261 replies to this topic

[stjobe]

To everyone that keeps going on about the MG being just an anti-infantry weapon; in Battletech, the MG was no worse an anti-'mech weapon than an AC/2, and 2/3rds as good as the Small Laser. It did 2d6 damage against infantry, so yes, it was great against infantry. It still did 2 damage against 'mechs.

It's only in MWO that the MG is useless against 'mechs - and we have no infantry to be good against...

BattleTech:
AC/2: 2 damage/turn (0.2 DPS)
SL: 3 damage/turn (0.3 DPS)
MG: 2 damage/turn (0.2 DPS)

MWO:
AC/2: 2 damage/round, 2 rounds/second, 4 DPS
SL: 3 damage per beam, 0.75 beam duration, 2.25 recycle, 1 DPS
MG: 0.04 damage per round, 10 rounds/second, 0.4 DPS

Please note that the AC/2 has 20 times the DPS in MWO compared to BT.
Also note that the SL has 3 times the DPS in MWO compared to BT.
Finally, note that the MG has 2 times the DPS in MWO compared to BT.

So not only can we throw out this whole "they're anti-infantry in BT" malarkey as untrue, we can also question why the AC/2 has gotten such a tremendous damage boost, whereas most other weapons have about 3x DPS compared to BT, and of course why the MG only gets 2x damage AND half the damage per ton of ammo as compared to the other ballistic weapons.

I still say that the easiest and most fair way of giving the MG viability as a low-end ballistic weapon is to triple the bullet damage (from 0.04 to 0.12) and leave it at that.

That would make the MG worth taking without making it overpowered (because of its continuous-fire nature, its ammo-dependency, its risk of ammo explosion, and finally because no planned or current 'mech has more than four ballistic hardpoints).

[BerryChunks]

Vassago Rain, on 15 January 2013 - 05:38 AM, said:

Dude.
They both do 2 damage to MECHS. They've always been anti-mech guns.
There weren't even infantry or tanks in the olden days, when all the guns were thrown in.

FASA had never fired guns, there was no internet, and all they knew about guns, they learned from watching Arnold movies. It was the early 80s. Heatsinks weren't something the common man knew about.

They picked a star trek name for a piece of gear, that turned out to be a real thing. Battletech heatsinks should be called 'heat pumps,' but they're not.

Get over yourself.

2 damage over " a turn" at .5 tons. Or pick up a 1 ton medium laser for 5 damage "a turn. Or a .5 SL for 3 damage "a turn". Flamers cause more heat in the person firing it than a laser.

Small laser. 1 heat, 3 damage.
Medium laser. 3 heat, 5 damage.
Flamer. 3 heat, 2 damage.

Now, the original Battletech rules DO allow you , upon agreement with your playgroup, to exchange the flamer Damage for HEAT damage (build up enemy heat), by 2 points "per turn".

Of course, the players themselves can mod the rules to do what they like. FLamers could be isnta-kills if they hit the head, or could blow up an XL engine with a single burst, if they were so inclined.

The rules are for the game, and people can come along and make stupid modifications as they like. That doesn't mean it should be done.

[Yokaiko]

Thontor, on 15 January 2013 - 06:01 AM, said:

400 damage? Last I checked, each machine gun round didn't do 0.2 damage.

You are right I forgot they doubled it.

Still my point stands the ammo does more damage to you than it has realistic potential to do to another mech.

[TexAce]

Time to get my Hunchy back, with 2 ER LL, 3 MGs and 1 MPL.

[Kaijin]

Congzilla, on 15 January 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

The fact of the matter is the the flamer and the MG are anti infantry weapons, they were never meant to be able to hurt mechs. Paul's idea gives them a niche use without taking them to far from what they were on TT. I think we should actually try it out before bashing it.

"These weapons are much heavier than those typically carried by infantry, but can be used by them when placed on a static mount, where they are called Support Machine Guns."
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Machine_gun

"Support Machine Guns are large crew-served support weapons mounted on vehicles or emplacement turrets. Too massive for a single trooper to carry, these guns fire large-caliber bullets at much greater ranges than most other ballistic weapons and with enough firepower to be a threat to heavily-armored vehicles."
http://www.sarna.net...ort_Machine_Gun

They are supposed to do as much damage (to mechs and other heavily-armored vehicles) as an AC/2, but with a much shorter range.

Edited by Kaijin, 15 January 2013 - 06:50 AM.

[Adridos]

HRR Insanity, on 14 January 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

MGs - just up the damage to 1-2 dps.

