51 replies to this topic

[XX Sulla XX]

I have been thinking a lot about the LBX and how to fix it lately. So far they have stuck with lore on damage and just change range, pattern etc but this is just not wkring. I believe what has to happen is a break with lore. We need to number to only refer to the number of projectiles but not damage. Make the damage like SRMs so it can be adjusted. Then you up the damage until the weapon is viable. Thing is short range spread damage has to do more damage to make it viable.

And if they ever get around to adding standard rounds they can stay at 10.

Edited by XX Sulla XX, 12 April 2015 - 12:07 PM.

[Xetelian]

Increase the damage a little and it'll be comparable to regular ACs.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

LB-ACs need one of several things to happen. I'll list them in probable order of ease of implementation:

1 - Increased damage-per-pellet. This should be a basic XML change, I'd imagine. Bump the damage-per-pellet up to 1.2 or 1.3 and iterate from there after a couple of weeks of live data.

2 - Air-burst cannister rounds. These would be a solid shell that fires in a single shot, but when it detects a hostile target (mech or turret or whatever) in its kill range (a small cone ahead of it) it detonates, releasing the submunitions in a much tighter spread at any range.

3 - Selectable ammunition. Allow it to run both slug and cluster rounds, with live toggling of ammo type in the event that a player loads both. Accompany this with special munitions for standard ACs to keep them competitive (AP, semi-guided, etc., are all lore-friendly and either already available or soon in the timeline).

Personally, I'd do all three, successively. Start with the trivial-to-implement damage bump while working on cannister rounds. Once those go live try to solve the ammo situation, which opens up a world of possibilities for PGI going forward (LRM, SRM, AC, all have variable munitions that ammo-toggles would enable).

[Lord Perversor]

as i see it.

Option A: keep it as current, but in the TO DO list for a future implementation of dual mode..

Option B: concede the LBX are and always will be the MWO shotguns, so stop trying to reduce the spread and make them AoE armor shredders like the Fps Shotguns by increasing pellet damage or just Pellet dmg vs armor

[Alistair Winter]

I think it's kinda cool that the LBX has been a running joke for, what, 2 years?



Thank God that Russ has promised aggressive balancing.

[DefinitelyNotMwHighlander]

It was time to fix the LBX YEARS ago.

I just accept game mechanics in this game will never be addressed outside their sloppy "temporary" filler code.
















But that -5% LBX spread quirk on some mechs.... idk man, make that quirk any stronger and it might be OP!

Edited by DefinitelyNotMwHighlander, 12 April 2015 - 12:35 PM.

[Jabilo]

Agreed.

It sure does need something.

Over the years I have seen most weapons come in to a semblance of balance. Hell, how long were pulse lasers in the wilderness, and even they have found their home.

Now if they completely overhaul the damage system, increasing time to live on the one hand and adding dynamic component damage on the other then maybe crit seeking weapons will have a place.

Until that joyous and far off day we have a weapon that has no place in the game except for giggles. In the meantime lets increase pellet damage to 1.1 and see how we go, with further increases as required.

You know I can not see anyone arguing against the LBX being underpowered, and how often do we all agree round here.

I agree with Alistair, it it hilarious this weapon has not been addressed in two years.

Edited by Jabilo, 12 April 2015 - 12:38 PM.

[DefinitelyNotMwHighlander]

Jabilo, on 12 April 2015 - 12:35 PM, said:

increase pellet damage to 1.1 and see how we go, with further increases as required.

Make it 1.4 damager per pellete like MW4...


...and even then, you could hit a single location with LBX's in that game at max range...

[Johny Rocket]

More damage per pellet. supposed to be a shotgun affect, shotguns are short range. srms get more damage per missile than lrms why not with the lbx. Shorten the effective range if need be.

[TripleEhBeef]

Copy-paste the old BF3 USAS Frags.

[DefinitelyNotMwHighlander]

TripleEhBeef, on 12 April 2015 - 01:36 PM, said:

Copy-paste the old BF3 USAS Frags.

I loved the crap out of BF3 when you could ROFLSTOMP everything with that Korean "AA12" and frag rounds.

[Spheroid]

^USAS? Real men used glitched M320 with G3.

