311 replies to this topic

[Wildstreak]

I have used LBX before on a Hunchback 4H, back then a couple years ago I preferred it since I was not good at aiming well. The LBX is a good beginner Ballistic due to its spread effect.

Now I am using a Hunchback 4G and switching between both of these weapons for comparison. Since using both, I have discovered the LBX still works better even though I have just as good an aim with the AC/10. I can score about 250+ damage with the AC/10 compared to 300+ with the LBX. So far at max, I can get into the 400s with the AC/10 but over 500 with the LBX. I wonder why the spread Autocannon works better, I would expect them to have roughly similar results.

Looking at this, first the LBX has better range.
LBX Range: 540; Max Range 1620
AC/10 Range: 450; Max Range: 1350
But due to spread, you get better damage closer in with the LBX since even with spread, the concentration on target would give better results. I usually do not fight much outside Range with either weapon. Even with a 90m difference, I would expect similar results, maybe a slight edge to the AC/10 since it does not spread.

Yet the LBX has the edge and I put some thought into why. The LBX is 1 less heat and 1 less critical slot but I do not see these as a cause for the damage difference either though the heat might allow more firings before pulling back to cool off. The LBX has a crit chance like a MG, I don't think that is a big deal. The LBX has a percent chance for additional damage that makes no sense but the percentages are low (higher than a MG but not game breaking) so I do not think they contribute much to what I see here.

I can come up with only 1 answer. The 1 ton difference between them. That 1 ton allows the LBX to carry 15 more shots for more damage while playing a match, even with spread a competent player can concentrate most of the pellet spread on target by firing more often at Range or less thus a LBX user gets more shots and a higher damage output not counting certain factors such as if killed and when.

Even my after match stats prove this to me, after a successful match I will have more damage and thus points & CBills from using LBX than a AC/10. Thus the AC/10s primary weakness is, to me, clear. This 1 ton difference makes a standard AC/10 less desirable than a LBX for use when the two should be even with the primary difference being single shot AC/10 vs spread LBX.

So the question comes to mind how to fix this. In the past year the LBX got buffed by having the spread reduced and fixed while the AC/10 recently got a projectile speed reduction. The 'nerf' did not really hurt the AC/10 in the hands of a competent player (still faster than a LBX shot anyway) while the 'buff' on the LBX helped it as it should. I do not think changing projectile speed on the AC/10 will do anything for this weakness between the 2 weapons.

I can only think of three things that could fix this problem.

Fix #1 - Up AC/10 damage per shot to maybe 10.5-11. I don't like front loaded damage but have to list this in honesty as an option. This would make ammo explosions more deadly and begs whether it throws off any balance between the AC/10 and other Autocannon.

Fix #2 - Increase the # of shots per ton for the AC/10 to say 22-23. This would give it a rough parity with the LBX by allowing as many shots within the same tons. But this is based off my HBK-4G and may not work on some other Mech based on amount of ammo used.

Fix #3 - Change the AC/10 weight to 11. This allows both to carry the same tons in ammo.

Maybe there is a solution I did not list. But there is a problem in my view and something needs changing so these 2 weapons have a rough comparison and similarity between them.

For reference, here is the HBK-4G I am running that I noticed this on. You can swap the AC/10 + 2 tons ammo for a LBX + 3 tons ammo. I have something similar on my 4H where I normally carry a LBX + 2 tons ammo, with an AC/10 I could only fit 15 shots.

Thanks for reading if you got this far.

[PanzerMagier]

Ac10 does better at range, LBX far better at brawling. Even though the LBX has better range, it sucks beyond 275m
There's a 1 ton difference, I feel they're pretty equal. So I don't think they need any change.

On the other hand why don't you waste your breath on something that needs more attention like command console, flamers, Narc...

[Sybreed]

PanzerMagier, on 26 January 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

Ac10 does better at range, LBX far better at brawling. Even though the LBX has better range, it sucks beyond 275m
There's a 1 ton difference, I feel they're pretty equal. So I don't think they need any change.

On the other hand why don't you waste your breath on something that needs more attention like command console, flamers, Narc...

NARC will get fixed soon. Command console and flamers do need a rework. Thomas said they'd include switchable ammo eventually, which should help LB-X a lot. Though, they need to give a higher cooldown when firing slugs, otherwise it'll just be better than an AC/10 in every wya.

[Roland]

Quote

Even with a 90m difference, I would expect similar results, maybe a slight edge to the AC/10 since it does not spread.

Err... No.

The fact that the AC10 doesn't spread is a MASSIVE advantage.

The LBX's spread makes it effectively a useless weapon. It will get you points on the scoreboard, but it'll be infinitely less effective at actually killing mechs.

When you spread damage, you are multiplying the amount of armor you need to go through. If I can put all of my shots on one of your torsos, say CT, then I only need to go through X armor and Y internals before you die. If I am spreading that damage around, then it means I need to go through that whole section, but also some other section, since that is where some of that damage is going.

