Jump to content

- - - - -

Bracket Builds


120 replies to this topic

#41 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 24 February 2018 - 12:23 PM

To further iterate on JSS's point... or more specifically to reign in from what people assume bracket builds to mean, to what an effective bracket build should be in MWO...

Whether your build is bracket, meta or anti-meta, (which even many meta builds are technically bracket builds that follow an important idiom)... the important factor is that the firing mechanics of the weapon need to be compatible and the weapons need to overlap in range. While it ties with being compatible, there's added emphasis on "Keeping it simple." This I believe is also what pretty much everyone else has been pushing as well with "2 to 3 weapons" or as I prefer to say it, 2 to 3 compatible weapon types.

This, while entertaining enough to have received a compliment from b33f, is far too complex to be tenable. The ranges don't overlap well, there's too many buttons, it's basically built for the challenge and being different (note at the time laser vomit wasn't a meta).

Laser vomit works decent regardless of how far fetched the design is, but performs exceptionally well when all of it has a good identical range that it can all be used in despite having 2 to 3 different laser types.

SRMs and close range slow firing ballistics overlap well, deliver that big punch and do what you need to do while they reload. Especially best if the velocities are all about the same for an equal amount of leading.

LRMs / ATMs and long range ballistics do not mesh together because you can't hold a lock and lead the target at the same time, so something suffers. But LRMs / ATMs and Lasers both require you to aim/shoot directly at the target and as such mesh well together.

LRMs / ATMs and Streaks with or without lasers will blend very well together as a bracket build, you have a lock on system the whole way through. A singular combat mechanic to utilize is accompanied by a simple premise and overlapping firing ranges. At a certain range your LRMs or ATMs and streaks can combine to completely overwhelm an enemy. This by far isn't the pinnacle of design, but it gives an example of that cohesion. Unlike back then (since AMS was terrible at the time), today you would want to time your missiles to fire all at once if they have AMS. If they don't, feel free to pepper them however you please.

Of the combination, ATMs works better for obvious reasons (more damage at closer ranges). In either case when too close cut to the Streaks. In my own missile dedicated builds, this is when the LRMs cut and the SRMs combine with the Streaks as I know that sometimes you just need the ability to lob missiles (or lasers) directly where you need it to finish the job. Again for me I often use a single LRM-20 or LRM-15 depending on weight, geometry or other concerns, some Streaks, and twin SRM-6 preferably mounted in the arms so I can hook them in any way needed as I tend to use SRMs up close and personal.

This gets into compatible weapon categories. You have three basic categories.
  • Aim At weapons, these are your hitscan MGs, your hitscan lasers, your lock on weaponry. You must aim at the target to be effective with these weapons.
  • Leading weapons, these are all your ballistic weapons and SRMs direct fire missiles (SRMs, MRMs, whatever else we get in the future). You must lead the target in order to successfully hit, making them largely incompatible with Aim At weapons. This is why many builds focus either ballistic or lasers rather than mixing them. They generally do not mix well for firing at the same time. Sequentially, sure they work great. But you lose time adjusting for lead, then adjusting to aim at, then adjusting for lead...etc...
  • Finally, the third category that exists only "because PGI".. Charging or Charge Up weapons. Basically every Gauss Rifle in the game. This generally will not work well with leading weapons as they fly too fast once fired. They don't work terribly well with aim at weapons at longer ranges as I will admit when paired with ER Large Lasers I'll be lasering in and have the Gauss fire... only to completely miss by pixels while still hitting with the lasers. We're not even gonna touch trying to use them alongside lock missiles (though this is probably the most compatible mix) or leading direct fire missiles...
There's your three basic categories of weapons. (For clarity on weapon type, I mean you could mix large and medium lasers as two laser types. AC/5 and AC/2 as two ballistic weapon types... so 2 to 3 types on average is where most would cut it off.)

Edited by Koniving, 24 February 2018 - 12:44 PM.


