Guest Posted Jul 20, 2010, 5:23 am
FireFly Posted Jul 20, 2010, 5:28 am	I remember posting this exact same idea a month ago or so, and I agree!  Quote: Ultimately, remaking how machine-gun type weapons work completely would maybe be for the best... like, they fire a lot of bullets but with very poor accuracy... lets say a machine-gun would fire a 3 bullet burst, each bullet doing 1 damage, but even a 100 skill sniper/machinegunner would probably only be able to land 2/3 hits at at our current average MG range... Gatling guns would just decrease the accuracy further, but add even more bullets to the fray... This would make regular machineguns a brutal CQC weapon, were they really should shine to begin with, but now I'm maybe getting ahead of myself. If above would be considered, it would also give the machinegunner spec a much more usage, as the weapon handling would, in theory, become less about pinpoint aiming and more about recoil compensation and tracking. As for shotguns, I agree again!
*Dark Tempest* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 5:34 am	Agree, very nicely presented. I can already feel my graphics card melting down.
Crazy AL Posted Jul 20, 2010, 7:18 am	*Dark Tempest* said: Agree, very nicely presented. I can already feel my graphics card melting down. LOL.. If multiple projectiles in DW melts your card, get the damn hamster out of it and replace those vacuum tubes. We are in the Transistor age!
johnny go Posted Jul 20, 2010, 7:24 am	cool :-) sounds good :-)
*Tinker* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 11:41 am	yeah nicely presented, particularly like the scatter effect of VSGs and FGs
Groove Champion Posted Jul 20, 2010, 4:43 pm	I don't like the idea. I wouldn't mind the VISUAL representation of MG/GG fire being changed so it looks like many projectiles are hitting, but I still think in terms of "seperating" the damage between shots, things should stay as they are (MG=1, GG=2). Changing these two weapons in such a significant way would force the combat ratings to be overhauled for all weapons. You're talking about bringing a huge change to two of the most commonly used weapons in the game. The repercutions of such a change are quite important. Also, how are you going to split up 1 or 2 points of damage into 6/12/20 shots? I'm really not interested in shaving off 3/4's of an armor point at long range with my MGs... I would only approve such a change if it was purely aesthetic.
*Wolfsbane* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 4:50 pm	I suspect it's all stored as floating point internally anyway and only rounded to the closest number for display purposes. That seems to be how most other things work in Darkwind.
FireFly Posted Jul 20, 2010, 5:07 pm	Groove, the MG does 2 damage, the GG does 1 damage with 2 shots, just thought I'd say.
Thin Izzy Posted Jul 20, 2010, 5:34 pm	Sounds like a variation on how autofire (bursts of automatic fire) was handled in the Champions RPG - if you made your base 'to hit' roll you would do the base number of dice of damage for the weapon/power, but if you made your roll by a more significant amount you would generate additional dice of damage (more of the bullets in the burst hit the target). The problem with this is that it would make machine gun/gatling weapon damage less reliable (but more influenced by skill). EDIT: You'd have to have a cap on the 'bonus' damage, too, so it doesn't get ridiculous.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 6:39 pm	Glow Plug said: I suggest not to change the amount of damage dealt but to split it in many projectiles. If the damage stays the same no need for a CR overhaul is there? Also what to do about the little stray bullets? would they do less then 1 pt of damage? if so would there be descriptive text i.e. "insignificant damage" ? (at least to car armor) Come to think of it this might litter the screen with text bubbles and make some situation hard to see. edit: or it could be just tracer fire that does no damage?
