23 replies to this topic

[Gattsus]

While walking back home I had a thought on the lack of usefulness of the LB-X/cLB-X, compared to pin point damage weapons like the AC or UAC.

Therefore, I thought it might be cool/fun if the LB weapons do either: jam enemy weapons or destroy enemy components without the need of stripping the armor before. This would have a crit chance with an X percentage that maybe could be flat, proportional or inversely proportional to the weapon size, i.e different crit chances for cLB-2/cLB-20.

I know destroying components without stripping the armor it's a bit harsh, but maybe if it's only jamming, it would be a great way of adding a different flavour to the weapon.

Let me know your thoughts,

Edited by Gattsus, 09 October 2014 - 06:11 PM.

[Mcgral18]

Through armour crits are best to be avoided.

Edited by Mcgral18, 10 October 2014 - 07:22 AM.

[Carrioncrows]

No.

Just give them more damage per pellet.

Instant success. They already spread their damage out everywhere and suppossedly do crit (which do nothing) and extra crit damage (which is useless 90% of the time)

So taking on more exhaustive rules to try and eek out some functionality out of these weapons is just throwing good money after bad.

New players shouldn't have to read a book to understand how a weapon works.

Just give it more damage to combat the spread out nature of the weapon.

LB2-X = 3 total dmg
LB5-X = 6 total dmg
LB10-x = 12 total dmg
LB20-X = 24 total dmg

[LordKnightFandragon]

Or, you know, tighten up the spread a bit so its less like a thrown handfull of sand and more a shotgun blast....

[Triordinant]

LordKnightFandragon, on 09 October 2014 - 06:26 PM, said:

Or, you know, tighten up the spread a bit so its less like a thrown handfull of sand and more a shotgun blast....

This is the way to do it.

[Chrithu]

LordKnightFandragon, on 09 October 2014 - 06:26 PM, said:

Or, you know, tighten up the spread a bit so its less like a thrown handfull of sand and more a shotgun blast....

Yaeh that's it. Make them a bit more effective within their optimal range span. Besides: LB-X aren't bad at all. As soon as armor is stripped they finish a mech quite fast, especially if yo use several of them.

[Mcgral18]

Carrioncrows, on 09 October 2014 - 06:23 PM, said:

No.

Just give them more damage per pellet.

Instant success. They already spread their damage out everywhere and suppossedly do crit (which do nothing) and extra crit damage (which is useless 90% of the time)

So taking on more exhaustive rules to try and eek out some functionality out of these weapons is just throwing good money after bad.

New players shouldn't have to read a book to understand how a weapon works.

Just give it more damage to combat the spread out nature of the weapon.

LB2-X = 3 total dmg
LB5-X = 6 total dmg
LB10-x = 12 total dmg
LB20-X = 24 total dmg

Faster RoF is another nice compromise. More damage downrange, but still ineffective damage....which is bad.

Better for brawling, though.

[Soul Tribunal]

Or let us fit Slugs to Punch holes in armor. Then Spread shot to finish the job...

-ST

[FupDup]

Mcgral18, on 09 October 2014 - 06:41 PM, said:

Faster RoF is another nice compromise. More damage downrange, but still ineffective damage....which is bad.

Better for brawling, though.

It would also mean more dakka.

We could always use more dakka.

[Tezcatli]

I like the idea of giving them more pellets instead of 1 pellet to 1 damage ratio they have. So an LBX5 is firing like 8 pellets. Have the spread start closer range. So that at close range they deal more total damage then standard equivalent. But scatter more damage if you can't get in close.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Mcgral18, on 09 October 2014 - 06:21 PM, said:

Though armour crits is best to be avoided.

Quoted for truth.

Carrioncrows, on 09 October 2014 - 06:23 PM, said:

Just give them more damage per pellet.

Quoted for truth, again.

Make each pellet do 1.3 damage, to start. I'd guess it might need to go as high as 1.5, but start a little lower and bump it up as necessary.

[Asmudius Heng]

The simplest solution as has been said is more damage per pellet.

It would be a great brawling weapon that way and not step on too many toes and be even more effective on internals.

Just make is 1.1 to start then ramp it up til it is being used well but not too much.

[SweetJackal]

One of the things that really does irk me about the LBX is how it's 'better optimal range' is touted over the plain ACs as a reason they cannot be improved. "We don't want to invalidate the AC-10 by making the LBX-10 a lighter, longer range AC."

They don't even need to tighten the cone, they just need to make that bonus range relevant by turning the cone into a cylinder. Easy to code and would mimic either a dynamic choke on the LBX or proximity detonated canister shot (both of which have been asked for as in lore changes to the LBX in the past.) Just a little thing so that your LBX is just as effective at 750m as it is at 250m instead of the coverage area getting to be larger than two Awesomes.

[Ultimax]

Carrioncrows, on 09 October 2014 - 06:23 PM, said:

No.

Just give them more damage per pellet.

Instant success. They already spread their damage out everywhere and suppossedly do crit (which do nothing) and extra crit damage (which is useless 90% of the time)

So taking on more exhaustive rules to try and eek out some functionality out of these weapons is just throwing good money after bad.

