12 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Let me preface this by saying that this discussion was a long time coming. Considering the poor history of the LBX and the memes that come with it, it continues to be a mediocre at best brawling weapon with a few niches at the high end. However, what I've really come to talk about is the poor maintenance of the LBX, especially since the Clan version was introduced. Since the IS LBX version are being added, I'm going to put most of the focus on a few weapons that the LBX competes against, and other related weapons.

So, let's begin:

IS LBX2

    <WeaponStats Health="15" slots="4" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" numPerShot="2" damage="1" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.04" heat="0.5" cooldown="0.72" ammoType="LB2-XACAmmo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="6" duration="0.0" lifetime="10.0" speed="1330" volleydelay="0" spread="0.35" gravity="0,0,-9.8" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="2.0" critChanceIncrease="0.14,0.08,0.03"/>

Clan LBX2

    <WeaponStats Health="7.5" slots="3" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" numPerShot="2" damage="1" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.04" heat="0.6" cooldown="0.72" ammoType="ClanLB2-XACAmmo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="5" duration="0.0" lifetime="10.0" speed="1330" volleydelay="0" spread="0.35" gravity="0,0,-9.8" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="2.0" critChanceIncrease="0.14,0.08,0.03"/>

So, the core differences between the weapon (outside of base weapon crits+tonnage) is health (not really of any consequence), and the heat difference of .5 (IS) vs .6 (Clan).

Seriously?

There are two obvious problems with this weapon... projectile speed and spread.

Let's consider the AC2 (and indirectly UAC2):

IS AC2

    <WeaponStats Health="10" slots="1" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" damage="2" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.0375" heat="0.6" cooldown="0.72" ammoType="AC2Ammo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="6" duration="0.0" lifetime="10.0" speed="2000" volleydelay="0" gravity="0,0,-9.8" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="1.0" critChanceIncrease="0.06,0.03,0.01"/>

The AC2's velocity is 2000. This is 50% more than the LBX2 velocity (or looking it from the other way, the LBX2 is only 2/3 or 66% of the AC2's velocity). What possible reason would you keep the LBX2 to be an inferior AC2 (or UAC2 for that matter)?

To put into context, the ERPPC has slightly less velocity than the LBX2/CLBX2.

As an aside, speaking of the ERPPC, there's very little reason to see use of the ERPPC over the CERPPC due to the damage... sure the heat on the IS ERPPC is better, but it's not enough to validate its use. Increasing velocity on the IS ERPPC would be an improvement (might as well make it more accurate if it doesn't deal more damage like the CERPPC).


I mention spread for a reason. One of the major changes between Clan SRMs and IS SRMs besides the obvious tonnage savings is spread. For Clans, this spread usually makes one generally need to commit to Artemis, particularly for the CSRM6, but can be questionable with the CSRM4. I don't understand why improved spread for the IS cannot be achieved.

As an aside, the SRM4+SRM2 are not very durable since the health changes. This is impacted further by using Artemis (remember, Artemis increases crit slot usage, thus making it easier to hit) and for whatever reason health was not scaled to compensate for that (for any SRM, Clan or IS for that matter).

Anyways, for the LBX2, spread probably makes little consequence, but it should still be tightened on the IS end, in additional to increasing velocity for both IS+Clan versions of the LBX2.


IS LBX5

    <WeaponStats Health="15" slots="5" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" numPerShot="5" damage="1" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.04" heat="1.0" cooldown="1.66" ammoType="LB5-XACAmmo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="8" duration="0.0" lifetime="10.0" speed="1330" volleydelay="0" spread="0.65" gravity="0,0,-9.8" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="2.0" critChanceIncrease="0.14,0.08,0.03"/>

Clan LBX5

    <WeaponStats Health="7.5" slots="4" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" numPerShot="5" damage="1" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.04" heat="1.5" cooldown="1.66" ammoType="ClanLB5-XACAmmo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="7" duration="0.0" lifetime="10.0" speed="1330" volleydelay="0" spread="0.65" gravity="0,0,-9.8" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="2.0" critChanceIncrease="0.14,0.08,0.03"/>

For whatever reason, it was determined that there's a heat difference of 1 (IS) vs 1.5 (Clan). That's it. Yet ironically it has the same velocity as the LBX2/CLBX2. Spread is the same, so I guess Clan tech is supposed to stay superior?


