137 replies to this topic

[MechMaster059]

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

Lol. Yes I can. It's called consistency.

We're going in circles because you can't seem to grasp the issue of difference in application and the danger of face-timing.

Nope. It is. It's hypocrisy otherwise. So aside from being a petulant diva, you're a hypocrite.

But that doesn't make it good.

No. The live is the testing.

Yet you show otherwise.

Meanwhile MXL is working fine.

So:
- Manipulating existing PL numbers that are proven to be balanced is NOT "consistent" with manipulating numbers on a new weapon.
- +42% DPS, extra range, and +20% heat efficiency are all buffs to compensate for face-time yet you keep proclaiming I don't understand the face-time risks involved.
- Now you've added "hypocrite" along with "diva" to your name-calling
- You say MXPLs and MPLs "should be better at their own niche", I concur with "that's what I'm going for", and you reply "that doesn't make it good"...
- Another refusal to admit they don't/can't test changes.
- I show I do understand face-time risks but you ignore it.
- They're not working fine if few players use them.

What you're doing here is simply ignoring counter-points that demolish your arguments, not giving proper credit to what I say, name-calling and saying things that don't make sense. We are approaching the point where it's no longer productive for me to reply to your posts.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

And the problem with percentages is that, they are more useful the larger the value is. why it's much more useful to say the HLL and the Blazer, but little on XPL. Remember the +0.05s one? If you can understand that, you should understand this.

EPIC FAIL.

When it comes to DPS, % reduction is all that matters, not absolute cycle time. Lowering the duration of an XPL by 15% is MUCH MUCH STRONGER than lowering the duration of a LL by 15% in terms of boosting DPS. The full laser duration skills result in a +7.5% DPS boost to XPLs but only a +3.33% DPS boost to a LL.

This kind of fundamental oversight on your part is why you shouldn't put too much stock in the fact that you're a tier 1 player.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

Hmm, no, it is. What is your metric of "OP" even? Is it just because it's characteristically high?

Because what is OP is something that is over-performing, something that upsets the balance, something that usurps and renders other weapons not worth taking. If the MXPL does so much DPS, yet is held back that other weapons retain choices, that it's not guarantee of good performance, then what is even the issue? Why fix what ain't broke?

I'm done with you proclaiming MXPLs are fine when in fact they're rarely used and you failing to have the foresight to realize that if they're given a heat buff they might suddenly become OP due to their ridiculously high +70% DPS relative to an MPL.

I'm not replying to your proclamations about the MXPL anymore.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

And I agree, as I said before I would like colder XPLs. But DPS is a big factor that you can't ignore.

I'm not going to reply to accusations of me ignoring DPS or face-time anymore. You simply don't want to give me the credit I'm due regarding these facets of the weapon.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

Okay. But again, how would that be in practice? Because +70%, in practice, pretty much nailed the MXL in it's spot.

So if you're reducing the DPS by +28% from MPL, we can safely assume the same reduction.

Nope, 70% was a number they pulled out of thin air and hoped for the best. Not replying to this anymore.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

So I'll be the devil's advocate and ask, if they are so bad that people don't take them -- why make them worse?

Continued ignoring of the heat buff and front-loading of damage. No point in replying.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

Still lower DPS on MXL and LXL. If I wanted to poke, I'd poke with legit PLs.

You already proved with your analysis that my proposal would deal MORE total damage due to not overheating than the current implementation.

FAIL

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

I really don't care about your opinion.

Then why do you keep replying?

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

So you probably struggle to find the difference in application of ACs, UACs, and RACs, I take it?

Because SPLs and MPLs aren't burst weapons, they are poke weapons with good DPS.

An attempt to counter-argue by getting nit-picky with language. Burst, poke, peek-a-boo, whatever you want to call it.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

So you do understand that your proposal will make them worse.

No, it will make them better as can clearly be seen in the graph I provided along with your analysis of total damage dealt over time.

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 07:38 PM, said:

Sure. But you can't do that with horrible DPS -- that means, reduction of their current DPS ain't doing them any favors.

...

I'm not replying to you proclaiming +42% (which is very strong) is "horrible DPS" anymore.

Edited by MechMaster059, 03 October 2023 - 08:52 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

All valid points. This is why I suspect SXPLs and MXPLs would make great SECONDARY / COMPLEMENTARY weapons by mixing them with other types of lasers.

