339 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 09 January 2013 - 12:21 PM, said:

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.

3 seconds in between would be stopping. I know its a knitpick... but I do watch my allies with MGs fire nonstop.

[AlanEsh]

Yeah, I've said this in every MG thread I have found over the months... "The MG should deal damage at the rate of about 2/3rds of a Small Laser."

There is no reason to hobble it -- many mechs have open Ballistic hardpoints that could use a viable weapon on the slot. Energy hardpoints are -rarely- empty because of all the useful small weapons available.

[Tickdoff Tank]

Voridan Atreides, on 09 January 2013 - 10:16 AM, said:

It states they are an anti-infantry weapon. Go to the link and look at the description. It says nothing about it saying they are useful against mechs....it only talks about how they are usefull against infantry. That is the whole purpose of putting a MG on your mech. To defend yourself from an infantry attack without having to overkill and use something like a Gauss Rifle, or a big AC.

You really need to work on your understanding of game rules. First, look at the basic stats for the weapon listed. Does that weapon do damage against a mech? Compare the damage done against a mech to another weapon, such as a small autocannon or a small laser. Are the numbers close? If the MG (or any weapon) was not supposed to damage a mech then it would not be allowed to. Look here: http://www.sarna.net...i/Plasma_Cannon This weapon does not do any damage to a mech under any circumstances. If they wanted the MG to be used *only* against infantry then they could have easily done so.

Compare the MG to a small laser. They are almost the same. The small laser does 1 more point of damage per round but the MG does not generate heat. They have the same range. They have the same basic weight (.5 tons), the MG needs 1 ton of ammo, the SL needs 1 ton of heatsinks. They both take 1 space. They fill the same role, short range and low damage weapon.

The MG gets a BONUS to killing infantry, but the basic functionality of the weapon allows it to do damage to a mech, damage that is comparable to other weapons that DO NOT get a bonus against infantry, therefore the MG is effective against mechs.

[Joseph Mallan]

Orzorn, on 09 January 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Remember over 20mm is an Auto Cannon (ie automatic cannon) not a Machine gun. After watching the video I didn't see any rounds go through the Gun barrel maybe a knitpick, but that was a great spark show,

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 January 2013 - 01:16 PM.

[malibu43]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

Remember over 20mm is an Auto Cannon (ie automatic cannon) not a Machine gun.

In "real life" or BT? Just curious...

[Tickdoff Tank]

Angelicon, on 09 January 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

Yeah, I've said this in every MG thread I have found over the months... "The MG should deal damage at the rate of about 2/3rds of a Small Laser."

There is no reason to hobble it -- many mechs have open Ballistic hardpoints that could use a viable weapon on the slot. Energy hardpoints are -rarely- empty because of all the useful small weapons available.

I mostly agree with you, but I agree with the OP a little more. If you set the MG to do .66 DPS (2/3 of the DPS of the SL) then I think the MG will still be underpowered. For the reasons that the OP has already listed. 1.2 DPS would be a good place (IMO) for the MG. If it turns out to be too powerful at 1.2 then it could be adjusted down, but I really don't think it would need to be.

[Joseph Mallan]

malibu43, on 09 January 2013 - 01:16 PM, said:

In "real life" or BT? Just curious...

Both. Auto cannons in BattleTech are IIRC 100mm and up. AC 2 is often the same size as "spooky's" 105mm Gun.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 January 2013 - 01:25 PM.

[stjobe]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

3 seconds in between would be stopping. I know its a knitpick... but I do watch my allies with MGs fire nonstop.

0.75 beam duration + 2.25 recycle = 3 seconds between start of beams.

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

Remember over 20mm is an Auto Cannon (ie automatic cannon) not a Machine gun.

"Machine guns are generally categorized as submachine guns, machine guns, or autocannons."
- wikipedia

[Tickdoff Tank]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

Remember over 20mm is an Auto Cannon (ie automatic cannon) not a Machine gun. After watching the video I didn't see any rounds go through the Gun barrel maybe a knitpick, but that was a great spark show,

Why is over 20mm an AC? That might be the real-world differentiation, but that does not really hold up for MWO. In CBT it does list 30mm and up as an autocannon, but the vast majority of the ACs are over 100mm. Even considering the low end AC2, that would be the 30mm round, which just happens to do the same damage as the MG. The MG weighs a comparable amount to the GAU8, as has been stated often, and the ammo of the MWO MG weighs more than a standard round of the GAU8, so I believe the comparison to the GAU8 is a reasonable one.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Joseph, 0:56, you can see where a round went through the barrel, so..

Oh, and that over 20mm is automatic cannon..really...huh..cause in BTech ACs start at 100mm and go up, according to the novels and fluff, at any rate...

Edited by Kristov Kerensky, 09 January 2013 - 01:24 PM.

[malibu43]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2013 - 01:21 PM, said:

Both. Auto cannons in BattleTech are IIRC 100mm and up. AC 2 is often the same size as "spooky's" 110mm or 120mm Gun.

Your first post said "over 20mm" and now you're saying "100mm and up." If the latter, then you could easily have something like the GAU8 or bigger in game and classify it as an MG.

[Eddrick]

MGs are a small and light weapon mostly for Light Mechs or people that like the "Spray and pray" method of attack. They definetly need an increase in damage.