IS LBX10

    <WeaponStats Health="15" slots="6" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" numPerShot="10" damage="1" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.04" heat="2.0" cooldown="2.5" ammoType="LB10-XACAmmo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="11" duration="0.0" lifetime="10.0" speed="1100" volleydelay="0" spread="0.9" gravity="0,0,-9.8" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="2.0" critChanceIncrease="0.14,0.08,0.03"/>

Clan LBX10

    <WeaponStats Health="10" slots="5" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" numPerShot="10" damage="1" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.04" heat="2.0" cooldown="2.5" ammoType="ClanLB10-XACAmmo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="10" duration="0.0" lifetime="10.0" speed="1100" volleydelay="0" spread="0.9" gravity="0,0,-9.8" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="2.0" critChanceIncrease="0.14,0.08,0.03"/>

Here's my gripe. This is a pure copy and paste job that never got changed outside of the required changes (tonnage+crit). I'll leave it to other people to make guesses.


IS LBX20

    <WeaponStats Health="15" slots="11" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" numPerShot="20" damage="1" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.04" heat="5.0" cooldown="4.0" ammoType="LB20-XACAmmo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="14" duration="0.0" lifetime="10.0" speed="1100" volleydelay="0" spread="1.0" gravity="0,0,-9.8" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="2.0" critChanceIncrease="0.14,0.08,0.03"/>

Clan LBX20

    <WeaponStats Health="16.5" slots="9" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" numPerShot="20" damage="1" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.04" heat="6.0" cooldown="4" ammoType="ClanLB20-XACAmmo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="12" duration="0.0" lifetime="10.0" speed="1100" volleydelay="0" spread="1.0" gravity="0,0,-9.8" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="2.0" critChanceIncrease="0.14,0.08,0.03"/>

There's the obvious heat change 5 (IS) vs 6 (Clan), but nothing else. This deserves a much longer/bigger discussion.

The biggest problem with the LBX20 is kind of along the same issue that the Heavy Gauss is facing (but Heavy Gauss is a whole different beast).. it's competing with the AC20. This DOES NOT mean the AC20 needs nerfing - it's that the addition of the LFE makes the AC20 a much more attractive proposition at close range. In order to use the IS LBX20 (or Heavy Gauss), you'd have to commit to a slower/larger STD engine. Unlike the Heavy Gauss that has a handicap (in the form of "the CASE penalty" - you equip it for your own safety as a build penalty or risk it making your life miserable, unlike Clan mechs that have CASE sprinkled wherever), the LBX20 is very much not gaining additional benefits (better spread, damage, something) considering the build disadvantage. It's not to say Clan Omnimechs don't have disadvantages, but Clan Battlemechs avoid a lot of these build penalties to field the Clan LBX20.

Essentially as currently constituted, the IS LBX20 will be a pointless option until it is revamped/buffed.


Here's one other bit of Dakka that still needs to be looked at:

IS Gauss

    <WeaponStats Health="10" slots="7" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" damage="15" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.05" heat="1.0" cooldown="5.0" ammoType="GaussAmmo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="15" duration="0.0" lifetime="10" speed="2000" volleydelay="0" groupedlocally="1" ExplodeChance="0.9" InternalExplosionDmg="20" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="0.5" critChanceIncrease="0.17,-1.0,-1.0" chargeTime="0.75" chargeFizzleTime="2.0"/>

Clan Gauss

    <WeaponStats Health="5" slots="6" type="Ballistic" projectileclass="bullet" numFiring="1" damage="15" heatdamage="0" impulse="0.05" heat="1.0" cooldown="5.0" ammoType="ClanGaussAmmo" ammoPerShot="1" tons="12" duration="0.0" lifetime="10" speed="2000" volleydelay="0" groupedlocally="1" ExplodeChance="1.0" InternalExplosionDmg="20" maxDepth="10.0" critDamMult="0.5" critChanceIncrease="0.17,-1.0,-1.0" chargeTime="0.75" chargeFizzleTime="2.0"/>

So, the only real difference is that one is guaranteed to explode while always having CASE equipped, and the other one only rarely doesn't explode (10% chance to not explode), while having a 3 ton +1 crit difference (3 tons mostly consumed by just ammo alone). Why does Clan Gauss have all the beneficial advantages again?