And that's, dear children, how imbalanced equipment is made.

[Yokaiko]

Adridos, on 15 January 2013 - 06:56 AM, said:

And that's, dear children, how imbalanced equipment is made.

Its a ton and a half small laser at 1 DPS, and the most anyone anywhere can put of a mech is 4, and personally I'd have a giggle if a 4MG -1X came charging at me.

Because what else is he going to have a pair of Mlas and an SRM4? Oh noes.

Edited by Yokaiko, 15 January 2013 - 06:59 AM.

[Adridos]

Yokaiko, on 15 January 2013 - 06:59 AM, said:

Its a ton and a half small laser at 1 DPS, and the most anyone anywhere can put of a mech is 4, and personally I'd have a giggle if a 4MG -1X came charging at me.

2DPS per MG, which produces no heat and weights half ton and has a bigger range and stable damage output (miss not as dramatic as with SL) vs 1 DPS SL.

One needs a ton of ammo, the other a HS. But wait, it gets better.

2MGs give you 4 DPS, no heat and weight 2 tons (MGs plus a ton of ammo). VS 2SL give you 2 DPS and require 2 heatsinks for a few shots... 3 tons.

And better...

4MGs give you 12 DPS, no heat and require 4 tons (MGs + 2 tons of ammo, more than you will ever need) VS poor 4SL which now require more than an equal ammount of HS which means ~8 tons and still have poorer range and the added problem of missed fire... al for a whooping 4 DPS... that is easily spread out, or lost completely for the next 2 seconds.

Now add the fact small lasers were and still are an actually deadly weapon which dominated quite a bit of top-tier builds and whoops.

[Yokaiko]

Adridos, on 15 January 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

2DPS per MG, which produces no heat and weights half ton and has a bigger range and stable damage output (miss not as dramatic as with SL) vs 1 DPS SL.

One needs a ton of ammo, the other a HS. But wait, it gets better.

2MGs give you 4 DPS, no heat and weight 2 tons (MGs plus a ton of ammo). VS 2SL give you 2 DPS and require 2 heatsinks for a few shots... 3 tons.

And better...

4MGs give you 12 DPS, no heat and require 4 tons (MGs + 2 tons of ammo, more than you will ever need) VS poor 4SL which now require more than an equal ammount of HS which means ~8 tons and still have poorer range and the added problem of missed fire... al for a whooping 4 DPS... that is easily spread out, or lost completely for the next 2 seconds.

Now add the fact small lasers were and still are an actually deadly weapon which dominated quite a bit of top-tier builds and whoops.

So wait you argument is that 4MGs is better?

Did they make machine guns fire like AC2s? They are only applying that DPS over y'know.......a SECOND....you can roll miss, the target runs around a corner etc etc. Which means that their uptime must be double a pulse laser or 25% greater than an Slas to do the same damage.

Pesonally I haven't put a MG on a mech in so long I don't remember how long they would actually fire for with four you get what? 30 seconds of fire time? and ALL in your face personal like for that?

...and how many 9 Slas Hunchies do you see running around anymore? I see WAY more Mlas, my -4P has mlas for that matter.

Like I said the most you can mount is four, it would actually mean you could do something with the ballistic slots on the lighter mechs except giggle and grind through it.

E

[Gen Kumon]

...personally, I'd be happy with 0.8 DPS. Double what we have currently, still lower than the SL.

[Yokaiko]

Gen Kumon, on 15 January 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

...personally, I'd be happy with 0.8 DPS. Double what we have currently, still lower than the SL.

Still not seeing why people are tweeking so much about bringing them up to small laser damage. You still can't boat them, and you wouldn't anyway on a Cataphract or the Jager when it finally releases.

So that leaves the non-ecm lights and two Cicada variants, hardly game braking.....but maybe even useful.

[stjobe]

Adridos, on 15 January 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

4MGs give you 12 DPS

Sure, at 3 DPS per MG. Nobody but you have mentioned that kind of buff.

Personally, I'd like to see MGs at 1.2 DPS. If you can hold them on target, they'll do more damage than a SL, which is only fair since they weigh more, are ammo dependent, can cause ammo explosions, and you can't mount more than four on any current or planned 'mech.

[Yokaiko]

stjobe, on 15 January 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

Sure, at 3 DPS per MG. Nobody but you have mentioned that kind of buff.

Personally, I'd like to see MGs at 1.2 DPS. If you can hold them on target, they'll do more damage than a SL, which is only fair since they weigh more, are ammo dependent, can cause ammo explosions, and you can't mount more than four on any current or planned 'mech.

