169 replies to this topic

[Vodrin Thales]

Vassago Rain, on 18 February 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

If you're humping me with your 10 damage shotgun. you're gonna get humped back by my 45 damage SRM battery, and a vastly superior ballistic.

So no, it's still terrible.

And there in is the real truth here. It's not that the LB-10X does too little damage at close range. It's that the SRM 6 weighs less and does a lot more damage. SRM's are a bit too effective in this game relative to table top and could probably toned down a bit, much more so than the LB-10X could use a buff.

By the way for those that are saying the LB-10X getting a slug round would make the AC10 obsolete. That's exactly what the intention was when it came out in table top. The UAC-10, and LB10X made the AC10 obsolete.

[MustrumRidcully]

Sifright, on 18 February 2013 - 12:30 PM, said:

I can't even begin to understand how the LBX10 is supposedly a team weapon,

Maybe i'm just not smashed on enough drugs and my grasp on reality is not non-existent.

It is great for teams where no one knows which hit location to aim for, and they are all spreading. Because then, it beats the AC/10, since it's still 1 ton lighter and 1 heat less per shot.

It may even make sense, because people complain about Splatapult, but other people always say they are fine, just kill its ears - As if most PUGs could manage to aim for the same ear ("shoot the left one!" *Double Gauss Salvo to the right ear later* "No, the other left!")...

[Sifright]

MustrumRidcully, on 18 February 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:

It is great for teams where no one knows which hit location to aim for, and they are all spreading. Because then, it beats the AC/10, since it's still 1 ton lighter and 1 heat less per shot.

It may even make sense, because people complain about Splatapult, but other people always say they are fine, just kill its ears - As if most PUGs could manage to aim for the same ear ("shoot the left one!" *Double Gauss Salvo to the right ear later* "No, the other left!")...

I have to admit when im ghetto pugging it's kind of disheartening watching just how many people don't even bother to target even a single mech...

Why pubbie why don't you want to shoot his weak spots? *sadface*

[SpiralRazor]

p00k, on 18 February 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

it's a niche weapon for niche users right now because it's, well, awful. inferior in most ways to its alternatives. and i'm not sure what "messing with criticals" people claim, but if you mean it's ability to "critseek" then you won't find any argument here, or anywhere i suspect; i think it's fairly established that the best way to affect crits is with weapons that do 10 damage at a time (though 5 will often suffice), and the better way is to just choose the weapon that can kill a mech outright

yes, straight damage buffs are what the lbx needs. it's the only reason the srms remain viable, by simply doing a crapload of damage for their tonnage. however, as a matter of game balance strategy, dramatic sweeping changes to any stat, be it damage, range, rof, etc, are bad ideas. doubling core values counts as a dramatic, sweeping change. imagine if instead of lowering the ppc's heat from 9 to 8, they dropped it from 9 to 4.5? or doubled its damage from 10 to 20?

as i said, if i had to throw a number out there, i suspect 1.5 would probably be about right. but again, dramatic changes as a policy are a bad way to balance games

p00k, on 18 February 2013 - 10:10 AM, said:

it's a niche weapon for niche users right now because it's, well, awful. inferior in most ways to its alternatives. and i'm not sure what "messing with criticals" people claim, but if you mean it's ability to "critseek" then you won't find any argument here, or anywhere i suspect; i think it's fairly established that the best way to affect crits is with weapons that do 10 damage at a time (though 5 will often suffice), and the better way is to just choose the weapon that can kill a mech outright

yes, straight damage buffs are what the lbx needs. it's the only reason the srms remain viable, by simply doing a crapload of damage for their tonnage. however, as a matter of game balance strategy, dramatic sweeping changes to any stat, be it damage, range, rof, etc, are bad ideas. doubling core values counts as a dramatic, sweeping change. imagine if instead of lowering the ppc's heat from 9 to 8, they dropped it from 9 to 4.5? or doubled its damage from 10 to 20?

as i said, if i had to throw a number out there, i suspect 1.5 would probably be about right. but again, dramatic changes as a policy are a bad way to balance games

Its nearly impossible to compare the LBX application to PPCs bro..bad example.....even at 2.0 the weapon wouldnt be anywhere near OP because of the damage spread. I have a LOT of time on quad AC/2s, and i know this is a truism....each pellet is still doing less then a single SRM, its just that the range on it would be better in return for vastly increased weight and shorter ammo supply.

