316 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Wintersdark, on 16 May 2016 - 01:20 PM, said:

But that's an uncommon problem, and it's using an LBX not because it's good but because it's the best of limited options.

Which while sad (I agree there), is a better situation than the poor AC10.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 May 2016 - 01:22 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 May 2016 - 01:22 PM, said:

Which while sad (I agree there), is a better situation than the poor AC10.

but only because you can't FIT and ac10 and proper ammo. If you could, it would still be the better choice, even at PBR. And even better for those instances you aren't PBR because of reasons.

So it's not BETTER, in reality, it's a workable substitute due to not being able to use the real thing. (at least without sacrificing more elsewhere to compensate)

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 16 May 2016 - 01:49 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 May 2016 - 01:49 PM, said:

but only because you can't FIT and ac10 and proper ammo. If you could, it would still be the better choice, even at PBR.

The 2D2 can fit it in, but doesn't use it because you sacrifice too much for negligible gains, which is suitable situation given that it is able to fit on more things. Btw, maybe McGral can clear this up, but I thought the LBX had better DPS thanks to crits over other weapons once internals are exposed, the problem is just that it is objectively worse at critting out items (which is less of a problem imo, if a bit ironic).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 May 2016 - 01:57 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 May 2016 - 01:54 PM, said:

The 2D2 can fit it in, but doesn't use it because you sacrifice too much for negligible gains, which is suitable situation given that it is able to fit on more things.

Which is what I thought I just said? Meaning, again, no, if one could have everything else identical and choose between an AC10 and an LB-X, you woul dstill be better with the ac10. But because of constraints in tonnage, crits, etc, you have to sacrifice something else to supoort the AC10, making the LBX a better compromise.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 May 2016 - 01:54 PM, said:

Btw, maybe McGral can clear this up, but I thought the LBX had better DPS thanks to crits over other weapons once internals are exposed, the problem is just that it is objectively worse at critting out items (which is less of a problem imo, if a bit ironic).

Perhaps he can. And perhaps in limited situations and builds the LB-X can help make a "Better Vulture" build. Personally, I prefer to have a mech that cracks the nuts open then being a scavenger that better equipped to play mop up for other peoples work.

And in my experience, outside of organized Comp/Team play? You can't control circumstances enough to make a sub 300 meter range mech that appealing, especially one that' snot terribly fast for ti's size.

Yes, in team building I can see where having a few Splat/Vulture builds can be used to exploit stuff. That's still a pretty dang small window of the MWO world.
But it's still a compromise. It's not better, it's just better than what you'd have to give up to make the ac10 fit in.

[Wintersdark]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 May 2016 - 01:54 PM, said:

The 2D2 can fit it in, but doesn't use it because you sacrifice too much for negligible gains, which is suitable situation given that it is able to fit on more things. Btw, maybe McGral can clear this up, but I thought the LBX had better DPS thanks to crits over other weapons once internals are exposed, the problem is just that it is objectively worse at critting out items (which less of a problem, if a bit ironic, imo).

On paper, it theoretically can. In practice, it doesn't. Those videos I posted, the oh-so-derided tests? That was the whole point of those. I wasn't trying to emulate things in a "furball brawl", I was actively demonstrating how even when 100% of pellets hit your target component, you still don't destroy the mech any faster.

Why? Because: You do a tiny bit of extra damage (on average), but it's small, and only happens after armour is stripped. The number of shots you get in between no armor left and dead? 2, maybe 3, if you've any other weapons at all firing. That extra damage (which relies on RNJesus) is also starting out behind, as the AC10 is potentially getting bonus carry through crit damage on a shot before the LBX, as the AC10 can do up to 3 10 damage crits (4.5 extra structural damage) to a mech with 9.9 armor remaining in that component. The LBX will, at most, do up to 3 2 damage crits in that last armored hit for a max of .9 carry through.