Exactly.

[Adridos]

Yokaiko, on 15 January 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

Did they make machine guns fire like AC2s? They are only applying that DPS over y'know.......a SECOND....you can roll miss, the target runs around a corner etc etc. Which means that their uptime must be double a pulse laser or 25% greater than an Slas to do the same damage.

Does SL have some kind of targetting system that makes it hit the same spot all the time? Or is it not that SL I've been playing with?

Oh, and by those crazy numbers a ton of MG ammo does 400 damage. 2 I've put into those 4MG configs do 800 damage. Not bad, not bad at all.

Also, I did a miscalculation on those four MGs damage. Did you not notice? Shows how far your thought process on that matter actually goes beyond stubbornly opposing me.

[Gen Kumon]

Yokaiko, on 15 January 2013 - 07:56 AM, said:

Still not seeing why people are tweeking so much about bringing them up to small laser damage. You still can't boat them, and you wouldn't anyway on a Cataphract or the Jager when it finally releases.

So that leaves the non-ecm lights and two Cicada variants, hardly game braking.....but maybe even useful.

Well, I'd be quite pleased with 1 DPS, but a LOT of people throw fits about it, so I'd be perfectly willing to compromise at .8.

[Yokaiko]

..and unless they make flamer heat negative to the mech carrying it, there will never bee a real use for them beyond troll builds.

[Jaynestown]

MG and Flamers should have comparable damage per second to a small laser when fired at a component that has lost 100% of its armor (+damage vs internals). Against a target with armor, they should do around the same damage they do now. Wouldn't that solve the problem?

That idea about flamers negating heat dissipation in a target is pretty great too. I don't understand why blasting a focused cone of heat off of a nuclear furnace is currently less negative to your heat scale than "moving around the desert" in general. A couple flamers should make Forest Colony feel like Caustic, both for the mech firing and the one being hit.

[Yokaiko]

Adridos, on 15 January 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

Does SL have some kind of targetting system that makes it hit the same spot all the time? Or is it not that SL I've been playing with?

Oh, and by those crazy numbers a ton of MG ammo does 400 damage. 2 I've put into those 4MG configs do 800 damage. Not bad, not bad at all.

Also, I did a miscalculation on those four MGs damage. Did you not notice? Shows how far your thought process on that matter actually goes beyond stubbornly opposing me.

Yeah I did, I didn't feel like beating you over the head with it.

Either way at 1dps per machine gun you would still need more uptime than a small laser to do the same amount of damage...for a heavier weapon, with ammo, that you can't really mount that many of.

Or do you think that you are going to have 4MG Cicada's stopping in the middle of a fight so they can hit one panel? That would be sort of suicide. In the case of the Cicadas that is still a lot less damage potential for the -3C that literally EVERY other variant of the chassis. What it would allow is a decent short range option so you could actually use the one energy slot for a PPC or Llas.

Edited by Yokaiko, 15 January 2013 - 08:14 AM.

[XWorldEaterX]

Jaynestown, on 15 January 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

MG and Flamers should have comparable damage per second to a small laser when fired at a component that has lost 100% of its armor (+damage vs internals). Against a target with armor, they should do around the same damage they do now. Wouldn't that solve the problem?

That idea about flamers negating heat dissipation in a target is pretty great too. I don't understand why blasting a focused cone of heat off of a nuclear furnace is currently less negative to your heat scale than "moving around the desert" in general. A couple flamers should make Forest Colony feel like Caustic, both for the mech firing and the one being hit.

lol that would be pretty cool. I think the flamer is pretty cool but right now it and the mg are useless. I ran into a cicada with mg's and flamers earlier while playing my brothers atlas and I just ignored him as he fired them into my back as we annihilated his entire team. He was so useless that the entire team left him for last even though he was just standing still behind me, it was sad really.

[Yokaiko]

Jaynestown, on 15 January 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

That idea about flamers negating heat dissipation in a target is pretty great too. I don't understand why blasting a focused cone of heat off of a nuclear furnace is currently less negative to your heat scale than "moving around the desert" in general. A couple flamers should make Forest Colony feel like Caustic, both for the mech firing and the one being hit.

It would need a cycle time, or you would have people stacking piles of them on awesomes and jamming weapon group keys in so they can use their heavy energy builds.

I don't think we want un-heatable x5 Flamer Awesomes blasting away with x3 ER-PPCs at RoF.