I seen one person do something wastefull, but interesting with it: They had a MG on "permafire" like some perople do with TAG.

[Joseph Mallan]

malibu43, on 09 January 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:

Your first post said "over 20mm" and now you're saying "100mm and up." If the latter, then you could easily have something like the GAU8 or bigger in game and classify it as an MG.

RL over 20mm BattleTech 100mm+ (still over 20mm).

[AlanEsh]

Battletech's MG is a 500kg/1000lbs weapon ... that's not a .50 cal machine gun or SAW or a tripod mounted M60. The 6-barrel M61 Vulcan weighs 200 lbs. The GAU-8 weighs in at 600 lbs. Anyone looking for "realism" in the MWO Machinegun should be pushing for it to do significant (near Small Laser) damage.

[Joseph Mallan]

Tickdoff Tank, on 09 January 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

Why is over 20mm an AC? That might be the real-world differentiation, but that does not really hold up for MWO. In CBT it does list 30mm and up as an autocannon, but the vast majority of the ACs are over 100mm. Even considering the low end AC2, that would be the 30mm round, which just happens to do the same damage as the MG. The MG weighs a comparable amount to the GAU8, as has been stated often, and the ammo of the MWO MG weighs more than a standard round of the GAU8, so I believe the comparison to the GAU8 is a reasonable one.

I didn't make the distinction Tank so I don't know.

Can you show me an AC in BattleTech under 100mm. I don't remember seeing any, but that does not mean there weren't any.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 09 January 2013 - 01:37 PM.

[CG Oglethorpe Kerensky]

GODzillaGSPB, on 09 January 2013 - 06:34 AM, said:

I know it's in the canon, but I don't think it's a good idea for MWO gameplay. If PGI gives it slugs that do the same 10 damage, nobody would use the ac/10 anymore. They could then try to make the lbx10 the same size and heat, but again, everybody would still use the lbx10 for versability (because it has a slightly higher crit-chance already, firing 10 projectiles at once). So the final step would be to make the lbx10 bigger and / or produce more heat than the ac/10. And then everybody would stop using the lbx10.

.

You aren't getting this...
The LB10-X replaces the AC/10, it actually started replacing it 500 years before but the IS forgot how to make it. There might be trade offs but the tech level in Battletech is moving. Did you know that by 3058 single heat sinks are virtually gone in the IS? The clans don't even have AC/10s or regular autocannons around, they have all been replaced by LBX or Ultra variants.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Joseph Mallan, on 09 January 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

I didn't make the distinction Tanker so I don't know.

Can you show me an AC in BattleTech under 100mm. I don't remember seeing any, but that does not mean there weren't any.

Not aware of any myself, neither in the TROs or the novels..but..it's BTech so that really doesn't mean anything

Remember, calibre of the weapons in BTech was always whatever some author in a novel said..or what some piece of fluff in a TRO might mention, there wasn't an actual hard rule on them anywhere.

[Joseph Mallan]

Kristov Kerensky, on 09 January 2013 - 01:38 PM, said:

Not aware of any myself, neither in the TROs or the novels..but..it's BTech so that really doesn't mean anything

Remember, calibre of the weapons in BTech was always whatever some author in a novel said..or what some piece of fluff in a TRO might mention, there wasn't an actual hard rule on them anywhere.

Understood about Caliber AC2, AC5 and AC20 have been classed as 120mm cannons.
, I do have to say it's interesting how when it is one players favor TT is not to be followed, when the DEVs aren't following it they should, cause its canon?

[Joseph Mallan]

Tickdoff Tank, on 09 January 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

You really need to work on your understanding of game rules. First, look at the basic stats for the weapon listed. Does that weapon do damage against a mech? Compare the damage done against a mech to another weapon, such as a small autocannon or a small laser. Are the numbers close? If the MG (or any weapon) was not supposed to damage a mech then it would not be allowed to. Look here: http://www.sarna.net...i/Plasma_Cannon This weapon does not do any damage to a mech under any circumstances. If they wanted the MG to be used *only* against infantry then they could have easily done so.

Compare the MG to a small laser. They are almost the same. The small laser does 1 more point of damage per round but the MG does not generate heat. They have the same range. They have the same basic weight (.5 tons), the MG needs 1 ton of ammo, the SL needs 1 ton of heatsinks. They both take 1 space. They fill the same role, short range and low damage weapon.

The MG gets a BONUS to killing infantry, but the basic functionality of the weapon allows it to do damage to a mech, damage that is comparable to other weapons that DO NOT get a bonus against infantry, therefore the MG is effective against mechs.

Unfortunately this is one case where the Clan version is not as good as the Inner Sphere. The Capellan Cannon does 10 damage + heat

[Divine Retribution]

I'm a fan of tripling damage (.12 per round) and cutting ammo per ton in half so each ton can do 120 damage. That way the damage potential for 1 ton of mg ammo remains close to the ammo for other ballistics. Because of the spray of bullets the mg will still be less useful than a small laser for dealing concentrated damage unless heat is a major issue, but will be able to spit out some useful amount of damage especially if used in groups.

Edited by Divine Retribution, 09 January 2013 - 02:09 PM.