A suggestion is to slow down Clan Gauss projectile speeds (to like 1600 or so) and/or improve the Cooldown of IS Gauss. Remember though Gauss is not a DPS weapon... as people try to claim Gauss is some sort of DPS weapon despite having a charge to fire the weapon.


TL;DR

IS LBX needs better spread across the board based on SRM/CSRM spread balance (SRM2/SRM4/CSRM2/CSRM4 too fragile, especially with Artemis).

LBX2/CLBX2 as slow as ERPPC/CERPPC (IS ERPPC needs velocity buff).

LBX10/CLBX10 is pure copypasta and needs to be changed.

IS LBX20 (and Heavy Gauss) needs a massive buff to justify use over LFE+AC20.

IS Gauss still inferior to Clan Gauss (Clan Gauss needs velocity nerf or more IS Gauss buffs).


If left unchanged, IS LBX will generally stay inferior to Clan LBX.

[Gas Guzzler]

TL;DR

Git Gud at forum posting.

The TL;DR that I'm getting is, the Clan version is better. This is not a new concept in any way, shape, or form...

Have you looked at Gauss rifles?

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 05 July 2017 - 01:03 PM.

[Deathlike]

Gas Guzzler, on 05 July 2017 - 01:02 PM, said:

TL;DR

Git Gud at forum posting.

If I don't do TL;DR, people really don't read (like, that's the common thing that happens).

Quote

The TL;DR that I'm getting is, the Clan version is better. This is not a new concept in any way, shape, or form...

Have you looked at Gauss rifles?

Yes. Yes I did (well, not the Light or Heavy ones in detail).

[Wintersdark]

Yep, the IS versions are all *slightly* cooler (not a huge gain for most, though 5 on the LBX20 is pretty substantial), larger and heavier.

I'd like to see tighter spread, but honestly, that's not going to correct balance problems. It's a good change, for sure, though. Spread is rarely a very relevant stat for LBX's, despite seeming to be critically important. This is because the spread differences are going to be very small (as the LBX spread, even for the 20, is in fact pretty small to start with.

Buffs to spread may make you feel better, but they won't help the LBX be a good weapon... Because the LBX's are bad and are going to remain bad not because of the IS v. Clam differences, but because the fundamental implementation of LBX's in MWO is bad.

Clam LBX's are also bad, except that there's no regular AC to compare them to in order to highlight the badness.



And yeah, the LBX20 IS side is basically DOA purely because of that slot difference. We knew this before the LBX20 arrived, however - it's not news to anyone. Clam side, you'll occassionally run a LBX20 for brawling because you can then avoid the burst time with UAC's (and the point cooler matters a lot too) but IS side, you've got the regular AC's and UAC's. Unless it's ghost heat shenanigans, there's literally zero reason to run LBX's IS side.

[Metus regem]

Thank you for doing all this foot work, as I've said in other threads, I think the LB-20X for the IS should rank in some where around 8 or 9 slots to be a justifiable option over an AC/20 or UAC/20 for IS mechs. To keep lore guys happy I say leave the weight alone, just reduce the crit slots, as it is being crit slot taxed (well all IS LB/s not named 10X are) for an ability they do not have in MWO, dual fire modes. This punishment doesn't make anysense to use a balance mechanic from TT for them here.

[Kaptain]

Went back and read most of it. Yup, agreed.

As for IS LBX vs AC...
Besides modeling slots and tons after the ISLBX10, an ulikely solution I fully support assuming we cant get crit splitting and ammo changing.

People often talk about buffing the damage of the LBX shot. What if we were to buff the cooldown and velocity so that it does more damage per second but spread out. That would atleast give it a middle ground between the FLPP of a regular ac and the unreliable DPS of an ultra. LBX20s could become great brawling weapons (assuming 10 slots) with these changes... and it would accomplish the "more damage despite the spread" that is already popular.

LBX2s and 5s could also benefit from running cooler (like the LBX10vsAC10) and from having increased velocity and cooldown. This would make them even better suppression weapons but without the full FLPP potential of their regular AC counterparts or the DPS potential of their heavier ultra counterparts. This way you are at-least getting something for your rather ridiculous slot tax.

Edited by Kaptain, 05 July 2017 - 03:00 PM.

[Deathlike]

Wintersdark, on 05 July 2017 - 02:26 PM, said:

Yep, the IS versions are all *slightly* cooler (not a huge gain for most, though 5 on the LBX20 is pretty substantial), larger and heavier.