New players shouldn't have to read a book to understand how a weapon works.

Just give it more damage to combat the spread out nature of the weapon.

LB2-X = 3 total dmg
LB5-X = 6 total dmg
LB10-x = 12 total dmg
LB20-X = 24 total dmg

Even at those numbers, they don't compete with SRMs.



The cluster round fragments in flight, peppering the target with submunitions. The cannon is able to punch through an opponent's armor with standard rounds, and then fire cluster rounds to increase the chance of scoring a critical hit on a target's internal systems. The LB-X's flak-like 'shotgun' effect also makes it an effective and deadly weapon against AeroSpace Fighters, VTOLs and Infantry.


1) We can't swap ammo.
2) We don't fight against VTOLs.
3) We don't fight against Aerospace Fighters.
4) We don't fight against Infantry.



We're playing a game where none of the reasons you bring an LB weapon exist.

SuckyJack, on 09 October 2014 - 07:24 PM, said:

"We don't want to invalidate the AC-10 by making the LBX-10 a lighter, longer range AC."

This is a lame excuse, or we wouldn't have SHS being inferior to DHS.


I'm not sure why they feel they need to protect the AC 10 so badly, it's stats aren't the greatest and no one will complain if we suddenly got a better AC 10.

[El Bandito]

Gattsus, on 09 October 2014 - 06:11 PM, said:

While walking back home I had a thought on the lack of usefulness of the LB-X/cLB-X, compared to pin point damage weapons like the AC or UAC.

Therefore, I thought it might be cool/fun if the LB weapons do either: jam enemy weapons or destroy enemy components without the need of stripping the armor before. This would have a crit chance with an X percentage that maybe could be flat, proportional or inversely proportional to the weapon size, i.e different crit chances for cLB-2/cLB-20.

I know destroying components without stripping the armor it's a bit harsh, but maybe if it's only jamming, it would be a great way of adding a different flavour to the weapon.

Let me know your thoughts,

Let LBX rounds destroy missiles. Like the Trophy Active Protection System.

Edited by El Bandito, 09 October 2014 - 07:39 PM.

[Carrioncrows]

Ultimatum X, on 09 October 2014 - 07:29 PM, said:

Even at those numbers, they don't compete with SRMs.



The cluster round fragments in flight, peppering the target with submunitions. The cannon is able to punch through an opponent's armor with standard rounds, and then fire cluster rounds to increase the chance of scoring a critical hit on a target's internal systems. The LB-X's flak-like 'shotgun' effect also makes it an effective and deadly weapon against AeroSpace Fighters, VTOLs and Infantry.


1) We can't swap ammo.
2) We don't fight against VTOLs.
3) We don't fight against Aerospace Fighters.
4) We don't fight against Infantry.



We're playing a game where none of the reasons you bring an LB weapon exist.




This is a lame excuse, or we wouldn't have SHS being inferior to DHS.


I'm not sure why they feel they need to protect the AC 10 so badly, it's stats aren't the greatest and no one will complain if we suddenly got a better AC 10.

As much as I hate to admit it.

This isn't battletech, it's MWO

Meta is king.
Damage trumps nonsense crit mumbo jumbo
and the easy answer is ALWAYS better than long the complicated ones.

The damage buff is the easiest and most effective way to go. The extra damage is enough to make the weapons worth taking and allows them to shine as a brawling weapons where you get better damage for being closer. Who wants to be forced to get close range to do the same damage the regular AC's can do at range? No one.

So yeah extra damage is the Huckleberry.

[FupDup]

Carrioncrows, on 09 October 2014 - 07:41 PM, said:

As much as I hate to admit it.

This isn't battletech, it's MWO

Meta is king.
Damage trumps nonsense crit mumbo jumbo
and the easy answer is ALWAYS better than long the complicated ones.

The damage buff is the easiest and most effective way to go. The extra damage is enough to make the weapons worth taking and allows them to shine as a brawling weapons where you get better damage for being closer. Who wants to be forced to get close range to do the same damage the regular AC's can do at range? No one.

So yeah extra damage is the Huckleberry.

Also note that a damage increase would indirectly improve the weapon's critting ability, since the crit multiplier takes the base damage...

[Carrioncrows]

FupDup, on 09 October 2014 - 07:50 PM, said:

Also note that a damage increase would indirectly improve the weapon's critting ability, since the crit multiplier takes the base damage...

That is an excellent point.

...but one that's so minor that it might as well be non-existent. I find the whole crit % and extra crit damage to be about as useful as heat damage from a flamer. Like ...technically it helps....but...

heh.

But still an excellent point.

[Asmudius Heng]

Good, for the critting ability to be worth it, the damage needs to be somewhat decent.

It will only be majorly effective at point blank range when you can pump all or nearly all pellets into an open location.

Thats cool if we are aiming for a giant mech shotgun.

As for the AC10 being made worse by comparison ... that weapon sucks anyway and probably needs a buff of some kind

[Xarian]

Flat bonus damage against internals would also work.

Arguing that the weapon is should be bad because it was designed to take out aircraft/infantry/etc is unhelpful and utterly irrelevant.

Edited by Xarian, 09 October 2014 - 10:14 PM.