31 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

ok so we all know about how the Clan LBX should have 2 firing modes,
a burst(shotgun) and a slug(Single Shell) but there have been problems,
1) implementing a duel firing mechanic, allowing for 2 firing types,
2) IS players worried that Clan with PP-FLD AC would be OP,


=So My Solution=
on how to implement all the above,
with in the current CryEngine & fully Balance it,

First LBX ammo, in Lore i believe there are 2 ammo types(to my knowledge)
LB ammo(Shotgun) and Slug ammo(shell), i think having two is a bit unnecessary,
so why not keep it as LBX ammo currently is, making LBX ammo appear as both,
(so for this system Basic LBX is used No Coding Here at all)

now we get on to how to actually have 2 firing modes,
the problem is changing type of projectile the LBX fires,
so since people smarter than me have tried to do that and failed i wont,
in stead ill work on just changing a single variable of the weapon, the spread,

the idea is simulate another firing type by manipulating the LBXs spread,
making it seem like your LBX10 is firing a slug round with out it actually firing one,
(from a coding point this shouldnt be too hard, ranges based on weapons STD range),


Now on to the hard part,
many think it should be a button press, to switch between Burst and Slug,
but many are also worried about Clan having instant PP-FLD AC's, so heres my idea,
make a simple Charge Mechanic, much like the Gauss (i know i know i know!),
give it a 0.5-1 second charge delay, that fires the weapon on full charge,


this would give pilots their on demand(on Click) Burst fire option,
but if they hold the trigger for a very short it fires a Slug giving them that option,
the charge is very short(0.5-1Second) and the LBX will always fire when fully charged,
if the Pilot releases the trigger before the charge is complete it fires Burst,
which is why it has a very short charge, to break up the Click PP-FLD,


=Notes=
with this we can remove C-ACs,
as i dont think Clan really had normal ACs,
IS LBX would act the same way if this was implemented,

=Remember=
for this Idea i looked for a way to make Duel Firing LBX with out much Coding,
to make things easy on the Development team so they could more easily implement this,
should they decide to, and in so try to implement this Idea,
-
This would only Be a place holder to actual LBX Slug rounds,
which Paul has said he wants to work on and towards,


this has been Reposted to get your Thoughts on it,
if it needs some Work and if so how is should Change
(Poll Here)

Thoughts, Comments, Concerns?
Thanks

[Alan Davion]

Didn't someone just recently say that LBX ammo consisted of the standard slug round and "air burst" rounds that don't actually act like buckshot until they're within a few meters of the target, whereupon they explode and the sub-munitions do the actual damage?

Pretty sure that's what they said.

Why not just have the LBX function like a PPC bolt does right now? Probably easier for PGI to code.

Edited by Alan Davion, 05 May 2016 - 08:11 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

Alan Davion, on 05 May 2016 - 08:10 PM, said:

Why not just have the LBX function like a PPC bolt does right now? Probably easier for PGI to code.

Because there's no way in h*ll that I'm spending 11 tons on a glorified AC/5 that does 2.5 points of splash to either adjacent component. I wouldn't even use a glorified AC/8 that does 1 extra point to either side, it's not worth it.

I would much rather they just tighten the baseline spread by 20% and buff the per-pellet damage to 1.5. That lets it be extra dangerous up close and decidedly less so the more distant the target. This makes it considerably less flexible than the AC/10, which will be consistent at all ranges within its bracket, but gives it some role where it is the superior choice.

[JustEvil]

Hm... How about turning every LB-X into perma slug firing and turning every AC into burst firing like in lore? Would spare PGI time for developing switching mechanics (which is so hard to do because?) since it is just a copy & paste to different weapon.

What was the primary ammunition used in LB-X anyway?

Edited by JustEvil, 05 May 2016 - 08:54 PM.

[LordNothing]

i think proper ammo switching across the board would help a lot. you could add ammo types to other weapons like inferno srms, or semi guided lrms (no indirect but better direct fire) and explosive pods (narc ammo that goes boom).

sure it will take a real programmer some time to do it but it would be worth it and help ease some of the boredom with the current weapons set.

Edited by LordNothing, 05 May 2016 - 09:28 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

JustEvil, on 05 May 2016 - 08:53 PM, said:

Hm... How about turning every LB-X into perma slug firing and turning every AC into burst firing like in lore? Would spare PGI time for developing switching mechanics (which is so hard to do because?) since it is just a copy & paste to different weapon.