#42 HammerMaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 2,516 posts
  • LocationNew Hampshire, USA

Posted 24 February 2018 - 03:28 PM

View Postjss78, on 24 February 2018 - 11:53 AM, said:

I'm a bit of a lore nerd, and I've REALLY tried to make bracket builds work in MWO.

IMO, the situation is that they do work, but they don't work well enough.

With that I mean, you DO get those situations where you can, for example, fire those long-bracket LRM's while closing in. Without the LRM's, you would've missed that bit of damage.

But to me that's just not worth losing that focused punch. MWO is a first-person shooter and this has unavoidable consequences on game play. We make use of cover to a level of detail not simulated in tabletop (peeking and poking). And unlike tabletop, we're able to relatively reliably hit the same component with all weapons. Both of these mean you want that focused punch, to make use of your 2-second exposure and cripple/destroy the enemy if possible.

Tabletop is just a different beast, and especially in a lore context the bracket build 'mechs make a ton of sense.

If you think about that poster boy of bracket build 'mechs, the Shadow Hawk 2H. The guy piloting could be a merc doing whatever mission he's ordered to. No-one asks him if he's geared for short or long range. Also the guy exists in a world where a major portion of all 'mechs are 20-tonners. That AC/5 and LRM 5 are credible threats against 20-tonners, while they're too light to have significant ranged weaponry to respond with. And there are tons vehicles around which can be crippled with a single LRM 5 hit to motive equipment. In a world like this, being able to do lots of jobs, to some degree, is good enough.


You've just described almost EVERYTHING wrong with MWO. Kudos sir.

#43 Spare Parts Bin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Contaminator
  • Contaminator
  • 1,743 posts
  • LocationSearching alternate universes via temporal wormhole generator.

Posted 24 February 2018 - 03:35 PM

Horseman,CFC Conky,ASH,Throe,Koniving you all understand a facet of this game. However it is my responsibility to tune what you can teach me into a methodology that works for me and then I need to share that methodology as I best understand it with others.

Edited by Spare Parts Bin, 24 February 2018 - 03:36 PM.


#44 Throe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 1,027 posts

Posted 24 February 2018 - 08:39 PM

View PostKin3ticX, on 24 February 2018 - 12:08 PM, said:

The LBX-2 is just a placeholder weapon because a couple mechs come stock with one. You are not supposed to actually use them.

Maybe for Clans, and most IS 'Mechs. On the Legend Killer, they're actually quite good. It's got to do with spread patterns. Reference Koniving's posts on the subject.

#45 Kin3ticX

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 2,926 posts
  • LocationSalt Mines of Puglandia

Posted 24 February 2018 - 11:07 PM

View PostThroe, on 24 February 2018 - 08:39 PM, said:

Maybe for Clans, and most IS 'Mechs. On the Legend Killer, they're actually quite good. It's got to do with spread patterns. Reference Koniving's posts on the subject.



Yikes, i just saw those are 4 crits each. I would use vanilla AC2 before I ever touched that (1 crit and 0 spread), or just use ultra 2s.

Ive used 6xUltra-2 on an MX90 with some so-so success.

#46 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 25 February 2018 - 06:13 AM

View PostThroe, on 24 February 2018 - 08:39 PM, said:

Maybe for Clans, and most IS 'Mechs. On the Legend Killer, they're actually quite good. It's got to do with spread patterns. Reference Koniving's posts on the subject.

Hey bud. It was discovered recently that Paul Inouye's stated 45 LBX-10 spread patterns settled upon different mechs from 2013 is no longer actually in use. Between recent testing and a personal inquirey, that stopped at the same time as the missile changes when missiles went from firing like this..

to firing like this.
So sometime in 2014.
The LBX, LRMs, SRMs, all had issues that were wrecking the HSR system

It also turned out that I had taken both LBX spread nodes (and didn't remember since I have never used them in the past as I don't like to dedicate my skill node to just one build; I change them like I change paint patterns). Taking both LBX spread nodes is literally that good. As such you could pull this off with pretty much any mech, now, provided you take those nodes.

