311 replies to this topic

[DONTOR]

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.

YES! please give my atlas an LBX 28! wont be OP at all...

[Khobai]

Quote

Big damage numbers just means that you did a **** poor job of putting damage in the same spot.

He had 7 kills. 782 damage / 7 kills = killing mechs with an average of 111 damage. Thats fairly efficient actually. And its even more efficient than that, when you consider he had 4 assists too.

But still... no one is saying LB10Xs are the best weapons. Everyone knows they're worse than other ACs, especially those of us who use them regularly. The point is theyre not so bad that theyre completely useless. Flamers are a weapon thats completely useless. LB10Xs are one tier below other autocannons at worst.

LB10Xs definitely need a real buff though. And not a tighter spread which is all PGI ever gives them.

Quote

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.

Yes but the game has damage transfer. If you hit a destroyed side torso, half that damage still transfers to the center torso. LB10Xs also get decent bonus damage vs internal structure. LB10Xs are pretty good against mechs that have already been can opened. For the most part you want to finish off already damaged mechs with LB10Xs.

Edited by Khobai, 28 January 2014 - 08:43 AM.

[Trauglodyte]

Reitrix, on 28 January 2014 - 08:18 AM, said:

Ah, i see you looked right but not left. 7 kills 4 assists on less than 800 damage. I run 105 shells. I'd say my damage went exactly where it was supposed to.

No, I saw it. Kills are such a horrible statistic to hang success on. You can get a kill with a flamer. Do you know what I mean? That's why I hate when people toss around damage, kdr, etc. There aren't enough meaningful stats in this game to really gauge success. Even w/l is bad because you could, theoretically, get carried. I like the LB and think that it is a fun weapon (in a goofy kind of way). Back in my TT days, I had a friend that swore by the combo of the AC20 and multiple SRMs because, and these are his words, he could go BANG followed by the RATTLE RATTLE. Was it valid? Eh, not at normal engagement ranges. IF you let him get up on you, though, you were hosed. Especially as he had a claw equipped. The point is, though, that with both the SRMs, the LB, and all damage in TT, you're stuck putting damage in spots where you don't really want it OR you're just out right missing with it. Granted, the benefit of spread weapons is that if you miss you can still do damage. But, you're still not getting everything where it is needed. Does that make sense?

Edited by Trauglodyte, 28 January 2014 - 08:31 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

You can get a kill with a flamer.

ive never seen someone get 7 kills with flamers though

[IceCase88]

This thread is really making me laugh. The AC10 has been largely regarded by the "elites" has the worst of the ACs for a long time. Now they are making the case it is the best when nothing has really changed with other than a velocity nerf. Conclusion.... the "elites" really do not have a clue and only follow the alleged "meta."

The LBX was total trash when introduced. It was only good for getting assist XP when it was a static XP reward and not based off damage inflicted. Since the tightening of the spread it has greatly increased in power. Is it better than an AC20? Of course not. No one will make that case. Not every mech can carry an AC20 but every mech, Locust excluded, can carry a LBX. Is it better than an AC10? Yes and no. Up close yes it is. At range, no it is not but that is only if you hit. The LBX is almost guaranteed to do some damage even at range. Is the LBX a primary weapon to open up armor? No. Is it a better finishing weapon than the AC10? Yes. Especially, when used in pairs. 2 LBX > 2 AC10 at finishing a mech off. I know from experience from using both on the same chassis.

in regards to weapons balancing, no one will be happy until the red team is nerfed and the blue team is buffed. Stop tinkering with the weapons. Set them to TT values and leave them alone. Ghost heat, gauss charge, velocity nerfs, etc.. Just stop it!The tinkering will never stop and not everyone will be happy. It diverts the attention of the Devs from pushing content out. If there is a bug in how a weapon is working, problem with hit reg, or damage reg then fix it. Stop nerfing various successful builds. It is getting ridiculous. About the only change made that was meaningful was adding the screen shake but then people QQed about that so it got greatly reduced to the point of being meaningless. Jump sniping is not even an effective tactic anyway. It makes the jumper a HUGE target. Let us try less QQ and more pew pew.

