311 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Quote

2 AC5s are a problem then?

Dual LB10Xs > 2 AC5s IMO. Although 3 AC5s > 2 LB10Xs.

[Deathlike]

Khobai, on 26 January 2014 - 08:39 PM, said:

Dual LB10Xs > 2 AC5s IMO.

I think it's a tossup, but when you consider the fact that you're literally comparing a higher caliber weapon that isn't really higher caliber in any consistent way... I can already guess that the Clan LBX20 will be a disappointment, compared to the AC10, let alone the AC20.

Edited by Deathlike, 26 January 2014 - 08:44 PM.

[Cyborne Elemental]

Hard to use any AC's when you're up against hill hopping 3xERPPC 1x Gauss murder machines.

AC-20 is like a midget trying to throw a bowling ball, and only really good for close fight.

AC-10 feels pretty sluggish since the velocity nerf, used to be a reasonable sniping weapon as well as decent brawling weapon.

Lb-10x doesn't seem to have suffered from any velocity changes, and still gives decent coverage at 400 meters even, and seems good enough to pepper light mechs and send em running.

AC-5 is just about right, but UAC-5 is too unreliable when the fighting gets crazy, especially with the 1st shot jams that happen all the time.

I try to dual AC-2 on my Shadowhawk, but it usually ends up just overheating me if it comes to a brawl where I need my jumpjets and secondaries going to stay alive.

[Roland]

Khobai, on 26 January 2014 - 08:39 PM, said:

Dual LB10Xs > 2 AC5s IMO. Although 3 AC5s > 2 LB10Xs.

Honestly, back prior to the most recent UAC nerf, dual UAC's absolutely obliterated dual LBX 10's.

Even now, I'd tend to always take two 5's, even standard ones, over 2 LBX... because at least you can crank that damage onto a single location, while the LBX is just gonna spray all over the place... And it's gonna be, what, 6 tons lighter, with more shots per ton?

Dual LBX10's is just twice as bad as a single LBX10.

Multiplying garbage by 2 doesn't make it gold. It makes it twice as much garbage.

[Jaguar Prime]

Another way to look at it.

When it would take 5 shots from an AC10 to strip the armor from a 50point section. It will take around twice as many shots to do the same with the Lbx, depending on panel size and range, because of the spread. Crits mean nothing until the armor is gone.

[Skyfaller]

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.

The LBX10 does have one big advantage over the AC10 when under 300m: its crit capability.

The spread under 400m is narrowed down so much that it literally hits like an LRM with artemis. 80% of the hits go to the CT and 20% go to the torsos (if you aim dead center CT). The crit bonus literally makes any mech it hits lose its weapons or get an ammo detonation disturbingly quickly.

The LBX10 is literally a short range 'SRM10' with a very fast refire rate and low heat generation.

You can run a Jager with dual LBX10, quad MG and dual med lasers

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...bdcebe4019f1655

I've killed two atlases solo in one map with this build. Its ridiculous how deadly it is at close range. You fire nonstop since your heat generation is negligible.

[Deathlike]

Khobai, on 26 January 2014 - 08:49 PM, said:

LBX ACs will perpetually disappoint until they gain the ability to fire both slugs and cluster rounds.

TBH, if they copied the idea of actually increasing the damage per pellet from 1 to 1.4 (like MW4 did), it wouldn't be so bad. Lowering the crit bonus to compensate would be fine (it's not something I care for too much).

Quote

The LB10X is primarily a close range weapon though. I typically use mine under 100m and they brutalize other assault mechs. They do far more damage at close range than UAC5s or AC5s. Especially once you breach armor and start getting bonus damage to internals.

If you're using it under 100m, an AC20 or 2UAC5 (in rapid fire) would be just as effective, if not better overall. Bonus damage to internals is overrated unless you're completely dependent on them (like MGs).

Quote

Also the LB10x is only good on certain mechs. Theyre good on Atlases because Atlases cant use dual AC10s or dual AC20s or triple AC5s. Any of those options would normally be better, but theyre simply not available to the Atlas.

Dual UAC5s in chain fire plays nicely and well last I checked.

[Khobai]

Quote

If you're using it under 100m, an AC20 or 2UAC5 (in rapid fire) would be just as effective, if not better overall.

Not even close.

AC20 = 5dps
Dual AC5 = 6.67 dps
Dual UAC5 = ~7.2 dps and they jam which is extremely irritating
Dual LB10X = 8 dps + bonus damage vs internal structure

LB10Xs can be BRUTAL weapons on an Atlas (since it cant take dual AC10s). But you have to get very close to get all those LBX pellets into the same location. As a generalist weapon, LB10Xs are bad because of their lack of range, but as a close range weapon theyre fairly deadly.

