Keshav Murali, on 04 September 2016 - 04:57 PM, said:
Your post is well thought out. Kudos.
Just a few things I'd like to say --> IS LPLs don't need a beam duration reduction, they already have very high burn DPS. (Unless you're talking about 9 damage LPLs here)
The beam reduction was minimal, 0.02s. Just to have it not end in 0.67s and to nudge the other numbers a touch.
Keshav Murali, on 04 September 2016 - 04:57 PM, said:
Also, this is just as "complicated" as ghost heat.
My number changes? They have nothing to do with the system or how well it's understood - it's simply weapons balancing that could happen with or without e-draw.
DrxAbstract, on 04 September 2016 - 05:24 PM, said:
Nobody would use IS LL/ER LL or Clan ER LL with those changes; the IS LPL and Clan LPL would be clear choices for performing at average engagement distances. The Clan LPL is simply too good, and could do with a max range reduction to 400 or 425 - It doesnt need to be any further than that, and would make a clear distinction of mid-range and long-range for choosing what to use between Clan LPL and Clan ER LL... And that Clan ER LL cooldown is debilitatingly excessive.
You would use the IS LLAS when you have less tonnage or want more range.
You would use the CERLLAS when you have less tonnage or want more range (225m extra optimal range is huge).
3x CERLLAS could be fired with no energy draw penalty, 30 damage at 775m for a build investment of 12 tons.
DrxAbstract, on 04 September 2016 - 05:24 PM, said:
The Clan LPL is simply too good, and could do with a max range reduction to 400 or 425 - It doesnt need to be any further than that
That would make it the same range as the IS LPL, except with worse stats elsewhere. That's not a realistic option, and neither is outright cloning the weapon from one faction to another.