298 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

MustrumRidcully, on 11 February 2013 - 08:50 AM, said:

Non-Stop or stopped, it's still only 0.8 DPS. Even if you boat 16 of them, that's only a DPS of 12.8 for 9 tons. 3 SRM6 bring 11.25 at a weight of 9 tons, at three times the range. With an alpha potential of 45, not 1.28. And that's only the theoretical DPS. After 5 seconds, 16 0.8 DPS MGs will have dealt about 64 damage. 3 SRM 6 will have dealt 90 damage. After 10 seconds, 16 0.8 DPS MGs will have dealt about 128 damage. 3 SRM6 will have dealt 135 damage. Now imagine you would ever be put in a situation where you cannot fire 10+ seconds continuously at an enemy - which will give you more damage output? Those 16 MGs or those 3 SMR6?

the SRM6 is the largest SRM... A better comparison would be the SRM2 or the Small Laser. SRM2 brings 1.43 DpS and the Small lasers brings 1 DpS. 0.8 for the MG is in proportion to its light brothers.The machine gun even on TT did less damage per shot than both its light competitors.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 11 February 2013 - 09:00 AM.

[Sifright]

People seemed to be confused as what exactly DPS is.

like i've seen people claiming that the fact the MG continuously fires is what makes it's low dps okay.
(this means it's lesson time! Yaaaaay)

so DPS for those that dont know what it means stands for Damage per second.

it's a simple mathematical way of looking at how much damage a weapon can be expected to achieve theoretically over a given time period presuming perfect accuracy.

A weapon that has High DPS and low damage per shot is actually a much more difficult weapon to use because you have to constantly aim at your target and readjust where you are shooting as he moves and it doesn't give you a chance to dodge or take evasive action with out destroying your damage potential.

A weapon with Low DPS and High damage per shot is much easier to use as you only have to aim once every so often as you fire your big burst of damage and then you can take evasive action.

This has been a lecture from Sifright, I hope that helped any one that didn't understand. (as i've seen this misinterpretation come up multiple times)

Joseph Mallan, on 11 February 2013 - 08:59 AM, said:

the SRM6 is the largest SRM... A better comparison would be the SRM2 or the Small Laser. SRM2 brings 1.43 DpS and the Small lasers brings 1 DpS. 0.8 for the MG is in proportion to its light brothers.The machine gun even on TT did less damage per shot than both its light competitors.

And the machine gun in table top also didn't make it harder to dodge or require the pilot to sacrifice the ability to take evasive action whilst using. Which it does in MWO.

You can't do a direct port of TT and expect it to work right.

Now me personally I'm fine with tossing most of the TT justifications in the trash can. As long as it makes a good and balanced game.

PGI obviously feel some what similar to that sentiment or they wouldn't have made the AC/2 the 2nd best ballistic weapon for damage over time.

it's just clear they haven't spent much time really thinking about the mg.

Edited by Sifright, 11 February 2013 - 09:06 AM.

[Novawrecker]

MustrumRidcully, on 11 February 2013 - 08:50 AM, said:

After 5 seconds, 16 0.8 DPS MGs will have dealt about 64 damage. 3 SRM 6 will have dealt 90 damage.
After 10 seconds, 16 0.8 DPS MGs will have dealt about 128 damage. 3 SRM6 will have dealt 135 damage.

What you are missing is that those SRMs, as lethal as they are, do it's damage every 4 seconds. While your (proposed damage) MGs doing 12.8 DPS, does it's damage every second (that's taking greater than PPC/L.Pulse/AC10/SRM4/etc/etc/etc damage per second). While you are correct that at 5 seconds the SRM will get a 2nd volley off and do 90 damage, it is only 6 damage above from your MG's at 84 damage (same goes for the 10 sec comparison with a difference of 7 damage).

By the time the SRMs get to their cool down, the MGs would have most likely blown something away of not scrapped internals. I'm not saying the SRMs won't do the same, but with your figures, the MGs will do it quicker and with no worries of heat nor cooldown.

Although a 200% increase is not as rediculous as 300% increase in damage for MGs, it is marginally high. Serious balancing considerations have to take place for it to receive such a damage boost.

Edited by Novawrecker, 11 February 2013 - 09:16 AM.