The difference in results from my Legend Killer Rifleman and my 3C Rifleman is in fact not some pay2win pattern spread difference assigned to the mechs, but simply one had the two spread nodes unlocked and my 3C is uh... "legendary" in that I refuse to unlock any more nodes than the bare minimum to get the advanced zoom for my ER PPCs / LMG build.

I had incorrectly assumed it to still be true (PGI is very bad at letting old mechanics go). In the same inquirey, self-heat retention as a hidden mechanic to many weapons was supposed to be removed alongside to coincide with the implementation of ghost heat but apparently lasted until the exact same time as the missile change (apparently they did a lot of overhaul to old systems at this time; when you've got programmers on the temporary payroll, might as well do all the work at once right?). This was actually sent as a follow up as the initial response said that self-heat retention is in the game as a RAC and flamer mechanic (and not hidden, you can see it in effect as the RAC and flamer are in use due to the cooldown bar changes). So that was kinda cool.

But these old hidden mechanics are thusly, gone forever™. I apologize for any confusion it may have caused and the failure on my part to test for their continued existence before bringing them up.

Edited by Koniving, 25 February 2018 - 06:25 AM.


#47 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 25 February 2018 - 06:19 AM

Honestly the removal of the different spread patterns is actually better for balance and LBX in general, as results will be consistent across all mechs, making it much better for everyone. Also it is good because before this, half the pellets that hit would actually go through the enemy regardless of what you saw, which helped to contribute to the impression of how useless LBX was or "is" in the eyes of many long time MWO veterans.

#48 Hobbles v

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sureshot
  • The Sureshot
  • 354 posts

Posted 25 February 2018 - 08:36 AM

View PostSpare Parts Bin, on 23 February 2018 - 04:59 PM, said:


I hate running out of ammo. I always carry back-up weapons.

In IS builds I would like to try dual AC-5s,dual LLs,and MRM10s.


Bring enough ammo to do 1500dmg. If you run out of ammo in quickplay everyone should be dead.

Also with boated acs you will find yourself more ammo efficient since you wont be juggling weapon velocities and missing less. Ultra auto cannons especially do not mix with lasers well. Since they have a lot of face time you wont have much time to swap between leading your target and direct firing with your lasers.

Boating is superior to mixes in most situations, also the easier you make your mech to pilot/shoot with the more of your time can be spent working on positioning and predicting enemy movements. These are the skills that really separate the good pilots from the bad (because shooting is easy)

#49 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 25 February 2018 - 10:12 AM

Most situations. (This is a joke btw. Two vids. Bonus; boat killing boat.)

#50 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • 8,987 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 25 February 2018 - 05:14 PM

View PostSpare Parts Bin, on 24 February 2018 - 05:59 AM, said:

I am listening to your opinions as well folks like Snuggles Time,Koniving,and others. Ash you say LBX-2s are junk,Koniving likes them. Snuggles Time hates missles period on assault Mechs. Molten Metal likes IS LLs and MRMs together others say Ballistics and MRMs. No offense, it takes time to understand what people are saying. I know I don't have all the answers just a piece of the puzzle. My desire is to not have to learn everything by experience but short circuit the process and learn from others. In short I am trying to reach Tier 4.

For the record I have never been in a private lobby in MWO.


Yeah the problem is anyone can give you an answer Posted Image

eg. Koniving brought the LBX2s vs ACs (after saying LBXs were better). User was absolutely destroyed by ACs, as expected, because LBX2s are flat out rubbish.

Yet user is is still trying to defend it, which again is just misleading and does not help new players improve/become more effective (if that is what they want). This behaviour, IMO, is utterly irrresponsible for those players.
If players just wanna have fun then whatever, it doesn't matter, run whatever build you can think of and go shoot stuff.

This is the problem when you have players that at best, barely average, commenting. They give out advice on based on what they think is effective because they might do 500dmg in it. Reality is it's against other bottom of the barrell players so is it really, good? No.

