109 replies to this topic

[Escef]

no one, on 10 March 2014 - 09:41 PM, said:

Thing is though, you could do the same thing, better with any other weapon better if you aimed at the damaged section.

Doing more damage per LBX shot than I am with AC10, mostly likely because it is more likely to do damage at all. Twin LBX deal more damage than I would get out of an AC20 (thought a single 20 cannon would be significantly lighter than twin LBX, freeing tonnage for a bigger engine or perhaps an AC2 or swapping the LLs to PPCs). My expected damage with twin AC5 or twin UAC5 would also be lower.

The thing with the LBX is your damage per hit is a bit lower, but your chance to hit is higher, making average damage per shot fired higher. It boils down to what you value more, devastating hits or actually connecting. My AC20 accuracy is around 60%, my LBX accuracy is around 70% (60.89% vs. 70.81% if you want to get more precise). That and you can harass at longer range with the LBX. No, you aren't going to do a lot of damage at 1000+ meters, barely any at all. But you get attention. You can throw people off their game. And if people look at me while someone else comes up to slip the proverbial knife in their ribs, I'm perfectly ok with that.

I'd seriously love to see the nay-sayers try the weapon in live drops. I mean, at least Winters uses it some, but I seriously doubt Roland has tried one in ages.

ANd before anyone asks, I do use AC20s on a few of my mechs. And I've tried single LBX before, I'm not wild about it. But pairing them up produces some pretty satisfying results.

[Deathlike]

Escef, on 10 March 2014 - 09:27 PM, said:

http://youtu.be/C5gAng9hDLo

@ 100m, even MGs look good at times.

In your vocal commentary, you're claiming that we're lying. That's not what we're saying at all.

Look, if you can get the shot @ 100m, congrats. The fact is if you have to literally fight @ that range, you could have done far better with the alternatives. At that same range, it is not hard to shove a boatload of AC2, AC5, or even the UAC5 at that range, and at a far more efficient rate. The reason why the 270 and under becomes the key range (where medium lasers thrive at) is because that is where most short range combat thrives at.

In the current version of "PPCWarrior with a hint of AC5/UAC5", you won't have enough opportunity at range to do it, and when you do, you won't be able to shave the armor required to make those crits effective. You might get the occasional light, but most smart pilots will engage when they feel they can take advantage of you, instead of allowing you do shove a pair of LBX on them.

LBX in their current state are not damaging or efficient enough in the ranges that matter, and when you literally have to facehug your target, the (paired) UAC5 is better than shoving up plenty more dakka into the mech than the LBX.

When you're particularly doing paired LBX10 vs paired UAC5s, the UAC5s are simply better dakka.

[Escef]

Deathlike, on 10 March 2014 - 10:07 PM, said:

Look, if you can get the shot @ 100m, congrats. The fact is if you have to literally fight @ that range, you could have done far better with the alternatives.

My weapon stats say elsewise. But building with those lighter alternatives would also give a lot different options for other guns, engines, and heat sinks. My accuracy with beams is much higher than for pin-point weapons, and my accuracy with the LBX is higher than it is for pin-point ballistics. The numbers don't lie, more likely to hit, higher average damage per trigger pull. Yes, pin-point weapons are more likely to produce spectacular looking results when they connect, but I'm less likely to connect with them.

I mean, what are your accuracy ratings with these weapons? I average in the 80-percentiles with beams, 70s with LBX and streaks, 50-60 with AC10 and 20, and in the low to mid 40s with UAC5, AC5, and AC2.

[no one]

Escef, on 10 March 2014 - 10:05 PM, said:

Doing more damage per LBX shot than I am with AC10, mostly likely because it is more likely to do damage at all. Twin LBX deal more damage than I would get out of an AC20 (thought a single 20 cannon would be significantly lighter than twin LBX, freeing tonnage for a bigger engine or perhaps an AC2 or swapping the LLs to PPCs). My expected damage with twin AC5 or twin UAC5 would also be lower.

Would you mind posting your weapons stats? You should be able to just copy-paste the thing.

[Escef]

no one, on 10 March 2014 - 10:17 PM, said:

Would you mind posting your weapons stats? You should be able to just copy-paste the thing.