Secondary weapons aren't a real thing, at least not like that (you are more likely to have secondaries with different range profiles vs different damage over time profiles). Complementary weapons means they have synergy with other weapons like them (meaning similar role AND similar firing mechanics). Given ballistics are the only real option X Pulse are sort of screwed regardless because they don't complement either role or firing mechanics.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 07:04 PM, said:

I meant big-alpha weapons like laser vomit, PPCs, and UACs, etc. XPLs can't possibly be good alpha/burst weapons without making them ridiculously OP due to their low damage/fast cycle time. They'll always need much more time on target than laser vomit/PPCs/UACs so why even bother trying to make them compete with that? There's a role to be filled for a heat efficient laser that can continuously spew out large amounts of damage as long as the player can continually see the target which DOES happen.

That's kinda the point of burst DPS. It wouldn't be anymore OP than laser vomit already is if DPH is the same. The whole point of burst DPS is that you trade more face time for faster damage.

Here is a quick history lesson though that I put in 6th's thread.

In MW4M, here were the stats for cERLL and cERLPL:

cERLL
Range: 800m
Damage: 7.5
Heat: 9.0
Cycle Time: 5.0s (4.5s + 0.5s animation time)

cERLPL
Range: 800m
Damage: 4.5
Heat: 5.6 (5.4 I think in mektek mods)
Cycle Time: 1.0s (0.75s + 0.25s animation time)

So 2 cERLPLs have 9 DPS for similar DPH, while 3 cERLL for the same tonnage had 22.5 damage at 4.5 DPS (effectively half). So for equivalent tonnage, cERLPLs got you double the DPS for 40% of the upfront damage. cERLLs were king in the game because of the PPFLD despite having half the DPS and cERLPLs almost having half the upfront damage (so at three salvos you were outdoing cERLLs for damage). I think people underestimate what it takes for burst DPS to be competitive and that's part of the reason it hasn't been outside of rare scenarios (UAC dakka boats haven't really ever been dominant outside the quad UAC10 Kodiak of old). X-Pulse aren't better than dakka or laser vomit so yeah, they still need work, however this ain't it.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 03 October 2023 - 09:11 PM.

[MechMaster059]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 October 2023 - 09:09 PM, said:

Secondary weapons aren't a real thing, at least not like that (you are more likely to have secondaries with different range profiles vs different damage over time profiles). Complementary weapons means they have synergy with other weapons like them (meaning similar role AND similar firing mechanics). Given ballistics are the only real option X Pulse are sort of screwed regardless because they don't complement either role or firing mechanics.

I can't speak to the competitive scene. Are you saying in competitive ballistics are the only viable weapons? That would be sad if that's the case.

With regards to being secondary/complementary weapons, I own some mechs with long range ballistic main weapons and some secondary lasers for brawling self-defense. With a sufficient rebalance, I'm thinking SXPLs/MXPLs might fill a role there.

I'm also thinking about my PXH-7S which I have an arm-mounted 4xMPL configuration for that was too hot, rebalanced MXPLs might be useful there too. MXPLs would be complementary because they have the same range as MLs which I have mounted in the arms for another cooler configuration of the mech. (Maybe swap out 1xML for 1xMXPL in each arm?) It's hard to fit heat sinks in the mech because of space issues due to all the laser slots and JJs so a high DPS and heat efficient weapon that only consumes 1 slot could be really nice.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 October 2023 - 09:09 PM, said:

That's kinda the point of burst DPS. It wouldn't be anymore OP than laser vomit already is if DPH is the same. The whole point of burst DPS is that you trade more face time for faster damage.

I think in the case of the LXPL there is an issue with their DPS being OP despite having the same DPH as LPLs/Laser vomit. It seems MXPLs/SXPLs are being ruined by their heat profile because face-time is much more dangerous at their ranges and they can be boated 4x or more so they rip right through a players heat bar.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 03 October 2023 - 09:09 PM, said:

Here is a quick history lesson though that I put in 6th's thread.

...

X-Pulse aren't better than dakka or laser vomit so yeah, they still need work, however this ain't it.

Interesting that the weapons were much less damage / heat efficient back then.

You seem to be a little dismissive of my proposal without being specific as to why. What do you propose?

[The6thMessenger]

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

Manipulating existing PL numbers that are proven to be balanced is NOT "consistent" with manipulating numbers on a new weapon.

It is on the basis that the MXL is balanced as well. That's all it has to be.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

+42% DPS, extra range, and +20% heat efficiency are all buffs to compensate for face-time yet you keep proclaiming I don't understand the face-time risks involved.

