Re-engineered Lasers try 2

[Scotty]

But the RE-Laser does do better than the standard laser.  On a ton-for-ton basis with total damage assigned to a single location it does not.  Of course, the PPC and ER PPC also lose to the standard large laser in that analysis, don't they?

RE-lasers are developments of IS pulse lasers and should be viewed as improvements on those weapons.  They are not the best weapons out there, they may never have improvements in technology, but they are not worthless.

I just explained to you very clearly that the RE Laser does not, in fact, do better than the standard laser.  In detail.

I'm not saying you have to stop using it, or that it's impossible to use one on the field.  I'm saying that there's a better weapon to use in the vast majority of situations.  It's like the AC/5.  You can use one, but you can also find something better without even looking that hard.

[Alexander Knight]

I just explained to you very clearly that the RE Laser does not, in fact, do better than the standard laser.  In detail.

Wrong.  You explained that for your playstyle the RE Laser does not do better.  I happen to like the 9 point hits vs the 4-6 point hits.  Yes, I am aware of your view that "Eating through the internal structure" will put the standard laser ahead of the RE laser.  In my view, once targets have vulnerable internal structure they're more likely to act in ways to shield that IS from damage.  This forces my opponents to change their own playstyle, which helps grant me control of the battlefield.

[Scotty]

Wrong.  You explained that for your playstyle the RE Laser does not do better.  I happen to like the 9 point hits vs the 4-6 point hits.  Yes, I am aware of your view that "Eating through the internal structure" will put the standard laser ahead of the RE laser.  In my view, once targets have vulnerable internal structure they're more likely to act in ways to shield that IS from damage.  This forces my opponents to change their own playstyle, which helps grant me control of the battlefield.

And, again, if that result on the battlefield is your goal, there are a dozen other weapons that do it better for similar tonnage, better range, and better damage against everything else on the battlefield.  RE Lasers are a ridiculously niche design that does not perform appreciably better (and in many cases perform worse) than weapons that already fill that niche (or don't even fill that niche).  I can point to a weapon that's considered outright bad in the form of the Improved Heavy Large Laser[/b], and that bad weapon outperforms the RE Large in nearly every way (it loses by one point against Reflective - one point!).

RE Lasers are not good.  They are not better than standard lasers.  They are not even particularly good at what they do in general.

[Weirdo]

Who's a forum poster that's gonna take a step back and cool off right cheesin' now?

You are! You're both posters who are going to back off right now! Yes, you are! :D

(And in case I'm being too subtle: [copper])

[Erkki]

Actually I totally forgot about damage against inner structure and forcing PSRs. Those factored, theres no reason to use REML over ML except maybe against special armor BA and possibly vehicles(dont care about PSRs, little to no inner structure).

LL, SNPPC and PR against RELL: yeah they lose a bit of efficiency against special armors, but they are still better choices most of the time. LL loses by 36% which but contributes more towards PSRs and chews IS better(weight and heat need to be factored). Also sinks > gun mass.

ERSL is just useless. Even standard SL is just as inefficient against the special armors and it wins by 50% towards PSRs and against inner structure.



But when comparing guns with each other there are often range profile differences and ammo and so forth, so things can become a bit fuzzy. To make it simplier, lets look at weapons that need no ammo and share the same ranges. Out of those weapons, a base to-hit of 8 is enough for X-medium-pulse, a gun not considered very good at all by most people I know to have an opinion on it, to be more efficient anti-hardened armor and such gun than the REML. Let me demonstrate:

To-hit odds difference between REML and XMPL with base to-hit of 8(REML needs 8, XMPL needs 6)
(26/36)/(15/36)=1,7333....

Allocated weight, how much damage a turn you get by allocating 1 ton, against the special armors while using DHS(notice the weapon ranges are same)
REML: 6/(2,5+3,5)=1,0
XMPL: 3/(2+3)=0,6

1/0,6 = 1+(2/3) = 1,666.... < 1,733...