Groove Champion Posted Jul 20, 2010, 6:48 pm	FireFly said: Groove, the MG does 2 damage, the GG does 1 damage with 2 shots, just thought I'd say. True, but still... how many shots are we talking about? 2 damage divided by 4 shots? 8 shots? If you don't hit enough times you don't damage vehicle armor? That would put the MG and GG in the "useless bin" with the vehicular shotgun. Why make it so complicated? If you want to have an animation with multiple shots, go right ahead! But don't break a damage system and damage values that are working just fine. What you're proposing is a headache and a half. Glow Plug said: I don't see why CR of all (or any weapon) would need a change if damage was splitted in many projectiles for MGs and GGs. They would do the same amount of total damage! Because your idea would make it much more difficult to get full damage with the MG/GG. Their relative combat value would be lessened. Maybe Sam wouldn't have to review all weapons, but MG/GG would become absolutely worthless.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 7:08 pm	actually i like that it might spread damage, the HMG is way too powerful imo Edit: The fact that if MG/GG are less efficient with unskilled gangers, would just make CRs more justifiable as far as their bulk and damage At the end of the day you will still be stuck with low bulk low strength weapons, just for bulk reasons
Crazy AL Posted Jul 20, 2010, 7:36 pm	I would like animations that more accurately represented "machine" guns. An M60 can fire over 3 rounds a second and as maching guns go, that's a fairly slow rate of fire. If each turn in DW is 1 second, we should see 4 rounds from an MG or 8 from a GG. Regarding the spreading of actual damage is a whole 'nuther aspect! If the rounds actually spread, does the spread increase with range like it should? This would make the MG a more powerful weapon up close and weaker at range at causing damage. However, the spread component could add to it's ability to hit at longer ranges with at least a little damage vs. full damage. Either way, game mechanics would have to be reviewed to see if this is possible, and any MG/GG/HMG/HGG capabilities would need to be reviewed and balanced so that overall in general their average performance wasn't changed, but perhaps that in much closer ranges and further ranges it was different.
Groove Champion Posted Jul 20, 2010, 8:00 pm	I still maintain this had better be an aesthetic change only. You can keep believing you aren't affecting the "potency" of the MG/GG by splitting up the damage over a greater number of projectiles that have a smaller chance of hitting. Call it "higher variation in dealt damage": you're just being pedantic. The MG/GG should still cause full damage or none at all, even if the animation of the shots is changed to resemble machinegun fire. I'm not interested in f***ing around with fractions because you want a different look for your weapon fire. [EDIT]: To top it all off, it's not like you're asking Sam to split damage for a weapon that does massive amounts of it -say the car cannon- no: you're suggesting we split the damage on two of the guns that already cause the lowest possible amount per shot? Nah. No thanks.
Groove Champion Posted Jul 20, 2010, 9:08 pm	Or so you seem to believe...
Groove Champion Posted Jul 20, 2010, 9:12 pm	More shots * Low Gunner skill = Less hits = MG/GG are garbage Since we're talking about one of the most readily available weapons in DW, you're not doing new players any favors with your silly suggestions. In fact you're not really doing any players a favor by dividing the MG/GG damage into a higher number of shots (potential misses) than any other weapon in the game. This is the sort of suggestion I might imagine as a creative way of nerfing a weapon that is over-powered: not a run-of-the-mill every-day gun like the MG.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 9:27 pm	@ Glow I think we are not understanding each other, you were no pedantic, but what you said regarding my post makes no sense if you change the chance to hit, you change the damage done depending on range, it's a fact Agreed with Groove that this is a use overhaul, personally i would love it, but doubt Sam would have the time on his budget If you want to make eye candy, it might be cool, if it didn't slow down the shooting phase the way ballistic weapons do edit: @ Groove It's not a disservice to noobs if the npcs are bound to the same changes right?
Groove Champion Posted Jul 20, 2010, 9:28 pm	I'm not going to discuss swampy statistics. There is only one statistic despite the pleas of misled statisticians: either it happens or it doesn't. 50% chances all the time. I spoke my piece. If you think breaking the MG/GG is a good idea, go right ahead. It wouldn't be the only stupid decision taken by the community lately.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 9:32 pm	Glow Plug said: I dare you to find where I suggested to change the hit probability. Aw I guess i got mixed up between the animation, and the shotgun effects of your 1st post
*Tinker* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 9:36 pm	@ Groove You don't think the HMG is over powered? It shoots very far, last i heard machine guns didn't go very far accurately, not many bullets would hit anyways, kinda like the uzi principle on a bigger scale. sorry for the little hyjack
Groove Champion Posted Jul 20, 2010, 9:40 pm	Of course... because your idiotic statistics prove anything? Anyone can flip a coin and show you statistics are garbage. So screw your uppity bull####.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Jul 20, 2010, 9:43 pm	Ok ... lets keep this to the point and attempt to remain calm please.
*Ninesticks* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 9:45 pm	Rather than locking the thread to prevent what seems an unavoidable flaming spiral - if you would both care to step back for a moment I am sure that would be appreciated. Edit - Damn! Gro is quick!
