298 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

The cool down suggestion is just to keep the weapon in line with other weapons. It may be the weakest weapon but it is also the only one that can fire non stop in game. With a damage Buff of up to 3X (2.5 is my preferred buff max) we should look at giving it a short recycle time.

Ammo count change... with the Clanners came the ability to load a 1/2 ton of MG ammo. We can try the option out as we are still testing the game.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 12 February 2013 - 08:48 AM.

[Novawrecker]

stjobe, on 12 February 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

I don't think the MG needs a crit buff.
I don't think the MG needs a range buff.
I don't think the MG needs a cooldown.
I'm indifferent to whether the ammo count is changed.
I do believe the MG needs a 3x damage buff.

I agree with all the above except the last line. 300% damage is too much if no other balancing considerations take place. I do agree that the MG needs a damage increase, just not 300%.

Sifright, on 12 February 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

I am Sifright and I agree with this message.

Back in line, Si, or it's the po-po wif you! (hehe)



"Move along, citizens. Move along ...."

Edited by Novawrecker, 12 February 2013 - 10:00 AM.

[Deathlike]

There's just a lot of bad ideas...

I understand that the boosts required to be made involves around DPS, but as the devs seem to want them to be weapon stripping than armor stripping (thru adding random critical hits thus improving the criticals dealt to weapons and electronics on a mech).

At a minimum, these weapons need a slight range boost to be effective. Making them as bad as small lasers is not really useful (especially when small lasers are much easier to boat).

However, they should never reach any damage levels or range that resemble an "AC1". The machine gun is not an AC, so don't make it something that it is not.

Remember that this weapon when buffed will be boated on lights and meds (like the Raven 4X or the Cic-3C) and having significant changes can make light mechs brawl in a potentially devastating matter.

If anyone has played MW3 with UA (unlimited ammo) and machine guns, boating them shred any mech that gets in their way. Unlike MW3, they can't be boated to the same degree, but that's not how they are supposed to be designed anyways.

Machine guns are supposed to assist in dealing damage when med and small lasers (and other energy weapons) are on cooldown and the fact that they going to be weapon and component strippers would be sufficient in neutering dangerous mechs (like the Raven-3L, with the weakened ECM health) or mechs with an AC20 or gauss. It can be equally useful to be able to reduce your opponent's DPS as much as improving your own DPS. Machine guns are not supposed to be the cureall... they are supposed to be useful and obviously as of right now, they are not. Making them something completely different from what the devs are proposing will create a bigger mess to balance around.

[Throat Punch]

Maverick01, on 05 February 2013 - 06:44 PM, said:

Machine gun range should be changed to 750 meters. This would make the MG great for suppressive fire tactics (although an ammo consumption monster). Furthermore, I would argue the DPS needs to be "slightly" increased to make this weapon viable on the battlefield (yes, all weapons need to be viable in MWO). The developers are taking the wrong approach in balancing this weapon: http://mwomercs.com/...apon-balancing/

For comparison purposes, the light machine gun employed by the U.S. Military is as follows:

M249 Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW)
Effective Range: 800 meters (point target)

I always figured that a 'Mechs machine guns were closer to this:

then to a squad support weapon.

[Joseph Mallan]

I wouldn't call it baoted till we see greater than 4 MGs. And a Mech with a weapon throwing up to 20 bursts of 0.8 damage is not Colossal damage. how much damage can a small laser or SRM 2 throw in a turn?

[stjobe]

Morsdraco, on 12 February 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

I always figured that a 'Mechs machine guns were closer to this:


then to a squad support weapon.

Funny that, I always pictured them closer to this:



After all, we're talking about "machine guns" on something 5-10 times taller than the average man - that .50 BMG would be like a .05 caliber round in comparison, whereas the 30mm GAU-8 above would be more to scale with what a 5.56mm is to a man.

[Viper69]

stjobe, on 12 February 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Funny that, I always pictured them closer to this:



After all, we're talking about "machine guns" on something 5-10 times taller than the average man - that .50 BMG would be like a .05 caliber round in comparison, whereas the 30mm GAU-8 above would be more to scale with what a 5.56mm is to a man.