[SpiralRazor]

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.

Exactly this..

Let me type it big and bold for people who dont understand.

The guys at FASA made Autocannons bad... Thats the truth and i remember the Fanpro rep stating it to us when we started selling Maximum Tech in the store..They are TL1 gear....when new iterations of the game came out, they introduced the TL 2 and beyond LBX and Ultra models, which made them relevant again....not to be outdone by the Clans, the IS developed special ammo for there OLD autocannons, kinda helping them to keep up while the Hypervelocity and Rotary ones were developed and deployed.


See?

No one should EVER use standard ACs if new ones are available...They are simply old, cheap to maintain and are found only in the armories of units that cant afford or dont have access to have better.

[SpiralRazor]

TheMightyWashburn, on 18 February 2013 - 10:47 AM, said:

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.

Only the most idiotic people try to compare 20 damage to a single location vs 10 2 damage pellets. 6xSRM 6 90 damage, 22.5 dps. So your saying that 6 SRMS should be even close to 3 LBX10s for the weight, crits ammo and effectiveness?


Please...go do your homework first.

[MustrumRidcully]

Sifright, on 18 February 2013 - 12:55 PM, said:

I have to admit when im ghetto pugging it's kind of disheartening watching just how many people don't even bother to target even a single mech...

Why pubbie why don't you want to shoot his weak spots? *sadface*

I did the "math" a while back - at least twice. But I believe the difference in damage dealt by a Splatapult between going for a direct Center Torso Kill and going for the ears results is something in the range of 20 % in favor of the ears. That means if really everyone 100 % manages to hit the same ear with the same precision they could hit the center torso, then you take 20 % less from the Catapult.

For my taste, the margin of error is too little to really declare this the superior tactic. It is if your team is flawless in this regard, but if it isn't, the center torso is an easier target and no one is likely to confuse left and right.

[Scorcher One]

As i said earlier: The LBX is a good weapon for the team - as it should be. No buff needed, close thread please. Cause of useless discussion.

[MustrumRidcully]

Trishena, on 18 February 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

As i said earlier: The LBX is a good weapon for the team - as it should be. No buff needed, close thread please. Cause of useless discussion.

How is the LBX better than an SRM6 for the team?

[Sifright]

MustrumRidcully, on 18 February 2013 - 01:13 PM, said:

I did the "math" a while back - at least twice. But I believe the difference in damage dealt by a Splatapult between going for a direct Center Torso Kill and going for the ears results is something in the range of 20 % in favor of the ears. That means if really everyone 100 % manages to hit the same ear with the same precision they could hit the center torso, then you take 20 % less from the Catapult.

For my taste, the margin of error is too little to really declare this the superior tactic. It is if your team is flawless in this regard, but if it isn't, the center torso is an easier target and no one is likely to confuse left and right.

I was actually refering to pubbies that just don't target mechs at all regardless of chassis so they just splash damage all over it with out aiming for that side torso I hit or what ever.

but yea Catapults you are better off just hitting CT.

40 armour + 20 internals on the ears and you can protect the ear by torso twisting it away, despite what all the super hyper elites say.

A1 catapult is general is pretty brokenly over powered.

Still I love that people think the LBX10 is even remotely as good as the SRM6. (by which i mean Bwuh? Hoooow......)

MustrumRidcully, on 18 February 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

How is the LBX better than an SRM6 for the team?

hes trolling put him on ignore he's said that basically 5 times with out ever bringing up why.

Edited by Sifright, 18 February 2013 - 01:18 PM.

[SpiralRazor]

Trishena, on 18 February 2013 - 11:52 AM, said:

The LBX-10 is a support canon, not one for killing. And it's support job.... well, the LBX is nice.

If you are playing in a premade, the LBX is a very strong weapon. If you play in PUGs, don't use a LBX.

Umm....no.....just no...every weapon in BT is for killing the OPFOR... glad you arent ever in my lance.

I apologize for being Vitriolic here, but there is just so much rampant stupidity about how the games mechanics work, and such general fail in some of these posts.

This is in some part why there are "bads", because people dont educate themselves about a games mechanics.

