443 replies to this topic

[Moonsavage]

Shoot an M1A1 Abrams MBT with a 50 Cal MG and see how far it gets you.

In the future, we can hope for NPCs in this game, until then MGs are critseek only.

[ICEFANG13]

Actually until the patch where they do crit seek, MGs are worthless only.

[shintakie]

Moonsavage, on 19 February 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

Shoot an M1A1 Abrams MBT with a 50 Cal MG and see how far it gets you.

In the future, we can hope for NPCs in this game, until then MGs are critseek only.

Does a 50 Cal MG weigh half a ton?

No?

Huh, why would you use that comparison then?

[stjobe]

Moonsavage, on 19 February 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

Shoot an M1A1 Abrams MBT with a 50 Cal MG and see how far it gets you.

In the future, we can hope for NPCs in this game, until then MGs are critseek only.

Thank you for that insightful contribution. I'm sure that while that 120mm Rheinmetall gun on the M1A1 Abrams will be called a "light rifle" in 3050 (and incidentally, be unable to damage 'mechs), a half-ton, 'mech-carried, does-as-much-damage-to-a-'mech-as-an-AC/2 MG in 3050 will be just like a .50 BMG.

Sure. That's plausible.

[Terror Teddy]

You know, they might improve MG's, autocannons and the like by adding ammuniion types.

-Armor Piercing
-Incendiary
-Increased Charge (boosted range)
Etc...

That would make some weapons a bit more flexible.

[Trauglodyte]

Gaan Cathal, on 19 February 2013 - 09:37 AM, said:

To be honest, this would be a lot less of an issue if, like in the game you've been playing for going on 30 years, you could replace them with lasers. For better or worse though, we can't. I've not got any desire to see the MG be a particularly powerful weapon, I just want it to be a weapon.

I think that we're all in the same boat there. Nobody wants it to be a half ton Gauss Rifle. We just want it to be more than a paper weight. Plus, the CDA-3C, SDR-5K, and soon to be Flea drivers would like for that one chassis to not be a walking pile of slag that can only put out 80 points of damage for 2000 rounds of ammo and 1.5 tons spent.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 19 February 2013 - 09:50 AM.

[ArchMage Sparrowhawk]

Critical Fumble, on 06 February 2013 - 05:12 AM, said:

Laughed because its totally illogical that a bunch of little MG holes would be more effective against internals than a big hole from other projectiles, a laser making a gash, or a missile making one decent sized hole and a bunch of shrapnel creating a bunch of little holes.

Well the MG is a tiny little hole maker that is always making tiny little holes and never needs to stop, while your lasers and cannons can only make so many big holes, and the way the crits work, thousands of tiny little holes are more damaging than 10 or so big holes.

[Helbourne]

stjobe, on 19 February 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

Thank you for that insightful contribution. I'm sure that while that 120mm Rheinmetall gun on the M1A1 Abrams will be called a "light rifle" in 3050 (and incidentally, be unable to damage 'mechs), a half-ton, 'mech-carried, does-as-much-damage-to-a-'mech-as-an-AC/2 MG in 3050 will be just like a .50 BMG.

Sure. That's plausible.

What are you talking about? The 120mm gun on the M1A1 or M1A2 Abrams should or really could never be called a 'light rifle'. One the gun is a smoothbore not rifled bore. Two the rounds that are fired from that gun are powerful. I bet they could easily damage / destroy any battlemech. Oh yeah at 4000 meters for an average range too.

[stjobe]

Helbourne, on 19 February 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

What are you talking about? The 120mm gun on the M1A1 or M1A2 Abrams should or really could never be called a 'light rifle'. One the gun is a smoothbore not rifled bore. Two the rounds that are fired from that gun are powerful. I bet they could easily damage / destroy any battlemech. Oh yeah at 4000 meters for an average range too.