IMO always uses "Jarls List" when taking advice. If someone has overall total that is below 350 avg match score and a WLR below 1.4, then they are not among the decent level of play for SoloQ. Also if someone has ~300 avg match score but a WLR above 4.0, they are decent and play in GroupQ mainly (just how the stats work out).

Anyway keep asking Qs, I'll keep it to real-talk without any contrivied rubbish and word soup, you will improve with the answers I give you.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 25 February 2018 - 05:21 PM.


#51 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • 8,987 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 25 February 2018 - 05:20 PM

View PostKin3ticX, on 24 February 2018 - 11:07 PM, said:

Yikes, i just saw those are 4 crits each. I would use vanilla AC2 before I ever touched that (1 crit and 0 spread), or just use ultra 2s.

Ive used 6xUltra-2 on an MX90 with some so-so success.


Yeah the IS UAC2 Mauler is just too hot, it is definately so-so at best. I mean I can make any build work, especially hot ones... But even that one is hard going. I actually ran it on Caustic for a Comp match last season from memory Posted Image

The 6xAC2s is by far a more friendly/forgiving build and still quite effective @ 1300m even though the Mauler MX90 losing its 20% velocity hurt it quite a bit.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 25 February 2018 - 05:20 PM.


#52 Spare Parts Bin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Contaminator
  • Contaminator
  • 1,743 posts
  • LocationSearching alternate universes via temporal wormhole generator.

Posted 25 February 2018 - 07:32 PM

Thanks ASH I continue to do,try, and ask pertinent questions.

#53 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,575 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 25 February 2018 - 08:45 PM

I will mention that, from personal experience helping new players, what works for one player and/or tier of play may not and sometimes do not work for other players and/ore tiers of play.

For example, there are many builds that are very effective in T1 and comp matches. Yet, I've seen new players utterly fail in those same mech designs. For one very specific example, the 6 MPL Crab design. It's a very common design, all boating one weapon type and all the strengths that go with it. For an experience and skilled player (who has the mech skilled out as well) will find it a cool(ish) running mech with minimal face time and reasonable ranges. That same build, with no skill unlocks and little experience or low player skill level, is a literal death trap. It's too short range, too hot, doesn't cool fast enough and just can't hold out to other builds even on their own tier level (which could even be T5).

Where as, in counter point, a Crab with two LLs and three ERMLs worked far better for same said new player, despite dissimilar (though close) weapon ranges, longer beam duration, etc. With out any skills, the alternative mech was able to cool faster and had better overall range. If it dropped a laser and a little engine speed, adding in an AMS (or two) onto it was an even larger boon (depending upon the specific chassis). Something else that would be seen as almost a complete waste in T1 and comp level of play.

So, I find it a little erroneous to proclaim to not listen to advice from people who aren't of X tier, of Y comp team or don't get Z statistics. If I listened to only those sources of advice I'd honestly still be in T3 or less, instead of T1. How I got into T1 personally (and quickly) was redirecting my play style from direct fire (a skill I was trying to sharpen) back to my love of LRM weaponry. Yes, I got into T1 because of cleaver and knowledgeable use of LRMs, a weapon often decried by comp players as complete garbage. I also would not have devised my favorite mech build, the Huntsmen with two LRM15s and four ERMLs. It can be highly effective, and I've even done very well against even comp teams with the build. (I've also don't very poorly against non-comp players with it, as can be the luck of the game.)

I'll also comment that the flaw with stats is... not everyone always plays the best builds. I know I will switch it up, and experiment with different builds and weapon combinations. As of late, I've been experimenting a lot with light and assault mechs, as well as seeing the effectiveness of playing dual AMS on mechs in relation to match score and C-bill earnings. Where as, for example, I'm not always playing my best performing mechs (such as above stated Huntsmen). I've often been seen in a Zeus as of late... a mech that is hardly seen anymore and considered one of the worst assaults in the game. I've been having fun with it, and getting reasonable results.