--> XMPL is more efficient when base to-hit number is 8 or higher. Using 4/5 pilots, that is basically almost all of the time, and a lot of the time even if the firing range is 3 or lower and in the short range bracket. Only advantage REML retains is double the hit cluster size(which isnt meaningless, and can possibly make REML+TC combo better for aerospace fighters perhaps?), but it loses 20% in damage counted towards PSRs and another 20% against damage to inner structure which is not a small thing when facing meks. On the top of it all, a larger portion of REML's required weight consists of the weapon itself: by using XMPLs you get proportionally more heat sinks that can be used for cooling other guns or systems.

Medium and small VSPL dont share quite the same ranges but they are both even more efficient at ranges 1 and 2 thanks for huge that to-hit odds bonus. Medium VSPL also happens to have exactly the same BV value, 56, as the REML.


But what about  REML+TC combination against XMPL?

ERML: 6/(2,5+2,5/4+3,5)=0,9056603774
XMPL: 3/(2+3+0,5(for TC))=0,454545...

ERML/XMPL: again the same 1,66 --> What happens is the to-hit required for XMPL to be better is a step higher at 9: (26/36)/(15+36)=1,733... Sorry about the maths.  ;)

My conclusion: I believe that for usual ground battles at least the XMPL is, facing special armors or not, a better choice than the REML for all 4/6 or faster meks and 5/8 vehicles as well as jumpers, as they can generate 2 or more movement modifiers consistently and can control engagement range at least somewhat. For the slowest of units there are probably more requirements for their close-range backup weaponry than being slightly more efficient against specialty armors than more conventional options.

What do you people think about the RE-lasers on Aerospace units, intended as a counter against possible laser-reflective armor units? Do standard energy weapons' full damage count towards structural integrity treshold? If not, I could see the RE lasers have a use right there.


edit: fixed typo

[Diablo48]

Few specific thresholds?  This example was heavily in favour of the standard medium laser.  If I wanted to demonstrate fewer, more specific thresholds, I could have set the Battle Armour's Reflective armour up to 10 points, or even 11 points, where it would take six medium lasers to kill a single trooper compared to only two Re-Engineered Medium lasers.

That would be the threshold I was talking about, yes.  Also, that cuts both ways because BA with 12 or 13 points of armor will take 3 REML hits to kill while the standard will do it in 7.  That means you will need 12 REML hits to wipe out a 4-suit squad which takes a full 6 turns with two lasers while standards need 28 hits which is only 5.6 turns using the 5:2 equivalency established earlier giving the standards a small advantage (misses will drag this out longer for both weapons in practice so that .4 turns may turn into an extra turn).

The standard medium laser is reduced to 2 points of damage, making a battery a less efficient SRM rack.  Switch the armour to standard, and you have much the same scenario:  SRMs should render medium lasers useless in 3025 play.

Ok, number crunching time.  A SRM 6 with a ton of ammo and 4 SHS to cool it weighs 8 tons.  A Medium Laser with 3 SHS to cool it weighs 4 tons so you can mount two of them for the weight of the SRM.  Those two Medium Lasers will do 10 damage in 2, 5-point clusters.  The SRM 6 will on average land 4 missiles for 8 total damage in 4, 2-point clusters.  That means the Medium Lasers are more efficient at grinding through armor with raw damage while the SRMs are better for critseeking which is exactly what I said earlier.

That is very different from what we see with RE-Lasers where you have the same damage output in both cases, superior critseeking with the standard lasers, and a huge difference in total damage output the moment you shoot at anything besides Reflective Armor which includes the internal structure of the Reflective Armor design.

First, I should point out that I re-used the initial dice roll for both cases- so the grouping of shots is the same for both the Re-Engineered lasers and the Medium lasers.

Second, thanks to probability, we know that this isn't an unusual case.  While this specific grouping is unlikely, there are other groupings that produce similiar results.  For example, there is a 25% chance to kill a trooper on the very first turn outright (which didn't happen here).  That result would have increased the odds that a second trooper would die on the following turn to 33%, which is 8.33%.  Not bad, considering that is the ideal grouping.

The fact is, there is an 90.625% probability that at least one trooper will be dead on turn 2.

