413 replies to this topic

[Davers]

I had really hoped my previous comment would have stopped the usual "No, it's good and I do fine" arguments, but much like the LB10-X I was ineffective.

[Antares102]

Davers, on 30 July 2016 - 11:19 AM, said:

I had really hoped my previous comment would have stopped the usual "No, it's good and I do fine" arguments, but much like the LB10-X I was ineffective.

Yeah.. just as I said. There is always somebody arguing against common sense.

[Mcgral18]

Pronotum, on 30 July 2016 - 10:01 AM, said:

Hint: They're better than you think. Great? Not exactly. They're niched. But definitely not bad.

Anyway, if you don't want to contribute to the discussion, kindly leave. You won't solve a thing like that.

So, back on topic. We ought to look at the main issues people seem to be having with the LB-10X and see what the bloody problem is... Either it is through poor perception and misuse or through an actual issue.

Right now people mentioned crap crits. ...is that all? No.
So, what else is everyone's gripe with them?

Let's all get to the same page, so we can properly discuss this.
Instead of throwing random ideas like crap to the wind.

They're bad.
Outright bad

Not useless, but you'd be better off with nearly any other weapon system in the game, even in it's "niche"
They have a 300M effective range, if that, due to spread. No, hitting every component of a robot with 1 damage is not effective.

The AC10 does full damage, to one component, out to 450 (+) Meters.
That's a significant advantage.
If you touch 9 armour with it? You have a 42% chance to destroy an item, and every subsequent it as well (while you need 5 pellets to hit and Crit with the LB10x)


We aren't blinded, we've seen them for the past 4 years amount to nothing, and nothing worthwhile has ever been given to them.

"No no, LBx are a good weapon system" is a meme for a reason.

Pronotum, on 30 July 2016 - 10:15 AM, said:

Bandito, first, I will say this. Clan LB's? They are made obsolete by the less bulky, same tonnage UACs. Already from a pure DPS standpoint. That should be adressed. How to fix them, however, is a different story. And if we applied the same to the IS LB-10X, then suddenly the AC10 risks obsoletion.

But let's not ignore what the IS LB10-X has going for it. We need to consider the fact that Hardpoints are a thing, limiting what you can do on a mech. And hardpoint combinations on mechs allow diffrerent builds... And the fact that the only good one, the IS LB-10X weighs less, and takes less slots than the AC-10. So the LB-10 should have spread as that balancer. Anyway, that one ton, one slot opens up a whole can of varied builds that you can't do with an AC/10 and that are viable. Again, an LB-10X on a Dragon? Not a bad idea. 2xLB10 Marauder? Doable.

We should not just drop ourselves to comparing the weapon stats on an excel spreadsheet. There is more to practical use than just that.

The LB10x has nothing going for it.
It's FAR worse than the 1 ton differential, because it's WORSE AT EVERY role. Even at point blank, you can hit multiple components, while being less Crit effective.

We aren't even using the spreadsheet yet, we're talking in game uses. It has none.
"But you can mount two!" Mount an AC20, fewer slots, more effective.
"But that's not an AC10" and it's not 2 AC10s either, but it's a direct comparison of 20 damage VS 20 damage...one being far better than the other, at similar effective ranges, more heat, and an incredible Crit weapon...unlike the LBx.

[Pronotum]

Antares102, on 30 July 2016 - 11:20 AM, said:

Yeah.. just as I said. There is always somebody arguing against common sense.

Alternatively arguing against blind sheep mentality, complacency and... lack of common sense of seeing there is no single truth to balance since player input is a varied beast...

It's not as simple as "buff all LB's to 1.5 per pellet" with zero regard how bloody ridiculous of a change that is or why the things are as they are. So, we'd all buff all LB's to 1.5 per pellet...

IS LB10-X and Clan LB's need to be looked at seperately.

I'd suggest slug Clan LB's and see how damage or range needs to be adjusted, since the C-UAC's fill the Close-med range use already. But then again, why not call it the Clan AC instead in that case? Buffing damage is a slippery slope that can lead into some unplesant things like power creep if overdone.

For the IS I suggest little to no change. Less spread risks bringing it into being a lighter AC clone at all the ranges it would matter, and more damage is another slippery slope... It weighs less. It's less bulky. It has the odd, and mostly useless quirk of extended range for damage dropoff. Those need to be taken into account.

Edited by Pronotum, 30 July 2016 - 11:31 AM.

[FupDup]

El Bandito, on 30 July 2016 - 09:45 AM, said:

Facepalm.

This meme will live an eternal life in the hearts of Forumwarriors™.