I'd like to see tighter spread, but honestly, that's not going to correct balance problems. It's a good change, for sure, though. Spread is rarely a very relevant stat for LBX's, despite seeming to be critically important. This is because the spread differences are going to be very small (as the LBX spread, even for the 20, is in fact pretty small to start with.

Buffs to spread may make you feel better, but they won't help the LBX be a good weapon... Because the LBX's are bad and are going to remain bad not because of the IS v. Clam differences, but because the fundamental implementation of LBX's in MWO is bad.

Clam LBX's are also bad, except that there's no regular AC to compare them to in order to highlight the badness.



And yeah, the LBX20 IS side is basically DOA purely because of that slot difference. We knew this before the LBX20 arrived, however - it's not news to anyone. Clam side, you'll occassionally run a LBX20 for brawling because you can then avoid the burst time with UAC's (and the point cooler matters a lot too) but IS side, you've got the regular AC's and UAC's. Unless it's ghost heat shenanigans, there's literally zero reason to run LBX's IS side.

Spread is actually a very important stat, but the problem is more about the mechanics (too overfocused on crit, which is more effective with direct fire weapons than LBX).

There are alternative options like velocity (to a degree) and improved/lower cooldown, and even actual straight damage per pellet increases that are still relevant for LBXes to be useful.

I'm not really going to discuss split-crits as it has come up in the older King Crab AC20 discussions, but since it's not there and PGI isn't planning to implement it, it's irrelevant for this discussion (can't discuss what isn't being considered/planned).

Edited by Deathlike, 05 July 2017 - 02:41 PM.

[Kaptain]

Deathlike, on 05 July 2017 - 02:40 PM, said:

There are alternative options like velocity (to a degree) and improved/lower cooldown, and even actual straight damage per pellet increases that are still relevant for LBXes to be useful.

We are on the same page. Reduce LBX20 to 10 crits and then buff the velocity and cooldown of the LBX2/5/20. I think we would be in a pretty good place with everything but possibly the reg ac20 having a use.

Once the nerf bat hits the IS-UAC20 (and its going to hit it hard I fear) Perhaps the AC20 will have a use again. Better ammo per ton would help it become the ac with "staying power" and FLPP reliability. Essentially if there was an ammo disparity between ultras and regs that favored the regs, ultras would become 'heavier' and thus more balanced against their regular conterparts. The same could be said for IS vs clan.

Edited by Kaptain, 05 July 2017 - 03:08 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Deathlike, on 05 July 2017 - 02:40 PM, said:

Spread is actually a very important stat, but the problem is more about the mechanics (too overfocused on crit, which is more effective with direct fire weapons than LBX).

It is, but the change wouldn't be enough to make a measurable difference. A spread change just moves where the [actual] optimal range of the weapon is. Most LBX's don't spread much to start with, and while all spread reduction is good spread reduction, yeah... The problem is the mechanics. If you made IS LBX spread literally zero, they'd still be inferior to IS AC's.

Quote

There are alternative options like velocity (to a degree) and improved/lower cooldown, and even actual straight damage per pellet increases that are still relevant for LBXes to be useful.

Damage per pellet is the only thing (that's not a SUBSTANTIAL value change elsewhere) that's going to fix LBX's, for IS or Clam.

Quote

I'm not really going to discuss split-crits as it has come up in the older King Crab AC20 discussions, but since it's not there and PGI isn't planning to implement it, it's irrelevant for this discussion (can't discuss what isn't being considered/planned).

Indeed. Waste of time as it's just not going to happen; and it'd only be relevant for the '20 and HG anyways.

---

All LBX's, IS and Clam, need 1.15-1.25 Damage per pellet. Then give IS LBX's a significant spread reduction to compensate for their mass/size, and I'll be a happy campstove.

Until LBX's are actually functioning like shooter Shotguns (higher damage up close when all pellets hit) they're going to be trash compared to a single shell PPFLD autocannon.

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

Without drastically changing the implementation of LBX autocannons (adding ammo swapping, changing the shot to have an airburst effect so that the spread is constant over ranges, splitting crits etc), I think the easiest way to improve them is to fit them into a close range, DPS niche. Right now that is sort of how LB10X is working for IS- while it isn't necessarily a top pick, it's an efficient weapon in terms of slots/tonnage vs. damage output.