Damage spread effectively is cutting your damage down to a fraction of what the scoreboard shows, by multiplying the amount of armor you have to go through before killing a mech.

This is why the LBX is a trash-tier weapon. Some folks don't realize this, because they look at the scoreboard at the end and say, "Hey! I did a lot of damage!" but they aren't really considering how effective they were in the only way that matters.. actually putting mechs in the ground.

[Khobai]

both weapons are bad. use an ac/20 or ac/5s instead.

[LORD TSARKON]

Khobai, on 26 January 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

both weapons are bad. use an ac/20 or ac/5s instead.

This

[Wildstreak]

PanzerMagier, on 26 January 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

Ac10 does better at range, LBX far better at brawling. Even though the LBX has better range, it sucks beyond 275m
There's a 1 ton difference, I feel they're pretty equal. So I don't think they need any change.

On the other hand why don't you waste your breath on something that needs more attention like command console, flamers, Narc...

I have going up to well over 1 year ago. And yet.....

@Roland, thanks for your post but I have to disagree with your argument due to that point being more about player skill than weapon difference, hence I did not mention it.

The AC/10's ability to kill depends more on player skill specifically the ability to constantly focus on hitting the same area over time. Since player skill matters more here, this is why I did not list this point. A player can hit just as often with the AC/10 but not hit the same area, this shows the player has to improve, not fix the weapon.

So the ability to put a Mech down is not relevant to what I listed. Damage spread may take longer for a kill but this makes the LBX more like a LRM without guidance, it is to assist in taking out enemies, not to get individual kills. This is in addition to making it easier to hit fast moving Lights due to spread.

I do not call the LBX a trash tier weapon, I describe it as a good starter Ballistic until someone improves their aim over time as I did. A comparison of these 2 weapons is best done when your hit % with both is closer as mine has gotten to where it is today.

The killing factor is not relevant since that is more on skill and, yes, the AC/10 should be able to kill more than the LBX. That does not change the fact that, when you have a close % to hit with both weapons, you can put out more with the LBX due to having 15 more shots.

@Khobai, I like my LBX when I use it. Just because a weapon is bad is no reason to avoid it, we should have choices.

[Roland]

Quote

So the ability to put a Mech down is not relevant to what I listed. Damage spread may take longer for a kill but this makes the LBX more like a LRM without guidance, it is to assist in taking out enemies, not to get individual kills. This is in addition to making it easier to hit fast moving Lights due to spread.

But this is a fallacious argument.

If you are looking for a weapon which easily just puts "some" of its damage onto the target, the the LBX fails in that niche as well. You could just bring a laser, and most likely get more damage on target, without any travel time at all, and no ammo constraints... Although the laser would at least allow you to be precise if you had enough skill, while the LBX is guaranteed to be imprecise no matter what.

Quote

I do not call the LBX a trash tier weapon, I describe it as a good starter Ballistic until someone improves their aim over time as I did. A comparison of these 2 weapons is best done when your hit % with both is closer as mine has gotten to where it is today.

No man, it's a trash tier weapon, because it ends up being less effective than basically any other weapon in the game, ton for ton. There is never a build which would not benefit from switching it out for another weapon.

[Krinkov]

I fixed your LBX http://mwo.smurfy-ne...b1941742c5e0425

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 26 January 2014 - 01:09 PM, said:

both weapons are bad. use an ac/20 or ac/5s instead.

Roland, on 26 January 2014 - 01:35 PM, said:

No man, it's a trash tier weapon, because it ends up being less effective than basically any other weapon in the game, ton for ton. There is never a build which would not benefit from switching it out for another weapon.

So if I kill either of you in-game using one of those pieces of trash, you're going to feel so bad, you're going to need a kaishakunin, right?

Edited by Mystere, 26 January 2014 - 01:47 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

PanzerMagier, on 26 January 2014 - 12:37 PM, said:

Ac10 does better at range, LBX far better at brawling. Even though the LBX has better range, it sucks beyond 275m
There's a 1 ton difference, I feel they're pretty equal. So I don't think they need any change.

On the other hand why don't you waste your breath on something that needs more attention like command console, flamers, Narc...

please explain how LBX is "far better" at brawling? Slightly less heat, but same range, RoF, and ammo, less concentrated damage?

[Corvus Antaka]

[Khobai]

Quote

So if I kill either of you in-game using one of those pieces of trash, you're going to feel so bad, you're going to need a kaishakunin, right?

I never said you couldnt kill anyone with an AC/10. Just that an AC/20 or AC/5 is better.

Ive killed people with machine guns. It doesnt make them good.

[Roland]

Mystere, on 26 January 2014 - 01:47 PM, said:

So if I kill either of you in-game using one of those pieces of trash, you're going to feel so bad, you're going to need a kaishakunin, right?

I killed people using FLARES in mechwarrior 4.
Didn't mean that flares were a good weapon.

