36 replies to this topic

[Zigmund Freud]

As title suggest, why would you even spend time on designing IS LB cannons and adding them in game, if all of them (save LB 10-X) are utterly unusable?
tldr: adjust slots and tons of all LB-X in a manner of LB-10, so they have at least some reasons to be used instead of AC.

I don't want to discuss if LB 10-X is good or bad, that's not a point. Because at least 10 one have some pros (1 tonn lighter, 1 slot smaller, neglectably less heat and longer range, which again is neglectable, since shotgun).
At the same time newly introduced LB 2, 5, and ridiculous 20-X AC are worthless. For some reason they occupy more slots, then their single slug brothers. And don't get me started on LB 20-X. It's so big that you have to run STD and put it in a ST. Not heavy gauss, but LB 20-X, a gun, that is objectively worse than AC20.

To the spreadsheet!
Here are current stats:

___________Damage_Heat_____C/D_______Range____Slots____Tons

AC/2________2______0.6______0.72______720______1______6

LB 2-X AC___2______0.5______0.72______810______4______6

AC/5________5______1.5______1.66______620______4______8

LB 5-X AC___5______1_______1.66______700______5______8

AC/10_______10______2.75____2.5______450______7______12

LB 10-X AC__10______2______2.5_______540______6______11

AC/20_______20______6______4________270______10______14

LB 20-X AC__20______5______4________360______11______14

As you can clearly see, right now LB-X are garbage. Only LB 10-X is somewhat viable for scrubs like me who can't aim, because 1 ton lighter and 1 slot smaller. Heat and range difference is insignificant, so whatever.

Here's what PGI could do in 5 minutes to fix this madness, without affecting a balance.

___________Damage_Heat_____C/D_______Range____Slots____Tons

AC/2________2______0.6______0.72______720______1______6

LB 2-X AC___2______0.5______0.72______810______1______6

AC/5________5______1.5______1.66______620______4______7

LB 5-X AC___5______1_______1.66______700______5______8

AC/10_______10______2.75____2.5______450______7______12

LB 10-X AC__10______2______2.5_______540______6______11

AC/20_______20______6______4________270______10______14

LB 20-X AC__20______5______4________360______9______12

LB-X are still worse than AC, because spread damage as crazy, so they will never be overused or get any close to tier 5 meta. But at least now people will have some reason to chose them over AC. LB 20-X is one slow smaller, than AC20, so you can put one in arms, as clanners can.

Will it make IS OP? Will it be new powerhouse? Don't be ridiculous. But at least you'll be able to see them fielded once in a while.

Edited by Zigmund Freud, 09 October 2017 - 09:32 AM.

[Jay Leon Hart]

Why? TT LBX are worth a damn, PGI's half-assed versions are not.

TT tonnage and slot requirements are apparently sacred, too, so TPTB won't change them.

Now, if you were to ask for a damage change, like SRMs or most lasers...

[Scout Derek]

Zigmund Freud, on 09 October 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

Will it make IS OP? Will it be new powerhouse? Don't be ridiculous. But at least you'll be able to see them fielded once in a while.

Once in Awhile?

I field them on my Assault mechs a lot, Particularly the Cyclops Slepnir and the Mauler.

Have you seen how much they can do in a 200-100M brawl? They absolutely kick the crap out of anything it's size or lower. Two shots of 2xLB20 and you can core out any ST of any mech.

LBXACs are the Fat man of the LBX series. They're not for Long range, they're not the best at Mid Range, they are the best at close range combat.

Alone though, they aren't worth crap, just like most ballistics, save for the Gauss Rifle(s) and the AC/20.

[Zigmund Freud]

Jay Leon Hart, on 09 October 2017 - 09:22 AM, said:

Why? TT LBX are worth a damn, PGI's half-assed versions are not.

TT tonnage and slot requirements are apparently sacred, too, so TPTB won't change them.

Now, if you were to ask for a damage change, like SRMs or most lasers...

Because we're stuck with Piggy's half-assed version, obviously. We could dream about ammo changing, slots splitting or viable crit system, but we have what we have. These solutions take time, while changing stats is super fast. It will be kind of unique weapon system in current game, in no way OP but at least usable.

[Scout Derek]

Zigmund Freud, on 09 October 2017 - 09:36 AM, said:

Because we're stuck with Piggy's half-assed version, obviously. We could dream about ammo changing, slots splitting or viable crit system, but we have what we have. These solutions take time, while changing stats is super fast. It will be kind of unique weapon system in current game, in no way OP but at least usable.

