You realize them's fighting words, about probably the best Pnp RPG's ever made... Back when race, class, and death meant something... and if you hit lvl 15 wizard you either were the luckiest man alive,,, or the smartest...
Spoiler
Tbf talked with more then a few people who claimed to have played with the G man. Nearly all of them said he played dirty and to the point you had to minmax or just get things past him, like one person who had dragons bane or something like that in his bag when the party "breezed" through one of the tougher dungeons [i.e. lived] and was apparently not amused at the results (not sure if it was tomb of horrors or not)so he brought in a greatwyrm red. To maul them. Party monk gives a "tribute" bag. He had the Dragon um... Eat him. Gman smirks at him, who smirked back and pointed to the inventory in said bag. Gman was not amused apparently at the no save red Dragon kill and the somehow surviving monk. Not sure how accurate they were about him either being from unrelenting to outright cheesing, just that a few unrelated people giving a similar consensus that he was harsh but would also build to kill, fair or not in his personal games.
And... Back on rails. Can they xml in a button to swap come tightness settings that turn on/off bonus damage effects? Like
{Setcone: 8 "meters"
Button: (insert here) set cone = +/-2.5+(setcone)}
Gives a 10.5 for one setting, and 5.5 for another. Could someone type it in actual programming language?
LocationStomping around in a giant robot, of course.
Posted 27 May 2016 - 07:22 PM
Actually, what would help LB-X most is getting rid of the ever-increasing spread. At the least, a predictable hit pattern that doesn't change based on range, centered on the crosshair center pixel.
In MWO, weapons that spread are weapons that waste damage, because in MWO, you can focus damage with meta-compliant weapons on single armor locations. If, for example an LB-5X hit like the pips on a six-sided die for "5":
That's spread, but the weapon has predictable, stable spread and doesn't become increasingly less predictable (and weaker) with range as pellets scatter.
Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 27 May 2016 - 02:14 PM, said:
I'll just take this opportunity to reiterate that the fastest, easiest, and most immediately effective fix for the LB line of ACs is to increase damage per pellet. It helps them at all ranges, while making them down right scary close-in, when the cluster can more reliably be placed on specific components.
Exactly.
This, 100%. Even if they started low, say 1.2 damage per pellet, this would completely fix them and make them interesting weapons; hammer blows up close, still less threatening at range.
I don't know what you guys are complaining about. The LB20X I put in my Kodiak 2's shoulder has been killing bad guys just fine. All I seem to be reading is "Why isn't my shotgun a good sniper weapon?".
Nobody has argued that it's poor at long range. That's a real nice, and real stupid, strawman you have there.
The problem is, it's not good at short range. It's HORRIBLE at long range; grossly awful, but up close it's still mediocre at best, and strictly inferior to a UAC20. Just because you can kill things with it doesn't make it good.
"I do fine with it" is not an argument. I've seen people do great with Vindicators, too.
Quicksilver Kalasa, on 27 May 2016 - 12:10 PM, said:
FTFY, the only thing I've really tried to argue against, is the idea that AC10s are hugely superior over LBX10s. Outside of that, would love for LBX to be a more solid alternative to SRMs rather than SRMs being the true shotgun weapon of this game.
LBX vs. SRM is such a sad comparison it's not even funny.
Nobody has argued that it's poor at long range. That's a real nice, and real stupid, strawman you have there.
Also, it isn't even technically supposed to be a shotgun.
Let me say that again, in bold, large letters for the woefully uninformed:
The LB series of autocannons are not supposed to be shotguns. According to their source rules, the way they behave is more akin to airburst weapons like flak cannons. They deal the same amount of spread at all ranges in their weapon profile, be that 50 meters or 500 meters.
Right now, they make zero use of their actual stated range - something no weapon in the game suffers from aside from LB ACs. Honestly, that leads to two ways to attempt to address the LB issue to make them useful across their entire range bracket.
Option 1 is something similar to my originally proposed change. That is to say to make them function superficially like Clan ERPPC. This simulates the fixed spread at all ranges you would expect from a proximity detonated airburst weapon system. Giving them significant bonus damage when hitting internal structure would be necessary to compensate for the initial lack of damage for the first half of any game, meaning the effectiveness of the weapon ends up evening out throughout a given match.