The machinegun on a mech I put closer to a M2 .50 than the GAU-8. The chunking sound in game sounds more like an M2 anyway than the burrrrrrrr of a GAU-8. Also the Machineguns on mechs were more for dealing with lightly armored vehicles and infantry, which would be way overkill for a Gatling gun. Although the Gatling gun has the advantage of being cooler running and ejects unfired rounds in the event of a dud. Maybe the Mech gun could be a chain gun like on an Apache gunship. it has a slower ROF than a gatling but the advantage of having a rotary barrel.

[Deathlike]

Joseph Mallan, on 12 February 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

I wouldn't call it baoted till we see greater than 4 MGs. And a Mech with a weapon throwing up to 20 bursts of 0.8 damage is not Colossal damage. how much damage can a small laser or SRM 2 throw in a turn?

I wouldn't say it's boated now, since it's useless. When certain weapons are boated, it's generally because it actually is useful (if not OPed). Those who boat them now are pretty much finding out what the rest think of them.

[stjobe]

Viper69, on 12 February 2013 - 12:43 PM, said:

The machinegun on a mech I put closer to a M2 .50 than the GAU-8. The chunking sound in game sounds more like an M2 anyway than the burrrrrrrr of a GAU-8. Also the Machineguns on mechs were more for dealing with lightly armored vehicles and infantry, which would be way overkill for a Gatling gun. Although the Gatling gun has the advantage of being cooler running and ejects unfired rounds in the event of a dud. Maybe the Mech gun could be a chain gun like on an Apache gunship. it has a slower ROF than a gatling but the advantage of having a rotary barrel.

Let's compare:

MWO MG: 500 kg, 1,500 kg with ammo
GAU-8: 281 kg, 1828 kg for complete weapon+ammo
M2 BMG: 38 kg, 55 kg with watercooling.

MWO MG: 2,000 rounds to the ton = 0.5 kg/round
GAU-8: 0.36 - 0.42 kg/round = roughly 2,000 rounds/ton
M2 BMG: 0.05 kg/round = roughly 40,000 rounds/ton

I'm not saying the MWO MG is an GAU-8, but to my mind the GAU-8 is a damn sight closer to a BattleTech MG than a M2 BMG is.

[Throat Punch]

This should give us a better idea: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Machine_Gun
First 3 listed are 20mm gatling guns. So, eveb tho i always thought of them as M2 type guns they seem to be a bit beefier.

[Strum Wealh]

stjobe, on 12 February 2013 - 01:28 PM, said:

Let's compare:

MWO MG: 500 kg, 1,500 kg with ammo
GAU-8: 281 kg, 1828 kg for complete weapon+ammo
M2 BMG: 38 kg, 55 kg with watercooling.

MWO MG: 2,000 rounds to the ton = 0.5 kg/round
GAU-8: 0.36 - 0.42 kg/round = roughly 2,000 rounds/ton
M2 BMG: 0.05 kg/round = roughly 40,000 rounds/ton

I'm not saying the MWO MG is an GAU-8, but to my mind the GAU-8 is a damn sight closer to a BattleTech MG than a M2 BMG is.

Morsdraco, on 12 February 2013 - 01:33 PM, said:

This should give us a better idea: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Machine_Gun
First 3 listed are 20mm gatling guns. So, eveb tho i always thought of them as M2 type guns they seem to be a bit beefier.

The other thing to keep in mind is that BattleTech's ballistic weapons are generally described as magazine-fed burst-fire weapons (in much the same style as the clip-fed 30 mm RARDEN autocannon used by the British Army) - that is, a single "unit" of ammo represents a burst that is made up of multiple individual projectiles.

GM "Whirlwind" (AC-5)

Quote

Mounted on the GM Marauder BattleMech, this weapon is approximately the size of a tree and fires shells in the 120 mm range in three round bursts.

Ceres Arms "Crusher" Super Heavy Cannon (AC-20)

Quote

Mounted on the Quickscell Hetzer Combat Vehicle, this weapon fires shells in the 150 mm range in ten shot bursts.

