105 replies to this topic

[Y E O N N E]

FupDup, on 05 February 2018 - 06:47 PM, said:

To play devil's advocate, saying 12 Clan MGs = 6 IS MGs is not a completely equal comparison at all because the Clan MGs will need to spend more tonnage on ammo, more critslots on the MGs and ammo, and more hardpoints. Therefore, the 12 Clan MGs do in fact occupy more resources than the 6 IS MGs.

That depends. Are you improving the IS MG by increasing its RoF or by straight-up increasing its damage-per-bullet? If it's the former, ammo requirements remain identical. If it's the latter, you have a problem.

As for critslots: Endo, Ferro, LFerro, and isDHS are all still present, often both Endo and Ferro together on the IS 'Mechs you want the MGs for.

The case is open and shut.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 05 February 2018 - 11:23 PM.

[FupDup]

Yeonne Greene, on 05 February 2018 - 11:23 PM, said:

As for critslots: Endo, Ferro, LFerro, and isDHS are all still present, often both Endo and Ferro together on the IS 'Mechs you want the MGs for.

The case is open and shut.

You shouldn't be balancing MGs (or any other weapon) based off of entirely separate stuff like Endo/FF/etc, that's going to produce very silly results very quickly.

The "ideal" goal to strive for should be to have it so if there was MixTech (not asking for it, just saying hypothetical) then people would have a reason to use either faction's weapons/gear with no clear favoring of one side over the other. If we turbobuff IS guns because of crappy Endo and stuff, that means Clan mechs if given the choice would always equip superior IS guns and IS mechs would never want to use Clan guns even if they had the choice to do so. That's broken.

Case opened right back up.

Edited by FupDup, 05 February 2018 - 11:31 PM.

[Destoroyah]

Well getting both endo and ferro on IS lights is usually not possible once you count the XL engine and required external heatsinks, if you can get both ferro and Endo on you usually have very little space free to use. Also CMGs are more ammo efficent because of their weight (4 CMGs +2 tons ammo = 3 tons vs. 4 ISMGs + 1 ton ammo = 3Tons). Yes Clan mechs that can use lots of MGs will need your ammo, but they can afford to get that ammo without spending more then IS.

Edited by Destoroyah, 05 February 2018 - 11:48 PM.

[InvictusLee]

Sigmar Sich, on 05 February 2018 - 11:18 PM, said:

There is also an interesting technology, MG Array. I think it is beyond our timeline (which year is it now? 3058?).
If you have one MG, you add 0.5 ton of a duct tape, and you can add another MG. So in one hardpoint you can have 2 or 4 machineguns. Which would help IS mechs, which usually do not have many ballistic hardpoints.

even in the old mechwarrior games, I never used arrays.
They were just useless.

In mwo, all they would do is add unnecessary complexity to an already complex game.

[Y E O N N E]

FupDup, on 05 February 2018 - 11:29 PM, said:

You shouldn't be balancing MGs (or any other weapon) based off of entirely separate stuff like Endo/FF/etc, that's going to produce very silly results very quickly.

Is it going to produce silly results? We are talking about min-maxing here. I have a Locust. It can just barely squeeze 7.5 tons of open space with only 8 open slots (14 with SHS) by sacrificing armor in its legs and the arms where its guns are stored. Piranha gets 8 tons of open space with 23 (26 with SHS) open slots, vestigial arms stripped.

It really is quite cut and dry. For every optimal build on a given Clan 'Mech, there is more firepower available per slot, per ton. Period. Even the MLX. Even the IFR. Even the SMN. You have no choice at all but to balance against the optimum configurations or you get the next VTR-DS, TBR, KDK-3, NTG, MCII-DS, etc.

Quote

The "ideal" goal to strive for should be to have it so if there was MixTech (not asking for it, just saying hypothetical) then people would have a reason to use either faction's weapons/gear with no clear favoring of one side over the other. If we turbobuff IS guns because of crappy Endo and stuff, that means Clan mechs if given the choice would always equip superior IS guns and IS mechs would never want to use Clan guns even if they had the choice to do so. That's broken.

That is a fool's errand.

You should not, and cannot, get the game to work if you try to make it such that you can transplant and mish-mash equipment and get the same performance result. This especially doesn't work if you are trying to get each side to have peculiarities of play that make having sides mean anything at all, mechanically. The two bases are supposed to have combinations unique to them that foil each other and are not direct analogues.