[DONTOR]

IceCase88, on 28 January 2014 - 09:29 AM, said:

This thread is really making me laugh. The AC10 has been largely regarded by the "elites" has the worst of the ACs for a long time. Now they are making the case it is the best when nothing has really changed with other than a velocity nerf. Conclusion.... the "elites" really do not have a clue and only follow the alleged "meta."

The LBX was total trash when introduced. It was only good for getting assist XP when it was a static XP reward and not based off damage inflicted. Since the tightening of the spread it has greatly increased in power. Is it better than an AC20? Of course not. No one will make that case. Not every mech can carry an AC20 but every mech, Locust excluded, can carry a LBX. Is it better than an AC10? Yes and no. Up close yes it is. At range, no it is not but that is only if you hit. The LBX is almost guaranteed to do some damage even at range. Is the LBX a primary weapon to open up armor? No. Is it a better finishing weapon than the AC10? Yes. Especially, when used in pairs. 2 LBX > 2 AC10 at finishing a mech off. I know from experience from using both on the same chassis.

in regards to weapons balancing, no one will be happy until the red team is nerfed and the blue team is buffed. Stop tinkering with the weapons. Set them to TT values and leave them alone. Ghost heat, gauss charge, velocity nerfs, etc.. Just stop it!The tinkering will never stop and not everyone will be happy. It diverts the attention of the Devs from pushing content out. If there is a bug in how a weapon is working, problem with hit reg, or damage reg then fix it. Stop nerfing various successful builds. It is getting ridiculous. About the only change made that was meaningful was adding the screen shake but then people QQed about that so it got greatly reduced to the point of being meaningless. Jump sniping is not even an effective tactic anyway. It makes the jumper a HUGE target. Let us try less QQ and more pew pew.

^^^^Nothing but the truth, LBXs in multiples are very very dangerous.

[Necromantion]

Why has nobody really mentioned the fact that the LB10X has a higher chance to crit internals when armor is stripped over single AC rounds?

That is the main reason i run them over other AC's because when I strip the armor in a close range build I can damage internals a lot quicker than with other ballistics.

[Necromantion]

PanzerMagier, on 27 January 2014 - 08:25 AM, said:

Sorry, but forgive me if I don't hold my breath in believing that PGI will "fix" narc.

They already posted saying they were going to and the proposed solution they are possibly implementing.

[ShadowbaneX]

Necromantion, on 28 January 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:

That is the main reason i run them over other AC's because when I strip the armor in a close range build I can damage internals a lot quicker than with other ballistics.

Stripping off armour can be much more of a chore. Also, it's subject to RNG.

[LowSubmarino]

I use lbx on the shawk with 4 ssrms and 2 medium lasers. It rox. Tried it before with ac 10 but that isn't even half as good.

[SniperCon]

No one has mentioned that LB10X has a knock effect on par with the AC20. For a good laugh do the following:

1. Rig up a triple LBX Ilya Muromets.
2. Take position 200m from an enemy Atlas.
3. Chain fire your LBXs from a stationary position.
4. Laugh as AC20 rounds harmlessly miss.

Multiple UAC5s are actually better for stagger locking opponents, but enemies will regard you as a threat and move to cover instead of returning ineffective fire.

[SniperCon]

oneda, on 28 January 2014 - 11:35 AM, said:

I use lbx on the shawk with 4 ssrms and 2 medium lasers. It rox. Tried it before with ac 10 but that isn't even half as good.

I also tried the AC10 but was too lazy to aim. Left Click for the win! (SSRMs)

[DONTOR]

Necromantion, on 28 January 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:

Why has nobody really mentioned the fact that the LB10X has a higher chance to crit internals when armor is stripped over single AC rounds?

That is the main reason i run them over other AC's because when I strip the armor in a close range build I can damage internals a lot quicker than with other ballistics.