Advice should be taken, but then tested and adjusted to the individual. Would I recommend my LRM Huntsmen to everyone? It's fun, but I would say it isn't a build nor play style for everyone. I know of a lot of skilled players who would probably do poorly in the design, despite being a higher tier than I am or even a comp player. However, same said players would (and do) kill me quick in their own designs (if I'm not careful).

I'm kinda reminded of an account I played one match in (to help them with an event, the one that will earn two hero mechs in March). I played a Raven(C) with two ERLLs. Completely decimated the enemy team. However, if I took that same mech out of T5 new account, and did it on my main account, I'd be hard pressed to do much. Why? Simply because of the tier levels of play.

#54 Spare Parts Bin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Contaminator
  • Contaminator
  • 1,743 posts
  • LocationSearching alternate universes via temporal wormhole generator.

Posted 25 February 2018 - 08:56 PM

Great post Tesunie. It seems like this game is changing quicker than I remember at any other time. When I started playing the original Battletech staples were the only Mechs available, no Clan Tech, no Civil War Tech. Cataphracts were the Kings of Dakka Brawlers and Stalkers were the feared LRM Boats.

#55 Leone

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,693 posts
  • LocationOutworlds Alliance

Posted 26 February 2018 - 08:11 AM

View Postjustcallme A S H, on 25 February 2018 - 05:14 PM, said:

IMO always uses "Jarls List" when taking advice. If someone has overall total that is below 350 avg match score and a WLR below 1.4, then they are not among the decent level of play for SoloQ. Also if someone has ~300 avg match score but a WLR above 4.0, they are decent and play in GroupQ mainly (just how the stats work out).


Just a note, but if you believe this, you shouldn't listen to any of my advice. I wouldn't suggest metamechs either, since they're designed for a certain playstyle and I've seen more new players leave than stay after trying 'em, but Tesunie already covered that angle.

~Leone.

Edited by Leone, 26 February 2018 - 08:36 AM.


#56 Spare Parts Bin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Contaminator
  • Contaminator
  • 1,743 posts
  • LocationSearching alternate universes via temporal wormhole generator.

Posted 26 February 2018 - 08:17 AM

View PostSpare Parts Bin, on 25 February 2018 - 08:56 PM, said:

Great post Tesunie. It seems like this game is changing quicker than I remember at any other time. When I started playing the original Battletech staples were the only Mechs available, no Clan Tech, no Civil War Tech. Cataphracts were the Kings of Dakka Brawlers and Stalkers were the feared LRM Boats.

View PostLeone, on 26 February 2018 - 08:11 AM, said:


Just a note, but if you believe this, you shouldn't listen to any of my advice. I wouldn't stick to metamechs either, since they're designed for a certain playstyle and I've seen more new players leave than stay after trying 'em, but Tesunie already covered that angle.

~Leone.


So much of the Meta doesn't work for me like Gauss and Laser Vomit.

#57 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 23,384 posts

Posted 26 February 2018 - 08:22 AM

Unfortunately, there are some players that don't understand that not everything works for everyone due to many different reasons, or that there could actually be more than one playstyle, or situations in which meta is useless.

Anyone so arrogant to think they're the **** from potato farming (since tier 1 fights as low as tier 4, and many new players that grind meta can get to tier 1 within 400 matches or in some cases, there's a guy whom got to the top of the Jarl's List with only 84 matches.), is someone that as a locked comprehension that does not consider alternatives. If someone built up like this from the very beginning, if a balance shift hit MWO, they'd probably drop like flies.

(The overall top player has only ever played 84 matches and has only been top player, second top player, and top player. Third top player has only ever played 111 matches. Actually many of them barely have any matches. Makes one question things even if you consider them to be alts... These haven't even been around long enough to make the current record of 200 something matches to get to tier 1. So... top stats don't mean much. Just being at the top of the Jarl's list doesn't mean much... in most cases. You should look at match count as well to know they've actually been around for a while and didn't get there by superficial means.)

