209 replies to this topic

[MustrumRidcully]

Pr8Dator, on 01 January 2013 - 04:11 PM, said:

The Large Pulse Laser is an excellent close combat weapon as it unloads damage quicker than a regular large laser and has 1 more damage, resulting in a higher DPS. Due to the way it shoots, you can often hit light mechs with this but not with the ERPPC. ERPPC has faster cool down but you are not going to be able to spam it in a brawl like you can with the large pulse laser without overheating. I would say if you have 3 energy slots, having 3 large pulse lasers is the best choice but if you have 4 energy slots, then going with 4 large lasers would be much better due to higher combined DPS and slightly lower tonnage than 3 large pulse lasers.

Don't compare it to a LL - compare it to a Medium Laser. That weighs only 1 ton, not 7, and two of them deal the same damage as your LPL. Yes, also a bit longer beam duration, but that's 5 tons you can spend on heat sinks (of which you need less of then for the LPL).

If you have not energy weapon hardpoints, you may have a reason to use the LPL - you just can't get the same damage output with MLs. But - you are still a bit screwed when you take the LPL. Imagine the game had Machine Gun Hard Points only, and there was a mech that had only machine gun hard points - sure, you have n other choice but to take MGs, but it's still a terrible choice of weapon - that you don't have an alternative merely suggests that you should pick a different mech. (Or wait for the MG to be buffed.)

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Pulse Lasers are a real waste of weight. In addition to weighing more, producing more heat, and having less range, you barely see a damage increase even at their proper range.

MPL: 2t, 5h, 6d, 180r
ML: 1t, 4h, 5d, 270r
That second one is obviously much better. You can even use the extra ton to slot a heatsink to cover the heat or just add another ML. Btw, 5/4=1.25. 6/5=1.2, meaning the MPL even has a worse heat to damage ratio.

[Windsaw]

Bluten, on 02 January 2013 - 02:32 AM, said:

Pulse Lasers are a real waste of weight. In addition to weighing more, producing more heat, and having less range, you barely see a damage increase even at their proper range.

MPL: 2t, 5h, 6d, 180r
ML: 1t, 4h, 5d, 270r
That second one is obviously much better. You can even use the extra ton to slot a heatsink to cover the heat or just add another ML. Btw, 5/4=1.25. 6/5=1.2, meaning the MPL even has a worse heat to damage ratio.

Why are you ignoring the main reason to use them?
The shorter firing time.
This is not an issue for all mech types, but in my lights I use MPLs whenever possible. Because I don't have to hold the target as long, which is a big deal if you are fast.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

I have a 3L Raven with 110k or so speed and I can shoot my MLs perfectly fine. The longer firing time just makes it easier for me, not harder. If I switched to MPLs it'd do nothing but hurt my performance due to the added heat and less range. I fire at 200-300m ALL THE TIME, even while strafing at close range.

[Flapdrol]

Just take standard large lasers. Better damage/heat, lower weight and fewer slots occupied.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Flapdrol, on 02 January 2013 - 03:01 AM, said:

Just take standard large lasers. Better damage/heat, lower weight and fewer slots occupied.

Slot cost is actually the same, but the rest are different and every regular is better than its pulse version. Simply put, Pulses are currently a waste. They either need their range bumped to compete, or either their heat or weight reduced. They need some kind of buff but until that comes, just forget they exist.

[Pr8Dator]

MustrumRidcully, on 02 January 2013 - 02:08 AM, said:

Don't compare it to a LL - compare it to a Medium Laser. That weighs only 1 ton, not 7, and two of them deal the same damage as your LPL. Yes, also a bit longer beam duration, but that's 5 tons you can spend on heat sinks (of which you need less of then for the LPL).

If you have not energy weapon hardpoints, you may have a reason to use the LPL - you just can't get the same damage output with MLs. But - you are still a bit screwed when you take the LPL. Imagine the game had Machine Gun Hard Points only, and there was a mech that had only machine gun hard points - sure, you have n other choice but to take MGs, but it's still a terrible choice of weapon - that you don't have an alternative merely suggests that you should pick a different mech. (Or wait for the MG to be buffed.)

As i said in a later post, what determines which is the better weapon to use has to do more with hardpoints than the weapon itself. All weapons are relevant. The more energy hardpoints you have, the better the lighter laser weapons and the lesser energy hardpoints you have, the better are the heavier laser weapons.

For instance, if you say ML is better. Now, if you only have 1 energy hardpoint with no tonnage concerns, which would you put on, ML or LPL? I'll take the LPL or ERPPC in this case anyday. Now, of cos that is only an example in isolation designed to illustrate the point. In reality, alot more factors need to be considered. As such, one should never make simplistic claims about what weapons are better than another except when criticizing flamers and MGs.

Windsaw, on 02 January 2013 - 02:42 AM, said:

Why are you ignoring the main reason to use them?
The shorter firing time.
This is not an issue for all mech types, but in my lights I use MPLs whenever possible. Because I don't have to hold the target as long, which is a big deal if you are fast.

