133 replies to this topic

[Avimimus]

It certainly isn't perfect as a primary weapon - mainly useful at point-blank range.

However, it is a critical secondary weapon in my Cataphract. 2xAC2 does not cause an enemy to retreat and the Cataph is to slow to flee. However, an LBX10 to the face causes most pilots to back off.

[FrostCollar]

Whenever I'm in a lighter mech I get a bit concerned when I see a Boomcat. Those autocannons will put some serious damage on me if they hit!

I breath a sign of relief if it turns out they went with 2 LB-X 10s. The fact is, it's a weapon that's extraordinarily short ranged in a game where its direct alternatives that have lower nominal ranges are actually far better at range, spreads its damage out in a game about focusing damage, has an irrelevant advantage (crits), and all in all doesn't pull its weight.

Avimimus, on 14 April 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

However, an LBX10 to the face causes most pilots to back off.

An AC 20 to the face causes me to back off. An AC10 or some UAC5 fire to the face makes me reconsider advancing. An LB-X 10 the face is nothing to be overly concerned about.

Edited by FrostCollar, 14 April 2013 - 11:29 AM.

[Jetfire]

I would use it if it was the Flak variant or Flak/Slug interchangeable... but the big old shotty approach isn't really sensible any more than the current MG implementation, but that's another thread.

[armyof1]

Rogue Jedi, on 14 April 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

fitted to a cicada 3m it works fine, run behind enemys and fire, then run to next enemy repeat OR find isolated heavy/assult keep firing and evading, a solo Atlas usualy lasts about 30 seconds in this senario.

it is a viable weapon, but needs to be fired point blank (within 30 meters) for maximum effect

[Escef]

Khavi Vetali, on 23 November 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

Check the past Ask the Devs. They have stated that they will be adding munition switching for LBX autocannons in the future, between cluster and slug rounds. How they will implement it to not obsolete the AC10 completely is anyone's guess.

Given that the original purpose of the LB10X was to obsolete the AC10, I don't see the problem. It isn't like anyone is clamoring about how Double Heat Sinks obsoleted singles. (There's one or two folk who say such things in table top, but they are the minority.)

[John MatriX82]

The weapon would be a viable primary weapon with the solid shot. Add a shot that deals 70-75% of its damage to the hit section and the rest with some splash damage, like some sort of proximity or timed warhead similar to flak. Make that to feed the solid shot you need to store proper ammo along with the one for the buckshot and when you want to load either one of the two ammo types you can do it by wasting a recycle time.

Otherwise make that the spread dynamically changes depending on the range. Whenever I hit something far away (let's say 450m) the spread should hit CT/RT/LT of the hit mech with all the pellets.

As the weapon is now, it's a JOKE to see that the AC 10 has 450m range and the LBX has 540. I don't care that this is a value from TT, just add the solid shot to make it viable, otherwise there's really no motivation to load up any mech with it unless you absolutely want the shotgun effect and you can't bring 2-3 srm launchers that deal more damage even with the current nerf and are more effective in any situation.

Having it dealing more crits is rather useless, you waste away 10 tons + ammo while a couple of srms do its work much better with less weight and more damage and it's not a primary weapon it's a finisher yes, but you really want to invest 12-13 tons to finish mechs sacrificing crit space for weapons that actually kill mechs? I don't..

[Deathlike]

Actually, the LBX10 would be very effective @ killing mechs if its spread wouldn't be so wide @ shorter ranges.

The crit bonus would then be icing on the cake.. instead of being "less than effective".

[Oppresor]

Smk, on 14 April 2013 - 11:17 AM, said:

They need to tighten the spread by like 85%. LBX weapons were actually fairly long range weapons. Now we have this buckshot awfulness.

I think it depends on what you want from the LBX. The reason I use it on my Atlas is primarily last ditch defence against Light units; nasty things like Ravens and (God forbid) Jenner's which close to contact very quickly and try their hardest to circle you quicker than you are able to get a lock of any sort on them. In short a nightmare for anyone in an Atlas.

The theory is straight forward. Use a big Shotgun to catch fast moving targets that travel through your arc of fire; no need to get a lock or to be dead on target because some of the spread will hit them. Working on that philosophy it would be a big mistake to tighten the spread; if anything it would be better to increase the spread and shorten the effective range of the weapon to sub 100 meters.

What I can say in the defence of the LBX10 is that in a few Tourmaline missions over Friday and Saturday night, it well and truly proved its worth in the Atlas on Atlas role at <100 ranges; I mean the thing Rocked.

For the future; I have read that we will be getting the LBX20 Scattershot at some time; needless to say if this is true, it's going on the Atlas. (I live in hope)

[Nightcrept]

Currently I use two of them on a d-dc build. I like it's effect when I fire the two with a pair of srm-6's and a ssrm.
Many players won't like that set up but after the missile nerf I had to adapt.