Enforcer BattleMech with "Federated" AC-10 (circa 2777)

Quote

Enforcers use big, ten-round clips that are easily slipped into and out of the 'Mech's back. If possible, a truck and crane system are parked close to Enforcers during battle to allow quick reloading of the 'Mech's autocannon. If the battle is too mobile and the Enforcer has no opportunities to reload, its pilot has no option but to mother his ten shots.

MechBuster Aerospace Fighter with "Zeus 75" AC-20 (circa 3023)

Quote

The one asset to the MechBuster is its Zeus 75 Autocannon/20, which fires a four-round burst of hyper-velocity depleted uranium armor penetrators (HDUAP).

Schwerer Gustav BattleMech with experimental Clan RAC-5 (circa 3073)

Quote

...three tons of reloads for the ammo hungry Rotary Autocannon, equal to sixty bursts, in the 'Mechs' CASE protected right-torso give the Gustav good endurance in the field.

It stands to reason that the Machine Guns are supposed to be depicted as working in the same way - that is, each of the 200 "units" of ammo would represent a magazine of, say, 50 individual bullets that are fired over the course of a 10-second period (one TT turn).
Likewise, AMS's 12 "units" of ammo would represent a multi-bullet burst from a magazine.

However, MWO took the license to model each unit not as a burst of projectiles, but as a projectile unto itself (and granting the MG and AMS far more units of ammo to compensate).

Personally, I would argue that the concept of the BattleTech MG is supposed to be closer to (a very heavy and magazine-fed version of) the M61 Vulcan (which is also the basis for the Phanlax CIWS, on which AMS is ostensibly based) than to the GAU-8, and that it is generally meant to fill a role more similar to that of the M2 than that of the GAU-8.

[ConnorSinclair]

Strum Wealh, on 12 February 2013 - 04:30 PM, said:

The other thing to keep in mind is that BattleTech's ballistic weapons are generally described as magazine-fed burst-fire weapons (in much the same style as the clip-fed 30 mm RARDEN autocannon used by the British Army) - that is, a single "unit" of ammo represents a burst that is made up of multiple individual projectiles.

GM "Whirlwind" (AC-5)

Ceres Arms "Crusher" Super Heavy Cannon (AC-20)

Enforcer BattleMech with "Federated" AC-10 (circa 2777)

MechBuster Aerospace Fighter with "Zeus 75" AC-20 (circa 3023)

Schwerer Gustav BattleMech with experimental Clan RAC-5 (circa 3073)


It stands to reason that the Machine Guns are supposed to be depicted as working in the same way - that is, each of the 200 "units" of ammo would represent a magazine of, say, 50 individual bullets that are fired over the course of a 10-second period (one TT turn).
Likewise, AMS's 12 "units" of ammo would represent a multi-bullet burst from a magazine.

However, MWO took the license to model each unit not as a burst of projectiles, but as a projectile unto itself (and granting the MG and AMS far more units of ammo to compensate).

Personally, I would argue that the concept of the BattleTech MG is supposed to be closer to (a very heavy and magazine-fed version of) the M61 Vulcan (which is also the basis for the Phanlax CIWS, on which AMS is ostensibly based) than to the GAU-8, and that it is generally meant to fill a role more similar to that of the M2 than that of the GAU-8.

the mech MG is almost ton for ton in line with the avenger

[Joseph Mallan]

stjobe, on 12 February 2013 - 12:29 PM, said:

Funny that, I always pictured them closer to this:



After all, we're talking about "machine guns" on something 5-10 times taller than the average man - that .50 BMG would be like a .05 caliber round in comparison, whereas the 30mm GAU-8 above would be more to scale with what a 5.56mm is to a man.

Your picture of the GAU-8 with the VW car, includes the weapon and feed system.The Picture I included is the Weapon without Ammo bin. Not nearly as impressive. Stand alone it IS the weight of a Clan Machine Gun (280 Kg or just over a 0.25 Ton)though.

[ConnorSinclair]

Joseph Mallan, on 13 February 2013 - 04:20 AM, said:

Your picture of the GAU-8 with the VW car, includes the weapon and feed system.The Picture I included is the Weapon without Ammo bin. Not nearly as impressive. Stand alone it IS the weight of a Clan Machine Gun (280 Kg or just over a 0.25 Ton)though.

