87 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

If I need mid-range poke, 3 LL is still fairly good.

Despite that, I'd probably rather run 2 LPL whenever possible... because wub.

[GrimRiver]

Khobai, on 24 March 2016 - 09:17 PM, said:

why would you ever use a LL over an ERLL? Its 50% more range for 1 extra heat.

LL has needed a buff for a while now.

And LPL need a nerf.

ERLL are bad at anything under 300m due to how long it takes the laser to do it's full damage,
which is where the LL fits in nicely(200m-400m). While you can use ERLL at short range, the LL is better suited for it.

I always take LPL over LL if I can fit them or if it has me sitting nice on heat.

[Tahribator]

Vanilla LL always felt very meh to me. It feels like the duration doesn't justify the damage and you need a large amount of LLs to be effective in comparison to LPLs, which is good in any amount.

[GrimRiver]

Tahribator, on 25 March 2016 - 11:26 AM, said:

Vanilla LL always felt very meh to me. It feels like the duration doesn't justify the damage and you need a large amount of LLs to be effective in comparison to LPLs, which is good in any amount.

I feel like it's a good thing that LL are meh because they're not too strong nor too weak
but it is sad that 2x LL are the mim to make any use of them while 1x LPL is good on it's own.

[Mcgral18]

Raso, on 25 March 2016 - 05:29 AM, said:

How much damage does an LPL actually deal at 450m? Is it more or less than a LLas? If it deals the same or comparable damage to the LLas at the LLas's optimum rage then I'm going to have to refit some of my mechs...

They deal 8.4 damage at 450M, so just under the LL
At 600M, they deal...3.9?

It makes a small difference, but rarely in the PUG LIFE.

[Rocket2Uranus]

Regular Laser-

Pros - Longer Range. If you miss for the first few seconds, you can move the cross hair and try to hit the opponent.
Cons - Have to hold the beam on target slightly longer for full damage.

Pulse Lasers -

Pros - Don't have to keep laser on target shorter. Does slightly more damage in less time. Can cycle faster than regular lasers by fraction of seconds.
Cons - Shorter Range. If you miss you can't make up for it by adjusting beam.

[Ultimax]

Mister D, on 24 March 2016 - 10:34 PM, said:

Yeah, but if C-ERLL had shorter burn time you would see it used more often.

Problem is C-LPL has ridiculous range in comparison to C-ERLL, its only 140 meters apart, and that 2 damage you're missing from ERLL makes up for it in dps, even outside of optimal range.

C-LPL needs range dialed back a smidge, and C-ERLL needs a shorter burn time, then things will be unique enough to warrant both.

This is mostly an issue in standard play, where every match plays basically the same because neither side has anything that resembles a plan - rush toward middle, fight at 400-500m.

If you do some organized play there are clearly matches where you're better off with CERLLAS and their 840m range - which more importantly translates to more damage beyond that range than the CLPL is capable of.

You really won't be able to get much done at 1200m with a CLPL for example, which is a range that does come into play for things like MRBC, MS Invitational etc.



The point being, not every weapon can be a generalist weapon to fit generalist situations (pug queue) - niche weapons do a niche thing, that's their point.

Not all players are going to play in niche situations, that's just the reality of totally random PUG teams, full of random mechs, with random builds on random maps & random game modes.

[Ultimax]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 25 March 2016 - 09:43 AM, said:

Not really quite the prevalence of iERLLs though, mainly because no Clan mech outside the HBK-IIC and Hellbringer has good enough mounts compared to some of the IS mechs.

TBR with A-LT does fine. Assuming 4 CERLLAS, not all would be high mounted, but only select few IS heavies have anything I would consider "all high mounts" for 3+ ERLLAS.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimax, on 25 March 2016 - 01:25 PM, said:

TBR with A-LT does fine. Assuming 4 CERLLAS, not all would be high mounted, but only select few IS heavies have anything I would consider "all high mounts" for 3+ ERLLAS.

You don't see them often enough compared to Grasshoppers, Quickdraws, Battlemasters, and Banshees mainly because while it has high mounts, the cockpit is not high mounted on the Timby. Don't get me wrong, it is still solid, but there are better ERLL mechs than the Timby.

[Ultimax]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 25 March 2016 - 01:40 PM, said:

You don't see them often enough compared to Grasshoppers, Quickdraws, Battlemasters, and Banshees mainly because while it has high mounts, the cockpit is not high mounted on the Timby. Don't get me wrong, it is still solid, but there are better ERLL mechs than the Timby.