My set up went from the standard brawler set-up of 1 ac-20 and 3xsrm-6's plus the lasers in the arms to 2xLL or 2erLL, 2LBX-10's, 2xSrm's and 1 SSrm.

It's been a surprisingly effective build compared to what I had expected.

[skullman86]

The buckshot just needs to be changed to a flak round. Instead of firing a cone of pellets, it should be a single shell that bursts mid air when it gets within certain distance of an object. This would make it better for targeting tight groups at long range, but it still wouldn't be a viable primary weapon without the ability to change ammo types on the fly.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/LBX

[FrostCollar]

Deathlike, on 14 April 2013 - 11:54 AM, said:

Actually, the LBX10 would be very effective @ killing mechs if its spread wouldn't be so wide @ shorter ranges.

The crit bonus would then be icing on the cake.. instead of being "less than effective".

I agree. We can talk about flak rounds, solid shot, proximity fuses, and other changes until the cows come home.

However, in the short term tightening up the spread seems to be a very easy way to make it more viable.

[Lazydrones541]

I use it on a Dragon Flame, a CN9-D, and a Jagermech.. works pretty well for me...

[LordBraxton]

One time last night I got ambushed by an Atlas, while I was in my Heavy Metal.

I Panicked thinking certain death had arrived

Finish targeting to see a single LBX10 as the Atlas' primary, backed up with LLs\SRM6 (some actual damage oh no)

Proceeded to lololololololol kill Atlas and win

[Roadkill]

LBX10 is terrible. Currently there are no situations in which you want an LBX10 over an AC/10, and that's saying something because the AC/10 isn't exactly a great weapon.

The problem is that the pellets don't do enough damage - they should be boosted like the LRM and SRM since they don't all hit a single location. Assuming that they don't do explosive (AoE) damage, I'd start with 1.5 damage/pellet and see if that's good enough. But just off the top of my head I suspect it needs to be closer to 1.8.

[TOGSolid]

General Taskeen, on 23 November 2012 - 06:25 PM, said:

Simple, the 'cluster shot' from an LB-X is supposed to behave like 'flak' shot, not a burst of pellets straight out of the barrel.

Something I've suggested in the past is to simulate this by capping how much the LB-10X can spread, thus making it viable out past "in your face" range. Capping the spread isn't a graceful solution but it will involve much less work for PGI instead of completely altering the behavior of the gun.

To cut down on the visual oddities, they could simply make the final spread always the same so that the speed of the spread ends up changing depending on range. Basically you end up with a narrower or fatter cone depending on distance with a maximum possible cone size so that at point blank range you still end up with a devastating shot to one spot.

Edited by TOGSolid, 14 April 2013 - 01:00 PM.

[TruePoindexter]

It's pretty meh in MWO. It deals damage and on occasion there have been some reasonably strong mechs centered on it (the Chunker Atlas comes to mind). In the end though in every instance of its use you would be better served by mounting pretty much anything else other than MGuns. Spread damage is worthless damage and since items in the game have health the 1 point pellets actually have a disadvantage in terms of dealing critical hits.

Maybe when slug ammo becomes available or the pellet damage gets increased it will be worth looking at again. Until then though it's just not worth it.

[Sahoj]

I've run it usefully on a DRG with an LBx10, SRM6 and 3x Medium pulse lasers - I think most my damage came from the lasers though.

[Grey Ghost]

Escef, on 14 April 2013 - 11:49 AM, said:

Given that the original purpose of the LB10X was to obsolete the AC10, I don't see the problem. It isn't like anyone is clamoring about how Double Heat Sinks obsoleted singles. (There's one or two folk who say such things in table top, but they are the minority.)

I just want to point out that while initially LBX AC's do obsolete normal AC's performance wise (with slug ammo), specialized ammo is eventually made to make them relevant again (ex Armor Piercing, etcetera, which LBX cannot use).

Edited by Grey Ghost, 14 April 2013 - 01:18 PM.

[TOGSolid]

I think one thing that needs to be at least acknowledged with the LBX is that if you CAN get in someone's face, it does an obscene amount of damage due to it's great rate of fire. So it's definitely not machine gun bad, it's just way too situational to be a good choice 99/100 times.

[Grumbling Coot]

I've used the LBX quite a bit as my primary weapon on my Cicada-3M. What I've found (by using the stats page) is that I hit with it more than other ballistics, but since not all of the pellets strike the target, the damage per shot fired is the SAME as my AC/10. Granted it's more spread out, but the weapon is also one ton lighter.

As far as it's effectiveness in battle, it needs back up weapons to either punch holes in armor, or to give you a ranged alternative. I do believe that it can be viable in the right situation.