18 replies to this topic

[MechLord71]

I hope PGI seriously considers changing the LBX-10 quirk to a standard AC-5 quirk for the Enforcer 5D. I think the 5P and 4R are fine as is, but the 5D needs a tweak in my opinion. I think the LBX to AC-5 quirk swap would preserve the differences between chassis, but improve the 5D. You can modify the numbers a bit if needed (not asking for a mini-daka dragon), but please no LBX-10 and bring on the AC-5.

Thanks!

[Macksheen]

Frankly, everyone else I've talked to has been good w/ the 5D ... it's the P that's so horrid.

I run mine w/ an LBX + 2xERLL + 1 ML. I wouldn't mind if it had additional ERLL quirks - that would track w/ the lore as well.

Edited by Macksheen, 21 February 2015 - 12:10 PM.

[Cabusha]

I switched my 5D to PPC+AC10 because the LBX sucks.

The 5P, just add endo and more ammo for the UAC5s, drop the useless extra heatsinks. Fun fun fun!

[Wintersdark]

If your going to go LBX, it needs much better LBX quirks than it has, because the LBX is far inferior to a regular AC10 (as has been long addressed, with hard math).... And the AC10 is still a fairly mediocre AC in the first place.

Either change from LBX, or increase the LBX buffs. Right now, there's little reason to use a 5D vs. a CN9-D, which is comparable but has much better buffs.

[Voq]

The LBX really isn't useful with the current quirks.
If it was a backup weapon to some heavier weapons, then fine. But as it is the quirks for it are weak, and it's weak to begin with.

I agree with AC5s. It does have 2 ACs in one arm. That makes the most sense.

[Macksheen]

Voq, on 21 February 2015 - 08:52 PM, said:

The LBX really isn't useful with the current quirks.
If it was a backup weapon to some heavier weapons, then fine. But as it is the quirks for it are weak, and it's weak to begin with.

I agree with AC5s. It does have 2 ACs in one arm. That makes the most sense.

Yeah, but the hardpoints are actually scaled based on the stock weapon, whatever that is. If it had an AC5 in that arm, it'd only come with one ballistic - if it was a 20 or gauss, it'd have 3 ballistic hardpoints.

And yes, I'm saying the strength of that one is the energy hard points. That's what you focus on. Heck, how many folks are running 3xLL on the other?

[Voq]

Macksheen, on 21 February 2015 - 09:08 PM, said:

Yeah, but the hardpoints are actually scaled based on the stock weapon, whatever that is. If it had an AC5 in that arm, it'd only come with one ballistic - if it was a 20 or gauss, it'd have 3 ballistic hardpoints.

And yes, I'm saying the strength of that one is the energy hard points. That's what you focus on. Heck, how many folks are running 3xLL on the other?

I've never heard of this scaling thing... I thought it was always a "lore" type thing...
I can't speak for every mech, but I can certainly think of quite a few that don't follow the mold you're describing (Protector, for instance).

[N a p e s]

As much as I failed to have much success with the LBX on the 5D, having that weapon quirked fits with its stock loadout and that's how (IMO) it should work. Now were they to give it quirks in the same range as the CN9-D (40% total cooldown buff) I'd be fine with it. People who would want to use that weapon get an auto-shotgun and anyone else gets a 20% buff to any other ballistic.

[Macksheen]

Voq, on 21 February 2015 - 09:17 PM, said:

I've never heard of this scaling thing... I thought it was always a "lore" type thing...
I can't speak for every mech, but I can certainly think of quite a few that don't follow the mold you're describing (Protector, for instance).

Protector EXACTLY follows this.

HBK-4G ... 3 ballistic spots ... comes with an AC20 ... Protector comes with ... a Gauss ... yet 2 ballistic ... maybe I mis-spoke and a Gauss translates to 2 ballistic often.

It's not a hard-fast rule, but if you look at many of the mechs under that lens, things make sense. The question of "Why quirk an AC20 when it has 3 ballistic hard points" ... is answered by "Because the mech mounts and AC20 at at one point in time PGI translated most of those mechs that have an AC20 by default into 3 ballistic hard points".

Why does the grid iron come with 2? Gauss. Can you mount 2 Gauss? No, they just historically have scaled ballistics that way.

Edited by Macksheen, 21 February 2015 - 09:40 PM.

[Punk Oblivion]

I am doing OK with the 5D running an LBX10 + 3ML. I would like to see them bring up the quirks to match the Cent-D.
OR they could keep the quirks the same, but change them into AC10 quirks O.o

Macksheen, on 21 February 2015 - 12:09 PM, said:

Frankly, everyone else I've talked to has been good w/ the 5D ... it's the P that's so horrid.

