122 replies to this topic

[mad kat]

Wintersdark, on 13 January 2015 - 06:59 AM, said:

See, there's so much of this. People say these things, but it's nothing but fluff. Care to specify exactly what situation the LBX is better in, and exactly why? With real numbers, as opposed to wishes and ignorance?

Every single person supporting the LBX here, every single one, hasn't had any hard evidence to support it. Not any. Just misunderstanding and ignorance.

Technically, it's situational, sure. It's marginally better inside 100m, against targets with no armor there. That's a very specific situation, and it's substantially worse everywhere else.

Saying someone is ignorant who clearly has a preference (Theres the key word) for the shotgun isnt going to get you very far in an argument.

I don't need numbers to reinforce a prefrence but only what im comfortable with. Now i forgive your 'ignorance' of a personal opinion.

Edited by mad kat, 13 January 2015 - 07:37 AM.

[Wintersdark]

mad kat, on 13 January 2015 - 07:20 AM, said:

Saying someone is ignorant who clearly has a preference (Theres the key word) for the shotgun isnt going to get you very far in an argument.

I don't need numbers to reinforce a prefrence but only what im comfortable with. Now i forgive your 'ignorance' of a personal opinion.

You're absolutely entitled to your opinion, but that doesn't make your opinion right.

You personally may not need numbers to reinforce your postion - that's pretty common, really, and it's form of confirmation bias. You like them, and want them to be better, so you tend to remember the times when it works well and other weapons don't.

That's why numbers are important in a discussion like this - it removes anecdotal stories from the discussion, as they're inherently unreliable. Numbers aren't.

As I said above as well:

Wintersdark, on 13 January 2015 - 07:16 AM, said:

With that said, as I've mentioned several other times in this thread: Use what makes you happy. It's a game, and it's meant to be fun. The LBX is terrible compared to a regular AC, but it's still pushing 10 damage at your opponents, even if much of that damage is wasted. But if you really like using it, use it.

Just don't kid yourself about how it works.

I don't think you should stop using it. But this thread poses a question: LB-10-X vs. AC-10, which is better?

It's not "Which do you like using more?" That's an entirely different question. I actually love using the LBX, to be honest, it looks and sounds awesome.

But no, it's "Which is better?"

The AC10 is an objectively, measurably better weapon, by a large margin.

I admit, I'm a bit irritated, because there's no discussion here. Ignorance is the right word, when the only argument against my posts is "I like it more" (Valid opinion, but not an argument as it's irrelevant to the topic) or "It's better at <this fuzzy situation>" - without any factual information supporting that argument and generally a gross display of ignorance as to how the weapon and crits work.

Why do I bother? To be honest, because I want to educate people. I don't want people to stop using them (that would be pretty two faced, as I use them myself sometimes), I just want to reduce the number of newer and less experienced players being told flat out incorrect information then passing it on to others, and for people to make educated decisions when they do use them.

Edited by Wintersdark, 13 January 2015 - 08:00 AM.

[mad kat]

Ok then a hard figure for you. I use lb-10x more than the ac10. Cold hard fact and numerically quantifiable as to why in my opinion the lb-10x is the better weapon.

But then i like brawling and any weapon that removes my foes weapons and components quicker once a few holes have inevitably appeared makes the shotgun more useful to my play style. That last word is the clincher is what suits your play style the best that subjectively makes it a superior weapon.

Ultimately neither weapon is better than the other as they both do different jobs, allbiet slightly.

[Punk Oblivion]

Wintersdark, on 13 January 2015 - 01:03 AM, said:

Also: with an average of 5.59 damage per AC10 round, you're firing at targets way to far away.

That was the average per SHOT during an overall match. Not per hit. I did not figure in accuracy. so with accuracy figured in:

LBX10= 6.74 damage per HIT
AC10= 9.99damage per HIT

Wintersdark, on 13 January 2015 - 07:06 AM, said:

It's a bad build. People think it's a good build because it gets large damage numbers, but it only gets large damage numbers because it's grossly inefficient and requires far more damage done to disable a target. An AC20 is flat out better and substantially lighter, and smaller, as is a pair of AC5's (not an ideal loadout mind you, but still better than 2xLBX10). Putting 20 damage in one spot is vastly better than 20 damage splattered all over your target, even if you're dropping those 20 damage splatters faster. And the AC20's effective range is still significantly longer than the LBX's which are utterly useless at 300m, where the AC20 is still doing nearly 20 damage to what you want to hit.

