19 replies to this topic

[CFC Conky]

Hello all,

I use the AC2 on a few of my mechs and compared to the LB2-X, it does pretty much the same thing using only one slot instead of four for the LB2. Is there any reason why one would take the shotgun over the single shot gun?

Thanks!
CFC Conky

Edited by CFC Conky, 05 August 2017 - 07:31 AM.

[BTGbullseye]

The shotgun has 990m extra maximum range and 90m better optimal, has 15% less heat generation, better crit rate once you're through the armor, and is less likely to miss completely at long range.

The AC hits all at once with no spread, uses 3 crit slots less, has 670m/s better projectile speed, and costs half as much.

I personally would go for the shotguns on my own mechs if I couldn't fit RACs.

Edited by BTGbullseye, 05 August 2017 - 08:11 AM.

[Alexander of Macedon]

There's no reason whatsoever to use the IS LB-2/5X. They're dogshit. The LB-20X is workable in some situations, the LB-10X is occasionally a good tradeoff.

Increased crit slot consumption with no weight savings on weapons with worse damage profiles is a no-go without ammo switching, which PGI is never going to implement.

[CFC Conky]

Thanks for the input gents .

CFC Conky

[R E S P E K]

For IS, go std AC2 or UAC2, skip the gimmics

[Koniving]

Side note:
IS and Clan LBX weapons now deliver "double damage" to crits (2 per pellet per crit instead of 1 per pellet per crit).
Combine with 15% of crit damage = bonus structure damage...

and the LB-2X has a chance of doing a maximum of 3.8 damage instead of just a maximum of 2.9.

But that's the maximum potential which hardly ever happens.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

There's pretty much no reason to use an LBX as IS. The normal ACs put all their damage in one spot, spreading damage is something the enemy does to stay alive, don't do it for them.

Even though LBX sometimes have higher optimal ranges in the stats, in gameplay their optimal ranges are much much lower due to their spread. Firing at optimal range with an LBX will result in multiple pellets missing the target and the rest spread to every component on the mech, meanwhile a normal AC will hit the one section you aim at.

LBX have higher crit rates against structure, but due to the spread and other negatives you are less likely to even get the enemy down to structure due to the disadvantages you have over a normal AC.


On the Clan side their ballistics fire in bursts rather than as a single slug, so players use LBX to frontload their damage.

[Rogue Jedi]

Dakota1000, on 05 August 2017 - 03:53 PM, said:

There's pretty much no reason to use an LBX as IS. The normal ACs put all their damage in one spot, spreading damage is something the enemy does to stay alive, don't do it for them.

Even though LBX sometimes have higher optimal ranges in the stats, in gameplay their optimal ranges are much much lower due to their spread. Firing at optimal range with an LBX will result in multiple pellets missing the target and the rest spread to every component on the mech, meanwhile a normal AC will hit the one section you aim at.

LBX have higher crit rates against structure, but due to the spread and other negatives you are less likely to even get the enemy down to structure due to the disadvantages you have over a normal AC.


On the Clan side their ballistics fire in bursts rather than as a single slug, so players use LBX to frontload their damage.

the LBX 10 or 20 make some sense at realy close range, especialy as the IS LB10 is lighter and takes up less slots than the IS AC10, and at longer ranges all the LBX sizes have a use to scare off Light Mechs but yes, otherwise I completely agree with that assessment.
basicly for the IS the LB2-x and LB5-x and LB20-x are not worth considering unless/untill we get ammo switching ^{(so you can use the cluster shot for anti light or crit seeking but solid shot for use against armor)}

[jss78]

Yep, IS LB-X's are in a pretty awful spot, because they don't get ammo switching like they're supposed to. LB-10X barely works out because the tabletop-based tonnage/slot requirements happen to be lower than for regular AC/10, but this is not the case for 2, 5 and 20.

Regular AC/2's are really weird in being six tons but only occupying ONE slot. I guess that's a holdover from the early tabletop, as it's just completely out of line of slot requirements for other similar-tonnage weapons. It really helps them, because e.g. AC/2 JagerMechs can typically run XL engines and BOTH endo and ferro. In effect it makes AC/2's more weight efficient.