I get what you're saying with the crit slots, but I believe people already attempted to change that in the feedback on the Test Servers with the new tech.

Honestly, I would be all for the crit slots change, but not the tonnage.

It goes like this; if you change an item to be better than the other items, then the other items need a change too in order to compensate for the first change, AKA; You can't give one kid the special treatment over the other ones, otherwise they'll all want it.

[Zigmund Freud]

Scout Derek, on 09 October 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

Once in Awhile?

I field them on my Assault mechs a lot, Particularly the Cyclops Slepnir and the Mauler.

Have you seen how much they can do in a 200-100M brawl? They absolutely kick the crap out of anything it's size or lower. Two shots of 2xLB20 and you can core out any ST of any mech.

LBXACs are the Fat man of the LBX series. They're not for Long range, they're not the best at Mid Range, they are the best at close range combat.

Alone though, they aren't worth crap, just like most ballistics, save for the Gauss Rifle(s) and the AC/20.

I know some people field them, but honestly, wouldn't you do better with 2xAC20 instead of 2xLB20? Yeah, no ghost heat, but still 2 simultaneous shots of LB20 will spread way more, than two separate shots of AC20. You can use them if you really want to, but there's no reason for this weapons to be as bad as they are. LB10 is still used less, than AC10, but LB2, 5 and 20 are way worse, than balanced.

[Zigmund Freud]

Scout Derek, on 09 October 2017 - 09:39 AM, said:

I get what you're saying with the crit slots, but I believe people already attempted to change that in the feedback on the Test Servers with the new tech.

Honestly, I would be all for the crit slots change, but not the tonnage.

It goes like this; if you change an item to be better than the other items, then the other items need a change too in order to compensate for the first change, AKA; You can't give one kid the special treatment over the other ones, otherwise they'll all want it.

Yea, but LB10 is ok allready, so I wouldn't say treating other LBs the same way is special. Besides, i don't want to change an item to be better than the other items, i just want it to not suck so hard.

[Daurock]

Jay Leon Hart, on 09 October 2017 - 09:22 AM, said:

TT tonnage and slot requirements are apparently sacred, too, so TPTB won't change them.

Now, if you were to ask for a damage change, like SRMs or most lasers...

Pretty much this.
I am not sure we want to be handing out too much more damage per shot though. I'd prefer to instead give the LBX cannons a large rate of fire buff (and maybe an associated ammo/ton) advantage over the standard AC. For example, we could take the -2 and -5 classes, and give them a roughly 20-30% ROF/DPS boost and I bet you'd have a lot of people wondering which to take between standard, ultra, or LBX.

[Bud Crue]

Only mech that I have whererin I can make an argument for taking an LBX20 over a standard AC20 is in my BH2. I run it with 6ERML and JJ. (Don't start with "why are you not running all energy vomit or gauss vomit?"). If I want something that doesn't put my heat over the edge (UAC10 is out), reaches out as far as my ermls (AC20 and UAC20 are out) and lets me hit as hard as possible, I am left with an AC10 or an LBX20. To me its tomato toemato at that point. With the engine cap I don't gain by going to an LFE as I am already packed to the gills with dhs. At the moment I go with the LBX20 and two less JJ instead of the AC10 as I like the sound of the LBX and it is more forgiving.

BUT

That is thee only mech that I have tried it on thus far where I can't build something better using LFE and a different autocannon(s).

[Jman5]

Jay Leon Hart, on 09 October 2017 - 09:22 AM, said:

Why? TT LBX are worth a damn, PGI's half-assed versions are not.

TT tonnage and slot requirements are apparently sacred, too, so TPTB won't change them.

Now, if you were to ask for a damage change, like SRMs or most lasers...

Yeah, the only way to address the tonnage issue of these weapons is to attack the problem indirectly. For example they can alter the ammo/ton of the LB20X to indirectly make the weapon more tonnage efficient. I would change it from 7 to 10 shots per ton on the LB20X. This lets you run 1-2 tons less of ammo and also saves you 1-2 slots.

Another problem that hurts the new LBX is that Inner Sphere LBX quirks don't help them. All the Clan LBX quirks are universal. But on the inner Sphere side they're all LB-10X specific. (except for a single 5% spread reduction quirk on one mauler variant). The same problem exists for the new UACs to a lesser extent where about half the jam reduction quirks are uac/5 specific while clans get all universal jam chance quirks.

[suffocater]

My 2LB20X-Black Widow feels offended.

[Insanity09]

Because the IS AC's deliver their damage as PPFL, it could be said, quite accurately, that they are already superior, even at equal tonnage.

