8 replies to this topic

[Big MO]

Been playing a fun little build that is definitely not meta on my night gyrs - running 3 lb10x and 4 ersl. The lb10x are in the side torsos and the right arm. 3 of the 4 ersl in the left arm and 1 in the head. What I've noticed is that the lb10x crit out much more quickly than the ersls. I have lost armor on the left arm multiple times without ever losing an ersl, but as soon as I lose armor on the STs or the right arm, I start losing lb10x to crits. I have lost all 3 lb10x in a single match without losing an arm / torso. There is some crit padding in the arms due to having to carry the majority of the ammo there, but it is equally distributed between the two arms. I have also yet to lose ammo to a critical hit, just to a loss of the entire arm. I just don't understand why a 5 slot, 10 ton weapon is significantly less durable than a 1 slot, half ton weapon.

[Wintersdark]

Big MO, on 02 April 2017 - 10:06 AM, said:

Been playing a fun little build that is definitely not meta on my night gyrs - running 3 lb10x and 4 ersl. The lb10x are in the side torsos and the right arm. 3 of the 4 ersl in the left arm and 1 in the head. What I've noticed is that the lb10x crit out much more quickly than the ersls. I have lost armor on the left arm multiple times without ever losing an ersl, but as soon as I lose armor on the STs or the right arm, I start losing lb10x to crits. I have lost all 3 lb10x in a single match without losing an arm / torso. There is some crit padding in the arms due to having to carry the majority of the ammo there, but it is equally distributed between the two arms. I have also yet to lose ammo to a critical hit, just to a loss of the entire arm. I just don't understand why a 5 slot, 10 ton weapon is significantly less durable than a 1 slot, half ton weapon.

Because crits are rolled for per slot. So assuming upper, lower, and hand actuators a 5 slot weapon with nothing else in the arm will take 5/8ths of the crits to that arm, while 2 ERSL's in the same arm (with nothing else) would each take 1/5ths of the total crits to that arm. Understand?

This is where crit padding comes in. If you added 2 DHS to each arm with 2 ERSL's, upper, lower, and hand actuators you'd have 3 slots of "grey" equipment (can take crits but not be destroyed), 1 slot each to ersl and 2 slots each to DHS = 9 slots. Each DHS would have 2/9 of taking a crit, each ersl 1/9.

Of course, the night Gyr doesn't have lower arm actuators, but I hope you understand my meaning.

[Koniving]

Big MO, on 02 April 2017 - 10:06 AM, said:

I just don't understand why a 5 slot, 10 ton weapon is significantly less durable than a 1 slot, half ton weapon.

From a repair and rearm standpoint (Battletech and MWO in closed beta), it isn't. It is true the LBX would always be easier to 'disable', but destroyed it is not. In MWO it all goes by health, andI assure you that after the changes the lasers have significantly less health.

They are also a lot smaller slot-wise and thus harder to crit. (Though you only see X amount of the weapon on the mech and MWO is NOT consistent with visual sizes... Battletech tells us that most of the weapon tends to be housed within the mech with only part of it protruding. There isn't much to the lasers, but there's a whole plethora of crap to the large ballistics. After all, despite what MWO would have us believe, an AC/20 is a freaking rapid fire cannon shooting anywhere from 4 large shells to 100 smaller shells in the span of 5 seconds or less. And the pellets of an LBX are supposed to be small cluster bombs, like those from a cluster missile.

Food for thought.

Back on topic.
The ER SL has 5 health each. The LB-10X has 10 health...
....Okay. I agree, that is NOT fair either way. That means your half ton weapons are extremely durable in addition to being hard to hit.

---

OP, I'm on your side with this. 2 or 3 HP per ER SL would make decent sense compared to 10 on the LB-10X. If the ER SL has 5, then the LB-10X should be significantly higher than ten. After all the lasers have fragile glass.

