94 replies to this topic

[Metus regem]

davoodoo, on 02 July 2017 - 06:26 AM, said:

and yet even artwork shows it having those.

But tbh i cant even blame them for changing that, laa is redundant if youre going to crit share as it still would be locked to side torso arc.

Look at the Dragon, the art doesn't show it having LAA, yet all TRO's list LAA on the weapon arm.

[davoodoo]

Metus regem, on 02 July 2017 - 06:44 AM, said:

Look at the Dragon, the art doesn't show it having LAA, yet all TRO's list LAA on the weapon arm.

How can artwork show lack of laa??

mech with laa can keep arm straight as well as one without laa...

edit: actually even art shows elbow movement

Edited by davoodoo, 02 July 2017 - 07:43 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

im still hoping PGI decides to change these weapons Crits from 11 to 10,
TT didnt always make sense in how weapons were designed, just look at MRMs,
(MRM10=3Tons)(MRM20=7Tons)(MRM30=10Tons)(MRM40=12Tons)
why are MRM20/30 1Ton heavier? doesnt make much sense to me,

[davoodoo]

Andi Nagasia, on 02 July 2017 - 04:40 PM, said:

im still hoping PGI decides to change these weapons Crits from 11 to 10,
TT didnt always make sense in how weapons were designed, just look at MRMs,
(MRM10=3Tons)(MRM20=7Tons)(MRM30=10Tons)(MRM40=12Tons)
why are MRM20/30 1Ton heavier? doesnt make much sense to me,

1 ton more for 1 less crit.
on top of that 4x mrm10 had 16 heat while mrm40 only 12

mrm40 was superior choice there which makes me wonder why 4x mrm10 have same battle value as 1 mrm40.

Edited by davoodoo, 02 July 2017 - 04:46 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

davoodoo, on 02 July 2017 - 04:44 PM, said:

1 ton more for 1 less crit.
on top of that 4x mrm10 had 16 heat while mrm40 only 12

mrm40 was superior choice there which makes me wonder why 4x mrm10 have same battle value as 1 mrm40.

yup which is why i thought it was odd,
MRM10= 3Tons, 2Crits,
MRM20= 7Tons, 3Crits,
MRM30= 10Tons, 5Crits,
MRM40= 12Tons, 7Crits,

MRM10x4(12Ton, 8Crits) vs MRM40(12Tons, 7Crits)(-1Crit)
MRM20x2(14Ton, 6Crits) vs MRM40(12Tons, 7Crits)(-2Tons +1Crit)
MRM10+30(13Ton, 7Crits) vs MRM40(12Tons, 7Crits)(-1Tons)
i guess its a trade off Crits and Tonnage Dance,

[The6thMessenger]

Could we get an option that is -1 ton and -1 crit of AC20 as LB20X?

[Felicitatem Parco]

Kaptain, on 28 June 2017 - 04:35 PM, said:

I personally don't care about the HG so do what you like there... but the LBX20 is stock in the arms of several mechs. The bushwacker and Night star come to mind right off the top of my head. On top of that I would love to run it in Victors, Highlanders, hunchbacks (with LFEs) and many other mechs. Either we need crit splitting or the crit slots need to be reduced by one.

Remember when ECM was first introduced on the Raven-3L, before host-state-rewind and before BAP or PPCs could counter it? Add it had full range, and the only thing that could cancel it was another ECM Mech? Also, it took away all your Friend-or-Foe indicators and blocked all sheared team radar when you were near an enemy ECM mech, so EVERY Mech you saw simply lacked any and all electronic info and just looked like an unlocked, cloaked enemy Mech? ''

Yeah... much later ECM was harnessed in by the addition of BAP and PPC's countering abilities, and a reduction of the power ECM has over your IFF. They added new systems and made changes to the original equipment,

They can simply make the HG and LB20 a 10 crit weapon, then finally fix the system to include crit splitting and make adjustments to have them be 11 crits again. Then they can add more crit-split equipment, like Arrow IV Artillery (clan 12 slots, IS 15 slots).

[Chuck B]

Im in the no camp for the HG, it needs work with effective range, but its a powerful weapon I don't want to see arm mounted.or LFE'd

I'm on the fence about the LB-X 20 so I voted yes, even though I still have some reservations.

If they do go to 10 crits, then PGI has to give clan autocannons (not ultras) single projectile damage to even the balance a bit. and Im not sure I want that as I see 20 damage projectiles an core IS advantage and balance factor.

Edited by Chuck B, 04 July 2017 - 05:52 PM.