Its because you cant base a weapons worth on luck which is what Criticals really boil down too. However when you hit a yellow CT atlas with 2 LBX and it dies youll know why. Criticals are hard to notice but when its an obvious crtical and it does insane damage it is hilarious.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Khobai, on 28 January 2014 - 08:45 AM, said:

ive never seen someone get 7 kills with flamers though

I have *shrugs*

[Khobai]

Quote

I have *shrugs*

I havent.

But if someone gives me proof of getting 7 kills in one game with flamers, I'll admit that I was wrong about flamers being completely useless.

[Zyllos]

mwhighlander, on 27 January 2014 - 08:24 PM, said:

My solution actually doesn't include ray tracing to find the distance. In MW4, the LBX did have ray trace to determine the distance and damage delivered by range, but with more simpler ranger finders you don't even need them. Its just a variable already presented by the HUD and then the value is swapped in to the detonation range -- doesn't even need to include ray tracing which would also include HSR involvement...

Ray tracing is a more elegant solution, but I agree, too resource intensive and unnecessary.

Here is the issue with your solution.

If you use the value on the HUD, it's dependent on where the crosshair is aimed. So if you aim ahead of the target, it will not detonate at the correct time because the range readout on the crosshair is different from the actual range of the target due to leading the target at extended ranges.

If you use the selected target as the detonation range, then it's affected by GECM, which is stupid.

This is why I say they should use the CClaymore::Update() code for it.

Edited by Zyllos, 28 January 2014 - 02:49 PM.

[Roland]

IceCase88, on 28 January 2014 - 09:29 AM, said:

This thread is really making me laugh. The AC10 has been largely regarded by the "elites" has the worst of the ACs for a long time. Now they are making the case it is the best when nothing has really changed with other than a velocity nerf. Conclusion....

Basically nothing you just said there is actually happening in this thread. I think you are confused.
No one is saying the AC10 is the best. They are saying it's better than the LBX10, because the LBX10 is trash. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king, and all that.

Also, the AC10 actually got WORSE from the velocity change.. what you just said there seems to indicate that you are confused about that.

Quote

Is it better than an AC10? Yes and no. Up close yes it is. At range, no it is not but that is only if you hit.

Again, you are making assessments based on what SHOULD be true, rather than what is ACTUALLY true.
The LBX10 is not actually good at close range, given that close range is 200m. At absolute point blank range, it's very slightly better than the AC10.. but the requirement of basically touching the other mech makes that a fairly trivial non-issue.

Quote

The LBX is almost guaranteed to do some damage even at range.

Again, this is a non-issue.
If you want a weapon which is merely "guaranteed to do some damage" then you can bring a laser, and get the exact same effect for much less weight, far fewer critical slots, no chance of ammo explosion, and infinite shots... oh, and it's hitscan with no travel time.

Again, this points out the problem with the LBX.... it's not that it can't kill mechs. Of course it can.

But as it stands, it does not have any actual niche which it excels at compared to other weapons. Even in the terrible niche of "do some damage because my aim isn't good", the laser surpasses it easily.

Quote

Is it a better finishing weapon than the AC10? Yes. Especially, when used in pairs. 2 LBX > 2 AC10 at finishing a mech off. I know from experience from using both on the same chassis.

Unless you are at a range of more than say 200m... in which case the 2 AC10's is far superior.

Again, you cannot judge a weapon based only on an imagined combat scenario where you are always at point blank range to your target. That isn't how weapons balance works.

That's why increasing the damage per pellet would work wonders. I'll summarize below:
1) It's already been done in prior titles. 14 damage was what the LBX10 did in MW4. It was a strong, but not overpowered, infighting weapon. Thus, there is a precedent for at least trying it to see its impact.
2) At range, it would still be weaker than the AC10, but not so much weaker as to be useless, as it is now.
3) Up close it would do gauss damage. Even with the current spread, it'd still be doing a good solid 10 to a single panel, with some extra scattered to the sides.

Again, just TRY it. The absolute worst thing that could happen is that it would be overpowered, and we could dial it back down.