Look up "light rifle" on sarna.net.
Notice that it's "based on the main guns used by tanks on pre-spaceflight terra".
Notice that it weighs 3 tons (the M256 gun of the M1A1 weighs about 1.5 tons)
Notice that it does 3 damage, with a -3 damage penalty versus 'mechs (i.e. it cannot damage 'mechs).

Now recall that the MG does 2 damage to 'mechs.

Do you still believe that the 500kg, 'mech mounted, 1000-years-in-the-future weapon the game rules call a "Machine Gun" is the equivalent of a .50 BMG?

Edited by stjobe, 19 February 2013 - 10:32 AM.

[Tickdoff Tank]

Helbourne, on 19 February 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

What are you talking about? The 120mm gun on the M1A1 or M1A2 Abrams should or really could never be called a 'light rifle'. One the gun is a smoothbore not rifled bore. Two the rounds that are fired from that gun are powerful. I bet they could easily damage / destroy any battlemech. Oh yeah at 4000 meters for an average range too.

You are using a real world comparison for A mech.. and it does not really work if you try to do that.

[Abrahms]

stjobe, on 19 February 2013 - 10:31 AM, said:

Look up "light rifle" on sarna.net.
Notice that it's "based on the main guns used by tanks on pre-spaceflight terra".
Notice that it weighs 3 tons (the M256 gun of the M1A1 weighs about 1.5 tons)
Notice that it does 3 damage, with a -3 damage penalty versus 'mechs (i.e. it cannot damage 'mechs).

Now recall that the MG does 2 damage to 'mechs.

Do you still believe that the 500kg, 'mech mounted, 1000-years-in-the-future weapon the game rules call a "Machine Gun" is the equivalent of a .50 BMG?

to add further, BTech sometimes has wonky rules. 3 dmg makes sense, the negative penalty in Btech likely could be removed and some sense of "realism" could still be achieved. It doesnt explain how physically the Btech weapons contain so much more momentum or explosives that one does 2-20 dmg and the other does 0.

120mm cannon of today would ideally deal 3 dmg, meaning the btech machine gun is an array of high powered rapid firing ballistic cannons of a small caliber. Significantly more powerful than any 50cal.

[stjobe]

With today's patch, these changes are made to the MG:

Quote

- The Machine Gun has a 14% increased chance to crit once, an 8% increased chance to crit twice, and a 3% increased chance to crit 3 times.
- When the Machine Gun crits, it will deal 12.5x the amount of normal damage per bullet to an internal item.
- The Machine Gun crit damage is 12.5 x 0.04 = 0.5 per crit. Max crit of 3 times = 1.5.
- Due to the rate of fire, the Machine Gun is now a heavy crit seeker and will be VERY effective vs. items on non-armoured locations.

A few notes:
Crit chances will be:
38% chance of single crit,
22% chance of double crits,
7% chance of triple crits.
For a total chance of 67% to crit.

On unarmoured targets, the MG will be a beast:

100 shots (10 seconds of fire)
38 * 0.5 = 17
22 * 1.0 = 22
7 * 1.5 = 10.5
33 * 0.04 = 1.32
-------------------
100 hits = 50.82

Of course, on armoured targets, it'll still suck:

100 hits on armoured location = 4 damage

Edited by stjobe, 19 February 2013 - 11:16 AM.

[Arkmaus]

stjobe, on 19 February 2013 - 09:45 AM, said:

Thank you for that insightful contribution. I'm sure that while that 120mm Rheinmetall gun on the M1A1 Abrams will be called a "light rifle" in 3050 (and incidentally, be unable to damage 'mechs), a half-ton, 'mech-carried, does-as-much-damage-to-a-'mech-as-an-AC/2 MG in 3050 will be just like a .50 BMG.

Sure. That's plausible.

What?

Despite thios being a somewhat silly argument, I seriuously doubt the main gun on an Abrams would be considered a "light rifle" at any time. Even in 3050, I HIGHLY DOUBT something like the Spider would be able to mount 4x 120+mm fully automatic cannons.

