35 replies to this topic

[Bud Crue]

LordNothing, on 01 April 2017 - 01:10 AM, said:

they need to tighten the spreads where if you shoot at a kodiak at the optimal range, all the pellets should land squarely on all the facing torso sections. perhaps a nonlinear spread where the shots have a slightly higher chance of being in the middle of the grouping than the extremities. ramping up dps is also an option.

Tighten?
Well if the skills tree nerf pdfs are any indication of future intent, PGI plans on increasing the spread not tightening it. Seriously, most of the few clan mechs with LBX spread quirks are losing them or they are being significantly reduced. Summoner-M, Gargoyle-P, even the Adder and the Mist Lynx variants. Only variant they don't touch is the Summoner Prime.

Sure this could be all part of some glorious PGI balance pass where they nerf a bunch of mechs and then add some buff/change to the weapon itself, but given their silence in this regard and the apparent belief that the skills tree will magically balance all mechs...I aint counting on it.

As to Yeonne's comment above. Yes. When the IV-4 had 40% it was wonderful, at 30% its still pretty great, but the LK is now better (imho) for this niche role. The proposed reduction down to 20% via the skills tree will render this already T5 mech even more marginalized. In this case we are talking about one of the worst mechs in the game being made merely viable (it is a T5 mech )with one of the worst weapons vis quirks. Reduce that mechs quirks even a bit, and that mech will never be seen again. Keep the LBX in the crap state that it is in and the weapon may as well disappear too particularly with MRMs coming onto the scene.

[Mole]

DrxAbstract, on 31 March 2017 - 09:34 PM, said:

So my question, because you were using an Assassin, would be: Were you spamming your Jump Jets?

I ask this because people do this a lot to unhinge HSR, which isn't a new thing as it has historically proven so effective at decoupling HSR from the model that it was patched for some Mechs... Although it never really went away, it has seen a resurgence these last few months and it's quite clear using JJs to foil hit detection is reaching similar levels of abuse that warranted patching in the past... Which makes it kind of a given that someone abusing hit detection in a Mech with a scrawny physical profile is going to beat a big, relatively stationary target.

There's also the question of difference in skill between the two players... But my guess would be you were abusing JJ hit detection. /shrug

Actually no, I wasn't using my JJs at all. We were trading down in a Canyon on Canyon Network. I would peek, splat him, he would splat me, and then I'd hide. I figured I'd stop peeking at him when it became clear I could no longer get away with it. But no matter how many times he splatted me with his LB cannons my splat with my SRMs always hurt him more. So I kept doing it.

[LordNothing]

Bud Crue, on 01 April 2017 - 04:46 AM, said:

Tighten?
Well if the skills tree nerf pdfs are any indication of future intent, PGI plans on increasing the spread not tightening it. Seriously, most of the few clan mechs with LBX spread quirks are losing them or they are being significantly reduced. Summoner-M, Gargoyle-P, even the Adder and the Mist Lynx variants. Only variant they don't touch is the Summoner Prime.

Sure this could be all part of some glorious PGI balance pass where they nerf a bunch of mechs and then add some buff/change to the weapon itself, but given their silence in this regard and the apparent belief that the skills tree will magically balance all mechs...I aint counting on it.

As to Yeonne's comment above. Yes. When the IV-4 had 40% it was wonderful, at 30% its still pretty great, but the LK is now better (imho) for this niche role. The proposed reduction down to 20% via the skills tree will render this already T5 mech even more marginalized. In this case we are talking about one of the worst mechs in the game being made merely viable (it is a T5 mech )with one of the worst weapons vis quirks. Reduce that mechs quirks even a bit, and that mech will never be seen again. Keep the LBX in the crap state that it is in and the weapon may as well disappear too particularly with MRMs coming onto the scene.

that is very unfortunate. its one of those weapons you just dont use when the quirks arent there, along with the uacs and where the ppcs used to be. they are still pretty good with cooldown quirks, gives a bit of advantage over other guns in a brawl, but those are probibly getting stripped for the skill trees as well. post skill tree were going to need another weapons balance pass, many mechs will also need to have their base stats refactored. the skill trees are a hammer poised to anihilate the current state of balance. i kind of welcome the change up but still its going to be a salt mine.

Edited by LordNothing, 01 April 2017 - 01:40 PM.

[Deathlike]

Kin3ticX, on 31 March 2017 - 09:30 PM, said:

The crit seeking is a gimmick because it doesnt mean **** until armor is gone and its a weapon that can only focus damage at close range

Its one of the reasons we mostly see LBX mixed with SRMs on serious builds. Dont really see LBX mixed with anything else nor would you have a reason to. Its just a very heavy SRM launcher for when you dont have anymore more missile hardpoints.

The thing about LBX is that its "damage" is more in line with missiles and MGs in the fact that you're doing lots of "filler" damage in crits and not actually doing real damage to the mech more often than not. Sure it can finish mechs, but I mean the MG does it with less tonnage involvement even if the LBX has a greater "effective range" than the MG.

LBX functionally isn't really in a good state and arguable needs significant tightening with its current mechanics to be "practical" for all intents and purposes. Unless it mechanically changes, it will be as mediocre as our balance overlord on a good day.

[LT. HARDCASE]

Mole, on 31 March 2017 - 07:12 PM, said:

...when you are in an Assassin armed with 4 SRM4 and trading with a Dire Wolf armed with 3 LB-10-X at 250m and you are winning.

No, that happened because of the state of the Dire Wolf.

Try the same thing against an LBX Kodiak.