[Roland]

DONTOR, on 28 January 2014 - 09:35 AM, said:

^^^^Nothing but the truth, LBXs in multiples are very very dangerous.

Why do you think this? Why does multiplying garbage make it into gold? What is the exact mathematical process that you believe takes place that makes multiple LBX's more dangerous than the equivalent tonnage in other weapons?

In past cases, some folks have laughably compared dual LBX10's to a single 20, but it's a stupid comparison, because it's 66% more tonnage. You need to compare it to equal tonnage.

A single LBX10 is bad. Two of them is twice as bad.

[IceCase88]

Roland, on 28 January 2014 - 03:13 PM, said:

Basically nothing you just said there is actually happening in this thread. I think you are confused.
No one is saying the AC10 is the best. They are saying it's better than the LBX10, because the LBX10 is trash. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king, and all that.

The AC10 has been replacing the Gauss in the meta which has been mentioned a few times in this thread.

Quote

Also, the AC10 actually got WORSE from the velocity change.. what you just said there seems to indicate that you are confused about that.

I agree the velocity drop has made it worse. However, as mentioned before it has been seen as a replacement for the Gauss.

Quote

Again, you are making assessments based on what SHOULD be true, rather than what is ACTUALLY true.
The LBX10 is not actually good at close range, given that close range is 200m. At absolute point blank range, it's very slightly better than the AC10.. but the requirement of basically touching the other mech makes that a fairly trivial non-issue.

Field tested and battle proven assessments. I fight within 200 meters and have no problems getting the close in any map.

Quote

Again, this is a non-issue.
If you want a weapon which is merely "guaranteed to do some damage" then you can bring a laser, and get the exact same effect for much less weight, far fewer critical slots, no chance of ammo explosion, and infinite shots... oh, and it's hitscan with no travel time.

Again, this points out the problem with the LBX.... it's not that it can't kill mechs. Of course it can.

You will do more damage with the LBX then hit scanning.

Quote

But as it stands, it does not have any actual niche which it excels at compared to other weapons. Even in the terrible niche of "do some damage because my aim isn't good", the laser surpasses it easily.


Unless you are at a range of more than say 200m... in which case the 2 AC10's is far superior.

Again, you cannot judge a weapon based only on an imagined combat scenario where you are always at point blank range to your target. That isn't how weapons balance works.

That's why increasing the damage per pellet would work wonders. I'll summarize below:
1) It's already been done in prior titles. 14 damage was what the LBX10 did in MW4. It was a strong, but not overpowered, infighting weapon. Thus, there is a precedent for at least trying it to see its impact.
2) At range, it would still be weaker than the AC10, but not so much weaker as to be useless, as it is now.
3) Up close it would do gauss damage. Even with the current spread, it'd still be doing a good solid 10 to a single panel, with some extra scattered to the sides.

Again, just TRY it. The absolute worst thing that could happen is that it would be overpowered, and we could dial it back down.

The LBX is a good finisher. I do not imagine the LBX in a combat scenario. I use it regularly on my Firebrand with great results. I will take a damage bump per pellet. That would be awesome and make my Firebrand even more lethal. Again, I usually fight within 200 meters so dual LBX does great for me. Open the enemy up with the 6 MLs and use the LBX when heat gets too high or it's time to finish the enemy. Field tested and battle proven.

[Trauglodyte]

Necromantion, on 28 January 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:

Why has nobody really mentioned the fact that the LB10X has a higher chance to crit internals when armor is stripped over single AC rounds?

That is the main reason i run them over other AC's because when I strip the armor in a close range build I can damage internals a lot quicker than with other ballistics.

Nobody is mentioning it because, while you have a greater chance of causing crits with the LB, the chances of you putting all 10 pellets into the opened area is much less vs. the AC10 and, even if you do crit, you're adding damage to 1 point pellets. On top of that, you're only putting 0.15 damage per crit pellet, back on the IS. In other words, you're less damage than you think you are.