*Tinker* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 10:02 pm	have a
*goat starer* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 11:11 pm	one of lifes greatest mysteries is why we continue to debate anything with glow when he is so utterly incapable of debating anything without resorting to bizarre patronising nonsense. it always reads like he is trying to explain really complicated concepts to sub normal intelligence seven year olds... which is ironic since the ideas tend to be those of sub normal seven year old and they are being explained to terribly complicated people. i suggest you lock this thread... and save us all the trouble in the future by automatically locking every thread glow posts in suggestions. he only posts this stuff for the attention in any case. He would probably be delighted if you locked it so he can sit in his trailer imagining the impotent rage of everyone who wants to reply and tell him what a plank he is... (you can edit it out Tink... I can edit it back in... screw you marshall! ) i had freally hoped that sam had banned him after his last stalking episode... but i guess he must have just been on holiday... or more likely in prison
Groove Champion Posted Jul 20, 2010, 11:30 pm	Quote: Goat starer Glow Plug said: Imagine if you were debating about the colors of a painting with someone in a forum and that person was claiming that your appreciation of colors is stupid... wouldn't you feel amused when your detractor eventually claimed he was blind all his life? Imagine debating the colors of a painting with someone in a forum and that person keeps talking about frames, the time of the day, the artist's favorite shoes and how this clearly shows the painting has dashes of red in it.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 11:37 pm	Goat stop bringing your personal life into this and starting up a storm over nothing
*goat starer* Posted Jul 20, 2010, 11:40 pm	my personal life? what a peculiar little fellow you are tinker.. how on earth did you decide which bit of that one to edit? i guess expecting sense from someone who supported the second biggest plank in the game (see the second post for the mystery identity) onto the RC cant be expected to show much in the way of common sense.... all we need now is... -Glow on the RC - that way we can have the two main frivolous / ridiculous / unworkable suggesters in the game making their suggestions where the rest of us dont have to read them. - Tinker on the RC - that way he can use his limited intelligence to full effect agreeing with all their ludicrous suggestions - ban all RC members from posting in the main forum its a work of genius.... Sam can do what he always did and ignore the RC altogether... none of us have to listen to thi8s inane ####e any longer... BINGO!!!!
Groove Champion Posted Jul 20, 2010, 11:49 pm	Not you, apparently. Besides, you're not interested in any ideas that go against your view of the game.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 12:15 am	No Goat i edited only the nasty comment you made
Groove Champion Posted Jul 21, 2010, 12:23 am	Glow Plug said: I respect the fact that you may not be exactly top gun with probabilities but if it's the case then I respectfully suggest you don't get involve into debate that concern maths. You've got it backwards. I'm smart enough to understand how worthless statistics are at predicting anything besides the arrival of a paycheck for those who scam companies/research funds/etc. into believing they have any relevance whatsoever when confronted with a chaotic reality. If statistic "proof" is all you have to offer as counter-argument, I should dismiss it as casually as you dismiss my arguments. The truth remains: you want to weaken one of the most common weapons in the game. You don't understand that only highly-skilled gunners will circumvent the added difficulties associated to splitting up 1 or 2 points of damage over multiple shots. You point me to wiki when you run out of valid arguments. You attack my understanding of math with baseless nonsense. I think you should remove yourself from this argument. Glow Plug said: Now, I think we need to mantis this. Who has an argument against it? And this just tops it all off. Despite everything in this thread, you dump 3/4 of it out of your memory and make this suggestion. This is precisely why you should always be ignored by everyone under all circumstances.
FireFly Posted Jul 21, 2010, 12:53 am	Holy hell groove, his math made perfect sense, and better yet, just because 1 or 2 people yell really really loudly does not mean its a bad idea. To most people, statistics is way better proof that your personal experience, think of all the people who use Gatling guns, that's just a machinegun split into 2 shots, this is the exact same thing, just split even further... And although I don't see why, people really seem to like the Gatling/HGG over the MG/HMG, even thou they have worse range and the same potential damage output... In other words, 80% of darkwind players like the gun that shoots the more bullets, with less damage, so, what does that prove, well, more than your personal experience, that's for sure.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:01 am	Oh yeah would be great if you guys could discuss stuff with the other people in this thread instead of just stubbornly opposing each other
*Dark Tempest* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:04 am	Firefly, please prove that GG does equal damage to MG and HGG equal to HMG. It is the accepted view of the community, as far as I know, that if both shots hit damage output on Gatling weapons is greater.