If you looked, I did factor that into my assessment when I conceded that there was an advantage in killing one trooper faster.  I am still not totally convinced it is that drastic and would have to chew through far more math than I would like on both of them to get useful results to see what the actual difference is, but I would expect the REML to have a small advantage here.

Only a little number crunching is needed to show that overall, the effectiveness of a squad of battle armour will be reduced much more quickly with Re-Engineered lasers than Medium lasers.

For example:

Code: [Select]

For Re-Engineered Medium lasers against any Battle Armour squad with up to 11 points of Reflective armour:
 
Odds the first laser hits an undamaged trooper on the first turn:  4/4
Odds the second laser hits the same, undamaged, trooper as the first: 1/4
----------
4/16 = 25% two Re-Engineered Medium lasers kill a Battle Armour on the first turn.

For Medium lasers against any Battle Armour squad with 6-7 points of Reflective armour:
 
Odds the first laser hits an undamaged trooper on the first turn:  4/4
Odds the second laser strikes the same trooper:  1/4
Odds the third laser strikes the same trooper: 1/4
Odds the four laser strikes the same trooper: 1/4
Odds the fifth laser strikes the same trooper: 1/4

Which is one of (several) outcomes that result in one trooper dying on the first turn: 4/1024 or  0.39%

Another outcome is:

Odds the first laser hits an undamaged trooper on the first turn:  4/4
Odds the second laser strikes a different trooper:  3/4
Odds the third laser strikes the same trooper: 1/4
Odds the four laser strikes the same trooper: 1/4
Odds the fifth laser strikes the same trooper: 1/4

Which is 12/1024, or 1.172%

As we can only afford one 'miss', the only remaining outcomes that result in a dead trooper on the first turn is if the third, fourth or fifth laser misses and the others hit.  They all have the same probability as if the second laser misses but the others hit, so we can add those together.

Third laser hits an undamaged trooper: 12/1024
Fourth laser hits an undamaged trooper: 12/1024
Fifth laser hits an undamaged trooper: 12/1024

That gives us a combined probability of 48/1024, which we add to the chance that they all hit the same trooper for a total of 52/1024 or 5.075% chance that they kill a suit on the first turn.  That's 1/5 the chance the Re-Engineered lasers have.

For Medium lasers against any Battle Armour squad with 8-9 points of Reflective armour:

Odds the first laser hits an undamaged trooper on the first turn:  4/4
Odds the second laser strikes the same trooper:  1/4
Odds the third laser strikes the same trooper: 1/4
Odds the four laser strikes the same trooper: 1/4
Odds the fifth laser strikes the same trooper: 1/4

Which is 4/1024, or 0.39%

For Medium lasers against any Battle Armour squad with 10-11 points of Reflective armour:

Even if all lasers hit the same trooper, he'll still be alive so the chance is 0%.

In summary,

Two Re-Engineered medium lasers that hit a squad of Battle Armour with between 6 and 11 points of reflective armour, there is a 25% that a suit will die on the first turn.

Five standard medium lasers that hit a squad of Battle Armour with either 6 or 7 points of reflective armour, there is a only a 5.075% that a suit will die on the first turn.

Five standard medium lasers that hit a squad of Battle Armour with either 8 or 9 points of reflective armour, there is a only a 0.39% that a suit will die on the first turn.

And for Battle Armour with either 10 or 11 points of reflective armour, 5 standard medium lasers cannot kill a suit on the first turn (which, again, two Re-Engineered Medium lasers have a 25% chance)

Yes, but that advantage will start to normalize out on subsequent turns which you did not analyze (probably because the probability web gets huge and ugly and far more trouble to deal with than it is worth).  I am not denying that there is an advantage, but I still do not see it being as overwhelming as you are suggesting.

Yes, the same advantage that medium lasers have in 3025 play.

I have absolutely no idea where this came from because this discussion was explicitly limited to Battle Armor which do not exist in 3025 play.

The benefits against Battle Armour also applies to rear torso armour.