Option 2 could also work, and retains the visual effect of a shotgun like spread, and involves severely tightening the cone of the LBs or else making them strictly parallel pieces of shrapnel, as well as a significant damage increase per pellet. Failure to tighten the spread to the point where it practically doesn't would mean you fail to address the weapon's current inability to be used at stated max effective range. Failure to increase the per pellet damage would fail to compensate for the spread nature of the damage that would no doubt inflict harm on 2-3 components outside of 50 meters from the target.
Also, it isn't even technically supposed to be a shotgun.
Let me say that again, in bold, large letters for the woefully uninformed:
The LB series of autocannons are not supposed to be shotguns. According to their source rules, the way they behave is more akin to airburst weapons like flak cannons. They deal the same amount of spread at all ranges in their weapon profile, be that 50 meters or 500 meters.
Right now, they make zero use of their actual stated range - something no weapon in the game suffers from aside from LB ACs. Honestly, that leads to two ways to attempt to address the LB issue to make them useful across their entire range bracket.
Option 1 is something similar to my originally proposed change. That is to say to make them function superficially like Clan ERPPC. This simulates the fixed spread at all ranges you would expect from a proximity detonated airburst weapon system. Giving them significant bonus damage when hitting internal structure would be necessary to compensate for the initial lack of damage for the first half of any game, meaning the effectiveness of the weapon ends up evening out throughout a given match.
Option 2 could also work, and retains the visual effect of a shotgun like spread, and involves severely tightening the cone of the LBs or else making them strictly parallel pieces of shrapnel, as well as a significant damage increase per pellet. Failure to tighten the spread to the point where it practically doesn't would mean you fail to address the weapon's current inability to be used at stated max effective range. Failure to increase the per pellet damage would fail to compensate for the spread nature of the damage that would no doubt inflict harm on 2-3 components outside of 50 meters from the target.
Then have it as airburst, exploding at X distance from a mech / wall or at max range like SRMs.
Making LBX's like PPCs would be sad, (and honestly, ruin the weapon for me, as I don't get along with PPCs for some reason) and reduce the weapon variety in the game.
Then have it as airburst, exploding at X distance from a mech / wall or at max range like SRMs.
Making LBX's like PPCs would be sad, (and honestly, ruin the weapon for me, as I don't get along with PPCs for some reason) and reduce the weapon variety in the game.
Ideal environment? I'd love that. I don't know if it is something PGI can actually code, though, due to limitations in the engine or other reasons. At least we know the ERPPC code works. *shrug*
Problem is, it removes diversity, and the LBX can be solid as is.
Just because it's not always the best, or good at everything, but it is good at what it's good at.
It wants tweaking, not completely changing.
Bump the pellet damage up to 1.1 or something if you want.
Problem is, it removes diversity, and the LBX can be solid as is.
Just because it's not always the best, or good at everything, but it is good at what it's good at.
It wants tweaking, not completely changing.
Bump the pellet damage up to 1.1 or something if you want.
No... the LBX is just bad.
In a brawl, if you can afford the extra ton, an AC10 is better than an LB10 for two reasons: spread and the way crits work in MWO. 5 or 6 1-damage crits will not destroy any components except a Gauss Rifle. A single 10 damage crit will break everything but an AC20. Similarly, you might inflict an extra 1 or 2 damage in crit related damage to the target with an LB, but the AC10 will be inflicting even more damage on its crits since it scales off the full 10 and not the 1 damage per LB pellet.
At mid range? The LB spreads even worse, meaning you're likely to run out of ammo before doing meaningful damage. The AC10, on the other hand, will do 10 damage, pinpoint, to where it hits.
The fact that the AC10, a #mediocre (but fun!) weapon system is better than an LB10 is saying something, here. In every environment.
The only situations in which I see an LB type weapon being selected over a standard or Ultra version is a case where every last ton needs to be saved, the mech is already running extremely hot before taking the autocannon into account (in which case, fire control will do better than swapping the AC types out anyways), or you're talking a Clan LB20 vs a Clan UAC20, which is a little more even a choice.
