50 replies to this topic

[Sephlock]

Once the patch hits.

If it doesn't pan out...

http://www.penny-arc...omic/2003/01/29

I'll be in my room....

Be honest: Is anyone else hoping for an epic 48 hours of endless machinegun and flamer massacres, like the ALRM fiasco?

After all this time, I think the MG and flamer deserve their day in the sun.

[verybad]

Machine Guns should NEVER get a day in the sun. THey're not anti mech weapons, they're anti infantry weapons. They're in the game for completeness, not to be a viable weapon.

[Monky]

They're anti mech weapons, they just get a bonus against infantry (double damage). They're as much an anti mech weapon as small lasers, which get a day in the sun.

[Lefty Lucy]

verybad, on 17 November 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Machine Guns should NEVER get a day in the sun. THey're not anti mech weapons, they're anti infantry weapons. They're in the game for completeness, not to be a viable weapon.

that's simply not true. In TT they do exactly as much anti-mech damage as an AC2 does, albeit with vastly inferior range.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

verybad, on 17 November 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Machine Guns should NEVER get a day in the sun. THey're not anti mech weapons, they're anti infantry weapons. They're in the game for completeness, not to be a viable weapon.

wrong. Machine Guns have always been an anti mech weapon, they were in battle tech long before infantry rules were ever introduced.

[Sephlock]

verybad, on 17 November 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

ac/2s should NEVER get a day in the sun. THey're not anti mech weapons, they're anti air weapons. They're in the game for completeness, not to be a viable weapon.

Fixed that for you, since AC/2s do the same damage as machineguns- sans the bonus vs infantry.

[verybad]

Yes, and the AC-2 in TT is an unviable weapon. It can pop vehicles at range and that's about it's only use. Both of them do an extremely low amount of damage to armor in the TT game.

I'm fine with the improvement's AC-2s fot because they are 6 tons and intended to be light antiarmor weapons.

Machineguns aren't. They're extremly useful for anti infantry in TT, but are largely ignorable if your'e in a mech (barring very poor luck)

Tanks ton't take damage from machine guns in real life, why should mechs ub MWO?

I DO wish there were targets for machine guns in the game...just not mechs.

verybad, on 17 November 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Machine Guns should NEVER get a day in the sun. THey're not anti mech weapons, they're anti infantry weapons. They're in the game for completeness, not to be a viable weapon.

Quoting myself to make my point more noticable.

Agent 0 Fortune, on 17 November 2012 - 05:52 PM, said:

wrong. Machine Guns have always been an anti mech weapon, they were in battle tech long before infantry rules were ever introduced.

Not a viable one unless you were doing ridiculous things like takeing 20 of them (and you've got to admit that's ridiculous)

Edited by verybad, 17 November 2012 - 05:59 PM.

[Tickdoff Tank]

verybad, on 17 November 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Machine Guns should NEVER get a day in the sun. THey're not anti mech weapons, they're anti infantry weapons. They're in the game for completeness, not to be a viable weapon.

Stop posting bad information. MGs have ALWAYS been anti-mech weapons. That is why they do 2 damage to mechs in a 10 second turn. Just like an AC2. They also get a bonus to attacking infantry. The MG fills the same role as the small laser. Short range ballistic filler weapon (in TT). They should fill the same role in MWO.

[ollo]

verybad, on 17 November 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Machine Guns should NEVER get a day in the sun. THey're not anti mech weapons, they're anti infantry weapons. They're in the game for completeness, not to be a viable weapon.

Poster name is program.

[Tickdoff Tank]

verybad, on 17 November 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

Yes, and the AC-2 in TT is an unviable weapon. It can pop vehicles at range and that's about it's only use. Both of them do an extremely low amount of damage to armor in the TT game.

I'm fine with the improvement's AC-2s fot because they are 6 tons and intended to be light antiarmor weapons.

Machineguns aren't. They're extremly useful for anti infantry in TT, but are largely ignorable if your'e in a mech (barring very poor luck)

Tanks ton't take damage from machine guns in real life, why should mechs ub MWO?

I DO wish there were targets for machine guns in the game...just not mechs.

Tanks take damage from the GAU-8 cannon in real life. Which weighs the same approximate amount at the MG in MWO.

Should the small laser be useless? It weighs the same as a MG. Has the same range.

[Team Leader]

I think MGs should have a dps only slightly over that of small lasers.. like .02 better, to offset ammo tonnage and cost

[wanderer]

verybad, on 17 November 2012 - 05:47 PM, said:

Machine Guns should NEVER get a day in the sun. THey're not anti mech weapons, they're anti infantry weapons. They're in the game for completeness, not to be a viable weapon.

Machine guns in TT are basically a short-range SRM 1, with less range and less heat. They are most certainly capable of killing a 'Mech in sufficient numbers. They happen to be even more nasty against infantry, but trust me. Half a dozen MG's at close range are a rather rude surprise for most opponents in TT.

Can you kill a 'Mech with an SRM 4? If so, you should be able to kill them in a similar period with a quad MG mount.

(My personal record in TT was a 'Mech with forty-two MG's. And a large laser. Butchered the first heavy 'Mech that closed with it, thinking it packed LRMs instead...bad mistake.)

