339 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

Kristov Kerensky, on 09 January 2013 - 10:59 AM, said:

It's about time the MGs were given SOME sort of buff so they are a viable weapon choice.

And for all of you saying MGs are anti-infantry/light vehicle only weapons..really? Some of you have played TT like Joseph, but you don't use the MG? I created an IS version of the Piranha years before the Clans were introduced in TT, and guess what? It ripped through anything it encountered in nothing flat, especially when it was used as it was designed to be used, JJ in behind the target, open fire, JJ out again. 20+ drops and over 50 kills before the prototype was taken out by a Warhammer..flippable arms..totally forgot about them when I jumped in behind that Hammer..mutual kill though, so it wasn't a total loss.

So..you keep telling yourself that MGs are useless against Mechs...

Yes... 12 MG are something respectable, 24 damage(34 with lasers) will sand off armor as fast as 7 medium lasers. But until we have a Piranha-like Mech we won't see that type of sand blasting.

[stjobe]

Thomas Dziegielewski, on 09 January 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

I'm starting work on it right now. Paul already mentioned in Command Chair.
http://mwomercs.com/...apon-balancing/

MG will become the first critical hit weapon. The LBX will get the same treatment as well.

It will be given a huge critical hit multiplier similar to what it does in TT rules.

So against armor the MachineGun will remain useless (but fun to use dammit!). But as soon as armor is gone and it starts tearing into 'flesh' it will be given a big critical hit damage multiplier.

It will literally rip apart the insides of a unprotected component.

Hope you like it.


Release Date : January 29th 2013 or so.

I'm saddened to hear this, as you might expect from my OP.

It's good that you're trying to do something with the MG, but I believe that not buffing the regular damage of it is going to make it non-viable, no matter how big that crit-damage buff is.

A weapon that's only usable when the enemy is almost dead is never going to be equal to a weapon that's usable at any time.

Dammit, I can't believe you actually typed these words: "against armor the MachineGun will remain useless" - why would you want a useless weapon in the game?

And please, please consider that there are 'mech variants both in-game and coming in to the game that have fully half of their hardpoints or more being ballistic hardpoints. The CDA-3C with its 4 ballistic, 1 energy comes to mind immediately. With a useful MG that variant would be viable, but now and with the proposed "useless" buff, it still won't be able to compete with its brethren variants.

A weapon can't balance "fun" against "useful".

[Joseph Mallan]

Orzorn, on 09 January 2013 - 12:03 PM, said:

Their use will still be dubious because, unless they also buff the damage to even just 0.066, they won't even have the ratio they once had with the small laser.

Every other weapon gotten about a 3x increase in damage over 10 seconds compared to the TT (3 damage vs 10 damage for the small laser), but the machine gun went from 2 damage to... 4 damage. It doesn't seem to have gotten the treatment most other weapons did, and its suffered for it.

I don't disagree with your objection but no other weapon can be fired nonstop without heat consequences.

[JSArrakis]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

From how I hear both my friends and other players complain about this Mech or that, they already have those. Some Raven variants make my friends cringe that they have to use them, so that already happens now. I Chose to grind an Atlas K, it sucked, and i am glad to be done with it. I have a low opinion of teh 3 Mech Grind and said what I do to circumvent it.

I don't see how My not grinding a Spider because i don't like it stops someone from trying it. I don't like Commandos but I still see many of them in the field, so someone is enjoying them even though i can't see me piloting one.

And apparently the DEVs were thinking the same thing I was cause the new buff will do nothing to help AP but will make them nice for blasting the crunchy bits.

Sorry I'm not a number cruncher. I go by feel. If a game/weapon/character feels fun its good. If math was fun to me I'd have aced Calculus and Compound angles during my apprenticeship.

The difference youre avoiding is this: An Atlas K, while not your niche is a threat none the less when in the hands of other players who DO have that niche. The Cicada 3C is a laughable mech and poses no threat in ANYONE'S hands.

By stating that MGs should not be buffed youre stating that the useless variants in the game should stay that way and remain space wasters, time sinks and cbill sinks. You are stating that no one should get enjoyment out of that variant, even after the amount of effort PGI has gone to in order to provide you with that variant.

The difference again with a Commando 2D, is with missiles and a possible laser, its a viable mech. With its damage and time on target, it can still be a threat. The Raven 4X with its 2 ballistic slots is a completely unviable mech, and not a threat to anyone. And again you think it should remain so... based on what? Your feelings again? Your opinion?

Every mech on the battlefield should be a threat no matter what weapons its using. Its pilot skill that you should be fighting against, not their weapon loadout.
Once more with gusto:

EVERY. MECH. ON. THE. BATTLEFIELD. SHOULD. BE. A. THREAT. REGARDLESS. OF. WEAPONS.

