383 replies to this topic

[Onyx Rain]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 05:03 PM, said:

Already fixed my post. I derped a decimal.

Again, still doesn't change my point. It's been called to buff it to the same DPS as a Small Laser and the AC/2.

Which one do we buff it to?

Also again, (for about the 5th or 6th time) as I've said from the beginning, I don't care about a damage buff. What I care about this this silly talk of making it a "High Crit" gun. It makes no sense. If it's not doing enough damage buff it. No reason to give it special abilities, though.

Ya I put in a corrected post too...

Anyways again, I say buff to small laser level because of the reason I stated in my corrected post above.

It does make sense as a high crit gun because it fires multiple bullets all hitting very fragile stuff. The armor isn't there to stop it....so it tears up all those wires/circuit board and dohickies.... A gauss round ya will completely decimate that stuff too...but so will a much smaller round, even something like a .50 cal...and most of us I think agree these guns probably shoot much larger/heavier rounds...2000 rounds/1 ton is 1 pound bulllets...which probably half a pound at least is the actual projectile....that will F up a circuit board and some wires...might as well hit that stuff with a gauss because the effect will be nearly the same as 10 half pound bullets that don't have armor to worry about.

But because the dmg is calculated the same way per mg round as it is per Gauss round it makes a gauss crit much much much more devastating....it is right that it is devastating but given what is being shot it is wrong that the mg rounds are no very devastating at all when they crit or even just hit that fragile area at all.

You con't need a canon to destroy a glass window....a rock accomplishes the same thing.

[Scarlett Avignon]

stjobe, on 12 December 2012 - 05:13 PM, said:

Your point being...? That the MG shouldn't get a crit increase to make it a viable weapon?

So far you've demonstrated a lack of knowledge of how the MG works in MWO, even what damage it does, and also an almost fanatical devotion to the idea that MGs aren't to be used against 'mechs at all.

Yes, it does speak against your point. If you have no idea how a weapon works or what it's supposed to do, you're in no position to advocate against it being changed one way or another.

For the record, I'm not opposed to it getting *both* a small DPS increase and a crit increase. It needs it.

Don't be dense. If you took the time you spent writing this "witty" retort to read back and see my point, I wouldn't have to tell you again. I'm not in the business of trying to educate people who would rather look cool than inform themselves.

If you care, you can go back and find out for yourself. If not, I honestly could care less about anything you say in the future.

[Onyx Rain]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 05:12 PM, said:

You aren't taking into account the bonus of ZERO heat at all. Small lasers are pretty horrible on the heat scale. That's a pretty big buff.

Yes I am...that is offset by the fact the weapon system weighs 3x as much as a small laser, takes up 2 crits, and the spray and pray effect make the little damage it does way less effective in actual combat situations then that same amount of damage would be if it was focused like a small laser's damage is. Plus small laser is only 2 heat...which is fairly easily covered by whatever heatsinks come in the engine/someone puts on a mech....you have to boat them to make talking about the heat reasonable. Plus MG....has limited ammo...so that further compensates for the no heat.

I've given you 4 disadvantages for MG compared to small laser's 1...the heat....that isn't enough to balance it out in your mind? Plenty for me. The small laser has every advantage but heat....the MG has no advantage but lack of heat.

Edited by Onyx Rain, 12 December 2012 - 05:21 PM.

[Scarlett Avignon]

Onyx Rain, on 12 December 2012 - 05:16 PM, said:

It does make sense as a high crit gun because it fires multiple bullets all hitting very fragile stuff

So, why would it make sense for a small bullet designed to kill infantry and penetrate light armor to do more damage against internals on a mech than a large caliber high-explosive round that detonates when it hits those same internals, exploding into hundreds of pieces of shrapnel.

I think you are confusing my argument. I'm not saying MGs CAN'T damage armor or internals. I'm saying they should be less effective than the larger weapons specifically designed to do the same thing.

[Cest7]

There needs to be a change to machine guns moving them from the "Absolutely useless" category to "Serving a purpose".

20 machine gun bullets still won't match up to an AC20 blast...

Edited by Cest7, 12 December 2012 - 05:25 PM.

