32 replies to this topic

[mikelovskij]

I'd consider taking at least about 60 ammo per AC5. Also medium lasers will only hep you overheat faster in most situations.

[Void Angel]

ShadowbaneX, on 08 February 2014 - 11:57 PM, said:

Well, it can strip armour off of lighter mechs, and yeah, some times, it's not all that effective, but other times it's just fun.

I really wish the whole "armor-stripping" concept would die in the fires in which it was wrought. The entire idea comes from an inaccurate perception of how spread-damage and punch-damage weapons interact during combat. Supposedly, "armor stripping" weapons like LRMs, LB-Xs, and (to a lesser extent) lasers have a viable role in combat because they set up punch damage weapons like PPCs and heavy autocannons for the kill. It seems to make sense on the surface, but the realities of the game do not support this fable.

The fatal flaw in this reasoning is that punch-damage weapons do everything the spread-damage weapon purports to do - weakening enemy armor to create vulnerabilities for others. And since they're putting all their damage on the same point, punch weapons do it better. In order to be competitive, a spread-damage weapon must do substantially more damage than an equivalent punch-damage weapon.

Consider the AC/10 v. the LB-10X. Assuming equal marksmanship, if you spread your shots over just two of the enemy's armor locations (not a realistic assumption for the LB-10X, except at very close range, but bear with me,) you would have to miss the desired location with your AC/10 literally half the time in order to break even, prior to armor strike-through - because that'd give you the same dps/location (5/shot.) The more astute will recall that the LB-X has certain other properties once armor is breached. I'll come back to that later - but right now, we're talking about the concept of "armor stripping."

The sticking point with the whole "armor stripping" concept is that 'mechs are not killed by stripping their armor; they're killed by penetrating the armor on a specific location and destroying the underlying component. Whether you just hammer down on the CT like a newb, or take the time to target that D-DC's AC torso, you kill a 'mech by killing components - and punch-damage weapons are much better at doing this. There is no hidden synergy between a weapon that does 10 damage spread all over the torso, and a weapon that does ten damage to one spot. Some will try to argue otherwise; they'll say, for example, that spreading the damage all over sets up their punch-sniper teammates for kills, so they really are being helpful, and self-sacrificing to boot! This is a silly opinion, I'm afraid, because something else sets up punch-damage weapons for killing shots - other fracking punch weapons. And where a spread damage weapon has to spread its damage, a punch weapon can be targeted entirely on the location you actually want to kill. Doesn't mean you'll always hit; you can miss, your target can evade or twist to spread the shot, etc. But all of this happens with both kinds of weapons (even LRMs.) Both weapon types can weaken armor, and "create opportunities for the team," but a punch damage weapon is going to create better opportunities (e.g. weaker armor locations) than a spread damage weapon - and it can still be a "killing weapon" as well.

Thus, in order to be a viable substitute, a spread damage weapon must be able to do more damage than a punch damage weapon in the same role - much more, because as I noted above, spreading damage over just two locations is a pipe dream; you're looking at three or more except with certain systems at very close ranges. This brings us back to the AC/10 and the LB-10X. They make an excellent example because they are so similar. They have the same rate of fire, the same damage, and while the LB-X has greater range, it also spreads its shots considerably - thus far, the measly one ton of weight savings is inconsequential, and even the moderate heat savings isn't enough: the AC/10 is a clear winner, and you should never buy an LB-X. But we're not done with the LB-10X just yet; the LB-X also has significantly faster projectile speed, and increased damage to internal structure via its special crit-seeking characteristics. So you have ways in which the LB-10X actually performs better than its AC/10 cousin - as it needs to, just to be competitive.

In short, the "armor stripping weapon" is a myth, born of ignorance and satan. Once again, there is no hidden benefit to spreading the same amount of damage over multiple locations. You can do the same thing with punch damage weapons for greater effect - you need more dps in order to be effective. Anything else is a toy to keep you happy and amused - and unaware that you're not really killing anything.

Now, don't think I'm down on the LB-10X. Quite the contrary, I have it on multiple 'mechs, and I love it to pieces - an LB-X stack is an excellent substitute for an AC/20 on a D-DC, for example. But if you're thinking about using it to "strip armor" so that your punch weapons can finish the job, you've fallen victim to a critical misunderstanding not only of the weapon system, but the fundamental workings of the game.

[ShadowbaneX]

Yeah, that's kinda what I was saying. Notice I mentioned light mechs, as in they have a chance of removing the armour from a light mech. Against mediums or larger, the LB-10/X is kinda useless unless you've got several or the armour's already gone.

[Void Angel]

Ah, I see. And here I wrote a dissertation.

