10 replies to this topic

[ICEFANG13]

At this time, Machine Guns (abbreviated as MG's from now on) are completely worthless. They have nothing special to offer, and have less DPS than a Small Laser. Small lasers only weigh a half-ton and require no ammo, generating so little heat, that a single one is generally heat-less. MGs require at least a ton and a half (for ammunition), and do nearly no damage per shot (.04) and have a DPS of .4. At this time, you would be better putting anything else in that slot than a MG. I have a few suggestions to fix MGs to make them viable weapons.

In my mind, I compare weapons to identify what is best. Sure, if I could put all Large Lasers, they would be better than Medium Lasers, but they weigh quite a bit more, and generate a lot of heat. This comparison of weapons is a very important part of MWO, and right now, MGs are not a part of any equations. If some one places 3 Small Lasers on a mech, that does as much damage as a Large Laser, and have higher DPS, and weigh a lot less (1.5 tons to 5), this is a comparison we should emulate for MGs, and, while they may lose on the slot battle, they win on the tonnage battle.

I once considered that MGs need a DPS (the only meaningful stat for MGs) of at least 1. If we consider this:
4 MG's and 1 ammo, 3 tons, DPS 4, range 90-200
1 A/C-2 and 1 ammo, 7 tons, DPS 4, range 720-2160

At this point, it starts to compare, but I redesigned my thinking after I considered this:
Only 2 mechs have 4 ballistic hard points, the Cicada-3C, and the Cataphract-4X. With the range of only 90-200, the Phract would lose too many slots to be effective in many situations, and it is too slow, that a faster mech could simply back away, and heavier mech can carry much more damaging weapons, and with much more range. The Cicada-3C would be dangerous, but remember, that it still can do a similar thing right now with 1A/C-2, and that has much more range.

I concluded that a DPS of 1 is still too low for MGs, I have a few suggestions to make them overall equally effective on the Cicada-3C, but much more effective for mechs with less slots to dedicate, but more tonnage:

1 Machine Guns need to have a DPS of 2 each.
2 They need to weigh 1 ton each.
3 The ammo needs to provide half to a eighth as many shots, or the weapons have to fire twice as fast (but still have a DPS of 2). I personally prefer the eighth ammo (250 per ton).
4 They need to create heat, but still be very low at 1 heat per second. For the record, A/C-2s produce 1.2 HPS, and Small Lasers are .67 HPS.
5 I also propose that MGs are renamed "Heavy Machine Guns", because I do understand that MGs are supposed to be worthless for mech to mech, and I think we should make a new weapon system. This should be helpful for canon and start to design a new game, but one that remains honest to it's roots.

For the record, Small Lasers have a DPS of 1, if we look at that (1 ton for 2 DPS), the Heavy Machine Gun still loses in terms of to total DPS to tonnage (ammo), single shot damage, and range. It is easier to use and has much less heat, and would become a dangerous but fair close range weapon.

If we look at the comparison again:
2 HMGs and 1 ammo, 3 tons, DPS 4, range 90-200
1 A/C-2 and 1 ammo, 7 tons, DPS 4, range 720-2160

They compare favorably, and in this case, have less ammo per ton (2000 to 250, per my suggestions). They win on the tonnage to damage a fair amount, but lose on the range, and slots by, what I feel, an equal amount.

The Cicada-3C build (the only one that I feel was great with the 1 DPS) was the reason for the ammo nerf, other builds can use it as a dangerous low heat weapon for close range engagements for low tonnage. The Cicada-3C can carry 4, but would use a ton of ammo with all four firing in 25 seconds, dealing 100 damage, very good, but also requires a very close range of only 90 for max damage. Other builds shouldn't go through ammo as fast, and for 2 tons, can have effective close range weapons.

I appreciate all the advice and suggestions that agree and disagree with me.

Edited by ICEFANG13, 26 December 2012 - 12:21 AM.

[MasterBLB]

I agree with only one point - MG damage has to be increased,as well as its maximum range.The other changes are not good.
Take Browning 0.50 as an example: http://en.wikipedia....iki/M2_Browning
It looks reasonable such guns could be mounted on mechs,doesn't it?So,according to that M2 info MG could have 800-1000m range while still having higher DPS and no heat as it has now.

[Rivy]

I think the weapon is fine in all aspects except damage right now. It has to be higher yeah, but I think 2dps might be a lot... I could be wrong.

[canned wolf]

MasterBLB, on 26 December 2012 - 03:12 AM, said:

I agree with only one point - MG damage has to be increased,as well as its maximum range.The other changes are not good.
Take Browning 0.50 as an example: http://en.wikipedia....iki/M2_Browning
It looks reasonable such guns could be mounted on mechs,doesn't it?So,according to that M2 info MG could have 800-1000m range while still having higher DPS and no heat as it has now.

Brownings have an 800-1000m range shooting at infantry and unarmored vehicles. There are no infantry or unarmored vehicles in MWO, in case you hadn't noticed. You also need to change the barrel on a browning every 1000 rounds or so because they tend to over heat and warp the barrel.

The real world and BT don't get along very well.