Trishena, on 18 February 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

As i said earlier: The LBX is a good weapon for the team - as it should be. No buff needed, close thread please. Cause of useless discussion.

Uninstall.

[Sunnova]

Rather than increasing damage or tightening spread of the LBX-10, why not decrease the tonnage? Maybe take off 2 or 2.5 tons off the LBX-10 (or make it match the AC/10). Or maybe increase the amount of ammunition per ton for the LBX-10?

The LBX-10 damage seems fine and once PGI perfects the crit system, it will be more important.

[Vassago Rain]

Vodrin Thales, on 18 February 2013 - 12:34 PM, said:

And there in is the real truth here. It's not that the LB-10X does too little damage at close range. It's that the SRM 6 weighs less and does a lot more damage. SRM's are a bit too effective in this game relative to table top and could probably toned down a bit, much more so than the LB-10X could use a buff.

By the way for those that are saying the LB-10X getting a slug round would make the AC10 obsolete. That's exactly what the intention was when it came out in table top. The UAC-10, and LB10X made the AC10 obsolete.

No, it's the that LBX is bad, when it should be good enough to rival SRMs.
It currently doesn't, so if you want to brawl, you only have one choice.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

AnnoyingCat, on 18 February 2013 - 09:15 AM, said:

remember what the 10 stands for?

Yes. 10 fragments. In TT, an LBX2 had 2 fragments, an LBX5 had 5 fragments, an LBX10 had 10... See where I'm going?

The only reason to take the smaller LBX ACs in TT was because they had better range with solid munitions than the regular AC equivalent.

[Sifright]

Sunnova, on 18 February 2013 - 01:24 PM, said:

Rather than increasing damage or tightening spread of the LBX-10, why not decrease the tonnage? Maybe take off 2 or 2.5 tons off the LBX-10 (or make it match the AC/10). Or maybe increase the amount of ammunition per ton for the LBX-10?

The LBX-10 damage seems fine and once PGI perfects the crit system, it will be more important.

decreasing tonnage could be a way to balance it, it still uses a hell of a lot of criticals though.

You... don't actually know how the critical hit system works in this game do you?

[Roland]

Maybe Trish is saying that the LBX10 is better for the team, because by her failing to actually do significant damage or kill mechs, it allows her teammates to score more points.

[Vassago Rain]

Sunnova, on 18 February 2013 - 01:24 PM, said:

Rather than increasing damage or tightening spread of the LBX-10, why not decrease the tonnage? Maybe take off 2 or 2.5 tons off the LBX-10 (or make it match the AC/10). Or maybe increase the amount of ammunition per ton for the LBX-10?

The LBX-10 damage seems fine and once PGI perfects the crit system, it will be more important.

No, it won't, because it deals barely any damage, so can't 'crit' anything, at all, ever.

It's a useless gun- It does too little damage, and is functionally inferior to every other ballstic, including AC2s. Do you understand just how bad it is? AC2 is better than LBX

LBX needs to work like a normal FPS shotgun. Big damage up close, spread out damage at range.

[Scorcher One]

Quote

How is the LBX better than an SRM6 for the team?

You really do not ask THAT question? 0_o

ANd i never talked about any SRM.... this thread was about the LBX, right?

Edited by Trishena, 18 February 2013 - 01:29 PM.

[Roland]

Vassago Rain, on 18 February 2013 - 01:27 PM, said:

LBX needs to work like a normal FPS shotgun. Big damage up close, spread out damage at range.

And this is exactly how it worked in Mechwarrior 4.

The LBX10 did 14 damage, and the LBX20 did 24 damage... but their damage dropped off with range.

Given that this game is actually simulating the individual pellets, you could achieve a similar affect simply by boosting the pellet damage (apparently to 1.4, to match MW4).

Of course, in MW4, the LBX got used more because the UAC's had a ridiculous double shot mechanism which made them virtually useless.

[Sifright]

Trishena, on 18 February 2013 - 01:28 PM, said:

You really do not ask THAT question? 0_o

ANd i never talked about any SRM.... this thread was about the LBX, right?

You haven't explained why the LBX is good. Please do explain.

We all want to know. The whole class wants to know.

Why is the LBX 10 good. What does it do well

what are its strong points.