342 replies to this topic

[Sigilum Sanctum]

Mcgral18, on 30 April 2014 - 11:13 AM, said:

Ah, but with a coolshot I can pump out 200 damage without worrying much about heat. 150 is very feasible. How much armor does your side torso have?

Good luck spreading .6 burn time over more than 3 components.

By the way...we do have private servers now. We can test all of this. In an organized manner to obtain CoF results, and in practical duels to see how they perform in reality.

I would be up for this some time after 5pm eastern. It could be neat

[SethAbercromby]

I've been running a private match with a few friends of mine on the Comstar TS. We had a 2v2 scenario of my Misery and an Orion vs an Atlas D-DC and a Hunchback. Unfortunately, I didn't ask about their specific loadouts but the Atlas was running the "obligatory" AC20, I believe.

My LB Misery proved to be absolutely devastating against opponents that are at least as good as I am (not that I'm a very good player). My Misery pounded out more than 400 damage and downed the Atlas in a brutal mostly 1v1, taking advantage of the sheer amount of damage the Stalkers STs can take before crumbling down and having an CT mounted LPL. The test provided near optimal conditions for a comparison and yet, the AC20 Atlas still lost. Does that mean that the Meta is wrong or does it just imply that the Meta itself is stuck in a state of stagnation of Min/Maxing where the LB simply doesn't get the chance to prove itself?

Or you know, blame the D-DC for being a bad 'Mech or something...

Edited by SethAbercromby, 30 April 2014 - 11:19 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

My argument on the 2xLBX10 Atlas's is this, why not take an AC20 and 5+ extra tons?

Because the LB10Xs fire much faster and generate less heat. If you get up in someones grill with dual LB10Xs you can do a lot more dps than an AC20.

[Bishop Steiner]

SethAbercromby, on 30 April 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

I've been running a private match with a few friends of mine on the Comstar TS. We had a 2v2 scenario of my Misery and an Orion vs an Atlas D-DC and a Hunchback. Unfortunately, I didn't ask about their specific loadouts but the Atlas was running the "obligatory" AC20, I believe.

My LB Misery proved to be absolutely devastating against opponents that are at least as good as I am (not that I'm a very good player). My Misery pounded out more than 400 damage and downed the Atlas in a brutal mostly 1v1, taking advantage of the sheer amount of damage the Stalkers STs can take before crumbling down and having an CT mounted LPL. The test provided near optimal conditions for a comparison and yet, the AC20 Atlas still lost. Does that mean that the Meta is wrong or does it just imply that the Meta itself is stuck in a state of stagnation of Min/Maxing where the LB simply doesn't get the chance to prove itself?

Or you know, blame the D-DC for being a bad 'Mech or something...

well, you can't jumpsnipe in them, so you know...........

[Phromethius]

It's really funny though all this talk of ELO brackets and ranges. I have played with pretty much everyone on this thread while solo pugging. SO either my ELO is lazy eight, or everyone elses ELO isn't as high on the mountain as they think. Or Occam's razor would suggest that even ELO is not a great tool for measuring the "viability" of anything, nor does it validate anyone's opinion. Like stated before, this is all subjective and up to personal preference. Just because a few of us can take subpar non meta potato flingers and actually hurt and kill anyone using "proper" ballistics doesn't mean we are bad. It actually means we have found a set of skills that the meta LACKS.

[TimePeriod]

OH I'M SORRY, DID I JUST STOMP ALL OVER YOUR TEAM?



Combat is at best, situational and meta is not. Above picture is after throwing together my Victor DS with every short range weapon I had in my inventory and took it to the field.

Edited by TimePeriod, 30 April 2014 - 11:45 AM.

[Deathlike]

Look, I'm not even trying to "ruffle the feathers" or "annoy people". I'm trying to have a discussion here. If you really don't want to have a discussion and be in your own world, then fine whatever. You can believe whatever you want.

The fact is, I always want a discussion about things. Is the status quo good? Can we at least attempt to make stuff better? That's the question I like asking. Sometimes the status quo is fine (it's not in MWO, but dealing with it is OK and it sucks at the same time).

LBX is just not in a state where I primarily PREFER TO BRAWL, HATE THIS AS BRAWLING WEAPON. People would say Pulse Lasers are good... but I've never found them to be "good" like ever, even in the situations where they would "appear" to be favorable", but they still underperform for their role.