What was the primary ammunition used in LB-X anyway?

because that would involve changing Every AC in the Game,
where as My Change is just a,

-<If (Switch) WeaponStats Slug="Slug!"/>
<If (Slug="False") WeaponStats Spread="25"/>
<If (Slug="True") WeaponStats Spread="5"/>

[Alex Morgaine]

If it can be done that easily id support it.

[Kaeb Odellas]

Charging the tightness of the LBX spread is a weird mechanic for a cannon to have. This might make a little more sense for SRMs or something.

[Lykaon]

A simple solution would be to code an LB class autocannon as if it were two weapons but only allow one to fire at a time and have a shared cooldown between them.

Example: Inner sphere LB10X is 11 tons 6 criticals. The game is coded instead that a single LB10X is two weapons each with 5.5 tons and 3 crit slots that must occupy adjacent critical slots (meaning all 6 slots used for the LBX cannon must be in the same location.)

So equiping an LBx cannon to a mech would be just like it is now in mech lab the difference is on the weapon groupings. There would be two listings for an LBx class gun that can be assigned to a weapon grouping.

LBX mode one = Shot: just like we have now with LBx class guns.
LBX mode two = burst: just like the clan Autocannons are now now firing a short stream of projectiles.

A single weapon group may not include both modes from the same weapon pairing and firing in either mode triggers a cooldown on both modes within a single weapon pairing.

In practice you would use an LBx class gun by assigning the shot firing mode to one weapon grouping and the burst firing mode to another weapon group. Selecting what mode is done by firing the appropriate weapon grouping.

For simplicity sake ammo would be universal for each LB class cannon and not require shot or slug ammo be accounted for independantly.

So why do I recomend the modes be shot and burst fire instead of shot and pinpoint front loaded? Simply because the I.S. AC10 already fills the role for pinpoint and also having thr LB10X do the same would pretty much invalidate the standard AC10. Also we would not need to alter any of the clan mechanics or pre existing builds or play styles.

[LordNothing]

Kaeb Odellas, on 05 May 2016 - 10:10 PM, said:

Charging the tightness of the LBX spread is a weird mechanic for a cannon to have. This might make a little more sense for SRMs or something.

variable geometry blunderbuss. who builds such a weapon?

[Sjorpha]

I hate it when people write "Discussion!" in their topic or "Discuss!" and the end of their posts.

I hate it almost as much as when people sprinkle unwarranted smilies to make posts look nicer when they're actually passive aggressive, often in conjunction with non-committal phrasing.

Like so:

" Nevermind me I'm just stating MY (totally superior) opinion and totally respecting your right to your (wrong and stupid) opinion, look at all the smiles in my post that denies you the right to respond to my passive aggression! Have a nice day!"

That was totally a digression. No offence I hope *smiley*. Carry on and discuss!!!!

I like the idea of a "Hold and charge to fire slug" mechanic, but I don't understand why it would be hard to code an actual slug for it.

Edited by Sjorpha, 06 May 2016 - 02:20 AM.

[dervishx5]

Ahem. IS had LBX too.

The thing with LBX (and multi-ammo type weapons) is that the guy who could code that for the game quit. So now PGI doesn't have anyone to interpret his code. According to them anyway.

True IS LBX10 makes IS AC10s even more pointless than they are now since they weigh 1 ton less and would have the ability to switch ammo types.

But fret not people! This will never be implemented. Please buy a Night Gyr.

[JustEvil]

Andi Nagasia, on 05 May 2016 - 09:31 PM, said:

because that would involve changing Every AC in the Game,

Well, that is the point and since MWO weapons stats and stuff are basically defined by XML files it would be just using a search & replace option.

[Pjwned]

There's nothing wrong with how LBX cannons work as they do now.

The problem with LBX cannons is that they're supposed to be amazing crit seeker weapons, but because the critical hit system in this game sucks so much that we not only find that they're actually bad crit weapons, it turns out they're actually worse than their standard AC counterparts for landing crits.

Fix the critical hit system and LBX cannons will see much more play, but since that requires PGI to do some real work at a faster than glacial pace it's not going to happen.

[Lily from animove]

Andi Nagasia, on 05 May 2016 - 09:31 PM, said:

because that would involve changing Every AC in the Game,
where as My Change is just a,

-<If (Switch) WeaponStats Slug="Slug!"/>
<If (Slug="False") WeaponStats Spread="25"/>
<If (Slug="True") WeaponStats Spread="5"/>

and why would one ever choose Slug = false?