Indeed, most people forget the main advantage of using pulse weapons... the faster damage output. Taking my triple LPL Fang for example... I put all 3 LPLs on chain fire and it works like nonstop laser machineguns that makes 2 damage per pulse.

Now, with only 3 energy hardpoints on my Fang, I see absolutely no reason to go with the "better" large lasers since I dun ever overheat, see? Its more about the hardpoints rather than which is the "better" weapon. Of course, that being said, my quad large laser Flame do perform better than my triple LPL Fang. If Fang has 4 energy hardpoints, I would have gone for 4 large lasers too. But being just 3, the LPL works better.

Edited by Pr8Dator, 02 January 2013 - 03:28 AM.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

PEWPEW PEWPEW PEWPEW
*shuts down*

[martius]

I just fitted 2 LPLs onto my Atlas and find them to be excellent bughunters. Commandos and ravens and the (now rare) Jenner are easier damaged with them as with the old beam weapons I used.

Strangely I also found them effective against bigger targets. Sometimes I think their firepower gets underestimated as its less odf a lightshow than multiple MLs or PPCs. Alternating between them and the Gauss is great for can opening- if you can aim.

[Apoc1138]

CoolLew, on 01 January 2013 - 03:32 PM, said:

both are great pages for information.
I just wanted to make sure I read that right... what is the rationale for min range on the PPC, or the lack of min range on the ER PPC?
I want to use regular PPCs, but I don't wanna be suck at a disadvantage when the fight gets to point blank range

they still do damage under 90m, so at 45m they do half damage... in reality, 90m is quite easy to maintain unless you are the only mech around and he realises this and gives up on moving to just get toe to toe with you

the rationale of no min range on ERPPC is that that is part of their bonus for generating so much extra heat

heat buffs (as in reductions) are coming soon for PPC / ERPPC and ER LL, which should make them all a bit easier to handle

[Pr8Dator]

Apoc1138, on 02 January 2013 - 04:17 AM, said:

they still do damage under 90m, so at 45m they do half damage... in reality, 90m is quite easy to maintain unless you are the only mech around and he realises this and gives up on moving to just get toe to toe with you

the rationale of no min range on ERPPC is that that is part of their bonus for generating so much extra heat

heat buffs (as in reductions) are coming soon for PPC / ERPPC and ER LL, which should make them all a bit easier to handle

Seriously, I am a little concerned with the heat buff on the PPC/ERPPC as this game is already bordering on being PPC/LRM Warrior Online even without the buff. It is clear they are already very popular and people do know how to handle them the way they are right now.

[Apoc1138]

Pr8Dator, on 02 January 2013 - 04:29 AM, said:

Seriously, I am a little concerned with the heat buff on the PPC/ERPPC as this game is already bordering on being PPC/LRM Warrior Online even without the buff. It is clear they are already very popular and people do know how to handle them the way they are right now.

I gloriously look forward to it when Mustrum and Vapor Trail come on to the forums to whine that PPC's are OP with their lower heat and EMP effect... my 4 PPC atlas is already grinning at the prospect

[Pr8Dator]

Apoc1138, on 02 January 2013 - 04:31 AM, said:

I gloriously look forward to it when Mustrum and Vapor Trail come on to the forums to whine that PPC's are OP with their lower heat and EMP effect... my 4 PPC atlas is already grinning at the prospect

Well, maybe that's why I've been field testing my Fang with 3 ERPPCs lately...LOL!

Edited by Pr8Dator, 02 January 2013 - 04:40 AM.

[HC Harlequin]

Use pulse lasers to kill things and shoot faster mechs. Use normal lasers to strip armor from slower mechs. Use PPC's to plink at range. If you don't worry about fast mechs or max damage then don't use pulses. If you are going to only concentrate on slower mechs with consistant damage with manageable heat then don't use pulse or PPC. If you aren't going to try to shoot faster mechs or fight big slow mechs at close range then use PPC

[Pr8Dator]

Just finished a PuG match top with 5 kills in a Fang armed with 3 large pulse lasers. Only overheated once by chain firing the three lasers and then using SRM6 in combination for the kill stroke... who says LPL isn't powerful? (only guy with higher damage than me was a Stalker LRM boat...)

Edited by Pr8Dator, 02 January 2013 - 06:13 AM.

[OneEyed Jack]

Kaijin, on 01 January 2013 - 04:21 PM, said:

IMO, the LPL is a bad deal. 10 heat for 10 damage and a slightly reduced duration form the LL .(0.75 vs 1.00), which does 9 damage for 7 heat and has 150m more max damage range. If you're going to spend 10 heat on a Large Laser, use an ER Large Laser.