I agree! I was SO VERY EXCITED for the Enforcer-P. But once I got my hands on it, I just could not find anything that would run consistently good on it. 2xUAC5 works sometimes, Gauss+ERLL works sometimes, Gauss+ERPPC works sometimes. I wanted to maybe run 4xAC2's, but it's too heavy, and even running 3xAC2, there is not enough ammo and it's too hot. There is only 1 laser hardpoint, so you can't run "insert weapons" with a 4MG back-up.

blah, either the 4P needs different quirks, or AC2's need a serious overhaul...

Edit: Currently my ENF-4P is running: XL240, 2JJ, AC10, LPL, 3MG's. This is the best build I have found for me so far.

Edited by Punk Oblivion, 22 February 2015 - 01:10 AM.

[Inflatable Fish]

how about just remove the lower arm actuator from the gun arm...

[Nightshade24]

"please, change quirk to something that suits the stock load out!"

-after PGI has did that-

"Great, you killed the mech PGI, you killed it"



Before anyone says otherwise, the "Wubverine" is a famous example of this... and I can sense the same thing happening again.

[Voq]

Nightshade24, on 22 February 2015 - 01:53 AM, said:

"please, change quirk to something that suits the stock load out!"

-after PGI has did that-

"Great, you killed the mech PGI, you killed it"



Before anyone says otherwise, the "Wubverine" is a famous example of this... and I can sense the same thing happening again.

The problem here isn't really the quirks themselves, but that they're cenetred around an ineffective weapon.
I'd be fine with the setup if the LBX worked well.

[HlynkaCG]

Nightshade24, on 22 February 2015 - 01:53 AM, said:

Before anyone says otherwise, the "Wubverine" is a famous example of this... and I can sense the same thing happening again.

The people pushing for more lore based quirks and the meta-tards are not the same people.

[N a p e s]

Voq, on 22 February 2015 - 02:51 AM, said:

The problem here isn't really the quirks themselves, but that they're cenetred around an ineffective weapon.
I'd be fine with the setup if the LBX worked well.

It certainly does point to the state of the LBX autocannon as a deeper issue.

[Punk Oblivion]

Nightshade24, on 22 February 2015 - 01:53 AM, said:

"please, change quirk to something that suits the stock load out!"

-after PGI has did that-

"Great, you killed the mech PGI, you killed it"



Before anyone says otherwise, the "Wubverine" is a famous example of this... and I can sense the same thing happening again.

I have always been in the thinking that I want more generalized quirks to bring up the effectiveness of a mech. Seems silly to have this system of "build whatever crazy thing you want!" Combined with a quirk system of "You have to use these weapons to make this mech effective!"

This goes for classes too. Lights should have more movement quirks. Mediums and heavies should have more DPS quirks. Assaults should have more structure (or even armor bonus) quirks.

Voq, on 22 February 2015 - 02:51 AM, said:

The problem here isn't really the quirks themselves, but that they're cenetred around an ineffective weapon.
I'd be fine with the setup if the LBX worked well.

Also this. LBX10 is such a fun weapon, it needs an overhaul as well to be effective.

[Zuri Prime]

The 4R seems to be the best variant of the three, with the 5D a distant second and 5P soon after that. The LBX and UAC quirks are just mediocre because one is just inferior to its one-shot counterpart and with the other presses the limits of what you can actually put on your frame. At least, that's what I'm getting from it.

[Madwill]

Airmanator, on 22 February 2015 - 01:07 PM, said:

The 4R seems to be the best variant of the three, with the 5D a distant second and 5P soon after that. The LBX and UAC quirks are just mediocre because one is just inferior to its one-shot counterpart and with the other presses the limits of what you can actually put on your frame. At least, that's what I'm getting from it.

Agreed, the 5R with both ballistic and energy quirks it is far more flexible then the other variants.

[Nightshade24]

Punk Oblivion, on 22 February 2015 - 11:38 AM, said:

I have always been in the thinking that I want more generalized quirks to bring up the effectiveness of a mech. Seems silly to have this system of "build whatever crazy thing you want!" Combined with a quirk system of "You have to use these weapons to make this mech effective!"

This goes for classes too. Lights should have more movement quirks. Mediums and heavies should have more DPS quirks. Assaults should have more structure (or even armor bonus) quirks.


Also this. LBX10 is such a fun weapon, it needs an overhaul as well to be effective.

IKR?

Like for eg we have this mech with the LBX quirk.

Let's for simplicity sake it's a 50% cooldown. LBX 10
then it gets a 30% ac 10 cooldown.
10% AC 5 cooldown, 10% AC 5 velocity, etc.


Like some half way quirks between specialised weapons and the generic ones. That way if you do not want to use a large pulse laser and want to use large laser instead or PPC instead of ER PPC you could without having that weapon feel worse then the quirked one.

(ALso I've seen huge succes with the LBX 10 quirk on the enforcer, I wish I had that mech but I blew all my money on wave III clans.)

HlynkaCG, on 22 February 2015 - 03:40 AM, said:

The people pushing for more lore based quirks and the meta-tards are not the same people.

Did I say they are?