[Deadboy]

Re: Browning - Real life rarely applies to video games as soon as balance starts to get involved. And srsly, we're driving two story tanks with knees here so real life need not apply.

Anyways, damage is too low currently on machine guns. This has all ready been talked about in the Dev Corner, Command Chair forums.

[Aurien Titus]

MG's are fine where they are now. They're even inline with canon. Completely useless against 'mechs.

[FerrolupisXIII]

MasterBLB, on 26 December 2012 - 03:12 AM, said:

I agree with only one point - MG damage has to be increased,as well as its maximum range.The other changes are not good.
Take Browning 0.50 as an example: http://en.wikipedia....iki/M2_Browning
It looks reasonable such guns could be mounted on mechs,doesn't it?So,according to that M2 info MG could have 800-1000m range while still having higher DPS and no heat as it has now.

yeah and the AC/ 20 should therefore be able to fire clear across the map. dont bring real world physics to battletech, it just makes your brain hurt.

i machine guns need a DPS boost but not much else. they should be kept small and have a similar DPS to a small laser, with less/ no heat, but ammo use. simple and easy. maybe slightly higher in DPS but not much more.

[Deadoon]

Aurien Titus, on 26 December 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

MG's are fine where they are now. They're even inline with canon. Completely useless against 'mechs.

in canon, they do 2 damage to mechs, low, yes but mid you that is the same as an ac/2. Also Mcahingguns and magshots are used heavily in solaris which is mech vs mech combat. And the quote you posted actually does not say that they are completely useless against mechs.

http://www.sarna.net...ut_(BattleMech) Solaris mech, why would a weapon "completely useless" against mechs be mounted in a 2 6 packs or have a load of 12 magshots which do the same damage and have triple the range?
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Piranha


They are the small laser of ballistic weapons.

[PANZERBUNNY]

Remember the armour of mechs are super advanced. Machine Guns at long range are just scratching paint. The range we have is effective range to do any damage.

[Craftyman]

Who cares if they are useless in tabletop? There is absolutely no reason to make them useless in MW:O and keep them useless just because the tabletop has them as useless against mechs. They need a buff simple as that. People are getting 100% hung up on the name and logic of it and that should not be a factor in weapon balance. For god's sakes change the name to "40mm armor-piercing chaingun" and call it a day if it will keep the tabletop whiners happy.

Agree with the OP, 2 DPS and 270m max range seems fair. In fact I wouldn't be against lowering the rate of fire and increasing each individual bullet's damage (as well as a meatier sound ) to increase ammo efficiency.

Edited by Craftyman, 26 December 2012 - 06:52 PM.

[ICEFANG13]

Rivy, on 26 December 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

I think the weapon is fine in all aspects except damage right now. It has to be higher yeah, but I think 2dps might be a lot... I could be wrong.

For reference, a Small Laser has a DPS of 1, weighs less because it doesn't need ammo, and more range. Run around with 2 of them, and compare, this has close range power, but hardly enough to be a threat, if used in multiples (which limits the mech to only close range effectively), it can build up, hence why the weight and heat suggestions, that would make them worse when boated, but not really effect them when used alone. A Jenner-F/Cicada-2A with 6 small would be similar to having 3HMGs, but also do not require ammo, fire a little hotter, and have more range. No one complains about these builds, even before ECM.

canned wolf, on 26 December 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

Brownings have an 800-1000m range shooting at infantry and unarmored vehicles. There are no infantry or unarmored vehicles in MWO, in case you hadn't noticed. You also need to change the barrel on a browning every 1000 rounds or so because they tend to over heat and warp the barrel.

The real world and BT don't get along very well.

Deadboy, on 26 December 2012 - 12:53 PM, said:

Re: Browning - Real life rarely applies to video games as soon as balance starts to get involved. And srsly, we're driving two story tanks with knees here so real life need not apply.

Anyways, damage is too low currently on machine guns. This has all ready been talked about in the Dev Corner, Command Chair forums.

I agree with both of you, comparison to real world is good, but we aren't playing a real world and its set in the future. I personally doubt that, the way things go now, in 300 years, we will even use ballistics in real life.

Aurien Titus, on 26 December 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

MG's are fine where they are now. They're even inline with canon. Completely useless against 'mechs.

In a way, I suggested we remove Machine Guns and re-make then in my suggestions called Heavy Machine Guns. I say directly in point 5:
"5 I also propose that MGs are renamed "Heavy Machine Guns", because I do understand that MGs are supposed to be worthless for mech to mech, and I think we should make a new weapon system. This should be helpful for canon and start to design a new game, but one that remains honest to it's roots."

The suggestion that MGs should always be worthless against mechs is illogical, they should not have even been programmed if this was the case. MGs should be worthless against mechs, as canon, but we should just take what we have and adjust it to a real weapon system.

FerrolupisXIII, on 26 December 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

yeah and the AC/ 20 should therefore be able to fire clear across the map. dont bring real world physics to battletech, it just makes your brain hurt.

i machine guns need a DPS boost but not much else. they should be kept small and have a similar DPS to a small laser, with less/ no heat, but ammo use. simple and easy. maybe slightly higher in DPS but not much more.

