Are the VS getting screwed with this Anniversary Pack?

You do realize my arguments were sarcastic analogues of your own argument, right?
I don't actually want any of those things buffed; I'm just showing how silly it is to compare the Lasher, MCG, and JH based on KPH and KPU when they're different types of weapons.
You said it yourself - The developers "won't buff a weapon based on how its doing against a weapon that has nothing to do with it."
The Lasher has nothing to do with the MCG or Jackhammer, other than the fact that they're all three empire-specific guns. The Lasher is no more similar to the Jackhammer than it is to the Baron or Uppercut, and it's no more similar to the MCG than it is to the CARV or the EM6. You're trying to draw connections where there are none.

I think the Lasher could need a higher projectile velocity and lower CoF.
That doesn't make it better in deterring enemy infantry, but makes it worse in deterring own infantry...
and a bit better in 1v1.
Maybe also higher direct hit damage.


And yes, you can and HAVE to compare Jackhammer/Chaingun/Lasher to each other.
They might be totally different, but they are still equivalents/counterparts to each other.
You have to compare Apples with Oranges here.

When the TR gets great tasty Apples and the VS gets small sour yukky Oranges, the Oranges have to be buffed.

Cosmetically, TR got shafted for this anniversary, getting the best looking camo with a lackluster MCG.

The Lasher and Jackhammer OTOH, are beautiful, while the camos for VS/NC are kind of weak.

All of the ES commies look awesome though.

Statistically, the Lasher is the weakest of the 3 as a traditional heavy weapon, but it's underrated, not underpowered. ( Credibility: I've got the base gun auraxed, and almost to gold on the AE already. )

Aren't they both in the "HEAVY WEAPONS" category? So nice try, but that's like saying comparisons between VS LMG's and other factions are apples to oranges.

We've been through three years of weapons in the same class being balanced against each other. Now you're trying to say that's invalid?

Troll on moron.

Well you're really being a child with the insults and whatnot, so I'm not sure if it's even worth responding, but here goes:
The "Heavy Gun" category is meaningless. It's just where DBG/SOE put the three non-LMG ES guns that can only be carried by heavies.
The Jackhammer is a shotgun, the MCG is a gatling gun, and the Lasher is a gun that shoots floating explosive orbs of plasma. They have nothing in common.

The Lasher is as similar to the Jackhammer as the Baron is to the Gauss SAW. You can try to claim all you want that they're the "same type of weapon". But it's obvious to anyone who isn't deliberately fooling themselves that they're not.

Yeah the "Heavy Weapon" category is pretty useless as far as intended role is concerned.

Lasher = Vertical Control and Area Denial, medium power, scaling up heavily with fight size
MCG = Horizontal Control and Sustained Fire, mid-high power, scaling up slightly with fight size.
Jackhammer = Close Quarters Control and DPS, high power, scales down with fight size ( IMO, though I haven't honestly used it much )

Sorry, but having a 25 damage at 3m is not enough of a feature to give the Lasher its own catagory like you are wanting. To even use lashers suppression ability you must do a few things:

1. Having the high ground is absolutely required.
2. Must have a door/corner
3. Currently you must for the most part sacrifice the ability to defend yourself against a head to head enemy.

These costs to use its "Suppression" are too high. This is why the weapon is underperforming versus any other weapon in the LMG class. Last I checked, you're not a developer, so you have zero right to say the lasher can't be compared to another weapon in its catagory. If it was not meant to be compared to other weapons as you say, the developers would have put it in a class entirely on its own.

Sorry, but you can't arbitrarily say that because a feature doesn't meet your specifications that it "doesn't count." The weapon has the feature, and thus it is different from every other infantry weapon.
Until there's another infantry gun with AOE splash, the Lasher is in its own category, whether you like it or not.
If the "cost" is too high for you, then use a different gun. If you're not in a situation to properly utilize the Lasher, don't use the Lasher.