I don't think it's fair to compare it to 85 and 95 ton assault mechs and the only disadvantage it has vs. Quickdraw and Grasshopper imo is really the differences in burn times.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimax, on 25 March 2016 - 01:44 PM, said:

I don't think it's fair to compare it to 85 and 95 ton assault mechs and the only disadvantage it has vs. Quickdraw and Grasshopper imo is really the differences in burn times.

I was just comparing it to the mechs it will likely be facing which all have high mounts and cockpit compared to the Timby, though comparing it to the Battlemaster is fairer than the Quickdraw since the Battlemaster is closer in tonnage. It does depend on the map, but maps like Polar definitely favor those with high mounts that can ridge hump really well.

As far as burn times go, not really, the GHR-5P and QKD-5K can run ERLL with solid mounts and less of their mech exposed than the Timby. Though if the cERLL didn't have the ghost heat limit of 2 things might be different.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 25 March 2016 - 01:51 PM.

[Deathlike]

Ultimax, on 25 March 2016 - 01:44 PM, said:

I don't think it's fair to compare it to 85 and 95 ton assault mechs and the only disadvantage it has vs. Quickdraw and Grasshopper imo is really the differences in burn times.

The burn times are annoying, but really stopped the proliferation of CERLL was heat... and indirectly Ghost Heat.

Before any Ghost Heat and actual "laser normalization" happened, tri-CERLL Kitfoxes were a thing. Ironically the duration was the same since debut (was adjusted multiple times, and a bad 2.0s attempt was made by our balance overlord).

Heat is actually the issue (on the CLPL it isn't as bad - and yet they have the same heat generation) despite duration still being a factor.

Personally speaking, there is a prohibitive aspect for both ISERLL and CERLL... whether it be duration and heat (though that's more applicable to the latter) that makes them not ideal for regular play. They are alright in their niches (ISERLL has better quirk support technically speaking), but it's also why they stay there.

Edited by Deathlike, 25 March 2016 - 02:00 PM.

[Ultimax]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 25 March 2016 - 01:50 PM, said:

I was just comparing it to the mechs it will likely be facing which all have high mounts and cockpit compared to the Timby, though comparing it to the Battlemaster is fairer than the Quickdraw since the Battlemaster is closer in tonnage. It does depend on the map, but maps like Polar definitely favor those with high mounts that can ridge hump really well.

While true, the TBR humps ridges faster than both of those - and doesn't have nearly as huge hitboxes as either of them - they are obviously tankier, but I find that's relative due to their lack of speed and overall size.

I wish PGI would pull their head out of their bum and find a different way to balance Clan ERs than 1.5s burn times.



As a side note, I think the BLR is better than the Banshee in this role anyway, the Banshee is pretty slow, its head sticks out over ridges before its weapons do and it has to "waste" tonnage on usually superfluous extra lasers to get the ERs/LLAS into the high mounts.

Deathlike, on 25 March 2016 - 02:00 PM, said:

The burn times are annoying, but really stopped the proliferation of CERLL was heat... and indirectly Ghost Heat.

Quad CERLLAS TBR with 24 DHS on maps like Polar, Grim Plexus, HPG, Alpine, etc. really has no issue with heat.

I don't have issues with it on the heat neural maps either.

20 heat followed by 20 heat, each spread out over the 1.5s burn is pretty easy to manage.

Edited by Ultimax, 25 March 2016 - 02:07 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimax, on 25 March 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

While true, the TBR humps ridges faster than both of those

Actually it doesn't, the Quickdraw runs a 300 XL (meaning it goes Timby speed) and has minor accel/decel quirks on top while the Timby still has minor accel/decel neg quirks attached to the A left torso. The Grasshopper runs a bit slower depending on how you build it, but also gets a larger accel/decel quirk than the Quickdraw, so chances are good it is just as fast if not faster.

Ultimax, on 25 March 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

and doesn't have nearly as huge hitboxes as either of them

The part of the Quickdraw that you are exposing is actually not that large, the only reason it is near as large as it looks is because of how long its legs are. The Grasshopper doesn't have to expose much either if you are just using 4 ERLL that are high mounted on the 5P. The Grasshopper does have the barn door CT problem, but again you aren't exposing near as much as you think compared to the Timby.