In a brawl, if you can afford the extra ton, an AC10 is better than an LB10 for two reasons: spread and the way crits work in MWO. 5 or 6 1-damage crits will not destroy any components except a Gauss Rifle. A single 10 damage crit will break everything but an AC20. Similarly, you might inflict an extra 1 or 2 damage in crit related damage to the target with an LB, but the AC10 will be inflicting even more damage on its crits since it scales off the full 10 and not the 1 damage per LB pellet.
At mid range? The LB spreads even worse, meaning you're likely to run out of ammo before doing meaningful damage. The AC10, on the other hand, will do 10 damage, pinpoint, to where it hits.
The fact that the AC10, a #mediocre (but fun!) weapon system is better than an LB10 is saying something, here. In every environment.
The only situations in which I see an LB type weapon being selected over a standard or Ultra version is a case where every last ton needs to be saved, the mech is already running extremely hot before taking the autocannon into account (in which case, fire control will do better than swapping the AC types out anyways), or you're talking a Clan LB20 vs a Clan UAC20, which is a little more even a choice.
Which is funny, because honestly, personally, LBX is one of mybest weapons.
(snip for tidiness)
Spoiler
IS:
1 LBX10 Light/Medium mechs often do OK, especially the CN9D, and my favoured Urbie uses an LBX10.
2 LBX10 Heavy/Assault mechs, especially my Jager / Catapult do quite well, as does the Atlas and King Crab. My FIrebrand with 2LBX10, 7T ammo, 2ML, 4SL is one of my main go-to mechs when needing to make money / perform well.
4 LBX10 Assaults do rather well for themselves, such as the Mauler (I forget if there's another IS one that can atm... probably not)
Clan:
I'll take CLBX2's in some instances, but mostly a pair on light/mediums or 4-6 on bigger mechs.
CLBX5's are great across the board, singly or in groups. 5-6 on Dire Wolf are very nasty, and my highest kills + damages are all from my 6LBX5 Dire Wolf, far exceeding the output of my 6CUAC 5 version. 4 on a Kodiak is reasonable too.
CLBX10's are reasonably solid, though not as good as LBX10's, though boating 4 is still pretty decent on a Dire Wolf or Kodiak
CLB20's are a nasty weapon, and sound fantastic, and can be OK in some instances, but I find with the range + ammo restriction, it's almost always better to run 2xCLB10 instead if possible.
Side note - 2LBX10, 2LBX5 on the Kodiak has been doing really well, including some 6 kill, thousand damage games.
The LBX works well if used as an LBX.
It's a flaying weapon, it throws people, physically with screen shake (each pellet has the impact force of an AC5 shell, causing tons of screen shake) and often mentally (it's a lot of screen shake). In 1vs1's, I can often come out best using LBX's due to that alone - them not being able to get a proper hit in because of it.
This also leads to it being a psychological thing - I've had just about every type of mech turn and scatter from LBX fire at one point or other, and it can make people think they're being hit with far more than they are.
With their max range, you can also spend a couple of shells to 'guide' people using it.
The LBX family as a whole also runs very cool - my Jager (engine DHS only when not firing the lasers) and Kodiak (with +2HS) run heat neutral.
My Dire with 6 of them can fire for ages too.
The fast pellet speed and spread makes it good at taking out light mechs, aiming at the legs lets you flay them pretty quickly.
At close to mid ranges, it does solid damage.
Yes, it may take 1-2 more shells on average than an AC equivalent, but often, you'll have an extra ton of ammo too so it more than evens out.
And on smaller mechs, it often means you actually have enough ammo to function or take the cannon at all.
Some of it's personal preference, and it may not be the best weapon, but it's not completely useless, it can be good, and it doesn't need making into a 'poor mans' ballistic PPC.
If you want to improve it, then increase the pellet damage to 1.1 or 1.2, or increase the crit rate by 100% or something.
But as I said before, we have 5 types of weapon:
PPFLD cannons (inc AC's, UACs, PPCs, Gauss)
- CAC/CUAC, which have a stream of shells and are still basically the same.
Hitscan (MG's, Flamers)
Shotguns (LBX's)
Direct DoT weapons (Lasers)
Cluster Missiles in 'dumbfire' and 'lock on' flavour. (all SRM / SSRM / LRM)
That's not a lot of diversity, so reducing 1/5 of that would be sad.