[davoodoo]

Andi Nagasia, on 03 July 2017 - 11:35 AM, said:

yup which is why i thought it was odd,
MRM10= 3Tons, 2Crits,
MRM20= 7Tons, 3Crits,
MRM30= 10Tons, 5Crits,
MRM40= 12Tons, 7Crits,

MRM10x4(12Ton, 8Crits) vs MRM40(12Tons, 7Crits)(-1Crit)
MRM20x2(14Ton, 6Crits) vs MRM40(12Tons, 7Crits)(-2Tons +1Crit)
MRM10+30(13Ton, 7Crits) vs MRM40(12Tons, 7Crits)(-1Tons)
i guess its a trade off Crits and Tonnage Dance,

No i actually found a benefit to 4x mrm10.

Getting critted in mrm40 would disable entire 40 missiles, while even after crit 3 mrm10 will still work.

It was tt, crits actually mattered.

Edited by davoodoo, 04 July 2017 - 06:34 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

No i actually found a benefit to 4x mrm10.

MRM10s fire faster than the MRM40 too

MRM40 is pretty terrible they need to fix it

Quote

why are MRM20/30 1Ton heavier? doesnt make much sense to me,

because they use less crits. makes perfect sense to me.

heavier mechs that have the tonnage to use bigger launchers need crits more than tonnage.

the real question is why the MRM40 doesnt follow that same trend. MRM40 takes up an absurd number of crit slots which actually makes it less than ideal on heavier mechs that need those crit slots.

MRM40 is just bad all around.

Edited by Khobai, 04 July 2017 - 07:20 PM.

[Tim East]

Wibbledtodeath, on 01 July 2017 - 11:39 PM, said:

IS LBX-20 is superior to an AC20

Nooooooo, I don't think so...
Even accounting for the ghost heat problems they give AC20's, the pinpoint nature of the damage they dish is so much better than spread damage as to be an overwhelming advantage.

[Kaptain]

Tim East, on 04 July 2017 - 11:16 PM, said:

Nooooooo, I don't think so...
Even accounting for the ghost heat problems they give AC20's, the pinpoint nature of the damage they dish is so much better than spread damage as to be an overwhelming advantage.

Agreed. Maybe in Table Top but here in mwo the Ultra20>AC20>LBX20. This does not hold true in every situation when we talk about 10s but for the 20s AC20 is certainly better than the LBX20 and it would continue to be so even at 10 slots. At 10 slots we could start to balance it though.

[color=#959595]I think from the LBX10 balancing over the years this is the obvious first step. The LBX10 is smaller, weighs less and generates less heat. Being smaller is a huge advantage as it actually lifts the build restriction of not being able to load two AC10 class auto cannons into a side torso. Even with these advantages people rarely choose the LBX over the regular 10.[/color]

[color=#959595]At the moment the LBX20 is not only missing the advantages of its smaller counterpart it has a huge disadvantage in being larger. 1 crit wouldn't be that big of a deal if it wasn't so large already. Being 11 crits prevents this from being used in an arm. This is huge as the few use cases where people really want to run LBX20s include the arms of jump capable brawlers such as the victor and highlander. This also prevents LBX20 lore builds such as the bushwacker 1l(?) and nightstar SS(?). And on top of all that it add a build restriction that only a standard engine can be used.[/color]

[color=#959595]In conclusion the LBX10 is rarely taken over its FLPP counterpart, despite its advantages include relaxed build restrictions. The LBX20 at 11 crits simply has unreasonable build restriction disadvantages as to choose it over its more FLPP and Higher DPS counter parts. [/color]

Edited by Kaptain, 05 July 2017 - 12:01 AM.

[VonBruinwald]

Yes, but only until such time crit-splitting becomes a thing.

[Captain Grayson Lighthorse]

I agree with lowering the crit requirements of not only the LBX-20 and HG, but of all of the LBXs. The clan LBXs pretty much all use less crits and take up less tonnage than the AC brothers, so why should the IS LBXs take up more space than like AC weapons? I would very much like to be able to run the LBX-20 and HG in my Victor, but can't with the crit requirements at 11. Also, in case no one thought of it, the new Annihilator will not be able to carry either of these weapons in anywhere but the side torsos if they remain at 11 crits. Since I have one coming later this month, I would like to be able to use these weapons in that 'Mech also.

There is a lot of comparisons between this MWO game and BattleTech. In actuality, once you get past the names of the 'Mechs and weapons there is not a lot of commonality. The 'Mechs in the BT board game carry only half as much armor as they do in MWO and have more effective weapons and they get destroyed much faster. I've played all three games. This MWO game is based more off of the MechWarrior 4 Vengence game than BattleTech. Nothing wrong with that because they're both video versions of the BT game.

I think they really need to up the armor on the mediums, heavies, and assaults to be more in line with the top values of the Locust and VIP 'Mech to make the game MUCH more fun. I'm just sayin'... But, that's off topic of this post.

Anyway, I'm all for the crit reduction of these weapons.