Mind you, the entire discussion IS SUBJECTIVE. This is abundantly clear. However, when the effect and work to make their "efficient" does not match up with reality... IT CAN BE OBJECTIVELY BAD. That is how testing these weapons are supposed to go. I know people have their own biases (they prefer to snipe, to lurm, to brawl, whatever), but I'm trying to be OBJECTIVE AS I CAN POSSIBLY BE and the reality says more often than not "it's not worth it". I cannot fathom certain builds other people run and/or prefer to run, but at least I can see "hey it works for them, because I'm probably not proficient in whatever it takes for them to be successful". That's fine. It happens. However... I LIKE TO BRAWL. There are weapons that are CLASSIFIED BY DEFINITION for brawling. If such weapons FAIL TO ACCOMPLISH that task proficiently, they have to be called out. It's that simple.

I'm not trying to argue for the fun of it... if you don't want a serious discussion, then don't be surprised if people think of you as the underhive. I will not, but trust me when I say that the LBX is NOT where it needs to be to be classified a "good weapon" when you seriously have to rely on the RNG FOR ALL 10 PELLETS to go where you want them to go.... yet the SRMs do a similar effect AND are VASTLY MORE PROFICIENT AT IT for LESS TONNAGE. That is what makes LBX so terrible by comparison. That's the problem I WOULD LIKE TO RESOLVE.

Builds I'm comparing BTW:
Original AC10 build:
SHD-2D

LBX10 build for now:
SHD-2D

[Bishop Steiner]

Deathlike, on 30 April 2014 - 11:33 AM, said:

Look, I'm not even trying to "ruffle the feathers" or "annoy people". I'm trying to have a discussion here. If you really don't want to have a discussion and be in your own world, then fine whatever. You can believe whatever you want.

The fact is, I always want a discussion about things. Is the status quo good? Can we at least attempt to make stuff better? That's the question I like asking. Sometimes the status quo is fine (it's not in MWO, but dealing with it is OK and it sucks at the same time).

LBX is just not in a state where I primarily PREFER TO BRAWL, HATE THIS AS BRAWLING WEAPON. People would say Pulse Lasers are good... but I've never found them to be "good" like ever, even in the situations where they would "appear" to be favorable", but they still underperform for their role.

Mind you, the entire discussion IS SUBJECTIVE. This is abundantly clear. However, when the effect and work to make their "efficient" does not match up with reality... IT CAN BE OBJECTIVELY BAD. That is how testing these weapons are supposed to go. I know people have their own biases (they prefer to snipe, to lurm, to brawl, whatever), but I'm trying to be OBJECTIVE AS I CAN POSSIBLY BE and the reality says more often than not "it's not worth it". I cannot fathom certain builds other people run and/or prefer to run, but at least I can see "hey it works for them, because I'm probably not proficient in whatever it takes for them to be successful". That's fine. It happens. However... I LIKE TO BRAWL. There are weapons that are CLASSIFIED BY DEFINITION for brawling. If such weapons FAIL TO ACCOMPLISH that task proficiently, they have to be called out. It's that simple.

I'm not trying to argue for the fun of it... if you don't want a serious discussion, then don't be surprised if people think of you as the underhive. I will not, but trust me when I say that the LBX is NOT where it needs to be to be classified a "good weapon" when you seriously have to rely on the RNG FOR ALL 10 PELLETS to go where you want them to go.... yet the SRMs do a similar effect AND are VASTLY MORE PROFICIENT AT IT for LESS TONNAGE. That is what makes LBX so terrible by comparison. That's the problem I WOULD LIKE TO RESOLVE.

Builds I'm comparing BTW:
Original AC10 build:
SHD-2D

LBX10 build for now:
SHD-2D

I spent plenty of time having a discussion. You and others chose to constantly summarily dismiss it. So now, instead of wasting my time, or that of my Internet Betters, I am finding more enjoyable ways to spend my forum time. As I said to PGI in another thread......

[Mcgral18]

Sigilum Sanctum, on 30 April 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

I would be up for this some time after 5pm eastern. It could be neat

I should be on later tonight. I use the Comstar NA TS server, if you know it. Ctrl+F to find my name, same as here.

Although we'd have to hope 2 people with premium are among those online, since I don't have any.

TimePeriod, on 30 April 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

OH I'M SORRY, DID I JUST STOMP ALL OVER YOUR TEAM?

Yep, I've also gotten over 1000 damage with a Tri-LB10x Muromets. Absolutely terrible build. But it makes such a nice noise.

