311 replies to this topic

[SaltBeef]

In MechCommander the LBX weapons would make a targeted Mech possibly more salvageable. The LBX had devastating finesse. LBX use should increase salvage reward if the weapon kills a mech.

[Bishop Steiner]

lockwoodx, on 27 January 2014 - 09:01 AM, said:

You sir just lost all my respect, for when I was rocking the dual LBX10 HBK-4G build I knew my limitations and was rewarded generously yet you scoffed along with your elitist pals. For shame on you.

Honestly haven't seen Joe hanging with the Elitists too often. Am...intrigued and a little scared by the concept of your build Details?

SaltBeef, on 27 January 2014 - 09:07 AM, said:

In MechCommander the LBX weapons would make a targeted Mech possibly more salvageable. The LBX had devastating finesse. LBX use should increase salvage reward if the weapon kills a mech.

never really understood how a mech with dozens of little hole punched thru it was somehow better salvage than one with a few bigger ones?

Ever see a car with a couple of bullet holes in it? How about one with a few shotgun blasts?

Not sure I ever got mechcommanders logic on that one.

[SaltBeef]

In that game the weapons were for shredding armor w/o killing internals. Pulse lasers also got the salvage bonus. Opposite from this game.

Edited by SaltBeef, 27 January 2014 - 09:19 AM.

[kesuga7]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 January 2014 - 09:00 AM, said:

So take an AC10 and a PPC! Let the whiners whine all they want. 20 damage is not huge damage! Yes I would be happier if we had a few decimeters of slop in our convergence, but the same damage of a single AC20 should not be something we complain about.

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...21c2887d2c42d31

Two different playstyles - the twin lb 10x one i mean
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...9be92c6e6e1f0da

on topic
honestly it seems that the LB 10x is bad because you are spreading that damage around
Lots of damage - can't take a torso out as fast but spread it all over - do allot of damage on scoreboard


While the AC 10 does all the damage in one spot thats really the thing that makes or breaks it

Edited by kesuga7, 27 January 2014 - 09:19 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

lockwoodx, on 27 January 2014 - 09:01 AM, said:

You sir just lost all my respect, for when I was rocking the dual LBX10 HBK-4G build I knew my limitations and was rewarded generously yet you scoffed along with your elitist pals. For shame on you.

If I said I didn't like your Mech It was due to my distaste for how the LB-X functions, not your using it. But please refresh me by quoting what I posted. As to being Elite... That is only a badge PGI gave me for pre ordering MW:O! I do not believe you will ever find me outright insulting a player for his ride. I may say I would not use that build and why, but I don't insult player's preference.

[SaltBeef]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 January 2014 - 09:09 AM, said:

Honestly haven't seen Joe hanging with the Elitists too often. Am...intrigued and a little scared by the concept of your build Details?


never really understood how a mech with dozens of little hole punched thru it was somehow better salvage than one with a few bigger ones?

Ever see a car with a couple of bullet holes in it? How about one with a few shotgun blasts?

Not sure I ever got mechcommanders logic on that one.

Think of it as shooting a fat 9mm round that goes through the outer door panel skin but not the internal crumple zone. Not a .308 that goes all the way through and out the other side. LBX is arse backwards in this game. They were surposed to be good at shredding armor but not killing internals. AC10 like the .308 round pierces armor and damages internals making mech less salvageable.

Edited by SaltBeef, 27 January 2014 - 09:32 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

SaltBeef, on 27 January 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

Think of it as shooting a fat 9mm round that goes through the outer door panel skin but not the internal crumple zone. Not a .308 that goes all the way through and out the other side. LBX is arse backwards in this game. They were surposed to be good at shredding armor but not killing internals. AC10 like the .308 round pierces armor and damages internals making mech less salvageable.

Every pellet that Hit Structure could get a crit, Just like a lucky pellet could go though your eye if shot with buckshot or a Glazer round to the face!

[MoonUnitBeta]

I love LBX for three reasons:
1. They sounds cool
2. They light up the mech you hit, and looks cool as they come out and smash into your target..
3. They make a really big splash effect when you shoot the water.

Not to mention I love dual LBX on my Jager. It's just so much fun!

[Trauglodyte]

Look, if you want to use LBs because you think that they're fun then go for it. If you want to use LBs because you think that they're effective then keep playing them. But, do not confuse yourself with damage done as efficient. The most damage that you should do in a game is about 400. That is roughly 12 mechs dead doing nothing but head shots. Damaging components other than the head, which isn't likely to happen 100% of the time, or completely obliterating the CT (or ST on XL carrying mechs) is wasted damage. That means that you're wasting ammor and/or heat in the process along with time. Time is an extremely important function of your ability to stay alive and win the match.

The point of this game, like every other activity, competition, and sport ( see here ), is to have fun. But, if winning a high percentage of the time and killing more often than you're killed is your primary path to having fun, then you need to put away the dilusions of all weapons being viable and stick to what gets the job done the fastest. So, in summation, there is a time for fun (use what you want) and a time to get the job done the best possible way (not everything is created equal).

[ShadowbaneX]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 January 2014 - 08:45 AM, said:

ya mean like this?
http://mwomercs.com/...b-10x-proposal/

I'd like the cluster shot for the LB-10/X to work this way, but more importantly, I want the ability to fire standard munitions from the thing. That's actually make the thing worth the 800,000 c-bills they're charging us for it.

As for the OP's build I go for something more like this.

[wanderer]

It's not too hard to fix.

Keep cluster shots as-is, give the LB-10X the solid shot it's supposed to have and the ability to swap. Cut the critmongering bonus for pellets down slightly.

