413 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

Blind Baku, on 04 August 2016 - 05:34 PM, said:

LBX needs love, I say cooldown and spread is [EDIT] a good place to start, test it that way, from there look at damage.

i would rather they Didnt Change the Spread and Just Up the Crit or Up the Damage,
think about it even if the spread was drastically reduced it would just be a weaker AC,

[El Bandito]

Andi Nagasia, on 04 August 2016 - 06:51 PM, said:

i would rather they Didnt Change the Spread and Just Up the Crit or Up the Damage,
think about it even if the spread was drastically reduced it would just be a weaker AC,

Correct, lowering spread would simply bring it;s function closer to regular AC10, while being inferior. Spread is LBX's niche--capitalize on that.

[Blind Baku]

I would be willing to try the damage adjustments, I just imagine that as a much harder sell to PGI. Spread we have a precedent for through quirks. I also want to put out the thought that a tighter spread means that meme-able crit damage becomes far more lethal at closer ranges. I may have mathed it wrong but I want to say using the combined total Crit Chance (so 42% for standard weapons, etc) if you have the better part of your pellets in the target area the total crit chance equals out to a higher damage bonus to structure ( direct pellet damage damage + projected damage from average crits x 2). That said, the buff to crit chance to put it into a more reliable area would accomplish the same end, explosive if 'unreliable' damage to open portions of mechs.

I built a test build on the RFL-3N last night just to make sure I was not completely talking out my ***.
AC-10 Build
LBX-10 Build
The build is based on what I run for the RFL-LK, and I took all ballistics modules off (no LBX Cooldown, as I do not have the equiv for the AC 10).

Popped over to Emerald to test, walked to the same spot (can't remember grid coord off head, but 200m off the left should to the Commando) and opened up. LBX won out in time to kill (I did test aiming first to remove leg, then arm, then torso). Walk to the end of the flight line and repeat on the Cicada, similar results. I is also worth not the AC10 suffered from needing to either pace very slowly through the shots, or take 'murder naps' (Overheating), where as the LBX was a fairly cool customer*.

I again get that the LBX is not in a great spot, but as a sustainable weapon that allows that build to pack more ammo, armor an speed (which also translates to agility), I don't think it is quite as broken as has been previously stated.

I did also follow up by dropping in both builds, matches were absolute rubbish, but the two worth note* (both polar) gave a ~680 (AC10, I apparently did not screen shot :/) and a 793 (LBX10). I do plan to run a few more runs because 1 offing is not enough to build a case for either weapon system.

If you have AC10 builds or LBX builds I would be happy to try them out, I know a lot of people don't like the 2LBX 2MPL build on the LK, but it is what I run. If you have suggested build keep in mind I want to try and showcase the cannons in this, not how hard "6 ML's can carry an under-powered weapon system". I may even try to get a vid cap so we can youtube how it works and how it doesn't. If we can better demonstrate the highlights and failings of the weapon I suspect we can give better feedback to PGI, and in turn provide 'better' solutions.

*I need to do this test a few more times, I was interrupted by real life issues... and I did not time it with a stop watch or anything like that. If anyone else wants to try the same, I would love to look at results.
**I did get early gamed out of one in the LBX build [salt salt salt] my team almost wanted to push tunnel in Crimson, they stalled out early and ran away from the 2 lights in the underside... [salt salt salt]

Edited by Blind Baku, 05 August 2016 - 06:31 AM.

[Brain Cancer]

Notably, dual AC/10s can and will oneshot a light from behind at any range. LB-Xs need to be within about 250m or so to minimize spread enough to deliver enough focused damage.

Direct full damage always beats spread damage.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Brain Cancer, on 05 August 2016 - 11:32 AM, said:

Direct full damage always beats spread damage.

I'm going to need more context for this, because SRMs are the strongest brawling weapon currently, and they are spread damage. I'm assuming you just meant if damage potential is equal for both weapons then PPFLD always beats spread damage which is definitely true.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 05 August 2016 - 12:35 PM.

[FupDup]

Brain Cancer, on 05 August 2016 - 11:32 AM, said:

Notably, dual AC/10s can and will oneshot a light from behind at any range. LB-Xs need to be within about 250m or so to minimize spread enough to deliver enough focused damage.

Direct full damage always beats spread damage.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 August 2016 - 12:34 PM, said:

I'm going to need more context for this, because SRMs are the strongest brawling weapon currently, and they are spread damage. I'm assuming you just meant if damage potential is equal for both weapons then PPFLD always beats spread damage which is definitely true.

The correct way to rephrase it is that "Direct full damage always beats spread damage if all other variables are kept equal."

For example, if there were alternative SRMs that dealt damage as a single projectile, while keeping identical range/heat/etc values, those alternate versions would heavily beat the current SRMs. If there was an IS Large Laser with 0.1 beam duration, with the same damage/heat/range etc., it would be clearly stronger than our current LL. Etc.

The important thing to note is that, unlike in the above examples, the variables are almost never all equal. Spread weapons tend to make up for spread in other ways such as hitscan (lasers), damage per tonnage ratio (lasers and SRMs), or other things.

Edited by FupDup, 05 August 2016 - 12:41 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

FupDup, on 05 August 2016 - 12:38 PM, said:

The important thing to note is that, unlike in the above examples, the variables are almost never all equal. Spread weapons tend to make up for spread in other ways such as hitscan (lasers), damage per tonnage ratio (lasers and SRMs), or other things.

Unfortunately for LBX however, those ways in which it tries to make up for it definitely leave something to be desired.

