11 replies to this topic

[Jazzbandit1313]

My question is why does the Large laser have to be 4 more tons than the medium lasers for only around 2x more damage.

[superteds]

cripes

[Gaan Cathal]

Because hardpoints.

[FupDup]

Because FASA said so in the 80's.

[Rahnu]

It's not even 2x damage, it's 5 -> 9 damage with a .25 second longer cooldown. A medium laser puts out 1.25 DPS - a large laser puts out 2.12 DPS for five times the weight and twice as many crit slots. On the bright side, it also has a much longer range, but ******* they are inefficient next to medium lasers.

They're also inefficient next to PPCs. PPCs generate the same amount of heat (after accounting for the dissipation not starting until a laser finishes firing) in exchange for 1 more damage, a .25 second shorter cooldown, a 2000 m/s projectile instead of a hitscan projectile, and 0 duration.

Needless to say, I have zero faith in PGI's balancing priorities after seeing this laughable situation.

Edit: I should mention, however, that even medium lasers look terrible next to ballistics due to the number of heat sinks required to become heat stable with even a moderate number of lasers (say, 4) and the 1-second duration. Awful, awful balance work here.

Edited by Zyrusticae, 29 June 2013 - 07:53 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Large Lasers are more efficient than Mediums in terms of heat, though. 1 large generates less heat than 2 mediums, and does full damage at twice medium laser range.

Anyways, generally speaking in Battletech tonnage/heat generation scales a LOT faster than damage/range.

Edited by Wintersdark, 29 June 2013 - 09:50 AM.

[Avimimus]

It is really all about range - the Large Laser is more effective at medium and medium-long ranges.

It also does more concentrated damage (in table-top all weapon systems are like shotguns apparently - so your multiple medium lasers wouldn't hit the same point - whereas the large laser would concentrate that damage)

[El Bandito]

Table top rulz.

Needs to be changed.

[aniviron]

It's partially about range, which is super important, but also about the way weapons scale up. None of the weights increase in linear fashion, because in general the heavier weapons are meant to be taken in small quantity on lighter mechs or in larger numbers of heavier mechs, and a 2ton llas would be pretty silly. Imagine a hbk-4p with 5llas, which would be about the optimal build for it given the number of tons that would take up. You could probably cram 8llas in there, actually, and still even have armor and heat sinks, given that you can still take seven if you are willing to make sascrifices.

This is why it weighs five tons. The math of "2x damage 2x weight" be damned, it is actually pretty decent balance.

[Ralgas]

If it was only double the weight you'd see 4 Llas cidada's everywhere and they would melt face before disappearing like a mechanical road-runner.........

beep beep! pew pew!

[Keisuke Nagisa]

Its fine the way it is. The range is your biggest advantage. Besides we dont meed 8 LL hunchbacks murdering everything.

By your logic PPC's should weight like 3-4 tons.

Edited by Keisuke Nagisa, 30 June 2013 - 08:33 PM.

[EyeOne]

Well, it is kind odd that it weighs that much more. But if you only have so many hardpoints it's worth the extra damage and more so worth the range.

It weighs 5 tons but when you've gotta have a Large Laser you've gotta have a Large Laser.