Ultimax, on 25 March 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

As a side note, I think the BLR is better than the Banshee in this role anyway, the Banshee is pretty slow, its head sticks out over ridges before its weapons do and it has to "waste" tonnage on usually superfluous extra lasers to get the ERs/LLAS into the high mounts.

The Banshee isn't that slow, but it definitely isn't perfect because you can't mount 6 ERLL high mounted. Still, it is faster than the Stalker and has more high mounts which end up making an ok choice for ERLL fights as well. The wasted tonnage is so minor it isn't really worth mentioning.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 25 March 2016 - 02:11 PM.

[Ultimax]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 25 March 2016 - 02:11 PM, said:

Actually it doesn't, the Quickdraw runs a 300 XL ...The Grasshopper runs a bit slower


The part of the Quickdraw ...

The Grasshopper doesn't have to expose ...

I meant the TBR is faster, more agile and pokes above ridges and gets back down faster than "both of those" meaning the Banshee and Battlemaster.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Ultimax, on 25 March 2016 - 03:12 PM, said:

I meant the TBR is faster, more agile and pokes above ridges and gets back down faster than "both of those" meaning the Banshee and Battlemaster.

Oh, yes, but it also doesn't pack the same punch 3 cERLL versus 5-6 iERLL is not really going to end well unless the Timby pilot gets a nice burn on the Battlemaster's unfortunately large cockpit or focuses heavily on a side hoping it is running an XL (which it probably should be).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 25 March 2016 - 03:58 PM.

[Deathlike]

Ultimax, on 25 March 2016 - 02:05 PM, said:

Quad CERLLAS TBR with 24 DHS on maps like Polar, Grim Plexus, HPG, Alpine, etc. really has no issue with heat.

I don't have issues with it on the heat neural maps either.

20 heat followed by 20 heat, each spread out over the 1.5s burn is pretty easy to manage.

I'm talking about other builds, and not explicitly the Timberwolf version.

The Timberwolf version has more of the ideal heatsinks numbers involved... and the non-Timberwolf versions simply don't sustain as well (not that you need to, but I learn towards Quicksilver's alternative options being better overall) but you have better placement or usage scenarios involved.

Mind you, I'm not going to subscribe to Gyrok's "Timberwolf is UP/needs buffs", but there are better options available for this purpose.

Edited by Deathlike, 25 March 2016 - 04:40 PM.

[Adamski]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 25 March 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

Oh, yes, but it also doesn't pack the same punch 3 cERLL versus 5-6 iERLL is not really going to end well unless the Timby pilot gets a nice burn on the Battlemaster's unfortunately large cockpit or focuses heavily on a side hoping it is running an XL (which it probably should be).

I'm not sure why 12t of weapons should ever compare favourably to 25-30t not to mention only requiring 3 slots as opposed to 10-12.

With all the weight and slot savings, add a cGauss for some instant punch with no heat.

Edited by Adamski, 25 March 2016 - 04:45 PM.

[Gyrok]

Deathlike, on 25 March 2016 - 04:39 PM, said:

Mind you, I'm not going to subscribe to Gyrok's "Timberwolf is UP/needs buffs", but there are better options available for this purpose.

I never said the TW is underpowered, or needs buffs...

I have said the BK is OP as sin; however, which is not precisely the same thing.

The TW is only really a very good option as a splat + SPL brawler...otherwise, something like the HBR is a better option for clans and peeking.

Having said that, the IS has better poking mechs...and has for a while. There are very few things that ridge hump like a stalker or battlemaster.

[Gyrok]

Adamski, on 25 March 2016 - 04:43 PM, said:

I'm not sure why 12t of weapons should ever compare favourably to 25-30t not to mention only requiring 3 slots as opposed to 10-12.

With all the weight and slot savings, add a cGauss for some instant punch with no heat.

The issue is...you can fire those 5-6 iERLLs in roughly the same time it takes to get 1 full burn of cERLLs. If you add a Gauss you are still at a disadvantage in damage in that trade, and if you fire 2 more ERLLs after half a second, you lose most of the damage from the second group.

Essentially, you have to hope your enemy is a bad pilot, and you have to be spot on, just trade evenly at best.

The only time you have hope of winning a trade is where you flat out range them, which means 800m+ and even then, you are only winning marginally if you do it perfectly.

Since you are likely going to say that 800m+ engagements happen all the time in group queue, let me preface that by saying, no...they do not.

Edited by Gyrok, 25 March 2016 - 05:33 PM.