[El Bandito]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 05 August 2016 - 01:02 PM, said:

Unfortunately for LBX however, those ways in which it tries to make up for it definitely leave something to be desired.

Don't you know? Being able to put dual LBX in the torso apparently makes up for all that deficiency!

[Mole]

El Bandito, on 05 August 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

Don't you know? Being able to put dual LBX in the torso apparently makes up for all that deficiency!

What, you can't do that with just a regular ol' AC/10?

[Deathlike]

El Bandito, on 05 August 2016 - 03:56 PM, said:

Don't you know? Being able to put dual LBX in the torso apparently makes up for all that deficiency!

Yes, when you double down in bad... making that build "less bad" apparently is acceptable.

[Tier5 Kerensky]

I've tried to find good use for LBX. The way I figure it, it's advantage is having better chance to hit for some damage. So it doesn't seem effective againts heavies and assults.

[Y E O N N E]

Deathlike, on 05 August 2016 - 04:04 PM, said:

Yes, when you double down in bad... making that build "less bad" apparently is acceptable.

Real-talk, though, we've been doing that with Inner Sphere medium lasers for eons now.

[davoodoo]

El Bandito, on 04 August 2016 - 07:27 PM, said:

Correct, lowering spread would simply bring it;s function closer to regular AC10, while being inferior. Spread is LBX's niche--capitalize on that.

How can you capitalize on its only flaw??

Yea in tt where you can actually miss stuff cannon which got slim chance to miss is a plus, then crit to engine is huge disadvantage for the hit mech, ammo explosions end mechs and even gyro or life support hits are devastating.

Here?? accuracy 100% and crit sux balls. Cluster ammo is inferior in every conceivable way to slug. There aint even infantry or vtols to shoot it at.

Edited by davoodoo, 05 August 2016 - 06:53 PM.

[El Bandito]

davoodoo, on 05 August 2016 - 06:51 PM, said:

How can you capitalize on its only flaw??

Yea in tt where you can actually miss stuff cannon which got slim chance to miss is a plus, then crit to engine is huge disadvantage for the hit mech, ammo explosions end mechs and even gyro or life support hits are devastating.

Here?? accuracy 100% and crit sux balls. Cluster ammo is inferior in every conceivable way to slug. There aint even infantry or vtols to shoot it at.

By giving it damage boost, so that it won't tickle at mid range, and can be more effective than regular AC10 up close. Since PGI is unlikely to code in cluster ammo, super shotgun is what we should strive for.

Also, giving the LBX small chance of critting internal components even through full armor, can make it more unique. Smaller munitions having easier time finding weak points and such.

Edited by El Bandito, 05 August 2016 - 07:17 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

El Bandito, on 05 August 2016 - 06:58 PM, said:

By giving it damage boost, so that it won't tickle at mid range, and can be more effective than regular AC10 up close. Since PGI is unlikely to code in cluster ammo, super shotgun is what we should strive for.

Also, giving the LBX small chance of critting internal components even through full armor, can make it more unique. Smaller munitions having easier time finding weak points and such.

Even with having 20% more Damage, it will still be balanced,
How? because Clan LBX weigh more than UAC which have Double Fire,
where as IS LBX weigh less but dont have Duel fire, balancing it against IS UAC,

[InspectorG]

El Bandito, on 03 August 2016 - 08:44 PM, said:

0.5 damage to armor is a stupid stupid idea.

The more i think of it, yeah.

But its like: how do you give it utility without being another SRM?

If you just flat increase the pellet damage, that will encourage face hugging. 3dmg per pellet and you can have a LBX60 if you get close enough. Is that a good thing?

[Andi Nagasia]

InspectorG, on 05 August 2016 - 08:03 PM, said:

The more i think of it, yeah.

But its like: how do you give it utility without being another SRM?

If you just flat increase the pellet damage, that will encourage face hugging. 3dmg per pellet and you can have a LBX60 if you get close enough. Is that a good thing?

give it a Min Range? like Clan LRMs? so at 80m it starts to decay?

[Mole]

Andi Nagasia, on 05 August 2016 - 08:07 PM, said:

give it a Min Range? like Clan LRMs? so at 80m it starts to decay?

Nobody's gonna be happy with that unless you can come up with an actual reason for that happening. How on earth do you explain a shotgun having a minimum range?

[Ghostrider0067]

Mole, on 05 August 2016 - 08:08 PM, said:

Nobody's gonna be happy with that unless you can come up with an actual reason for that happening. How on earth do you explain a shotgun having a minimum range?

Minimum range else you take damage from ricochet?

[El Bandito]

InspectorG, on 05 August 2016 - 08:03 PM, said:

The more i think of it, yeah.

But its like: how do you give it utility without being another SRM?

If you just flat increase the pellet damage, that will encourage face hugging. 3dmg per pellet and you can have a LBX60 if you get close enough. Is that a good thing?

1. Nothing is wrong with ballistic version of SRM, as long as it is implemented correctly. Not all mechs have missile mounts, and some mechs such as the Atlas might like to maximize the close range damage by bringing both SRMs and LBXs.

2. So what if it encourages face hugging? The brawler also puts himself at great risk, and more brawling is always more fun than mid-long range sniping.

3. I never said anything about 3 damage per pellet. In fact, if you read my first post in this thread I specifically proposed 1.4-1.5 damage per pellet.

El Bandito, on 30 July 2016 - 09:40 AM, said:

LBX pellet needs to be 1.4 or 1.5 to be actually useful without quirks. Afterwards we can tone down LBX quirks of certain mechs.

Edited by El Bandito, 05 August 2016 - 08:29 PM.