[gamingogre]

Novawrecker, on 07 February 2013 - 11:25 AM, said:

Except that small lasers have both a cooldown and heat generation to balance them out. Your triple-damaged increased MG does not. Scratch your head for a change and realize that triple damage is too much. I am not in disagreement with you that the MG does need a damage increase, but triple is too much and will be abused.

Novawrecker, on 07 February 2013 - 03:14 PM, said:

Sirfright, keep thinking that people will not abuse the MG if it's raised to 1.2 dps. We currently have legal mechs that can carry 4 ballistics on them (you know, one of those "factors" not accounted for, according to you). If the Pirannah, or omni-mechs with pod weights instead of other factors, are released, expect this matter to be even more absurd.

We've beaten this dead horse enough to ensure the zombie apocalypse, but 300% increase in damage is leading to broken levels. Don't want to believe me? Let them succumb to this appeal and have them do this increase .... then the real crying will begin.

After reading all this, I wonder if you have a misunderstanding of the meaning of DPS(damage per second) in context with cooldown and continual damage. In this contect, DPS is absolute and ideal. Absolute means that a cooldown or continual damage effect HAS NO EFFECT on the DPS of the weapon. These effects only affect how the damage is applied. Ideal means that the DPS damage given is assuming you hit you target 100% of the time. Having a coodown means you only have to aim at your target some of the time to get full DPS. Continuous fire means you have to aim 100% of the time to get 100% of the DPS.
Currently the MG DPS is below all other weapons, has a more difficult effect(continual fire) to manage and comes with the minimum range given in the game.
Assuming weight, range and crit slots stay the same, I recommend raising the DPS of the MG to around that of the small laser. Due to it's firing effect it will rarely see it's full DPS and the ammo penalty balances the heat problems of the SL.

[Sifright]

Sifright, on 11 February 2013 - 09:05 AM, said:

People seemed to be confused as what exactly DPS is.

like i've seen people claiming that the fact the MG continuously fires is what makes it's low dps okay.
(this means it's lesson time! Yaaaaay)

so DPS for those that dont know what it means stands for Damage per second.

it's a simple mathematical way of looking at how much damage a weapon can be expected to achieve theoretically over a given time period presuming perfect accuracy.

A weapon that has High DPS and low damage per shot is actually a much more difficult weapon to use because you have to constantly aim at your target and readjust where you are shooting as he moves and it doesn't give you a chance to dodge or take evasive action with out destroying your damage potential.

A weapon with Low DPS and High damage per shot is much easier to use as you only have to aim once every so often as you fire your big burst of damage and then you can take evasive action.

This has been a lecture from Sifright, I hope that helped any one that didn't understand. (as i've seen this misinterpretation come up multiple times)




And the machine gun in table top also didn't make it harder to dodge or require the pilot to sacrifice the ability to take evasive action whilst using. Which it does in MWO.

You can't do a direct port of TT and expect it to work right.

Now me personally I'm fine with tossing most of the TT justifications in the trash can. As long as it makes a good and balanced game.

PGI obviously feel some what similar to that sentiment or they wouldn't have made the AC/2 the 2nd best ballistic weapon for damage over time.

it's just clear they haven't spent much time really thinking about the mg.

Novawrecker, on 11 February 2013 - 09:12 AM, said:

What you are missing is that those SRMs, as lethal as they are, do it's damage every 4 seconds. While your (proposed damage) MGs doing 12.8 DPS, does it's damage every second (that's taking greater than PPC/L.Pulse/AC10/SRM4/etc/etc/etc damage per second). While you are correct that at 5 seconds the SRM will get a 2nd volley off and do 90 damage, it is only 6 damage above from your MG's at 84 damage (same goes for the 10 sec comparison with a difference of 7 damage).

By the time the SRMs get to their cool down, the MGs would have most likely blown something away of not scrapped internals. I'm not saying the SRMs won't do the same, but with your figures, the MGs will do it quicker and with no worries of heat nor cooldown.

Although a 200% increase is not as rediculous as 300% increase in damage for MGs, it is marginally high. Serious balancing considerations have to take place for it to receive such a damage boost.

Learn to read.

[Novawrecker]

gamingogre, on 11 February 2013 - 09:17 AM, said:

Continuous fire means you have to aim 100% of the time to get 100% of the DPS.