Tri 10 gets more kills, AC20+AC10 is more space efficient, with an STD engine. In fact...I just recently got a 7 kill game with an AC20 and 2 LLs....more efficient?

[Deathlike]

Bishop Steiner, on 30 April 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

You and others chose to constantly summarily dismiss it.

What is your argument then?

If the argument is "I can use it, but you suck at it" is the discussion, do I have to really go with the hyperbolic "I got X kills with a Flamer, does that mean it's good?" response?

I'm not trying to argue just to pee on you. If you want to keep responding like that, I guess we can't have nice things.

[Sigilum Sanctum]

Mcgral18, on 30 April 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

I should be on later tonight. I use the Comstar NA TS server, if you know it. Ctrl+F to find my name, same as here.

Although we'd have to hope 2 people with premium are among those online, since I don't have any.

Ive got like 19 days of premium left so we're good. Ill add you ingame when I get home.

[Bishop Steiner]

Deathlike, on 30 April 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

What is your argument then?

If the argument is "I can use it, but you suck at it" is the discussion, do I have to really go with the hyperbolic "I got X kills with a Flamer, does that mean it's good?" response?

I'm not trying to argue just to pee on you. If you want to keep responding like that, I guess we can't have nice things.

As I said, I am done wasting my time, so now I am wasting everyone else's. I have no need to rehash what has been printed by myself, MischiefSC and dozens of others on here. Continue to dismiss it as ad hominem, or however you like, but FACT is in the doing. We have all been doing and posting about it. You, Roland and others keep posting to tell us how wrong and misguided we are.

So, since it is essentially blowing down to several people who could give a leaky drizzle less what the MetaLords think, posting "Hey, we have been having a lot of fun and success running build-X, it has been surprisingly effective, in fact WE HAVE BEEN DOING BETTER IN IT, OBJECTIVELY SEEN BY IMPROVED MATCH PERFORMANCES (or in my case, simply much more consistent in it)" only to have the inevitable descent of the MetaVultures to any topic that would dare say something non MetaApproved could have a place, and then summarily tell us how we are BADs, misguided and wrong, can't say I exactly see where you are coming from.

Fact. I am using them on certain builds, with certain weapon combinations and getting BETTER results than when running the "approved" builds. End of the day, I really don't give a crap if I have the Forums Overlords approval on it.

[Phromethius]

You are not discussing though. You actually are saying that you "suck' at it so its not viable. You have stated it many times already. Your "objective" facts. Just because you can't brawl with it well doesn't mean its not a good weapon. Your experience is counter to my own. That is why this is pointless. I have better luck killing things with my LBX than I do my 4sp with dual artemis SRM6s. So what does this actually mean? Does my opinion or experience zero out yours? You are better at SRMS than I and I might be better at the LBX than you. That is the only summation that can be extrapolated. It does not however prove that SRMS are a better brawling weapon.

EDIT: meh, Bishop said his rant better. But yeah. it has come down to /shrug for me

Edited by Phromethius, 30 April 2014 - 11:55 AM.

[CCC Dober]

I have been running dual LBX10 on the Atlas and they've become my preferred close combat solution ever since. The results that I saw outclassed all other autocannon-centric builds. Mainly because the LBX10 meshes well with streaks. While the spread pattern may be troublesome at longer distances, it gives you a chance to hit/drop more 'zippy' targets with lag shield. That sends a clear message to Light Mechs and that makes survival a whole lot easier. Means you can stay alive long enough to crit stuff in later stages of the game. That used to be my problem in the Atlas before, but now the little buggers stay at range (where the dual ER Lasers come in handy). So in my case the switch to LBX10s gave me some breathing room and longevity to reach the endgame more often. I would definitely recommend using them on the Atlas. Can't speak for other Mechs, but the synergy with streak missiles still applies.

Edited by CCC Dober, 30 April 2014 - 11:55 AM.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

As any thinking person should be able to acknowledge, individuals are not the same one to another. Person A might do really well with LPLs and terribly with PPCs (guilty), Person B might love him some PPCs and AC10s and do really badly with LPLs and LBXs, and Person C might dislike both LPLs and PPCs and prefer MLs and LBXs.

Morality and Truth are fixed and consistent. Individual performance is not - it is highly variable. Some things are more commonly better (so-called Meta builds become meta because they are more commonly successful), but that doesn't make them universally more effective. Taste and talent count for a more than anything, and those two things vary wildly among the player population.

