109 replies to this topic

[Stardancer01]

using the standard large laser as our base point
would you consider the Large Pulse Laser an upgrade?
or do you ever design a mech with it in mind instead of a large laser?
The main advantages the Large Pulse Laser gets over the standard large laser
1, it dose 1point more damage per discharge
2, its damages 25% faster
3, it has a cool sound
The min disadvantages
1, it has 33% shorter range (450-300)
2, it has 2 points more heat (7-9)
3, it is 2 tons heaver (5-7)
Would be better if it were
lighter?
caused damage at twice the speed?
had a quicker recharge time?
made less heat?
or is it fine the way it is?

[Wingbreaker]

LPLs are a fairly niche weapon that have their place as a headhunter's piece. Basically, otherwise, the other LLs are better choices. An LPL puts fire on target very quickly, at very short range, with the obvious heat drawback.

I think LPLs could stand a 1 ton weight reduction, but that would put future clan systems at a point where they may become even more overpowered. Heat is a dangerous balancing act here, as well, as any reduction in the LPL heat buildup opens up seriously hard hitting headhunter mechs that make a goshawk look like child's play.

Recharge/refresh time seems the best way to deal with any necessary changes to pulse lasers, as it is a self-countering system reliant on heat dissipation.

[xenoglyph]

LPL requires less skill, so you pay a tax in the form of weight, heat, and range nerfs.

LLs are a formidable weapon, especially in the hands of a pilot with steady aim.

I think it's fine how it is.

Edited by xenoglyph, 11 December 2012 - 04:12 AM.

[MustrumRidcully]

LPLs are too inefficient. The Large Laser got a lot of buffs that makes it comparable in damage/weight efficiency to other weapons in its range category, but the LPL is still far off.

The biggest drawback of the LPL may be - it just has 30m more range than a medium laser, but weighs 7 times as much, and has only 0.25 shorter beam duration, and twice the damage. I just can't think of a play style or a build where it wouldn't be better to simply just install 2 Medium Lasers and more heat sinks. Maybe if you have only 2 energy hardpoints? But then you hopefully have ballistic or missile hard points - put something more powerful in those.

LPLs were more intersting in the table top because they had a to-hit bonus and it dealt all its damage to one hit location. That to-hit bonus was a lot stronger than 0.25 points of beam duration are in MW:O, and the one hit location advantage is just not existent in MW:O due to weapon convergence.

They could try to raise the range of the LPL to that of a Large Laser, and lower its beam duration to 0.5 seconds or 0.25 seconds. Then it may be worth it. It would be almost as efficient as the PPC, but without a minimum range in exchange for a shorter max range.

BTW, I am using my efficiency calculations from my weapon balance thread here.

Spoiler

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 11 December 2012 - 06:19 AM.

[Blark]

This is the only reason I use LPL's sometimes:

Stardancer01, on 11 December 2012 - 03:45 AM, said:

[..]
3, it has a cool sound
[..]

Imo pulse lasers are not worth it for the most part (unfortunately), the shorter duration imo just does not make up for the increased heat, weight and shorter range. (MPL is still the most usefully imo, being the strongest 1slot laser).

So personally, I'd only take the LPL over a LL if I had spare tonnage/heat and very limited energy slots and only for brawlers.. but for the most part it just doesn't seen worth it

[Bogsveigir]

I think they're fine where they are. The Large Pulse is stronger, but not much, hotter, but not too much, recycles faster, again, not too much. They have that cool sound, though, that gets your attention when fired at you.

[Redshift2k5]

I'm very happy with my large laser mechs (such as 4x LL K2 which you will almost always see me pilotting), and every time I try LPL they seem underwhelming due to the tonnage cost (costing me fewer heatsinks) and higher heat, and lower range.

Of course, they can't reduce the LPL tonnage because tonnage changes would negatively impact stock mechs; however heat adjustments or pulse duration could be welcome changes.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

What Large Pulse Lasers needs the most is really just a range buff. The overall damage and fire rate is fine, heat is ok, but for THAT tonnage, i should be able to have a max range of at least 400. Maybe even on par at 450 with the Large Laser

Edited by mwhighlander, 11 December 2012 - 04:43 AM.

[Cebi]

I love my LPLs. They may not have the best stats, but by Jove do they have a sexy sound and visual effect!

[Glythe]

LPL is not worth the weight.... for the same weight/heat you can have 3 medium lasers and extra heat sinks.

When the TT game made lasers have random hit locations the LPL remotely made sense because all the damage went to one spot. For the LPL to be half way worthwhile it needs to be faster firing (as in .25 seconds to discharge) AND the extra weight needs to make sense in terms of the damage. As long as 3 medium lasers are better than one LPL the LPL is useless to 95% of the mech population. I love the idea and I want to make it work.... but the bottom line is that it is a waste.


The alternative to make the LPL worthwhile would be to make lasers take 2 seconds to discharge and leave the LPL as a .5 second burst. Then you have something to consider.... but even then the heat values for the damage are BS.

Edited by Glythe, 11 December 2012 - 05:13 AM.

[RedDragon]

Glythe, on 11 December 2012 - 05:12 AM, said:

LPL is not worth the weight.... for the same weight/heat you can have 3 medium lasers and extra heat sinks.

When the TT game made lasers have random hit locations the LPL remotely made sense because all the damage went to one spot. For the LPL to be half way worthwhile it needs to be faster firing (as in .25 seconds to discharge) AND the extra weight needs to make sense in terms of the damage. As long as 3 medium lasers are better than one LPL the LPL is useless to 95% of the mech population. I love the idea and I want to make it work.... but the bottom line is that it is a waste.