[Khobai]

The LBX is supposed to be a spread weapon. Tightening the spread makes no sense to me. It might as well just be a normal AC10 if youre going to tighten its spread.

What they need to do is keep the spread but increase the pellet damage. So its more like a shotgun. High damage at close range but spreads out and not as good at longer ranges.

Since theyre adding a new weapon mechanic for ATMs/snubnose PPC/heavy gauss that allows for variable damage depending on range. They should just apply that mechanic to LBX autocannons. Make LBX cannons do more damage at shorter ranges and less damage at longer ranges.

So LBX could do like 1.5 damage per pellet at pointblank range which would scale down to 1 damage at optimum range and then less than 1 damage beyond optimum range upto its maximum range where it does 0 damage. Then it would hit extremely hard close up like a shotgun should.

Edited by Khobai, 01 April 2017 - 10:27 PM.

[FireStoat]

Interesting. If PGI used the upcoming mechanic of ATM damage being based on range of impact for the LBX series of cannon, to give reduced base damage on a long shot but slightly increased damage for short range hits... Great idea, actually. Depending on values tweaked, they could dispense with the 'it's a crit seeking weapon' baloney and give the gun a reason worthy of competition vs the UAC.

[Khobai]

Quote

hey could dispense with the 'it's a crit seeking weapon' baloney and give the gun a reason worthy of competition vs the UAC.

increasing the per pellet damage would also have the bonus effect of making it better at critting.

but it would be better in general too.

[Grey Ghost]

Mcgral18, on 31 March 2017 - 09:40 PM, said:

You can't alpha them though
You need cAC10s to alpha...but then you get half the damage (and no modules)

According to smurfy's C-AC/10s are linked with C-UAC/10s ghost heat wise. If the intention is to avoid ghost heat, you'd have to use C-LB10-Xs.

[El Bandito]

FireStoat, on 02 April 2017 - 12:18 AM, said:

Interesting. If PGI used the upcoming mechanic of ATM damage being based on range of impact for the LBX series of cannon, to give reduced base damage on a long shot but slightly increased damage for short range hits... Great idea, actually. Depending on values tweaked, they could dispense with the 'it's a crit seeking weapon' baloney and give the gun a reason worthy of competition vs the UAC.

Or just give flat increase to damage and reduce the range by 25%. Simpler to do.

Edited by El Bandito, 02 April 2017 - 01:37 AM.

[Mcgral18]

Grey Ghost, on 02 April 2017 - 01:26 AM, said:

According to smurfy's C-AC/10s are linked with C-UAC/10s ghost heat wise. If the intention is to avoid ghost heat, you'd have to use C-LB10-Xs.

No, if you use ALL cAC10s, the GH is minimal (and more precise damage than LB10x), but not Frontloaded, the .22 duration exists.

Under 1 point of extra heat, as opposed to 21

[Khobai]

Quote

Or just give flat increase to damage and reduce the range by 25%. Simpler to do.

LBX really just needs a buff. It doesnt need both a buff and a nerf.

LBX isnt supposed to be short range either. LBX actually has longer range than standard autocannons in tabletop. LBX should still do 1 pellet per damage at its tabletop optimum range. LBX should keep its longer range but just get a bonus when it hits things up close, like how atms/snubnose ppc/heavy gauss will work.

Edited by Khobai, 02 April 2017 - 09:15 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Khobai, on 01 April 2017 - 10:09 PM, said:

So LBX could do like 1.5 damage per pellet at pointblank range which would scale down to 1 damage at optimum range and then less than 1 damage beyond optimum range upto its maximum range where it does 0 damage. Then it would hit extremely hard close up like a shotgun should.

You really don't need this part. The fact that it's a shotgun means less damage per component over range already, If you add this in, you just make the gun overly useless at even moderate distances; which is bad considering how much of a tonnage investment the LB-X already is, especially for IS 'Mechs. I think it should be moderately effective as a sand-blaster, not just an extra punchy de facto slug at face-grinding ranges.

[Khobai]

Quote

The fact that it's a shotgun means less damage per component over range already

except the fire pattern should be changed from a cone to a cylinder. that way the pellets dont spread out. LBX is supposed to be more accurate than standard autocannons at longer range. Not less. Since a cylinder pattern doesnt spread it would allow the LBX to retain its accuracy at longer ranges.

if you change the fire pattern from a cone to a cylinder like ive always suggested then you do need to implement the damage dropoff mechanic to prevent it from being too good at longer ranges. So at short ranges it would be like a shotgun and at longer ranges it would be like a sandblaster. Instead of being a sandblaster at short range and useless at longer ranges.

Edited by Khobai, 02 April 2017 - 11:46 AM.

[Y E O N N E]

Khobai, on 02 April 2017 - 11:39 AM, said:

except the fire pattern should be changed from a cone to a cylinder.

No it shouldn't. You are literally inventing a problem to fix with damage falloff. The end result is the same if I've got 6x 1.0 pellets hitting CT at 400 meters for 6 damage with a cylinder spread or if I've got 4x 1.5 pellets hitting CT at 400 meters for 6 damage with a cone.

And technically, it already is more accurate; it's easier to score a hit with an LB-X than an AC because it's a spread. What it isn't is more precise which, it's a goddamn cluster round. C'mon, now.

[Stonefalcon]

Mole, on 31 March 2017 - 07:12 PM, said:

...when you are in an Assassin armed with 4 SRM4 and trading with a Dire Wolf armed with 3 LB-10-X at 250m and you are winning.

If that DW pilot was any decent he should have dropped you in two shots. I find Assassins very easy to kill since they don't have that bounce in their step.