66 replies to this topic

[The6thMessenger]

I've been mulling over the useless LB5X, no really it's weak as hell. You know what would make it at least useful? God damn damage-buff. But then here's a different approach, lets rework the entire LBX lineup into a +DMG +CD, like the god damn shotgun it's supposed to be.

LB2X:
- Damage: 3 (1 x 3)
- Heat: 0.6
- Velocity: 2000
- Spread: 0.30
- Range: 720m
- Max Range: 1440m
- Cooldown: 1.25s
- DPS: 2.4
- Ammo/Ton: 58

LB5X:
- Damage: 7 (1 x 7)
- Heat: 1.66
- Spread: 0.45
- Velocity: 1650
- Range: 600m
- Max Range: 1200m
- i-Cooldown: 2.324s
- i-DPS: 3.01
- C-Cooldown: 2.55s
- C-DPS: 2.745
- Ammo/Ton: 25

LB10X:
- Damage: 13 (1 x 13)
- Heat: 3.5
- Spread: 0.9
- Velocity: 1100
- Range: 450m
- Max Range: 900m
- i-Cooldown: 3.0s
- i-DPS: 4.33
- C-Cooldown: 3.29s
- C-DPS: 3.95
- Ammo/Ton: 18

LB20X:
- Damage: 24 (1 x 24)
- Heat: 7
- Spread: 0.9
- Range: 270m
- Max Range: 540m
- Velocity: 1100
- i-Cooldown: 5.0s
- i-DPS: 4.8
- C-Cooldown: 5.4s
- C-DPS: 4.44
- Ammo/Ton: 7

The LBXs this way, have reduced DPS, but increased alpha and heat. Despite doing spread damage, they would try to overwhelm spread with enough damage. This also puts the LB5X at a different use than the standard AC5, solving the problem of it being a completely worse weapon by giving it the niche of increased damage. The increased CD as a result will also help it, because it would be less starey at a the closer range that it's actually effective. It doesn't matter that LB5X has worse DPS and worse range than the AC5, because it has the fallback of greater damage.

I also adjusted the heat, spread and velocity of the LBXs, the LB20 would have similar spread as with LB10X, for it already has worse optimal damage. The LB5 just got better velocity and spread. Overall, I normalized the ranges to mirror the standard ACs, it already has higher damage -- it doesn't need higher damage and 3x max-range. The increased heat is there to make it not completely unbalanced in terms of heat-efficiency, I mean if LB2X is still doing 0.4 with 3 damage, that is way colder than 0.5 with 2 damage, it's still pretty cold in comparison considering that you are still doing way more damage/heat.

Note that Clan LBXs would have longer cooldown, to compensate the fact that C-ACs have burst-fire that prolongs their CD and as a result have lower DPS than IS counterparts.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 20 June 2019 - 03:43 PM.

[Y E O N N E]

I don't hate it.

[Nightbird]

LBX5 needs less spread, no real problem with the rest of the line-up IMO since I use them all.

[Khobai]

The entire purpose of LBX autocannons is to do spread damage (and get crits as a secondary function).

if you keep giving LBX less spread then they cease to be functionally different from regular AC5s

LBX dont need less spread. They need their damage buffed from 1.0 to 1.1-1.2 damage per pellet. Theyre meant to be a sandblasting weapon theyre not meant to focus damage into one location.

LBX also need a higher crit multiplier. Because for a weapon thats supposed to be good at critting theyre actually quite bad at it. Because each pellet ends up hitting a different piece of equipment which leads to no single piece of equipment actually getting critted. LBX crit multiplier should be increased from x2 to x2.5 so it only takes 3-4 pellets instead of 5 pellets to destroy a 10 health equipment.

Edited by Khobai, 16 June 2019 - 08:58 PM.

[FupDup]

Khobai, on 16 June 2019 - 08:47 PM, said:

The entire purpose of LBX autocannons is spread

if you keep giving them less spread then it ceases to be functionally different from regular AC5s

LBX need a damage buff. Theyre meant to be a sandblasting weapon theyre not meant to focus damage into one location.