[Dirus Nigh]

The P-51 and P-47's primary weapon was the .50 caliber machine gun. The things blowing up in this video are trucks, boats and trains.

http://youtu.be/5I7Wo4iHkUU

Edited by Dirus Nigh, 12 December 2012 - 05:25 PM.

[Scarlett Avignon]

Onyx Rain, on 12 December 2012 - 05:20 PM, said:

Yes I am...that is offset by the fact the weapon system weighs 3x as much as a small laser

They both weigh .5 tons on my client.

[Orzorn]

Onyx Rain, on 12 December 2012 - 05:08 PM, said:

8 damage per 10 seconds is just .8 dps....that is less then a small laser still for 3x the weight 2x the crits, and it is still spray and pray so even if a small laser did .8 dps too...it would still be way more useful then a machine gun.

Half tons of ammo would help that out. Also, machine guns would be useful for ballistics users for filling up extra half tons or single tons. They don't exactly have to compete with a small laser because they fill somewhat different roles.

Its also important to note that machine guns don't deal with scaling heat issues. 4 machine guns is as heat neutral as 1 machine gun, whereas 4 small lasers would produce 2.64 heat per second, which, with 10 heat sinks, would still leave you with 1.64 heat. Not a whole lot, but still something to account for (especially with such small weapon systems).

Still, I see your point and it would be something to keep in mind when balancing the weapon.

[Scarlett Avignon]

Dirus Nigh, on 12 December 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

The P-51 and P-47's primary weapon was the .50 caliber machine gun. The things blowing up in this video are trucks, boats and trains.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/5I7Wo4iHkUU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>http://youtu.be/L6OTxPiViHk

Use [*media] and [*/media] for your video links. I say this because I just found it out myself the other day.

(Ignore the * in the bracket.)

[Orzorn]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

They both weigh .5 tons on my client.

You can't use a machine gun without ammunition. Ammo weighs 1 ton (1 ton + .5 tons is 1.5 tons, which is 3 times that of a .5 ton small laser) and takes up one crit (1 crit for the mgun + 1 for the ammo is 2 times that of the small laser).

Edited by Orzorn, 12 December 2012 - 05:27 PM.

[stjobe]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 05:24 PM, said:

They both weigh .5 tons on my client.

Try loading your 'mech with an MG and no ammo and see what DPS it does.

Small laser: 0.5 tons, good to go.
MG: 0.5 tons, needs 1 ton of ammo to do anything.
1.5 = three times the weight of the small laser.

Again, you demonstrate a total lack of understanding of how the game mechanics work.

[Scarlett Avignon]

Thontor, on 12 December 2012 - 05:26 PM, said:

have you not read any of my posts?

do you not understand that MWO components have hit points?

nobody suggesting that machine guns do more damage vs internals than other weapons..

only that they receive a buff to critical damage to put them on par with other weapons.. in time needed to destroy a component

not in damage per bullet

If they have a system that bases the destruction of components on the damage of a weapon, and MGs are getting the shaft, then their system is broken, not the gun. If you double the rate that a MG damages modules, then it's getting special treatment over other weapon systems, which it doesn't need.

Again, buff the damage, if need be (which will buff the crit chance, if I'm understanding the system right) but don't give it some arbitrary crit modifier.

Thontor, on 12 December 2012 - 05:27 PM, said:

need at least 1 ton of ammo there as well

really, you could get by with 4 machine guns and 1 ton of ammo.. giving you 50 seconds of continuous fire.. and that would be 3 tons giving each machine gun an average weight of 0.75 tons..

but that only works if you "boat" machine guns

Try 4 Small Lasers and one Heat Sink. Let me know how that works out.

Don't tell me MGs don't have a built in advantage over Small Lasers.

[Onyx Rain]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

So, why would it make sense for a small bullet designed to kill infantry and penetrate light armor to do more damage against internals on a mech than a large caliber high-explosive round that detonates when it hits those same internals, exploding into hundreds of pieces of shrapnel.

I think you are confusing my argument. I'm not saying MGs CAN'T damage armor or internals. I'm saying they should be less effective than the larger weapons specifically designed to do the same thing.

Grr....because firing a gauss round at those internals is like firing a gauss round at a glass window....ya it is gonna blow that thing to pieces.....Now I pick up a rock and throw it at a window...window shatters...both windows are destroyed. I don't need a gauss round to destroy a glass window...just a rock, but I did need a gauss round to get through the armor.