[Gagis]

LB5-5 can be valuable in a marginal corner case since it produces practically no heat. If you happen to have a very heat inefficient build that uses ppcs or lasers with s ballistic or two on the side, switching from ac5 to lb5 can help in keeping it ftom overheating.

[Yumoshiri]

i once did spam 3x ac2, 3x lbx2 direwolf

the fun thing is the lower velocities, so even if you got all in 1 weapon group, the screen will shake twice for each volley.
also.. lbx2 will do more damage if armor is removed

[Alexander of Macedon]

Yumoshiri, on 06 August 2017 - 03:48 AM, said:

i once did spam 3x ac2, 3x lbx2 direwolf

the fun thing is the lower velocities, so even if you got all in 1 weapon group, the screen will shake twice for each volley.
also.. lbx2 will do more damage if armor is removed

This is specifically about IS LB-Xes, though. The clan ones are good because clan ACs are bad, clan ACs and UACs already spread damage, and the LB-Xes only take one crit slot more than the UACs.

The IS LB-2X takes an absurd 4 crit slots compared to the AC/2, the 5 and 20 still take one more, IS ACs are PPFLD instead of multiple shells, and IS LB-20Xes can only be run in STD engine torsos because the IS ACs have higher crit slot (and tonnage, incidentally) requirements across the board than clan ones.

tl;dr clan LBs are a different beast because the gap between them and cUACs is much smaller to begin with, cACs are ******, and all clan ballistics are lighter and smaller. IS LB-10Xes are viable because they allow you to pack a lot more damage relative to IS ACs than cLB-10Xes relative to cUACs while giving up less armor, speed, ammo, &c., which helps make up for the damage spread.

Edited by Alexander of Macedon, 06 August 2017 - 06:37 AM.

[BTGbullseye]

I hear a lot of people downtalking the LBX, but I seriously doubt they've comprehensively played with any of them. (most will just be spouting stuff they heard from other people who claim to know what they act like)

I will admit, I have yet to do any LBX2 or 20 builds, so I can't say from experience that they are better or worse, but I would expect them to be much better for learning to lead your target for when you get around to more ammo restricted builds. (same fire rate and ammo per ton as AC2, but it spreads a little to help correct for imperfect accuracy and lag issues)

Also, the spread on the LBX2 is such that you would have to be beyond the typical engagement range (300m-500m) for them to not be effectively pinpoint damage if you're aiming for specific components. (and if you get the LBX Spread skills, they improve on pinpoint accuracy massively, way more than this thread would lead you to believe)

Edited by BTGbullseye, 06 August 2017 - 10:12 PM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Topic's old, but here's more info.

IS LBX20 is basically something no one should ever really use since it takes up so many torso slots. Right now an LFE engine is superior to a STD engine, the LFE engine takes up 2 slots in each side torso but is much lighter. IS LBX20 leaves 1 slot open in the side torso and so forces you to use the much heavier STD engine. Not only does it do that, but it also has terrible spread, meaning its actually less effective in combat than a normal AC20. The crit damage that LBX provides only works after you've taken the armor off of a section entirely, and even then its very minimal. You save multiple tons by swapping to an LFE engine instead of an STD engine, so you can also back the AC20 up with an extra weapon, such as a medium laser to make that build even better than the LBX20 one.

So in short LBX20 takes longer to open up enemy armor because it spreads damage, it gets even less effective the further you get from the target, and it forces you to bring a much heavier engine with no bonus.


On the far opposite end with AC2s vs LBX2s, the LBX2 takes up 3 times the slots and loses the main reason people would take an AC2, which is the extremely long range accurate firepower that you get for bringing an AC2. The AC2s deal pin point damage out at over 700m while the LBX2s are never pin point and the best they can do at 700m is just lightly sandblast the enemy paint job. Normal AC2s also come with their own crit bonus that offers the same crit damage levels as an LBX2 but with lower chances of happening.

IS LBX generate less heat than IS ACs, but due to the damage spread that they have its very likely that you'll have to take extra shots to kill an enemy, especially if you are working at range, negating the heat advantage.

The only LBX that really is any good is the LBX10, as it is actually one slot smaller and one ton lighter than the normal AC10. Even then you get what you pay for in tonnage.