Dude, your idea of better is making it more risky more than it is rewarding. This should be self-explanatory.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

Now you've added "hypocrite" along with "diva" to your name-calling

You mean description. I am describing what you are doing, and it is a reflection of your character -- and it is of a petulant hypocritical diva.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

You say MXPLs and MPLs "should be better at their own niche", I concur with "that's what I'm going for", and you reply "that doesn't make it good"

And those aren't mutually exclusive concepts. You can make it different, but it's not good and competitive enough to go against the conventional sense of peekaboo because there's not enough advantage to justify it.

Imagine you're working right? 8 hours a day, 15$ an hour. Your idea is making people work 10 hours a day, for 14 $ an hours. Yes, that's 140$ total, 140$>120$, but's still means your pay is reduced by 1$, that means your time is less valuable. I'm sure some people would appreciate the sum of 140$, but it's such a poor use of my time, and the longer hours just aggravates me more.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

Another refusal to admit they don't/can't test changes.

Because they already did, and that was the live.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

I show I do understand face-time risks but you ignore it.

No, you don't. You really don't.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

They're not working fine if few players use them.

Again, devil's advocate. If they aren't fine, then why nerf them?

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

What you're doing here is simply ignoring counter-points that demolish your arguments, not giving proper credit to what I say, name-calling and saying things that don't make sense.

No, what you're doing is simply giving excuses, not arguments, excuses. There is nothing to credit, because what you are saying is demonstrably wrong -- as it exists on the live server. And it's not name calling, it's a description, a conclusion made from such despicable character and action.

"Demolish" lol. Like I said, diva.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

We are approaching the point where it's no longer productive for me to reply to your posts.

Then don't.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

EPIC FAIL.

k

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

When it comes to DPS, % reduction is all that matters, not absolute cycle time.

Lowering the duration of an XPL by 15% is MUCH MUCH STRONGER than lowering the duration of a LL by 15% in terms of boosting DPS. The full laser duration skills result in a +7.5% DPS boost to XPLs but only a +3.33% DPS boost to a LL.

I don't know what to tell you dude, DPS, the +7.5% is higher than +3.33% to an LL, but LL ain't a DPS stare-down weapon is it?

Kicking down the LL's peek from 1s to 0.85s, is effectively a boost of 9 DPS to 10.59 DPS; HLL's 18 damage peek from 1.45s to 1.2414s, 12.414 DPS to 14.827 DPS. And if you don't understand what that means, it means you can deliver damage more efficiently and return to the crevice that you seek shelter, commonly known as "cover".

And then also the qualifier of it being "OP", really? So it's DPS bonus is just more than the basic lasers, make it OP? I guess that's the mental gymnastics you can muster when you can delude yourself that a weapon merely doing +70% DPS is op.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

This kind of fundamental oversight on your part is why you shouldn't put too much stock in the fact that you're a tier 1 player.

Lol, k.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

I'm done with you proclaiming MXPLs are fine when in fact they're rarely used and you failing to have the foresight to realize that if they're given a heat buff they might suddenly become OP due to their ridiculously high +70% DPS relative to an MPL.

So maybe don't heat buff them, lol. In fact, just don't touch them, that saves the trouble with the nerf.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

I'm not replying to your proclamations about the MXPL anymore.

I don't care.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

I'm not going to reply to accusations of me ignoring DPS or face-time anymore. You simply don't want to give me the credit I'm due regarding these facets of the weapon.

See, a diva. You aren't due anything, you haven't earned anything, I don't owe you ****.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

Nope, 70% was a number they pulled out of thin air and hoped for the best. Not replying to this anymore.

But current MXL still works. And if you still insist that they are barely used, means they are UP and needs MORE DPS.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

Continued ignoring of the heat buff and front-loading of damage. No point in replying.

It isn't as front-loaded as you think, and the heat-buff ain't worth jack if the DPS ain't good. And right now, consensus is that it's not enough.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

You already proved with your analysis that my proposal would deal MORE total damage due to not overheating than the current implementation.

Go back to the pay analogy I did.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

FAIL

k

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

Then why do you keep replying?

Because it's funny, seeing you pretend like you're smarter than what you actually are; how well you think you know the game but don't. I wanted to be charitable and amicable, but that all went the window as soon as you acted like a petulant child.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

An attempt to counter-argue by getting nit-picky with language. Burst, poke, peek-a-boo, whatever you want to call it.

Nope. Precisely different applications, as high-lit by QK.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

No, it will make them better as can clearly be seen in the graph I provided along with your analysis of total damage dealt over time.

Not in practice. We all know the state of MXL right now, and we can extrapolate that a reduction of DPS, to a DPS weapon, will reduce it's effectiveness.

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 08:41 PM, said:

I'm not replying to you proclaiming +42% (which is very strong) is "horrible DPS" anymore.

Then don't.

It's still horrible tho.