[Osric Lancaster]

Kinda agree with Deathlike, you don't want to give the LB-X splash damage. It's simultaneously more boring and less lore friendly than what we have now. The objective of weapon balancing is NOT to make all weapons slight variations of the same garbage. It's OKAY to have a gun that sucks at focusing damage or that spreads at range as long as it does something else well to offset that disadvantage.

Raising the damage per pellet to turn the LB-X into a brutal short ranged weapon is one way.

What I would like to see though, is something that draws on the lore role of the weapon as a critical seeker. If you kept the current LB-X firing mechanic, but had it do partial (say half) critical damage to components through armor. That way I actually fear the weapon not because it's dealing direct damage, but because of it's potential to light up that ammo in my legs or pop my weapons if I take enough hits from one.

Of course the atrophied and forsaken critical system kind of screws things up for making weapons 'crit seekers' which is why everything seems to be balanced around equivalent focused dps/ton and not much else.

[Bishop Steiner]

Osric Lancaster, on 16 May 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

Kinda agree with Deathlike, you don't want to give the LB-X splash damage. It's simultaneously more boring and less lore friendly than what we have now. The objective of weapon balancing is NOT to make all weapons slight variations of the same garbage. It's OKAY to have a gun that sucks at focusing damage or that spreads at range as long as it does something else well to offset that disadvantage.

Raising the damage per pellet to turn the LB-X into a brutal short ranged weapon is one way.

What I would like to see though, is something that draws on the lore role of the weapon as a critical seeker. If you kept the current LB-X firing mechanic, but had it do partial (say half) critical damage to components through armor. That way I actually fear the weapon not because it's dealing direct damage, but because of it's potential to light up that ammo in my legs or pop my weapons if I take enough hits from one.

Of course the atrophied and forsaken critical system kind of screws things up for making weapons 'crit seekers' which is why everything seems to be balanced around equivalent focused dps/ton and not much else.

you start seeing through armor crits you will will get blown away by the tornado of butthurt that will descend on these forums.

And Comps will starts spraying and praying everyone in MAXI-LBX machines.

No
freaking
thank you

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Wintersdark, on 16 May 2016 - 02:02 PM, said:

I was actively demonstrating how even when 100% of pellets hit your target component, you still don't destroy the mech any faster.

If they are equal at 150m then, the LBX10 does become better for the simple fact is saves you 1 ton and has a lower impact on heat (however tiny it is). Then again, because of RNG, you would have to do several tests to actually get a good estimate, even if it is doing .1 extra damage, it is still worth it for a splat mech.

Wintersdark, on 16 May 2016 - 02:02 PM, said:

That was the whole point of those. I wasn't trying to emulate things in a "furball brawl"

That was more in response to the UAC vs LBX tests, not so much the AC10 vs LBX10.

Either way, remove the stupid crit mechanic, give it better damage per pellet (1.4-1.5 would be a great start), and tighten up the spread on the 2s and 5s (because their spread is still depressing).

Bishop Steiner, on 16 May 2016 - 02:09 PM, said:

And Comps will starts spraying and praying everyone in MAXI-LBX machines.

I think you meant KDK-LBX machines.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 May 2016 - 02:21 PM.

[Raso]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 May 2016 - 02:18 PM, said:

If they are equal at 150m then, the LBX10 does become better for the simple fact is saves you 1 ton and has a lower impact on heat (however tiny it is). Then again, because of RNG, you would have to do several tests to actually get a good estimate, even if it is doing .1 extra damage, it is still worth it for a splat mech.


That was more in response to the UAC vs LBX tests, not so much the AC10 vs LBX10.

An AC10 that is 1 less to and only usful well inside of SRM range and ia still just an AC10 at that and has no other benefit doesn't seem worth it to me.

I think inside of 200m the LBX10 should be scary. It should rip armor apart and if a structure is exposed it should shred it.

Up it's damage inside of 10-15% of its optimal range to nearly 1.75 damage a pellets and have it fall off to 1 damage at it's optimal range. Have pellets always deal max damage to exposed structure. Slightly up spread on a few versions to taste.