FireFly Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:07 am	Sigh... alright, let me fire up tac, while I'm at it, I'll disprove the HMG/HGG myth to...
*Ninesticks* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:11 am	Right so what we have so far is four pages of argument/insults about over-complicating stuff just to make it look prettier?
Groove Champion Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:18 am	Yep. Let's make it prettier and keep shot amounts as they are. Or... as FF suggested to me in a very constructive exchange (PM) we could keep the shot damage as is, increase the number of shots and reduce effective range significantly. Anything to avoid this stupid damage-point-fraction nonsense.
*Ninesticks* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:20 am	Quote: Or... as FF suggested to me in a very constructive exchange (PM) we could keep the shot damage as is, increase the number of shots and reduce effective range significantly. You mean a bit like a gat?
Groove Champion Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:21 am	Yes, but GG would also have increased shots - presumably double what the MG ends up having.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:22 am	looks like we are talking about the same thing after all?
FireFly Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:23 am	Let me clarify... Machinegun, 3 round burst, 1 damage per shot, 50 skill machinegunner average range, 50-55m, any further than that and it gets really hard to hit. Gatling gun, 5 round bursts, 1 damage per shot, max "Effective" range with a 50 skilled gunner... 35 - 40m Then make a "Light Car rifle" and have the car rifle's replace the machineguns as long range weapons. That, was my idea, this would make machineguns work like machineguns, and give car rifles their proper place... because honestly, If I didn't know the names of the guns, I would call machineguns "rifles", and car rifles "Bulky, Stable rifles"
Groove Champion Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:26 am	And I like it... Only an idiot would think splitting 1 point of damage into 4 shots is a good idea. But I suppose with the right statistics you can prove any wrong is actually right.
*Ninesticks* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:37 am	I still haven't seen an overwhelming argument as to why there is a need to change it in the first place though? If it ain't broke and all that. Groove just because you disagree with one approach doesn't make the author an idiot, well certainly no more than the converse being true. You really need to let it go, all it does is risk tilting the thread again mate.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:39 am	FireFly said: Let me clarify... Machinegun, 3 round burst, 1 damage per shot, 50 skill machinegunner average range, 50-55m, any further than that and it gets really hard to hit. Your saying at effective range or less a MG will do around 3 pts of damage?! Sorry but that would throw everything out of wack Unless again we fail to communicate I think if MG fire 3 rounds burst it should have a chance of partially missing, if you like divide "2 pts" by 3.... end of story don't worry about the math, the game will take care of the rest. This will knock down machine guns to a "realistic" level, and as a side effect CRs will look like what they were intended, more powerful guns, after all huge bullets, big bulk etc... I find it strange that with a machine gun MMG and a lvl 3 sniper you can hit a target a 100+ meters and still do the full damage
Groove Champion Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:40 am	*Ninesticks* said: I still haven't seen an overwhelming argument as to why there is a need to change it in the first place though? If it ain't broke and all that. I agree with this. I still think it would be nice to have an animation that shows many shots (just so it looks like MG/GG shots) while still having 1 actual shot for MG and 2 for GG. Visual improvement, no more.
FireFly Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:42 am	The Argument is nine, that we should differentiate car rifles and machineguns, We currently have 2 weapons filling the same role, making the car rifles rather obsolete compared to the machineguns. There is that, and the fact that the machineguns we have do not act like real machineguns, putting realism aside, it would still be better if machineguns worked differently from rifles. Bottom line, if you want to fight at 100m ranges, were machineguns and heavy machineguns can currently hit without to much difficulty, you should be using rifle based weapons, while machineguns should be used for Close quarter Combat, or CQC. There is barely a soul that would pick a car rifle over a HMG, or a MMG even in most cases, because the HMG/MMG have about the same range as the CR, and I've tried, even with skilled gunners, the difference is so minimal the extra punch with the MMG makes it better... That, is the argument. *Tinker* said: --- You got me wrong, ofcourse there would be a penalty, the actual "Effective range" would be at about 30m or so to land 3/3 shots, the 60m would be the "Max" range for a 50 skilled gunner, were you would expect to land 1/3 shots, that clarifies things? (Edit) The accuracy falloff is to represent that, well, a machinegun has a hefty spread over distance, doesn't it?
