383 replies to this topic

[Deadoon]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 03:03 PM, said:

1. Please show me the cannon where they say they just dump ammo into empty spaces in a mech.
Ammo comes in bins, each bin by itself is weightless, but each ammo added to it weighs 1000 diveded by shots/ton. For example in TT a single salvo of srm 4 ammo weighs .04 tons by itself but will still take up a full slot. Source : tactical operations page 376/377 fractional accounting.
2. If a mech has no ammunition-consuming weapons, why would you even build an "integral ammo transport system" into it?
It was a simple justification of why ammo placed in the foot can be moved to a lower arm mounted machinegun on the oppsite side of the mech.
3. Your link goes to a dead article. (Not saying this means your wrong, just thought you should know.) As far as arena mechs go, in the lore, there are often many things that happen in the arenas that are of zero practical use, but are showy. Look up the Sternacht pistol.
Add an extra ) to the end of it, I also fixed the link. Also it is specifically a non-flashy design.

There happy now?

Edited by Deadoon, 12 December 2012 - 03:17 PM.

[Scarlett Avignon]

stjobe, on 12 December 2012 - 03:09 PM, said:

The real-life machine gun is the quintessential anti-infantry weapon. So is the BT machine gun, but it was also the quintessential backup weapon for many, many mechs. Most of the mechs in TRO 3025 had machine guns as backup weapons - because they did as much damage as an AC/2 at a much lower weight and severely reduced range.

No. The machine gun is added as a back up weapon to deal with infantry trying to swarm a mech. Much like a co-axial machine gun on modern battle tanks.

[Red squirrel]

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 12 December 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

Oh wow this thread blew up fast.

Not that anyone is listening to reason at this point, but I would point out that any comparisons whatsoever to real world weaponry are irrelevant. The more you scrutinize battletech physics, the more they fail to hold up to any measure of realism, and game balance always trumps realism anyway.

NOOOOOOOOOO you distroyed my world

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 03:13 PM, said:

Again: WHY?

Are we finding ourselves short of weapons that are capable of making critical hits? Is there a dirth of mech variants in the game that mount machine guns as their main weapon system and are woefully under-powered? Is there even one?

CDA-3C

[Scarlett Avignon]

Deadoon, on 12 December 2012 - 03:15 PM, said:

There happy now?

Your example of ammo containers weighing nothing comes from the construction rules. They are considered to weigh nothing for the purposes of the simplified construction rules in BT. That doesn't mean they pour ammo into a hole in the mech, it means that they weight of ammunition factors in the weight of it's container and it's feed system.

[Oysterboy]

We are arguing that the machine gun needs to maintain realism in a FICTIONAL game?

Its funny that THIS is the first post i checked after wondering why so many people avoid the forums...

now i commend the BT fans for their passion, but this game has at the least, "bent" the rules of the BT universe more than once. Piranha will most likely do it again, but making the machine gun viable in order to add MORE weapons to the game i think is worth it.

[Deadoon]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 03:20 PM, said:

Your example of ammo containers weighing nothing comes from the construction rules. They are considered to weigh nothing for the purposes of the simplified construction rules in BT. That doesn't mean they pour ammo into a hole in the mech, it means that they weight of ammunition factors in the weight of it's container and it's feed system.

Explain then ,why does a single machine gun salvo weigh the same in a mech as it does for infantry?

[Warrax the Chaos Warrior]

Red squirrel, on 12 December 2012 - 03:20 PM, said:

NOOOOOOOOOO you distroyed my world

And I did it with a machine gun... nerf machine guns nao pls.

In the meantime, I'm sorry, help yourself to a cookie.

[Scarlett Avignon]

Red squirrel, on 12 December 2012 - 03:20 PM, said:

CDA-3C

CIcada CDA-3C

Armament: 1PPC, 2 Machine Guns

Obviously the MGs are the anti-armor weapon and not the Particle Projector Cannon.

[MechFrog1]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 01:47 PM, said:

There will be TONS of viable weapons as the timeline carries on. No reason to bloat the stats on an anti-infantry weapon.

