261 replies to this topic

[Orzorn]

I don't even care anymore to argue. I just want at least for the MG to have a fair shot. Give it is proper 0.0667 damage per round at the very least, to keep the damage ratio with the small laser.

Why is it that so many people argue against buffing the MG's damage and call it an anti-infantry weapon when the small laser did only a single damage more than the MG? Mathematically, it makes no sense to argue against a buff of at least that caliber, and due to the spreading nature of the MGs, you could ask for more. Why is it fair for the MG to only get its ratio restored when the SRM does 2.5 damage per missile "because it spreads"?

The answer is that it isn't. If you gave the MG 1.0 DPS, the same as the small laser, it still wouldn't actually achieve that much, due to its spread and the fact that you have to keep it on target for a full second to accomplish that, whereas the small laser only has to burn for a fraction of a second.

Regardless, I welcome the buff, as much a buff as it may end up being. I also welcome the new system. Hopefully the LB-10X gets some critical hit love as well. That would be nice.

The best use of the machine gun after it is changed would be on a mech with a hard hitting, but long cooldown weapon like the AC/20. Put 2 machine guns on a Hunchback, toggle them on with a keyboard macro or whatever, and start shooting. If you get an armor breach, you might be able to destroy a component or so. Still, that kind of system takes 2 tons to use, and with which I could put several useful things on my mech.

Regardless, I highly doubt those 4 MG mechs will improve very much. They still lack in the area of damage, so they'd rarely get to the internals anyways.

Edited by Orzorn, 14 January 2013 - 05:20 PM.

[TruePoindexter]

HRR Insanity, on 14 January 2013 - 05:00 PM, said:

Read my response. The end result of A or B is... A. Use the real weapons.

Not disagreeing - just clarifying. I do suspect that even after the buff to MGuns it will still be preferable to use other weaponry or optimize heat efficiency over carrying MGuns.

[TruePoindexter]

Mahws, on 14 January 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

At which point you should have used those extra tonnes/crit slots for another heatsink or two.

So, to make a machine gun worth taking you need:
1) An extremely heat inefficient build.
2) With spare ballistic slots/tonnage.
3) That is currently so overheated that it can't fire ANY weapons without shutting down.
4) An enemy under 100m away that currently has one or more internals exposed.
5) An enemy under 100m away that currently has one or more internals exposed with weapons that you can disable (not a leg, or an unused arm or side torso).

That's a pretty damn specific set of circumstances.

Indeed I am wondering about that too:
http://mwomercs.com/...18#entry1738018

There are situations where the 1.5 tons or so that could be used for MGuns can't really be used for much else. Still that's enough for a lot of additions including AMS. It'll be a hard sell to say that component damage out weighs the other options.

This does also give some use for mechs like the CDA-3C which is otherwise lackluster.

Edited by TruePoindexter, 14 January 2013 - 05:39 PM.

[Mahws]

It gives some use to it, but not enough to make it non-lackluster. Why take 4MG on a Cicada when you can take 4 MPulse instead? Even 4SL would be more effective.

[TruePoindexter]

Mahws, on 14 January 2013 - 05:38 PM, said:

It gives some use to it, but not enough to make it non-lackluster. Why take 4MG on a Cicada when you can take 4 MPulse instead? Even 4SL would be more effective.

Because the CDA-3C has 1 energy hardpoint and 4 ballistic. Currently aside from some AC2 sniping builds the mech has no real value. With the MGun change it may become more viable.

[HRR Insanity]

TruePoindexter, on 14 January 2013 - 05:40 PM, said:

Because the CDA-3C has 1 energy hardpoint and 4 ballistic. Currently aside from some AC2 sniping builds the mech has no real value. With the MGun change it may become more viable.

AC5 + ML is better.

[Mahws]

More viable is not the same as viable. With the current changes, no matter how you slice the MG crit bonus, it'll only be able to hit crippled enemies, and even then all it'll be able to achieve is disabling vulnerable components. Not nearly as beneficial to the team as 4 MPulse build that can snipe damaged opponents and not be useless the rest of the time as well.

Edited by Mahws, 14 January 2013 - 05:51 PM.

[De La Fresniere]

Dragonkindred, on 14 January 2013 - 04:08 PM, said:

Machine guns were never intended to be good against mechs. Originally designed to shoot infantry

Apparently there was originally no infantry in BT, meaning the MG couldn't have been designed for that specific purpose.

Additionally, since MWO doesn't have infantry but does have MGs, it stands to reason that the MG's role in BT is irrelevant; the MWO MG *has* to be effective on mechs.

What confuses me more than anything is... currently the MG is particularly awful at dealing crits. But they're doing a 180 and trying to make that (the one thing it's worst at) into its *only* function?

Nothing about this change makes any sense. Especially considering we need a non-heavy Ballistic weapon and this would be a fantastic opportunity to fill that gap.

[shintakie]

TruePoindexter, on 14 January 2013 - 05:40 PM, said:

Because the CDA-3C has 1 energy hardpoint and 4 ballistic. Currently aside from some AC2 sniping builds the mech has no real value. With the MGun change it may become more viable.

More viable than totally nonviable isn't exactly somethin to be proud of.

[PANZERBUNNY]

Novawrecker, on 14 January 2013 - 02:32 PM, said:

Terrible idea. What's to stop mechs that mount 4 ballistics to carry your version of the MG? That would mean that for 2 mere tons, you have someone shooting your for 4-8 DPS for 0 heat ....

very, VERY bad idea.

