96 replies to this topic

[Huntsman]

While the devs intended solution for the machine gun has been known for some time...well, its finally upon us. It makes the weapon viable only as a tonnage-cheap add-on to already effective brawlers, while mechs that were pure garbage because they are light and the lionshare of their hardpoints are ballistic, such as the Cicada 3C and the Spider 5K, are still trash.

Not to mention how terribly unhelpful is it to have a weapon only become useful when the target is already half dead.

Why this convoluted crit system? Some misguided attempt to stick to TT rules in a spot where it's not workable to do so? Just ditch this crit garbage and buff the damage of the machine gun for crying out loud?

[General Taskeen]

More proof that MW3 had the best MG's in any Mech game ever.

[Bhael Fire]

I use MGs and get consistent results with them. They're even better now.

They're just meant to keep a steady flow of damage on your target to keep their HUD lit up and to cause confusion while you target them with heavier hitting weapons. Just like a more effective version of the flamer; they're mainly for harassing, not killing.

[Tennex]

kind of stupid that it can burn internals but not extra damage.

by the time you are finished with the internals of an exposed torso.

you could have already destroyed the exposed torso with a small laser.

Edited by Tennex, 19 February 2013 - 01:48 PM.

[General Taskeen]

"Meant to be," is a subjective term for MGs.

[Devils Advocate]

The issue is that crits to the engine don't do anything unless it happens to be a crit to the torso of an XL engine. If machineguns could disable engines on exposed torsos they'd be quite valuable since that's where the lion's share of internal armor is.

[Bhael Fire]

General Taskeen, on 19 February 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

"Meant to be," is a subjective term for MGs.

No...not really. It is what they are meant for; harassing. Just like the flamer.

[General Taskeen]

Bhael Fire, on 19 February 2013 - 01:50 PM, said:

No...not really. It is what they are meant for; harassing. Just like the flamer.

Anytime you say this or anyone else. Is it a subjective term. Fact™.

"I just played MW3, seems the MG is meant to be good against armor."

Subjective.

Doesn't mean "that's what it is for" in terms of MWO's current programming. That's how it is currently programmed, doesn't mean its good or not subject to change.

Edited by General Taskeen, 19 February 2013 - 01:54 PM.

[Pihb]

seems like a hardpoint problem and not a weapon problem I agree, balistic slots are dumb on lights, and most mediums.

[Pyrrho]

If you call my Cicada 3C trash one more time I am going to pelt 4xMG at you until you say "hey, that tickles" and then I will hit you in the face with an ER-PPC.

[Bhael Fire]

General Taskeen, on 19 February 2013 - 01:51 PM, said:

Anytime you say this or anyone else. Is it a subjective term. Fact™.

Not sure what you're talking about. Just like a gauss rifle is meant for long to mid-range sniping, a machine gun (in MWO) is meant for short range harassing. If it were meant for any other purpose, it would have higher heat and more damage.

[Voridan Atreides]

So I have not used them. Are they at least useable now? Say I have a left over balistic slot and I cannot fit anything else expept an MG. Should I put it on or not?

[Pyrrho]

Voridan Atreides, on 19 February 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

So I have not used them. Are they at least useable now? Say I have a left over balistic slot and I cannot fit anything else expept an MG. Should I put it on or not?

Having extra damage to brawl with is never a bad thing. Even if it is the most ineffective weapon in the game it DOES do damage. Extra damage should always be welcomed. Some people think that the only time to use a MG is when you have a left over Ballistic slot and nothing else goes in.

Also, DAKKA DAKKA DAKKA is the greatest sound ever.

Edited by Pyrrho, 19 February 2013 - 01:58 PM.

[Huntsman]

This is just one of a bunch of issues that have come to mind with this patch. Really, I don't know what it is that set me off with the release of it today.

Honestly...ya know I never raise my "online voice" on forums...and I really have enjoyed this game despite the needling over certain issues at the back of my skull since I started playing in the summer. I just figured, "well, ok, they'll fix it. Just give it time." After all these months though, concerns that to me are forefront matters are either not being addressed, or are being handled in ways that are like nails on a chalkboard to me.

Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm right..maybe it's just a difference of opinion...but for the very first time in almost 6 months...I've just about had it. I don't know why I feel the need to express this fact like some narcissistic twitter blogger who honestly believes everyone wants to listen to him and gives a crap. This isn't a "I'm leaving" post. I hate those and frankly I just want to throttle anyone who makes one. The devs don't care if a single player stays or goes. I get that. We all know that person who says they're leaving is still sitting there playing the game.