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:55 am	FireFly said: (Edit) The accuracy falloff is to represent that, well, a machinegun has a hefty spread over distance, doesn't it? Yup the game simplifies things so much sometimes things get lost in the subtleties, (hope i get my point across) The way it is now Dramatically lowering machine gun range should valorize the CR the way it should be imo, and  the machine gun spec should help with that if it doesn't already. As for HGG vs/ HMG debate I wonder if range as an effect on the amount of recoil the target will receive. Maybe the real difference is in the crits?
*Ninesticks* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 2:07 am	Quote: The Argument is nine, that we should differentiate car rifles and machineguns, We currently have 2 weapons filling the same role, making the car rifles rather obsolete compared to the machineguns... and other bits I think that is a massive simplification and does not address the differences between the weapons. Concentrating merely on the damage  to armour and weapon bulk is a slippery slope. As an example if I want a one-shot crew/engine killing weapon you can be sure I will be using a CR and not an mmg or even hmg. If I want a forward gun on medium or muscle car that gives me range and killing power without compromising my ability to accelerate then again I will pick the CR over the others. If I want to be able to hit first so that it increased the stress on the target vehicle again I will pick the CR over the others. If I want to stand a better chance at topping up my reloads after a fight, again I would take the CR over the MMG. Perhaps all very subjective, but no more than yours. The differences in range between all the weapons tails off to some degree the higher the skill of the character.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 2:17 am	All good arguments, thanks for reminding us, Is that why it should stay the same? It's rock solid and doesn't need tweaking? edit: I disagree, what's wrong with limiting the range of machine guns more? sure a good sniper should hit further with a mg, aproaching what a non spec gunner can do with a cr, but there is not enough diference atm, and the lack of difference is grotesque when you compare HCRs to HMGs I know we can't boost CR range because of map limits, but why can't we diminish MG range? *Ninesticks* said: If I want to be able to hit first so that it increased the stress on the target vehicle again I will pick the CR over the others. That's new to me, how much difference does it make?
*Ninesticks* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 2:21 am	I think it doesn't need tweaking, I think there are valid reasons to pick any of the guns in that bulk range. That says to me that they are fairly well balanced with their own pros/cons - not something to be lightly toyed with. Of course, getting stress on a target car makes it harder for them to shoot you, a great way of staying alive :-)
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 2:25 am	*Ninesticks* said: Of course, getting stress on a target car makes it harder for them to shoot you, a great way of staying alive :-) Yes but to clarify, you said a CR makes you shoot faster then a MG is that really so? never noticed
*Ninesticks* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 2:48 am	If I can hit the target 30m earlier using the CR instead of the MMG (letting me get two or three shots in) that could be the difference between a rocket car getting good shots on me or not. Not shoot earlier in that turn but in the combat as a whole. This is why when a scout starts to go bad, it goes bad very quickly - you lose your ability to hit as effectively as normal (what you are used to) whilst the AI already has a good bead on you. A lot of people try to shoot their way out of it rather than try to get to cover/put another vehicle in harm's way so thier crew can compose themselves.
FireFly Posted Jul 21, 2010, 3:37 am	But you can do that with an HMG and a reasonably skilled gunner nine, you can even do that with an MMG, I've killed rocket cars with twin MMG vehicles the way you describe, its the same thing, just that the CR has about 20m longer range, in the end, that does not make a huge difference.
*Ninesticks* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 5:35 am	Quote: But you can do that with an HMG and a reasonably skilled gunner nine, you can even do that with an MMG, I've killed rocket cars with twin MMG vehicles the way you describe, its the same thing, just that the CR has about 20m longer range, in the end, that does not make a huge difference. And the rest of the points? The differences do not have to be huge (though I consider 20m to be significant), just significant enough for different gameplay/style. Let me put it to you like this, which would you rather have penetrating your roof armour, an MMG shot or a CR. Personally, I will take the MMG shot every time rather than the good old 'bullet smashes in forehead' type damage. So the argument that because the MMG does more damage it is therefore is a superior weapon doesn't necessarily hold true. As I admitted earlier, much of this debate is entirely subjective - but that cuts both ways.