[Gabrielpendragon]

I can keep a mg on target just as well as i can for a small laser, they are both pretty spray and pray weapons.

[stjobe]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 05:30 PM, said:

If they have a system that bases the destruction of components on the damage of a weapon, and MGs are getting the shaft, then their system is broken, not the gun. If you double the rate that a MG damages modules, then it's getting special treatment over other weapon systems, which it doesn't need.

Again, buff the damage, if need be (which will buff the crit chance, if I'm understanding the system right) but don't give it some arbitrary crit modifier.

You're not understanding the system right (as I keep telling you). The crit chance isn't dependent on the damage done, it's fixed. The weapon critting still needs to do enough damage to destroy the 10 points of health the component has before it breaks.

Also, at this point, the MG does need special treatment. It's completely useless as it is now, a literal waste of tons and crit space.

[Gabrielpendragon]

I also think that machine guns much have explosive rounds, normal bullets would be very unlikely to explode even if hit.

[Scarlett Avignon]

Onyx Rain, on 12 December 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

Grr....because firing a gauss round at those internals is like firing a gauss round at a glass window....ya it is gonna blow that thing to pieces.....Now I pick up a rock and throw it at a window...window shatters...both windows are destroyed. I don't need a gauss round to destroy a glass window...just a rock, but I did need a gauss round to get through the armor.

You are saying they can both do it. Not that Machine Guns deserve to be better at doing it.

[Deadoon]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 05:23 PM, said:

So, why would it make sense for a small bullet designed to kill infantry and penetrate light armor to do more damage against internals on a mech than a large caliber high-explosive round that detonates when it hits those same internals, exploding into hundreds of pieces of shrapnel.

I think you are confusing my argument. I'm not saying MGs CAN'T damage armor or internals. I'm saying they should be less effective than the larger weapons specifically designed to do the same thing.

500kg machine gun hmm? gau-8 is 380 and it kills tanks just fine.
Ac/2? 6 ton autocannon? of you mean 3 of this thing; http://en.wikipedia....ki/Bofors_40_mm l

You really need to understand that it is called a machine gun because of the scale involved.

[Scarlett Avignon]

stjobe, on 12 December 2012 - 05:32 PM, said:

You're not understanding the system right (as I keep telling you). The crit chance isn't dependent on the damage done, it's fixed. The weapon critting still needs to do enough damage to destroy the 10 points of health the component has before it breaks.

Also, at this point, the MG does need special treatment. It's completely useless as it is now, a literal waste of tons and crit space.

You say the system gives each "hit" (bullet, missile, laser, etc) a chance to cause critical damage. If critical damage is achieved, the weapon's damage is then deducted from the health of the item. Once the item reaches zero health, it is destroyed.

Therefore, you buff a weapon's damage, you buff how fast it can destroy equipment.

No, I think I got it.

Edited by Franklen Avignon, 12 December 2012 - 05:39 PM.

[Onyx Rain]

Franklen Avignon, on 12 December 2012 - 05:31 PM, said:

If they have a system that bases the destruction of components on the damage of a weapon, and MGs are getting the shaft, then their system is broken, not the gun. If you double the rate that a MG damages modules, then it's getting special treatment over other weapon systems, which it doesn't need.

Again, buff the damage, if need be (which will buff the crit chance, if I'm understanding the system right) but don't give it some arbitrary crit modifier.



Try 4 Small Lasers and one Heat Sink. Let me know how that works out.

Don't tell me MGs don't have a built in advantage over Small Lasers.

That is what people are saying...the current system totally screws over machine guns when it comes to crits on internals....so we suggest buffing the crit multiplier....but you say that make no sense, but its like the rock vs glass and gauss vs glass example...either way the pane of glass and its function are destroyed.

How many mechs come with 1 heat sink? ...None.

Small laser has every advantage over MG...every single one except heat.....MG has no advantage over small laser...isn't even close to being on par in any area...except for its lack of heat.

Ok I take that back, rof....it fires more shots faster...but because its dmg is so tiny even that doesn't begin to put it on par with small laser. The dps is only slightly more then 1/3 that of a small lasers....factor in the spray and pray vs focused small laser damage and that 1/3 as effective is more like 1/6th as effective.