Weapon Matches Fired Hit Accuracy Time Equip. Damage
AC/20 372 3,779 2,301 60.89% 1 day 05:46:58 44,849
MEDIUM LASER 2,399 78,196 64,941 83.05% 8 days 14:44:54 182,244
LRM 20 2 300 106 35.33% 00:07:46 109
SMALL LASER 28 507 358 70.61% 02:17:41 533
SRM 4 534 35,796 16,669 46.57% 1 day 18:44:14 33,921
ER LARGE LASER 955 22,933 19,342 84.34% 3 days 10:13:35 103,291
ER PPC 226 4,573 2,539 55.52% 19:44:20 24,653
LARGE LASER 2,385 52,083 43,675 83.86% 8 days 07:02:51 221,035
PPC 459 10,559 5,762 54.57% 1 day 16:12:46 51,455
LRG PULSE LASER 290 5,468 4,292 78.49% 23:36:51 28,563
MED PULSE LASER 106 2,825 2,288 80.99% 07:48:35 8,222
ANTI-MISSILE SYSTEM 516 0 0 0.00% 1 day 20:11:40 0
AC/2 286 19,642 8,169 41.59% 23:23:27 16,215
AC/5 586 27,863 14,871 53.37% 1 day 23:28:38 74,430
AC/10 323 4,314 2,453 56.86% 1 day 00:31:34 24,454
GAUSS RIFLE 604 7,056 4,033 57.16% 2 days 00:20:02 59,356
LB 10-X AC 99 1,432 1,014 70.81% 07:37:16 6,719
MACHINE GUN 66 23,079 8,722 37.79% 05:20:03 892
ULTRA AC/5 117 7,117 3,260 45.81% 09:03:57 16,122
LRM 5 180 38,700 11,399 29.45% 17:34:32 12,226
LRM 10 249 73,743 20,868 28.30% 22:56:13 21,831
LRM 15 275 106,775 28,657 26.84% 1 day 02:18:26 30,581
SRM 6 226 13,796 6,259 45.37% 17:30:47 12,682
STREAK SRM 2 1,375 77,758 58,932 75.79% 4 days 18:14:11 135,917
TAG 7 238 87 36.55% 00:35:37 0
SRM 4 + ARTEMIS 11 1,344 713 53.05% 00:43:36 1,485

I really hate how messy this looks, but I'm not going to sit here and play with tables all night.

Edited by Escef, 10 March 2014 - 10:24 PM.

[Deathlike]

Escef, on 10 March 2014 - 10:15 PM, said:

My weapon stats say elsewise. But building with those lighter alternatives would also give a lot different options for other guns, engines, and heat sinks. My accuracy with beams is much higher than for pin-point weapons, and my accuracy with the LBX is higher than it is for pin-point ballistics. The numbers don't lie, more likely to hit, higher average damage per trigger pull. Yes, pin-point weapons are more likely to produce spectacular looking results when they connect, but I'm less likely to connect with them.

You do understand that any part of the LBX (10 pellets) hits its target, like lasers, you get credited for a hit right? So, all you need is effectively 1 pellet to hit.

Look, you only need to be accurate above 50% of the time when you have direct fire weapons to be successful. Sure, you can be 90% accurate with lasers, but it doesn't actually mean you're doing 90% of the damage in the area you'd like to either. Same goes for LBX.

Quote

I mean, what are your accuracy ratings with these weapons? I average in the 80-percentiles with beams, 70s with LBX and streaks, 50-60 with AC10 and 20, and in the low to mid 40s with UAC5, AC5, and AC2.

55%+ with PPCs
88%+ with Med Lasers
50%+ with most ACs (except the AC10 - only slightly under, which I don't use for whatever reason)
72%+ with the LBX10 (since I don't use it, it's not a great stat)

There's a reason why instant frontloaded damage is preferable. At least when I had fun with SRMs, I was grossly inaccurate (40+% acc) but the damage was at least there.

[Mordin Ashe]

Boating multiple LBXs is my favorite thing to do lately! Or, well, at least I think about it since I don't have that much time to play. Anyway. While 4xLBX/10 seems a bit excessive, three of such weapons should be OK. Currently I have a D-DC with 2xLBX/10, 2xLL and 3xSSRM2. Very balanced build and the best one can do without sacrificing any important aspect of a Mech that could have hurt it in the long run, because it is both strong, armored and somehow fast.
Still, on a niche chassis three LBX/10 should be viable. Even though it may not do as much alpha damage, chainfiring such beast should shake the enemy beyond reason and you can bet the enemy will start panicking and doing mistakes once he realises all his armor sections are blipping.
3xLBX/10 means 33 tons of weapons, this thing would need at least 8, but preferably 9 tons of ammo, meaning almost half of Mech's tonnage will be filled with weapons and AMS. Scratch that AMS and you can still have Mech that is fast, agile AND deadly. XL non-voluntary though.

