139 replies to this topic

[Bhael Fire]

FupDup, on 19 February 2013 - 07:23 PM, said:

The constant rate of fire isn't as good for harassers as it sounds, because if the enemy is in your line of sight that means you can be in theirs real soon if you don't stay on the move.

It really depends greatly on play style and skill. I loadout MGs on fast mechs only.

The main point is that MGs are a viable option if used correctly. Just like flamers. Could they use a damage buff? Sure...I don't think it would break the game and would actually be kind of cool to see more of them on the field. But whatever...they are fine as is for those that like the style of play they offer.

Edited by Bhael Fire, 19 February 2013 - 07:34 PM.

[Vermaxx]

This is a matter of opinion. I HAVE a fast-enough mech, the Hunch goes 89. They are not useful. I managed to kill one person before they were modified last patch - it took almost a thousand rounds of ammo in addition to the 3 pulse.

The MG is fun, but not effective in any build. It might 'annoy' people but it does not make an effective 'harasser' weapon.

[megoblocks]

SpiralRazor, on 19 February 2013 - 06:18 PM, said:

My bet is that the LB10X will be just as useless as it is now, and still sell for 800k.(Should be 400k as per Sarna)



Improving critical damage is not that way to go with multiple-projectile weapons. It does not fix the underlying issues with any of them.


Oh, and umm..fix the range on the LB10X cluster rounds. To my knowledge, there is no effective range difference between the slug and the canister round. Cluster rounds were -1 to hit.

Wow, you've got this totally wrong. First, for the lb10x, been using 2 of them on an Atlas DC and it's a big improvement.

As for mgs, you guys really should crunch the numbers & save those mgs for when a weak spot opens, and then maybe you'll see just how amazing of a gun it is for a half ton (plus ammo). Crunch the numbers, and with the new increased crit rate, you're looking at about 3 dps for a 1/2 ton, 1 slot gun. Take 2 (like I have on my Trench) and you've got 6 dps for 1 ton (2 if you count ammo). Nothing else compares to that per slot, per ton, and 0 heat. It's not my primary weapon at all (on my Trench, for example, I use 2 MLs and 2 SRM 6s to open them up) but once there's a weak spot, mgs really shine now.

[Roland]

Weapons that only do critical damage, and don't do REAL damage, are pretty much always gonna be garbage (unless, maybe, engine crits are introduced).

The reason?

Because I can just take a real weapon, and instead of worrying about destroying internal components of your mech, just BLOW UP THE SECTION, thus achieving the same result as if I destroyed the individual components.

Only, it's better, because:
1) The real weapon works on armor too.
2) Destroying certain sections will kill you.

[slayerkdm]

Vermaxx, on 19 February 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

This is a matter of opinion. I HAVE a fast-enough mech, the Hunch goes 89. They are not useful. I managed to kill one person before they were modified last patch - it took almost a thousand rounds of ammo in addition to the 3 pulse.

The MG is fun, but not effective in any build. It might 'annoy' people but it does not make an effective 'harasser' weapon.

First off, the 3 pulses alone are an effective package. So if you are not killing anything, dont blame the MG.

My Hunchback which I threw back on the 3MG along with 2LL and a ML scored 500 points of damage in the three matches I played before work. Most of that was from the lasers, but I did crit some sections.

I dont understand the argument put forth here. So many go on about how you would be better off using Streaks or SRMS, well, ya, you just listed the best bang for the buck weapon there is. This is just a narrow min maxers whining thread.

They are a good filler on the Hunchback G on some builds. In the case of Alpine and bigger maps, you need more range. Hunchbacks dont have the tonnage for long range effective ballistics. So Energy weapons are the best alternative there on the G. So you use up your tonnage on LL's and then fill in with MG's, because you already have AMS, one more DHS will make no real diffrerence, you are at max speed already.

You guys should keep to your splat cats and steak ravens, you are never going to like MG's or use them. Most of you dont even have mechs that have ballistic hard points. lol.

[Kingdok]

Carrioncrows, on 19 February 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

Then what the XXXX is the point of them being in game.

This may be news to most people but BATTLETECH is a mech based game, flamers and Machine guns were in the game when it was ONLY mech versus mech combat.

It was only later when Battletech expanded and introduced vehicles and infantry that Machineguns and flamers got "Bonuses" against those targets.

They are still Battlemech class weapons.

Everyone talks about machine guns and how they are .50 cal weapons or 7.68. It's a 1/2 ton machinegun, you can fit 12.04 Browning M-2 .50 cals in that weight. This isn't a machinegun, it's closer to a cannon.

And yet for all that it might as well be an airsoft gun the way it is implemented.

I liked this post, and I agree that MG's need some serious lovin...

I take exception to your math, however. Yes, the M-2 .50 cal is a very trim 84 pounds by itself -- in a configuration relying on the human gunner for all aiming, unjamming, etc. Imagine the complexity required to mount that .50 cal inside a violently moving vehicle, with remote controlled targeting and firing, automatic ammo feed mechanisms, systems for dealing with the spent casings (whether stored within the mech or ejected thru the armor) and so on.