You checked? Wow. Where? How? Incidentally, I actually do have a bit of game dev experience. Whether I do or not though has absolutely no bearing on whether or not I can see what functions certain weapons clearly do and do not have. You're basically saying, "You're not an automotive engineer, so you have zero right to say that the Ram and f-150 are both trucks."

No, they wouldn't have. Why would they? It's clear to everyone that the 3 weapons in the "Heavy Gun" category are completely unique from one another; it would have been a waste of resources to make individual categories for all three. And the result would be meaningless. Let's say they did do that. Let's say they put the JH in its own category called "Heavy Shotguns". And they put the MCG in its own category called "Heavy Chainguns", and the Lasher in its own called "Heavy Plasmaguns". What would that change? Nothing. Except people like you would probably come to the forums and say, "NC has exclusive access to the Heavy Shotgun category, and TR get exclusive access to the Heavy Chaingun category, while we VS only get access to the crappy Heavy Plasmagun category. No fair! Their unique weapon categories are better because KPH KPU blah blah...!"

Like I said this is exactly the sort of "argument" that made the PS1 Lasher 2.0 a do all and be all weapon.

No weapon in PS2 is like that, not one, for very good reason, because when you make a weapon like that EVERYONE carries it all of the time.

I very, very much doubt DBGs would ever make that mistake again.



The closest thing to the PS2 Lasher is probably the PS1 Thumper and it wasn't great 1 on 1 either, for exactly the same reasons. You are wanting the Moon on a Stick, I very much doubt you'll get it, but if you did it would be nerfed massively within 2 weeks (as the PS1 Lasher 2.0 was).

Well if that is your "arguement", then every single weapon in the game should be "buffed" to a Betelgeuse levels of Q4 aKPH!

As they are ALL "unperforming" compared to it! (which is a complete nonsense arguement, of course)

In reality you cannot balance something like the MCG or Lasher against the JH purely by kill statistics, because they are very different weapon types.

To be honest I think it is pretty telling that it is only VS main players saying this, everyone that regularly plays against the Lasher knows exactly how powerful it is now as a suppressive weapon.

It needs to be used in specific situations certainly, but that is what allows it to BE so powerful in those situations and remain balanced.

Like I said they could change it completely (to a beam shotgun or whatever - although mark my words the forums would MELT from the complaints of VS that DO currently use it in its niche), but it won't ever be a weapon with good 1 on 1 AND good suppression as it would just be hidesously unbalanced.



I mean you're making the arguement that the Lasher cannot kill well 1 on 1, which is true, but then the JH cannot suppress or indeed win at any reasonable range (because it is a Shotgun - it is a flexible Shotgun, certainly, combining something like the Baron in one fire-mode with something like a PA/Auto-shotgun in the other fire-mode, but it is still a Shotgun and it is out-TTK by almost anything at any real range).

No PS2 weapons are be all and do all weapons for VERY good reason.

Given the arguments being made here for buffing the Lasher the Betel should either be massively nerfed (it wasn't in the last patch) or every other weapon should be buffed UP to its Q4 aKPH!

Of course that shouldn't happen any more than the Lasher should be made a great 1 on 1 AND great suppressive weapon.

That's actually a good point though.

The TR have the Pounder which is also an excellent suppresive weapon.

The NC have.........



No RL is a "suppressive weapon" since their splash was nerfed because with their RoF it requires about a squad of RL users aiming at a doorway to remotely suppress it now (where as it would take ~3 Lasher or Pounder users to do the same job), same with UBGLs since their RoF nerf.

However that still doen't mean you can directly compare JH, MCG & Lasher power and use by kill statistics anymore than you can directly compare the Bouncing Betty and LPPA by kill statitistics.

The JH is a Shotgun.

The MCG is a strange LMG.

The Lasher is really like nothing else in PS2, the closest thing to it would be the Pounder (or UBGL except its RoF is now way to low to be compared) or the PS1 Thumper.



Saying they are "heavy weapons" is meaningless, because they aren't the same weapon types at all.

You were trying to say the lasher cant be balanced using KPH/KPU as if what you were saying was some kind of invisible law. You needed to be reminded that the stats are there, they can and will be used whether you like it or not.