Their main purpose is critting. an wiht these both modes available, and no mode altering crits as well, I don't see anyone except total aim failing noobs to ever use the false mode.

Edited by Lily from animove, 06 May 2016 - 04:25 AM.

[2fast2stompy]

AFAIK, the problem isn't a lack of neat ideas, the problem is actually coding this in.

[Y E O N N E]

2fast2stompy, on 06 May 2016 - 06:26 AM, said:

AFAIK, the problem isn't a lack of neat ideas, the problem is actually coding this in.

Well, I know my idea is something they've already demonstrated they can do. They tighten spread all the time with quirks, and they've raised and lowered the damage on many weapons over the years.

[2fast2stompy]

Yeonne Greene, on 06 May 2016 - 06:27 AM, said:

Well, I know my idea is something they've already demonstrated they can do. They tighten spread all the time with quirks, and they've raised and lowered the damage on many weapons over the years.

Your idea has nothing to do with the thread topic, which is what I was addressing, that being a "mechanic for implementing true dual fire lbx".

And frankly, it sounds to me your idea would make lbx20 clearly superior to AC20. And maybe you missed the patch, but they reduced the spread by like 40% already, it's pretty accurate now.

Edited by 2fast2stompy, 06 May 2016 - 06:40 AM.

[Revis Volek]

Alan Davion, on 05 May 2016 - 08:10 PM, said:

Why not just have the LBX function like a PPC bolt does right now? Probably easier for PGI to code.

NOOOO!

NEVER! This means they will be slow, wonky never hit the target right, have the ability to phase through a mech with no dmg or even hit but register no dmg at all.

Please dont take a note from PPC's, they stink.

Sjorpha, on 06 May 2016 - 02:17 AM, said:

I hate it when people write "Discussion!" in their topic or "Discuss!" and the end of their posts.

I hate it almost as much as when people sprinkle unwarranted smilies to make posts look nicer when they're actually passive aggressive, often in conjunction with non-committal phrasing.

Like so:

" Nevermind me I'm just stating MY (totally superior) opinion and totally respecting your right to your (wrong and stupid) opinion, look at all the smiles in my post that denies you the right to respond to my passive aggression! Have a nice day!"

That was totally a digression. No offence I hope *smiley*. Carry on and discuss!!!!

I like the idea of a "Hold and charge to fire slug" mechanic, but I don't understand why it would be hard to code an actual slug for it.

No one cares....

[Y E O N N E]

2fast2stompy, on 06 May 2016 - 06:38 AM, said:

Your idea has nothing to do with the thread topic, which is what I was addressing, that being a "mechanic for implementing true dual fire lbx".

And frankly, it sounds to me your idea would make lbx20 clearly superior to AC20. And maybe you missed the patch, but they reduced the spread by like 40% already, it's pretty accurate now.

A.) It would make LB-20X superior to AC/20 under 100 meters...which is fine because if we're not making the LB series of weapons superior in some role then it will never be useful. That's the problem with this game; we have a bunch of weapons that have no niche where they are a good choice. MGs, IS Small Lasers, Clan Medium Pulse (not strictly bad, just not good enough anywhere), LB-X, AC/2...even Clan ER Medium Lasers and IS Medium Pulse are on the border of being out-classed at all brackets.

B.) AC/20 right now are not in a good place. They are too hot in pairs, with projectiles that are much too slow, and they don't have enough range or rate of fire to make them worth considering over SRMs for the weight they command. A Jager with 4xSRM6A is flat-out superior to a Jager with 2xAC/20, for instance. AC/20 needs its own set of changes (including the Clan UAC/20) and I never consider changes to one weapon without also considering changes to others.

C.) They reduced spread by 30%...and it still sprays all over the 'Mech at horrendously short-ranges for the damage it deals (11 tons for a gun that's worse than an SRM4 between 150-270 meters and worse than a pair of SRM4 at all ranges up to 270 meters while being pretty useless above 300 meters in general...awesome). But, I'm fine with baby steps; apply the damage buff first, see what happens.

D.) Thread topics are merely discussion catalysts; threads must evolve, else we just create an echo-chamber.

E.) The exact technical methodology used to create ammo-switching is, frankly, irrelevant to us. It doesn't matter if PGI codes it as two separate guns or as a dynamic flag on a single item, because what we see on our end is the same thing. That makes discussion on the subject moot except for reasons of personal entertainment. More relevant would be what to do about standard ACs if LBs gain the slug-fire ability, because the latter out-class the former.