Edited by Khobai, 26 January 2014 - 11:50 PM.

[Roland]

Quote

LBX ACs will perpetually disappoint until they gain the ability to fire both slugs and cluster rounds.

Buff the damage per pellet and you'll have a weapon which actually does what most folks here seem to THINK it does.

It'll be a very good weapon at point blank range, while only moderately useful at range.

Quote

I typically use mine under 100m and they brutalize other assault mechs.

100m is stupid range though... It's machine gun range.
You don't carry 22 tons of weapons on an assault mech that require you to get within 100m of a target to be useful

Carry AC5's, and your damage beyond 100m will be so much better, that the fact LBX becomes useful at point blank range won't matter, because you'll have already killed them.

Quote

The LBX10 does have one big advantage over the AC10 when under 300m: its crit capability.

Nope.

That's what it had going for it in TT. But in MWO, due to the way crits work, the AC10 is superior to the LBX10 when it comes to critical hits.

[Lightfoot]

The AC10 kills faster if you hit and if the mech has all it's armor when you start. If the armor is gone the LBX can crit easily and be faster. LBX scores more damage but alot of it is missing critical areas, so useless usually. AC10 is much better overall. LBX should be better.

Edited by Lightfoot, 26 January 2014 - 09:33 PM.

[Deathlike]

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

Not even close.

AC20 = 5dps
Dual AC5 = 6.67 dps
Dual UAC5 = ~7.2 dps and they jam which is extremely irritating
Dual LB10X = 8 dps + bonus damage vs internal structure

LB10Xs can be BRUTAL weapons. But you have to get very close to get all those pellets into the same location.

You are seriously pulling the DPS argument here?

I like gambling, so the UAC5 tends to pull out better "burst damage" than "sustained DPS", which is the problem you are ignoring.

LBX10 has never threatened me any more than other weapons.. if anything, it is the least threatening ballistic on the field (right next to MG and occasionally the AC2), ESPECIALLY when I'm not exposed. When my armor is exposed, I expect to die swiftly... making a distinction between LBX10 and any other ballistic weapon is silly at that point.

Edited by Deathlike, 26 January 2014 - 09:36 PM.

[Deathlike]

Khobai, on 26 January 2014 - 10:04 PM, said:

im not ignoring it at all. at close range the pellets go into the same location effectively making it a burst damage weapon, and at that range its superior to the UAC5.

I'll put it this way. I don't know the exact math where either one will jam or where they both do, but it is better than a 50-50 chance that I can get off a second pair of UAC5s bullets to fire THROUGH the jamming mechanism. Essentially, it would be the "equivalent" of the 2LBX10's damage @ that range. Unless I'm playing like poo, I'm pretty sure getting the shot @ < 100m is pretty easy, and if I choose so, I can actually OUTDAMAGE the LBX10 if I gamble once more while the dual LBX10 is still waiting on its cooldown.

I primarily use 1 UAC5 (I'm not overly crazy), and if I ever decided to go 2 UAC5s on a regular basis, I would go to town much faster than 2 LBX10s any day of the week. That's from experience alone.

Edited by Deathlike, 26 January 2014 - 10:09 PM.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Yeah, I'm just ganna chime in on this party late.

DPS in MechWarrior has always been a very moot argument. If you are exposing yourself long enough for DPS to out damage a >1 second expose time of an alpha strike, you're dead.

The biggest defensive action a pilot uses is torso twisting to do what? Spread the incoming damage around. LBX's in their MW:O state do that for you.

If you are within 100m of me or a team mate, you are in our LoS. You are probably dead or about to die. (alternatively, my entire team is already dead and literally any other weapon is just as effective if not more so)


With the LBX, the way the crit system works; doesn't. Using a weapon to crit-seek instead of just outright kill a component is to put it bluntly ******* stupid.


The LB-10x in TT -> Great Weapon
The LB-10x in MW2 -> Good Weapon
The LB-10x in MW3 -> Amazing Weapon
The LB-10x in MW4 -> Greatest brawler weapon in existance (ok, the LBX20 was better...)
The LB-10x in in MW:LL -> Great Weapon

The LB-10x in MW:O -> Utter Garbage. Don't use it.


Why? PGI is terrible with weapon mechanics.

Edited by mwhighlander, 26 January 2014 - 10:27 PM.

[Deathlike]

Khobai, on 26 January 2014 - 10:04 PM, said:

That's an incredibly ignorant attitude. Just about every weapon in the game can be a threat in the right hands. Even machine guns can kill you and are a threat. Ive played games in my Jager-DD with dual LB10Xs and quad machine guns where ive done over 1000 damage and gotten 6+ kills. Are they the best weapons? absolutely not. But they can still kill you.