[ShadowbaneX]

Void Angel, on 09 February 2014 - 09:57 PM, said:

Ah, I see. And here I wrote a dissertation.

It's a valid point you have though. Taking LB-10/X's to remove armour is a pretty dumb idea from where I'm sitting.

[Void Angel]

I'm sure we agree - I had this "conversation" with people over the horrible state of LRMs just after the emergency nerf from LRMageddon. LRMs still feel a bit too weak; I think the reason people are using them so much is 1) that XL trial Stalker deathtrap, and 2) the current metagame punishes brawlers, leaving dakka mechs and snipers as king of the hill - punishing brawlers and keeping engagement ranges open for the majority of many matches.

[Victor Morson]

Man, I have that argument every time I talk about LRMs. I set them up to be kill weapons, and then someone starts insisting they work fine without Artemis/TAG as "support weapons" to "soften targets." If your gun isn't going to kill things, it's probably a total waste of tonnage, in particular when it's that heavy folks!

LBX/10 is even worse in that regard.

[JC Daxion]

Void Angel, on 09 February 2014 - 06:43 PM, said:

In short, the "armor stripping weapon" is a myth, born of ignorance and satan. Once again, there is no hidden benefit to spreading the same amount of damage over multiple locations.

I disagree, Losing armor is always a good thing, Some people are just not as good of a shot, So being able to pin-point that shot constantly is something that they can't do consistently. For example, If i am aiming for the RT, maybe i hit the CT, or the guy twists a bit, and i hit the arm.. But with spread weapons, i not only hit the RT, but i hit the arm, and the CT.. A few more shots, now that whole area is losing lots of armor..

The guy turns, twists, or what ever and goes under cover.. Maybe a teammate, is flanking, and now get's a shot of opportunity, But it may be from behind, or an angle that only let's them target the arm.. which because of this spread damage weapon is much weaker, verse had the person been just pin-pointing the RT, or CT or what ever.

For me, when i come across some mech that is in really bad shape from armor loss, It let's me pick and choose the best place to attack from.

Now you could say, if the person had pin-pointed all that damage to the CT they would be dead, and that is true, But at the same time, Not everyone has the ablity to land shots on a moving target in the same place from 600m+ I think this especially true against the better pilots, that don't let you stack up all those easy to pin-point shots in one place.. They are going down fighting till the end, with their entire mech glowing. red..

But one last thing.. Maybe you are aiming for that glowing read area.. and only need a little damage for the kill, but you are off just a smidge, instead of hitting that red part, you hit the yellow, and the mech keeps on walking.. I have often gotton kills using even an SRM4, that just one missile drifts to that red crit and pulls the kill.. verse just slightly missing it, had i used an AC-10 shot..


Lights are another example,, better to hit with a spread shot, than miss completely.. and then when a shot of opportunity comes, you blast it in a single shot kill, because of that armor that has been stripped from various parts, verse just missing legs, or arms, or what ever..


Down the road if they ever adjust convergence making it harder to pinpoint with maybe weapons, with high-alpha's this will be even more important.. because you wont be-able to easily land 2 AC-20's, or 4 PPC's or what ever.. to the exact same spot, unless you lined up your shot for a few seconds, which would be impossible if you are moving.

As much as i like arm-lock making it easy to pin-point.. I find turning it off, when i have weapons in arms and torso, i find my weapons spread around a lot more. This is another aspect that could be looked into as well.. to help reduce that pin-point damage from multiple systems in different locations..

[Baron Cunedda Kell]

Their is NO right way to build mechs, everyone has their styles and flavor of how and why they build mechs... With that said, your build doesn't look bad, but the best way to see if the build is good, go and play it...see how it rolls in matches..and then go back and twik it, to suit your needs... All these suggests are great and very kind of them to share, but ultimately its gonna be you..who makes the final decision... thats the beauty of this game.. you can change your mech every moment and never stop trying to find that killer build...

[Buckminster]

Victor Morson, on 10 February 2014 - 05:34 AM, said:

Man, I have that argument every time I talk about LRMs. I set them up to be kill weapons, and then someone starts insisting they work fine without Artemis/TAG as "support weapons" to "soften targets." If your gun isn't going to kill things, it's probably a total waste of tonnage, in particular when it's that heavy folks!

LBX/10 is even worse in that regard.

The only thing I'll say about the "LRM as a support weapon" theory, is that you can fire it indirect. So it is possible to use them against a target you can't see to make it easier to kill when you finally can see it. It's not a theory I subscribe to, but I can see the idea.