[Oriius]

Isn't there a Plasma Rifle weapon in the TT? it seems like something that would have more of a place than say the flamer on it's own, though i'm not sure what time in the lore the plasma was developed. ;s

[Vassago Rain]

Oriius, on 17 November 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

Isn't there a Plasma Rifle weapon in the TT? it seems like something that would have more of a place than say the flamer on it's own, though i'm not sure what time in the lore the plasma was developed. ;s

The plasma rifle is a long-ranged flamer, that does a lot more impact damage. On the downside, it uses ammo, and is quite heavy.

[wanderer]

Oriius, on 17 November 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

Isn't there a Plasma Rifle weapon in the TT? it seems like something that would have more of a place than say the flamer on it's own, though i'm not sure what time in the lore the plasma was developed. ;s

3070-era weapon, though it's one of my favorites. PPC damage, decent range AND it heats the target up? Win win win.

It'll be a while till we see it in MWO, obviously- along with it's "heat gun" cousin, the Clan plasma cannon (which deals no damage but a lot of overheat to 'Mechs, while cooking vehicles and infantry with wild abandon).

[Comassion]

wanderer, on 17 November 2012 - 06:00 PM, said:

(My personal record in TT was a 'Mech with forty-two MG's. And a large laser. Butchered the first heavy 'Mech that closed with it, thinking it packed LRMs instead...bad mistake.)

Always check the sheets.

That 'mech? You say four or more hexes away from it. Always.

[verybad]

Sephlock, on 17 November 2012 - 05:53 PM, said:

Fixed that for you, since AC/2s do the same damage as machineguns- sans the bonus vs infantry.

The AC-2 is a light Autocannon. Perhaps something like a 60-75 mm weapon. Machineguns are probably 12.5-25 mm anti infantry weapons.

I don't care what the damage in TT is. Please don't try and inform me of it, becaus I'm more than familiar with it. The AC-2 is a 6 ton weapon, and it's that's a good reason for it to be relevant. in a game where weight is a very important part of balancing mechs The Machinegun is,

Quote

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Machine_Gun
The Machine Gun is the quintessential anti-infantry weapon, issuing a stream of bullets at a high rate of fire to cut down opposing soldiers.

[Oriius]

Vassago Rain, on 17 November 2012 - 06:04 PM, said:

The plasma rifle is a long-ranged flamer, that does a lot more impact damage. On the downside, it uses ammo, and is quite heavy.

Sounds to me like a weapon they could actualy balance quite well in this game, I know i'd love to use it.

It will be interesting to see how the flamers and mg's work out though, i'd like to be able to fit some flamers and not feel as if i'd gimped myself and my team by doing so. ;s

[J4ckInthebox]

Quote

Tanks ton't take damage from machine guns in real life, why should mechs ub MWO?

Maybe because this MG is nearly twice as heavy as the GAU-8 Avenger (281kg)? You know, the thing that literally saw tanks in half ?

Granted, it mostly does that much damage because it hits from above on the less-armored part of the tank. But still.

[verybad]

Tickdoff Tank, on 17 November 2012 - 05:58 PM, said:

Tanks take damage from the GAU-8 cannon in real life. Which weighs the same approximate amount at the MG in MWO.

Should the small laser be useless? It weighs the same as a MG. Has the same range.

GAU-8 Avenger


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search
GAU-8 Avenger
The GAU-8/A Avenger's barrel and breech assembly
(ammunition drum off edge of photo). Type Gatling-type autocannon Place of origin United States Service history In service 1977–present Used by United States Air Force (Avenger)
Various navies (Goalkeeper) Production history Manufacturer General Electric Number built Approx. 715^[1] Variants GAU-12/U Equalizer
GAU-13/A Specifications Weight 619.5 lb (281 kg) Length 19 ft 10.5 in (6.06 m) (total system)

112.28 in (2.85 m) (barrel only) Barrel length 90.5 in (2.30 m) Width 17.2 in (0.437 m) (barrel only) Cartridge 30 × 173 mm Caliber 30 mm caliber Barrels 7-barrel (progressive RH parabolic twist, 14 grooves) Action Electric-Motor, Hydraulic-Driven Rate of fire up to 4,200 rpm (rounds per minute) Muzzle velocity 3,500 ft/s (1,070 m/s) Effective range 4,000 feet (1,220 m) Maximum range Over 12,000 feet (3,660 m) Feed system Linkless feed system
The General Electric GAU-8/A Avenger is a 30 mm hydraulically-driven seven-barrel Gatling-type cannon that is mounted on the United States Air Force's Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II. It is the largest, heaviest and most powerful aircraft cannon in the United States military. Designed specifically for the anti-tank role, the Avenger delivers very powerful rounds at a high rate of fire.

Not a machine gun. First off, it's firing depleted uranium rounds


It's a vastly different weapon from a battletech machinegun.

The AC-2 actually seems a lot more similiar.

Getting back to the balancing side. A machine gun causes no heat, and while it uses ammo, it's virtually limitless.

Machine guns DO cause damage to mechs, just not much, and it takes a long time to do usefull amounts.

This IMO is balanced, as the weapon has very few drawbacks, and weighs practically nothing.

Edited by verybad, 17 November 2012 - 06:20 PM.