[MechaBattler]

More projectiles. But with more spread at distances. So it's not pin point damage. Unless! You get within close range to deal that damage in a tight enough cluster to potentially get it all in one spot.

[Y E O N N E]

That's...almost exactly what we have now. How would simply adding more projectiles fix it?

[Mcgral18]

Alistair Winter, on 12 April 2015 - 12:33 PM, said:

I think it's kinda cool that the LBX has been a running joke for, what, 2 years?



Thank God that Russ has promised aggressive balancing.

Ah, the critical damage.


You know, it has a chance to deal the same crit damage as an AC20!

It just requires all 10 pellets to roll a 6% crit chance.

So, 0.06^10

Or 0.0000000000006% chance to deal 60 critical damage.

Which translates to 9 extra IS damage.
Assuming all the pellets hit a target, and that component is missing armour.


As opposed to the AC20s ability to always roll 20 critical damage on a single component with a 42% chance, or a 3% chance to roll 60.

That is, a 3% chance to deal 29 damage, as opposed to a 0.0000000000006% chance to deal 19 damage.



Yeah, that gun is awesome.

[Deathlike]

Can you not crush my hopes so quickly?

Someday soon™.

[DefinitelyNotMwHighlander]

Deathlike, on 12 April 2015 - 03:47 PM, said:

Can you not crush my hopes so quickly?

Someday soon™.

lol quickly...

lol soon...

[SweetJackal]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 12 April 2015 - 12:27 PM, said:

2 - Air-burst cannister rounds. These would be a solid shell that fires in a single shot, but when it detects a hostile target (mech or turret or whatever) in its kill range (a small cone ahead of it) it detonates, releasing the submunitions in a much tighter spread at any range.

They don't need to impliment Air-burst canister rounds, they need to have the mechanics emulate them. Difference is, Air-burst rounds would be designed to have the same spread distance no matter what the range, as it would explode a certain distance from the mech and create a cone spread that would always start the same distance from the target. Air-bursts would have the same distance between the farthest two pellets when the target was at 150m as it would when the target is at 1500m. This effect is also what an automated choke on a shotcannon would do, change the angle of spread so that the distance between the two farthest pellets would be the same no matter what the range.

The simplest way of implementing this in game is to turn the shape of the spread from a cone to a cylinder. Have the spread maintain the same area of coverage no matter what distance instead of having it be smaller up close and larger at greater distances.

The bonus range to the LBX series of cannons was pointed to as a strength of the weapon yet the means in which the projectiles are handled neuters it outside of short range. The way the Quirks were classed reflects this as the LBX-10 was put into the same effective range bracket as the AC-20. Either make it worth the weight at those shorter distances or have it maintain it's intended effectiveness at any range.

[SovietKoshka]

I actually Like the way lbx shoots, now, i do think it could use a dmg buff, or perhaps a fire rate buff, and maybe an ammo/ton buff, but i do not think the range and spread needs to be changed.

My reason for this is simple, i am a **** shot, and when facing an enemy with damage, i find it difficult to focus fire, so i use my handy dandy lbxes to seek damaged components while my other weapons try to focus, plus lbxes will ruin a lights day.

[Pjwned]

LB cannons need a crit system that isn't complete ass so they can have enhanced crit modifiers that actually contribute something.

Mcgral18, on 12 April 2015 - 03:07 PM, said:

Ah, the critical damage.


You know, it has a chance to deal the same crit damage as an AC20!

It just requires all 10 pellets to roll a 6% crit chance.

So, 0.06^10

Or 0.0000000000006% chance to deal 60 critical damage.

Which translates to 9 extra IS damage.
Assuming all the pellets hit a target, and that component is missing armour.


As opposed to the AC20s ability to always roll 20 critical damage on a single component with a 42% chance, or a 3% chance to roll 60.

That is, a 3% chance to deal 29 damage, as opposed to a 0.0000000000006% chance to deal 19 damage.



Yeah, that gun is awesome.

That's not how the probability works by the way, that would only be true if 1 pellet critting relied on the previous pellet critting, which isn't the case.

EDIT: I don't know if it's actually wrong.

Edited by Pjwned, 13 April 2015 - 05:01 PM.