I'm sorry, is holding a button THAT difficult for you? Cause those that currently do it, continue to do so with no problem what so ever. To those players, continuous aim is little to no difficulties to them. If they allow triple increased MGs, it will be those players that will make the most (ab)use of it. It will be those players that will pump out the absurd damage from such weapons if they permit a 300% increase.

I do believe the MG does need a damage increase, but this farfetched nonsense of 300% is beyond rediculous. But hey, don't listen to anyone's warning about this pandora's box some of you want to open. Let them make the changes and provide addresses for all those crying about the change later, year supplies of tissues are to be delivered.

[REDACTED]

Edited by Viterbi, 11 February 2013 - 07:27 PM.
Removed offensive language

[Joseph Mallan]

Sifright, on 11 February 2013 - 09:05 AM, said:

1) And the machine gun in table top also didn't make it harder to dodge or require the pilot to sacrifice the ability to take evasive action whilst using. Which it does in MWO.

No weapons on TT made it harder to dodge with the exception of Pulse lasres and buck rounds vs Aerospace Fighters (+1 to hit bonus)

Quote

You can't do a direct port of TT and expect it to work right.

WHich is why I am trying to use onlt MWO mechanics to show how to balance MGs to other light weapons.

Quote

Now me personally I'm fine with tossing most of the TT justifications in the trash can. As long as it makes a good and balanced game.

PGI obviously feel some what similar to that sentiment or they wouldn't have made the AC/2 the 2nd best ballistic weapon for damage over time.

it's just clear they haven't spent much time really thinking about the mg.

Or they thought about it and went... Meh, lil ballistic, lil damage. I still think a 0.8 DpS with comparable cool downs to a AC2 would be OK for such a small gun. Even a .25 Cool down would be acceptable to me. A Machine gun has to keep its eye on the target just like LRMs or Lasers do deliver full damage and that makes sense for a weapon that fires a lot of little bullets v spitting out a few high powered shells per minute.

[Sifright]

Novawrecker, on 11 February 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

I'm sorry, is holding a button THAT difficult for you? Cause those that currently do it, continue to do so with no problem what so ever. To those players, continuous aim is little to no difficulties to them.

Aiming at a single mech continuously has never been difficult.

It's the fact that doing so puts you at a huge disadvantage, for your machine guns to hit constantly you can't take any evasive action this is a HUGE downside and you are ignoring it completely.

Novawrecker, on 11 February 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

If they allow triple increased MGs, it will be those players that will make the most (ab)use of it. It will be those players that will pump out the absurd damage from such weapons if they permit a 300% increase.

300% damage increase is 1.2 DPS which would be impossible to maintain with out getting your mech blown to scrap.

Novawrecker, on 11 February 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

I do believe the MG does need a damage increase, but this farfetched nonsense of 300% is beyond rediculous. But hey, don't listen to anyone's warning about this pandora's box some of you want to open. Let them make the changes and provide addresses for all those crying about the change later, year supplies of tissues are to be delivered.

What pandoras box no mech has no more than 4 ballistic hard points even with the 300% damage buff it still wouldn't make any mech that would normally take AC2 or other ballistics take the MG.

[REDACTED]

Continuous firing weapons that with a 0.1 cool down is a detriment and you keep bringing it up like it's a plus side, either you don't understand how the game works (which is possible) or you were getting confused by wording.

Either way you were still mistaken, and you should have read what had been said more throughly.

Edited by Viterbi, 11 February 2013 - 07:27 PM.
Removed reference to removed content

[stjobe]

Novawrecker, on 11 February 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

I do believe the MG does need a damage increase, but this farfetched nonsense of 300% is beyond rediculous.

At the moment, a MG is about a third as much damage on target as a Small Laser. How is it "beyond ridiculous" to make it as powerful as a Small Laser, when it's also a ton heavier, has to have ammo (which can explode), and needs to be kept on-target 100% of the time to be even that powerful?

Let's look at a badly ASCII-formatted table of a theoretical 15 seconds of firing a choice couple of weapons:

s__1xSL_3xMG__1xML
0___3___1.2_____5
1_______2.4_____
2_______3.6_____
3___6___4.8_____
4_______6.0_____10
5_______7.2_____
6___9___8.4_____
7_______9.6_____
8_______10.8____15
9___12__12.0____
10______13.2____
11______14.4____
12__15__15.6____20
13______16.8____
14______18______
15__18__19.2____

So, that's in order of columns the second, a single Small Laser, three current MGs (or a single 300% buffed MG), and a single Medium Laser. The number in the column is damage done to the target so far.