I actually like using 2-UAC5's with 3 ASRM6's in my D-DC.

Also, sadly, I have changed my Ilya from 3 LBX10's to 3-UAC5's with two ML's. I just am having a hard time getting consistent damage with 3-LBX10's recently :-/

[Punk Oblivion]

mad kat, on 13 January 2015 - 08:15 AM, said:

Ok then a hard figure for you. I use lb-10x more than the ac10. Cold hard fact and numerically quantifiable as to why in my opinion the lb-10x is the better weapon.

The game tracks your weapon stats. It is easy enough to pull your numbers to compare the two weapons.

(weapon damage) / (shots fired) = damage per shot, this factors in misses to overall efficiency of the weapon

(weapon damage) / (shots hit) = damage per shot landed. This only factors in hits, this includes extra damage for crits.

Personally I like the first one better as it gives you an overall calculation of your personal efficiency with the weapon, including all the misses you have.

[Voivode]

Using the first formula from Punk Oblivion I have slightly higher damage per shot fired with the LB10X.

This is likely due to the fact that I'm much more willing to take potshots on the move or shots past the full damage range with the AC10 than I am with the LB10X. I approach using the two with a very different mentality.

Honestly, I use the AC10 much more often but there are some builds I prefer the LB10X on. For a short range brawler the extra ton and lower heat the LB10X provide can make a difference. I'd much rather pair an LB10X with SRMs than an AC10 for the simple fact that they deal damage in the same way (cone of fire/spread) so they will support each other well. Two PPCs and LB10X just isn't going to work well as the weapons don't complement each other. At that point the extra ton is less meaningful than having a ballistic that deals damage the same way the PPCs do.

Edited by Voivode, 13 January 2015 - 12:00 PM.

[Punk Oblivion]

Voivode, on 13 January 2015 - 11:49 AM, said:

Using the first formula from Punk Oblivion I have slightly higher damage per shot fired with the LB10X.

This is likely due to the fact that I'm much more willing to take potshots on the move or shots past the full damage range with the AC10 than I am with the LB10X. I approach using the two with a very different mentality.

Honestly, I use the AC10 much more often but there are some builds I prefer the LB10X on. For a short range brawler the extra ton and lower heat the LB10X provide can make a difference. I'd much rather pair an LB10X with SRMs than an AC10 for the simple fact that they deal damage in the same way (cone of fire/spread) so they will support each other well. Two PPCs and LB10X just isn't going to work well as the weapons don't complement each other. At that point the extra ton is less meaningful than having a ballistic that deals damage the same way the PPCs do.

Funny, I am totally opposite in my thinking haha. Firstly I am way more likely to take pot-shots with the LBX, since if my aim is off, I may still do SOME damage. where a pot-shot with an AC10 means if I miss, thats 0 damage.

Also I tend to pair cone with pin-point. So it is a good mix. So I will pair SRM's with an AC10. And I will pair an LBX with a PPC.

Edited by Punk Oblivion, 13 January 2015 - 12:14 PM.

[mad kat]

Punk Oblivion, on 13 January 2015 - 10:29 AM, said:

The game tracks your weapon stats. It is easy enough to pull your numbers to compare the two weapons.

(weapon damage) / (shots fired) = damage per shot, this factors in misses to overall efficiency of the weapon

(weapon damage) / (shots hit) = damage per shot landed. This only factors in hits, this includes extra damage for crits.

Personally I like the first one better as it gives you an overall calculation of your personal efficiency with the weapon, including all the misses you have.

If you want numbers i have (for the first ratio).

Lb-10x=5.15
Ac10=5.9

But I have fired the shotgun twice as much so you could argue stats wise it's the inferior weapon but that's the whole point of the ratio.

[Voivode]

Punk Oblivion, on 13 January 2015 - 12:10 PM, said:

Funny, I am totally opposite in my thinking haha. Firstly I am way more likely to take pot-shots with the LBX, since if my aim is off, I may still do SOME damage. where a pot-shot with an AC10 means if I miss, thats 0 damage.