Rather than bring an LBX I'd suggest that people attempt to cram in a UAC instead, UACs spread damage a bit less than LBX and have the option of firing double the damage for a potential jam.



LBX honestly needs a buff.

[The Basilisk]

If you look carefull you will find an increasing number of golden little ones under the account avatars and badges of the players "talking down" LB-Xes.
While those not talking them down mostly do not have those.

In fact LB-Xes can perform better with newer, more inexperienced players...why ?
Same reason why LRMs and other spreadfire weapons work better for beginners. They are easier to aim.
Its realy simple, try shooting a shotgun under the premise to hit anything at all and then use a sniper gun.

It's not that simple to use a bunch of AC5s or UACs to cleanly drill a hole through ONE of your enemys components.
Most ppl will spread dmg of UACs as much as LBXes.

Sure it is always better to outright kill an enemy in MWO than to just wound him.

And then there is still the matter of bad habits...like sloppy aiming and shooting....there is no learning without challange boys and girls.

IS ACs and UACs are the better weapons in Hands of better players.
Question is what you prefer. Some guys to hit something at all or learning to be better shoots down the road.

[Dusty Howard]

So I read this thread as a curiosity and wow this is terrible advice. So ac2 vs lbx2. Same cooldowns. Ac2's are a bit hotter, but rather negligible. The biggest difference between the two is the slots which I will get to later. Range isn't an issue if you are shooting at anything past 600 meters with these two weapons it's just suppression fire. Damage and accuracy are not much of an issue. because if you're shooting past 600 meters you are either closing range or you're doing it wrong and need to get with your team and share some armor. Now single pellet vs multiple pellet, again both are equally accurate (with lbx spread skills) UNDER 600m. Past that yes the ac2 is more accurate but again at that range it's suppression fire. If you are gonna be boating ac2/lbx2's. Which most people do, then go ac2's. Why? Less slots. More slots to work with more ammo you can fit, more heat sinks you can squeeze in. Lbx2's just eat all that up. Also the ac2 does better damage to armor then the Lbx2. So if you are boating, the ac2's is probably your primary weapons and you need to get through that armor as fast as you can to make the most use of the ac2's. So I guess that sorts it ac2's are better right? Not necessarily. As crit weaponry the lbx2 is a beast. It's not a weapon you boat, its a weapon you throw into a mech when you want to crit components off people. You could use machine guns, but that requires you to be danger close and as much as I advocate sharing armor, there's no reason to put your *** on the line if you don't have to. I find a single lbx2 to be as effective as multiple machine at blowing components off. In fact all of my mechs that do use lbx's only have one or two (ex. lbx2 in the shoulder of a cataphract) Will allow you to get that juicy crit damage at the same range as your primary weapons. Go ahead try it. put one lbx2 in a mech and watch you win the fights because your enemy is losing its weapons faster then you. I've tested the single lbx2 vs the ac2 and it's quite noticeable.Yes there is a weight difference between lbx's and machine guns. 4 machine guns two tons of ammo 4 tons over the lbx2 and 2 tons of ammo 8 tons but those 4 tons are allowing you to fight where you want to fight, over having to hump your enemy. This games all about position. So that's my take on the argument. If you're gonna boat the weapon systems use an ac2 or an ultra ac2. The arguments between those two weapon systems are for a different thread. But if you want a weapon that that will supplement primary weapons, with high crit and you're not running 120+kph where you can use machine guns, throw an lbx2 in, it will probably save your life. Now onto lbx 10's and 20's and Ultras and other ac's......lol Im just kidding I stay on point.

[Tarl Cabot]

and wow, grats on necro a 1 year thread...

[justcallme A S H]

Alexander of Macedon, on 05 August 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

There's no reason whatsoever to use the IS LB-2/5X. They're dogshit. The LB-20X is workable in some situations, the LB-10X is occasionally a good tradeoff.

Increased crit slot consumption with no weight savings on weapons with worse damage profiles is a no-go without ammo switching, which PGI is never going to implement.

The only reason is Solaris.

Swapping on 2AC2 for 2xLBX2 and keeping 3AC2s means you can keep the heat down and DPS up on a Jager for Div 5 or whatever it is.

That however is a totally niche situation and the only time it is viable for that one specific reason.

