SOL Ranger, on 02 July 2017 - 06:27 AM, said:
This has already been answered if you actually read the posts I made to the other angry guy, what is it with you guys cherry picking values and details ignoring context and weapon properties as a whole just to drive your narrative. You're using exactly the same style of irrational debating as Ruor did, believing excluding all the facts surrounding the highlighted part you hastily react to gives any validity to your statements and also thinking insults will further your cause. Neither is rational and I would urge you to stop and think instead.
This needs to be said because frankly I'm tired of these angry hastily emotionally written posts that keep coming. If you don't like the suggestion then that is fine and express that but don't make up silly insulting posts because you're angry and instead argue the points you dislike factually. "I like the traditional role for the weapon more and we shouldn't change things so much as you suggest" would suffice as a valid opinion and comment.
However beginning to tell me how delusional I am for disagreeing with your desires, for suggesting a mechanic and property you clearly do not understand nor want to understand really doesn't make a good case for your argument, it simply shows you have no valid argument.
Facts:
- We do not need three near identical and dysfunctional crit seeking short range ballistic weapons that most of will end up highly underused/unused.
- The old manuscripts are dysfunctional for a game like MWO and could well do with some practical alterations to create more fun gameplay options.
- Critical seeking HMG's cannot be balanced properly without neutering the weapon into something else entirely already.
- 80m HMG's will only be applicable on the very few fastest, ballistics hardpoint inflated mechs in the game.
- We need something practical in the short/medium ranges for ballistics as there is a gaping hole there.
- There is no moderate to longer range suppressive fire weapon to be found.
- There is no short/moderate range general purpose ballistics weapon on the low end.
That is why I am suggesting a role and use case change.
I want the weapon to actually serve some meaningful role oriented purpose beyond existing in the weapons list on live later with the rigidly TT appropriate properties nobody but maybe ACH/MLX/Piranha and SHC pilots want to ever use.
Can we have a proper conversation now?
Your actually the one who got emotional, I just got sarcastic since you seem to want MGs to be the best ballistic weapons in the game with some sensational stats.
As for your facts...
Your first one is an opinion.
Your second is an opinion.
Your third is an opinion.
Your fourth is an opinion and already proven wrong on test.
Your fifth is an opinion and proven wrong with weapons like AC20, AC10, UAC20, UAC10, and Heavy Gauss. If you had said for light mechs then the answer is HMG, MG, Light Gauss, AC5.
Your sixth is opinion and moot because there is no such thing as suppression fire in MWO.
Your seventh is the same as your fifth, see above for answer.
Basically you have an unsupported opinion and you are passing it off as if it's concrete facts when it isn't. It's just your opinion. Then you get upset when I've been picking your opinion apart. I don't need to go through each line when you open with things like let a heat free, 1.4 dps weapon that can be stacked to be better tonnage and slots than an AC5 have similar range with the only significant difference being a CoF which you think would balance because it provides suppression fire.
I then pointed out the CoF would get changed to make the weapon effective, again because no such ting as suppression fire in MWO, because people want their weapons to actually do damage.
Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I'm angry. I'm not. Your suggestions will gain no traction and won't happen. Just because you have reasons for you changes doesn't make them reasonable, logical, or fit in the game. You want to turn a very nasty short range weapon into the single best weapon in the game and then say the only balance needed is CoF bloom because people are afraid of tracers coming at them which will suppress them.
MGs are short range ballistic weapons. They are niche. In that niche right now the HMG is performing above standard because of it's higher damage and boosted critical damage. Having both high damage and crit boost is too much because the 80m range limitation isn't a useful balancing tool. The mechs boating HMGs are able to get into optimum range easily enough. Which means something else has to be used to balance. Since we don't really need three MGs doing the same thing it only makes sense to differentiate between them. The LMG with low damage, best range, and also does the best with criticals. The regular MG has a bit less range, a little more damage, and a little less critical than the LMG. The HMG does the most damage, has the shortest range, and does the least critical damage.
This gives three distinct options for what you want to do, provides some different range considerations for how you prefer to play, and helps keep some balance so MGs don't become the ruler of all short range encounters.
1
