64 replies to this topic

[Alistair Winter]

I dare say that, with the exception of Jenner pilots, no one is using small lasers or small pulse lasers.

What would be the negative consequences of double range for both weapons, or even triple range for small lasers (270 meters) and double range for small pulse lasers (180 meters)?

As far as I can tell, it would tempt more people to rely on high DPS rather than high alpha, it would also lead to more variety and probably make many ballistic / missile boaters make use of their unused energy hardpoints.

Thoughts?

[Team Leader]

Agreed need more viable weapons. Small lasers and SPL are too {Scrap} to use seriously unless it's literally all you can fit. And if that's all you can fit you're almost always better off shedding .5tons of armor and putting in a Med laser

I assume you mean the max range being 270, after which it does no damage. If normal range was 270 that would be kinda wonky and nobody would take many medium lasers.

Well they might but still I don't think it should be OVER buffed to the point of ML/SL redundancy get what I mean

[Alistair Winter]

Team Leader, on 22 September 2013 - 06:57 AM, said:

I assume you mean the max range being 270, after which it does no damage. If normal range was 270 that would be kinda wonky and nobody would take many medium lasers.
Well they might but still I don't think it should be OVER buffed to the point of ML/SL redundancy get what I mean

I think there needs to be a point where you're actually considering using small lasers instead of medium lasers, where it's not an automatic choice. For a lot of my mechs, I have to make a hard choice between large lasers and medium lasers, but small lasers never enter the equation.

Even if they had identical range, the low damage makes the medium laser an easy choice for most mechs.

[MonkeyDCecil]

I would love a range buff on both. But I do use both on some of my builds. Like you said, I use it SL on my jenner. But on my 3D I use 4 SPL, an LBX and an AC/5. And I do great damage. It would be great if the SL range was 180m to 360, and the SPL was 120m to 240m. Would to see something like this.

[DocBach]

They aren't meant to be mainstay weapons, they are tertiary systems; the only real point in small lasers were for 'Mechs that couldn't fit anything else ie really light mechs, mechs with oversized engines, or mechs that had floating tonnage left over because of FASA math.

Edited by DocBach, 23 September 2013 - 05:36 AM.

[FupDup]

SL: 165m
SPL: 120m
MPL: 230m
LPL: 390m

[Tempered]

I think if you double the range, you're going to see the hunchback start boating them again.

[FupDup]

Tempered, on 22 September 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

I think if you double the range, you're going to see the hunchback start boating them again.

The Hunchback 4P is one of the easiest mechs to neuter in the game. I say bring it on.

[maddog6707]

Currently SL and SPL are 90m and 180m max I could see a small buff for SL to 220m Max.

[Tezcatli]

My Blackjack 1X runs small pulse lasers. They're awesome. Especially for dealing with lights. They don't need a range bump. You can make a case for small lasers. Since usually the regular laser counterparts are longer range then the pulse weapons.

[Deathlike]

Suggested buffed optimal ranges:
SL: 135m
SPL: 120m
(remember, flamers are now @ 90m, MGs @ 120m)
MPL: 210m
LPL: 360m
(remember, ML is 270m)

Edited by Deathlike, 22 September 2013 - 09:21 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

Yeah, that could help them.

[dario03]

I wouldn't mind if they buffed all the laser ranges and the flamer and mg.
SL - 150-180
SPL - 120-150
ML - 300
MPL - 250
LL - 500
LPL - 400
ERLL - 750
Flamer - 120
MG - 150

Edited by dario03, 22 September 2013 - 09:34 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

MonkeyDCecil, on 22 September 2013 - 08:35 AM, said:

I would love a range buff on both. But I do use both on some of my builds. Like you said, I use it SL on my jenner. But on my 3D I use 4 SPL, an LBX and an AC/5. And I do great damage. It would be great if the SL range was 180m to 360, and the SPL was 120m to 240m. Would to see something like this.

I've used the SPLs on my Ilya Muromets and the SL on my CTF-3D, just for the sake of variety. I have recently switched to medium lasers, It's made a huge difference. Granted, it was hilarious to get a few kills with red lasers before, but usually the joke was on me as those lasers made less damage than laser pens.