The problem is that with the way Autocannons lineups are handled in BT is that smaller ACs are supposed to have better range in exchange for lower damage output, but the spread on the LB 5-X and LB 2-X limits their range to ranges where they have to compete directly with the bigger LBX's: A competition that they obviously can't (and probably shouldn't) win.

If we had ammo-swapping then the slug mode would provide the long-range role for the smaller LBX's and you could switch to clusters to give you some situational close range punch ("generalist" kind of weapon). Other ideas might be to make them airburst so they fire a single slug that only spreads out a few meters in front of the enemy target, or even adopting the Clan ERPPC splash mechanic to simulate spread damage but giving consistent performance at all ranges.

[Khobai]

FupDup, on 16 June 2019 - 08:54 PM, said:

The problem is that with the way Autocannons lineups are handled in BT is that smaller ACs are supposed to have better range in exchange for lower damage output

You cant save a weapon like the LB2X it should just be removed from the game. Theres just no situation where it will ever be better than an AC2/UAC2.

It might be possible to save the LB5X though. Thats borderline.

Honestly id be okay with removing both from the game. Some weapons just dont have a feasible design space in the game. And thats fine but it raises the question of why theyre in the game still...

Weapons like the LBX2, ATM3, SRM2, SSRM2, etc... just dont need to exist at all. Theyre bad weapons and people who use them are only hurting their team by running inferior builds. So why even let people use them?

Edited by Khobai, 16 June 2019 - 09:11 PM.

[Curccu]

Khobai, on 16 June 2019 - 09:04 PM, said:

Weapons like the LBX2, ATM3, SRM2, SSRM2, etc... just dont need to exist at all. Theyre bad weapons and people who use them are only hurting their team by running inferior builds. So why even let people use them?

SRM2 and SSRM2 are ok? those you can boat or add to bigger splat to dodge ghost heat. iSSRM2 has same DPS as cSSRM6 which makes it ok.

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 16 June 2019 - 09:04 PM, said:

You cant save a weapon like the LB2X it should just be removed from the game. Theres just no situation where it will ever be better than an AC2/UAC2.

It might be possible to save the LB5X though. Thats borderline.

If it's doing more damage per shot than the AC2/UAC2 then it would, it is exactly what it needs. You got a variation of a rapid-fire shotgun for long range anyways which allows it to have it's own niche.

Khobai, on 16 June 2019 - 09:04 PM, said:

Weapons like the LBX2, ATM3, SRM2, SSRM2, etc... just dont need to exist at all. Theyre bad weapons and people who use them are only hurting their team by running inferior builds. So why even let people use them?

Lol, wut. No, the problem is how they are handled, and PGI is refusing to make adjustments for them. They need to exist, because they offer variety -- problem is that they aren't a good choice versus energy-weapons, especially for the tonnage-starved lights.

I mean since when is the last time a 2x ML + 2x SRM4 Locust was meta? **** needs to be able to go fast, while have enough ammo, and you just won't go far with 1 ton of ammo. I know that 2x SRM4, not 4x SRM2, but yeah you need the DPS though.

And then there's the issue of AMS being just much more potent than before, and the only way to go through them is to increase tube-count, which puts people at a disadvantage. You don't have remove these small weapons, you just need to implement them right.

You need:
- Ammo-Quirks for the low-tonnage, as in 20-Tonners get 3x Ammo/Ton quirks, 25-tonners get 2.5x Ammo/Ton-quirks, 30 to 25 tonners get 2.0x ammo/ton quirks, and 40 to 45-tonners get 1.5x ammo/ton quirks.
- AMS needs to not completely nullify missiles, such as a full 1s would only kill 1 missile out of a SRM2, etc.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 16 June 2019 - 10:31 PM.

[crazytimes]

I have a MAD IIC with 3 lb5x + 4mpl that is one of my very few +1 k/d and w/l mechs. Quirked and skilled so they range to ~850m with a 1.5s reload, run cool, can chain fire to harass or group fire for a decent punch close range. I don't roll it out often, but it does okay.

It was my second purchase, I didn't like the self immolation if I mistimed shots with 2xgauss+2ppc, Had an lb5 from a cache and that was all I could afford at the time. I wouldn't deliberately use lb5x is any other case. Such a nothing weapon.