Problem is, it removes diversity, and the LBX can be solid as is.
Just because it's not always the best, or good at everything, but it is good at what it's good at.
It wants tweaking, not completely changing.
Bump the pellet damage up to 1.1 or something if you want.
It isn't good at what it's good at. People think it is, but people misunderstand how it works all the time. Fundamentally, it's pretty simple: Even in what people consider ideal circumstances, it takes as much or more ammo to kill someone than a non-LBX autocannon. Thus, it's not actually better at anything.
Ovion, on 28 May 2016 - 11:36 AM, said:
Which is funny, because honestly, personally, LBX is one of mybest weapons.
(snip for tidiness)
Spoiler
IS:
1 LBX10 Light/Medium mechs often do OK, especially the CN9D, and my favoured Urbie uses an LBX10.
2 LBX10 Heavy/Assault mechs, especially my Jager / Catapult do quite well, as does the Atlas and King Crab. My FIrebrand with 2LBX10, 7T ammo, 2ML, 4SL is one of my main go-to mechs when needing to make money / perform well.
4 LBX10 Assaults do rather well for themselves, such as the Mauler (I forget if there's another IS one that can atm... probably not)
Clan:
I'll take CLBX2's in some instances, but mostly a pair on light/mediums or 4-6 on bigger mechs.
CLBX5's are great across the board, singly or in groups. 5-6 on Dire Wolf are very nasty, and my highest kills + damages are all from my 6LBX5 Dire Wolf, far exceeding the output of my 6CUAC 5 version. 4 on a Kodiak is reasonable too.
CLBX10's are reasonably solid, though not as good as LBX10's, though boating 4 is still pretty decent on a Dire Wolf or Kodiak
CLB20's are a nasty weapon, and sound fantastic, and can be OK in some instances, but I find with the range + ammo restriction, it's almost always better to run 2xCLB10 instead if possible.
Side note - 2LBX10, 2LBX5 on the Kodiak has been doing really well, including some 6 kill, thousand damage games.
The LBX works well if used as an LBX.
It's a flaying weapon, it throws people, physically with screen shake (each pellet has the impact force of an AC5 shell, causing tons of screen shake) and often mentally (it's a lot of screen shake). In 1vs1's, I can often come out best using LBX's due to that alone - them not being able to get a proper hit in because of it.
This also leads to it being a psychological thing - I've had just about every type of mech turn and scatter from LBX fire at one point or other, and it can make people think they're being hit with far more than they are.
With their max range, you can also spend a couple of shells to 'guide' people using it.
The LBX family as a whole also runs very cool - my Jager (engine DHS only when not firing the lasers) and Kodiak (with +2HS) run heat neutral.
My Dire with 6 of them can fire for ages too.
The fast pellet speed and spread makes it good at taking out light mechs, aiming at the legs lets you flay them pretty quickly.
At close to mid ranges, it does solid damage.
Yes, it may take 1-2 more shells on average than an AC equivalent, but often, you'll have an extra ton of ammo too so it more than evens out.
And on smaller mechs, it often means you actually have enough ammo to function or take the cannon at all.
Some of it's personal preference, and it may not be the best weapon, but it's not completely useless, it can be good, and it doesn't need making into a 'poor mans' ballistic PPC.
If you want to improve it, then increase the pellet damage to 1.1 or 1.2, or increase the crit rate by 100% or something.
But as I said before, we have 5 types of weapon:
PPFLD cannons (inc AC's, UACs, PPCs, Gauss)
- CAC/CUAC, which have a stream of shells and are still basically the same.
Hitscan (MG's, Flamers)
Shotguns (LBX's)
Direct DoT weapons (Lasers)
Cluster Missiles in 'dumbfire' and 'lock on' flavour. (all SRM / SSRM / LRM)
That's not a lot of diversity, so reducing 1/5 of that would be sad.
It needs to do more damage per pellet, if it stays as a shotgun. It's trash right now.
With Clan LBX's... I'll take a mech with UAC's against that same mech with LBX's (and unlike the IS situation, the LBX's are actually larger than UAC's, so this is always possible) and I'll beat them into the dirt every single time.