Notice how the two lasers don't have numbers by all the seconds? That's seconds when the laser doesn't need to be held on target to keep its DPS constant. Notice how the MG has numbers by all the seconds? That's because you can't take it off-target for even a tenth of a second without losing DPS.

Also note that the Small Laser weighs 0.5 tons, the Medium Laser weighs 1 ton, and three MGs weigh 2.5 tons with a ton of ammo (a single 300% buffed MG still weighs 1.5 tons with a ton of ammo).

Edited by stjobe, 11 February 2013 - 10:31 AM.

[Darth JarJar]

Vassago Rain, on 05 February 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

Machineguns are great for killing mechs.
That's why the piranha exists, and so many macross mechs boat them...

Please stop talking about this subject, as not a single one of you knows what you're saying.

Says the guy comparing Mechwarrior to macross.....

[Sifright]

von Bremerhaven, on 11 February 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

Says the guy comparing Mechwarrior to macross.....

The irony here is that you clearly know less about Mech warrior history than vassago.

also hes right.

[Eggs Mayhem]

I hate doing this, but I feel like the math I did earlier in the thread regarding triple DPS got straight up ignored. Did it not make sense or did only a few read it?

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 11 February 2013 - 10:28 AM, said:

At the moment, a MG is about a third as much damage on target as a Small Laser. How is it "beyond ridiculous" to make it as powerful as a Small Laser, when it's also a ton heavier, has to have ammo (which can explode), and needs to be kept on-target 100% of the time to be even that powerful?

Let's look at a badly ASCII-formatted table of a theoretical 15 seconds of firing a choice couple of weapons:

s__1xSL_3xMG__1xML
0___3___1.2_____5
1_______2.4_____
2_______3.6_____
3___6___4.8_____
4_______6.0_____10
5_______7.2_____
6___9___8.4_____
7_______9.6_____
8_______10.8____15
9___12__12.0____
10______13.2____
11______14.4____
12__15__15.6____20
13______16.8____
14______18______
15__18__19.2____

So, that's in order of columns the second, a single Small Laser, three current MGs (or a single 300% buffed MG), and a single Medium Laser. The number in the column is damage done to the target so far.

Notice how the two lasers don't have numbers by all the seconds? That's seconds when the laser doesn't need to be held on target to keep its DPS constant. Notice how the MG has numbers by all the seconds? That's because you can't take it off-target for even a tenth of a second without losing DPS.

Also note that the Small Laser weighs 0.5 tons, the Medium Laser weighs 1 ton, and three MGs weigh 2.5 tons with a ton of ammo (a single 300% buffed MG still weighs 1.5 tons with a ton of ammo).

I like this graph! It shows both the Bads of the MG. The bad MGs have to have a constant sream of bullets to do any type of damage. No other weapons do that. All have a cool down but the MG. This eventually (as in long time) leads the MG to doing more damage than the lasers. That should not happen.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 11 February 2013 - 11:02 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Vassago Rain, on 05 February 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

Machineguns are great for killing mechs.
That's why the piranha exists, and so many macross mechs boat them...

Please stop talking about this subject, as not a single one of you knows what you're saying.

IF Mgs were great at killing Mechs... The Piranha would not have needed to boat 12 of them.
AC20=Mech Killer
Gauss=Mech Killer
MG=..........Not Mech Killer.

Got any stats for those Macross MGs? It would be interesting to compare. (honest I'm interested!)

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 11 February 2013 - 11:11 AM.

[stjobe]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 February 2013 - 11:00 AM, said:

I like this graph! It shows both the Bads of the MG. The bad MGs have to have a constant sream of bullets to do any type of damage. No other weapons do that. All have a cool down but the MG. This eventually (as in long time) leads the MG to doing more damage than the lasers. That should not happen.

You're looking at three MGs after about 15 seconds out-damaging a single Small Laser. What enemy are you going to fire on for 15 seconds straight that isn't already dead or could be dispatched much more easily with just about any other weapon?

The continuous-fire nature of the MG is a serious drawback in a game where the alpha strike rules supreme.

