20 replies to this topic

[Ultimax]

I wanted to see how all of the lasers & pulse lasers compared using the new numbers from today's scheduled patch (or at least the November roadmap).

I gave each one a simple efficiency score based on 2 damage per 1 point of heat (=100% efficient, using SLAS/CERSLAS as the standard).

Why did I bother doing this when we have smurfy's which is 1000x better? Boredom.



https://docs.google....dit?usp=sharing

Edited by Ultimatum X, 04 November 2014 - 10:44 AM.

[Remarius]

An I missing something or are you forgetting range?

[Bishop Steiner]

Ultimatum X, on 04 November 2014 - 08:50 AM, said:

I wanted to see how all of the lasers & pulse lasers compared using the new numbers from today's scheduled patch (or at least the November roadmap).

I gave each one a simple efficiency score based on 2 damage per 1 point of heat (=100% efficient, using SLAS/CERSLAS as the standard).

Why did I bother doing this when we have smurfy's which is 1000x better? Boredom.



https://docs.google....dit?usp=sharing

I wonder what peoples REAL efficiency is, as in how much damage on target? Total damage by total shots taken, etc.

[FupDup]

This is a funny result, because it suggests the dawn of a new Small Pulse Laser meta.

It also indicates that the IS ERLL apparently sucks, even though it's often regarded as the best IS energy available (if not one of the overall best energy).

[Remarius]

FupDup, on 04 November 2014 - 08:55 AM, said:

This is a funny result, because it suggests the dawn of a new Small Pulse Laser meta.

It also indicates that the IS ERLL apparently sucks, even though it's often regarded as the best IS energy available (if not one of the overall best energy).

If you deliberately discount its main advantage.... RANGE....

[FupDup]

Remarius, on 04 November 2014 - 08:59 AM, said:

If you deliberately discount its main advantage.... RANGE....

Speaking of which, the chart in the OP forgot to list ranges.


EDIT: Aaaand I scrolled up and saw that you already brought that up. :\

Edited by FupDup, 04 November 2014 - 09:00 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Weight.
Crits.
Damage.
Heat.
Range.

And most overlooked?

Beam Duration.

All 6 factors must be balanced to judge efficiency. For instance, IS Pulse lasers have long done good damage, with great beam durations. Heat kinda meh. But the killer has always been the lack of range, for the extreme weight tax. Solution? Leave the range as is, but lower heat/increase damage, otherwise, why take 1 MPL when you can take 2 ML?

The Killer to many Clan Lasers is the ridiculously long beam durations, even on Pulse Lasers, despite still paying the massive tonnage tax. But because the range is good this largely negates the issue, though they still require higher damage to heat ratio to justify taking over the much farther reaching, lighter weight, ER versions.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 04 November 2014 - 09:04 AM.

[DONTOR]

I'm down with some 5 damage CERSLs on my Murder Ferrets, atleast then I can pack more missles, might be worth a look.

[Ultimax]

Remarius, on 04 November 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

An I missing something or are you forgetting range?

I didn't forget it, I just wasnt THAT bored.

I kid, I kid.

I figured we were all well aware of the ranges, I made this chart for myself really and figured why not share?

So the goal was primarily to compare the dmg for heat.

Bishop Steiner, on 04 November 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

I wonder what peoples REAL efficiency is, as in how much damage on target? Total damage by total shots taken, etc.

The million CBill question!

Bishop Steiner, on 04 November 2014 - 09:03 AM, said:

And most overlooked?

Beam Duration.

Actually all beam durations are listed under "DUR".


All of the factors you listed are definitely critical to fully evaluating a weapon, my goal was primarily looking at heat for damage based on what range you specialize.

I'll add range over lunch though.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 04 November 2014 - 09:14 AM.

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 November 2014 - 09:03 AM, said:

Weight.
Crits.
Damage.
Heat.
Range.

And most overlooked?

Beam Duration.

All 6 factors must be balanced to judge efficiency. For instance, IS Pulse lasers have long done good damage, with great beam durations. Heat kinda meh. But the killer has always been the lack of range, for the extreme weight tax. Solution? Leave the range as is, but lower heat/increase damage, otherwise, why take 1 MPL when you can take 2 ML?

The Killer to many Clan Lasers is the ridiculously long beam durations, even on Pulse Lasers, despite still paying the massive tonnage tax. But because the range is good this largely negates the issue, though they still require higher damage to heat ratio to justify taking over the much farther reaching, lighter weight, ER versions.

Personally, I find that the only Clan laser that is truly gimped by long durations is the CERLL. The rest are fine, at least by my fuddy duddy standards. And later today, that CERLL will be restored back to 1.5 second duration, which should hopefully revive its usage outside of fringe builds. My Badder will certainly be very pleased about it...

[Angel of Annihilation]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 November 2014 - 09:03 AM, said:

Weight.
Crits.
Damage.
Heat.
Range.

And most overlooked?

Beam Duration.

All 6 factors must be balanced to judge efficiency. For instance, IS Pulse lasers have long done good damage, with great beam durations. Heat kinda meh. But the killer has always been the lack of range, for the extreme weight tax. Solution? Leave the range as is, but lower heat/increase damage, otherwise, why take 1 MPL when you can take 2 ML?