Quote
At close to mid ranges, it does solid damage.
Yes, it may take 1-2 more shells on average than an AC equivalent, but often, you'll have an extra ton of ammo too so it more than evens out.
Not 1-2 more shells on average. LOTS MORE. 1-2 more if you're inside 100m against a gigantic target maybe. But of course, the UAC pushes way more DPS even accounting for jams, so it's killing in fewer rounds, and pushing those rounds out faster.
Well, ignoring the 2's, but they're kinda bad either way.
Ultimately, this is much like the LRM20 situation.
It's terrible, due to several design flaws, and objectively worse than all the other launchers in pretty much every way (except, ironically also like the LBX20, in terms of pure visual and audible awesomeness). However, it's still a big weapon, and can certainly kill things.
As a result, people who don't actually understand how the weapon they are using actually works find some success with it, and they assume as a result that it's fine.
You CAN kill people with any weapon short of a tag laser. Being successful with something doesn't mean it's good.
And if it's not good, if it's simply worse than comparable weapons, then it should get tweaked a bit to be better.
The LBX is like that. It needs a damage-per-pellet increase, to make it less terrible at it's stated optimal range and actually good up close, so you have meaningful choices to make when deciding which sort of autocannon to use. Sure, you can kill people with it now, but generally speaking choosing to use it is simply a disadvantage, whether you understand the weapon enough to know it or not.
After a per-pellet damage increase, the LBX would actually be MORE dangerous, when you're up close. Thus, it'd be an actually superior brawling weapon. Still spreading, so less useful further away (but still doing actual damage, so being a better competitor for SRM's at 150-270m, and obviously superior past 270m - which is fair, given the *massive* tonnage and size difference.
Ultimately, this is much like the LRM20 situation.
It's terrible, due to several design flaws, and objectively worse than all the other launchers in pretty much every way (except, ironically also like the LBX20, in terms of pure visual and audible awesomeness). However, it's still a big weapon, and can certainly kill things.
As a result, people who don't actually understand how the weapon they are using actually works find some success with it, and they assume as a result that it's fine.
You CAN kill people with any weapon short of a tag laser. Being successful with something doesn't mean it's good.
And if it's not good, if it's simply worse than comparable weapons, then it should get tweaked a bit to be better.
The LBX is like that. It needs a damage-per-pellet increase, to make it less terrible at it's stated optimal range and actually good up close, so you have meaningful choices to make when deciding which sort of autocannon to use. Sure, you can kill people with it now, but generally speaking choosing to use it is simply a disadvantage, whether you understand the weapon enough to know it or not.
After a per-pellet damage increase, the LBX would actually be MORE dangerous, when you're up close. Thus, it'd be an actually superior brawling weapon. Still spreading, so less useful further away (but still doing actual damage, so being a better competitor for SRM's at 150-270m, and obviously superior past 270m - which is fair, given the *massive* tonnage and size difference.
Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time
Posted 29 May 2016 - 03:02 PM
Wintersdark, on 28 May 2016 - 04:59 AM, said:
"I do fine with it" is not an argument. I've seen people do great with Vindicators, too.
Ovion, on 28 May 2016 - 09:53 AM, said:
Then have it as airburst, exploding at X distance from a mech / wall or at max range like SRMs.
Making LBX's like PPCs would be sad, (and honestly, ruin the weapon for me, as I don't get along with PPCs for some reason) and reduce the weapon variety in the game.
Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time
Posted 29 May 2016 - 03:09 PM
Ovion, on 28 May 2016 - 11:36 AM, said:
The LBX works well if used as an LBX.
Actually the point being made is the LB-X doesn't actualyl act liek an LB-X
"An improvement on the common autocannon intended to expand the weapon’s role into anti-vehicle and anti-infantry work, the LB-X makes use of light, heat-dissipating alloys to reduce its weight and thermal buildup. These materials, coupled with a smooth-bore, multi-munition feed mechanism, make the LB more expensive than standard autocannons. However, the slight range increase and the ability to switch between standard-style bursts and explosive cluster munitions—both specially developed for this weapon system—more than mitigate this higher cost. Inner Sphere LB-X autocannons—like the Mydron Excel LB-X series, Imperator’s Code Red LB 10-X or Defiance’s Disintegrator LB 20-X— boast much improved efficiency over their standard kin."
