109 replies to this topic

[Cybermech]

typical stuff in this thread, old proof mixed with trolling.
what some seem to be missing is this game does not support skill, its easy win with easy weapons.
LBX-10 requires more skills or at least more thought process.

LBX is for against no armor situations, so yes it is going to be terrible against armored mechs.
If people are so sure of its absolute failure then showing it against unarmored mechs should demonstrate it with ease.

It comes down to play style, some like to dance, this weapon is more for those situations.

[Roland]

Cybermech, on 12 March 2014 - 02:49 AM, said:

LBX-10 requires more skills or at least more thought process.

No, the LBX precludes skill, since it is impossible to be precise with it.

[SirLANsalot]

Roland, on 12 March 2014 - 05:03 AM, said:

No, the LBX precludes skill, since it is impossible to be precise with it.

LBX is a facehugger weapon, get in point blank and just blast them, when armor is gone the crits kill whatever torso your tearing into.

[N a p e s]

I want to like the LBX and sometimes I even feel like its in a good spot but then a couple more games and I realize that it needs a buff before it can be taken seriously. Here are my stats and analysis of said stats.

LBX10 7711 5963 77.33% 42930
AC10 8308 5120 61.63% 51613

So I'm dealing 5.6 dmg/shot and 7.2 dmg/hit with the LBX10 vs 6.21 dmg/shot and 10.08 dmg/hit with the AC10.

The comparison doesn't make it seem too bad, its lighter, takes one slot less and creates less heat so it could be excused. But when you consider that the 7.2 dmg/hit gets spread around onto maybe 2-4 sections (in comparison to the AC10's pinpoint application) it feels pretty bad.

If it's worth anything it's still one of the coolest weapons in the game.

[wanderer]

I've done this before, but:

Consider that for 11 tons + ammo, you're dealing.... 10 damage spread across the target. And optimally at facehug range.

For 4 tons + ammo, you could have been doing 12 (and better grouping at that) with an Artemis-SRM6 at the same facehugging ranges- even WITH the SRM problems nowadays. Sure, the LB-X goes further, but you can use that extra tonnage for something that actually deals reasonable damage outside of 270m instead and get twice the gun for the same tonnage.

Let's also note that a standard AC/10 actually deals enough damage with a single crit to destroy equipment and deal significant additional damage, while an LB-X...just plain doesn't.

The LB-10X is half a gun, too. It's supposed to fire solid AND cluster ammo, but since MWO can't apparently figure out multiple fire modes/ammo for a single weapon, it's massively gimped.

Edited by wanderer, 12 March 2014 - 07:50 AM.

[Jody Von Jedi]

OK, I'll add my stats to the mix.
AC/20 489 7,672 5,084 66.27% 1 day 21:41:09 99,876 MEDIUM LASER 2,273 69,548 58,369 83.93% 9 days 03:03:17 184,129 LRM 20 213 64,148 16,162 25.19% 21:58:10 16,017 SMALL LASER 44 468 223 47.65% 03:23:17 355 SRM 4 77 2,426 713 29.39% 06:51:02 1,372 ER LARGE LASER 676 13,186 11,001 83.43% 2 days 19:05:43 64,094 ER PPC 68 1,364 798 58.50% 06:52:30 8,186 FLAMER 42 508 253 49.80% 03:05:03 99 LARGE LASER 288 7,603 6,165 81.09% 1 day 03:56:15 33,856 PPC 83 773 378 48.90% 08:11:14 3,387 LRG PULSE LASER 25 802 669 83.42% 02:49:10 4,612 MED PULSE LASER 181 4,921 3,842 78.07% 18:06:56 15,654 ANTI-MISSILE SYSTEM 1,277 0 0 0.00% 5 days 07:02:58 0 AC/2 162 23,150 13,250 57.24% 15:23:30 27,311 AC/5 180 11,129 6,177 55.50% 16:16:22 31,688 AC/10 107 1,774 1,059 59.70% 10:33:34 10,112 GAUSS RIFLE 98 698 361 51.72% 08:52:40 5,453 LB 10-X AC 89 1,098 844 76.87% 08:05:18 5,337 MACHINE GUN 45 15,913 8,670 54.48% 04:09:16 1,036 ULTRA AC/5 123 4,067 2,303 56.63% 11:58:29 11,634 LRM 5 87 4,862 1,133 23.30% 07:36:45 1,231 LRM 10 76 12,427 3,412 27.46% 07:23:18 3,439 LRM 15 359 135,855 42,668 31.41% 1 day 10:35:00 43,470 NARC 5 26 4 15.38% 00:28:27 0 SRM 2 11 294 75 25.51% 01:05:21 140 SRM 6 340 30,807 11,627 37.74% 1 day 07:11:05 22,598 STREAK SRM 2 910 29,979 16,293 54.35% 3 days 19:37:02 42,332 TAG 1 125 44 35.20% 00:09:24 0 SRM 4 + ARTEMIS 28 1,084 314 28.97% 03:14:43 611 SRM 6 + ARTEMIS 2 114 14 12.28% 00:24:10
53

I don't have near the experience with the LBX as say the AC/20, but damage per shot details below.

5.7 dmg per shot AC/10
4.86 dmg per shot LBX

Yes, accuracy may be a bit better with the LBX, but I think I prefer the AC/10.

But if we were comparing AC/20? Hands down my favorite weapon.

Avg 13 damage per shot with the AC/20.............oh yeah.


Jody

[Odins Fist]

Cybermech, on 12 March 2014 - 02:49 AM, said:

typical stuff in this thread, old proof mixed with trolling.
what some seem to be missing is this game does not support skill, its easy win with easy weapons.
LBX-10 requires more skills or at least more thought process.

