

Large Pulse Lasers After The Buff Still Not Enough?
#21
Posted 09 February 2013 - 06:44 PM
#22
Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:28 AM
#23
Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:43 PM
Uite Dauphni, on 10 February 2013 - 11:28 AM, said:
I remember being enchanted to see that speed was determined by engine power and weight... and extremely puzzled when purposefully leaving a few tons out didn't yield any speed increase.
I suppose it's an artificial money sink. You want to spend tonnage to increase your speed? "Buy a bigger Engine, they're cheap!"
But who knows... the game is still very, very early in development. There's still some insanely dumb, basic things that haven't been looked at... for example, why does every mech have 2 extra points of armor that make you exceed weight just enough to make you waste 0.5 tons? And MGs and Flamers stayed useless for *months*. It's entirely possible a mech's speed will eventually depend on actual tonnage and not max tonnage.
#24
Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:47 PM
I don't think LPL's are though, and I don't agree at all with "redesign the rules that a lot of people know and love just for the sake of having minor increase in customization". And I don't even know those rules personally, just feel it's a stupid argument to make.
#25
Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:14 PM
0.25 sounds like it's nearly instant, but it's bigger than it seems. A full speed stock hunchback can spread the beam across its body and then some assuming the firer doesn't change their aim or move.
#26
Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:18 PM
Stringburka, on 10 February 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:
Didn't mean to imply they weren't, haha.
Just saying, they're absolutely not shy about leaving some fairly basic issues unresolved for several months, so any potential fix to any issue might be *years* away.
#27
Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:49 PM
Drogum Nethar, on 09 February 2013 - 06:44 PM, said:
-2 to hit modifier on your 2d6 attack roll in TT is a huge advantage. Enough so that for a mech with other long range weaponry (LRMs for example) I'd rather have a LPL than a PPC in TT especially if we're talking clan tech.
That being said, some BT rules could use a refresh but the game is fine as is IMO.
Edited by Narcissistic Martyr, 10 February 2013 - 01:52 PM.
#28
Posted 10 February 2013 - 03:55 PM
If you can't hit your target, no amount of damage dealing ability will help you.
Personally, I love LPLs, and I run a pair on my Centurion AL. I can get 4 tons from a downgrade, but I would do serious harm to my actual damage dealt in game. Non pulse lasers simply have a harder time with convergance, especially against moving targets, and doubly so against lights. The burst firing makes striking a single component infinitely easier. LLs are more likely to sweep across multipe components, making kills take much longer despite comparable damage.
LPL love!
:3
#29
Posted 10 February 2013 - 03:59 PM
I think this is only one step towards balancing the large energy weapons. The LPL got a big boost this time, and it will take some time for it to be reevaluated. I think it's close, but there is still something missing. But the answer could be something that we aren't even thinking about, like how they made AC/Gauss better by changing the size of the round.
#30
Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:11 PM
armor and weapons are the main thing to change.
this "pgi are keeping to TP" thing is absolutely wrong and have no idea why such thoughts would be going around
#31
Posted 10 February 2013 - 04:16 PM
Cybermech, on 10 February 2013 - 04:11 PM, said:
armor and weapons are the main thing to change.
this "pgi are keeping to TP" thing is absolutely wrong and have no idea why such thoughts would be going around
Yep. Armor is slated to have different types with certain values. (Such as reflective or ablative.)
#32
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:31 PM
#33
Posted 10 February 2013 - 06:28 PM
Davers, on 10 February 2013 - 03:59 PM, said:
Add to that that they avoid changing range, damage (and to some extent heat) due to cannon reasons (but do if really needed) and changes that are most likely to be seen are beam duration and recycle rate (and "extras").
Beam duration of .25/.5/.5 for the S/M/L pulse lasers seem a good fit, if they really need a boost. MPL's are the strongest as is, which is logical since they're based on regular medlasses and those are excellent.
Cybermech, on 10 February 2013 - 04:11 PM, said:
armor and weapons are the main thing to change.
this "pgi are keeping to TP" thing is absolutely wrong and have no idea why such thoughts would be going around
It's not "pgi are keeping to CBT", it's more "pgi tries to keep to CBT where other methods can be used to circumvent an issue, not breaking CBT rules unless they firmly believe it'll improve gameplay enough to offset the loss of traditionalists".
In other words, if X is unbalanced and that can be solved either by breaking CBT rules or by not breaking CBT rules they'll usually not break the CBT rules.
#34
Posted 17 February 2013 - 02:29 AM
The only type of mech i can see using it without getting laughed at would be a short range assault that just has extra weight and is an all medium range brawler (~270). Other than that its a waste
#35
Posted 17 February 2013 - 02:45 AM
Davers, on 10 February 2013 - 03:59 PM, said:
I keep reading this.... over and over and over....
Yet, I have never once read a proper explanation.
I'm sorry... but can someone enlighten me as to why the stock mechs need to be EXACTLY like the TT stock mechs?
Heck, there are already examples of stock mechs being different than TT. Namely, mechs that had rear-facing weaponry either lost it outright or had it switched to the front.
So we already have a precedence.
Personally, I like the LPL now. My only suggestion would be that they should be 6 tons, and not 7.
That would be a nice sweet spot between the LLAS and the PPC.
Heaven forbid they one day fix the wacky convergence and hit detection issues with PPCs. Once that happens, the Large Pulse Laser will be largely ignored again.

#36
Posted 17 February 2013 - 03:18 AM
#37
Posted 17 February 2013 - 03:25 AM
#38
Posted 17 February 2013 - 03:33 AM
TheFlyingScotsman, on 10 February 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:
If you can't hit your target, no amount of damage dealing ability will help you.
Personally, I love LPLs, and I run a pair on my Centurion AL. I can get 4 tons from a downgrade, but I would do serious harm to my actual damage dealt in game. Non pulse lasers simply have a harder time with convergance, especially against moving targets, and doubly so against lights. The burst firing makes striking a single component infinitely easier. LLs are more likely to sweep across multipe components, making kills take much longer despite comparable damage.
LPL love!
:3
I keep hearing this over and over and I've never noticed it. So I just went in and did a test run on my DRG-5N and put bother a LL and an LPL on the left arm and bound them both to the same key to test it and, quite frankly, they both have the same burst duration. IDK why people keep saying the LPL has a shorter firing span, but when you fire them both together, you'll notice that they do not have a shorter firing span than the LL.
#39
Posted 17 February 2013 - 04:25 AM
#40
Posted 17 February 2013 - 04:38 AM
Anony Mouse, on 09 February 2013 - 05:49 AM, said:
Dont forget standard PPC have a 90M minimum range, no good in a knife fight. Also don't LPLs recycle faster?
90m is the minimum they do full damage at, they still do respectable damage below that. I'd take a PPC over the LPL's every time, more range, better alpha, no beam duration for the same weight.
To me LPL's need to be the same weight as a large laser and make the heat and range the tradeoff.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users