[Mcgral18]

Phromethius, on 30 April 2014 - 11:50 AM, said:

You are not discussing though. You actually are saying that you "suck' at it so its not viable. You have stated it many times already. Your "objective" facts. Just because you can't brawl with it well doesn't mean its not a good weapon. Your experience is counter to my own. That is why this is pointless. I have better luck killing things with my LBX than I do my 4sp with dual artemis SRM6s. So what does this actually mean? Does my opinion or experience zero out yours? You are better at SRMS than I and I might be better at the LBX than you. That is the only summation that can be extrapolated. It does not however prove that SRMS are a better brawling weapon.

Well, I'm going to throw an LB10x on my victor to see how it works.

But from past experience, it simply isn't worth it for the most part. Rather large CoF at 300M, same cooldown as an AC10, little less heat, one less ton.

But I'll try it none the less.

Best thing to do would be to get everyone into a private match and do real testing, which myself and sigil will try doing tonight. Anyone else is free to join us. Testing can also be just dueling LB10x VS AC10 or UAC, or true testing such as CoF at range.

[N a p e s]

Mcgral18, on 30 April 2014 - 11:56 AM, said:

Well, I'm going to throw an LB10x on my victor to see how it works.

But from past experience, it simply isn't worth it for the most part. Rather large CoF at 300M, same cooldown as an AC10, little less heat, one less ton.

But I'll try it none the less.

Best thing to do would be to get everyone into a private match and do real testing, which myself and sigil will try doing tonight. Anyone else is free to join us. Testing can also be just dueling LB10x VS AC10 or UAC, or true testing such as CoF at range.

If you have a Victor 9B try the LB10+2MG combo in a brawling scenario. Results have been surprisingly good.

Edit: Any mech with three ballistic slots is an option really but its best when they're all in the same section.

Edited by Napes339, 30 April 2014 - 12:00 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Okay, to reiterate -

LB10X have been, for a long time, trash quality. Unreliable, inconsistent, weak compared to comparable tonnage. I know, I've tried them a few times and always tossed them on the heap.

My premise is that due to gradual changes to hit detection that's not so much the case anymore. I wouldn't say it is flat out superior to, well, any comparable weapon. I would say that range has some significant advantages over brawling and that is its own issues.

Taken in the context of damage done for the weight though, I'm saying it's better than it's been. Significantly, measurably.

Does it still need a buff? Absolutely.

It does, however, synergize really well with MGs. I'm finding that while my Banshee crushes face with 2xLB10X very well it lacks the speed to deploy them as well as my Jag, which cooks along at around 80. I've noticed a tiny bump in my KDR using them in my Banshee but it's a feast/famine situation, where the trip-5 and 2xPPCs is lower but more consistent. I'm getting 0,0, 6, 5, 0 sorts of swings using it in my Banshee. My Jag, conversely, using 2xLB10X, 4xMGs and 2 MLs is rarely, rarely putting up less than 300 damage an 1 kill and I've had several 5-7 kill matches with it.

So my point is....

It's better. Can it be better still? Yeah, I still say bump per-pellet damage. 1.2 would be fine. The crit-multiplier is nice but it's just too heavy to carry as a 'finisher'. It needs a bit more up-front killing power. It needs carried in pairs to sand-blast effectively and thus using LB10Xs well is a minimum 22 ton + ammo investment, plus two ballistic spots.

As brawling becomes more viable though.... honestly, I'll load LB10Xs and SRMs on my Jag and go ruin lives at point blank.

I know Bishop has seen it. I see a few others have - anyone else who was a 10X hater who wants to give them a significant test?

[CCC Dober]

Guys, don't waste your time testing isolated weapons in duels. The LBX10 is a weapon with a steadily increasing threat potential the more damage the target has sustained. It will suck in a straight up comparison with the AC10 because it works best in tandem with other weapons that weaken the armor enough to exploit.

What you need to do instead is mix the AC10 and LBX10 with complementary weapons (on the same Mech) and see which one achieves the best results in their optimum fighting ranges. This is how you test them the way they are meant to be used. Otherwise its apples to oranges and the comparison has no value in typical combat situations.

[TimePeriod]

The whole point in using an LBX is to get in close. If I can get my 80 ton Victor-DS within 1-200m of anything I can open up even a highlander faster then a AC40. The LBX is an outstanding weapon at that range combined with LPL, streaks and/or MPL.

Waffleiron

This is my current build.

Edited by TimePeriod, 30 April 2014 - 12:20 PM.