Increase the ROF over AC20 and UAC, so that they give a range of capabilities. LBX offering the highest sustained DPS, UAC offering the highest burst, but both lacking pinpoint. AC20 offers pinpoints damage but lacks the DPS of LBX or burst of UAC. The easiest way to balance IS and Clan ballistics would be to tweak IS rate of fire until their DPS/ton is more competitive with Clan counterparts. "More" competitive is the operative term- I think LB10X and below are fine, since IS currently has slightly better boating platforms.

I don't think there is anything drastically wrong with LBX autocannons, and it's rather a question of how they efficiently you're using crits and tonnage by equipping them. An IS LB20X that can't be fit with an LFE or in the arm better work dramatically better than an IS UAC20 in all other ways- better ammo/ton, better DPS, tighter spread etc.

If PGI can't code splitting crits, and isn't willing to drop the slot count for IS LB20X, then a cooldown of 3s and keeping 10-12t of ammo, before skills, is probably close to the mark.

Edited by Aggravated Assault Mech, 05 July 2017 - 03:22 PM.

[Kaptain]

Aggravated Assault Mech, on 05 July 2017 - 03:18 PM, said:

Increase the ROF over AC20 and UAC, so that they give a range of capabilities. LBX offering the highest sustained DPS, UAC offering the highest burst, but both lacking pinpoint. AC20 offers pinpoints damage but lacks the DPS of LBX or burst of UAC. The easiest way to balance IS and Clan ballistics would be to tweak IS rate of fire until their DPS/ton is more competitive with Clan counterparts. "More" competitive is the operative term- I think LB10X and below are fine, since IS currently has slightly better boating platforms.

Love it.

[Deathlike]

Wintersdark, on 05 July 2017 - 03:05 PM, said:

Damage per pellet is the only thing (that's not a SUBSTANTIAL value change elsewhere) that's going to fix LBX's, for IS or Clam.

Well, the thing is that right now LBX doesn't even have real range (unless you like spread tiny bits of damage around a mech, akin to a poor man's LRM hit) and to make use of LBX in any proper manner is brawling - so the damage has to be a bit more concentrated and hurtful.

It's also why I never take "nerf MG" discussions seriously - the facetime for that DPS isn't quite the same.. while not exactly applicable to LBX in the same sense, the effective DPS of LBX is significantly tied to range (essentially a double whammy/requirement).

The cooldown of LBX being a "shotgun" is really a gimmick for some mechs+builds like the Centurion-D.. you have to dig a hole into your target's armor before the LBX becomes of actual use and a threat (which is also why I never take most LBX threads seriously). Too many factors into an LBX discussion come into play (mostly conditional) and when it comes down to it, the memes are correct.

[Wintersdark]

Deathlike, on 05 July 2017 - 03:52 PM, said:

Well, the thing is that right now LBX doesn't even have real range (unless you like spread tiny bits of damage around a mech, akin to a poor man's LRM hit) and to make use of LBX in any proper manner is brawling - so the damage has to be a bit more concentrated and hurtful.

It's also why I never take "nerf MG" discussions seriously - the facetime for that DPS isn't quite the same.. while not exactly applicable to LBX in the same sense, the effective DPS of LBX is significantly tied to range (essentially a double whammy/requirement).

The cooldown of LBX being a "shotgun" is really a gimmick for some mechs+builds like the Centurion-D.. you have to dig a hole into your target's armor before the LBX becomes of actual use and a threat (which is also why I never take most LBX threads seriously). Too many factors into an LBX discussion come into play (mostly conditional) and when it comes down to it, the memes are correct.

Agreed, 100%. That's why I said " [actual] optimal range" - I meant, not the listed optimal range, but the range in which the spread doesn't make your cannon a sandblaster.

Everything else is Band-Aids though, and unless the values are ridiculous (old cn9-d quirks).... Pellet damage is the only fix.


Edit: the shotgun comment had nothing to do with cooldown.

The shotgun reference was in regards to the implementation of shotguns in FPS games: higher damage than a rifle, but only within very short range - because the sum of the pellet damage is higher than the rifle bullet damage, but spread means the damage is dispersed quickly and thus less damage is actually delivered as range increases.

Edited by Wintersdark, 05 July 2017 - 04:57 PM.