[MechMaster059]

The6thMessenger, on 03 October 2023 - 10:00 PM, said:

...

blah blah blah, another repetitive post hyperventilating about +42% DPS being "horrible" and not realizing how dumb you look when you argue +15% duration reduction gives more benefit to HLLs (which can only get +10% duration reduction) than to XPLs.

..

Tier 1 indeed.

[The6thMessenger]

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 10:11 PM, said:

Tier 1 indeed.

k diva

Edited by The6thMessenger, 03 October 2023 - 10:11 PM.

[Curccu]

[Widowmaker1981]

Something to think about on the 'LXPLs doing too much DPS' subject:

I was playing around with combining RAC5s with LXPLs - seems like a fairly obvious combo, given the facetime, to get around ghost heat in RACs.

2xRAC5 is 21.82 DPS, 6.5 HPS, 3.35 damage per heat.
3xRAC5 is 32.73 DPS, 13.26 HPS (with ghost heat). This means the 3rd RAC is 10.91 DPS / 6.76 HPS = 1.61 damage per heat.
A LXPL is only a TINY bit better in damage per heat (1.63) than the 3rd RAC, even with ghost heat.
A LXPL is 4.4 DPS, for 7 tons and 2 slots. In order to have more DPS than a RAC5, you need 3 of them, at 21 tons and 6 slots (11 tons heavier than the RAC).

So, it seems there is basically no point in combining LXPLs with RAC5s, you might as well just take a 3rd RAC5 and eat the ghost heat.

RACs are CERTAINLY not OP in T1 games. So why would LXPLs be? No jam, sure.. but the jamming isn't the problem. If you can DPS till jam with RACs on any kind of regular basis, its going unusually well.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 04 October 2023 - 08:31 AM.

[Curccu]

Played a game with Vulcan-5M with 2xLXPL 10 mins of trading and semi camping in River city I was shooting like crazy, I died last in my team (1 coward ran away almost fresh) and.... 200 dmg I was like wtf? If I had 2xHLL 4xLMG Incubus-1 I would have done close to 1k dmg.

So **** weapon IMHO... And oh yeah OP if you double the alpha damage of XPLs it's still **** damage and while nerfing DPS... well even worse weapon than it currently is.

[MechMaster059]

Widowmaker1981, on 04 October 2023 - 08:28 AM, said:

Something to think about on the 'LXPLs doing too much DPS' subject:

I was playing around with combining RAC5s with LXPLs - seems like a fairly obvious combo, given the facetime, to get around ghost heat in RACs.

2xRAC5 is 21.82 DPS, 6.5 HPS, 3.35 damage per heat.
3xRAC5 is 32.73 DPS, 13.26 HPS (with ghost heat). This means the 3rd RAC is 10.91 DPS / 6.76 HPS = 1.61 damage per heat.
A LXPL is only a TINY bit better in damage per heat (1.63) than the 3rd RAC, even with ghost heat.
A LXPL is 4.4 DPS, for 7 tons and 2 slots. In order to have more DPS than a RAC5, you need 3 of them, at 21 tons and 6 slots (11 tons heavier than the RAC).

So, it seems there is basically no point in combining LXPLs with RAC5s, you might as well just take a 3rd RAC5 and eat the ghost heat.

RACs are CERTAINLY not OP in T1 games. So why would LXPLs be? No jam, sure.. but the jamming isn't the problem. If you can DPS till jam with RACs on any kind of regular basis, its going unusually well.

RACs are very different from lasers:

- RAC has built-in damage dealing countdown timer in the form of jamming. The weapon's damage output goes to 0 if it jams and leaves you in a very dangerous position. In order to avoid jamming you have to arbitrarily stop firing the weapon. While I find this drawback can be managed well enough in 1v1 encounters, in big brawls involving multiple mechs it's dangerous and can leave you hanging unable to fire your weapon while being fired upon.

- RAC spin up time severely diminishes the effectiveness of the weapon against lights.
(This is why I would lower the spin-up time on RAC2s from 0.75 down to 0.5 and maybe even lower the spin-up time on RAC5s from 0.75 down to 0.65.)

- RAC has ammo tax, lasers have heat sink tax. Heat sinks benefit every weapon system on the mech. RAC ammo only benefits RACs. While RACs have the least burdensome ammo tax of all ballistics, it's there and something that needs to be considered. I remember long ago having a stellar game in my SHD-2D which mounts 1xRAC5, 3xSRM4, and 2xLPPC on Grim Plexis. It was one of those games when you're one of the last mechs standing and have scored multiple kills. The 3 remaining enemy mechs and my 2 teammates were badly damaged, then I run out of ammo on the RAC5, then on the SRMs... and we collapse. We absolutely would have won if I had just ½T more of RAC5 and SRM ammo. (I adjusted the mech after the match) This can't happen with lasers.