Also I tend to pair cone with pin-point. So it is a good mix. So I will pair SRM's with an AC10. And I will pair an LBX with a PPC.

WIth a brawler I take the mentality my torso twisting actuators should be running non-stop. I like the SRM + LB10X combo because that spread damage allows me to fudge my aim a bit and not really have to stop torso twisting while I blast the enemy. With an AC10, I'd rather take that half second to aim and make sure I hit the right component, but that also gives the other guy a chance to aim at a specific component on my mech.

[Tim East]

Wintersdark, on 13 January 2015 - 01:03 AM, said:

Also: with an average of 5.59 damage per AC10 round, you're firing at targets way to far away.

But his figures were counting miss-oh wait.

Punk Oblivion, on 13 January 2015 - 10:17 AM, said:

That was the average per SHOT during an overall match. Not per hit. I did not figure in accuracy. so with accuracy figured in:
LBX10= 6.74 damage per HIT
AC10= 9.99damage per HIT

Beat me to it.

Well, my other point is that if you're going to take such a hostile tone while using math as a basis for your argument, it wouldn't hurt to have it right. I agree that the AC10 is objectively better as a weapon assuming you can hit what you aim at with it. I also use the LB10X a little over four times as much, because I flat-out like it better. You're not going to convince people who use it regularly to stop; people do what they want. It's part of being human. On the other hand, if your goal is to convince newbies not to use it, you really ought to present the facts (as you have done) and a better argument about why PPD>spread damage than "the pros do it." It's not just about being right, it's about how you say it.

Basically, because traditional AC10s do all of their damage immediately to a single hit location of the enemy, they are what is known as PPFLD, or pin-point front-loaded damage weapons. PPFLD weapons are widely regarded as superior to spread FLD weapons, and for good reason. Applying all your damage to a single location greatly increases the chances of penetrating armor in said location, doing critical damage to a critical item therein, or even outright destroying the entire location, with the possible result of disabling the enemy mech. By spreading the damage across multiple components, spread weapons, even spread FLD weapons like SRMs and LB autocannons tend to lead to a greater time to kill, or TTK by virtue of allowing an enemy to make greater use of its armor before dying. The exception to this is when the enemy has a section which has been stripped of armor but not destroyed adjacent to components that have not been stripped of armor, AND (not or) you do not have the accuracy (gunnery skill, if you will) to reliably strike that component in the heat of battle with a PP weapon. In such an event, a spread FLD weapon such as the LB or SRMs can come really handy for finishing off a mostly-broken thing that moves fast. Against fully armored targets, they aren't as good since you will take much longer to drill a hole through armor, and if you have the accuracy to hit any component on an opponent you want, they're completely superfluous in comparison to proper PPFLD weapons.

Usually, this is the part where I talk about lasers and DOT weapons, but that's a bit outside the scope of a comparison between LB vs AC. Suffice to say, the skill of the user plays a large part in how much utility you will gain from any given weapon, and it is always situational even then.

tl;dr: AC10 is better in far more circumstances LB10 is.

Your aim is not great and target is wounded: LBX10.
Your aim is great and target status is irrelevant: AC10
Your aim is not great but target is still armored: AC10
Your aim is irrelevant and target is almost dead (multiple armor-stripped parts adjacent to one another) :Pretty much doesn't matter.

At least it isn't flamers. Those things aren't good in any circumstance that I've been able to find.

[Wintersdark]

Tim East, on 13 January 2015 - 01:04 PM, said:

But his figures were counting miss-oh wait.

Beat me to it.

yeah, I didn't realise he was using fired, not hits. Anyways, there was no hostility in my post to Punk, and I hope he didn't read any into it.

Quote

Well, my other point is that if you're going to take such a hostile tone while using math as a basis for your argument, it wouldn't hurt to have it right.

aside from misunderstanding Punk's average damage ratio, where have I been wrong?

Quote

I agree that the AC10 is objectively better as a weapon assuming you can hit what you aim at with it. I also use the LB10X a little over four times as much, because I flat-out like it better. You're not going to convince people who use it regularly to stop; people do what they want. It's part of being human. On the other hand, if your goal is to convince newbies not to use it, you really ought to present the facts (as you have done) and a better argument about why PPD&gt;spread damage than &quot;the pros do it.&quot; It's not just about being right, it's about how you say it.