[Void Angel]

Shooting at people who can't possibly shoot back at you is (if it's effective; note that they're talking about increasing the missile speed again) an advantage - so it can compensate a bit for spread damage. It's all of a parcel with needing an edge to make up for the fact that damage spreads.

[Void Angel]

JC Daxion, on 10 February 2014 - 08:01 AM, said:

Spoiler

I disagree, Losing armor is always a good thing, Some people are just not as good of a shot, So being able to pin-point that shot constantly is something that they can't do consistently. For example, If i am aiming for the RT, maybe i hit the CT, or the guy twists a bit, and i hit the arm.. But with spread weapons, i not only hit the RT, but i hit the arm, and the CT.. A few more shots, now that whole area is losing lots of armor..

The guy turns, twists, or what ever and goes under cover.. Maybe a teammate, is flanking, and now get's a shot of opportunity, But it may be from behind, or an angle that only let's them target the arm.. which because of this spread damage weapon is much weaker, verse had the person been just pin-pointing the RT, or CT or what ever.

For me, when i come across some mech that is in really bad shape from armor loss, It let's me pick and choose the best place to attack from.

Now you could say, if the person had pin-pointed all that damage to the CT they would be dead, and that is true, But at the same time, Not everyone has the ablity to land shots on a moving target in the same place from 600m+ I think this especially true against the better pilots, that don't let you stack up all those easy to pin-point shots in one place.. They are going down fighting till the end, with their entire mech glowing. red..

But one last thing.. Maybe you are aiming for that glowing read area.. and only need a little damage for the kill, but you are off just a smidge, instead of hitting that red part, you hit the yellow, and the mech keeps on walking.. I have often gotton kills using even an SRM4, that just one missile drifts to that red crit and pulls the kill.. verse just slightly missing it, had i used an AC-10 shot..


Lights are another example,, better to hit with a spread shot, than miss completely.. and then when a shot of opportunity comes, you blast it in a single shot kill, because of that armor that has been stripped from various parts, verse just missing legs, or arms, or what ever..


Down the road if they ever adjust convergence making it harder to pinpoint with maybe weapons, with high-alpha's this will be even more important.. because you wont be-able to easily land 2 AC-20's, or 4 PPC's or what ever.. to the exact same spot, unless you lined up your shot for a few seconds, which would be impossible if you are moving.

As much as i like arm-lock making it easy to pin-point.. I find turning it off, when i have weapons in arms and torso, i find my weapons spread around a lot more. This is another aspect that could be looked into as well.. to help reduce that pin-point damage from multiple systems in different locations..

Of course losing armor is a good thing - but your reasoning leaves something to be desired. If your marksmanship is poor, the solution is to improve it, not to take scatter-damage weapons in the hopes that some of your marginally accurate shots hit home. With the exception of the LB-10X, scatter-damage weapon systems are much more difficult to hit with: SRMs, for example, have a 300m/s projectile speed - less than half the slowest ballistic projectile. Does this make SRMs bad weapons? No! Even with the hit registration issues, the increased damage compensates most people very well for their scatter damage and slow speed. But it does make SRMs a poor substitute for marksmanship. Even using the LB10X against lights is an exercise in futility if you're not hitting that light dead center at pretty close range. If you only hit him with three pellets, you'll make him react - but the effect is mostly psychological.

The crux, the focal point, the reason that the entire "armor stripping weapon" concept is wrong, is that while losing armor is indeed always bad for the enemy, all weapons destroy armor. If you're not accurate enough to hit with a punch weapon, you're not accurate enough to place your spread center mass on your intended target - either way you're losing damage when you miss, and destroying armor when you hit. There is simply no such thing as a weapon that's only good for "stripping armor." If a weapon cannot kill, it's not a good weapon - ask a bear hunter what he thinks of using buckshot to shoot a grizzly so that his hunting partners can hit it better when it slows down from blood loss. That is almost exactly the relationship that's being proposed between "armor stripping" and "killing" weapons.

This idea needs to die in the fires in which it was wrought.

Edited by Void Angel, 10 February 2014 - 01:49 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Buckminster, on 10 February 2014 - 09:27 AM, said:

The only thing I'll say about the "LRM as a support weapon" theory, is that you can fire it indirect. So it is possible to use them against a target you can't see to make it easier to kill when you finally can see it. It's not a theory I subscribe to, but I can see the idea.

I think a lot of people don't realize how severely they're gimped like that; the only 'mechs worth indirecting are either assaults or very, very about-to-pop 'mechs. When you have a nice Artemis+TAG going, pretty much every round goes into one spot instead of falling on them like a light gentle rain.

Folks see damage numbers/red flashes and think it's working just as good when it really isn't. But it's pretty misleading if you're not really watching that damage scan.