- LXPLs narrow 2 slot profile gives it more flexible mounting options like the CT and makes it easier to fit heat sinks on the mech. (Low slot costs are a defining feature of lasers and one of their biggest advantages compared to other weapon types.)

The bottom line: RACs have major drawbacks of their own so they need to be DPS kings or they wouldn't be worth mounting at all.

=====

Curccu, on 04 October 2023 - 12:00 PM, said:

.... 200 dmg I was like wtf?

I had this experience in my CDA-3F as well. Many many lousy games. I'm trying to help fix that with my proposal.

I would also say this: keep trying. It's a different playstyle that you have to get used to. Eventually you'll have a monster game where you melt people you catch off-guard or who are preoccupied with one of your teammates. You may think, "well any mech can go to town on distracted opponents". You just wait and see when you experience how easy-mode it is with 2xLXPLs.

Curccu, on 04 October 2023 - 12:00 PM, said:

If I had 2xHLL 4xLMG Incubus-1 I would have done close to 1k dmg.

Heavy Large Lasers are overpowered. They should weigh 6 tons given their massive alpha and light mechs being able to boat 2 of them is OP. (HML and HSL should also have their weight normalized to +50% more than ER lasers and their numbers adjusted accordingly. Not really "heavy" if they weigh the same are they?)

This is how HLL should be:
18.5 damage (+0.5 damage buff)
14 heat (-0.5 heat buff)
5.25s cooldown (-0.25s cooldown buff)
6 Tons (massive +2T weight nerf)

These numbers maintain its HPS, give a small DPS boost, and bring its DPS / ton down in line with other lasers. (It still retains a massive alpha advantage to insure it's a viable alternative to LPLs)

These numbers would make it nearly impossible for an Arctic Cheetah to boat 2 of them. (ACH-Prime: 2xHLL(12 Tons), no ECM, 2 head armor, 11 armor on torso and legs, no rear or arm armor... LOL. Loses the ECM and if it gets sneezed on it loses a component.)

An Incubus could still carry 2 but it would have to sacrifice 30kph off the engine, -1 LMG, -0.25T armor, and -0.5T LMG ammo to accommodate +4 more tons. (I needs to make the LMG related sacrifices to add +1 heat sink due to lowering the engine size)

Curccu, on 04 October 2023 - 12:00 PM, said:

So **** weapon IMHO... And oh yeah OP if you double the alpha damage of XPLs it's still **** damage and while nerfing DPS... well even worse weapon than it currently is.

It's hard to grasp what a huge buff better damage / heat efficiency would be until it's in game. I think you're being a little flippant about how much impact better front-loading of the damage would be as well. It would make XPLs noticeably better against light mechs and other fast movers.

Edited by MechMaster059, 04 October 2023 - 01:44 PM.

[Widowmaker1981]

MechMaster059, on 04 October 2023 - 01:04 PM, said:

RACs are very different from lasers:

- RAC has built-in damage dealing countdown timer in the form of jamming. The weapon's damage output goes to 0 if it jams and leaves you in a very dangerous position. In order to avoid jamming you have to arbitrarily stop firing the weapon. While I find this drawback can be managed well enough in 1v1 encounters, in big brawls involving multiple mechs it's dangerous and can leave you hanging unable to fire your weapon while being fired upon.

Im aware of the game mechanics.

Yes, it is a drawback. However, in practice, matches do not play out that way, at least not frequently. Being exposed for long enough to jam multiple RACs from fresh is very dangerous, unless youve somehow managed to isolate a single enemy mech far away from their team, in an IS assault.

MechMaster059, on 04 October 2023 - 01:04 PM, said:

- RAC spin up time severely diminishes the effectiveness of the weapon against lights.
(This is why I would lower the spin-up time on RAC2s from 0.75 down to 0.5 and maybe even lower the spin-up time on RAC5s from 0.75 down to 0.65.)

Ill grant, Xpulse are probably better vs lights than RACs, sure. Still bad though, not in the same league as Snac20 PPFLD.