Unfortunately many new players that run pure meta are likely to flop once a balance change makes the current meta obsolete as it often forbids even the most basic skills that are learned over time. For example playing with the arms unlocked allow the torso to twist several times faster than if it is locked, but when you run pure laser meta the only way to play it right is arms locked. Between this handicap after a drastic meta change and rapidly getting to tier 2 or higher, new players drop the game like it has Ebola due to being unable to adapt to the fact that there is more to the game than point and click = get kill.

Some people value stats so highly that they will get it no matter what for the bragging rights. In turn, if they are unable to achieve or maintain them, they resort to other means to get them easily. And anyone that values stats enough to say that no stats means no right to speak, is not above the worst methods of competitive play.

Consider this: More than 30 of the consistently top 100 players over the past 10 seasons now have purple names. It would not surprise me exactly how many purple names could be found within the top 10 thousand. Shame you can't do a direct search for it.

Purple names are those whom are permanently banned. Takes two guesses how they get there.

Actually it just takes one.

Edited by Koniving, 26 February 2018 - 09:12 AM.


#58 Horseman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 4,694 posts
  • LocationPoland

Posted 26 February 2018 - 10:41 AM

View PostLeone, on 26 February 2018 - 08:11 AM, said:

Just a note, but if you believe this, you shouldn't listen to any of my advice. I wouldn't suggest metamechs either, since they're designed for a certain playstyle and I've seen more new players leave than stay after trying 'em, but Tesunie already covered that angle.

~Leone.
Ash exaggerates, but isn't very far off the mark: statistically, people with sub 1.0/1.0 ratings are reducing their team's chance of success, while those with ratings around that mark are just competent enough to hold their own (read: your first stop on the way to gitting gud, but not the actual end goal).

View PostKoniving, on 26 February 2018 - 08:22 AM, said:

Unfortunately, there are some players that don't understand that not everything works for everyone due to many different reasons, or that there could actually be more than one playstyle, or situations in which meta is useless.
Or perhaps the mech / build just isn't suitable for an inexperienced player. I have recently decided to try a splatcat again, and compared to my first attempt ~1.5 years ago it's a night and day difference.

#59 Spare Parts Bin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Contaminator
  • Contaminator
  • 1,743 posts
  • LocationSearching alternate universes via temporal wormhole generator.

Posted 26 February 2018 - 03:03 PM

View PostHorseman, on 26 February 2018 - 10:41 AM, said:


Or perhaps the mech / build just isn't suitable for an inexperienced player. I have recently decided to try a splatcat again, and compared to my first attempt ~1.5 years ago it's a night and day difference.


I just watched Baradul/ aka Molten Metal play a 2 games with a K-2 Catapult armed with a pair of SPPCs, an LBX-10, and twin ERMLs. I loved his results but I would trade the twin SPPCs for a single HPPC and the LBX-10 for a UAC-5, plus an AMS w/1 ton ammo, and a TC1, swapping ERMLs for MLs. I plan to try this on my K-2.

#60 Throe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Marauder
  • The Marauder
  • 1,027 posts

Posted 26 February 2018 - 04:00 PM

Thanks for the update on the LB-X Koniving. I'll have to give that build another try on my Jagermech later. It's one 'Mech I've refrained from instantly maxing out the skill trees on so I could experience the "grind", even though I still have many hundreds of spare GSP banked. Right now it's running dual RAC5 as primary with 4 ERML for burst and backup, which has been immensely fun, despite the relative absence of skills/quirks. I've been excited to see how well it can do fully skilled, as I've been routinely and consistently in the 500+ damage range with it so far.

I'm curious to know more about the current state of LB-X spread patterns. Do you know of any current resource in that regard? I love the fact that the IS versions all have triple range, but have found that 4x LB-X 2 AC simply aren't very effective for me so far. Maybe, as you said, the issue is that my Jagermech simply doesn't have the 2 spread skills you're saying are so critical. The dual RAC build seems to be more forgiving in that aspect, so maybe I'll stick with those until I have the chassis fully skilled.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users