As the lasher stands now, it sucks 1 on 1 and it sucks at suppression. Suppression would mean I can delay the enemies while firing, not have them rush the damage and just kill its user. I am growing tired of arguing with you because your argument doesnt change. It cant change because you have nothing but opinions that have zero stats backing them.


Thats okay though, we can work around this. Right now the lasher sucks at both roles, suppression and Head to head. So you decide then, will it get a buff in its suppressive abilities or will it get a buff head to head? No matter which you choose, its KPH/KPU must become EQUAL with the MCG and Jackhammer. A buff in EITHER AREA will suffice to bring it up to par. If you are just going to say the same argument that its a different weapon, dont waste your time with a reply. Instead, go post that logic in every thread calling for a buff to empire specifics using stats of opposite empire specifics in the same catagory (Airhammer, PPA, Banshee / pheonix, lancer, and striker to name a few) because theyre, as you say, completely different weapons and you cant use those stats.

Yes, you're right; the stats are there, and you will use them incorrectly, whether I like it or not.
There's no invisible law here. You're the one claiming that the Lasher must be balanced by bringing its KPH and KPU up to match the MCG and Jackhammer. To make that argument, you must make the claim that the weapons are all meant to serve the same purpose; are all the same type of weapon. Therefore, the burden of proof is on your shoulders, not ours. You're the one crying "imbalance!"
So either prove that the Lasher, MCG, and JH are all meant to fill the same exact role, or abandon your argument.

Lol, you're right! Clearly, every LMG in the game is severely underperforming. They all need to be buffed immediately to bring their KPU & KPH stats up to match the Betelgeuse!
Although, why stop there? According to Foxirus and friends, it doesn't even matter if the weapons have different mechanics or serve different roles. We gotta bring everything up to match! Every primary and every sidearm must have a KPH and KPU equal to the BG!
ASAP!

If I were a developer and saw this thread title and knew what the anniversary bundle was about and why things were included

I would probably stop reading the forums and just do redit/twitter posts for updates instead

Silly Kesuga, Everyone knows they don't read these forums

When MechWarrior online first started out developers did post on the forums
but as time went on
They changed
And started to post only on external websites and external website posts had more information then the official website itself


Guess same thing happened to SOE/DBG

I'm using them incorrectly? Says who?

I am basing three weapons that are in the same classification for the heavy class on stats. Are you trying to tell me that if the lasher was blatantly over powered, Noone would try to get it nerfed by using the stats of the then underperforming MCG or the Jackhammer? Because I would LOVE to see you tell all those people EVERYONE who have and would use the stats in the way I am doing now that they are all wrong and can't use those stats because the weapons are "not the same".

I would love to see you go and tell every thread calling a nerf to the Banshee using stats from the PPA and Airhammer to prove it that they are wrong, All those weapons are entirely different from each other. How about when people try to use the stats to compare the MBT abilities? They are completely different and don't have ANYTHING to do with each other.. Are you going to go try and shoot down all those threads for using KPH/KPU? No? I didn't think so.

Sigh, the rules of statistics say so. You can't make comparisons based solely on certain variables if there are additional variables not being accounted for.
The PPA, Airhammer, and Banshee all serve the exact same purpose. They're all AI weapons. They all fire explosive rounds with AOE splash. They're all ESF-mounted.
What can you say is similar about the Heavy Guns?

They're all AI weapons, They all fire rounds, They're all Heavy Only.

Let me use your argument..

The PPA is a suppression weapon because it has such a large ammo size before reload, The Banshee is a machine gun that drains its ammo too quickly for suppression despite have explosive radius, And the Airhammer is a shotgun that also can't be counted as a suppression type weapon. According to this logic, Balancing these weapons based off the stats of KPU and KPH (like they already did) is not possible because the weapons are just toooo different.


Your argument doesn't work because this has already been done in the past with similar situations. 3 faction weapons, all slightly different but in the same class, all balanced around each others stats. If you need an Example: Lancer, Striker, Phoenix.