Let's have a look at another hypothetical scenario: 5 hardpoints, filled either with Small Lasers or (current) MGs:
5 SL, 0 MG: 5.0 DPS, 15 alpha
4 SL, 1 MG: 4.4 DPS, 12.04 alpha
3 SL, 2 MG: 3.8 DPS, 9.08 alpha
2 SL, 3 MG: 3.2 DPS, 6.12 alpha
1 SL, 4 MG: 2.6 DPS, 3.15 alpha
0 SL, 5 MG: 2.0 DPS, 0.16 alpha

Notice how most of the DPS and practically all of the alpha is from the Small Lasers? And how the more MGs you take, the lower your DPS?

Now substitute the MGs for 300% buffed MGs:
5 SL, 0 MG: 5.0 DPS, 15 alpha
4 SL, 1 MG: 5.2 DPS, 12.12 alpha
3 SL, 2 MG: 5.4 DPS, 9.24 alpha
2 SL, 3 MG: 5.6 DPS, 6.36 alpha
1 SL, 4 MG: 5.8 DPS, 3.48 alpha
0 SL, 5 MG: 6.0 DPS, 0.6 alpha

The DPS actually gets better the more triple-MGs you have, but the alpha is still practically all from the Small Lasers.

I believe that the continuous-fire mechanic of the MG means it can have a higher DPS than the Small Laser and not be overpowered. There's just not enough time in MWO for it to make a significant difference. A target that's stationary is either already dead or disconnected, or it could just as easily be taken out by a heavier weapon. One of the big issues though is that the next heavier ballistics is 5.5 tons heavier and not really suited for mounting on a light 'mech.

Edited by stjobe, 11 February 2013 - 11:16 AM.

[Gaan Cathal]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 February 2013 - 11:07 AM, said:

IF Mgs were great at killing Mechs... The Piranha would not have needed to boat 12 of them.
AC20=Mech Killer
Gauss=Mech Killer
MG=..........Not Mech Killer.

In fairness, SLAS in MWO aren't exactly great at killing mechs either, so being more-or-less on par wouldn't break the MG mechanically or conceptually. The simplest solution is to set it's DPS to equal or slightly less than an SLAS (bear in mind it's got that constant-fire issue) and tune the ammo-per-ton to keep it in check. A heatless ballistic SLAS with 10k ammo/ton would obviously be overpowered, one with 10 ammo/ton would be a joke. Ergo somewhere on that scale is a range of ammo/ton values that make the MG appropriately powered. This would also somewhat self-correct potential boating issues since more tonnage of ammo will be necessary, which is a tough issue for light mechs, requiring control of fire to focus on compartments and lowering realised DPS to keep it in check. I certainly don't see larger mechs replacing an AC/2 and ton ammo with a pair of MGs and six tons ammo, put it that way, and that's the balancing concern. It doesn't matter if folks would replace SLAS with MGs or vica versa since they can't.

[Novawrecker]

Sifright, on 11 February 2013 - 10:20 AM, said:

You can get angry fling crap at me like that but at the end of the day you HAVEN'T been reading whats been said.

Pardon, was it not you that started this "flinging", or need I quote you? As much as you want this to urk me, it didn't as I was more like "yeah yeah, blow it our your hole/brain (they're in the same loc anyways)".

I didn't read your post cause I wasn't responding to it and when I had finally posted my response, it was in mid of you making your own (i.e. I didn't even get a chance to read yours). Again, practice what your preach.

On to related matters. If you cannot see that raising MG damage by 300% without taking to consideration other balancing factors, well I am sorry, I'm not going to beat it into your thick skull and frankly that's your limitation. There are more effective manners to go about this than just a flat 300% increase. You believe consistant aiming is a detriment? There will ALWAYS be several people that do things beyond what you believe can be done. You haven't faced the pilots that consistantly stay on your back continuosly popping flamers on you (and I don't mean the jackholes trying to emulate it, I mean the actual pilots that consistantly succeed at it). And while, granted, flamers doesn't do as much, give these pilots that have practiced consitanly aiming at your back while still avoiding you these 300% increased MGs, they'll gladly make use of it by taking shots at your back every second tearing you apart even quicker than they should due to your folley of 1.2 dps MGs. And if 4 ballistics isn't enough to convince you, let them make this MG change and see the Pirannah, or even worse, they release Omni-mechs (be them IS or Clan) based on Pod tonnage solely released.