I deal with engineers every day, and they would ALL be eating up that 1000 lbs in short order to produce such an automated weapon. An anti-mech MG is probably going to use a more powerful round than our venerable .50 cal, but it wouldn't have to be much bigger to require a half-ton spot in a mech.

Now, they just need to HIT like a half-ton autocannon and I will be satisfied.

[GMan129]

why is your title about MGs and your post doesn't mention them and is all about LBX?

[Carrioncrows]

The Argument is:

I want all my weapons.

I want all my weapons to be EFFECTIVE. Machineguns are the only low weight class of weapons available in the game, the next lowest weight option is the AC2 which weighs in at a whopping 7 tons (6 for gun, 1 for ammo)

It's not rocket science to make this effective, hell it certainly doesn't require 6 months.

Dmg: 0.2 dmg a shot @ 90m, 0.1 dmg from 90m to 200m
Cycle: 10 shots a sec
Ammo: 200

That's 2 damage a sec and 20 secs of firing time per ton of ammo. For a total of 40 dmg.

The machineguns are both limited by their range of 90m-200m and their ammo pool.

Does it make boating them more effective. Hell yes, what other reason is there for the Spider 7k, the Ravens 4x, ect ect.

So wait that spider 7k with 4 machineguns could pump out 8 dps a sec?

Yes.

That sounds like a lot until you factor in that with 4 tons of ammo he could only sustain that ROF for 20 secs for a total of a 160 dmg. This regulates machineguns to a support role, a nice support weapon but still a support weapon and any attempts to turn it into a main brawling weapon would require significant ammo reserves.

And by then to stack on a full two minutes of firing time per gun would require 6.5 tons (Total of 240 dmg). Now your getting into AC2 tonnages.

See how that balances out?

Problem solved.

I clocked myself at 3 minutes, 21 secs.

[Scraper]

I actually like the MGs, they aren't overpowered broke like in previous MW games where people would boat them and destroy you.

I DO NOT run them on anything heavier than a medium. On my Spider I get decent post game damage reports if I play properly and thats a single LL and 3 MGs (or was it 4?). I rarely hit above 400 dmg with the setup, but obviously the MGs are doing SOMETHING. Then again lights are usually BEHIND and enemy where the armor is a bit softer usually.

[megoblocks]

Roland, on 20 February 2013 - 01:43 PM, said:

Weapons that only do critical damage, and don't do REAL damage, are pretty much always gonna be garbage (unless, maybe, engine crits are introduced).

The reason?

Because I can just take a real weapon, and instead of worrying about destroying internal components of your mech, just BLOW UP THE SECTION, thus achieving the same result as if I destroyed the individual components.

Only, it's better, because:
1) The real weapon works on armor too.
2) Destroying certain sections will kill you.

Nope. You're missing their role. Mgs don't compete with primary weapons, they supplement them. For their tonnage, slots, and heat, nothing comes remotely close to being able to strip out items (crits). So if you take 1 (or 2) as something you wait to use until a soft spot opens up, you have all that extra space and tonnage (and heat) to beef up all your other weapon points. And crits are far from worthless. Ammo explosions will ruin anyone's day. Gauss rifles are so frail, you want to take them out as quickly as you can (and they go boom too)

[Carrioncrows]

Scraper, on 20 February 2013 - 02:56 PM, said:

I actually like the MGs, they aren't overpowered broke like in previous MW games where people would boat them and destroy you.

It's impossible to boat them.

The only one that comes close is 7k. This argument is invalid.

megoblocks, on 20 February 2013 - 02:58 PM, said:

Nope. You're missing their role. Mgs don't compete with primary weapons, they supplement them. For their tonnage, slots, and heat, nothing comes remotely close to being able to strip out items (crits). So if you take 1 (or 2) as something you wait to use until a soft spot opens up, you have all that extra space and tonnage (and heat) to beef up all your other weapon points. And crits are far from worthless. Ammo explosions will ruin anyone's day. Gauss rifles are so frail, you want to take them out as quickly as you can (and they go boom too)

If it's a weapon and it takes up tonnage it needs to be comparable.
Crit stripping is useless. 1.5 tons for a weapon that kills components. It doesn't kill the mech it just kills junk in the location when it could be 1.5 tons better spent on ACTUAL weapons that kill the whole location and EVERY COMPONENT in it?

Seriously, a few more hits from a medium laser in any breached location and it snaps it off like a twig. Why spend 1.5 tons and 10-15 secs with a MG to kill what you hope is equipment in that location?

If it's a weapon and it takes up weight it needs to be effective, comparable and functional.

The MG is none of these.

Buff the dmg to 0.2 dmg a hit and drop the ammo pool to 200. keep the crit crap for all I care but I've been waiting for 6+ months to use this gun and more importantly 6+ months to use the mechs that are FORCED to use this weapon.

[Asmudius Heng]

I like the idea of crit seeking, but they should also do more damage in general.

Hopefully this is just the first phase of adding in some unique advantages to weapons just as PPCs have the EMP like effect and so forth.

On it's own the extra critical damage does nto seem tobe enough to justify the poor overall damage of the weapons even if they are no heat.

