443 replies to this topic

[One Medic Army]

Novawrecker, on 06 February 2013 - 03:13 AM, said:

Ah this debate again ...

Reminder:

Small laser - 3 damage, 2 heat, 2.25 sec cooldown (balanced for a .5 ton weapon).

Unlike the MG which has 0 heat and virtually 0 cooldown. And you still want it to do more damage, or are you still blind to the making it broken by increasing it's damage with out changing it's coolddown/heat ratio?

The fact that they are increasing it's damage multiple when critting is more than sufficient.

A small laser does 3 damage over .75 seconds followed by a cooldown of 2.25 seconds.
An MG does .4 damage over 1 second with no cooldown.
Since short-range weapons are best used on fast mechs, and fast mechs do best with high burst damage loadouts the MG is completely worthless for damage.

I have been nearly cored through the rear in a cataphract, then chased around for a good 30seconds by a 4MG spider without being killed because the dmg is so pathetic, then I turned around and blasted him until he went away.

MGs are terrible because you need to hold them on target for longer to do less damage compared to small lasers. Even if MGs got a 3x damage buff (1.2dmg/second) you would still need to hold an MG on target for 2.5 seconds to do damage equivalent to a small laser on target for .75 seconds.

If you're using small lasers/MGs heat isn't an issue since (unless you're stoooooopid) you're doing it on a small fast mech, which has about 19-20 heatsinks (with DHS), and only 4-6 weapon hardpoints.

[Thirdstar]

Tichorius Davion, on 06 February 2013 - 11:04 AM, said:

So the Ballistic Slots on all Lights are effectively useless because no self respecting light pilot will put an AC/2 on it.

Bit trollish of me, apologies. But it seemed appropriate.

[CDLord HHGD]

KuruptU4Fun, on 06 February 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

Cdlore, the only thing your chart doesn't take into account is the MG, is not a point to point weapon like an A/C 2 or SL. It has a cone of fire that spreads damage out over more than one area, the other point is that those MG buffs will do damage to the internal structure. Otherwise you're spot on

I suppose the "cone" would take into effect the gun bouncing around. Though on a round by round basis, it is point to point. That's what I believe the Devs did because it doesn't make sense for the MG to fire the burst and then have a cooldown (or maybe it does), but the current rendition of the Mg is it spitting a constant stream of rounds at the target. Some hit the same spot, some don't. So to take it up to .2 damage per round and drop the ammo to 400 rounds may be the sweet spot. Also, I don't see in the book a reference to the "cone". Also, it's CDLord .

[Joseph Mallan]

FupDup, on 06 February 2013 - 11:05 AM, said:

Those are the only targets in MWO...


And how exactly is one supposed to fill up all 4 ballistic slots on a Spider 5K without using a single MG? The other smallest ballistic weapon is the AC/2, and those are 6 tons each. 4 of them means you would need 24 tons to fill up all of a 5K's ballistic hardpoints without using a single MG. That leaves you 6 tons left over for ammo, armor, and engie...um okay.

You don't, you use a large laser instead and do damage at long range!

[FupDup]

Joseph Mallan, on 06 February 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

You don't, you use a large laser instead and do damage at long range!

Yeah, but then again doesn't that kinda defeat the entire purpose of even having a 4-ballistic variant in the first place? In program design, it's usually a bad idea to include stuff that does nothing other than waste hard drive space and slow down loading times.

Edited by FupDup, 06 February 2013 - 11:11 AM.

[DEN_Ninja]

Thirdstar, on 06 February 2013 - 11:06 AM, said:

Bit trollish of me, apologies. But it seemed appropriate.

Sorry but what is wrong with at the least keeping it in the game?

[Sifright]

FupDup, on 06 February 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

Yeah, but then again doesn't that kinda defeat the entire purpose of even having a 4-ballistic variant in the first place? In program design, it's usually a bad idea to include stuff that does nothing other than waste hard drive space.

GUYS ITS OKAY I KNOW WHAT TO DO NOW.

I'll just fit lasers and missiles in my ballistic slots.

[KuruptU4Fun]

cdlord, on 06 February 2013 - 11:09 AM, said:

I suppose the "cone" would take into effect the gun bouncing around. Though on a round by round basis, it is point to point. That's what I believe the Devs did because it doesn't make sense for the MG to fire the burst and then have a cooldown (or maybe it does), but the current rendition of the Mg is it spitting a constant stream of rounds at the target. Some hit the same spot, some don't. So to take it up to .2 damage per round and drop the ammo to 400 rounds may be the sweet spot. Also, I don't see in the book a reference to the "cone". Also, it's CDLord .

My apologies CDLord for getting your name wrong.