[Escef]

Deathlike, on 10 March 2014 - 10:25 PM, said:

Look, you only need to be accurate above 50% of the time when you have direct fire weapons to be successful. Sure, you can be 90% accurate with lasers, but it doesn't actually mean you're doing 90% of the damage in the area you'd like to either. Same goes for LBX.

Oh, I know how it works, I've been at this long enough. I just prefer doing damage over a lower chance to hit with better selection of what part of the target I hit. Ideally, I'd pack pin-point and beam weapons (like I do on my K2, twin LL, twin AC5). But I also can't run every mech that way either, it gets boring. Sure, I could throw an AC20 and 2 PPCs on my CTF-1X or 3D, my K2, my Orions, my 733C, either of my Atlases, etc. But the game would get stale mighty fast.

[no one]

Escef, on 10 March 2014 - 10:19 PM, said:

Weapon Matches Fired Hit Accuracy Time Equip. Damage

AC/20 372 3,779 2,301 60.89% 1 day 05:46:58 44,849

AC/5 586 27,863 14,871 53.37% 1 day 23:28:38 74,430

AC/10 323 4,314 2,453 56.86% 1 day 00:31:34 24,454

GAUSS RIFLE 604 7,056 4,033 57.16% 2 days 00:20:02 59,356

LB 10-X AC 99 1,432 1,014 70.81% 07:37:16 6,719

ULTRA AC/5 117 7,117 3,260 45.81% 09:03:57 16,122

That's fine, thank you.

LB 10-X
6,719 / 1,014 = 6.626 average damage per hit.
6,719 / 1,432 = 4.692 average damage per shot.

AC-10
24,454 / 2,453 = 9.969 average damage per hit.
24,454 / 4,314 = 5.669 average damage per shot.

You do better with the ac/10. And you're doing pinpoint damage with the AC/10.

Edit: As an interesting side note, in order to bring the damage up on your LB 10-X to the same damage per shot as your AC10, we would need to increase the damage to 1.2 per pellet. To get the same damage per hit you would need 1.5 damage per pellet.

Edited by no one, 10 March 2014 - 11:04 PM.

[Escef]

no one, on 10 March 2014 - 10:33 PM, said:

That's fine, thank you.

LB 10-X
6,719 / 1,014 = 6.626 average damage per hit.
6,719 / 1,432 = 4.692 average damage per shot.

AC-10
24,454 / 2,453 = 9.969 average damage per hit.
24,454 / 4,314 = 5.669 average damage per shot.

You do better with the ac/10. And you're doing pinpoint damage with the AC/10.

Must've flubbed entering a number when I ran the digits. Still, can't fit twin AC10, either (if I could do that on the Atlas I would have tried it, believe you me). Though I am now slightly curious about how an AC10/AC5 combo might work...

Edited by Escef, 10 March 2014 - 10:39 PM.

[Deathlike]

Escef, on 10 March 2014 - 10:38 PM, said:

Must've flubbed entering a number when I ran the digits. Still, can't fit twin AC10, either (if I could do that on the Atlas I would have tried it, believe you me). Though I am now slightly curious about how an AC10/AC5 combo might work...

At this point, the "AC15" hybrid isn't a bad "alternative" to the current state of the Gauss Rifle. Although, I'd say different firing speeds tend to discourage such a build.

[The Basilisk]

The whole mauler thing is a missunderstanding.
The artist that is working for MWO is doing some new Mauler designs.
But noboddy said it will be for MWO.
BTW the Mauler has not enough variants for this timeline.
Only feasible variants would be MAL-1R the standart 4 AC2 Mauler and MAL-3R the LB-X no laser version.
All other variants either utilize equipment past Jihad periode ( now is 3050 and Blakes word jihad will be past 3069 ) or equipment that isn't and will never be implemented in MWO. ( MAL-C with C3 slave unit and minus 1 tonn of AC2 ammo )

Edited by The Basilisk, 10 March 2014 - 10:56 PM.

[CarnifexMaximus]

No it wont. If you really want to do this, you can. However, you pay too high of a cost to pull it off. Here is a generic 90 ton mech designed with REMLAB using 4x LB10s.