Otherwise - AC2s, always.

[Tier5ForLife]

Dusty Howard, on 08 September 2018 - 04:04 PM, said:

So I read this thread as a curiosity and wow this is terrible advice. So ac2 vs lbx2. Same cooldowns. Ac2's are a bit hotter, but rather negligible. The biggest difference between the two is the slots which I will get to later. Range isn't an issue if you are shooting at anything past 600 meters with these two weapons it's just suppression fire. Damage and accuracy are not much of an issue. because if you're shooting past 600 meters you are either closing range or you're doing it wrong and need to get with your team and share some armor. Now single pellet vs multiple pellet, again both are equally accurate (with lbx spread skills) UNDER 600m. Past that yes the ac2 is more accurate but again at that range it's suppression fire. If you are gonna be boating ac2/lbx2's. Which most people do, then go ac2's. Why? Less slots. More slots to work with more ammo you can fit, more heat sinks you can squeeze in. Lbx2's just eat all that up. Also the ac2 does better damage to armor then the Lbx2. So if you are boating, the ac2's is probably your primary weapons and you need to get through that armor as fast as you can to make the most use of the ac2's. So I guess that sorts it ac2's are better right? Not necessarily. As crit weaponry the lbx2 is a beast. It's not a weapon you boat, its a weapon you throw into a mech when you want to crit components off people. You could use machine guns, but that requires you to be danger close and as much as I advocate sharing armor, there's no reason to put your *** on the line if you don't have to. I find a single lbx2 to be as effective as multiple machine at blowing components off. In fact all of my mechs that do use lbx's only have one or two (ex. lbx2 in the shoulder of a cataphract) Will allow you to get that juicy crit damage at the same range as your primary weapons. Go ahead try it. put one lbx2 in a mech and watch you win the fights because your enemy is losing its weapons faster then you. I've tested the single lbx2 vs the ac2 and it's quite noticeable.Yes there is a weight difference between lbx's and machine guns. 4 machine guns two tons of ammo 4 tons over the lbx2 and 2 tons of ammo 8 tons but those 4 tons are allowing you to fight where you want to fight, over having to hump your enemy. This games all about position. So that's my take on the argument. If you're gonna boat the weapon systems use an ac2 or an ultra ac2. The arguments between those two weapon systems are for a different thread. But if you want a weapon that that will supplement primary weapons, with high crit and you're not running 120+kph where you can use machine guns, throw an lbx2 in, it will probably save your life. Now onto lbx 10's and 20's and Ultras and other ac's......lol Im just kidding I stay on point.

Try making paragraphs. It is not hard and it helps to read posts.

[Tier5ForLife]

Alexander of Macedon, on 06 August 2017 - 06:37 AM, said:

This is specifically about IS LB-Xes, though. The clan ones are good because clan ACs are bad, clan ACs and UACs already spread damage, and the LB-Xes only take one crit slot more than the UACs.

The IS LB-2X takes an absurd 4 crit slots compared to the AC/2, the 5 and 20 still take one more, IS ACs are PPFLD instead of multiple shells, and IS LB-20Xes can only be run in STD engine torsos because the IS ACs have higher crit slot (and tonnage, incidentally) requirements across the board than clan ones.

tl;dr clan LBs are a different beast because the gap between them and cUACs is much smaller to begin with, cACs are ******, and all clan ballistics are lighter and smaller. IS LB-10Xes are viable because they allow you to pack a lot more damage relative to IS ACs than cLB-10Xes relative to cUACs while giving up less armor, speed, ammo, &c., which helps make up for the damage spread.

What he said.

I'm a Clanner and I tend to use LBX's. As far as AC's, I prefer the I.S. ACs with the one round per shot. The only semi plus of firing 10 small rounds is that it allows you to adjust your aim and hit on maybe 4 out of 10.

I simply do not use UACS. First, I've never used a weapon that jams so I'm not going to start now (OK, in the early 80's if you did not have the gas rings right, the M-16 would jam)

I also dislike the heat from them. And I have a bad habit on just holding down the fire button and I understand that the pluses from UAC's come from double tapping.

Edited by LikeUntoBuddha, 10 September 2018 - 09:41 AM.