The improved range of the LBX's is somewhat irrelevant because of the spread; you don't really want to use LBX's at longer ranges (or indeed, at anything other than a fraction of optimum).
Likewise, the improved crit chance is nice, but if you are spending that much tonnage on weapons that don't strip armor very well, then the value becomes very limited.
I too don't think that equal treatment for the LBX2/5/20, as compared to the 10, is the wrong way to go.
As it stands, I will never use the 2 or the 5. The 20... maybe, just for grins, but requiring a STD engine makes that extremely unlikely as well..

So, to balance the weapons, to make them a viable alternative to regular AC's, you are looking at CD, heat, tonnage, and/or space.
Much like the LBX-10, which improved on 3/4, and is considered ok, but not great.
Instead, for the LBX2 you have vastly worse space. The LBX5 and 20 are worse on space, but have better heat. And it doesn't seem like enough to make them viable.

[Damnedtroll]

I use LBX20 on assault mech, require a lot less face time because they are easy to aim. Can shot it while torso twisting while ac20 and uac20 with low bullet travel time need more aiming.

Yes they do less pinpoint damage and sometime you are like ''why he didnt fall ,why he didnt fall damn it !'' But a twin lb20x open mech like popcorn at close range and you can harass with the IS version at quite a long range.

Done a game for the event with a quad lb2x and done over 800 damage with my jaegermech at first try. Was flabbergasted at the result. Crappy weapon but like ac2 you can do something with it. Don't forget It's more or less made to cut down helicopter in TT... lot of weapon cannot show all their potential in mwo and without able to change ammo type, lbx, atm, lrm, srm and autocannon ! cannot show all their potential.

Edited by Damnedtroll, 09 October 2017 - 02:57 PM.

[Bombast]

Crit splitting or I riot (Or a reduction of one crit, at least, just to get everything on track).

[process]

Give IS LBs +50% damage and Clan +20% damage, leave every other stat alone, and try that out for a few weeks.

[Bombast]

process, on 09 October 2017 - 01:41 PM, said:

Give IS LBs +50% damage and Clan +20% damage, leave every other stat alone, and try that out for a few weeks.

60 damage BoomHammer? Sign me up!

[process]

If you can get close enough to land 60 points, you've earned it!

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

If PGI were aggressive with the CD rate of LB-ACs and bumped the damage/pellet to 1.5 then the price in space would very likely be worth it for certain builds.

[panzer1b]

If the LBX family had actual high crit multipliers i could see the appeal, but as it stands, the ONE and ONLY reason youd ever bringa LBX20 (on clam at least) is if you run it alongside SRMs and want something that doesnt burst fire or have ghost heat issues (on IS there is never a good reason to run it outside of derping).

They need to either give it higher raw DPS, alfa strike, or insanely high crit multiplier to make em viable compared to normal autocannons. Outside of facehugging range, no amount of skill is going to allow you to hit a single component with every LBX pellet, and at that point, id rather take IS ACs for PPFLD or cGR since clan lacks any other PPFLD option (and ERPPCs cant be used in a brawl like at all).

Anyways, it is what it is, and since PGI is dead set of following tabletop for weight and slots (and sofar refuses to implement crit splitting which would have been super useful), the only thing they can do is up damage, DPS, or crit multipliers. That or just leave it as is and forget it exists, which is much more likely since things like cACs have been that way for a long time and noone bothered making them balanced or viable compared to UACs.

[Brain Cancer]

Zigmund Freud, on 09 October 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

As title suggest, why would you even spend time on designing IS LB cannons and adding them in game, if all of them (save LB 10-X) are utterly unusable?
tldr: adjust slots and tons of all LB-X in a manner of LB-10, so they have at least some reasons to be used instead of AC.

They're useless because PGI can't actually code multiple fire modes at this point, nor make them useful at long ranges. Cluster ammo is closer to a flak round than anything else- in TT, you can hit with the full pellet spread even at the end of the range band.

And LB-10X are lighter because they were originally going to be Star League tech, which was the original plans for Clan tech. Once FASA dropped the ball and made a completely OP tech tree for them instead, it was relegated to being used for the IS tech tree instead, thus other LB's were "balanced" around those.

You'll notice a lot of SL tech was "better than" without balancers, most notably Gauss and LB-10X. That's because it was the initial tech update for Battletech, and would have been the "Clantech" had FASA not decided to screw everyone up forever by putting out things like halfweight LRM launchers, pulse/targeting computer+ better gunnery skill Clan standards, and so on.