It' supposed to be a switch ammo capable AC, with superior effective range than a standard version, less heat, and less weight. It utterly fails at that long range aspect. The LB-X was NEVER meant to be short ranged Mech Shotgun. That is a misconception fed by the previous MW titles.
Also just because it's one of "your best weapons"'
Really is meaningless. I kick a lot of people's butts in my VND-1AA, too. It's still a bad mech. It's just that it's individual strengths work well enough with my personal playstyle to overcome most of it's weaknesses. But it doesn't make it a good mech.
Actually the point being made is the LB-X doesn't actualyl act liek an LB-X
"An improvement on the common autocannon intended to expand the weapon’s role into anti-vehicle and anti-infantry work, the LB-X makes use of light, heat-dissipating alloys to reduce its weight and thermal buildup. These materials, coupled with a smooth-bore, multi-munition feed mechanism, make the LB more expensive than standard autocannons. However, the slight range increase and the ability to switch between standard-style bursts and explosive cluster munitions—both specially developed for this weapon system—more than mitigate this higher cost. Inner Sphere LB-X autocannons—like the Mydron Excel LB-X series, Imperator’s Code Red LB 10-X or Defiance’s Disintegrator LB 20-X— boast much improved efficiency over their standard kin."
It' supposed to be a switch ammo capable AC, with superior effective range than a standard version, less heat, and less weight. It utterly fails at that long range aspect. The LB-X was NEVER meant to be short ranged Mech Shotgun. That is a misconception fed by the previous MW titles.
Also just because it's one of "your best weapons"'
Really is meaningless. I kick a lot of people's butts in my VND-1AA, too. It's still a bad mech. It's just that it's individual strengths work well enough with my personal playstyle to overcome most of it's weaknesses. But it doesn't make it a good mech.
Getting people to accept the fact that they're using terrible weapons, is kind of one of those things that people get butt hurt over.
They think "I am a good player I don't use bad weapons!"
And make the false assumption that bad weapon choice negates some of their skill level.
While their in game skills may or may not be worse, their ability to see things from the BUILD, and MATH perspective certainly is.
What each and every single one of these people, fail to see is that taking an AC10, objectively will improve their performance rather dramatically.
Most will NEVER test that out for themselves either. If they did they'd never use an LBX weapon again.
Locationclimbing Mt Tryhard, one smoldering Meta-Mech corpse at a time
Posted 29 May 2016 - 07:22 PM
Mavairo, on 29 May 2016 - 07:06 PM, said:
Getting people to accept the fact that they're using terrible weapons, is kind of one of those things that people get butt hurt over.
They think "I am a good player I don't use bad weapons!"
And make the false assumption that bad weapon choice negates some of their skill level.
While their in game skills may or may not be worse, their ability to see things from the BUILD, and MATH perspective certainly is.
What each and every single one of these people, fail to see is that taking an AC10, objectively will improve their performance rather dramatically.
Most will NEVER test that out for themselves either. If they did they'd never use an LBX weapon again.
Well, as noted, like SHS, etc there are some very situational builds that they work in, but ONLY because they have neither the Tons/Crist or Hardpoints for a better choice.
Among bad players, the lab had the advantage of not requiring good aim to register a hit, so the whole placebo effect, etc. The Slop crowd likes it, because like missiles and lasers, it's ready to accumulate high damage for epeen inflation, ignoring the fact that it's a horribly inefficient weapon at actually killing anything.
Which is funny, because honestly, personally, LBX is one of mybest weapons.
(snip for tidiness)
Spoiler
IS:
1 LBX10 Light/Medium mechs often do OK, especially the CN9D, and my favoured Urbie uses an LBX10.
2 LBX10 Heavy/Assault mechs, especially my Jager / Catapult do quite well, as does the Atlas and King Crab. My FIrebrand with 2LBX10, 7T ammo, 2ML, 4SL is one of my main go-to mechs when needing to make money / perform well.
4 LBX10 Assaults do rather well for themselves, such as the Mauler (I forget if there's another IS one that can atm... probably not)
Clan:
I'll take CLBX2's in some instances, but mostly a pair on light/mediums or 4-6 on bigger mechs.