[Antares102]

Pronotum, on 30 July 2016 - 11:25 AM, said:

It's not as simple as "buff all LB's to 1.5 per pellet" with zero regard how bloody ridiculous of a change that is or why the things are as they are. So, we'd all buff all LB's to 1.5 per pellet...

Yes it is. The ONLY thing that counts is how effective you can put damage on your enemy.
Therefore if a weapon is less effective than others, either, nerf all other weapons or buff the inferior one.

Pronotum, on 30 July 2016 - 11:25 AM, said:

IS LB10-X and Clan LB's need to be looked at seperately.

Then buff IS to 1.2 damage per pellet and clan to 1.3.

Edited by Antares102, 30 July 2016 - 11:36 AM.

[Positive Mental Attitude]

been running lb10s on my iv-4 for a week over using the 2 ac10s... I dont even want to go back to ac10s now. I also fight you within 400 meters generally anyway and the heat advantage over ac is more dps in my book.

[Antares102]

Deethree, on 30 July 2016 - 11:43 AM, said:

been running lb10s on my iv-4 for a week over using the 2 ac10s... I dont even want to go back to ac10s now. I also fight you within 400 meters generally anyway and the heat advantage over ac is more dps in my book.

The typical "I am doing fine with them".
What Tier are you? If it's less then 3 then everything works, including knives.

And even when leaving the Tier stuff aside, how many other mechs have you tried?
IV-4 is not really a heavy hitter meta mech. Its more like close to garbage.
I also own a IV-4 and i also did 1000 damage with it with AC10s (including arty and crits).
Does this mean IV-4 is good? No ! I just good lucky.
Play 1000 games with different mechs and you quickly realize that IV-4 is less than average
and LBX are inferior to AC10.

Edited by Antares102, 30 July 2016 - 12:00 PM.

[Coolant]

LBX do have greater range, less tonnage and less space...but it's not enough.

[Positive Mental Attitude]

Antares102, on 30 July 2016 - 11:54 AM, said:

The typical "I am doing fine with them".
What Tier are you? If it's less then 3 then everything works, including knives.

And even when leaving the Tier stuff aside, how many other mechs have you tried?
IV-4 is not really a heavy hitter meta mech. Its more like close to garbage.
I also own a IV-4 and i also did 1000 damage with it with AC10s (including arty and crits).
Does this mean IV-4 is good? No ! I just good lucky.
Play 1000 games with different mechs and you quickly realize that IV-4 is less than average
and LBX are inferior to AC10.

Ive played enough games to know what works and what doesnt. For me the lbx is working as intended and for my playstyle its better than the ac10.

[Mcgral18]

Coolant, on 30 July 2016 - 12:01 PM, said:

LBX do have greater range, less tonnage and less space...but it's not enough.

"greater range" is a fallacy

It's considerably shorter realistic range to the AC10 (which can actually be used beyond effective, with difficulty)

[Agent1190]

PGI reads thread - "OK, we'll buff LB damage by 50%.

2 hours later, forum warriors whine about OP LB's.

@Antares102, just because you are tier 1 doesn't mean someone else can't make a statement in the forums that you may not agree with. He said he's been running his IV-4 with LB10's and doesn't want to go back to AC10's on it. Why do you have a problem with that? Does it hurt your position that much to see someone preferring LB10's to AC10? Besides, he is having fun playing his IV-4 the way he wants to play it. Why do you begrudge him that?

Check yourself before you post. You're a good player, and you have good ideas. Don't cloud them with ******** like the above post.

[Antares102]

Agent1190, on 30 July 2016 - 12:10 PM, said:

Antares102, just because you are tier 1 doesn't mean someone else can't make a statement in the forums that you may not agree with.

But it does mean, that my chances playing against potatos is reduced.
And that is what I am basing my statements on.

I just HATE people who are constantly arguing against common sense.
But you are right I should not let this stuff get the best of me.

Edited by Antares102, 30 July 2016 - 12:15 PM.

[Positive Mental Attitude]

Antares102, on 30 July 2016 - 12:14 PM, said:

But it does mean, that my chances playing against potatos is reduced.
And that is what I am basing my statements on.

How is that even close to true? Im at the top of tier 3 only bc im just coming back to this game almost a month ago, and I spend more time in faction community play warfare. The fact that you think the iv-4 isnt a heavy hitter shows you have little understanding of the mech and most likely the entire game in general. Tiers in this game mean nothing, getting a high tier simply means gaming the scoring system. Theres many ways to go about that.