Don't forget, the M1A2 SEP is close to 70 tons and firing that main gun gives it a good jarring. I would wager a guess that a 120mm SABOT from an Abrams would blow right throw most of the mechs in this game.

I would guess the MG's used in this "timeframe" would be similar to 20 mm cannon rounds or maybe 50 BMG.

Edited by Arkmaus, 19 February 2013 - 11:24 AM.

[Edustaja]

So basically it will just chew up the items and not damage the internals?

[KuruptU4Fun]

stjobe, on 19 February 2013 - 11:15 AM, said:

With today's patch, these changes are made to the MG:


A few notes:
Crit chances will be:
38% chance of single crit,
22% chance of double crits,
7% chance of triple crits.
For a total chance of 67% to crit.

On unarmoured targets, the MG will be a beast:

100 shots (10 seconds of fire)
38 * 0.5 = 17
22 * 1.0 = 22
7 * 1.5 = 10.5
33 * 0.04 = 1.32
-------------------
100 hits = 50.82

Of course, on armoured targets, it'll still suck:

100 hits on armoured location = 4 damage

Ask and ye shall receive, well kinda.... I hope you all enjoy

[Arkmaus]

Edustaja, on 19 February 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:

So basically it will just chew up the items and not damage the internals?

Well, firing a 20 mm cannon (or 23 mm cannon) at a modern tank would do pretty much nothing to the armor (maybe the top armor would have some issues), and I seriously doubt the MGs represented would exceed that caliber.

[Edustaja]

Not talking about armor but mech internal structure and item hitpoints.

[shintakie]

Arkmaus, on 19 February 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:

What?

Despite thios being a somewhat silly argument, I seriuously doubt the main gun on an Abrams would be considered a "light rifle" at any time. Even in 3050, I HIGHLY DOUBT something like the Spider would be able to mount 4x 120+mm fully automatic cannons.

Don't forget, the M1A2 SEP is close to 70 tons and firing that main gun gives it a good jarring.

I would guess the MG's used in this "timeframe" would be similar to 20 mm cannon rounds or maybe 50 BMG.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Light_Rifle

Important bit for your information.

Quote

The precursor to the modern Autocannon, the Rifle was based on the main guns used by tanks on pre-spaceflight Terra.

If readin comprehension isn't your thing, its sayin that light rifles are based on tank weapons of today.

Next argument?

KuruptU4Fun, on 19 February 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:

Ask and ye shall receive, well kinda.... I hope you all enjoy

Still not sure that'll even do anythin. We've said it time and time again. Why bother with a weapon thats useful for 10% of a fight when you can have one thats useful for 100% of a fight?

Still goin to test it out on my 4 MG, 1 ML Cicada though.

[Arkmaus]

shintakie, on 19 February 2013 - 11:21 AM, said:

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Light_Rifle

Important bit for your information.



If readin comprehension isn't your thing, its sayin that light rifles are based on tank weapons of today.

Next argument?



Still not sure that'll even do anythin. We've said it time and time again. Why bother with a weapon thats useful for 10% of a fight when you can have one thats useful for 100% of a fight?

Still goin to test it out on my 4 MG, 1 ML Cicada though.

I said MGs...NOT Autocannons...hence the Spider reference.

Maybe reading comprehension isn't YOUR thing.

THought this was a thread about MGs....like the title states.

Edited by Arkmaus, 19 February 2013 - 11:29 AM.

[shintakie]

Arkmaus, on 19 February 2013 - 11:25 AM, said:

I said MGs...NOT Autocannons...hence the Spider reference.

Maybe reading comprehension isn't YOUR thing.

Maybe next time I will post in crayon.

You talked about the guns on a tank not bein a light rifle. I proved you wrong.

Light rifles do not do damage to battle mechs.

MG's do damage to battle mechs.

Ergo (I have no idea what that word means), MG's > Modern day tank weapons in Battletech.

You. Are. Wrong.

Edited by shintakie, 19 February 2013 - 11:33 AM.