MechMaster059, on 04 October 2023 - 01:04 PM, said:

- RAC has ammo tax, lasers have heat sink tax. Heat sinks benefit every weapon system on the mech. RAC ammo only benefits RACs. While RACs have the least burdensome ammo tax of all ballistics, it's there and something that needs to be considered. I remember long ago having a stellar game in my SHD-2D which mounts 1xRAC5, 3xSRM4, and 2xLPPC on Grim Plexis. It was one of those games when you're one of the last mechs standing and have scored multiple kills. The 3 remaining enemy mechs and my 2 teammates were badly damaged, then I run out of ammo on the RAC5, then on the SRMs... and we collapse. We absolutely would have won if I had just ½T more of RAC5 and SRM ammo. (I adjusted the mech after the match) This can't happen with lasers.

- LXPLs narrow 2 slot profile gives it more flexible mounting options like the CT and makes it easier to fit heat sinks on the mech. (Low slot costs are a defining feature of lasers and one of their biggest advantages compared to other weapon types.)

The bottom line: RACs have major drawbacks of their own so they need to be DPS kings or they wouldn't be worth mounting at all.

=====

I dont need this explaining to me. I understand how the game works.

In practice, these guns are sustained fire weapons and therefore directly compete with RACs, and they dont come close in any way, other than ease of use (they are obviously vastly easier to use). RACs are not that hard to use, though, so the ease of use doesnt actually matter a great deal in practice, other than instant fire vs spin up which is their only advantage. RAC builds can have heatsinks too, and RAC ammo dmg/ton is extremely high, so you dont need more than 5 tons for 2 rac 5s. They also shake the ever living .. out of the enemy.

But the main point is that, despite their DPS, RACs are already not a good idea most of the time because that much exposure is bad, if your enemies can shoot at all straight and arent oblivious. LXPLs share the same disadvantage, and have much, much lower DPS, so its hard to see them as problematic, except in the same way that LRMs and RACs already are (effectiveness inversely proportional to enemy skill level)

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 09:53 PM, said:

I can't speak to the competitive scene. Are you saying in competitive ballistics are the only viable weapons? That would be sad if that's the case.

With regards to being secondary/complementary weapons, I own some mechs with long range ballistic main weapons and some secondary lasers for brawling self-defense. With a sufficient rebalance, I'm thinking SXPLs/MXPLs might fill a role there.

I'm also thinking about my PXH-7S which I have an arm-mounted 4xMPL configuration for that was too hot, rebalanced MXPLs might be useful there too. MXPLs would be complementary because they have the same range as MLs which I have mounted in the arms for another cooler configuration of the mech. (Maybe swap out 1xML for 1xMXPL in each arm?) It's hard to fit heat sinks in the mech because of space issues due to all the laser slots and JJs so a high DPS and heat efficient weapon that only consumes 1 slot could be really nice.

Kitchen sink builds aren't really competitive, it is just more effective and efficient to specialize builds rather than have "backups". This game is different from TT (though in TT the backups is really only relevant for assaults).

MechMaster059, on 03 October 2023 - 09:53 PM, said:

Interesting that the weapons were much less damage / heat efficient back then.

You seem to be a little dismissive of my proposal without being specific as to why. What do you propose?

Hot take: Make X-Pulse the ER pulse equivalents they are meant to be and make pulse the defacto burst alpha laser weapons. They are meant to be the more 'accurate' weapon so it seems backwards to make them the rapid fire weapons just because the word pulse typically makes people think rapid fire.

Make standard lasers function like MGs/RACs/etc and have no cooldown and make their DPS per ton twice that of the DPS per ton for pulse.

So using LPLs as an example:

LPL
Range: 480/960
Damage: 11
Heat: 7
Cooldown: 3
Duration: 0.75
DPS: 2.93333 (per ton is 0.419)

LL
Range: 480/960
DPS: 4.19
HPS: 2.6666

So 4 LL do 12.57 damage in the time 3 LPLs can do 33 damage, but by the time LPLs are able to cooled down after the first firing, 4 LLs could have done ~47.1375 damage. That might not be enough damage tbh but it's a start (might need to allow the LLs to do at least half the damage of the LPLs during its duration burn meaning probably more like 250% the DPS).

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 04 October 2023 - 02:45 PM.

[Widowmaker1981]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 02:43 PM, said:

Hot take: Make X-Pulse the ER pulse equivalents they are meant to be and make pulse the defacto burst alpha laser weapons. They are meant to be the more 'accurate' weapon so it seems backwards to make them the rapid fire weapons just because the word pulse typically makes people think rapid fire.

Make standard lasers function like MGs/RACs/etc and have no cooldown and make their DPS per ton twice that of the DPS per ton for pulse.

So 4 LL do 12.57 damage in the time 3 LPLs can do 33 damage, but by the time LPLs are able to cooled down after the first firing, 4 LLs could have done ~47.1375 damage. That might not be enough damage tbh but it's a start (might need to allow the LLs to do at least half the damage of the LPLs during its duration burn meaning probably more like 250% the DPS).