This is fair.

In my defense, I never used "the pros do it" as an arguement, at least never beyond a addendum in the form of "<why you want ppfld>, there's a reason you never see them at higher levels of play".

Now, I didn't go into as exhaustive of detail here as you do quite well, because I felt I explained the individual "sub reasons" if you will well enough. I was more arguing for the AC10 in the comparison in direct competition with the LBX's purported strengths (that is, crits etc) rather than simply "AC10 us better because PPFLD" (Not an invalid argument but not one that addresses how the AC10 is better at what the LBX is purportedly good at.)

Quote

tl;dr: AC10 is better in far more circumstances LB10 is.

Your aim is not great and target is wounded: LBX10.
Your aim is great and target status is irrelevant: AC10
Your aim is not great but target is still armored: AC10
Your aim is irrelevant and target is almost dead (multiple armor-stripped parts adjacent to one another) :Pretty much doesn't matter.

This is covered in your comment immediately above, but isn't obvious: The ranges at which your aim matters really impact this. Unless you've go atrociously bad aim, its pretty hard to miss at all at the ranges in which an LBX does anything useful at all. You don't need "great aim" in those cases. If you're struggling to hit targets at 200m even with zoom ballistics are not a good weapon for you at all.

Quote

At least it isn't flamers. Those things aren't good in any circumstance that I've been able to find.

Yeah. As I've repeatedly said, people shouldn't stop using LBX's, they can work and thanks to Elo (it includes but isn't limited to pilot skill) even if you run wholly bad builds you'll still end up doing reasonably with them.

But flamers hurt the user more than the target. They're the only weapon where in most cases using them against a target can leave you actually worse odd.

[terrycloth]

AC10 - 1945 damage out of 391 shots, so ~4.9?
LB10X -11147 out of 2017 shots, so ~ 5.5

LB10X wins even if you ignore its set mechanical advantages (lower weight and heat) over the AC10.

[Wintersdark]

Punk Oblivion, on 13 January 2015 - 10:17 AM, said:

That was the average per SHOT during an overall match. Not per hit. I did not figure in accuracy. so with accuracy figured in:

LBX10= 6.74 damage per HIT
AC10= 9.99damage per HIT

Whoops, my bad, sorry! I'm so used to people rating their weapons by damage/hits, I misread that. Given that... 9.99 is crazy good per hit.

Quote

I actually like using 2-UAC5's with 3 ASRM6's in my D-DC.

Also, sadly, I have changed my Ilya from 3 LBX10's to 3-UAC5's with two ML's. I just am having a hard time getting consistent damage with 3-LBX10's recently :-/

2 UAC5's can be quite effective, pushing very high pinpoint DPS when you want it in good sized chunks, and maintaining good ROF at range when you want to discourage people.

LBX Ilyas are awesome fun but require extremely short range to achieve anything. They used to be better in the days when Forest Colony was a big map and River City was pretty normal, but today there's a lot of longer range maps where the reality is most of the time you'll be firing at ranges where you're just lightly sandblasting mechs and they don't even need to twist.

It does have an awesome "BOOM" though

[kenyzed]

I liked reading the back and forth between Tim East and Wintersdark, I feel like it helped me understand the tone and intention of your posts slightly better. So I have a question: Can you delineate specifically why you think the lesser weight of the LBX doesn't add appreciably to the 'goodness' of the weapon?

If you are using two LBX10s versus 2 AC10s, I feel like 2 tons can go a long way in your build.

Edited by kenyzed, 13 January 2015 - 01:55 PM.

[Nightshade24]

Wintersdark, on 13 January 2015 - 07:06 AM, said:

It's a bad build. People think it's a good build because it gets large damage numbers, but it only gets large damage numbers because it's grossly inefficient and requires far more damage done to disable a target. An AC20 is flat out better and substantially lighter, and smaller, as is a pair of AC5's (not an ideal loadout mind you, but still better than 2xLBX10). Putting 20 damage in one spot is vastly better than 20 damage splattered all over your target, even if you're dropping those 20 damage splatters faster. And the AC20's effective range is still significantly longer than the LBX's which are utterly useless at 300m, where the AC20 is still doing nearly 20 damage to what you want to hit.