[General Taskeen]

The remove it from the game argument, for the MG/Flamer, need to stop. That would mean removing every Mech variant that came with them from TRO that PGI decided to put into the game (Spider-5K, Cicada-3C, Catapult-K2, for example).

MWO doesn't need to follow strict TT damage values, other Mech titles already got that picture quite clearly. MechWarrior 3 being the best example with MG's and Flamers that were useful (and did damage) vs. Mechs.

Here is yet another idea for the MG:

Reduce Ammo Per Ton to 400 or 600
Change Damage Per Bullet to 0.6 (or 0.8)
Change Cooldown to 0.2

(0.6 with 0.2 cool down is 3DPS; 0.8 with 0.2 cool down is 4DPS; a mini AC/2)

For the Flamer:

Damage Per Flame (lul) to 2 (+5 Heat Transfer)
Heat Per Shot to 3
Range 90
Cool Down changed to 2 or 2.25

[Orzorn]

stjobe, on 09 January 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:

And please, please consider that there are 'mech variants both in-game and coming in to the game that have fully half of their hardpoints or more being ballistic hardpoints. The CDA-3C with its 4 ballistic, 1 energy comes to mind immediately. With a useful MG that variant would be viable, but now and with the proposed "useless" buff, it still won't be able to compete with its brethren variants.

Hell, I'd love to be able to stick 2 machine guns on my Hunchback 4G when I use an AC/20. That would be awesome, because my AC/20 often gets blown off, or I run out of ammo. Having some back up machine guns could be nice.

The point is that energy users have small and medium lasers as backups, but heavy ballistic builds get nothing, because anything else weighs 6 or more tons.

Quote

I don't disagree with your objection but no other weapon can be fired nonstop without heat consequences.

I understand that, but that's why I'm not even asking for a buff, I'm asking for the weapon to be normalized to the same damage scheme that all the other weapons seem to have gotten. I do understand that the damage buff is "balanced" by those weapons not actually being able to use all of those firings in 10 seconds, because they'll overheat, but even so, the machine gun currently takes 1.5 tons as a system. That's 3 small lasers, if you had the points for them.

I think the machine gun at least deserves a fair chance and should be given the same treatment all the other weapons got. I don't understand why it has to be the odd man out for some reason.

[stjobe]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2013 - 12:13 PM, said:

I don't disagree with your objection but no other weapon can be fired nonstop without heat consequences.

The Small Laser can.

2 heat per shot, 3 seconds between shots. Even with just the required 10 heat sinks you dissipate away 3 heat during those 3 seconds. Hold the trigger for as long as you want, you'll never overheat.

[Joseph Mallan]

JSArrakis, on 09 January 2013 - 12:15 PM, said:

EVERY. MECH. ON. THE. BATTLEFIELD. SHOULD. BE. A. THREAT. REGARDLESS. OF. WEAPONS.

Ostscout

Quote

[color=#000000]OTT-7K - The -7K [/color]Ostscout[color=#000000] replaces the [/color]Medium Laser[color=#000000] with the new [/color]TAG[color=#000000] laser designator, sacrificing its limited offensive capability to allow it to designate targets for [/color]Arrow IV[color=#000000] artillery missiles. Otherwise, the -7K [/color]Ostscout[color=#000000] is identical to[/color]

Yup no weapons of it's own only a TAG. By itself not a threat at all. has been that way since the 3050.

[The Amazing Atomic Spaniel]

stjobe, on 09 January 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:

Dammit, I can't believe you actually typed these words: "against armor the MachineGun will remain useless" - why would you want a useless weapon in the game?

Well, in real life machine guns are useless against armour. How many machine-gun bullets would you have to fire at a Challenger II tank to penetrate its armour?

Just because the people who thought up the TT rules were sometimes idiots doesn't mean we have to follow them .

[JSArrakis]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2013 - 12:22 PM, said:

Ostscout
Yup no weapons of it's own only a TAG. By itself not a threat at all. has been that way since the 3050.

And that mech is in the game is it? This game we're currently playing MWO.
You think we're talking about TT still? If you want TT mechs/rules, go play TT.
The mech you are using as an arguement will NEVER be implemented in MWO, so you have done nothing but introduce yet another strawman as an arguement.

[Orzorn]

RocketDog, on 09 January 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

Well, in real life machine guns are useless against armour. How many machine-gun bullets would you have to fire at a Challenger II tank to penetrate its armour?

Just because the people who thought up the TT rules were sometimes idiots doesn't mean we have to follow them .

[General Taskeen]

RocketDog, on 09 January 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

Well, in real life machine guns are useless against armour. How many machine-gun bullets would you have to fire at a Challenger II tank to penetrate its armour?

Just because the people who thought up the TT rules were sometimes idiots doesn't mean we have to follow them .