LBX is for against no armor situations, so yes it is going to be terrible against armored mechs.
If people are so sure of its absolute failure then showing it against unarmored mechs should demonstrate it with ease.

It comes down to play style, some like to dance, this weapon is more for those situations.

Well I have to say it does require a modificarion to a pilots "play style"

Odins Fist, on 11 March 2014 - 09:20 AM, said:

Ah, the ol LBX-10 debate.. Let me fix it for you.

A long time ago in closed beta I ran (2) LBX-10s on an Atlas D-DC, and it worked nicely.
Then some changes happened, and it still worked, just not as nicely.

Present/Today: (2) LBX-10s = really decent damage numbers, but low kills due to the fact that the LBX-10 is a finisher for wounded mechs, not a Kill everything quick weapon, it lacks pinpoint due to damage spread, and you cannot argue that point.

It's neat that some people learn HOW to PLAY with the LBX-10, it's one of those weapons you really have to adjust your play style to be very proficient with. Also all weapons are like that in similar ways, it's just that the LBX-10 simply does not concentrate damage like other weapons.

I have been watching the ol (3) AC-10 setup, and watched it down mechs faster with less overall damage stats.

Conclusion: It's better to destroy an enemy Mech faster, and with less damage needed to be done versus putting up BIG damage numbers and fewer kills. The faster you reduce the enemy team size by destroying it's mechs, the better your chances of winnning the match.

The old "I like this weapon better, so it must be better" thing, doesn't make it the better weapon, it just means you are proficient with that weapon, that is all...

Odins Fist, on 11 March 2014 - 09:20 AM, said:

The old "I like this weapon better, so it must be better" thing, doesn't make it the better weapon, it just means you are proficient with that weapon, that is all...

^ This, AGAIN.

[Wintersdark]

Cybermech, on 12 March 2014 - 02:49 AM, said:

typical stuff in this thread, old proof mixed with trolling.
what some seem to be missing is this game does not support skill, its easy win with easy weapons.
LBX-10 requires more skills or at least more thought process.

LBX is for against no armor situations, so yes it is going to be terrible against armored mechs.
If people are so sure of its absolute failure then showing it against unarmored mechs should demonstrate it with ease.

It comes down to play style, some like to dance, this weapon is more for those situations.

Do you understand exactly what advantage the LBX offers against unarmored targets? I mean, the math involved? Or are you just parroting what other people have told you?

I ask this because it seems to me that the lions share of people spouting this nonsense about the LBX being a "finisher" weapon must just not understand how it works.

The LBX's advantage vs. unarmored targets is that it has a higher crit rate. That means, it's more likely to do damage to internal components than "normal" weapons - +14%, +8%, and +3%. This is calculated per pellet. When that happens, the pellet is doing 1, 2, or 3 hits respectively (of 1 damage) to a random component in that location. Most components have 10 health. 15% of THAT damage (not overall damage, just the "crit" damage dealt to components) is then added to the structural damage.

So, lets assume you get... 5 crits against your target section. This means you do 5 damage to the internal components, and an additional .75 damage to structure. That 5 damage is half what's required to destroy a single component, and it's also randomly distributed in 1 damage bits against components in your target location.

That's a pretty trivial amount of additional damage.

So, against unarmored targets, you do very, very slightly more damage to structure.... but we're discussing firing 1-2 10 damage rounds against those targets. At that damage level, you'll destroy an unarmored section in pretty much exactly the same number of hits, crit bonus or no. AC10's, AC5's... they'll destroy an armored section as fast or faster, and are more likely to destroy internal components even without the crit bonus than an LBX, because they are dealing 10/5 damage chunks. The AC10 is guaranteed to destroy a component per crit, whereas the LBX is far more likely to just slightly damage everything.

In short: The crit bonus is a nice bit of gravy, but it's NOT something that's significant enough to push the LBX into some niche role. And even if it was a significant damage advantage, it would still not be a worthwhile role for a massive, primary weapon system.

wanderer, on 12 March 2014 - 07:49 AM, said:

Consider that for 11 tons + ammo, you're dealing.... 10 damage spread across the target. And optimally at facehug range.

For 4 tons + ammo, you could have been doing 12 (and better grouping at that) with an Artemis-SRM6 at the same facehugging ranges- even WITH the SRM problems nowadays. Sure, the LB-X goes further, but you can use that extra tonnage for something that actually deals reasonable damage outside of 270m instead and get twice the gun for the same tonnage.

And this, of course. This is about the most apt way to put it, too - the reality is that a single SRM6, even with the current hitreg issues, is superior to one LB-X AC10.

[Kubernetes]

"And this, of course. This is about the most apt way to put it, too - the reality is that a single SRM6, even with the current hitreg issues, is superior to one LB-X AC10."

Pretty much. The LBX is okay in a knife-fight, but why would you devote at least 13 tons and 8 slots for a weapon that is only effective at close range? SRMs weigh less and take fewer slots for similar performance.

Every time I load up an LBX, I'm bummed out that my large ballistic is merely a secondary or tertiary weapon, and then I think "What a waste" and unload it. A UAC5 and 2 MLs weigh the same and outperform it in every way.

[Deathlike]

Wintersdark, on 12 March 2014 - 02:43 PM, said:

Lots of good stuff

Well, you're missing the additional crit damage bonus which is documented a little bit @ smurfy's, but generally speaking it doesn't really generate a destroyed component (like DHS) with its natural brand of inconsistency unless you have at least a pair of LBX or a few components within the section that's being destroyed. Something like the 4P's Hunch typically has 6 meds and 2 DHS, which LBX will have a hard time of disabling... even the 4MG Spider is more proficient at this (although, the Ember's a better choice these days...). Then again... MG uptime....

Edited by Deathlike, 12 March 2014 - 09:50 PM.