106 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

superteds, on 01 December 2012 - 03:38 AM, said:

ffs

look the rl or canon applications of this don't matter in the slightest.

it is BAD to have weapons in game that are just flat-out pointless. It's even worse to attempt to justify them being bad because 'well they're bad in real life/canon'.

You either make them worthwhile mounting (and to hell with the canon) or you remove them from the game.

You mean how a MG was Pointless on TT if infantry was not being used? I played TT for 25 years without ever using a MG! That is how important MGs are to this game without PBI.

[Asatruer]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 December 2012 - 08:37 AM, said:

You mean how a MG was Pointless on TT if infantry was not being used? I played TT for 25 years without ever using a MG! That is how important MGs are to this game without PBI.

There were many stock iconic mechs back in those 25-years-ago-days that had MGs, and to claim that you never used an MG on one of those mech is completely ludicrous. You never once in your 25 years of playing BattleTech used the MGs on a Locust, Stinger, Pheonix Hawk, Crusader, Warhammer, Thunderbolt, Goliath, or Battlemaster?
How about after TRO: 3050 introduced clan mechs, did you never shoot an MG on a Hellbringer or Timber Wolf?
My suspension of disbelief is completely stretched beyond snapping.

They were also not pointless without infantry.
As you are well aware as you have played BattleTech for 25 years, the MG is nearly as good as the SL, and the SL was not pointless without infantry. Saying the MG is pointless without infantry would be akin to saying the SL is pointless with infantry since it did 1 point of damage to infantry compared to the MG's 2d6.
How can you say a weapon that does only 1 point less damage for no heat, at the same range for the same (not including the half ton of ammo you could get and use on multiple MGs) tonnage as a SL is pointless? Sure, that half ton of ammo is a potential liability (200 points of damage waiting to happen if you never fired any of your MGs), but the SLs heat was a liability as well, as it could be the straw that breaks the mech's back causing greater ill-effects from overheating.
That makes firing an SL potentially more of a liability than not firing an MG is a liability.

What is it about letting the MG in MWO do the same 2/3rds DPS of an SL as it does in TT is so over-powered that you think it should be so pointless as to have been not worth the time and effort PGI put into coding it into MWO?

[Widow0Maker]

Due to the constant motion of battle, it seems like machine guns are incredibly useful as tracer rounds for heavy powered A/C slugs. I don't know about anyone else, but the number of times I have missed a clutch A/C 20 or Gauss shot due to the fact that it tracked differently from my lasers is huge. Using the machine gun as a short (but not melee) range tracer for high precision A/C round placement seems like one of the machine guns best uses. Just as the flamer isn't really meant to due damage, but rather overheat a mech, it seems like the machine gun is best suited for spotting other cannons. Just my two cents.

I didn't read every single post, so sorry if I am repeating someone else.

[Scratx]

Am I the only one who realises that half ton is the minimum weight unit anything is allowed to weight?

[Locan Ravok]

Dudeman3k, on 01 December 2012 - 12:53 AM, said:

Well, to put some realism into the picture:

Reality and Mechwarrior don't mix very well...

I have being fighting with the 90 meters of max. range MG for 15 years and I finally found inner peace by accepting that Mechwarrior/Battletech have no links with the real word what so ever.

[Hidirian]

Noth, on 03 December 2012 - 02:08 PM, said:

I really suggest not using realism in this debate. Autocanons are described as 20mm and higher. No point in a 20mm machine gun in this reality when you have an AC that is 20mm.

That's why in BT they're called "Machineguns" on Mechs because they're only 20mm an ac/2 in BT is 30/35mm+. I'll apparently have to link THIS yet again so you can scroll down to the bottom of the page and read that MG's in BT are indeed 20mm.

[wanderer]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 December 2012 - 08:37 AM, said:

You mean how a MG was Pointless on TT if infantry was not being used? I played TT for 25 years without ever using a MG! That is how important MGs are to this game without PBI.

Wow. You missed out on some fun, then.

I've been playing as long as you have, my first kill I remember was an MG hit to a Battlemaster. Ammo crit. Boom. Ironically, to it's MG ammo.