be fine with HMGs having spread larger than an LBX? They will insist the spread be reduced so the weapon can be effective.

The best way to balance is what has been said earlier... LMGs do crit damage, MGs do some crit and some armor, HMGs do armor damage. Then the optimal could be pushed to 125 and the maximum up to 250m.

It already does have the spread and I don't in particular see an issue with it given other practical improvements. It is more effective if used in shorter quarters but it is also useful in almost all the other roles you want it in. This is also why I have been suggesting better ammo capacity to make it a perfectly viable weapon to use as a supplemental ballistic weapon even when firing ineffective fire due to the cone at medium to longer ranges, just like LRM's do take that into account with a high ammo capacity per ton.

However if people cannot adjust and if the cone is not found to be all too big then that is user error and nothing more just like demanding LRM's to be pinpoint at maximum range would be. I want the options of different motivated use cases to be there in a flexible configuration but with consequences and that is a new fresh role for the weapon that will work if implemented.

I find your suggestion doesn't go far enough to give it purpose nor does it take into account the context of current ballistics weapons available. In my opinion it is still far too similar to the other models and the ranges involved are just too cramped and keep it a niche among only the lightest, ballistics inflated and fastest mechs without offering anything else any use of it.

Part of my suggestion is to bring the HMG into conventional use among for other chassis too and without proper ranges it just can't become anything else than it is currently. I don't like that weapons are relegated to extremely minor use when they do not need to be with rather minor easiy changes like adding range and some other properties to make it at least more practically applicable.

[Ruar]

SOL Ranger, on 01 July 2017 - 06:59 PM, said:

It already does have the spread and I don't in particular see an issue with it given other practical improvements. It is more effective if used in shorter quarters but it is also useful in almost all the other roles you want it in. This is also why I have been suggesting better ammo capacity to make it a perfectly viable weapon to use as a supplemental ballistic weapon even when firing ineffective fire due to the cone at medium to longer ranges, just like LRM's do take that into account with a high ammo capacity per ton.

However if people cannot adjust and if the cone is not found to be all too big then that is user error and nothing more just like demanding LRM's to be pinpoint at maximum range would be. I want the options of different motivated use cases to be there in a flexible configuration but with consequences and that is a new fresh role for the weapon that will work if implemented.

I find your suggestion doesn't go far enough to give it purpose nor does it take into account the context of current ballistics weapons available. In my opinion it is still far too similar to the other models and the ranges involved are just too cramped and keep it a niche among only the lightest, ballistics inflated and fastest mechs without offering anything else any use of it.

Part of my suggestion is to bring the HMG into conventional use among for other chassis too and without proper ranges it just can't become anything else than it is currently. I don't like that weapons are relegated to extremely minor use when they do not need to be with rather minor easiy changes like adding range and some other properties to make it at least more practically applicable.

ACs are the longer range weapons. MGs are the short range ballistic weapons. Similar to how SRMs are the short range missiles.

You are wanting MGs to be the best ballistic weapons in the game which will cause power creep in all other ballistics to match. Especially considering the fact MGs are the only weapons which can be boated without worrying about heat.

[Damnedtroll]

mg is for killing meat bags with flak vest... hmg for killing battle armor and lmg is for killing civilians, that's different roles ! lol

Edited by Damnedtroll, 01 July 2017 - 07:44 PM.

[SOL Ranger]

Ruar, on 01 July 2017 - 07:06 PM, said:

ACs are the longer range weapons. MGs are the short range ballistic weapons. Similar to how SRMs are the short range missiles.

You are wanting MGs to be the best ballistic weapons in the game which will cause power creep in all other ballistics to match. Especially considering the fact MGs are the only weapons which can be boated without worrying about heat.

Get some perspective and stop claiming I want anything but what I have written in this thread, if you want to know what I want MG's to be try reading my posts I wrote in this thread and you will know.

I have no more time for you nor your continually made up hyperbolic taken out of context non issues.

[Monkey Lover]

CJ Daxion, on 01 July 2017 - 02:43 PM, said:

what mechs are boating 8 of them? Shadow cat can get 7, a couple IS mechs get 6..

80m is is practically on top of the mech. It makes IS SL's seam like long range weapons.




That said, I still think mechs should be limited to 2 flamers, but that is a different thread

"coming mechs" will have 8 just few weeks away now

[Johnny Z]

Monkey Lover, on 01 July 2017 - 01:16 PM, said:

All the hmg haters were boating 7 and coming 8 machine-guns on clan mechs.

What about the 1-4 ballistic light and mediums Russ said heavy machine would "help"

Buff them make them worth taking in lower numbers and put crazy ghost heat or just limit anything over 4(ish)

My Phoenix Hawk has 1 ballistic on the left arm and I had hopes heavy machine guns would improve the current regular machine gun in there now. Then I seen the range....

Edited by Johnny Z, 01 July 2017 - 09:30 PM.

[Mycroft000]

I've run several matches in my NVA-S with 12 ERmicros and 4HMGs, I do not know what anyone is complaining about with the HMGs, they are FANTASTIC.

[Monkey Lover]

Johnny Z, on 01 July 2017 - 09:30 PM, said:

My Phoenix Hawk has 1 ballistic on the left arm and I had hopes heavy machine guns would improve the current regular machine gun in there now. Then I seen the range....

Whats bad is with 1-3 machineguns it gets hard to justify facing the enemy to fire the weapon none-stop., Most the time your better off twisting and turning to spread the damage.

[LordNothing]

Damnedtroll, on 01 July 2017 - 07:43 PM, said:

mg is for killing meat bags with flak vest... hmg for killing battle armor and lmg is for killing civilians, that's different roles ! lol

are these battle armor worth a lot of points? because i haven't found any yet.