This general idea actually sounds really good, though it would definitely also run into the problem of making standard lasers either OP in potatoland or useless in T1

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Widowmaker1981, on 04 October 2023 - 03:09 PM, said:

This general idea actually sounds really good, though it would definitely also run into the problem of making standard lasers either OP in potatoland or useless in T1

It just depends, there are a lot of numbers you can tune to limit its potential while still making it different. Whether it be the DPS, DPH, range, etc. IMO PGI were wrong when they said that heat capacity can't be used to limit burst damage, while they might have been concerned about high heat weapons, MW4 already had a solution for that with heat spread (half heat on firing of weapon, rest of heat is spread out over some duration that is specific to the weapon).

The oddballs though at that point are the heavy lasers and the Blazer.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 04 October 2023 - 04:02 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Nine-Ball, on 04 October 2023 - 04:06 PM, said:

X-pulse are infinitely easier to land two quick shots in under a second, and if taking these numbers into account your still dealing way more damage with way more accuracy. If an enemy dodges you don't lose any DPS to them dodging your bullets, you only lose DPS if you don't get a full 0.25 burn on the enemy, which is redonkulous since you only need to hold the laser on them for 0.25 seconds at base (not even factoring in the extremely common 15% burntime reduction).

This isn't realistic. It is just as much a chance that the enemy "dodges" during your burn if you are just blindly holding the trigger down as any other weapon. Don't get me wrong upfront damage can be helpful, but for how minimal this damage is, it's almost negligible (as the damage per tick of the beam is more on par with standard lasers than other pulse lasers).

[The6thMessenger]

Nine-Ball, on 04 October 2023 - 04:06 PM, said:

In short, RACs run cooler and deal better DPS than X-pulse when used single or two/three of them. Its only when X-pulse are boated in significant number do they begin to match RAC boats in terms of DPS, however X-pulse are easier to handle and be accurate with for their full damage effect as opposed to RACs.

RACs are also made worse by the projectile delay that requires lead, and spool-up time, and a poorly-optimized jam-bar to incentivized to commit to extended engagements. Versus X-Pulse, it's just point-and-click, with low commitment.

If there's a takeaway here, it should be that RACs need some rework. X-Pulse kinda works mechanically as they are right now.

Widowmaker1981, on 04 October 2023 - 08:28 AM, said:

RACs are CERTAINLY not OP in T1 games. So why would LXPLs be? No jam, sure.. but the jamming isn't the problem. If you can DPS till jam with RACs on any kind of regular basis, its going unusually well.

Don't you get it? The +50% is a scary number.

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 02:43 PM, said:

Hot take: Make X-Pulse the ER pulse equivalents they are meant to be and make pulse the defacto burst alpha laser weapons. They are meant to be the more 'accurate' weapon so it seems backwards to make them the rapid fire weapons just because the word pulse typically makes people think rapid fire.

Make standard lasers function like MGs/RACs/etc and have no cooldown and make their DPS per ton twice that of the DPS per ton for pulse.

For the purpose of distinction, yes it'll be pretty distinct.

But I think build-wise, as the weapons easy to put on a mech for most general application for the reason of low-tonnage, this is bad. X-Pulse and standard Pulse are the competing equipment precisely because they are the same 1-ton-1slot, 2-ton 1-slot, and the 7-ton 2-slot equipment, with the X-Pulse essentially exchangeable on an already established build.

The X-Pulse being the ER variants, is kinda okay as a concept. Problem is that, it'll be just a faster standard-laser that quickly taxes the heat -- I guess why the Standard Laser in your application is also changed, and why in current iteration it's a rapid-fire laser.

The standard Lasers are a staple to many mixed builds, you'd be ruining ERML+Gauss, the ML-AC20s, the LL-AC10s and LL-AC5 mixes, the ML-SRMs, etc. Might work better on a stare-down LRM, but it'll be just playing to face-time that makes it already bad.

Here's a different take, maybe the X-Pulse be just the continuous MG laser in this case? It obviously loses out on the alpha anyways, and plays like a machine-gun already, so why not be the machine-gun but eats heat-bar instead of ammo? Get in, get out, that's it.

But I think, given their current setup, Cauldron wants Cooldown and Laser-Duration to work with them. A shame, because it would be interesting to have a different skill setup, that players don't have to build CD/LD nodes.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 04 October 2023 - 04:56 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Nine-Ball, on 04 October 2023 - 04:50 PM, said:

X-Pulse works but everybody thinks they're like RACs because "muh factime" when they're not.

