169 replies to this topic

[Moro Ibex]

Having played MWO and a lot of other MW games and having used the LBX10/20 in many many fights I can say the thing the gun needs the most is simply this:



That is a choke. It makes shotguns have a tighter spread on their pattern. The weapon has the spread of a sawed off shotgun. It needs to be more like a duck gun and reach out an extra 40 yards.

In the LBX world this is a tighter spread of the pellets out to about 300 meters -then- have them start to separate (and separate -quickly-). Of all the ballistic weapons the LBX should have a maximum range. Its just a bloody shotgun. I have been hit with a shotgun at 65 yards. Hurt like a cast iron *****, broke the skin in two spots but other then that I was fine. (disclaimer: #10 dove load out of a 20 gauge, no choke)

My solution:

This gun should (IMHO) have a tight spread out to about 300 meters. At 300m the pattern breaks up and at 375-400 meters the gun is useless. Up close this gun should be looked upon as what it is: ITS MY BOOMSTICK!!!!

Out far this gun shouldn't scare a toddler.

[Khobai]

Quote

also, the fact that it costs 800k cbills should NOT factor into game balance. if you want to complain, make it cheaper. because it's a one time cost (not that R&R is still in effect anyways). it should not be "better" than weapons that only cost 400k. cbills in this game come easy, and 800k is, quite frankly, still chump change. even a casual player can get 800k in a short night of gaming

I see no problem with better weapons costing more. The truth is the LB/10X is supposed to be a direct upgrade to the AC/10. The LB/10X is one of the most flexible weapons in tabletop because of its good mix of abilities: it can armor punch or crit seek, its got decent ammo per ton, its got decent range, its got low heat, and its got relatively modest tonnage/crit requirements.

[General Taskeen]

Khobai, on 18 February 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

LB10X needs the following buffs:

1) firing pattern should be a cylinder rather than a cone so its effectiveness doesn't decrease at range.
2) cluster ammo damage should be increased by 50% (let's see how that works and go from there)
3) cluster ammo should do double critical damage to components (just a flat x2 modifier to critical damage)
4) LB10X should have the ability to switch between firing cluster and slug ammo

"But then why would anyone use the AC/10?"

No one should ever have to use AC/10s. The whole reason the LBX and UAC autocannons were introduced is because standard autocannons were AWFUL. FASA knew it so they released better versions of the autocannons to balance the autocannons with other weapons. But they couldn't get rid of the standard autocannons because they were already used in stock designs.

In a real time game, all they have to do is make the AC/10 fire faster. The LB-X fire rate then could then be what an AC/10 fire rate used to be. Then you have an LB-X that fires slower, but comes with an advantage of being multi-functional, weighs less,a and shoots a little further with a damaging cluster shot and less DPS AC/10 slug shot. Simple.

I do agree that the cluster shot cone should be way tightened so it can actually be effective at the enhanced max range, and also the clusters or pellets doing more damage than just '1.'

Edited by General Taskeen, 18 February 2013 - 10:21 AM.

[LaserAngel]

Khobai, on 18 February 2013 - 10:11 AM, said:

LB10X needs the following buffs:

1) firing pattern should be a cylinder rather than a cone so its effectiveness doesn't decrease at range.
2) cluster ammo damage should be increased by 50% (let's see how that works and go from there)
3) cluster ammo should do double critical damage to components (just a flat x2 modifier to critical damage)
4) LB10X should have the ability to switch between firing cluster and slug ammo

"But then why would anyone use the AC/10?"

No one should ever have to use AC/10s. The whole reason the LBX and UAC autocannons were introduced is because standard autocannons were AWFUL. FASA knew it so they released better versions of the autocannons to balance the autocannons with other weapons. But they couldn't get rid of the standard autocannons because they were already used in stock designs.

I hear that argument often about the AC/10 vs. LB 10-X. The AC/10 is supposedly the Assault Rifle of the autocannon world. It's already just shy of the AC/20 in terms of criticals and tonnage. Even with my own limited knowledge, it was obvious FASA took pity on the poor thing and made the LB 10-X light and smaller than the classic AC/10 to balance it.