E.g. for as much as Gauss-vomit has been talked about, I don't actually care that the IS can't do what the DS can do. It doesn't matter. If PGI were on the ball at all, they'd take one look at the dramatically heavier IS UACs, and say "hey...we can make these more reliable such that IS can better lean on the double tap and get their effective 70 alpha that way!" The misfires essentially count the same as the loss of effectiveness due beam spread on the Clan side. Increase the jam duration to compensate to keep the boats curbed.

Boom, UAC-vomit: a different-playing solution for the same role that allows you to run everything else 'Mech more comparably.

Alternatively, they'd buff the crap out of the AC/10 so slow and lumbering IS Assaults can build PPFLD machines to combat brutal high Clan alphas with brutal short IS exposures.

Quote

Case opened right back up.

Not at all.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 06 February 2018 - 12:21 AM.

[Snazzy Dragon]

Clans even get free CASE to minimize the risk of having ammo stored all over the place. IS CASE is moot because it'll still blow out your XL on lights and cripple the mech in 2 places with LFE + CASE if stored in a limb. And IS CASE isn't even free!

[0Jiggs0]

I like this idea from a thematic perspective. If the IS are "old-tech" and the Clans are "high-tech", then each side should have advantages and disadvantages relative to their theme. IS MGs would be heavier, firing larger, less accurate, but more damaging slugs. Clan MGs would deal less damage, but with more range and precision. Compare a .223 NATO cartridge with a .75 lead ball. The difference, of course, should not be that extreme, but implementing more of these sort of design contrasts would go a long way in making each faction feel distinct.

[Sigmar Sich]

November11th, on 06 February 2018 - 12:17 AM, said:

even in the old mechwarrior games, I never used arrays.
They were just useless.

In mwo, all they would do is add unnecessary complexity to an already complex game.

No.
2-MG array and 4-MG array could be just an singular items, same as SRM4-6 to SRM2.
And ability to increase damage output on hardpoint-starved mechs can be useful.

This is lore-friendly way to do what topic suggests. If it is needed at all.

UPD: Though optimal solution would be "buff IS machineguns", i agree, there is no need to invent inventions, i've got carried away. IS MGs are heavier, then give them better stats. If not damage, than range.

Edited by Sigmar Sich, 06 February 2018 - 03:11 AM.

[R Valentine]

The problem with MGs isn't MGs, it's the Parana and the Mist Lynx. How do you balance a weapon that only one mech can mount 12 of and fire all 12 at once? Even 8 is over the top. What other weapons are allowed to fire 8 at once? Small lasers? Only MGs let you fire them in stupid numbers like 12.

[Daurock]

Kiran Yagami, on 06 February 2018 - 06:13 AM, said:

The problem with MGs isn't MGs, it's the Parana and the Mist Lynx. How do you balance a weapon that only one mech can mount 12 of and fire all 12 at once? Even 8 is over the top. What other weapons are allowed to fire 8 at once? Small lasers? Only MGs let you fire them in stupid numbers like 12.

Traditionally, The answer to that has often been "Nerf the problem mechs." We've seen it before, With the agility nerfs to the Kodiak, NTG, and the TBR torsos. Sometimes warranted, sometimes not, but generally it's a route that leads to a lot of tears, and calls to "Restore their glory."

Knowing PGI, I wouldn't be surprised if they have some similar ham handed nerfs incoming for all variants of the Pirahna, not just the problem ones.

20 ton clan mech with the Agility of an IS 50 Tonner anyone?

Edit:
In all seriousness though, IS does need an MG buff. I'd vote for a damage buff on the order of 50% or so. That'd make them roughly on par with Clan stuff, DPS/Ton wise when you add in Ammo. It'd open up SO many more options for a lot of IS mechs. (I might even not feel bad when taking out my MG King Crab.)

Edited by Daurock, 06 February 2018 - 06:37 AM.

[Sigmar Sich]

Kiran Yagami, on 06 February 2018 - 06:13 AM, said:

The problem with MGs isn't MGs, it's the Parana and the Mist Lynx. How do you balance a weapon that only one mech can mount 12 of and fire all 12 at once? Even 8 is over the top. What other weapons are allowed to fire 8 at once? Small lasers? Only MGs let you fire them in stupid numbers like 12.

What if "Ghost Spread" ? Since MG have no noticeable heat. And MG boating is fixed.