I've stripped the arm armor down to zero, head is at 16 points in MWO terms, and legs are stripped a bit lower than I would be comfortable with. Also this is 3/5 speed (48 KPH). I'm really at a loss as to how you would free up more tonnage to get at least a 300 STD in there so you at least can go 59 kph after tweak and keep up with most highlanders and trail behind most Atlases.

So, if you like LBX's and don't mind a 48 kph mech that cannot pinpoint damage unless it is just about face hugging its target at all then I guess this is for you.

I gotta ask though, why not save 16 tons and 4 crits by taking 2x AC/20s?

Edited by CarnifexMaximus, 10 March 2014 - 11:07 PM.

[Escef]

The Basilisk, on 10 March 2014 - 10:50 PM, said:

The whole mauler thing is a missunderstanding.
The artist that is working for MWO is doing some new Mauler designs.
But nowboddy said it will be for MWO.
BTW the Mauler has not enough variants for this timeline.
only feasible variants would be MAL-1R, MAL-3R
All other variants either utilize equipment past Jihad eara or equipment that isn't and will never be implemented in MWO.

Others have said it was confirmed in the podcast, but I don't listen to it. If I'm going to sit and listen to people talk for hours, I'll be listening to NPR. (90.9 WBUR or 89.7 WGBH). Also, they might grab the DCMS-MX90-D Daboku. Also, the 3R has a C3 Slave, which PGI would either have to find a way to implement (much of its functionality is a given in the game), or turn it into Command Console Light.

[White Bear 84]

Roland, on 10 March 2014 - 06:44 PM, said:

I think this deserves a bump, just for its sheer hilarity.

[Kubernetes]

The thing is, in nearly every instance you'd do better to upgrade to an AC10 or drop down to a AC5/UAC5. With an Atlas DDC, you can fit two UAC5s or an AC10/AC5 combo, both options weigh less, and both will outperform the dual LBX in every way at every range.

I have been seeing a lot of dual LBX Jagers and K2s recently, and I have to admit those are two heavy mech opponents that I don't mind staring down at 500m or even 300m. It's comical to watch them hit me for 20pts of distributed damage--I can destroy their side torsos with just two alphas (4 seconds).

(full disclosure--I used to defend the LBX, but I've come to realize that it's just wasted tonnage. Spraying damage around is pointless, a waste of time, and gets you killed.)

[General Taskeen]

Annihilator does the 4xLBX thang, although LBX are better in TT (can use standard rounds) AND LBX did way more damage, straight up, in previous Mech Warrior games (you could snipe with em in MW3 and MW:LL, but not as much in MW4). Let's face it, LBX is just a challenge weapon (in this game) with an interesting sound.

We can post damage stats all day, but definitely in the "pro player realm" they are rarely used where lasers, ppc's, and ac's are the main weapons of choice. It used to be the different in previous games where a helluva lot more was used that dealt more consistent damage, especially LBX.

[DONTOR]

They are FUN, and they are HARD to get good with but once you do you can make them work. It has alot to do with positioning and the weapons you pair them with.

[DONTOR]

Kubernetes, on 11 March 2014 - 03:22 AM, said:

The thing is, in nearly every instance you'd do better to upgrade to an AC10 or drop down to a AC5/UAC5. With an Atlas DDC, you can fit two UAC5s or an AC10/AC5 combo, both options weigh less, and both will outperform the dual LBX in every way at every range.

I have been seeing a lot of dual LBX Jagers and K2s recently, and I have to admit those are two heavy mech opponents that I don't mind staring down at 500m or even 300m. It's comical to watch them hit me for 20pts of distributed damage--I can destroy their side torsos with just two alphas (4 seconds).

(full disclosure--I used to defend the LBX, but I've come to realize that it's just wasted tonnage. Spraying damage around is pointless, a waste of time, and gets you killed.)

Yet you praise the UAC? It too is unreliable but in a different way and its jaming can get you killed. It seems best when used at range and then upclose in emergencys (brawling with them can leave you down 2 weapons when it really matters) . I use plenty of UAC and LBX builds they both have their uses.

[MeiSooHaityu]

I like the LBX10, but I would not want to run a 4 LBX10 mech.

I ran a 3 LBX10 Cataphract for a while and it was OK, but I like running 2 LBX10s and 1 UA/C5 FAR better (or A/C5..your choice).

The 3MLasers with the Ultra is good for laying down fire and the 2 LBX10s are good for stripping components and limbs.

I would rather ditch 2 of those 4 LBXs for more pinpoint ballistics.