Real-Life doesn't apply well for real-time Meching game. Why? Becuz lasers.

[JSArrakis]

General Taskeen, on 09 January 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Real-Life doesn't apply well for real-time Meching game. Why? Becuz lasers.

Exactly, if you want real life bullets and machine gun realism, I have a few other things to talk about, MGs being at the bottom of the list. Being a physics major and all. Heres a few things that make the list:

Gyroscopic balancing on uneven terrain without IR terrain scanning subsystems that point at the feet.
PPCs would require a particle accelerator the size of 3 CERNs and would irradiate the pilot every time they fired.
Lasers that strong would melt their metal housing and barrels.
True rail guns and mass driver projectiles move very close to the speed of light and would set the air on fire in their path and would cause an impact that would throw the targetted mech atleast a mile.

So if you dont want to introduce realism to this list (and many more things I have not listed), will you kindly keep your realism off of my machine guns.

Edited by JSArrakis, 09 January 2013 - 12:39 PM.

[Orzorn]

JSArrakis, on 09 January 2013 - 12:38 PM, said:

So if you dont want to introduce realism to this list (and many more things I have not listed), will you kindly keep your realism off of my machine guns.

As per my video, it doesn't help their argument, because real life machine guns can be very effective against armor, considering the Warthog's position as an anti-armor and anti-vehicle platform.

Regardless, all that matters is good game balance, and machine guns sucking is not good balance.

[General Taskeen]

Thomas Dziegielewski, on 09 January 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

So against armor the MachineGun will remain useless (but fun to use dammit!). But as soon as armor is gone and it starts tearing into 'flesh' it will be given a big critical hit damage multiplier.

Thomas and other Devs. Please reconsider. This is Battle Tech, Fiction, we have colored lasers, particle cannons, 12+ meter Tanks with legs and arms. How can it be justified having a light mech/medium using mostly Fiction Machine Guns (Cicada-3C or Spider-5K) to try and do anything with them as they are currently featured (especially trying them with their TRO loadout and either whittle them down with 1 energy weapon or hope an opponent has no armor). They need to be fun, yes, but they need to be effective. Flamers and MG's should be semi-equivalents of bringing Small Lasers into combat for balance sake.

I'm sure you guys have already looked at the weapon tables from previous titles and Mech Warior 3 is the absolute best of example of programming/featuring an effective MG/Flamer for Mech vs. Mech combat. Please, again, reconsider and think outside the box. The main problem starts with MG/Flamer having 0 cool down, this is the problem area. Give them cool downs and give them effective damage vs armor and internals like every other weapon in the game.

Edited by General Taskeen, 09 January 2013 - 12:46 PM.

[Bluescuba]

The only buff mg really needs is to enable it to shot down incoming missiles

[Odins Fist]

Maybe they should just leave it the way it is, it's kind of like firing a BB gun at a Tank..
.
The fact that it "CRITS" internals is ok, but really, it's just like shooting spit wads at a Tiger II tank..

[Boogie Man]

I'm sorry but the whole idea of making the machine gun a crit seeker is not viable at all. Once the armor is stripped what weapon isn't already good at dealing damage to internals? Machine Guns need to strip armor too otherwise they will always be a waste of tonnage and criticals.

[Malckovich]

Buff machine guns to .06 per bullet. Total DPS per machine gun .6, 66% of a small laser. Seems like a simple change.

I don't care what TT rules say, I don't even care what reality says. I'm playing a game, reality is suspended even if it is simulating something. If I want to play a mech that has machine guns it shouldn't be a detriment to my team, it should perform a function.

And honestly I don't think crit buffing is giving it enough niche function to be viable. Small weapon, small damage, just like any other weapon in the game is proportioned. However it is currently out of proportion with other small weapon systems.

[Bullvyne]

I was drunk one night shopping for a cicada. When I came across one that had 4 ballistic hard points I almost wet myself laughing. "What the hell will I put in it?" I asked myself. It was so absurd I had to buy it! One Ultra AC5 and 3MG later Gimpy was born. During UAC5 jams I would go to a pristine armor spot and see how long it took to even scratch it. I dont think I ever did. I found myself scotch taping down my MG mouse button, because once your in the thick of it there is no point in letting loose the button(see:wiki on finger fatigue).
I dont mind a MG buff, but the easy fixall for this problem is to put little people all over the map (random techs civillians, medics etc..), and some livestock. Then I could jump back into Gimpy, and make sure no innocent civillian, and or cow made it out off my combat drop area alive. Devs. this Idea is free as long as you add some good death screams (BY THE GODS HOW COULD YOU AARAAAAAGHHHHHHHHHHHHH...gurgle...gurgle.....ehhhhhh), and big poofy red clouds when I eradicate the area of humanity and wildlife.