Edited by Sigmar Sich, 06 February 2018 - 06:58 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Sigmar Sich, on 06 February 2018 - 06:57 AM, said:

What if "Ghost Spread" ? Since MG have no noticeable heat. And MG boating is fixed.

If PGI did Balance MGs it would probably be in the same way RACs are Balanced,
a bar would fill then once its filled your MG would not work till it cooled,

[Sigmar Sich]

Andi Nagasia, on 06 February 2018 - 09:04 AM, said:

If PGI did Balance MGs it would probably be in the same way RACs are Balanced,
a bar would fill then once its filled your MG would not work till it cooled,

I think discussed problem here was MG boating (on the clan side), and nerfing MG itself doesn't solve that. "Ghost Spread" does, however. Too much machineguns, creating parasitic vibrations, reducing overall accuracy. Plausible.
Not still sure it is a problem to be solved, though.

[Athom83]

Technically MG buffs are long overdue as they are supposed to have like similar DPS as AC/2s .

Edited by Athom83, 06 February 2018 - 11:04 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Sigmar Sich, on 06 February 2018 - 10:46 AM, said:

I think discussed problem here was MG boating (on the clan side), and nerfing MG itself doesn't solve that. "Ghost Spread" does, however. Too much machineguns, creating parasitic vibrations, reducing overall accuracy. Plausible.
Not still sure it is a problem to be solved, though.

Increasing spread just makes it useful only on the fast, agile 'Mechs which will be cramming up your rear and negating the spread anyway.

[Sigmar Sich]

Yeonne Greene, on 06 February 2018 - 10:55 AM, said:

Increasing spread just makes it useful only on the fast, agile 'Mechs which will be cramming up your rear and negating the spread anyway.

Yeah, good point.
So if major offenders here are clan MG boats, easiest way to solve it would be to buff IS MGs, which can't be really boated.

[Khobai]

Quote

If PGI did Balance MGs it would probably be in the same way RACs are Balanced,
a bar would fill then once its filled your MG would not work till it cooled,

giving machine guns ghost heat limit of 8 is the easiest fix

give them just enough ghost heat to make it so you cant fire 8-12 machine guns indefinitely

that doesnt affect IS at all, it only affects clan machine gun boats

Quote

So if major offenders here are clan MG boats, easiest way to solve it would be to buff IS MGs, which can't be really boated.

no the easiest way is to put a ghost heat limit on clan machine guns since clans can boat machine guns in higher quantities than IS.

IS machine guns are already stronger than clan machine guns, they dont need to be buffed more

Edited by Khobai, 06 February 2018 - 11:07 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Khobai, on 06 February 2018 - 11:01 AM, said:

giving machine guns ghost heat limit of 8 is the easiest fix
give them just enough ghost heat to make it so you cant fire 8-12 machine guns indefinitely
that doesnt affect IS at all, it only affects clan machine gun boats

but at what GH multiplier would make that work,
give all MGs 0.01Heat? and have them jumps up exponentially when boated past 8?

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 06 February 2018 - 11:11 AM.

[Sigmar Sich]

Khobai, on 06 February 2018 - 11:01 AM, said:

no the easiest way is to put a ghost heat limit on clan machine guns since clans can boat machine guns in higher quantities than IS.

I had an impression players are sick with clan nerfs, so i suggested an IS buff
Also, do MG produce noticeable heat, to be endangered by ghost heat? I never boated those, so i don't know. (as far as i know MGs in this game are cold as **** of a witch)
P.S. I wouldn't really call slightly bigger spread and lower item health as good tradeoff for half a weight...

[R Valentine]

Sigmar Sich, on 06 February 2018 - 11:20 AM, said:

I had an impression players are sick with clan nerfs, so i suggested an IS buff
Also, do MG produce noticeable heat, to be endangered by ghost heat? I never boated those, so i don't know. (as far as i know MGs in this game are cold as **** of a witch)
P.S. I wouldn't really call slightly bigger spread and lower item health as good tradeoff for half a weight...

We're really sick with clan hard point inflation. First we had Deathstrike and now this. Hasn't' PGI learned yet to scrutinize hard point counts and positions before releasing mechs? And you can't nerf hard points. PGI has never adjusted the hardpoint count on a mech after release. Especially on a battlemech. They can fudge it some on omnis, but even then all they ever do is add. Never take away. Meanwhile, IS gets crap mechs like the Thanatos. "Death's calling card, hurrr hurr". The only one calling death is the Thanatos itself after its shoulders fall off.