[Curccu]

crazytimes, on 17 June 2019 - 01:06 AM, said:

I have a MAD IIC with 3 lb5x + 4mpl that is one of my very few +1 k/d and w/l mechs. Quirked and skilled so they range to ~850m with a 1.5s reload, run cool, can chain fire to harass or group fire for a decent punch close range. I don't roll it out often, but it does okay.

How about 3xUAC5 and 2xLPL? can upgrade to XL engine --> is faster, more heatsinks and so on.

[crazytimes]

Curccu, on 17 June 2019 - 03:06 AM, said:

How about 3xUAC5 and 2xLPL? can upgrade to XL engine --> is faster, more heatsinks and so on.

I've got a meta MCII-B and a dakka Night Gyr since, so happy to keep something a bit different. It's not a build I would make now, but is just the only valid use for LB5Xs in my whole stable and has happy tier 5 memories attached. I know it's not meta, but it really is one of the few mechs the numbers say I am definitely not a team handicap in.

[Battlemaster56]

Not against it since I like my mech shotguns stronger, but I find it won't change the situation with the lbx5 since the 2 will still be a batter suppressing weapon with range and a nice spread. 10 and 20's gonna more dangerous and shred mech faster than they already can now in close range.

Lbx5 not even a good middle ground weapon in general is kinda the problem.

[The6thMessenger]

Battlemaster56, on 17 June 2019 - 04:36 AM, said:

Lbx5 not even a good middle ground weapon in general is kinda the problem.

True. But at least you have a point in taking LB5X over standard AC5, now we just need reason to take LB5X over the other LBXs.

We could probably approach this by giving LB5X better velocity over LB10s and LB20s, likewise the LB5 had 0.65 spread, versus the 0.9 of the LB10Xs and the 1.0 of the LB20Xs, this means it's still pretty better as a shotgun from a range. It's not good for suppressive fire, but it's till probably good for skirmishes. Reworked 3x LB5X is basically previous 2x LB10X.

EDIT:

I readjusted LB5X Damage/Ton, so it should have:

iLB2X: 0.5 Damage/Ton, 0.4 DPS/Ton
CLB2X: 0.6 Damage/Ton, 0.48 DPS/Ton

iLB5X: 0.875 Damage/Ton, 0.37625 DPS/Ton
CLB5X: 1 Damage/Ton, 0.3921 DPS/Ton

iLB10X: 1.18 Damage/Ton, 0.3936 DPS/Ton
CLB10X: 1.3 Damage/Ton, 0.395 DPS/Ton

iLB20X: 1.714 Damage/Ton, 0.3428 DPS/Ton
CLB20X: 2 Damage/Ton, 0.37 DPS/Ton

As you could see, the LB5X is about same ballpark DPS/Ton as the LB10X, however my problem is that the iAC5 has piss-poor dps/ton and if I raised the iLB5X DPS anymore than 0.37625, the AC5 will probably be obsolete -- having the same DPS though should mean that the AC5 can at least capitalize with it's ppfld at a range. The LB5X on the IS side is just less flexible than the Clan-Side, so it needs all the buff it could get.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 17 June 2019 - 05:28 AM.

[N a p e s]

I like the general idea of having the LB line of ACs being higher raw damage output with slower RoF and have proposed similar things in the past. Whether it be done with an increased damage per pellet value or a number of pellets which doesn't match the value in the name is fine by me.

[Khobai]

The6thMessenger, on 16 June 2019 - 10:30 PM, said:

If it's doing more damage per shot than the AC2/UAC2 then it would, it is exactly what it needs. You got a variation of a rapid-fire shotgun for long range anyways which allows it to have it's own niche.

No lol. Even if the LBX2 did 3 damage it still wouldnt get used over the UAC2.

Again certain weapons just dont have any room for design space.

The only way LBX2 should remain in the game is if PGI could resolve mode switching somehow. If you could switch between slug and cluster than the LBX2 would have a place in the game. Although the AC2s place in the game would be supplanted instead, and it would have to be replaced with the Light AC2.

While switching between two modes that each use a different ammo type isnt possible. I believe mode switching while using the same ammo type is 100% possible and PGI just hasnt explored that alternative. It wouldnt be a big deal if LBX and slug both used the same ammo type.