Any MG when standing still will still have a CoF because of recoil, movement only makes it worse.

Edited by KuruptU4Fun, 06 February 2013 - 11:19 AM.

[Esplodin]

Joseph Mallan, on 06 February 2013 - 10:08 AM, said:

Give me one sentence that introduces the MMOs MGs using DU rounds and I will accept your argument

They are actually made out of imaginarium - the most incredible substance in human existence. Just like every other weapon in the game. I think it is funny that we can have suspension of disbelief for 5 story 100 ton death machines but the reality line refuses to let machine guns cross.

Edited by Esplodin, 06 February 2013 - 11:16 AM.

[KuruptU4Fun]

FupDup, on 06 February 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

Yeah, but then again doesn't that kinda defeat the entire purpose of even having a 4-ballistic variant in the first place? In program design, it's usually a bad idea to include stuff that does nothing other than waste hard drive space and slow down loading times.

Then ultimately your argument should be to change the crit slots (either type or size wise) of the mech. Or remove that variant because it's not competitive enough in a match.

[TheGunBunny]

Seriously? you are gonna compare the 30mm galtling cannon on the A-10 to a machine gun in battletech. I guess technically they both shoot "bullets", but please don't say that gun is the model of what a machine gun is...

[Sifright]

KuruptU4Fun, on 06 February 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

Then ultimately your argument should be to change the crit slots (either type or size wise) of the mech. Or remove that variant because it's not competitive enough in a match.

or we could make it useful by making the only weapons it use work properly.

Any other suggestion is ridiculous.

[CDLord HHGD]

KuruptU4Fun, on 06 February 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

My apologies CDlore for getting your name wrong.

Any MG when standing still will still have a CoF because of recoil, movement only makes it worse.

*sigh*

[Sifright]

TheGunBunny, on 06 February 2013 - 11:16 AM, said:

Seriously? you are gonna compare the 30mm galtling cannon on the A-10 to a machine gun in battletech. I guess technically they both shoot "bullets", but please don't say that gun is the model of what a machine gun is...

you are right.

The battle tech one weighs twice as much and has had over a thousand years of ballistic technology and material science work on it.

So the Btech "machine gun" is likely vastly more powerful

[One Medic Army]

TheGunBunny, on 06 February 2013 - 11:16 AM, said:

Seriously? you are gonna compare the 30mm galtling cannon on the A-10 to a machine gun in battletech. I guess technically they both shoot "bullets", but please don't say that gun is the model of what a machine gun is...

The BT MG is a 20mm minigun if you read the fluff. More like the ones on attack choppers than on the A-10, but it's as reasonable an analogy as comparing it to a .50 BMG heavy man-portable.
Seriously, the thing weighs 1000lbs in BT.

[FupDup]

KuruptU4Fun, on 06 February 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

Then ultimately your argument should be to change the crit slots (either type or size wise) of the mech. Or remove that variant because it's not competitive enough in a match.

An alternative solution would be to simply adjust 1 or 2 values in existing code to make said variant competitive.

Or, if an MG did seriously touch you inappropriately in your childhood and scared you for life ( ), we can always just remove all traces of MG code from the game and implant a new small ballistic weapon in its place to make those variants competitive. However, we would have to defy the lore to do that. We could either invent something like an AC1 or we could skip to 3072 and use the Magshot. Would that float your boat?

Edited by FupDup, 06 February 2013 - 11:19 AM.

[Sifright]

cdlord, on 06 February 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:

*sigh*

he is trolling put on him on the ignore list.

Real life literally has no place in Btech.

nothing is btech works remotely like it would in rl and any one using rl as the basis of their arguments is a fool.

[DocBach]

I've got two ballistic slots on my Atlas's right torso but I can't fit two AC/20s in it. Its a waste of slots, the Catapult which is way lighter can fit two AC/20s on it but my 100 ton Atlas can't. Devs, please change AC20s so I can fit both of them on my Atlas, or else the ballistic slots are useless!

[Thirdstar]

Tichorius Davion, on 06 February 2013 - 11:12 AM, said:

Sorry but what is wrong with at the least keeping it in the game?

Constructive feedback, if the Devs decide to buff it so that it is an effective weapon then keep it the game. If the only buff to be applied is 'crit seeking' then the weapon is better off being removed.

[Sifright]

DocBach, on 06 February 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:

I've got two ballistic slots on my Atlas's right torso but I can't fit two AC/20s in it. Its a waste of slots, the Catapult which is way lighter can fit two AC/20s on it but my 100 ton Atlas can't. Devs, please change AC20s so I can fit both of them on my Atlas, or else the ballistic slots are useless!

funny in TT you would be able to fit both AC/20s as I recall.