34 replies to this topic

[Tuonela]

I don't know anyone who has ever complained about large laser boating. 4 LL assaults are common, and are definitely not an issue, I rather think the weapon is currently well balanced.

This post is really just to ask PGI to reconsider the extremely low limit of 2 for LLs in terms of extra heat damage, that limit should be at the lowest 3, but in my honest opinion 4 is fine as well.

[Joseph Mallan]

just so happens I have had 2 Large Lasers on My Atlas for months now. So, I'm Cool!

[Stoicblitzer]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 July 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:

just so happens I have had 2 Large Lasers on My Atlas for months now. So, I'm Cool!

glad you're happy.

lasers are different because of how they work. they require more skill to use than ppcs. not sure they should have put limits on lasers.

[AntiCitizenJuan]

It should be 3 IMO

[VikingFarmer]

Funny thing is this won't hurt my 6LL stalker, i stagger fire them all the time in groups of 2 anyway. It does bone my 3ERLL founder catapult though will have to test the heat to see how it does.

[Joseph Mallan]

Stoicblitzer, on 11 July 2013 - 04:21 PM, said:

glad you're happy.

lasers are different because of how they work. they require more skill to use than ppcs. not sure they should have put limits on lasers.

*Shrug* I haven't had more than 3 PPCs on a Mech either. I have had 4 Large on a Stalker though. I don't have a problem, now some future Clanners might!

[Khobai]

you should be able to fire as many as you want without penalty. fix convergence.

[Asakara]

I guess I will need to find another loadout for my 1X besides the 5 LL "facemelter" setup.. And my 4 LL dragon too.

It was fun when my unit would run a lance of facemelters. When all of us focus fired we could drop an atlas in 1 group salvo (20 LLs to the CT hurts a bit)... Oh well, I will adapt.

[Sable]

i also think 2 for large lasers is too low. It should be 4 because lasers already have negatives to balance out their positives. Burn time, lower range, heat doesn't start dissipating until you're done firing. There's already 3 negatives, it doesn't need another negative.

Edited by Sable, 11 July 2013 - 05:40 PM.

[mistformsquirrel]

Tuonela, on 11 July 2013 - 04:16 PM, said:

I don't know anyone who has ever complained about large laser boating. 4 LL assaults are common, and are definitely not an issue, I rather think the weapon is currently well balanced.

This post is really just to ask PGI to reconsider the extremely low limit of 2 for LLs in terms of extra heat damage, that limit should be at the lowest 3, but in my honest opinion 4 is fine as well.

I agree. Lasers aren't like PPCs - PPCs are instant damage to the location they hit, lasers you actually have to work to keep on target. I dont' even use Large Lasers and I think that's a bit silly.

[soarra]

Tuonela, on 11 July 2013 - 04:16 PM, said:

I don't know anyone who has ever complained about large laser boating. 4 LL assaults are common, and are definitely not an issue, I rather think the weapon is currently well balanced.

This post is really just to ask PGI to reconsider the extremely low limit of 2 for LLs in terms of extra heat damage, that limit should be at the lowest 3, but in my honest opinion 4 is fine as well.

hope you realize all your weapons are not suppose to be fired every time.. thats why we have weapon groups and chain fire

[Farpenoodle]

3 or 4 is a good number. I think 3 since firing 4 with that threshold would likely not be too punishing if you happened to alpha them.

[Lysander Voidrunner]

They gave 6 Mlas, 3Llas is more logical, same kind of damage and probably similar to 2PPCs with misses and all that.

[Damocles69]

i agree. should be at least 3

[Gallowglas]

Agreed. Large lasers are probably the most balanced of all the weapons available. I think 3-4 would be a reasonable threshold, but 2 is definitely too low.

[Purlana]

They don't want you boating those OP Large Pulse Lasers!

[TheGreatNoNo]

Had a conversation with someone in match about this. Agreed it should be three, due to , harder to use due to its DoT nature , less range and when you are firing them you have to stay exposed to deal the damage while firing instead of fire and run while the shot is traveling.



Edit: And un-**** the large pluses please. They were a rare sight back before the raised heat already.

Edited by Lost One, 11 July 2013 - 05:53 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

All I can say is I am glad I saw this comming a few weeks ago and changed my Heavy Metals loadout to NOT use triple LLs in the left arm. If I hadn't found another great build, that would have hurt....ALOT.

Honestly I think this is going to be a good thing because it will encourage people to mix up their builds a bit and I think people are going to find that they preconcieved notions of what is a good build and what really is a good build are two different things.

Edited by Viktor Drake, 11 July 2013 - 06:13 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Farpenoodle, on 11 July 2013 - 05:46 PM, said:

3 or 4 is a good number. I think 3 since firing 4 with that threshold would likely not be too punishing if you happened to alpha them.

I distinctly remember a L variant Charger that had...4 Large Lasers. But BTWiki does not have i.

[Farpenoodle]

Joseph Mallan, on 11 July 2013 - 06:12 PM, said:

I distinctly remember a L variant Charger that had...4 Large Lasers. But BTWiki does not have i.

I'm sure it's not the only Canon 4 LL mech either. My point was that with a threshold of 3, the penalty for firing 4 likely wouldn't be bad enough to make it unviable. Besides, quite a number of people already fire their LLs in pairs. I wouldn't be unhappy with either number though. 2 is just too low.