60 replies to this topic

[Kurayami]

uh im getting tired of people claiming that MG's were worthless in TT and are only anti infantry weapon.
here the stats
heat 0 damage 2 <- see that number? it is equal to AC2. care to say that AC2 is anti infantry weapon?

[MrPenguin]

Kurayami, on 28 November 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

uh im getting tired of people claiming that MG's were worthless in TT and are only anti infantry weapon.
here the stats
heat 0 damage 2 <- see that number? it is equal to AC2. care to say that AC2 is anti infantry weapon?

Well, I'm fairly sure if you fired an AC/2 at infantry it would most certainly kill them

[Ptom]

Orkhepaj, on 28 November 2012 - 08:21 AM, said:

The only reason why machingeguns are so useless is that jenners cant mount them , and the biased devs dont care for it,cause they want jenner online.

The next hero mech will be released when they finally buff machine guns. Watch it be a jenner with a crazy amount of ballistic slots.

[Joseph Mallan]

Kurayami, on 28 November 2012 - 09:14 AM, said:

uh im getting tired of people claiming that MG's were worthless in TT and are only anti infantry weapon.
here the stats
heat 0 damage 2 <- see that number? it is equal to AC2. care to say that AC2 is anti infantry weapon?

AC2 kills 2 PBI
MGs kill 1d6 PBI (IIRC)

So by comparrision... yeah the AC2 stinks at killing Infantry.

Also IIRC Small Pulse Lasers kill 2 or 3 d6 PBI per burst.

[Kurayami]

MrPenguin, on 28 November 2012 - 09:15 AM, said:

Well, I'm fairly sure if you fired an AC/2 at infantry it would most certainly kill them

touche.

Joseph Mallan, on 28 November 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

...

Ye laser were always better, especially when considering ammo explosions.

still the point is - MG were bad but valid cqc antimech weapon, so using both canon and real world logic i find it amusing how hard people try to leave them worthless. why so much hate? afraid of MG boats?)

Edited by Kurayami, 28 November 2012 - 09:23 AM.

[verybad]

Orkhepaj, on 28 November 2012 - 08:21 AM, said:

The only reason why machingeguns are so useless is thatthere are no little people to shoot, just mechs.

Fixed it for you.

[Kurayami]

verybad, on 28 November 2012 - 09:22 AM, said:

Fixed it for you.

im pretty sure that inside every big mech there is a little squishy human. and that those transparent "glass" thingys are not so bulletproof comparing to vehicle armor.

[TungstenWall]

MrPenguin, on 28 November 2012 - 09:01 AM, said:

In reality, this is somewhat incorrect. There are 50cal rounds that can pierce through tank armor.
Well, in reality anyway. Don't know the TT rules.

I doubt a 50cal can take down a MBT of any major militar power (US, Russia, Japan Def, French, German, est.)

BUT!
I know there is an automatic weapon that is mounted on jets that fly here in South Arizona. From what I understand, those things are built specifically to rip armored targets apart (Yes the machine gun). I forget the Jets name (Thunderbolt?)

So while i dont think a 50cal will be a great anti tank weapon.
Why not mount the weapon i was talking about/ replace the machine gun with it?


Of course ("Because CoD and BF make me an expert on military equipment! Derp") I could be completely wrong and the gun that I mentions itself may be a version of the 50cal

[Kurayami]

TungstenWall, on 28 November 2012 - 09:24 AM, said:

...

GAU 8 cannot penetrate Russian MBT armor headon. No problems with sides or back though.
Also .50 cal machinegun with special munitions will have no problems with taking down light armored units like apc.
Also .50 cal AT rifle will have no problems with reaping tanks apart (see WWII AT rifles)

[verybad]

A GAU 8 is NOT a machine gun, it's an autocannon. It's specialized in favor of penetrating armored vehicles, not designed for killing people, like machine guns are intended for.

[Deadoon]

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Machine_Gun

Quote

Gatling Gun 20mm

Hmm, that's no 50 cal eh?

Frankly the amount of ammo and the damage the machine gun does is pitiful.
X2.5 the damage(1 dps) and give us 5000 rounds to the ton. This would make it a round that weighs twice as much as a .50, and gives us a weapon that is fairly decent in cqc.

[JPsi]

Without regard to the TT/balance discussion also going on here, on the argument on machine guns vs Heavy armor (tank or mech) lets take a look at the following.



Please note they are only 9mm rounds, who needs .50 Cal? While on this point, ****** ordinary machine guns, implement these!

Edited by JPsi, 28 November 2012 - 09:49 AM.