I wish ignorance is bliss, but not when it's time to be killed by superior weapons.

Back when MGs were still terrible, I made a conscious effort to see how bad the 4 MG Spider would hurt me after many MG buffs. Sadly, those weaksauce buffs were that.. weaksauce. Nothing had changed. Once the superbuff happened (which I also recall fondly - the superbuff was the one were crits translated into extra damage to internal armor), then I saw awesomeness from MGs, terrorizing mechs that had their internals exposed. Those were the good times and I ran 2 MGs on a HBK-4G because it was glorious. Now, they are not so hot, but far better than they were before.

See, as much as I'd want to like LBX, I cannot. The numbers NOR my experience with them matches up with productive matches, other than inflating my damage score grossly for more C-bills. This is still true to this very day. I wish there was a better way of explaining it other than, I pay attention both ways... dishing and taking damage from LBX. LBX is still not where it needs to be as a "brawling weapon".

Edited by Deathlike, 26 January 2014 - 10:28 PM.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

They key for critical hits isn't item destruction, it's transferred damage. IIRC any critical hit transfers 15% of damage dealt to the item back to the Internal Structure. With their boosted crit chance and critical damage multiplier, LBX-AC10s should be pushing out a whole bunch of bonus damage when shooting open locations.

I've never had a solid answer one way or another on whether critical hits are possible against things like actuators and engines, but my (admittedly anecdotal) impression is that you can get critical hits, and thus bonus damage, off of all those pieces of gear even if it doesn't actually hurt the item. This makes MGs and LBX-AC10s very deadly finishers when shooting exposed CTs.

[Deathlike]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 26 January 2014 - 10:29 PM, said:

They key for critical hits isn't item destruction, it's transferred damage. IIRC any critical hit transfers 15% of damage dealt to the item back to the Internal Structure. With their boosted crit chance and critical damage multiplier, LBX-AC10s should be pushing out a whole bunch of bonus damage when shooting open locations.

In theory, it should. In practice, the instant 10+ pt damage weapons (AC10, AC20, PPC, ERPPC, Gauss) are better at it. Remember that the weapons HAS to generate a critical to get that bonus damage. Once it happens (the crit is generated), the AC10/PPC becomes a 11.5 damage point weapon to internal armor, and the AC20 becomes a 23 damage point weapon to internal armor. I mean, the rich get richer.

Quote

I've never had a solid answer one way or another on whether critical hits are possible against things like actuators and engines, but my (admittedly anecdotal) impression is that you can get critical hits, and thus bonus damage, off of all those pieces of gear even if it doesn't actually hurt the item. This makes MGs and LBX-AC10s very deadly finishers when shooting exposed CTs.

Believe it or not, actuators and other crits that naturally have 0 armor are not factored in the crit tables. What happens is that REGARDLESS of whether you have any objects in the affected section (engine, DHS, or completely blank slots in any section of the mech), the crits are still generated towards the damage bonus formula.

MGs are woefully dependent on that mechanism. LBX... it doesn't seem to make a difference in the grand scheme of things due to spread.

Edited by Deathlike, 26 January 2014 - 10:35 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

II wish ignorance is bliss, but not when it's time to be killed by superior weapons.


Back when MGs were still terrible, I made a conscious effort to see how bad the 4 MG Spider would hurt me after many MG buffs. Sadly, those weaksauce buffs were that.. weaksauce. Nothing had changed. Once the superbuff happened (which I also recall fondly - the superbuff was the one were crits translated into extra damage to internal armor), then I saw awesomeness from MGs, terrorizing mechs that had their internals exposed. Those were the good times and I ran 2 MGs on a HBK-4G because it was glorious. Now, they are not so hot, but far better than they were before.

See, as much as I'd want to like LBX, I cannot. The numbers NOR my experience with them matches up with productive matches, other than inflating my damage score grossly for more C-bills. This is still true to this very day. I wish there was a better way of explaining it other than, I pay attention both ways... dishing and taking damage from LBX. LBX is still not where it needs to be as a "brawling weapon".

That's your opinion. I'm sorry that you cant get LB10Xs to work for you. But I happen to be extremely deadly with them. This game was played with my dual LB10X Founder's Atlas. I submit this as proof that LB10Xs can do competitively high damage.

Of course LB10Xs arnt where they need to be. I never claimed they were the best weapons. But they arnt so terrible that theyre useless either. You make it sound like theyre on the same level as flamers LOL.

You can go back to living in your box where people only use AC5s, AC20s, and PPCs. But I find playing meta builds extremely repetitive and boring. Other weapons exist in the game and theyre really not as bad as people say they are. I've even won tournaments using non-meta builds people said were bad.