CLBX5's are great across the board, singly or in groups. 5-6 on Dire Wolf are very nasty, and my highest kills + damages are all from my 6LBX5 Dire Wolf, far exceeding the output of my 6CUAC 5 version. 4 on a Kodiak is reasonable too.
CLBX10's are reasonably solid, though not as good as LBX10's, though boating 4 is still pretty decent on a Dire Wolf or Kodiak
CLB20's are a nasty weapon, and sound fantastic, and can be OK in some instances, but I find with the range + ammo restriction, it's almost always better to run 2xCLB10 instead if possible.
Side note - 2LBX10, 2LBX5 on the Kodiak has been doing really well, including some 6 kill, thousand damage games.
The LBX works well if used as an LBX.
It's a flaying weapon, it throws people, physically with screen shake (each pellet has the impact force of an AC5 shell, causing tons of screen shake) and often mentally (it's a lot of screen shake). In 1vs1's, I can often come out best using LBX's due to that alone - them not being able to get a proper hit in because of it.
This also leads to it being a psychological thing - I've had just about every type of mech turn and scatter from LBX fire at one point or other, and it can make people think they're being hit with far more than they are.
With their max range, you can also spend a couple of shells to 'guide' people using it.
The LBX family as a whole also runs very cool - my Jager (engine DHS only when not firing the lasers) and Kodiak (with +2HS) run heat neutral.
My Dire with 6 of them can fire for ages too.
The fast pellet speed and spread makes it good at taking out light mechs, aiming at the legs lets you flay them pretty quickly.
At close to mid ranges, it does solid damage.
Yes, it may take 1-2 more shells on average than an AC equivalent, but often, you'll have an extra ton of ammo too so it more than evens out.
And on smaller mechs, it often means you actually have enough ammo to function or take the cannon at all.
Some of it's personal preference, and it may not be the best weapon, but it's not completely useless, it can be good, and it doesn't need making into a 'poor mans' ballistic PPC.
If you want to improve it, then increase the pellet damage to 1.1 or 1.2, or increase the crit rate by 100% or something.
But as I said before, we have 5 types of weapon:
PPFLD cannons (inc AC's, UACs, PPCs, Gauss)
- CAC/CUAC, which have a stream of shells and are still basically the same.
Hitscan (MG's, Flamers)
Shotguns (LBX's)
Direct DoT weapons (Lasers)
Cluster Missiles in 'dumbfire' and 'lock on' flavour. (all SRM / SSRM / LRM)
That's not a lot of diversity, so reducing 1/5 of that would be sad.
A few points you should note.
First, that is not how screen shake work. The shake someone sees is the sum of all randomly generated vectors per pellet. For example, if 2 pellets hit the target with completely opposite shake vectors, the sum would be no shake. Even if each pellet had AC20 level impulse. (that is how shake works for LRM too)
second... LBX weapons are so unbelievably bad. at least in their current state.
They need to significantly increase damage per pellet and reduce spread (even the same spread regardless of range)
Making LBX weapons work as PPCs have one big down-side. It makes them hit or miss weapons. Something LBX weapons should be the exact opposite of.
Getting people to accept the fact that they're using terrible weapons, is kind of one of those things that people get butt hurt over.
They think "I am a good player I don't use bad weapons!"
I think people tend to link themselves with their purchase, and make that their preference. You see this in things like smartphones, too - someone who bought an iPhone will tend to defend it to the death, and the guy who bought an Android phone will do so too - even if there's not really any logic or objectivity to either. Or car brands. Etc.
As if somehow, having chosen a poor weapon (and done well with it!) makes them look like worse players; because it means admitting they didn't really understand the ins and outs of the weapon. That's hardly reasonable, though, because most players haven't objectively tested things themselves, so ignorance is not a personal failing. Much like a hell of a lot of MWO, it's not like how these things work is very obvious.
When the reality is that if you're using it, and succeeding with it, then you're a better pilot than you thought you were. Be happy! Good on ya.
Just like someone succeeding with a Vindicator just shows they're good pilots (and are probably being underestimated, too). Pilot is more important than mech or weapon, after all.
7
JC Daxion, on 23 December 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:
