Register Register

Author Topic: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.  (Read 1835 times)

Charistoph

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 865
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #30 on: 25 October 2020, 16:51:53 »
fuel for fire: What about better MG ranges, but the rounds come equipped (ie worse grouping) with HGR style parachutes? ... the longer the range the less damage and the less d6 v infantry.

PB: 4 dmg, 4d6
short: 3 dmg, 3d6
Med: 2 dmg, 2d6
long: 1 dmg, 1d6
extreme: 0mdg, 1d6

would drop the rapid fire rule as a rapid burst of 1d6 x4 could be pretty devastating if you roll a 6 .. for a half-ton (or 1/4) weapon is absurd.  Although, it would feel like MW 2 again! I felt like a god in my MAD IIC with all MGs and one SPL (it made it seem like a tracer/targeting laser) ... some JJ for fast zipping, everything was toast with a short burst.

I do like the direction this is going.

The ammo bomb is the worst part of Machine Guns, though, and even a half ton at the Long Range value would be painful.
Are you a Wolf, a Sheep, or a Hound?
Quote from: Megavolt
They called me crazy…they called me insane…THEY CALLED ME LOONEY!! and boy, were they right.

Col Toda

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2408
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #31 on: 02 December 2020, 12:53:33 »
A Piranha would not be scary anymore . Light Machine Gun array/4s   stop being crit or head hunting tools looking for floating ammo hits or multiple consciousness checks . Machine guns are huge tools for combat vehicles.  Mechs have the heat sinks for a small x pulse laser for anti infantry work . So I am way against this idea .

Wolf72

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1722
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #32 on: 02 December 2020, 18:43:39 »
would not take away dmg to mechs/armor, just sayin'.
War does not determine who is right, only who is left. -- said no Clanner ... ever!

KS #1357

SteelRaven

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7691
  • Fight for something or Die for nothing
    • The Steel-Raven at DeviantArt
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #33 on: 02 December 2020, 21:58:55 »
Weighing in at a half ton/quarter ton a piece, the 'machine guns' mounted on mechs and tanks are less actual machine guns and more micro auto canons.

Problem is when the writers talk about MGs as if they are M2 Browning or a Kord-12.7 rather than something closer to it's stated weight such as the GAU-8 Avenger or a MK44 Bushmaster. While small compared to a standard AC, these are still big guns and the only reason have short range because of the armor in the BTU ignores anything not traveling at it's highest velocity. (These guns can probably still splatter infantry from across the map while bouncing off armor like hail stones) The Rapid Fire rules also hint at MG's GAU-8 Avenger like nature as the weapon doesn't heat up unless the Mechwarrior holds down on the trigger longer than that 1 short burst, firing more rounds in the same relatively short amount of time (1 turn) 

Should Mechs ignore small arms? Absolutely and do so in fiction (unless writers decide otherwise because plot) but the game made some abstract concessions in order to make combined arms more appealing. For myself, I consider each PBI squad to be carrying 1 squad support anti-mech weapon among then to justify their TW numbers. They are not just spraying their space AKs/M4's at the towering armor and hopping for the best but firing one carefully aimed shot from their biggest gun (possible modular and carried in pieces) 

Should both MGs and AMS both be used as point defense similar to Naval CIWS? Why not? It would justify the insane ammo counts and give both weapon systems more utility on the battlefield. Yes, I'm saying the Piranha should be both a walking war crime and a walking iron dome AMS platform *evil laughter*               
Battletech Art and Commissions
http://steel-raven.deviantart.com

RifleMech

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2045
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #34 on: 06 December 2020, 19:14:03 »
Weighing in at a half ton/quarter ton a piece, the 'machine guns' mounted on mechs and tanks are less actual machine guns and more micro auto canons.

Problem is when the writers talk about MGs as if they are M2 Browning or a Kord-12.7 rather than something closer to it's stated weight such as the GAU-8 Avenger or a MK44 Bushmaster. While small compared to a standard AC, these are still big guns and the only reason have short range because of the armor in the BTU ignores anything not traveling at it's highest velocity. (These guns can probably still splatter infantry from across the map while bouncing off armor like hail stones) The Rapid Fire rules also hint at MG's GAU-8 Avenger like nature as the weapon doesn't heat up unless the Mechwarrior holds down on the trigger longer than that 1 short burst, firing more rounds in the same relatively short amount of time (1 turn) 

Should Mechs ignore small arms? Absolutely and do so in fiction (unless writers decide otherwise because plot) but the game made some abstract concessions in order to make combined arms more appealing. For myself, I consider each PBI squad to be carrying 1 squad support anti-mech weapon among then to justify their TW numbers. They are not just spraying their space AKs/M4's at the towering armor and hopping for the best but firing one carefully aimed shot from their biggest gun (possible modular and carried in pieces) 

Should both MGs and AMS both be used as point defense similar to Naval CIWS? Why not? It would justify the insane ammo counts and give both weapon systems more utility on the battlefield. Yes, I'm saying the Piranha should be both a walking war crime and a walking iron dome AMS platform *evil laughter*               


Actually, rapid firing of machine guns does generate heat. It's 1D6 per rapid firing machine gun.

I also wouldn't ignore small arms fire. The novels I remember support weapons were dangerous and small arms fire was distracting.

I wouldn't mind if MGs could be used for AMS but then I think all weapons that Aerospace use for AMS should be able to be used for AMS. Especially against arrows. There's one scene I remember where all the mechs starting firing up to shoot down the incoming missiles.




PuppyLikesLaserPointers

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 755
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #35 on: 07 December 2020, 00:38:23 »
MG in Rapid Fire mode do generate heats and that's why it can't be suited for mechs - for same heat you can have a Flamer instead. Battle Armors can use the glitch freely, though.

My best idea for using machine gun ammo is;
1. Order a J-27.
2. Fill it with full of machine gun ammunition.
3. Grab it by your Atlas.
4. Shalt thou count to three, no more, no less.
5. Once the number is three, then lobbest thou thy Holy J-27 Ordnance Transport towards thou foe.

Amen.

RifleMech

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2045
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #36 on: 09 December 2020, 04:35:41 »
 ;D ;D

Mendrugo

  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4608
  • Manei Tetatae
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #37 on: 09 December 2020, 04:56:23 »
I also wouldn't ignore small arms fire. The novels I remember support weapons were dangerous and small arms fire was distracting.

I wouldn't mind if MGs could be used for AMS but then I think all weapons that Aerospace use for AMS should be able to be used for AMS. Especially against arrows. There's one scene I remember where all the mechs starting firing up to shoot down the incoming missiles.

Speaking of arrows...there was a table in TRO:3026 that allowed for small arms to have a chance to do 'Mech-scale damage.  If you rolled an insanely lucky streak (high "to hit" roll, 12 to actually do 1 damage, 2 for hit location, then high again for 2-3 critical hits) a person with a bow and arrow could conceivably take out an Atlas.
"We have made of New Avalon a towering funeral pyre and wiped the Davion scourge from the universe.  Tikonov, Chesterton and Andurien are ours once more, and the cheers of the Capellan people nearly drown out the gnashing of our foes' teeth as they throw down their weapons in despair.  Now I am made First Lord of the Star League, and all shall bow down to me and pay homa...oooooo! Shiny thing!" - Maximillian Liao, "My Triumph", audio dictation, 3030.  Unpublished.

SteelRaven

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7691
  • Fight for something or Die for nothing
    • The Steel-Raven at DeviantArt
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #38 on: 09 December 2020, 17:00:02 »

Actually, rapid firing of machine guns does generate heat. It's 1D6 per rapid firing machine gun.


Yes, why I compared it to the GAU-8. On the A-10, they can only fire in sort burst to prevent super heating the gun barrels.So firing a signal burst would generate 0 but holding down the trigger in Rapid Fire mode would start building up heat your Heat Sinks would need to absorb. 

As for small arms, I have already gone on record that I don't agree how Fasa treated small arms but I'll concede to the rules and whatever logic each player uses to justify them. I will not be the one to kill a cat girl today.   
Battletech Art and Commissions
http://steel-raven.deviantart.com

RifleMech

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2045
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #39 on: 10 December 2020, 22:21:29 »
Yes, why I compared it to the GAU-8. On the A-10, they can only fire in sort burst to prevent super heating the gun barrels.So firing a signal burst would generate 0 but holding down the trigger in Rapid Fire mode would start building up heat your Heat Sinks would need to absorb. 

As for small arms, I have already gone on record that I don't agree how Fasa treated small arms but I'll concede to the rules and whatever logic each player uses to justify them. I will not be the one to kill a cat girl today.   

You'd have to change the rules though so you can fire a standard burst or rapid fire one.

I still kind of like how small arms mostly didn't do damage but could sometimes get lucky while support weapons always did damage. Having enough troopers to do damage is okay. Changing it would mean needing to change how armor takes damage though.

And thank you. Cat Girls everywhere appreciate your not killing any today.  :thumbsup:

SteelRaven

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7691
  • Fight for something or Die for nothing
    • The Steel-Raven at DeviantArt
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #40 on: 11 December 2020, 00:16:48 »
You'd have to change the rules though so you can fire a standard burst or rapid fire one.
I must be misunderstanding the Rapid Fire rules.
Battletech Art and Commissions
http://steel-raven.deviantart.com

RifleMech

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2045
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #41 on: 13 December 2020, 02:28:44 »
I must be misunderstanding the Rapid Fire rules.

You can't change from short to long bursts. Only MGs set to rapid fire can do so and do so for the whole came. It'd be nice if rapid fire rules were that simple but they're not. :(

Wolf72

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1722
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #42 on: 13 December 2020, 11:26:25 »
I think that's just a rule abstraction and simplification as to keep from adding another in combat rule to be kept track of. (totally support, pick a mode and stick with it for the battle.  UAC's get a pass on it it though)
War does not determine who is right, only who is left. -- said no Clanner ... ever!

KS #1357

RifleMech

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2045
Re: Do away with mech machine guns dealing mech damage.
« Reply #43 on: 15 December 2020, 08:46:27 »
I think that's just a rule abstraction and simplification as to keep from adding another in combat rule to be kept track of. (totally support, pick a mode and stick with it for the battle.  UAC's get a pass on it it though)

Yep. I think RACs are the only ones too.