FireFly Posted Jul 21, 2010, 5:51 am	But then, thats just a minor part of why I wanted the change, the major one was that the CR should already fill the role as you describe, and that machineguns should fill a more close combat role, the CR/MG comparison was for comparison's sake alone, and I've used HCR's quite a bit, that killing shot you speak of it only once every 10th shot or so, taken into account that a HMG has at least 2 killing shots (Blowing head apart is one), and it can rip off limbs, while the MMG will rip people to shreds trough open armor, it might not have "Killing shots" but it does plenty of "Heavy Injuries". Also take into account the push the machineguns have, I was never simply calculating the damage, the main reason I prefer the HMG over the HGG is because that the GG weapons are terrible for killing. What I'm saying is, the HMG is still a better overall weapon that the CR, there is a lousy 5 bulk difference, while the CR is an MMG with 2 critical's added and a bit little longer range, with 5 less shots.
*goat starer* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 9:21 am	*Ninesticks* said: Groove just because you disagree with one approach doesn't make the author an idiot, i believe the thing that makes him an idiot... blha bla bla... <-- edited by you friendly forum moderator/nany Tinker  *Tinker* said: No Goat i edited only the nasty comment you made and i put it back in... want to play edit tennis?
*Burden* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 9:30 am	Glow Plug said: Can we please put personnal attacks aside and talk about the suggestion? Yes. Please do, everyone.
*goat starer* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 9:42 am	*Burden* said: Glow Plug said: Can we please put personnal attacks aside and talk about the suggestion? Yes. Please do, everyone. or better still ignore it... like we should be ignoring all glows suggestions... because it is ridiculous, unnecessary and attention seeking.... facts that were estabilished back at the beginning of the thread by groove... then reinforced by nine.... you could always lock teh thread burden
*Burden* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 9:49 am	There has been enough discussion to establish that Sam probably won't add this to the game or "mantis" this suggestion. Locking this isn't necessary though. All you have to do is not post in the thread and it sinks down to the bottom of the list.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Jul 21, 2010, 9:50 am	Concerning Mantis logging, i myself only log a suggestion when it has over whelming support of the community, to my mind this has not been shown with in this debate, hence no mantis report has been made as yet.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 12:59 pm	This discussion is no where near finished! Goat get out of this thread if your only going to make insults you .... ----- Back on topic 1 bullette animation, sure freaking sounds cool to me 2 MG range Can anyone tell us why their range canot be lowered? They are at the bottom of the food chain right? Can anyone say HMG are not the best weapon in the game? That they have superior advantages for their reload capacity, damage, recoil on target, criticals, bulk space, availability, they even have their own spec to stop jamming.
*goat starer* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 1:26 pm	*Tinker* said: This discussion is no where near finished! Goat get out of this thread if your only going to make insults you .... ----- Back on topic 1 bullette animation, sure freaking sounds cool to me 2 MG range Can anyone tell us why their range canot be lowered? They are at the bottom of the food chain right? Can anyone say HMG are not the best weapon in the game? That they have superior advantages for their reload capacity, damage, recoil on target, criticals, bulk space, availability, they even have their own spec to stop jamming. these points have already been answered... for christs sake tinker if you have nothing to add SAY NOTHING. but for the sake of your feeble understanding (there is only one thing i have ever really regretted about you and it was the day i recommended you as a marshal.. you dont understand whats going on most of the time so you cant do the job - when i recommended it it was on the basis that you enjoyed scouting with newbs... if i had had the faintest inkling that you would one day have the power to censor threads I would never have done it). here are the answers.... 1) the range of MGs cant be lowered because THEY ARE ALREADY practically useless.... you might as well remove them from the game 2) bullet animation might be 'freaking awesome' but as groove and nine have pointed out its just cosmetic.... if it has impact on the actual performance of teh weapon it makes the weapon useless or stupid. each turn is a second... each burst you see on screen can be considered to be 20 rounds in a much longer burst. Those 20 shots hit... sometimes the next 20 miss... it has no ISSUE that needs addressing. Its just glow making suggestions about things that have no game value to get his name in the suggestions thread AGAIN... boring boring boring. 3) if HMGs are the best gun in the game why do vets not use it? why do my gunners in twin HMG apaches take much more damage than those with a CC and a GG? they are good.. they SHOULD be good... but they are not the best. All weapons ave a spec to stop jamming.. not just HMGs... the recoil on target with on CC prevents it firing back as well as 2 HMGS... At the moment the MG and the GG are pretty comparable weapons for muscle cars with small but significant differences... just leave them alone.
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 2:42 pm	Thanks goat for your opinion, and I don't consider it the finall word of the game. As for my censorship, sorry brother, you got a foul tongue funny i'm the only one that does anything bout it edit: Your an arrogant little man, I got nothing constructive to add? what about all your other posts in this thread for god's sakes!