[Kubernetes]

I've actually come to the opinion that Clan LB10s and 20s have a role, but only because they don't have PPFLD equivalents. In a torso-twisting knife fight, the ability to snapshot (along with SRMs) makes them better than the stream of shells. Also, when everything is moving around chaotically, the UACs tend to spread damage even more than the LBXs. Just think about them as ballistic SRMs for mechs with spare tonnage and mounts.

[Antares102]

Deethree, on 30 July 2016 - 12:19 PM, said:

How is that even close to true? Im at the top of tier 3 only bc im just coming back to this game almost a month ago, and I spend more time in faction community play warfare. The fact that you think the iv-4 isnt a heavy hitter shows you have little understanding of the mech and most likely the entire game in general. Tiers in this game mean nothing, getting a high tier simply means gaming the scoring system. Theres many ways to go about that.

If you are Tier 3 then you are also playing against Tier 4 and 5 which have zero idea how this game is played.
And as I said I also own a IV-4 and did great with it sometimes but again this doesnt mean that it is a good mech.
Tiers do mean one thing: How high your chances are to play against total potatos.

But whatever.. so IV-4 is a good mech and LBX are ok because you are doing well with them in one mech.
Fine .. QED.. I admit defeat.

Edited by Antares102, 30 July 2016 - 12:24 PM.

[Deathlike]

This thread will never go away.

The reality is that while you can say that LBX is serviceable, but it's just inferior to the alternatives.

I'll have fun running LBX... but it's just not even a comp viable option.

Bad weapons (and mechs) are classified bad for good reason. You might get a good game with them, but... they'll never really win out if you can aim with a better weapon.

Deethree, on 30 July 2016 - 12:19 PM, said:

How is that even close to true? Im at the top of tier 3 only bc im just coming back to this game almost a month ago, and I spend more time in faction community play warfare. The fact that you think the iv-4 isnt a heavy hitter shows you have little understanding of the mech and most likely the entire game in general. Tiers in this game mean nothing, getting a high tier simply means gaming the scoring system. Theres many ways to go about that.

IV4 is not really a mech seen much on the field (like a pretty baby). Compared to the rest of the Quickdraws, it trades high mounted energy hardpoints for low slung dakka hardpoints while being forced to carry an XL engine (heavier energy boat builds on the Quickdraw can run XL too, but not as a full requirement).

The best thing about the Quickdraw are the large arms to draw some fire instead of the torsos.. and you're giving effectively a defensive attribute up (because the majority of the weapons are in the arms in the IV4)

[Agent1190]

Kubernetes, on 30 July 2016 - 12:21 PM, said:

I've actually come to the opinion that Clan LB10s and 20s have a role, but only because they don't have PPFLD equivalents. In a torso-twisting knife fight, the ability to snapshot (along with SRMs) makes them better than the stream of shells. Also, when everything is moving around chaotically, the UACs tend to spread damage even more than the LBXs. Just think about them as ballistic SRMs for mechs with spare tonnage and mounts.

I think this argument is more the IS LB10 vs IS AC10 (or UAC 5's for some reason). Both are snapshot weapons. For clans, both the C-LB# and C-AC/C-UAC# are spread weapons (unless you are firing at a sack of potatoes that can't twist). The differences in the weapons on the clan side get a little more muddled. The downside for the clans - C-LBs weigh the same as C-UACs, but require one more crit slot. This can have a huge impact on builds. At least the IS AC10 weighs less and takes up less crits to compensate for it's inferiority.

BTW - hope you guys get the buff you are looking for - my C-LB20x wants to do 30 damage per shot...

Edited by Agent1190, 30 July 2016 - 12:38 PM.

[Brain Cancer]

LB-X's would actually be useful "critseekers" if they did meaningful damage to equipment.

If I put an LB-20X into an exposed armorless torso, there should be structure left but a long list of wrecked weapons, heat sinks, and so on should be the result. By comparison, what would be junk for critseeking (big guns like the PPC, Gauss, or AC/20) should be doing a fraction of their damage to equipment.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Mildly incremental changes are worth a look. Very mild increments.

While I'm not a fan of the argument that every weapon should have parity with others (which is hard enough to determine as it is), I'm a fan of differing weapons have a valuable niche.

LBX by and large, currently do not. It's a surprise in WC, MRBC etc when you see someone using them in lieu of AC or UAC. They are used in such small amounts compared to others (and I'm sure PGI has all the data it needs to ascertain that), that it should be clear that they aren't in a good enough place to be a worthwhile consideration for right now, except for those that simply like the undergunned dynamic, the crit-seeking mythology or tire of Clan burst style AC's and want something single shot, albeit spreadout to all-hell.

A small tweak per pellet couldn't hurt trying, but PGI has to be pendulum-swing adverse and keep it mild per iteration imo.