Perhaps health should be based on slots +/- a factor such as weight. 1 slot * 0.5 tons = 0.5 HP. 1 slot x 1 ton = 1 HP. It's sort of up and down but energy weapons light and cheap and versatile as they are would definitely be fragile compared to the other less popular weapon systems.

This would mean your Clan LB-10X would have a health of 5*10... 50. Obviously it would need an additional modifier to keep it from going overboard. Still, a single IS AC/20 with a lucky triple crit would still instantly fry your LB-10x and it wouldn't take long for smaller IS ACs, PPCs, Gauss or LBX/MGs to fry 'em either.

Edited by Koniving, 02 April 2017 - 12:50 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Oh they did implement the weapon health changes? I wasn't sure, so tried to leave health out.

Still not fair, really, but way better than (almost) everything having a flat 10 health.

I think there should be a baseline set at X hp per slot, then modified from there for balance... So if X=5, an ERSL would have baseline 5 health and a 5 slot cannon 25. But that's just me, and ultimately just wish listing.

[Big MO]

Ok, I understand what you guys are saying, but the patch notes seemed to indicate that larger, heavier weapons should be more durable than they used to be. IS AC20 was given as an example. I know I am comparing apples to oranges, but I have played lbx10 on IS Jagers and Warhammers lots of time - almost never had one crit out. Unfortunately I don't have any baseline experience running clan lbx10 before the patch. Going to go do some comparisons - IS lbx10, other clan lbx, and see what happens in matches. Thanks.

[Wintersdark]

Big MO, on 02 April 2017 - 05:43 PM, said:

Ok, I understand what you guys are saying, but the patch notes seemed to indicate that larger, heavier weapons should be more durable than they used to be. IS AC20 was given as an example. I know I am comparing apples to oranges, but I have played lbx10 on IS Jagers and Warhammers lots of time - almost never had one crit out. Unfortunately I don't have any baseline experience running clan lbx10 before the patch. Going to go do some comparisons - IS lbx10, other clan lbx, and see what happens in matches. Thanks.

Clan equipment has less health than IS equipment now reflecting how their equipment is lighter and smaller; IS equipment is bulkier but tougher.

Previously, though, just luck. It's just that now, big clan weapons pop really easily despite having (relatively) more health than small clan equipment, for the reasons outlined above.

You can have 30% more health, but when you take 500% more hits... well.

[Koniving]

Big MO, on 02 April 2017 - 05:43 PM, said:

Ok, I understand what you guys are saying, but the patch notes seemed to indicate that larger, heavier weapons should be more durable than they used to be. IS AC20 was given as an example. I know I am comparing apples to oranges, but I have played lbx10 on IS Jagers and Warhammers lots of time - almost never had one crit out. Unfortunately I don't have any baseline experience running clan lbx10 before the patch. Going to go do some comparisons - IS lbx10, other clan lbx, and see what happens in matches. Thanks.

IS healths...

AC/2, 10.
AC/5 10
AC/10 15
LB-10x 15
AC/20 25
Gauss Rifle 10

Half ton machine gun = 7.5

Clan
AC/LB/UAC health is identIcal. (Shouldn't be, AC/LBX consumes more slots than UAC and is inferior damage wise.)
2 = 7.5
5 = 7.5
10 = 10.
20 = 16.5
Gauss Rifle = 5

0.25 ton MG = 3.5

For a company that preaches linear inclines.... there isn't a lot of linear increases as you go up here.

[Tarl Cabot]

Wintersdark, on 02 April 2017 - 06:02 PM, said:

Clan equipment has less health than IS equipment now reflecting how their equipment is lighter and smaller; IS equipment is bulkier but tougher.

And... why can not be extended to the isXL engine.....? /hides...

[Big MO]

Maybe I hit a bad run of luck with the old RNG for a while - would have thought I planned enough games to rule that out. Switched the mech over to LBX5s the other day and didn't see any problems. Switched it back to lbx10s last night and didn't lose a one to a crit. Unless someone at PGI saw this and a server side parameter got tweaked, but that seems highly unlikely.