I'm not arguing that LPL is a good weapon, because I don't think it is, overall. But your premise is flawed. LPL is 9 Heat for 10 Damage. ERLL is 10 Heat for 9 Damage. Of the two, I find LPL to be the better option. ERLL simply adds too much heat for a longer range that is rarely an issue. My reasoning is simply that the nature of a beam weapon makes them a poor choice for long ranges. Sure you can hit mechs at very long ranges but, unless you're both standing still, you're probably just blistering paint. Even a very good aim is going to have a very difficult time staying on target, let alone on a single location, for the entire beam length at those ranges if even one of the mechs is moving. If they're both moving, forget about it.

CoolLew, on 01 January 2013 - 04:30 PM, said:

My Atlas only has one energy hard point in each arm, and I would like regular PPCs (since ER PPC have higher heat). If this quote above is correct, then my PPCs may still be worth using...

It scales down, rather than being a direct 1pt tick per 10 meters, and ends at 0 Damage at 0 meters, rather than the 1 Damage the post you're referring to would imply.

Bluten, on 02 January 2013 - 02:56 AM, said:

I have a 3L Raven with 110k or so speed and I can shoot my MLs perfectly fine. The longer firing time just makes it easier for me, not harder. If I switched to MPLs it'd do nothing but hurt my performance due to the added heat and less range. I fire at 200-300m ALL THE TIME, even while strafing at close range.

That's an issue with your own aim, rather than the quality of the weapon. When I first began playing, I preferred standard lasers for the longer firing time. Being able to drag the beam across the target make it easier to get a hit. However the effectiveness of a dragging hit is much reduced for being spread out across locations and partially wasted on terrain. As my aim has improved, I've come to love the MPL for the improved pinpoint damage. I can also maintain a standard beam on target better, getting overall better efficiency than MPL (less heat/tonnage), but it takes longer, making it less effective for snapshots or combining with ballistics. I'd probably love the LPL for the same reasons, but I'm put off by the tonnage.

Bluten, on 02 January 2013 - 03:05 AM, said:

Slot cost is actually the same, but the rest are different and every regular is better than its pulse version. Simply put, Pulses are currently a waste. They either need their range bumped to compete, or either their heat or weight reduced. They need some kind of buff but until that comes, just forget they exist.

As mentioned above and in other posts by several people, this is simply not true. You are simply stating your personal tastes as if they were objective analysis. Each of the weapons has a legitimate use.

[HC Harlequin]

In other words, if you can't shoot
AND you can't shoot fast mechs
AND you whine a lot about how fast mechs are SOOOO OP
AND you are not using pulse lasers..

Then...

[Kmieciu]

Large Laser is currently more popular than PPC, ERPPC, LPL and ERLL combined.
Can`t argue with that.

[Craftyman]

Pr8Dator, on 02 January 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

Just finished a PuG match top with 5 kills in a Fang armed with 3 large pulse lasers. Only overheated once by chain firing the three lasers and then using SRM6 in combination for the kill stroke... who says LPL isn't powerful? (only guy with higher damage than me was a Stalker LRM boat...)

One cherry picked game does not justify a bad weapon. There is too much trade off for its tiny benefits. FFS if you replaced the LPLs with regular LLs you would have 6 more tons of heatsinks/SRM ammo/Armor/engine/what have you and you're only losing 3 damage. That is a SINGLE SMALL LASER'S worth of damage for 6 tons. Don't get me wrong I WISH LPLs (they are cool as fug) were good but they are garbage and anyone running them is gimping themselves either out of ignorance or for fun.

[Pr8Dator]

Craftyman, on 02 January 2013 - 06:42 AM, said:

One cherry picked game does not justify a bad weapon. There is too much trade off for its tiny benefits. FFS if you replaced the LPLs with regular LLs you would have 6 more tons of heatsinks/SRM ammo/Armor/engine/what have you and you're only losing 3 damage. That is a SINGLE SMALL LASER'S worth of damage for 6 tons. Don't get me wrong I WISH LPLs (they are cool as fug) were good but they are garbage and anyone running them is gimping themselves either out of ignorance or for fun.

I didn't play like 200 matches with this config to get this result... this is the VERY FIRST TIME I slapped on this config (3LPL + SRM6 config) after reading this thread and got this result. Also, the DPS of 3 LPL is 7.50 while the DPS of 3 Large Lasers is only 6.36. Which means that you will kill an enemy on the average 18% faster using 3 LPL rather than 3 Large Lasers. Of course, thats only comparing the two weapons in a vacuum. Thats why I simply let gameplay performance do the talking and that match spoke real good about the LPLs to me. I overheated only once in that match which means I really don't need more heatsinks. I am still left with more than 25% SRM ammo after killing so many which means I don't need more ammo. I am still alive which means my speed is high enough (103kph) to keep me alive, this means I don't need more armor or better engine. I don't have enough slots for another 2 ballistic weapons which are the only hardpoints left. So what am I to do with the extra tonnage?

But yes, I probably could have attained this result with my quad large laser Flame, which is my fav mech by the way, in this match.

I guess what I am trying to do here is to get you guys interested enough to at least try it since there's really nothing new to do before the next patch, right?

Edited by Pr8Dator, 02 January 2013 - 07:09 AM.