[Khobai]

Quote

In a real time game, all they have to do is make the AC/10 fire faster. The LB-X fire rate then could then be what an AC/10 fire rate used to be. Then you have an LB-X that fires slower, but comes with an advantage of being multi-functional, weighs less,a and shoots a little further with a damaging cluster shot and less DPS AC/10 slug shot. Simple.

Yes but the LB/10X is supposed to be better. Period. Trying to balance AC/10s with LB/10Xs is just making both suck. The LB/10X is supposed to be able to do everything the AC/10 can do and better.

Now later in the timeline... standard autocannons start to get access to special types of ammo like armor-piercing and precision ammo. That combined with the level 3 rule that lets standard autocannons fire like ultra autocannons (but with an insanely high chance to jam) sort of fixes the standard autocannons. But those new ammo types don't start to appear until like 3055.

[Chaos7]

Over 1000 games I never even considered using it ...

[jakucha]

p00k, on 18 February 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

it's a beta but it isn't. you know, the whole cash purchases/xp thing being final and whatnot

and no, it is an issue. it shows bad planning. maybe 2.0 is what it needs. i doubt it. 1.5 is probably reasonable. however drastic changes are not how you balance things. big changes are how you encourage flavor-of-the-week builds. remember the nov 6 patch?

and hell, it's been awful for months. it would be even less of an issue for it to only go to 1.2 for two weeks.

Spending money on the game doesn't make it not a beta. Not sure why everyone assumes it does.

[Pierce Rossignol]

I agree the LB10-X should be buffed. I understand its usefulness as a crit-seeker, but really it just doesn't do very much damage for the cost and weight. I was running two of them on a brawler Atlas as a "Flyswatter" against Lights and found that, anecdotally anyway, I get more kills with an AC20 for a third the weight. I say keep the spread and buff the damage, and introduce slugs as an option.

I do believe that the AC10 / AC20 / LB10X should be buffed. The 5's and the Gauss seem dialed-in.

Buffing ballistics would help counter ECM. If I've got range and line of sight and you're stupid enough to stand still, I should be able to take pieces off you with a half-million credits' worth of boomstick.

[Vodrin Thales]

SpiralRazor, on 18 February 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

So SRM-6 stands for Six damage? Okay. And yeah, my point is that we dont have Laser 270 or LRM 1 anymore, but yes....we did.

The reason that buffing the damage on the LB-10X is a bad idea has nothing to do with the name and everything to do with game balance. Anyone who has mounted these weapons and used them to full effect will tell you that they are very effective inside 100 meters in their current configuration. They just quickly begin to suck outside that range. Increase the damage to 2.0 per pellet and you now have an much lighter weight AC20 with a more rapid cycle time when you are engaging inside 100 meters.

Sounds a bit OP, doesn't it? I'd love to see the QQ the first time someone mounts 3 of them on an Illya, especially considering they would be more effective at point blank than an SRM6 splatcat (the damage spread is tighter at close range than an SRM).

The only way to "fix" these weapons is to either allow players to swap ammo with them (remember the slug from TT), or tighten the pellet spread. Buffing damage will make them way too strong in close.

[De La Fresniere]

Pierce Rossignol, on 18 February 2013 - 10:33 AM, said:

I agree the LB10-X should be buffed. I understand its usefulness as a crit-seeker

One of the LB10-X's weaknesses is that it's particularly bad at breaking items via crits, so even that is a drawback rather than a strength...

[Khobai]

Quote

Buffing damage will make them way too strong in close.

Not really. Not if you change it to a cylinder firing pattern instead of a cone. Because then its impossible to put all the cluster rounds in the same location. Thats why changing it from a cone to a cylinder and upping the damage makes sense. Plus it restores the range advantage to the weapon.

[Culler]

The LB10X right now is an AC-10 that generates a little less heat, weighs one fewer ton, and takes 1 less crit slot. In exchange it gives up any hope of being useful outside of short range, while the AC/10 is effective at all brawling distances and even does good damage at sniping distances.

