116 replies to this topic

[Terror Teddy]

Davers, on 27 March 2013 - 09:33 PM, said:

I find it funny that the AC/2 received a tremendous buff, and none of the 'machine guns should suck' crowd went on rants about how they should only be good at AA like in TT. But talk about machine guns, which have a tiny fraction of their range, and everyone starts yelling. It really makes no sense

And whenever Damage to Weight ratio is mentioned with AC/2 vs MG (1/12 the weight) no-one wonders about the light laser that does 1/3rd the DPS of the ERPPC and is at 1/14th the weight...

by that reasoning the MG's should be buffed to about 1.2 dps

[Znail]

Khobai, on 08 November 2012 - 05:47 AM, said:

In table top machine guns do 2 damage while small lasers do 3 damage. So if you keep the 2:3 dps ratio between machine guns and small lasers then machine guns should do 0.67 dps, instead of the 0.4 dps they currently do. In other words, PGI needs to give them a 70% damage increase to make them as effective as they are in TT.

Additionally PGI needs to add a new ballistic weapon with weight in between a machine gun and an AC/2. Currently theres a huge weight gap in ballistic weapons. We need a ballistic weapon that weighs 3-4 tons so light mechs with ballistic slots have other options besides machine guns. One possibility is to add mech mortars, which do exist in 3049, and fall right in that gap for weight.

0.67 dps would be a start and then we could actually test them out and see how that works. Personally II think that 1 dps would be more like what is needed to make up for that you need to keep your aim on the enemy constantly to get that dps instead of only having to aim every 3 seconds, The only argument against this would be that the increased heat for the small laser makes that actually matter for that weapon and thus the heat free MG's being able to do damage could be an issue. But I think that 0.67 dps is very safe to start with. Where exactly that MG's need to be between 0.67 and 1 dps is up for testing, but as long as we have our current version so are they pointless and only a placebo weapon. It makes a nice noice and lets you think that you are actually doing something.

[Utilyan]

MG with 600m range would be so awsome. It would annoy noobs tho.

The number one reason im against machine gun buff,even though its my favorite weapon, is I don't want to discourage anyone from playing.

Same with flamers.

I got a Jager-DD with 6MGs/2 flamers.....I love it.

I would trade damage for better cosmetics, I rather put on a memorable show. Like if the flamers did no damage, but made building and terrain catch on fire and stuff, i'm for it. Machine guns maybe more brass flying....choice of tracer round colors n' stuff......They sound pretty good already.


Fact I wish they would explore more of the leeway of machine gun types. From my understanding of BT a AC/10 weapon puts out its 10 damage in 1 round but how exactly it does that might be weapons of differ rate of fire and differ calibers, differ brand weapons ect.

So even if its redundant i'd like to see differ machine guns, might look differ, sound differ but for most part do same thing in game.

[Corwin Vickers]

I have tried to make Mgs work as "crit seekers" but from everything I can tell they don't. Had 4 of them on the ballistic spider and fired at an atlas with no armor for what seemed like forever. I don't think he lost any of his weapons.

Useless atm

[Axident]

I had a round where I got seven kills in a Jager with 5 MGs, 2ERLLs, and 1AC2. The MGs and AC2 were firing as a group and I'd originally tried it as a WTF build for lols, but it did a lot better than I expected. Okay, everything in that match went right for me and the opposition did seem to be a few heat sinks short of a working reactor, but several of the kills were from the ballistics alone and I actually ran out of MG ammo before the final one. 4000 rounds burned through in one match. So there are times when they can be fun.

Oh, and custom tracer colors would be awesome on night matches.

[MoonUnitBeta]

Axident, on 27 March 2013 - 11:01 PM, said:

I had a round where I got seven kills in a Jager with 5 MGs, 2ERLLs, and 1AC2. The MGs and AC2 were firing as a group and I'd originally tried it as a WTF build for lols, but it did a lot better than I expected. Okay, everything in that match went right for me and the opposition did seem to be a few heat sinks short of a working reactor, but several of the kills were from the ballistics alone and I actually ran out of MG ammo before the final one. 4000 rounds burned through in one match. So there are times when they can be fun.

Oh, and custom tracer colors would be awesome on night matches.

Ran a Jager DD with 6 machine guns and two large pulse lasers, 16k ammo or something.
3 kills and 364 damage. I looked at my stats and 62 of that damage was from machine guns, the rest from my lasers.
Those lasers chewed through armor and the machine guns basically did the rest... It was fun lol!

[Terror Teddy]

MoonUnitBeta, on 27 March 2013 - 11:03 PM, said:

Ran a Jager DD with 6 machine guns and two large pulse lasers, 16k ammo or something. 3 kills and 364 damage. I looked at my stats and 62 of that damage was from machine guns, the rest from my lasers. Those lasers chewed through armor and the machine guns basically did the rest... It was fun lol!

62 damage.

That's 10,3 per machinegun for the entire match.

And 151 damage per LPL.

That right there tells you it's something wrong with them.

[Voidcrafter]

"That". "Powerful".

weapon / games played / shots fired / shots hit / % accuracy / time played / DAMAGE.

[MustrumRidcully]

Voidcrafter, on 28 March 2013 - 05:14 AM, said:

"That". "Powerful".

weapon / games played / shots fired / shots hit / % accuracy / time played / DAMAGE.

At least now I know in which ELO bracket I belong. Probably somewhere above the steering wheel hive.

76 % Accuracy with the LB10 X AC? 92.21 % with the MG? I don't think I could get there.


