443 replies to this topic

[Sifright]

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

lets break down what those crits over 10 seconds mean.

38 X 1 crit hit = 0.04 dmg x 38 = 1.52 damage done to criticals split over piece of equipment in that hit location.
22 X 2 crits hit = 0.04 dmg x 22 x 2 = 1.76 damage done to criticals split over every piece of equipment in that hit location
7 X 3 crits hit = 0.04 dmg X 7 X 3 = 0.84 damage done to criticals split over every piece of equipment in that hit location

Total damage done to equipment = 4.12 damage on average over 100 shots.

You have killed no equipment.

Awesome crit seeker.

[stjobe]

Sifright, on 19 February 2013 - 11:33 AM, said:

lets break down what those crits over 10 seconds mean.

38 X 1 crit hit = 0.04 dmg x 38 = 1.52 damage done to criticals split over piece of equipment in that hit location.
22 X 2 crits hit = 0.04 dmg x 22 x 2 = 1.76 damage done to criticals split over every piece of equipment in that hit location
7 X 3 crits hit = 0.04 dmg X 7 X 3 = 0.84 damage done to criticals split over every piece of equipment in that hit location

Total damage done to equipment = 4.12 damage on average over 100 shots.

You have killed no equipment.

Awesome crit seeker.

No, 'fright, you missed that they buffed the crit damage of the MG 12.5x, to 0.5 per hit.
So it's 17 + 22 + 10.5 (49.5) damage spread over every piece of equipment in that hit location.

Edited by stjobe, 19 February 2013 - 11:37 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

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.

Understood. I realize the issue with that, and the abuse that WOULD happen if allowed. Swap out 4 MGs would allow for 4 more lasers. Personally I normally used MGs and Ammo for more armor or a sink or 2. I have had conversations where getting a buff to 16 damage per turn was deemed to little for so small a weapon. I question the motives of a player that wants so small a weapon to be much more powerful than what I suggested. A little more is a different story.

[Xenosphobatic]

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

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

I think the idea is that it will do damage to internals as well.

...at least I hope so.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sifright, on 19 February 2013 - 11:33 AM, said:

Total damage done to equipment = 4.12 damage on average over 100 shots.

You have killed no equipment.

Awesome crit seeker.

Gauss rifle has 3 HP still right???

[Sifright]

stjobe, on 19 February 2013 - 11:35 AM, said:

No, 'fright, you missed that they buffed the crit damage of the MG 12.5x, to 0.5 per hit.
So it's 17 + 22 + 10.5 (49.5) damage spread over every piece of equipment in that hit location.

0.5 a hit?

hmm so over 10 seconds you just about kill 5 pieces of equipment. Much better than originally but still bloody useless.

Joseph Mallan, on 19 February 2013 - 11:37 AM, said:

Gauss rifle has 3 HP still right???

and the gauss rifle user in that would have popped you into scrap with his 30+ damage

[Arkmaus]

shintakie, on 19 February 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

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.

Your link also states that "light rifles" could not fire different types of ammunition.

Modern day AFV main guns can (SABOT, HEAT, HESH, etc..). That essentially negates any similarities to what is mentioned in your link. Whether they are called "light rifles" by a bunch of guys in their Mom's basement is really a moot issue. While Sarna or whatever it is called may refer to them as "light rifles" what is shown in-game is far from it. MG's, which is what this conversation is about, should not be able to damage Battlemechs.

There is NO way an MG in this game is more powerful than a modern day AFV round, especially one firing SABOT ammunition (apparently "light rifles" were based on tank main guns that never existed since just about every main tank gun today can fire a variety of ammunition types...but I digress).

In the end it doesn't really matter since it's all fantasy though, right?. Apparently fantasy based on sheer sillyness and defying physics.

[xRatas]

Sifright, on 19 February 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

0.5 a hit?

hmm so over 10 seconds you just about kill 5 pieces of equipment. Much better than originally but still bloody useless.



and the gauss rifle user in that would have popped you into scrap with his 30+ damage

Gauss weighs a bit more. I'm seriously thinking about putting 2 of these in some of my energy builds. Might be worth it when waiting for the PPC:s or lasers to cool down.

Edited by xRatas, 19 February 2013 - 11:41 AM.

[stjobe]

Sifright, on 19 February 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

0.5 a hit?

hmm so over 10 seconds you just about kill 5 pieces of equipment. Much better than originally but still bloody useless.

and the gauss rifle user in that would have popped you into scrap with his 30+ damage

I agree that it's still useless. For one thing, it can't function as a stand-alone weapon since it only does 0.4 DPS to armoured targets. But doing 5 DPS to exposed internals are a damn sight better than what it was.

Let's just hope that the cries of "MG kill stealer!" will echo enough that PGI decides to buff the weapon properly.

[shintakie]

Sifright, on 19 February 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

and the gauss rifle user in that would have popped you into scrap with his 30+ damage

Well, in the unlikely scenario that you find a gauss user without armor over its gauss rifle and he doesn't have a bead on you already, and you can get into firin position to hit the unarmored section that houses the gauss without sprayin bullets on armored sections, I'd say the MG user will probably win that scenario as long as the Gauss user has no other weapons as backup to that Gauss.

On the plus side, either way you'll probably take out the Gauss before you die.

[Sifright]

stjobe, on 19 February 2013 - 11:41 AM, said:

I agree that it's still useless. For one thing, it can't function as a stand-alone weapon since it only does 0.4 DPS to armoured targets. But doing 5 DPS to exposed internals are a damn sight better than what it was.