Spoiler

Edited by Khobai, 26 January 2014 - 10:52 PM.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Deathlike, on 26 January 2014 - 10:34 PM, said:

Believe it or not, actuators and other crits that naturally have 0 armor are not factored in the crit tables. What happens is that REGARDLESS of whether you have any objects in the affected section (engine, DHS, or completely blank slots in any section of the mech), the crits are still generated towards the damage bonus formula.

MGs are woefully dependent on that mechanism. LBX... it doesn't seem to make a difference in the grand scheme of things due to spread.

It's good to know the mechanic behind it.

My experience has been that the damage multiplication on crit really boosts the LBX, but any LBX build badly needs something to strip armor (or needs a patient pilot who won't contribute much until the rest of the team has stripped some armor), much like any good MG build requires.

The superior tonnage, critical space, and heat load compared to a standard 10 all make it more attractive in the mechlab, too, and in some cases might well make up for various field weaknesses.

[Deathlike]

Khobai, on 26 January 2014 - 10:37 PM, said:

That is your opinion. I am sorry that you cant get LB10Xs to work for you. But I happen to be extremely deadly with them. This game was played with my dual LB10X Founder's Atlas. I submit this as proof that LB10Xs can do competitively high damage.

High damage is inflated... which I've explained before. I've genuinely tried LBX when the buff happened. Unfortunately, it's simply not on par with the AC10 in overall effectiveness (it doesn't have to be like mega concentrated damage, but respectable spread damage on the target within brawling range).

Quote

Of course LB10Xs arnt where they need to be. I never claimed they were the best weapons. But they arnt so terrible that theyre useless either. You make it sound like theyre on the same level as flamers LOL.

I can direct you to FupDup's infamous flamer video, but that's a different discussion. I just think there are simply better alternatives based on my options, and LBX has not claimed a place in that. That's all. It's not complete garbage, but it's definitely not competitive (my definition anyways) when other options are available.

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 26 January 2014 - 10:40 PM, said:

It's good to know the mechanic behind it.

My experience has been that the damage multiplication on crit really boosts the LBX, but any LBX build badly needs something to strip armor (or needs a patient pilot who won't contribute much until the rest of the team has stripped some armor), much like any good MG build requires.

The superior tonnage, critical space, and heat load compared to a standard 10 all make it more attractive in the mechlab, too, and in some cases might well make up for various field weaknesses.

I dunno, I like downgrading to a UAC5 due the to specs of the AC10/LBX10.. it's an easy choice based on overall effectiveness. If anything, one would argue UAC5's weakness is really not as bad as some would make it to be (which speaks to the mechanic used - it's not what I would call well designed). I generally don't like weapons that is heavily dependent on other to succeed (an effort vs success ratio if you would), so while I really don't like the MG's plight, it's "manageable" (it's half a ton, before you factor in the ammo) but I completely discard when it comes to higher level play. LBX10... it shouldn't be a handicap. I'd expect this for like a Clan LBX2 or Clan LBX5.. but not the LBX10.

Edited by Deathlike, 26 January 2014 - 10:52 PM.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Since the UAC5 has been coming up in discussion, I wanted to point out that, assuming my understanding of the math is correct, you always want to double-tap your UAC5. Even with jams the net dps is significantly higher than a standard AC5 or a macro-fired UAC5.

Deathlike, on 26 January 2014 - 10:49 PM, said:

I dunno, I like downgrading to a UAC5 due the to specs of the AC10/LBX10.. it's an easy choice based on overall effectiveness. If anything, one would argue UAC5's weakness is really not as bad as some would make it to be (which speaks to the mechanic used - it's not what I would call well designed). I generally don't like weapons that is heavily dependent on other to succeed (an effort vs success ratio if you would), so while I really don't like the MG's plight, it's "manageable" (it's half a ton, before you factor in the ammo) but I completely discard when it comes to higher level play. LBX10... it shouldn't be a handicap. I'd expect this for like a Clan LBX2 or Clan LBX5.. but not the LBX10.

I don't take an LBX-AC10 as my only offensive punch. I always bring something with it, whether an extensive suite of MLs, some ERLL/LPL, or another AC variety. I have had great success recently with LPL/LBX combos. The range and weight of the LPL should make it a poor choice, but I've been finding the damage-per-shot and overall dps to be hugely powerful. It's an amazing weapon for stripping armor. Two of them out-damage an AC20, and they out-dps it too (relevant due to the short burn time making twist protection still viable). They're excellent for punching holes in armor, which the LBX can exploit.

That said, both the LBX and LPL require careful use of terrain to close with the enemy. I find sniper builds to be distasteful and I don't tend to do well with them, while my brawler setups seem to do quite good work (though there are exceptions to both trends), and the LPL/LBX combo has been very friendly to me.