DocBach, on 22 September 2013 - 08:43 AM, said:

They aren't meant to be mainstay weapons, they are tertiary systems; the only real point in small lasers were for 'Mechs that couldn't fit anything else ie really light mechs, mechs with oversized engines, or mechs that had tonnage left over because but no criticals.

Every time someone on this forum says "they aren't meant to be _____", I just want to punch a cow square in the jaw.

It's the same reason why so many fans were happy with useless MGs, useless flamers, useless single heat sinks and a bunch of useless mechs. Because they read in a book that some things are supposed to be better than other things, and they think this computer game needs to be an exact carbon copy of the tabletop game, thinking that it's more important to stay true to every quirk of the Battletech universe rather than making a good and balanced game, with features that actually serve a purpose. I don't care what your old books tell you about this weapon or that mech. If PGI puts them in this game, they better give me a reason to use them.

My only consolation is that PGI is starting to realize their mistakes and are no longer listening to arguments like yours.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Double range is probably too far, triple is certainly too far.

What SLs need is to have their range pushed out like the MG did, to 120m (240m max). This leaves the ML comfortably ahead on the range department while still letting SLs be far more useful than they currently are.

The SPL should probably have its range stay where it's at, which would let it have significantly better performance relative to the SL without it being as much of an issue as it is while they're matched in range.

[GMAK]

Would not be a bad idea to give more range to the small laser. Nobody use them now.

[Alistair Winter]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 22 September 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

Double range is probably too far, triple is certainly too far.

What would be the negative consequences? Would we see 6 small laser Stalkers dominating the battlefield? I really don't see any one who could abuse this buff. Hunchbacks? They'd get their hunch blown off even faster than today.

There seems to be an irrational fear of drastic changes, a la "imagine what a Spider with 6 MGs could do to an Atlas' rear armour", when drastic changes really are needed.

[Orkhepaj]

oh no jenner boost

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Alistair Winter, on 22 September 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:

What would be the negative consequences? Would we see 6 small laser Stalkers dominating the battlefield? I really don't see any one who could abuse this buff. Hunchbacks? They'd get their hunch blown off even faster than today.

There seems to be an irrational fear of drastic changes, a la "imagine what a Spider with 6 MGs could do to an Atlas' rear armour", when drastic changes really are needed.

My 4P SL builds are already nasty. Giving them double or triple the range would make them stupidly OP.

Jenners and other lights would also have a far easier time of things if they could hit at full power past where they can currently not even damage enemies. SLs might well become the LRM-carrier secondary weapon of choice, too.

Mostly, though, the performance gap between the SL and the ML would be way too small at double or triple range. Thus the 120m suggestion I made in my previous post. It strikes a nice balance between increasing SL performance and retaining the advantages of the ML.

[Alistair Winter]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 22 September 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

My 4P SL builds are already nasty. Giving them double or triple the range would make them stupidly OP.

I have yet to see anyone with 4P's and small lasers that were close to getting top score in a match, let alone earn a description as "nasty". Hat's off to you for knowing how to use them, but I have my doubts many others would be a big threat with the Hunchback if this buff happened.

At best, perhaps it would finally make a few medium mechs as dangerous as heavy and assault mechs.

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 22 September 2013 - 02:23 PM, said:

Jenners and other lights would also have a far easier time of things if they could hit at full power past where they can currently not even damage enemies. SLs might well become the LRM-carrier secondary weapon of choice, too.

In regards to LRM-carriers, those aren't a problem today anyway. The ability to defend themselves with 4 small lasers at 0-180 meter range (12 damage!) would hardly ruin the game.

Jenners, I could see that being a problem among elite players, perhaps. The thing about high DPS versus high burst damage is that it requires far more skill to stay on target for 0.75 seconds with only a 2.25 cooldown, while going 150 kph, compared to the longer cooldown and higher damage of medium lasers. With medium lasers, you can shoot a few alphas and evade while your mech cools down, or just spend more time evading and firing alpha strikes with less regularity.

It's hard to make full use of the small laser, like the MG or AC2, because you have to stay on target all the time. So again, maybe the best pilots would be able to take advantage of double range, but I doubt most players would.

The problem with the Jenner F is that it's so hard to adjust weapons to make other light mechs more viable without making the Jenner F super-overpowered.