I'm still playing I think. The thing is once a game starts to grate on me, even I don't know when the last time I'm going to boot the game up will be. I just sorta fade off, and 6 months later I think to myself, "ya know...what ever happened to that game I used to play..." I just don't want to fade off. I've enjoyed the Mechwarrior franchise for 18 years. Any other game, I'd probably care alot less.

[Bhael Fire]

Voridan Atreides, on 19 February 2013 - 01:56 PM, said:

So I have not used them. Are they at least useable now? Say I have a left over balistic slot and I cannot fit anything else expept an MG. Should I put it on or not?

They've always been "useable" — it's just that now they do a lot more damage against exposed crits....so they will finish the job faster on critically damaged mechs.
However, like always, they are a support weapon meant for harassing and confusing your target, and should not be relied upon as your main weapon system.

[shintakie]

Bhael Fire, on 19 February 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

They've always been "useable" — it's just that now they do a lot more damage against exposed crits....so they will finish the job faster on critically damaged mechs.
However, like always, they are a support weapon meant for harassing and confusing your target, and should not be relied upon as your main weapon system.

They dont finish the job faster on critically damaged mechs. The crits dont do damage to internal structure, only to internal equipment. At best they're a way to troll your own team by reducin salvage rewards if you win.

[General Taskeen]

Bhael Fire, on 19 February 2013 - 01:55 PM, said:

Not sure what you're talking about. Just like a gauss rifle is meant for long to mid-range sniping, a machine gun (in MWO) is meant for short range harassing. If it were meant for any other purpose, it would have higher heat and more damage.

An MG is as effective in terms of how a developer wants to balance it. Take the MG from MW3, for example, since most weapons in that game are loosely based on TT damage values. The MG of "TT" does "2" damage, the MW3 MG reflected that by making an MG bullet do .2 damage in 4 bullet bursts every 0.625 seconds. In other words, it does damage no matter what. Its worth equipping.

Examining how MW:LL does an MG? Being a game with infantry and vehicles, they decided the MG would purely be useful only against Battle Armor, Vehicles, and Aircraft. In that game it is fine because it is effective vs. targets that are regularly encountered.

MWO does not have the luxury of anything but Mech vs. Mech combat in a game where any equipped weapon should be effective at dealing decent damage. A Small laser in MWO does not do 0.03 damage, it sticks with a TT value of "3," for instance, for "short range harrassing" as you say. Going by pure descriptions of a Small Laser, it is often quoted as being equipped on Canon Mechs to fend off "Infantry," even though its used against Mechs as well, so it should only do next to no damage right?

A Gauss Rifle shell sticks to a TT value of "15" damage in the game, while an MG bullet has regressed damage of 0.04 based on a 0 cool down, which is ridiculous to balance around, hence the problem.

Edited by General Taskeen, 19 February 2013 - 02:09 PM.

[Lightfoot]

General Taskeen, on 19 February 2013 - 01:41 PM, said:

More proof that MW3 had the best MG's in any Mech game ever.

16x MG Puma, 1400 rounds.

[FupDup]

General Taskeen, on 19 February 2013 - 02:09 PM, said:

MWO does not have the luxury of anything but Mech vs. Mech combat in a game where any equipped weapon should be effective at dealing decent damage.

Even if we had infantry in MWO, machine guns would still be utter garbage. This is because we could just click-and-drag a single small or medium laser over an entire platoon of infantry and murder most of the gits in a single shot. Unless all non-MG weapons did next to zero damage against infantry, MGs as an anti-infantry weapon would be just as dumb as ever because a small/medium laser could do the same thing for less tonnage (MG + ammo = 1.5 tons) + more range + deal respectable damage to mechs (at the cost of a minute amount of heat generation).

Edited by FupDup, 19 February 2013 - 02:35 PM.

[LogicSol]

Tennex, on 19 February 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

kind of stupid that it can burn internals but not extra damage.

by the time you are finished with the internals of an exposed torso.

you could have already destroyed the exposed torso with a small laser.

Then carry a small laser.
Don't have a free energy slot?
Carry a AC/2
Don't have the tonnage?
Then carry a machine gun. 2 of them can manage 15 damage against any internal component(engine included) before a slas can get to 6, and they don't create any heat to boot.

Edited by LogicSol, 19 February 2013 - 02:30 PM.