[Mystere]

Roland, on 26 January 2014 - 02:02 PM, said:

I killed people using FLARES in mechwarrior 4.
Didn't mean that flares were a good weapon.

Khobai, on 26 January 2014 - 01:58 PM, said:

I never said you couldnt kill anyone with an AC/10. Just that an AC/20 or AC/5 is better.

Ive killed people with machine guns. It doesnt make them good.

I said nothing about anything being good. I just want to be your second.

[Rebas Kradd]

It's strengths are suppression, point-blank brawling, and hitting lights. But it does nothing that a more skilled pilot couldn't do with AC/5's.

'Course, I don't really have a problem with some weapons being underpowered. Still SMH trying to figure out this weird thing where people demand that EVERY weapon be good...

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 26 January 2014 - 02:19 PM.

[Pjwned]

I really, honestly do not see a problem with 1 gun being better suited for range and a variant of it being better suited for brawling. Even if the LBX has a higher effective range, if you try using it from ~450m away it's usually not very worthwhile because pellets will often be too spread out or even miss, while the AC10 will deal focused damage and at not much further distances suffer from only minor damage dropoff. So, aside from the bonus critical damage, the AC10 is not really less effective in close quarters, but since it's clearly more effective at range I think that being 1 ton heavier is a fair tradeoff.

Personally I would love to see more weapon variants like the LB 10-X, and better yet focus on making other alternative weapons (i.e flamers & pulse lasers) more attractive to use.

Roland, on 26 January 2014 - 12:57 PM, said:

Err... No.

The fact that the AC10 doesn't spread is a MASSIVE advantage.

The LBX's spread makes it effectively a useless weapon. It will get you points on the scoreboard, but it'll be infinitely less effective at actually killing mechs.

When you spread damage, you are multiplying the amount of armor you need to go through. If I can put all of my shots on one of your torsos, say CT, then I only need to go through X armor and Y internals before you die. If I am spreading that damage around, then it means I need to go through that whole section, but also some other section, since that is where some of that damage is going.

Damage spread effectively is cutting your damage down to a fraction of what the scoreboard shows, by multiplying the amount of armor you have to go through before killing a mech.

This is why the LBX is a trash-tier weapon. Some folks don't realize this, because they look at the scoreboard at the end and say, "Hey! I did a lot of damage!" but they aren't really considering how effective they were in the only way that matters.. actually putting mechs in the ground.

I think you are oversimplifying things drastically there. For one thing, at close enough ranges the spread is still pretty tight, and when it comes to shredding up internals (read: "dropping mechs to the ground") you don't really get better than the LBX. It is also possible that the damage spread to a valuable component (such as an arm or a leg) and disabled a crucial weapon system or the mech's movement, and that's nothing to just discard completely.

I guess it's a trash weapon if you try to use it like its standard counterpart, but then I would have to wonder why because it's obviously not designed that way.

Edited by Pjwned, 26 January 2014 - 02:37 PM.

[Roland]

Pjwned, on 26 January 2014 - 02:23 PM, said:

I really, honestly do not see a problem with 1 gun being better suited for range and a variant of it being better suited for brawling. Even if the LBX has a higher effective range, if you try using it from ~450m away it's usually not very worthwhile because pellets will often be too spread out or even miss, while the AC10 will deal focused damage and at not much further distances suffer from only minor damage dropoff. So, aside from the bonus critical damage, the AC10 is not really less effective in close quarters, but since it's clearly more effective at range I think that being 1 ton heavier is a fair tradeoff.

Personally I would love to see more weapon variants like the LB 10-X, and better yet focus on making other alternative weapons (i.e flamers & pulse lasers) more attractive to use.

The thing is, the LBX isn't good up close either. Even at trivial ranges, it still spreads damage all over the place. Unless you are touching the enemy, it's gonna spread damage.

It would be great if the LBX was good at infighting, but it isn't.

You want to make it a good infight weapon? Increase its damage per pellet to 1.4, which is where the damage was put for prior titles like MW4. THEN it would have a useful niche.

[Sephlock]

Roland, on 26 January 2014 - 02:34 PM, said:

The thing is, the LBX isn't good up close either. Even at trivial ranges, it still spreads damage all over the place. Unless you are touching the enemy, it's gonna spread damage.

It would be great if the LBX was good at infighting, but it isn't.

You want to make it a good infight weapon? Increase its damage per pellet to 1.4, which is where the damage was put for prior titles like MW4. THEN it would have a useful niche.

Did those titles also have doubled armor?

[East Indy]

Rebas Kradd, on 26 January 2014 - 02:12 PM, said:

'Course, I don't really have a problem with some weapons being underpowered. Still SMH trying to figure out this weird thing where people demand that EVERY weapon be good...

Apart from a reasonable desire to see variety, it's just powergaming. A lot of people want to win at all costs, so they focus on weapons that confer an advantage to obvious playstyles, or even just have a theoretical one. Very little experimentation is done, perception becomes reality, and people adopt an all-or-nothing opinion that may not even be based on personal experience.