We have discussed this before my friend, and I showed a comparison at the top of this post, if they have anything close to 1, they will still be worthless. Consider a Raven-2X to a Raven-4X, even with a DPS of one, a 4 small laser Raven-2X is superior in almost every way to a 2 small laser/2MG Raven-4X. When you think about how 'weak' (I would say balanced) small lasers are, no one would use MGs at that power, except on the Cicada-3C and Raven-4X maybe

Deadoon, on 26 December 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

in canon, they do 2 damage to mechs, low, yes but mid you that is the same as an ac/2. Also Mcahingguns and magshots are used heavily in solaris which is mech vs mech combat. And the quote you posted actually does not say that they are completely useless against mechs.

http://www.sarna.net...ut_(BattleMech) Solaris mech, why would a weapon "completely useless" against mechs be mounted in a 2 6 packs or have a load of 12 magshots which do the same damage and have triple the range?
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Piranha


They are the small laser of ballistic weapons.

I believe my suggestions would make them like that, right now they are worthless. I feel it would be logical, if we were to take a MG into battle, we wouldn't want to if it was considered a small laser in effectiveness. Small lasers are like back pocket knifes, great at the end of a battle, but not very effective otherwise, even in multiples.

Rivy, on 26 December 2012 - 03:48 AM, said:

I think the weapon is fine in all aspects except damage right now. It has to be higher yeah, but I think 2dps might be a lot... I could be wrong.

For reference, a Small Laser has a DPS of 1, weighs less because it doesn't need ammo, and more range. Run around with 2 of them, and compare, this has close range power, but hardly enough to be a threat, if used in multiples (which limits the mech to only close range effectively), it can build up, hence why the weight and heat suggestions, that would make them worse when boated, but not really effect them when used alone. A Jenner-F/Cicada-2A with 6 small would be similar to having 3HMGs, but also do not require ammo, fire a little hotter, and have more range. No one complains about these builds, even before ECM.

canned wolf, on 26 December 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:

Brownings have an 800-1000m range shooting at infantry and unarmored vehicles. There are no infantry or unarmored vehicles in MWO, in case you hadn't noticed. You also need to change the barrel on a browning every 1000 rounds or so because they tend to over heat and warp the barrel.

The real world and BT don't get along very well.

Deadboy, on 26 December 2012 - 12:53 PM, said:

Re: Browning - Real life rarely applies to video games as soon as balance starts to get involved. And srsly, we're driving two story tanks with knees here so real life need not apply.

Anyways, damage is too low currently on machine guns. This has all ready been talked about in the Dev Corner, Command Chair forums.

I agree with both of you, comparison to real world is good, but we aren't playing a real world and its set in the future. I personally doubt that, the way things go now, in 300 years, we will even use ballistics in real life.

Aurien Titus, on 26 December 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

MG's are fine where they are now. They're even inline with canon. Completely useless against 'mechs.

In a way, I suggested we remove Machine Guns and re-make then in my suggestions called Heavy Machine Guns. I say directly in point 5:
"5 I also propose that MGs are renamed "Heavy Machine Guns", because I do understand that MGs are supposed to be worthless for mech to mech, and I think we should make a new weapon system. This should be helpful for canon and start to design a new game, but one that remains honest to it's roots."

The suggestion that MGs should always be worthless against mechs is illogical, they should not have even been programmed if this was the case. MGs should be worthless against mechs, as canon, but we should just take what we have and adjust it to a real weapon system.

FerrolupisXIII, on 26 December 2012 - 01:36 PM, said:

yeah and the AC/ 20 should therefore be able to fire clear across the map. dont bring real world physics to battletech, it just makes your brain hurt.

i machine guns need a DPS boost but not much else. they should be kept small and have a similar DPS to a small laser, with less/ no heat, but ammo use. simple and easy. maybe slightly higher in DPS but not much more.

We have discussed this before my friend, and I showed a comparison at the top of this post, if they have anything close to 1, they will still be worthless. Consider a Raven-2X to a Raven-4X, even with a DPS of one, a 4 small laser Raven-2X is superior in almost every way to a 2 small laser/2MG Raven-4X. When you think about how 'weak' (I would say balanced) small lasers are, no one would use MGs at that power, except on the Cicada-3C and Raven-4X maybe

Deadoon, on 26 December 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

in canon, they do 2 damage to mechs, low, yes but mid you that is the same as an ac/2. Also Mcahingguns and magshots are used heavily in solaris which is mech vs mech combat. And the quote you posted actually does not say that they are completely useless against mechs.

http://www.sarna.net...ut_(BattleMech) Solaris mech, why would a weapon "completely useless" against mechs be mounted in a 2 6 packs or have a load of 12 magshots which do the same damage and have triple the range?
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Piranha


They are the small laser of ballistic weapons.

I believe my suggestions would make them like that, right now they are worthless. I feel it would be logical, if we were to take a MG into battle, we wouldn't want to if it was considered a small laser in effectiveness. Small lasers are like back pocket knifes, great at the end of a battle, but not very effective otherwise, even in multiples.