[Joseph Mallan]

ConnorSinclair, on 13 February 2013 - 02:56 AM, said:

the mech MG is almost ton for ton in line with the avenger

Except the Avenger is 110kg. or 7/8 a ton light... of a ton At 110Kg it is half again as light as a Clan Mech's machine gun, but IS in line with a Battle Armor's MG (100Kg).
Sorry Connor I couldn't help it. My sense of humor is unchecked this early.

Your Picture of the GAU-8 is still MUCH smaller (mass) than the VW sir. I see the feed system is in the background though.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 13 February 2013 - 04:39 AM.

[Retu81]

The problem with comparing BT MGs to a GAU-8 is that it's absolutely useless against the frontal or even the side armor of a main battle tank. A situation, which IMHO is similar to using battletech MGs against mechs.

Sources (wiki, fas.org) give GAU-8 armor penetration of 69mm@500 meters and 38mm@1000 meters, still impressive for a 30mm gun. At those ranges GAU-8 would have problems penetrating the front armor of a M4 Sherman (for example a T-55 has 100 mm of armor at hull front). Only way to make it work, which fortunately is an option for an attack aircraft, is to attack the tank from above, where the armor is thinnest (again T-55 as an example: 30-33 mm hull/turret top).

[ConnorSinclair]

Retu81, on 13 February 2013 - 04:40 AM, said:

The problem with comparing BT MGs to a GAU-8 is that it's absolutely useless against the frontal or even the side armor of a main battle tank. A situation, which IMHO is similar to using battletech MGs against mechs.

Sources (wiki, fas.org) give GAU-8 armor penetration of 69mm@500 meters and 38mm@1000 meters, still impressive for a 30mm gun. At those ranges GAU-8 would have problems penetrating the front armor of a M4 Sherman (for example a T-55 has 100 mm of armor at hull front). Only way to make it work, which fortunately is an option for an attack aircraft, is to attack the tank from above, where the armor is thinnest (again T-55 as an example: 30-33 mm hull/turret top).

This is not surprising considering the MGs in the battletech franchise are only ever good on exposed sections. You knocked armor off with a heavy weapon then sprayed the exposed area with MG's in an attempt to cause catastrophic failure.

Otherwise we're drifting off into Heavy MG, which is really Anti-mech machineguns.

Basically AC5s with extremely short range, god I miss that.

[Joseph Mallan]

A little over 1 1/2" of armor at over 1/2 mile. that cannot be AP ammo can it? So in its effective range(1,220m) The GAU-8 has ammo that is not effective quite v tank armor (the M1A2 Abrams tank has 120 mm (4.72 inches of armor).

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 13 February 2013 - 04:55 AM.

[ConnorSinclair]

Joseph Mallan, on 13 February 2013 - 04:36 AM, said:

Except the Avenger is 110kg. or 7/8 a ton light... of a ton At 110Kg it is half again as light as a Clan Mech's machine gun, but IS in line with a Battle Armor's MG (100Kg).
Sorry Connor I couldn't help it. My sense of humor is unchecked this early.

Your Picture of the GAU-8 is still MUCH smaller (mass) than the VW sir. I see the feed system is in the background though.

Without the feed all you have is a fancy barrel and hammer, hell the feed system is the most advanced part of the avenger. You might as well throw away the entire weapon without it.

Thats like saying, no you can't have the advanced Doppler with your Aim-7, because its not the actual missile despite the fact that neither could exsist without the other.

Joseph Mallan, on 13 February 2013 - 04:52 AM, said:

A little over 1 1/2" of armor at over 1/2 mile. that cannot be AP ammo can it? So in its effective range(1,220m) The GAU-8 has ammo that is not effective quite v tank armor (t[color=#0E2233]he M1A2 Abrams tank has [/color]120 mm[color=#0E2233] (4.72 [/color]inches[color=#0E2233]) of armor).[/color]

usually, AP, HE and ball?

Possibly 1a, 10, 1he, 10?

[Joseph Mallan]

ConnorSinclair, on 13 February 2013 - 04:51 AM, said:

Basically AC5s with extremely short range, god I miss that.

Sorry but 120mm is in no means a Machine gun. Heavy or otherwise.