Eh, it's a fair assessment with the "muh-facetime" since mechanically they are applied the same, the difference is that X-Pulse is easier to achieve and comparatively more incognito because the laser-burn is less noticeable than an AC impact.

I pity RACs in this regard, because X-Pulse are comparatively more useful or at least easier to use.

Nine-Ball, on 04 October 2023 - 04:50 PM, said:

If they were to be buffed then cutting the burn and reloadtime to 0.2 would better fit what they are trying to do -- frontload all that damage baby! That way it only takes an entire second to fire 3 times and at base you can throw out 10 strikes in 4.2 seconds as opposed to 5.25 seconds.

I agree with CD reduction, because they are more privy to it than front-loading the beam damage.

Nine-Ball, on 04 October 2023 - 04:50 PM, said:

If RACs were to be fixed they would have to make them faster firing UACs but fall to the jamming shenanigans so they're not just faster firing UACs -- and when I say faster firing I mean there is either zero (yes, zero) reload time or a reload time equivalent to an X-pulse. UACs can fire twice before reloading RACs can fire endlessly before heat or jam bar fills.

My fix is simple, and can be achieved by XML. +100% jam chance, -50% jam duration and dissipation. Boom, you got a more front-loaded, controllable and reliable weapon. None of that redlining BS, as if the stare-time isn't horrible enough.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 04 October 2023 - 05:14 PM.

[MechMaster059]

Widowmaker1981, on 04 October 2023 - 01:54 PM, said:

I dont need this explaining to me. I understand how the game works.

Well you just gave a DPS and heat comparison while ignoring all these other factors so I had to list them out.

Widowmaker1981, on 04 October 2023 - 01:54 PM, said:

In practice, these guns are sustained fire weapons and therefore directly compete with RACs, and they dont come close in any way, other than ease of use (they are obviously vastly easier to use).

...

Um... ya. XPLs being much easier to use is a big deal. If my proposal was implemented XPLs could even act like pseudo-peek-a-boo weapons since they would be able to put out a nice little bite of damage in less than 2 seconds.

I think Nine Ball's post does a thorough job of explaining the advantages of how XPLs deal damage vs RACs.

=====

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 02:43 PM, said:

Hot take: Make X-Pulse the ER pulse equivalents they are meant to be and make pulse the defacto burst alpha laser weapons.

So I did a little digging and X-Pulse in TT are indeed merely longer range and less heat efficient PLs, just like ER vs standard lasers for IS mechs.

I guess I'm a little surprised that PGI chose to completely break from the lore in how they implemented XPLs for MWO... LOL. People are always talking about staying faithful to the lore and that you can't do this or that because it would break with lore yet here we are with XPLs being a complete break from the lore!?

I think what they've done has the potential to be a much more distinct weapon if implemented properly and perhaps that's what they were going for rather than just a boring long-range copy of PLs.

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 October 2023 - 02:43 PM, said:

Make standard lasers function like MGs/RACs/etc and have no cooldown and make their DPS per ton twice that of the DPS per ton for pulse.

An interesting but RADICALLY different proposal for standard lasers. I'm not so sure making lasers continuous burn weapons would be good for the game. That would make them MUCH stronger vs light mechs. You could just keep painting all over a light mech with them... as in, that has the potential to make light mechs unviable.

=====

Nine-Ball, on 04 October 2023 - 04:50 PM, said:

...
If they were to be buffed then cutting the burn and reloadtime to 0.2 would better fit what they are trying to do -- frontload all that damage baby! That way it only takes an entire second to fire 3 times and at base you can throw out 10 strikes in 4.2 seconds as opposed to 5.25 seconds.
...

0.2 duration is what I recommend as well. The cooldown on XPLs MUST be increased though so that:

- Laser Duration skills aren't so OP for XPLs
- even more damage can be front-loaded while holding DPS steady
- more than 2 XPLs can be chain-fired
- provide a bigger window of time to re-adjust aim at moving/twisting targets to get back on the component you're trying to hit.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

The6thMessenger, on 04 October 2023 - 04:47 PM, said:

The standard Lasers are a staple to many mixed builds, you'd be ruining ERML+Gauss, the ML-AC20s, the LL-AC10s and LL-AC5 mixes, the ML-SRMs, etc. Might work better on a stare-down LRM, but it'll be just playing to face-time that makes it already bad.

The only one of these that are legitimately competitive is ERML+Gauss but given the dominance it has in the game maybe that's a good thing. It really messes with how laser vomit on the Clan side plays out as well since you would now have to switch all your medium lasers to pulse to get the same benefit.