[Quad Ace]

20 of them in MW2 was pretty useful

[TungstenWall]

Kurayami, on 28 November 2012 - 09:28 AM, said:

GAU 8 cannot penetrate Russian MBT armor headon. No problems with sides or back though.
Also .50 cal machinegun with special munitions will have no problems with taking down light armored units like apc.
Also .50 cal AT rifle will have no problems with reaping tanks apart (see WWII AT rifles)

verybad, on 28 November 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

A GAU 8 is NOT a machine gun, it's an autocannon. It's specialized in favor of penetrating armored vehicles, not designed for killing people, like machine guns are intended for.

But.. But in CoD/BF!...

JK

Like I said, I am no Weapons expert.

I would like to see the GAU 8 (or something like it) in game as a ballistic weapon, but maybe that is what the AC-2/5/U5 are but on semi?

[Stradivarious]

Orkhepaj, on 28 November 2012 - 08:21 AM, said:

The only reason why machingeguns are so useless is that jenners cant mount them , and the biased devs dont care for it,cause they want jenner online.

No, in all actuality, the reason why they suck is because in TT they were designed for a specific reason. They are *not* anti-armor machine guns, for that you have autocannons(which are interpreted wrong in MWO but *shrug* it works, they weren't a single slug weapon, helical shaped cassettes of 10 rounds for each volley per pull of the trigger). (Or if you go way back to the original novels, all AC ammo was the same caliber, the number rating 2/5/10/20 referred to how many rounds per volley, it was later changed to different calibers but the number designations were blurred into mm ratings, i.e. 20 = 200mm)

MGs were specifically for anti-infantry work which is far more common then battlemechs every were/are/whatever time period you want. Pulse lasers also got a bonus vs infantry, other then that, mech scale weapons are near useless vs infantry. Oooh I got one with my PPC, while 15 others stuff satchel charges in your knee and ankle joints. MGs did 2 points of damage per hit vs a mech, you got a shitload of ammo for them but 2 pts makes anything but a superlight mech giggle like you tickled them, same with flamers which depending on the way the rules were interpreted either did 3 damage or 3 heat. Flamers and Inferno SRMs were fear weapons in the novels/sourcebooks. In actual TT play they were near useless as the rules involved weren't threatening enough.

In all honesty, I have no friggin idea why they kept them in MWO except to make some canon variants work. If they make them effective vs mechs it's storyline breaking, which is their perogative obviously but disappointing all the same if they head down that path.

[Matthew Pryde]

Oh man, a thread like this, I need to do this.

*Takes drag of tobacco pipe whilst rocking back and forth on an old rocking chair on the porch of (for some inexplicable reason) a country home on Strana mechty)

"Baaaaack in my day, Machine guns mounted on a mech meant 'please shoot this spot and I'll go up like an oil derrick"

That is all.

[Kurayami]

verybad, on 28 November 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

A GAU 8 is NOT a machine gun, it's an autocannon. It's specialized in favor of penetrating armored vehicles, not designed for killing people, like machine guns are intended for.

GAU8 weights 282 or so kg. MG in BT weights 500kg. GAU 8 specializes in destroying lightly armored targets (most MBT could withstand GAU8 rounds so i wouldn't call it anti mbt) "specialization" is - longer barrels, high rate of fire, specialized ammunition.
Based on art of mechs and vehicles BT MG is in no way smaller than GAU8. It is also have comparable ROF. Rounds are able to penetrate lightly armored targets... IN BT where everything have armor values compared to modern MBT.

Basically we are talking about high caliber high ROF gatling gun fed with AP ammo (lightly armored vehicles and BA should withstand ordinary munitions) so no matter what you will name it - it will be deadly.

Edited by Kurayami, 28 November 2012 - 09:47 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Kurayami, on 28 November 2012 - 09:21 AM, said:

still the point is - MG were bad but valid cqc antimech weapon, so using both canon and real world logic i find it amusing how hard people try to leave them worthless. why so much hate? afraid of MG boats?)

I've seen what a MG boat can do in the right hands even when they are P.O.S.

Quote

on the argument on machine guns vs Heavy armor (tank or mech) lets take a look at the following.

Pretty impressive at shredding... plywood! How's it work against armor???

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 28 November 2012 - 09:51 AM.

[ferranis]

Pretty useless to argue about real life with tt stuff (something is just not logical), but maybe you can think the mg is so heavy because itself+the adjusting system has to withstand high amount of stress and is therefore build with heavier materials.

It is just not a good weapon against battlemechs, no one would have bothered to invent large autocannons /lasers/ppcs if you could just lump together 20 mg and go for it.

[Stradivarious]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 November 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

AC2 kills 2 PBI
MGs kill 1d6 PBI (IIRC)

So by comparrision... yeah the AC2 stinks at killing Infantry.

Also IIRC Small Pulse Lasers kill 2 or 3 d6 PBI per burst.

Yeah Joe beat me to it. 2 damage x the modifier vs infantry if you actually read the rules Kurayami. Pulse lasers and MGs got the bonus, everything else did standard damage to one person, ignoring the rest of the entire platoon.