Maximum range as per energy weapons (2X) rather than ballistic 3x since it's smoothbore rather than rifled, a slightly slower ROF than the AC/10 as well.

Seriously, we -need- the ability to use multiple ammo types in many weapons, and the LB-X series is the worst offender.

[Trauglodyte]

Btw, if people are serious about buffing the LB line of weapons, I would do the following:

• keep the damage at the max effective range (ie, LB 10-X = 10 damage at 540m)
  
• increase the damage from 0-540 on the same scaling rate as it decreases beyond the max effective range

This would essentially have the LB 10 doing 15 damage and buffing it between minimum and maximum effective ranges. That would, in essence, increase its "brawling" threshhold.

[Zyllos]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 January 2014 - 08:45 AM, said:

ya mean like this?
http://mwomercs.com/...b-10x-proposal/

This is EXACTLY what I am talking about.

This allows the LBX/10 (or in your case, LB-X) to utilize it's full range while still delivering it's spreading damage.

[Trauglodyte]

Bishop Steiner, on 27 January 2014 - 08:45 AM, said:

ya mean like this?
http://mwomercs.com/...b-10x-proposal/

The only way for this to happen is for the weapon to be recoded as a pure ballistic, like the AC10 currently is, but turning it into a pure spread weapon (think a single "old" SRM). I don't think that the Cryengine allows for proximity interactions so you couldn't have a prox fuse like the weapon is intended. The unfortunate side effect of changing it to a pure spread AC would be that it would raise the skill cap for people that use them now. Instead of leading and spraying/praying, you've got to actually aim and then pray. Essentially, you'd force more work for return. But, the benefit would be that it would be usable at extreme ranges instead of how it is now.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 27 January 2014 - 10:24 AM.

[El Bandito]

LBX does retain the 1100 speed while AC10 got nerfed to 950. Small detail.

[Krujiente]

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.

I find the spread to be extremely minimal inside 180 meters, which is brawling ranges. The problem with that is that at that range for 11 tons I can take 3 MPLs with and some heatsinks and outdamage with a hitscan weapon at the cost of heat and a burn time. the LB10 when I do use it though (rarely) it is great for seeking holes in armor (surprisingly good at legging lights) and ruining a gauss rifle users day.
I would agree its not worth the 11 tons it weighs unless they put in slug ammo or increase the pellet damage or greatly decreased the spread. Internals wrecking as an idea might be nice, but at the point of internals lasers are pretty great because they instant hit and he can't retaliate shoot you for the burn time if he's dead.

[Zyllos]

Trauglodyte, on 27 January 2014 - 10:24 AM, said:

The only way for this to happen is for the weapon to be recoded as a pure ballistic, like the AC10 currently is, but turning it into a pure spread weapon (think a single "old" SRM). I don't think that the Cryengine allows for proximity interactions so you couldn't have a prox fuse like the weapon is intended. The unfortunate side effect of changing it to a pure spread AC would be that it would raise the skill cap for people that use them now. Instead of leading and spraying/praying, you've got to actually aim and then pray. Essentially, you'd force more work for return. But, the benefit would be that it would be usable at extreme ranges instead of how it is now.

Actually, the CryEngine easily allows for this. I was just actually researching the available documents on it and the CProjectile code just needs to be inherited to include rangefinder code on each Update() call. This will check distance and if it reads whatever distance you want set (could be included from the XML file for the weapon), it then can call Explode() or Destroy() (or a new function) that tells it to produce whatever CProjectile code the LBX produces now.

You are correct that it looks like the CryEngine doesn't have proximity code coded into the base object files but that doesn't stop a developer from inheriting and producing their own. PGI has already done this to the engine on many occasions and situations.

Edited by Zyllos, 27 January 2014 - 10:48 AM.

[Trauglodyte]

That's a good find, Zyllos. Personally, I gave up on coding after many a C++ debacle back in my Total Annihilation days. Nothing worse than spending 6 hours coding the movement and activation sets for new units only to have it blow up while compiling because I missed a semi-colon somewhere. Oye!

I'd like for the LB series to actually work like a prox sensor flak weapon. That is what it is supposed to be. Hell, they stole the concept from the German Flak-88s. That being said, I think that them spending time to make it work like we want it might be asking a bit much given how much content we're missing and how many other weapons aren't operating properly or well enough. If they want to dedicate the time, then go for it. I'd be impressed if they took the easy way out and bumped up the damage a little or made it a single ballistic old style SRM. Either way, it brings the weapon up to snuff a little bit. But, it won't ever be something that the big boys use and that's fine. To each, their own. Right now, though, it is nothing more than a fun weapon to kind of laugh about when you kill someone.

[Zyllos]

Actually, this is MUCH easier then I was thinking...

Looking at the CClaymore code, all they do is iterate through the lists of valid targets and check distances to them in a certain direction. If this is true, it explodes.

All the LBX CProjectile code would have to do is act just like a CClaymore object for Update() calls for checking proximity. What this does is make the LBX projectile only explode into fragments if it's near a object it can actually damage, but if it gets near terrain, buildings, ect, whatever you want don't include in the m_targetList, then it just lands into the dirt, doing nothing.

Existence of this code should make adding this functionality extremely easy as most of the work is already done. But, problems could arise in using the proximity code for a static object like a CClaymore might make the LBX CProjectile act in unexpected ways. But I find that issue easily solvable after seeing how the new CProjectile code acts.

Edited by Zyllos, 27 January 2014 - 11:00 AM.

[wanderer]

You can actually even improve cluster firepower by not making it a pure "spread" weapon, if you want to go that way.

Have the cluster narrow towards a minimal separation as it goes from 0 to midrange, back to it's original spread at the end of it's range band, then simply start to spread further as it approaches maximum.