The alternative to make the LPL worthwhile would be to make lasers take 2 seconds to discharge and leave the LPL as a .5 second burst. Then you have something to consider.... but even then the heat values for the damage are BS.

When the question is whether the LPL is worth taking over a LL, it doesn't matter if you can take 3 MLs instead. Chassis with limited slots (as the Dragon) just can't carry 3 ML.

So is the LPL better than the LL? I'd say it's different. On most chassis the LL may be the better choice, but on my Dragon I always try to use the LPL because I don't have to worry about the heat and as a skirmisher the point-damage and higher ROF of the LPL is woth the extra weight.

[Taemien]

What sort of lasers you use (Pulse or normal) relies almost entirely on the speed of your mech. If you're going under 65kph, I recommend regular lasers. You get more range (since you can't get to the target very fast) and your aiming platform is stable (not whizzing over rocks and cliffs). Going over 65kph, I'd take a look at Pulse Lasers. The easy to aim and faster recycle times means your aim doesn't have to be as stable, which is a bonus due to you rocking over hills and obstacles. In addition you have the speed to close to the closer ranges needed.

If you think LPL are a waste, you simply are not using them properly or are mounting them with the wrong mindset. Such as the comment about them being useless as long as they are less efficient then three medium lasers. If you're trying to use them in the same situations as you use medium lasers, you're doing it wrong. The only thing similar about the two weapons is they both have laser in the name.

Edited by Taemien, 11 December 2012 - 05:19 AM.

[Redshift2k5]

My K2 runs at 80 and I can fire my quad LL just fine I can see why you'd want a faster pulse on anything considerably father than that, though.

Taemien, on 11 December 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

Such as the comment about them being useless as long as they are less efficient then three medium lasers. If you're trying to use them in the same situations as you use medium lasers, you're doing it wrong. The only thing similar about the two weapons is they both have laser in the name.

Medium lasers have a nominal range of 270m, while LPL have a nominal range fo 300m. That is a very similar range profile, and for many the short beam duration is insufficient bonus to offset the weight difference between 2 medium laser (2 tons, 10 damage) and even one LPL (7 tons, 10 damage)

[Mr 144]

Niche Builds...such as an AWS-9M with both tonnage and speed (relative). Speed is essential to make any sort of use of them, as you have to have a reason to to need the extra .25 seconds. Arm Based Energy Hardpoints are a great spot for them, but never more than 2.

As Mustrum pointed out (and fix your first sentence, you mean LLs are too effecient, I believe) Limited hardpoints play a factor...so do C-bills When working with the 9M (my LPL example), it's next to impossible to swap around loadouts easily if you are poor due to hardpoint limitations and XL cost. I'm 'having fun' in my LPL 9M atm, but only because I was both crit full, and tonnage light. This meant that in order to 'tweak' my prefered build (which do not include LPLs) I need to buy yet another XL engine. As I'm farming other mechs also, and oddly enough, my 9M is my PUG money maker, I'm just not investing in it at this time...hence throw some LPLs in it for kicks....the range ain't bad in the current meta...I'm fast enough to take advantage of the shorter duration...was crit full...had tonnage to spare...and am personally good at high-heat builds.

I disagree with xenoglyph...in fact, I think it's just the opposite. LPLs require more skill than LLs due to 'lead' targeting. With less time spent on target, your aim (perhaps 'twitch' is a better term here) must be better to make use of them.

And the point people are making Redshift2K5 is 3xML are better than LPLs, but hardpoints, placement, (and convergence) restrict this, other wise your K2 would be running 10xML instead of 4xLL and you know it...range be damned at 80kph.

They definately need balancing...as aside from the super-cool sound and my poor-man's hardpoint reasoning, they only have a 'fun factor' for me.

Mr 144

Edited by Mr 144, 11 December 2012 - 05:35 AM.

[Ghogiel]

LPL is not worth taking.

[Warma]

DO NOT suggest balancing mechanics that alter:

Slots
Weigth
Range

These are tabletop-critical values and affect the role of a weapon and the configurations it is used in. Weapon variables which should be used for balancing in MWO are:

Beam Duration
Heat
Fire Rate
Damage

These variables are mech buildsheet invariant and can be used more freely. Even they should be close to the intended values, as they also affect weapon role, but there is a lot of room to wriggle with small changes.

In my opinion, LPLs could use a bit more damage and a bit less heat. Their DPS/ton should be larger than LLs, since they have less range. Otherwise they're quite allright.

[Purlana]

If I want the extra range I use large lasers, if I don't then I just skip to medium or medium pulse.

It's just more efficient that way...

Edited by Purlana, 11 December 2012 - 05:53 AM.

[De La Fresniere]

They're pretty bad.

Unless you somehow don't have a second Energy hardpoint in that section, two regular Medium Lasers will do the job much better. They have 10% less range, but they generate 20% less heat and, most importantly, they weigh 2 tons instead of 7. Five tons is a considerable amount even for an Assault, so it's huge for Mediums and immense for Lights.

Whoever decided on weapon values was on some seriously nasty drugs...

[Panzerjotun]

All of you who think they suck please keep thinking that.

[Purlana]

General Pace, on 11 December 2012 - 06:00 AM, said:

All of you who think they suck please keep thinking that.

I am thinking that instead of 4 Large pulse lasers + Heat Sinks, that I can downgrade them and add additional weapons.

Edited by Purlana, 11 December 2012 - 06:16 AM.