Let's just hope that the cries of "MG kill stealer!" will echo enough that PGI decides to buff the weapon properly.

my understanding is that it just effects the damage it does to equipment not the internals them self.

[Arkmaus]

Why are gauss rifles more suceptible to damage than weapons like autocannons?

Shouldn't ACs be more likely to explode since their ammunition is using a propellent rather than magnets?

This whole Battletech thing makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Edited by Arkmaus, 19 February 2013 - 11:45 AM.

[shintakie]

Arkmaus, on 19 February 2013 - 11:40 AM, said:

Your link also states that "light rifles" could not fire different types of ammunition.

Modern day AFV main guns can (SABOT, HEAT, HESH, etc..). That essentially negates any similarities to what is mentioned in your link. Whether they are called "light rifles" by a bunch of guys in their Mom's basement is really a moot issue. While Sarna or whatever it is called may refer to them as "light rifles" what is shown in-game is far from it. MG's, which is what this conversation is about, should not be able to damage Battlemechs.

There is NO way an MG in this game is more powerful than a modern day AFV round, especially one firing SABOT ammunition (apparently "light rifles" were based on tank main guns that never existed since just about every main tank gun today can fire a variety of ammunition types...but I digress).

In the end it doesn't really matter since it's all fantasy though, right?. Apparently fantasy based on sheer sillyness and defying physics.

You're right, this is magical BT fairy land.

You know what else makes absolutely no sense? Battlemechs. Any military that would willingly use a Battlemech would get absolutely destroyed by combined arms. Heck, they'd be absolutely destroyed by anyone who bothered to use a single aircraft.

So...whats your point that has to do with the topic at hand?

[stjobe]

Arkmaus, on 19 February 2013 - 11:40 AM, said:

MG's, which is what this conversation is about, should not be able to damage Battlemechs.

Seriously, do us all a favour and just read the thread - or just read some BattleTech rules. This idiotic argument has been debunked at least three times in this thread alone.

Modern-day MG != BattleTech MG.

[Sifright]

Arkmaus, on 19 February 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

Why are gauss rifles more suceptible to damage than weapons like autocannons?

Shouldn't ACs be more likely to explode since their ammunition is using a propellent rather than magnets?

This whole Battletech thing makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Magnets man, HOW DO THEY WORK!?

Edited by Sifright, 19 February 2013 - 11:47 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sifright, on 19 February 2013 - 11:39 AM, said:

0.5 a hit?

hmm so over 10 seconds you just about kill 5 pieces of equipment. Much better than originally but still bloody useless.



and the gauss rifle user in that would have popped you into scrap with his 30+ damage

yeah... I know. Range is a wonderful thing. Machine Gun 0.5 Tons Gauss 14 tons. I would certainly hope it will smash you to scrap first

[shintakie]

Arkmaus, on 19 February 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

Why are gauss rifles more suceptible to damage than weapons like autocannons?

Should ACs be more likely to explode since their ammunition is using a propellent rather than magnets?

This whole Battletech thing makes no sense to me whatsoever.

Its a side effect of when Gausscats were the big thing. PGI wanted to nerf the Gauss Rifle without actually makin the Gauss Rifle itself do any less damage or produce more heat. Their solution was to reduce its item hp to practically nill in order to make it a very fragile weapon. This is meant to be the tradeoff for havin a weapon with low heat and high damage.

Wonderin how badly this'll come back to bite PGI in the butt with the MG change...

[stjobe]

Sifright, on 19 February 2013 - 11:42 AM, said:

my understanding is that it just effects the damage it does to equipment not the internals them self.

Oh crap. You're right.

So you'll not be blowing off any limbs with your MGs then. You might empty them of components, but that's about it.

Bloody hell, that's depressing. Just when I was warming up to the idea that they got a semi-useful buff.

[Xenosphobatic]

Arkmaus, on 19 February 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

Why are gauss rifles more suceptible to damage than weapons like autocannons?

Shouldn't ACs be more likely to explode since their ammunition is using a propellent rather than magnets?

This whole Battletech thing makes no sense to me whatsoever.

AC's move ammo into the breech as it cycles, which means that there's only one shell around it at any time. If you hit an ammo reserve however, the ammunition will explode. The Gauss rifle, due to it's strong magnetic makeup, causes a large explosion due to the opposing forces flying apart (and taking internals with them). The ammunition for a Gauss however is just a metal slug, and has no propellant and no chance to explode.

Edited by Xenosphobatic, 19 February 2013 - 11:50 AM.

[Sifright]

Joseph Mallan, on 19 February 2013 - 11:46 AM, said:

yeah... I know. Range is a wonderful thing. Machine Gun 0.5 Tons Gauss 14 tons. I would certainly hope it will smash you to scrap first

well you brought up the gauss rifle as a counter point (cherry picking the best example to make the mg look good)

I pointed out that the gauss rifle user would have murdered the light in that time.

Queue you getting bent out of shape because the gauss is heavier.

Xenosphobatic, on 19 February 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

AC's move ammo into the breech as it cycles, which means that there's only one shell around it at any time. If you hit an ammo reserve however, the ammunition will explode. The Gauss rifle, due to it's strong magnetic makeup, causes a large explosion due to the opposing forces flying apart (and taking internals with them).

Man that ain't how electro magnets work....

stjobe, on 19 February 2013 - 11:47 AM, said:

Oh crap. You're right.

So you'll not be blowing off any limbs with your MGs then. You might empty them of components, but that's about it.

Bloody hell, that's depressing. Just when I was warming up to the idea that they got a semi-useful buff.

Yea, I mean it's nice that machine gun users can now do SOMETHING, where as before they could do NOTHING. it's just that something is rather pointless.