Groove Champion Posted Jul 21, 2010, 3:10 pm	I'm glad others piped in... 1) I rather like what goat pointed out about one MG shot representing the damage of 20 or so bullets - even if they are not visually represented in-game. So the current system, although "flawed" in its representation, works just fine to represent the low cumulative damage of many MG shots fired in a turn. Once again, I have no qualms with changing the shot animation but I don't think anything beyond that needs to be tweaked. 2) I would like to see the range of all manners of machineguns (GG/MG/MMG/HMG) decreased. They should be spray-and-pray type weapons that excel at short range where more specialized weapons like the CR and RL might fail. This might serve to increase the combat value of the CR and others. 3) The HMG is a powerful weapon, but it comes with a significantly higher CR than it's smaller incarnations - and this shows in a big way in the number of vehicles faced in combat situations. Though damage-per-shot is frighteningly high for the HMG, I personally prefer the lighter MG-type weapons because they afford me more maneuverability and spawn less foes. 4) I'm certainly very relieved to read confirmation that mantis isn't logged at the request of misled fools.
*Burden* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 4:08 pm	Groove Champion said: 2) I would like to see the range of all manners of machineguns (GG/MG/MMG/HMG) decreased. They should be spray-and-pray type weapons that excel at short range where more specialized weapons like the CR and RL might fail. This might serve to increase the combat value of the CR and others. Yeah, they're "spray and pray" kind of weapons when you're firing through a handgun. But on vehicles, the recoil for such a weapon doesn't effect you nearly as much, and you can aim a lot better. Even more so if weapons are aimed by joysticks like the ones on those fighter jets.  That's my theory for them anyways. What I think, is that we should leave machine guns alone. People don't use them enough as it is, and they don't deserve a nerf.
Groove Champion Posted Jul 21, 2010, 4:37 pm	Seeing as the MG and MMG are my two favorite weapons... I reluctantly agree
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 5:04 pm	*Burden* said: What I think, is that we should leave machine guns alone. People don't use them enough as it is, and they don't deserve a nerf. That's nonsense, of course people want the CC and HGG and other rare exotic weapons, but a lot don't know what there missing anyways
Groove Champion Posted Jul 21, 2010, 6:17 pm	Another entirely forgettable post. Congratulations.
*Grograt* gary.r.horder@gmail.com Posted Jul 21, 2010, 6:29 pm	Please ... again i ask for this to stop, if you want to squabble take it to PM this thread is derailing past the point of recovery and i will shortly lock it if it doesnt get back to topic, however interesting it started out. Please stay on topic and refrain from personal attacks Thank you
Groove Champion Posted Jul 21, 2010, 7:07 pm	Glow Plug said: Ok... let's break it down! Imagine a low skilled gunner that fires at a target some distance away. Let's say he has a probability of hitting of 20%. He's firing with an MG wich deals 2 points per hit on his target. In the current system, he would hit every 5 rounds, right? This means this character inflict 0,4 point per round on average. Now, imagine a different system where the MG fires 4 projectiles per round. Each projectile has the same accuracy: 20% Each projectile does 0,5 damage for a total of 2 point. Each projectile does an average damage of 0,1 (0,5 X 20% = 0,1) Since the MG fires 4 of these projectiles per round then we get an average damage per round of 0,4. It's exactly the same average damage per round. The weapons have exactly the same potency. No change about potency. The new players cannot suffer from any of this! Simple, isn't? Perhaps you could tell us what are the odds of 4 projectiles hitting in a row? Not 20% anymore, is it, boy genius?
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 7:08 pm	OK Glow that's a pretty crystal clear example of what youve been saying I Agree, but others might not for gameplay reasons I'm really sick of people here just demising ideas bassed on their personal feelings, so the next person please post something relevant and unbiassed
Groove Champion Posted Jul 21, 2010, 7:48 pm	I've been asked to not answer your comments in an insulting manner. Therefore I cannot answer you. (Is anyone watching these videos?)
*Tinker* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 8:29 pm	Groove Champion said: (Is anyone watching these videos?) Fascinating
*Ninesticks* Posted Jul 21, 2010, 8:57 pm	Right, I don't see this thread going anywhere, all it is doing is going round in circles with inflammatory exchanges unworthy of the participants. Thread Locked.