They are now scary at close range, and useful at range under certain circumstances. They have two uses, as a close range brawler and a late game vulture. That's two more uses than they currently have.

[Wintersdark]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 May 2016 - 02:18 PM, said:

If they are equal at 150m then, the LBX10 does become better for the simple fact is saves you 1 ton and has a lower impact on heat (however tiny it is). Then again, because of RNG, you would have to do several tests to actually get a good estimate, even if it is doing .1 extra damage, it is still worth it for a splat mech.

I did it many, many times, and have done it many times in the past. I posted a couple videos, but I've spent countless hours over the years testing these, trying to find useful situations where they're better. I love LBX autocannons and WANT to find them outperforming regular ones somewhere.

Quote

That was more in response to the UAC vs LBX tests, not so much the AC10 vs LBX10.

It's a wholly different discussion, though, when you go clan side. Totally different, as the LBX autocannons are the same weight and actually larger, and UAC's burst and can doubletap. The LBX20 test vs UAC in particular though was about demonstrating how horrible the spread is, and how grossly inefficient that makes the weapon vs twice the damage as pinpoint; particularly given that it comes at an increased logistic cost instead of decreased.

But yeah, it's a totally different discussion and confusing the two causes problems.

Quote

Either way, remove the stupid crit mechanic, give it better damage per pellet (1.4-1.5 would be a great start), and tighten up the spread on the 2s and 5s (because their spread is still depressing).

ID not object, but I'd honestly prefer MORE spread with a per pellet damage increase. The spread offsets the damage increase, so you do over par damage close and under par damage at longer ranges.

And, yeah, definitely ditch the BS crit mechanics as they're terrible. Or do t, it doesn't even matter.

Quote

I think you meant KDK-LBX machines.

This thread aside, I'm totally running 2xUAC10 AND 2XLBX10 on my KDK3. 4 UAC10 is decidedly better, but I have wierd issues firing 4 UAC10's simultaneously. They don't seem to work consistently. Tried a bunch with my DWF but couldn't get reliable results.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Raso, on 16 May 2016 - 02:32 PM, said:

An AC10 that is 1 less to and only usful well inside of SRM range and ia still just an AC10 at that and has no other benefit doesn't seem worth it to me.

Depends on the build, if the mech is built for SRM range, then a weapon being useful outside its main firepower really isn't that useful.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Wintersdark, on 16 May 2016 - 02:37 PM, said:

I did it many, many times, and have done it many times in the past. I posted a couple videos, but I've spent countless hours over the years testing these, trying to find useful situations where they're better. I love LBX autocannons and WANT to find them outperforming regular ones somewhere.

That's fine then, while it certainly isn't a perfect situation, the fact that you can kill something just as fast as a PPFLD weapon inside typical non-arty SRM range, that means it does have something over the AC10, even if it is a pitiful advantage.

Wintersdark, on 16 May 2016 - 02:37 PM, said:

ID not object, but I'd honestly prefer MORE spread with a per pellet damage increase. The spread offsets the damage increase, so you do over par damage close and under par damage at longer ranges.

That still makes them worse SRMs, which is why I like the smaller spread. If SRMs are tighter packed than any LBX, that is a problem given the tonnage requirements for LBX. The day that I choose the LBX over SRMs is the day I consider LBX perfect (and then they can make SRMs different and unique).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 May 2016 - 02:43 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 May 2016 - 02:38 PM, said:

Depends on the build, if the mech is built for SRM range, then a weapon being useful outside its main firepower really isn't that useful.

unless one is not playing in an organized team environment were you can guarantee control of engagement ranges.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 May 2016 - 02:43 PM, said:

unless one is not playing in an organized team environment were you can guarantee control of engagement ranges.