Other balancing factors need to take place to warrent this damage increase. But hey, not my prob if you wish not to recognize this.

Edited by Novawrecker, 11 February 2013 - 11:26 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 11 February 2013 - 11:10 AM, said:

You're looking at three MGs after about 15 seconds out-damaging a single Small Laser. What enemy are you going to fire on for 15 seconds straight that isn't already dead or could be dispatched much more easily with just about any other weapon?

The continuous-fire nature of the MG is a serious drawback in a game where the alpha strike rules supreme.

Let's have a look at another hypothetical scenario: 5 hardpoints, filled either with Small Lasers or (current) MGs:
5 SL, 0 MG: 5.0 DPS, 15 alpha
4 SL, 1 MG: 4.4 DPS, 12.04 alpha
3 SL, 2 MG: 3.8 DPS, 9.08 alpha
2 SL, 3 MG: 3.2 DPS, 6.12 alpha
1 SL, 4 MG: 2.6 DPS, 3.15 alpha
0 SL, 5 MG: 2.0 DPS, 0.16 alpha

Notice how most of the DPS and practically all of the alpha is from the Small Lasers? And how the more MGs you take, the lower your DPS?

Now substitute the MGs for 300% buffed MGs:
5 SL, 0 MG: 5.0 DPS, 15 alpha
4 SL, 1 MG: 5.2 DPS, 12.12 alpha
3 SL, 2 MG: 5.4 DPS, 9.24 alpha
2 SL, 3 MG: 5.6 DPS, 6.36 alpha
1 SL, 4 MG: 5.8 DPS, 3.48 alpha
0 SL, 5 MG: 6.0 DPS, 0.6 alpha

The DPS actually gets better the more triple-MGs you have, but the alpha is still practically all from the Small Lasers.

I believe that the continuous-fire mechanic of the MG means it can have a higher DPS than the Small Laser and not be overpowered. There's just not enough time in MWO for it to make a significant difference. A target that's stationary is either already dead or disconnected, or it could just as easily be taken out by a heavier weapon.

Yes which is why a MG should get 0.8 damage per second with a 0.5 second cool down. Or however it would need to be back to being 2/3 as powerful as a Small Laser per turn. So for instance Small laser does 12 damage in one ten second turn a Machine gun should do 8 damage in one ten second turn. Both need to keep the "beam/stream" on target the same length of time with similar cool down. It's not that hard to balance the two guns!

[Sifright]

Novawrecker, on 11 February 2013 - 11:19 AM, said:

Pardon, was it not you that started this "flinging", or need I quote you? As much as you want this to urk me, it didn't as I was more like "yeah yeah, blow it our your hole/brain (they're in the same loc anyways)".

I didn't read your post cause I wasn't responding to it and when I had finally posted my response, it was in mid of you making your own (i.e. I didn't even get a chance to read yours). Again, practice what your preach.

On to related matters. If you cannot see that raising MG damage by 300% without taking to consideration other balancing factors, well I am sorry, I'm not going to beat it into your thick skull and frankly that's your limitation. There are more effective manners to go about this than just a flat 300% increase. You believe consistant aiming is a detriment? There will ALWAYS be several people that do things beyond what you believe can be done. You haven't faced the pilots that consistantly stay on your back continuosly popping flamers on you (and I don't mean the jackholes trying to emulate it, I mean the actual pilots that consistantly succeed at it). And while, granted, flamers doesn't do as much, give these pilots that have practiced consitanly aiming at your back while still avoiding you these 300% increased MGs, they'll gladly make use of it by taking shots at your back every second tearing you apart even quicker than they should due to your folley of 1.2 dps MGs. And if 4 ballistics isn't enough to convince you, let them make this MG change and see the Pirannah, or even worse, they release Omni-mechs (be them IS or Clan) based on Pod tonnage solely released.

Other balancing factors need to take place to warrent this damage increase. But hey, not my prob if you wish not to recognize this.

lol. thanks for the good laugh

[Novawrecker]

Sifright, on 11 February 2013 - 11:28 AM, said:

lol. thanks for the good laugh

You're welcome, but don't call your "farting", your laughs. Down right embarassing