I like the idea that you hold your fire on MGs til you see an open section then hose it and see items being broken very fast - I also think that you should only need to take a ton of ammo and a few MGs and your ammo would depelete fast as the RoF should be much higher.

This makes it a situational weapon - however, situational weapons need to be VERY powerful in that situation if they are useless in other situations.

A small bonus to criticals on a very sub par weapon does not make it the specialist weapon PGI want it to be.

[Tempered]

If mg's are buffed any more than they have been, they will be better than small pulse lasers. No heat, continuous damage, nearly infinite ammo, and a large crit bonus. Hell, I'll load up on them.

[Moromillas]

No, it was never meant to be a long range weapon. It's essentially a shotgun like weapon, always has been.

When compared to the ac/10, you trade range in order to gain slightly higher sustained damage, and slightly less slot and tonnage use.

If you don't like that, then put a different weapon on your Mech.

[Team Leader]

Own post Copied from another thread:
If machine guns could do 1 DPS, that's a MAX of 4 damage from a full machine gun build, under 90 meters, with them constantly firing. Other weapons get huge holes in their DPS because of reload and recharge times, as well as heat. This "artificially" chops their DPS. Machine guns don't have that. Their damage translates into pure DPS, 1 second on target is a second of damage.

You have to be pointing at the guy from 90 meters away and hold down those buttons on one spot. Based on the way the bullets spray everywhere, I don't think a 2 DPS machine gun would even be that much of a threat. Sure, a spider might be able to peel some armor off the back of an inattentive atlas, but he has to be standing still and inch away. A Phracht charging into battle with 4 MGs isn't even a real threat. I say we cut ammo to 500 a ton, make MGs fire the same speed (slower, faster, I dunno beta it), and give them a DPS of 2. Lets try this guys. Forget this imaginary crit stuff, forget range increases, just let the machine gun do damage like its supposed to.

[FupDup]

Tempered, on 20 February 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

If mg's are buffed any more than they have been, they will be better than small pulse lasers.

That's not saying much.

Tempered, on 20 February 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

No heat,

I'd rather just throw in some DHS with that tonnage (provided that critical slots allow) to make my real weapons more heat efficient. I can also just stop firing for a moment or so to dissipate heat. The lost damage during that time of not firing is much less than the damage an MG can do during that time.

Tempered, on 20 February 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

continuous damage,

Continuous super-low damage that is. As a career light mech user myself, weapons that take a long time to dish out their damage are to be avoided. You want to minimize the amount of time that you are exposed to the enemy (you have to expose yourself to fire).

Tempered, on 20 February 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

nearly infinite ammo,

See the points above, plus small and medium lasers have completely infinite ammo as well as superior attributes in almost all areas (the heat generation is tiny).

Tempered, on 20 February 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

and a large crit bonus. Hell, I'll load up on them.

On a Raven 4X, Spider 5K, or Cicada 3C, that is exactly what should be encouraged. The only way to fill up every ballistic slot on those 3 mechs without gimping oneself is to use at least a few MGs. Large mechs probably won't benefit from MGs no matter how much they get buffed because they're such big targets to shoot at. Bigger target means you die faster, meaning you want to unleash your damage as quickly as possible so that you're less likely to die.

Edited by FupDup, 20 February 2013 - 04:04 PM.

[Davers]

The simple fact is that the machine gun should be able to compete with a small laser. It trades no heat and having ammo for 2/3 the damage.

In MWO it should have a .8 or .9 DPS with the standard 3x range as the rest of ballistics.

[Carrioncrows]

MG = 1.5 tons - Ammo that could explode
Small laser - .5 tons.

Of course they should be better or comparable.

And the reason is obvious: Hard points.

You want to always take the best weapon for for the slots you have. That may be Sm lasers, pulse lasers or machineguns but you are still limited by the number of hard points on a mech.

And in the special cases where you have the option of both, THAT is where diversity of builds kicks in. There shouldn't be one build that beats all other builds, that is NOT what mechwarrior is all about.

It's about all builds all weapons viable are legit. They are most not-legit right now.

As for pulse lasers that's a whole other conversation that needs it's own thread.

[shintakie]

Davers, on 20 February 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:

The simple fact is that the machine gun should be able to compete with a small laser. It trades no heat and having ammo for 2/3 the damage.

In MWO it should have a .8 or .9 DPS with the standard 3x range as the rest of ballistics.

With the way the MG works it needs to do more damage than a SL, not less. Its already gimped enough as it is with the way its damage is dealt, no reason to keep true to the 2/3 damage of a small laser thing on top of that.

A MG in MWO that did even somethin ridic like 2 dps, on paper, sounds amazin. In real game applications its not that excitin. Your damage spreads out, you have to hold on target the entire time you fire and can't use cover or block fire with lesser damaged parts of your body, you have to just keep shootin.

[ElLocoMarko]

Let's throw around a few numbers to see why MG's feel a bit week for a (needs ammo) 1.5T weapon.

(BIG EDIT) - REDACTED
Sorry to those that quoted me. I fixed it below. Thank you for your input.

Edited by ElLocoMarko, 21 February 2013 - 09:12 AM.