Yeah, but balance around PUG play is kinda silly don't you think, unless there is a repeat of the lurm-pocalypse or something. I mean if that were the case we would never have wasted so much time on objective game modes because they are ultimately pointless without a good respawn mechanic. We would make long range and short range even more powerful because of their limited effectiveness in PUGs compared to mid-range builds, etc etc.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 May 2016 - 02:47 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 May 2016 - 02:42 PM, said:

That still makes them worse SRMs, which is why I like the smaller spread. If SRMs are tighter packed than any LBX, that is a problem given the tonnage requirements for LBX. The day that I choose the LBX over SRMs is the day I consider LBX perfect (and then they can make SRMs different and unique).

Oh, not that big. Think spread before this recent tightening, not more than that. Just enough that beyond 150m, you're hitting 3+ components, up close though you're delivering gauss rifle damage rather than AC10 damage.

[Bishop Steiner]

Most telling to me is we have over 280 individual mech variants...and you are able to list 2, where it's arguably situationally useful.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Wintersdark, on 16 May 2016 - 02:49 PM, said:

Oh, not that big. Think spread before this recent tightening, not more than that.

Yeah, but that's still too wide, right now it seems about on par with ASRM spread, which 2 ASRM4 would beat out even with the reduced spread and 1.5 damage per shot which is why I'm against increasing spread even to pre-nerf. Weapons like the LBX5/2 especially as they have way too much spread for their optimal range.

[Ovion]

Honestly...
I don't like it.

I like LBX's as they are.
Mech Shotguns, that work effectively if used as LBX's.
My absolute best mechs are a Twin-LBX10 Jagermech and a 6CLBX5 Dire Wolf.
My 2 and 4 LBX10 Maulers, Atlas, etc do well too.

The 6LBX5 Dire is the only mech I've broke 1,000 damage in.

I honestly think, the best thing to do would be up the crit chance, same for Machine Guns and Flamers.
50-100% crit chance even.
Make them actual crit weapons.

As is, you can do well with LBX's so long as you use them as such.
Flaying terror weapons. They throw peoples aim and freak them out, each pellet being equivalent to an AC5 shells impact.
Long range, and if you're practiced with the weapon, can happily hit lights - which do NOT care for it at all.

Turning it into 'an off number AC with splash damage' doesn't fit the weapons lore or feel, and would remove some of precious little variety we have in weapons.

We'd then have:
Beam weapons in short and long burn varieties. (All lasers)
Cannons in 1-shot and rapid-fire. (All AC's, PPC's, LBX's)
Cluster Missiles in short, short lock and long lock flavour.
Short range Hitscan (MGs, Flamers).

Having: Cluster Cannons gives us some extra diversity, and a different way to do it.

LBX's can be good used correctly. Sure they may want a little buff, and those of us that do do well with the things rejoice at that prospect.
Give them +.1 or .2 damage per pellet, increase the Crit chance massively, reduce the spread some, whatever... but don't turn them into a not-ppc.

If nothing else, it'd take away one of those few things I'm good at, and one of the things I truly enjoy in the game.

Edited by Ovion, 16 May 2016 - 02:55 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 May 2016 - 02:53 PM, said:

Most telling to me is we have over 280 individual mech variants...and you are able to list 2, where it's arguably situationally useful.

The problem is, that out of those 280 variants, the configs using the AC10 are almost all outclassed by better builds except ones that have strong enough AC10 specific quirks like the CN9-A. Point being, the LBX10 is used in comp on a specific build, the AC10 is not outside of the 2D2 for those that do like it (LBX10 isn't universally chosen over it, but a lot switched over to LBX10s) and maybe the ON1-VA (not really sure what is run on it).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 16 May 2016 - 02:56 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 16 May 2016 - 02:55 PM, said:

The problem is, that out of those 280 variants, the configs using the AC10 are almost all outclassed by better builds except ones that have strong enough AC10 specific quirks like the CN9-A. Point being, the LBX10 is used in comp on a specific build, the AC10 is not outside of the 2D2 for those that do like it (LBX10 isn't universally chosen over it, but a lot switched over to LBX10s) and maybe the ON1-VA (not really sure what is run on it).

and that's the danger basing everything on what happens in Compland though....really out of 280 mechs...what a whopping dozen + see use anyhow? So by that perspective, why not just deepsix everything else?