Its range is terrible and has a MASSIVE amount of ammo that when hit EXPLODES and obliterates your mech.

The more MG ammo you have the better chance you have of getting hit and blowing up.

There's a reason in TT when you take a stock mech with MG's.....first turn you DUMP all your MG ammo and continue the game.

Compared to Small Lasers, they would be about equal.....almost.

Edited by PANZERBUNNY, 14 January 2013 - 07:13 PM.

[Bilbo]

HRR Insanity, on 14 January 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

The 3-4 seconds is weapon recycle time. Not heat.

And no, there is no purpose if the end result of that 3-4 second delay is either:

A ) Any real weapon - Ripped of arm/torso/leg
B ) MGs - lots of busted stuff, then I fire the rest of my weapons to do A.

A wins.

I could drop the Artemis stick the MG and ammo in its place and effectively lose nothing. My build runs hot. I could use the crit seeking MG to do damage while I wait for A. Right now I have no choice but to wait for A, while with the change I could be taking out weapons on the opposing mech while I wait for A.

[DragonsFire]

Bilbo, on 14 January 2013 - 07:32 PM, said:

I could drop the Artemis stick the MG and ammo in its place and effectively lose nothing. My build runs hot. I could use the crit seeking MG to do damage while I wait for A. Right now I have no choice but to wait for A, while with the change I could be taking out weapons on the opposing mech while I wait for A.

Bingo!

I also have a number of builds that run pretty hot that I could place 2 MG's into in order to do that crit seeking damage while waiting for the cycle time on my primaries.

Shutting down against good opponents means you will die. Being able to keep up constant damage against said opponents will help provide an edge. MG's allow you to do this without worry of shutdown. Additionally, it's a means of firing with relative impunity at light mechs for instance, on open sections, without fear of 'wasting' ammunition or heat capacity in a brawl.

I like the "planned" implementation and I look forward to testing it out and seeing how it progresses. Notice the emphasis.

Edited by DragonsFire, 14 January 2013 - 07:50 PM.

[Five oh Five Squat]

Irvine, on 14 January 2013 - 02:18 PM, said:

This "new" system will make the spider more viable because it runs mgs&flamers

Which with people filling it with jump jets will make it the ultimate gimmick build.

[Orthodontist]

You know, I figure its best to wait and see how this pans out. I think the way he presented this change is exactly what MG/Flamer needed, a niche in the ecosystem of weapons.

Currently they are without a home.

Lets have some faith for once.

[HRR Insanity]

Orthodontist, on 14 January 2013 - 07:52 PM, said:

You know, I figure its best to wait and see how this pans out. I think the way he presented this change is exactly what MG/Flamer needed, a niche in the ecosystem of weapons.

Currently they are without a home.

Lets have some faith for once.

They will remain in the same niche they are in now: Useless weapons.

Faith is earned.

Edited by HRR Insanity, 14 January 2013 - 07:59 PM.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

I am bewildered at how much they are apparently struggling with bringing the Mgun in the ballpark range of even being worth their own damn tonnage.

There is a VERY VERY easy fix to make them worth it. For any of you familiar with Machine Gun Arrays, read this. I posted it a while back, and is still a better fix than increasing crit damage (although I am not against this idea).

http://mwomercs.com/...34#entry1611934

[HighlandCoo]

Im not seeing where this was posted. Can anyone linky?

[Frozen Winter]

I've always wanted MGs to be crit machines. I don't mind they do no damage vs armor. However being able to destroy everything on the inside in a few seconds? Oh yeah sign me up. I used to run a three MG build on my Dragon. I'll be glad to dust that mech off again when this goes through.

[Trauglodyte]

Personally, I would have bumped up the damage to 0.075 per shot. That would have effectively given it a DPS value of 3/4 that of the Small Laser while also giving it the same 150 damage per ton of ammo tha every other ballistic weapon currently has now. Then, they could have halved the planned critical damage buff leaving the changes 100% even with what they're going to release tomorrow. A 0.75 DPS weapon still isn't going to scare anyone, especially as you're still burning through a ton of ammo in 20s with only 1 MG - you need more to be effective which just pushes you through ammo faster.

Anyway, the way I look at it is this: MGs should be supplementary weapons and they're kind of missing the boat on this change. BUT, there are several mechs with ballistics that need the MG to be effective (specifically the Light Mechs/Cicada):

Flea - 1 variant (2-4 hard points)
Commando - 0 variants
Spider - 1 variant (4 hard points)
Jenner - 0 variants
Raven - 1 variant (2 hard points)

Cicada - 2 variants (4 hard points; 1 hard point)
Hunchback - 2 variants (1 hard point; 3 hard points)
Centurion - 3 variants (1 hard point, 3 hard points - 2 variants)

Dragon - all variants
Catapult - 1 variant (2 hard points)
Cataphract - all variants

Awesome - 0 variants
Stalker - 0 variants
Atlas - all variants

That's 24 mechs that carry ballistics that are getting hosed into using ONLY Autocannons and Gauss Rifles. Wouldn't it be nice, ya know, if there were variations in mech designs that allow the user to shift weight into other areas while still utilizing the alloted hard points and preferred heat efficiency/combat style? Its shocking, I know.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 14 January 2013 - 08:42 PM.

[Mahws]

HighlandCoo, on 14 January 2013 - 08:22 PM, said:

Im not seeing where this was posted. Can anyone linky?

Here you go:
http://mwomercs.com/...apon-balancing/