The Killer to many Clan Lasers is the ridiculously long beam durations, even on Pulse Lasers, despite still paying the massive tonnage tax. But because the range is good this largely negates the issue, though they still require higher damage to heat ratio to justify taking over the much farther reaching, lighter weight, ER versions.

Also don't forget that many of these factors are subjective. For example, some people are able to hold targets with beams better than others so they might very well get better results out of the longer duration beams than others. Also if your playstyle always finds you at the frontlines, range might not have all that much value.

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 04 November 2014 - 09:15 AM, said:

Personally, I find that the only Clan laser that is truly gimped by long durations is the CERLL. The rest are fine, at least by my fuddy duddy standards. And later today, that CERLL will be restored back to 1.5 second duration, which should hopefully revive its usage outside of fringe builds. My Badder will certainly be very pleased about it...

Eh, the C-MPL and C-LPL were definitely hurt pretty bad by the last couple heat spikes. I remember when the Clans launched in June, the Nova-S was actually pretty decent bone stock. Then it got so you basically could not maintain any volume of fire with a mere 6 C-MPL. And that was trading the MG and AMS for extra DHS.

I would be fine with C-Pulse being largely rolled back to their introductory stats, especially on heat. But when you compare their duration to the IS versions? Then their range and weight and durations to their C-cousins? They are still far from ideal trade offs. And since the last change to the TW, I still haven't gotten my build sorted to cover the changes. And it's funny, I was probably the only guy NOT abusing the JJ and Missiles on the S torso..... I just used the ones so I could run 3 MG and an MPL in the torso to augment my LPL and MPL in each arm.

I miss that build.

[Ultimax]

FupDup, on 04 November 2014 - 09:15 AM, said:

Personally, I find that the only Clan laser that is truly gimped by long durations is the CERLL.

Yes, and after today the CERMLAS will be lower than it's ever been at 1.15 and the CLPL will be at 1.12!

So these will both be shorter duration than IS ERLLAS.


However, many IS mechs are becoming specialists - and my gut tells me many specialists will:

> Have even shorter beam durations
> Will have faster CD and therefore higher DPS (possibly worse HPS, depending on whether or not they recieve a -heat gen perk).
> Even more efficient heat per damage, if they gain -heat gen perks.
> Will meet or exceed range vs. range against clans.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 04 November 2014 - 09:23 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Viktor Drake, on 04 November 2014 - 09:20 AM, said:

Also don't forget that many of these factors are subjective. For example, some people are able to hold targets with beams better than others so they might very well get better results out of the longer duration beams than others. Also if your playstyle always finds you at the frontlines, range might not have all that much value.

you can't really be terribly subjective in balancing though, you have to balance largely in a void, because it has to be changes that work for the game as a whole, not a select group of players, a lesson missed by Russ when he listened purely to the comp crowd on weapon quirks. I guess those mechs, subjectively, are all much better, in 1-2 builds competitively. A shame that the chassis as a whole are still relatively worthless outside those 1-2 builds.

[stjobe]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 November 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

I wonder what peoples REAL efficiency is, as in how much damage on target? Total damage by total shots taken, etc.

I did that math about a year ago; about 45% for lasers, 50 for ballistics.

[RazorbeastFXK3]

For the increased heat and shortened range of the pulse lasers even if the pulse lasers dealt less damage than the regular lasers I'd still go for the pulse 'cause you don't have to hold them onto the target as long as you do with the regular lasers to deal full damage.

I guess I'm just too sloppy of a mechwarrior as I'm having difficulty just using PPC at long ranges..

But with the ER Large Lasers you can reach out and scratch someone with minimal risk of retaliation from your target. As for the small lasers and pulse small lasers, since the duration of the pulse is shorter, they are able to be executed faster instead of waiting for the full duration of the small laser too.

[kapusta11]

Bishop Steiner, on 04 November 2014 - 08:54 AM, said:

I wonder what peoples REAL efficiency is, as in how much damage on target? Total damage by total shots taken, etc.

Check your stats. Effectiveness = 100*(Accuracy/100)*(Damage Done/[Weapon's Base Damage*Number of Hits])

Mine is 100*0.9*0.66 = 60% damage "on target" with ML/CERML, 65% with LL/CLPL and 72% with LPL.

Edited by kapusta11, 04 November 2014 - 09:44 AM.

[SweetJackal]

How efficient are my Lasers?~
I want to mount Blazers!~
They are wind breakers!~
We are not Mech Shakers!~

My Lasers go Pew Pew!~
They vaporize the dew!~
The morning sun is bright!~
BUT I HAVE MORE LIGHT!~

[Ultimax]

Edited to add, by popular demand, ranges!

Now, a great mystery has been solved, like a fog lifted from our eyes.


I'm not sure what the small pulse laser ranges (plural) will be, because they were incorrect in the Nov Road Map IIRC.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Well, I notice my heat eff changed on boht my 4x LPL and 4x CERPPC Warhawks...it went from 1.43 and 1.22 down to 1.15 and 1.09. I know the LPL got increase by 1 heat, but why such the drastic change and why the PPC eff drop? CERPPC didnt change at all this patch did it? Or is the heat eff number now including with Ghost heat or something?


As for how the heat change on the 4x LPL, I can duo fire them 6 times instead of 9 lol....so, its a moderately noticeable change, but nothing to bad.