So there will be tons of viable weapons as the timeline carries on, therefore we shouldn't make a perfectly viable weapon from the tabletop game viable in MWO?

[Red squirrel]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 03:16 PM, said:

No. The machine gun is added as a back up weapon to deal with infantry trying to swarm a mech. Much like a co-axial machine gun on modern battle tanks.

Do you actually read what other people are writing?
It seems to me that you live in your very own universe.

[Smeghead87]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 03:13 PM, said:

Again: WHY?

Are we finding ourselves short of weapons that are capable of making critical hits? Is there a dirth of mech variants in the game that mount machine guns as their main weapon system and are woefully under-powered? Is there even one?

Yes, I currently struggle to make a viable Raven 4X build because it has 2 ballistic slots with 2 machine guns in by default.
Machine guns in their current form, are not really worth taking in my opinion. So if I take those out and the ammo that goes with them, I'm left with a 2 ton gap and 2 ballistic hardpoints to fill.

The next best ballistic weapon is the AC2, which whilst it can be a very effective weapon, it takes up 7 tons (if you include 1 ton ammo) That's a lot of tons devoted to a single weapon on a small mech, so without viable machine guns, I either have to devote a lot of weight and space to autocannons, or completely neglect 2 out of the total 5 hardpoints and put the biggest guns in the other slots that I can.

I personally have never been a big fan of autocannons because I seem to miss with them more than the srms and lasers I usually use. So the option to have a lightweight viable ballistic weapon would really help me out.

This is one example that I have played in game, I know theres a Cicada with a heavy ballistic set up but I havn't used that, and there are always new mechs being added. Can you imagine trying to make a viable 20 ton Flea with ballistic hardpoints with AC2s as the lighest viable ballistic?

[Scarlett Avignon]

Deadoon, on 12 December 2012 - 03:22 PM, said:

Explain then ,why does a single machine gun salvo weigh the same in a mech as it does for infantry?

Infantry has an unlimited supply of ammo in BT. Obviously this is because Infantry can fire their guns an infinite number of times and there will always be a bullet in the gun each time, and not because BT rules simplify things. Such as, say...adding in the weight of feed systems and containers into the weight of ammunition.

[Rofl]

SteelPaladin, on 12 December 2012 - 03:14 PM, said:

PGI has been pretty clear that they have 0 intention of any other combat assets on the battlefield except mechs in MWO. They haven't even hedged it as a pie-in-the-sky "one day" sort of thing; they out and out say "we're not looking at it." We're not going to see infantry in MWO, so being great at anti-personnel is absolutely meaningless; it's no different than saying it's great at anti-Cthullu, because it will never actually happen on the battlefield.

Weapons need to be good at something that will actually happen or it is pointless to have them in game. Having useless "trap" choices is horrible game design. Games don't get awards and good reviews for being "realistic" at the expense of gameplay unless they're hardcore sim games, which is not possible here since you can't have a hardcore sim of something made up in the first place.

Therefore, by default, MGs WILL be at least passable anti-mech weapons when the game is balanced. There's no other option because there is no other enemy. The HOW they reach that point is the only question.

Making them crit seekers means they remain largely useless until a mech's armor is breached, at which point they then become effective against the soft internals of the mech. Believe it or not, this actually retains their feel of being for "soft targets" better than buffing their damage, because other weapons would be needed to breach the battleplate before they can really do anything.

Otherwise, I'd be fine w/boosting their DPS to match an AC/2. They'd become a bit better at criticals just by virtue of the larger damage AND they'd be able to contribute reasonably well even against a fully armored mech.

An Anti-Cthullu weapon? No weapon forged by man's great ingenuity could claim to have such a title. Foolish unbelievers, the worlds will all burn in fire! Your struggles against each other is petty! No house or clan can stay such a force! The end is inevitable. Better to kill yourself now, lest you endure the unspeakable horrors that await!