Psssst.
pst.

hey buddy.

Pssssssst.

There is more to this game then simple kills, damage, and efficiency kills.

[Wintersdark]

kenyzed, on 13 January 2015 - 01:55 PM, said:

I liked reading the back and forth between Tim East and Wintersdark, I feel like it helped me understand the tone and intention of your posts slightly better. So I have a question: Can you delineate specifically why you think the lesser weight of the LBX doesn't add appreciably to the 'goodness' of the weapon?

If you are using two LBX10s versus 2 AC10s, I feel like 2 tons can go a long way in your build.

Weight matters, but in this case it's an issue of opportunity cost, and to have that discussion you'd have to discuss specific builds rather than the two weapons.

The problem is, an AC5 is a better weapon than an LBX10, too. It's damage:heat ratio is much better, it's still doing pinpoint damage, it's dealing 5 point crits. Much better range, refire rate, virtually heat free; and it's much lighter. The discussion gets very complicated here however.

Ultimately, the AC10 is a pretty poor autocannon choice except in conjunction with PPC's which have very similar projectile properties (allowing easy pairing), so once you start talking builds then use of the LBX or AC10 at all comes into question.

[Wintersdark]

Nightshade24, on 13 January 2015 - 02:03 PM, said:

Psssst.
pst.

hey buddy.

Pssssssst.

There is more to this game then simple kills, damage, and efficiency kills.

There's also Just Having Fun. I've repeatedly touched on that, and won't repeat it again - it's twice on this page alone.

But simple kills and damage done are terrible metrics for performance, and that's actually a fairly important part of my argument overall. Getting more damage done doesn't mean you did better, and kills are mostly irrelevant in a team PvP game with high TTK.

What DOES matter, in terms of winning battles, is killing or crippling mechs as quickly. To a lesser extent, there's suppression but other weapons do that a lot better. If people know you're firing an LBX they'll often no be suppressed because they understand unless you're extremely close it's not going to seriously hurt them. An AC5 or even an AC2 would do the job better at lower opportunity cost.

[Michael Abt]

The LBX10 has its strengths, and if you adjust your playstyle accordingly it is possible to yield great results with it. Too many players are theocrafting too much though, and/or often lack the necessary fantasy what it takes to make unusual things work.

[Punk Oblivion]

Wintersdark, on 13 January 2015 - 02:11 PM, said:

The problem is, an AC5 is a better weapon than an LBX10, too. It's damage:heat ratio is much better, it's still doing pinpoint damage, it's dealing 5 point crits. Much better range, refire rate, virtually heat free; and it's much lighter. The discussion gets very complicated here however.

I agree! I think all the AC's need to be re-worked to some extent. AC5/UAC5 are low heat weapons with good refire rate. And AC20's have good front-end damage with good refire rate (per damage)

I think all the AC's should be brought in line with either the AC5 or AC20. Most likely the AC5, otherwise the smaller AC's will be OP haha.

AC2 is way too hot and a bit too heavy. And ghost heat is the final nail in the coffin for that weapon.

The AC10 is ok. It is inferior to the AC20, but I typically will bring an AC10 over a 20 because of my meh aiming ability haha.

The LBX10 needs a re-work. Either a much faster fire rate, or a flat damage boost to unarmored sections.

[terrycloth]

I like AC20s. I like AC5s. I can't hit anything with AC10s at ranges where I shouldn't just be using an AC20. If I don't have room for an AC20, those are the ranges where an LBX works fine. At longer ranges... I hit a lot more with the LBX because its projectile is faster. They're usually paired with damage-spreading SRMs anyway. That's why I ever use it.

I don't see any reason to ever use an AC10. 10 pinpoint just isn't enough pinpoint to be really dangerous. I tried the AC10 + PPC builds and was really, really bad with them -- ERLL + UAC5 worked better. But I guess that's how you put together enough pinpoint for the pinpoint to matter.

Saying it's a better brawling weapon, though? It's a meh brawling weapon, just like PPCs (or AC5s for that matter).