If they choked down on the spread or buffed the damage some it would be a little more worth taking as anything but the filler it is now. AC/10s aren't exactly fantastic (they're OK) and this is just a poor man's AC/10, for when you just can't fit something worthwhile. UAC/5s are much superior to the LB10X.

Doubling the damage would be way too much. I've tried boating 3 LB10Xs and it works OK. Doing double damage would make that build ridiculously OP. From very close ranges you're already doing 30 damage every 2.5 seconds in a reasonable spread (one component for any heavy mech or larger) for very little heat. Doing 60 would be way too much.

I think a 25% damage increase or a choke such that your shot is still accurate out to 300m rather than the 100m it is now would be appropriate. The AC/10 would still have the edge on range by a large margin and would be a better weapon for destroying most components.

[TheMightyWashburn]

1.2 Damage per projectile. Brings the DPS to 4.8 where the AC20 is at 5DPS. That seems fair. Especially since several mechs can carry 2 or even 3 of them. No other changes.

Btw, 2 dmg per pellet is 8 DPS, higher than anything else in the game. That would be ridiculous. Now imaine a Ilya with 3 of them, dealing out 24 damage per second. It would kill anything in 3-6 seconds.

[G is for Gamma]

I actually like the LBX. I've used it on the Atlas, Dragon, Centi, and Cataphract with pretty ballin results. Is it a god mode weapon? no, but I've found them to be really useful and fun weapons.

One of my favorites in the game.

[MustrumRidcully]

Buff the damage to 1.25 per pellet. If it ever gets selectable ammo, don't give this buff to the regular rounds.

Then we'll see how it works. 1.25 is about the level of buff that the SRMs received, which have a very similar damage spreading issue.

[Vassago Rain]

Vodrin Thales, on 18 February 2013 - 10:38 AM, said:

The reason that buffing the damage on the LB-10X is a bad idea has nothing to do with the name and everything to do with game balance. Anyone who has mounted these weapons and used them to full effect will tell you that they are very effective inside 100 meters in their current configuration. They just quickly begin to suck outside that range. Increase the damage to 2.0 per pellet and you now have an much lighter weight AC20 with a more rapid cycle time when you are engaging inside 100 meters.

Sounds a bit OP, doesn't it? I'd love to see the QQ the first time someone mounts 3 of them on an Illya, especially considering they would be more effective at point blank than an SRM6 splatcat (the damage spread is tighter at close range than an SRM).

The only way to "fix" these weapons is to either allow players to swap ammo with them (remember the slug from TT), or tighten the pellet spread. Buffing damage will make them way too strong in close.

They're not effective in any range, because they deal 1 damage to locations, spread all over the mech. It's a terrible gun.

[Inveramsay]

I actually think it is pretty good as it is now, what I would want though is a much tighter spread as using it over 100m is very hit and miss. It could probably use a bit of a ROF boost and maybe a few more rounds per tonne of ammo though I'd settle for tighter spread

Edited by Inveramsay, 18 February 2013 - 10:59 AM.

[Velba]

People in this thread need to learn how to use a weapon that crits ten times in one shot properly.

Vassago Rain, on 18 February 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

They're not effective in any range, because they deal 1 damage to locations, spread all over the mech. It's a terrible gun.

^Like this guy

Edited by Velba, 18 February 2013 - 11:04 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Then we'll see how it works. 1.25 is about the level of buff that the SRMs received, which have a very similar damage spreading issue.

Which would be fine if it weighed 3 tons like SRM6s. The LB10X weighs 11 tons. It should get at least a 50% damage increase on cluster rounds.

[Splinters]

I would agree that the LB-10X needs the TT rule that they can swap for either cluster or regular AC10 ammo for the weapon to be truly useful. The cluster shot's don't need a damage buff if they can tear open a mech with regular ac10 ammo and then fill in the holes with the shotgun for the crits.

-S