[Scarlett Avignon]

Smeghead87, on 12 December 2012 - 03:25 PM, said:

Yes, I currently struggle to make a viable Raven 4X build because it has 2 ballistic slots with 2 machine guns in by default.

I watched a video the other day of a group that ran around with nothing but AC/20s on their Raven 4X's. Seemed pretty viable to me.

Here you go!

[Warrax the Chaos Warrior]

Rofl, on 12 December 2012 - 03:28 PM, said:

An Anti-Cthullu weapon? No weapon forged by man's great ingenuity could claim to have such a title. Foolish unbelievers, the worlds will all burn in fire! Your struggles against each other is petty! No house or clan can stay such a force! The end is inevitable. Better to kill yourself now, lest you endure the unspeakable horrors that await!

You can hit him in the head with a really large steamship. Doesn't work 100% of the time, steamships need increased critical chance buff now.

[Funkin Disher]

It's currently useless in the game. They are currently looking into making it a viable weapon in the game, along with flamers. Is there a problem with that?

Edited by Kane0, 12 December 2012 - 03:33 PM.

[Scarlett Avignon]

mint frog, on 12 December 2012 - 03:24 PM, said:

So there will be tons of viable weapons as the timeline carries on, therefore we shouldn't make a perfectly viable weapon from the tabletop game viable in MWO?

It performs as it should. Pretty crappily against armor, likely very good against infantry.

I'll say it for about the fourth time or so, though. If they want to buff the damage, fine. There's just no reason to give it special crit abilities over other weapons.

[Deadoon]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 03:27 PM, said:

Infantry has an unlimited supply of ammo in BT. Obviously this is because Infantry can fire their guns an infinite number of times and there will always be a bullet in the gun each time, and not because BT rules simplify things. Such as, say...adding in the weight of feed systems and containers into the weight of ammunition.

Wat, a support machine gun(an infantry version of the mounted machine gun) uses 5kg ammo reloads(1/200 a ton, aka same weight as a bm reload)

[Red squirrel]

Rofl, on 12 December 2012 - 03:28 PM, said:

An Anti-Cthullu weapon? No weapon forged by man's great ingenuity could claim to have such a title. Foolish unbelievers, the worlds will all burn in fire! Your struggles against each other is petty! No house or clan can stay such a force! The end is inevitable. Better to kill yourself now, lest you endure the unspeakable horrors that await!

Within the Mythos, the crinoid, winged, vegetable star-headed Elder Things, AKA The Old Ones (one of the various races going by that name in the Mythos, anyway) have survived invasions by:

The half-fungus, half-crustaceon Mi-Go
The fabulous, pre-human star-spawn of Cthulhu
The ten foot, cone shaped Great Race of Yith, masters of time travel
The flying polyps (which drove the Great Race to flee into the future)
Their own rebellious minions, the shaggoths/shoggoths.
Until finally being defeated by the shoggoths after their skills went into decline (those that stayed in the past at least).

While they might not be able to defeat Cthulhu and his star-spawn, the Elder Things at their height proved to be their match (or at least, good enough for their war to end in a peace treaty rather than them being exterminated)

http://www.giantitp....t=113960&page=5



Edit: "With energy weapons the Elder Things were able to push back Cthulhu and kill his spawn."
So maybe large pulse lasers do have a purpose once Chtulu gets implemented......

Warrax the Chaos Warrior, on 12 December 2012 - 03:30 PM, said:

You can hit him in the head with a really large steamship. Doesn't work 100% of the time, steamships need increased critical chance buff now.

But then he will regenerate

Edited by Red squirrel, 12 December 2012 - 03:38 PM.

[Smeghead87]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 03:29 PM, said:

I watched a video the other day of a group that ran around with nothing but AC/20s on their Raven 4X's. Seemed pretty viable to me.

Here you go!

But I already said I don't like autocannons, and I also don't like building small mechs around 1 big ammo dependant weapon. Buffing the machine guns would give me a option which I don't currently have. The choice to build a varied weapon loadout, not a big AC boat. It's all about giving the player more options.