Unless the LB10 X AC scores similar to Lasers - if from 10 pellets one hits, it's a hit.
Yeah, if I look at the numbers, it seems like that's how it works 443 shots should deal more than 3040 damage. Actual Damage Utilization is around 52 %

[LordDeathStrike]

i have a jaeger with 6 machine guns 2 er ppcs and enough double heat sinks to sustain fire, 6k rounds of mgun ammo. it rips **** up, the ppcs and other people break the armor and the 6 machine guns tear out the guts.

[Voidcrafter]

MustrumRidcully, on 28 March 2013 - 05:28 AM, said:

At least now I know in which ELO bracket I belong. Probably somewhere above the steering wheel hive.

76 % Accuracy with the LB10 X AC? 92.21 % with the MG? I don't think I could get there.


Unless the LB10 X AC scores similar to Lasers - if from 10 pellets one hits, it's a hit.
Yeah, if I look at the numbers, it seems like that's how it works 443 shots should deal more than 3040 damage. Actual Damage Utilization is around 52 %

Well if you're interested how the weapons are working for me overall, here's the rest:



Just a note - these are not completely correct, since I fire lotta PPCs and ACs in the nothing, on suspicious blue smokes(while in thermal), or in the begining of the round to see how they're affecting my heat.
And yea - I'm kinda bad with Gausses and AC20s - I really don't like them, not cause of that, but cause they give the wrong idea to people to think, that they can go boating them and get away with it

[MustrumRidcully]

Voidcrafter, on 28 March 2013 - 06:10 AM, said:

Well if you're interested how the weapons are working for me overall, here's the rest:



Just a note - these are not completely correct, since I fire lotta PPCs and ACs in the nothing, on suspicious blue smokes(while in thermal), or in the begining of the round to see how they're affecting my heat.
And yea - I'm kinda bad with Gausses and AC20s - I really don't like them, not cause of that, but cause they give the wrong idea to people to think, that they can go boating them and get away with it

63 % for the AC/20 isn't bad, I think. Or at least not any worse than I am.

One of my pet projects with these stats is finding the "real" accuracy of Lasers, or as I call it "damage utilization" (with x shots you can deal y damage, but you actually deal z, so y/z is your "real" accuracy):
42830 damage expected with your number of shots, actual damage is 23295, so you're at 54 %.

I wonder if the lower damage utilization I often measure for lasers is because people take more risky shots, or because holding the beam on target is actually that difficult.
4915 damage expected from your LLs, actual damage is 2605, so 53 %.

It's still all anecdotal, but I have the feeling that beam duration really makes the difference here, and if people take pot shots, the difference between MLs and LLs is not really big here.

I need more stats!

Mustrum "Spreadwarrior Online is my third-favorite game" Ridcully

[Terror Teddy]

Voidcrafter, on 28 March 2013 - 05:14 AM, said:

"That". "Powerful".

weapon / games played / shots fired / shots hit / % accuracy / time played / DAMAGE.

AC/10 120 3,187 1,605 50.36% 09:58:01 15,256 MACHINE GUN 145 82,450 38,773 47.03% 12:10:49 1,632 MED PULSE LASER 127 4,010 2,943 73.39% 10:54:45 10,478

AC/10 and MG's is my main weapon followed by my hunchbacks two secondary ulse lasers.

Normally i have a minimum of 2 MG's simply because of DAKKA on the Jager or the Hunchback because I dislike emty weapon slots,

With 39000 shots HIT and 1600 damage over 145 matches and using about 2 MG's we get:
-19,5 tonnes used
-269 rounds per match
-11,03 damage per match then I'm down to 5 damage per gun.

5 damage per MG/match

My statistcs tend to show that I'm also terribly triggerhappy - or I need ballistic state rewind since my MPL have a +20% accuracy.

[Voidcrafter]

MustrumRidcully, on 28 March 2013 - 07:41 AM, said:

63 % for the AC/20 isn't bad, I think. Or at least not any worse than I am.

One of my pet projects with these stats is finding the "real" accuracy of Lasers, or as I call it "damage utilization" (with x shots you can deal y damage, but you actually deal z, so y/z is your "real" accuracy):
42830 damage expected with your number of shots, actual damage is 23295, so you're at 54 %.

I wonder if the lower damage utilization I often measure for lasers is because people take more risky shots, or because holding the beam on target is actually that difficult.
4915 damage expected from your LLs, actual damage is 2605, so 53 %.

It's still all anecdotal, but I have the feeling that beam duration really makes the difference here, and if people take pot shots, the difference between MLs and LLs is not really big here.

I need more stats!

Mustrum "Spreadwarrior Online is my third-favorite game" Ridcully

Yea it's that - I take risky shots all the time - that's why I play this game - for the challenge and the thrill
And still there are alot of variables in the shooting with all the weapons - damage reduced by range, or target went to cover before your beams finish their circle etc.
Don't think it's that possible to calclulate

[MustrumRidcully]

Voidcrafter, on 28 March 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

Yea it's that - I take risky shots all the time - that's why I play this game - for the challenge and the thrill
And still there are alot of variables in the shooting with all the weapons - damage reduced by range, or target went to cover before your beams finish their circle etc.
Don't think it's that possible to calclulate

I tend to think a lot of the errors will even out, or at least be systematic and be shown across the board.

I think I do take risky shots with my AC/20 as well. Especially "long"-distance shots at 500m or so I often take. Hey, it's still 10 damage if it hits, and I usually carry enough ammo (or survive short enough?) that it's not an issue.

[Sifright]

Another mg thread that needs to be closed and it's post count and link added to the MG dicussion thread

This is a post to assist the mods in understanding the breadth of the problem I will be copy pasting this into older machine gun threads that did not recieve mod or dev attention so the feed back can be linked from the new thread.

[Egomane]

Closed!

For MG discussion go here: http://mwomercs.com/...eedback/unread/