Edited by Khobai, 17 June 2019 - 10:22 AM.

[Damnedtroll]

LBX are pretty good beside the lb2x... lb5x group well with erppc IS or Clan and lb10x with ppc. But used quad lb2x in my rifleman for some time with good results.

Lb20x are good short range stomper and I have at least 4 build using them.

Having the possibility to choose cluster or slug would be awesome tho.

[FupDup]

Khobai, on 17 June 2019 - 10:17 AM, said:

The only way LBX2 should remain in the game is if PGI could resolve mode switching somehow. If you could switch between slug and cluster than the LBX2 would have a place in the game. Although the AC2s place in the game would be supplanted instead, and it would have to be replaced with the Light AC2.

The IS AC/2 will always have its tiny 1-slot size as a unique advantage that can't ever go away even with a buffed LB 2-X. The 4-slot size is a really, really huge drawback that seriously limits mounting options and build optimization. On the Clan side though...I dunno what to do with the CAC/2. That thing isn't really supposed to exist anyway.

[dwwolf]

Not more pellets svp, hit scan will have fits.
Id rather the dmg per pellet increased.

The concept of LBX spread is ridiculously implemented in MWO.

LBX AC have no penalty to the number of hits at range and the to hit bonus is the same at any range, that means the spread is the same at any range.
That would mean either proximity fused or timed fuses. ( or both ).

[The6thMessenger]

Khobai, on 17 June 2019 - 10:17 AM, said:

No lol. Even if the LBX2 did 3 damage it still wouldnt get used over the UAC2.

That's a lot more bang-per-ton, and people are just going to ignore it? That's straight up 50% extra damage, that unlike the UAC2, it's ensured.

You aren't representative of everyone, not because you won't use it means nobody else would. Here you are at a tunnel-vision again.

Khobai, on 17 June 2019 - 10:17 AM, said:

Again certain weapons just dont have any room for design space.

Sure, but that begs the question, why not just make more space?

Khobai, on 17 June 2019 - 10:17 AM, said:

The only way LBX2 should remain in the game is if PGI could resolve mode switching somehow. If you could switch between slug and cluster than the LBX2 would have a place in the game. Although the AC2s place in the game would be supplanted instead, and it would have to be replaced with the Light AC2.

While switching between two modes that each use a different ammo type isnt possible. I believe mode switching while using the same ammo type is 100% possible and PGI just hasnt explored that alternative. It wouldnt be a big deal if LBX and slug both used the same ammo type.

I agree with the ammo-switching part, but if nothing else the damage-bonus would still be a worthy reason, and if anything it's more worthy considering the increased damage/ton. The point of the small-weapons is for the lights to have something, to have variety, the problem is how it's handled -- as in none at all. People won't put SRMs on their Locust precisely because ammo-shortage, and that has to be addressed.

dwwolf, on 17 June 2019 - 11:12 AM, said:

LBX AC have no penalty to the number of hits at range and the to hit bonus is the same at any range, that means the spread is the same at any range.
That would mean either proximity fused or timed fuses. ( or both ).

What?

You do realize that if you are close enough with the LBXs, it's pretty much a PPFLD right?

Edited by The6thMessenger, 17 June 2019 - 02:04 PM.

[Dauntless Blint]

I always saw LBX5 as a sustain Crit damage profile. Run cold,run long. That's old philosophy though. I'm not up with the play these days. I see people wanting more alpha damage, that's always welcome I guess.

For me LB20 spreads too much.
LB10 is fine.
LB5 could do with velocity increase and tightened spread, maybe slight cool-down buff. same with AC5's.
LB2's or any of the 2's family require too much face time, need to be boated and could do with an ammo-per-ton buff IMO and maybe a small cool down buff at close range or locked targets...that would be great.

Every time I see a possible IS build, it is always 75% the firepower of the Clan build in the same weapon-class-and-closest-chassis when all hard-points are filled for the mech's I like to play (yes there are many who are on par) I sometimes think they could use a little damage per ton(weapon) balance.

Time to see if the patch made any LB5 noticeable difference.

Edited by Dauntless Blint, 17 June 2019 - 07:49 PM.