Rear armor will be even worse because there is so little of it in relation to the internals underneath.  It also does not help that even very light 'Mechs can strip away huge chunks of rear armor with physical attacks due to the fact that reflective armor takes double damage from them.  You may very well want to switch your plan to small TSM designs in this case because even a 20 tonner with active TSM gets two 8-point punches against Reflective Armor thanks to the multiplicative damage bonus stacking for 4 times damage.

You are aware that Re-Engineered Medium lasers deal ~20% more damage than their weight in standard Medium lasers, correct?

Which then drops to less than half the damage output of the standards the moment you crack the armor and puts the standards well ahead even if the target has max Reflective Armor over the location in question and nothing else ever hits the location which are both very favorable and unrealistic assumptions in favor of the REML.  After all, torso locations must split some of that armor to the rear so the front will be less than the 2/3 reflective armor it could theoretically be and you have to take out the torso to take out the 'Mech (barring head hits which are total luck).

And that the Large Re-Engineered lasers are more 'efficient' as well?

As I have said before, the RELL is the one that does have a clear advantage over the standard version.  That should give it a real niche on some designs, although as Scotty pointed out it is big enough to start competing with some very substantial weapons and the competition is very tight up there.  It also cannot really compete on its effect against Reflective Armor alone because the Thumper Cannon is the same weight after factoring in DHS and does more damage there even before factoring in its other benefits, although the RELL is also very effective against Hardened Armor which gives it a meaningful advantage.

You know, if you're going to be so flippant with your responses, you're going to very quickly run out of willing discussion partners - and not because you're right....

That is exactly why he is on my ignore list.

All that said, damage against the internal structure is also important, and the Large Lasers go back up high on the advantage for that due to their overall improved damage.  Amusingly, the damage disparity is the same in opposite directions against Reflective armor and against internal structure.  Before the armor is gone, the RE Larges have a six point advantage, after the armor is gone the standard lasers have a six point advantage.  Naturally, getting through the armor faster would intuitively mean that the RE Larges have less ground to make up, and come out overall on top, if only just barely.

One important detail is that the Reflective Armor bonus is calculated up front just like Ferro-Lamellor which I abuse ruthlessly with my armor layouts for a little bit of free protection, although Hardened Armor is a difference in absorption rather than a reduction so it does not get this bonus.  What that means is that a single point of Reflective Armor is enough to cut any energy weapon hit in half so the standard Large Lasers will loose a bit more damage to that which tweaks the numbers some.  This is fairly trivial with the Mediums because they do so little damage per hit, but the Large is a big enough cluster to be concerned about it.  When combined with the generally more efficient nature of the RELL I can see a real niche for it when you expect to be facing a lot of designs with Hardened armor, although I would rather take ballistic and missile weapons if I expect lots of Reflective armor with a special focus on the Artillery Cannons because their AE damage is doubled against Reflective Armor.

[FedComGirl]

(sigh)

All these numbers being thrown around only convinces me more that RE Lasers do have a place. I also haven't seen anyone compare RE lasers to standard large lasers. A small RE Laser does as much damage against reflective as a large laser. Two will equal a large laser against other armors with two tons left over. Two RE mediums will do more damage than a standard large either way. As for the RE large lasers it's better than a PPC with capacitor so if it fits I'll take it. Yes there's a loss of range but if getting into physical combat is an argument against RE lasers, range doesn't matter.

And then there's the internal structure argument. It's a non issue. It doesn't matter what kind of armor they have or what kind of weapons you have. If you don't get through the armor, your not going to damage the internal structure.

Now can we please stop hating things and start thinking up good ways to use them?

[Erkki]

--

Now can we please stop hating things and start thinking up good ways to use them?

I'm thinking hard but I'm failing to find any good use for them except maybe as pure anti-laser-reflective-armor-BA. I want to look beyond the fluff and handwaving so I do the maths(the min-maxing). They do have some hipster value too I guess.

What about my question about them for Aerospace units, 2 posts up?

[FedComGirl]

I think they'd be good against Aerospace units with reflective armor. I can see them regularly being mounted on Aerospace units to counter Aerospace units as well as ground based AA units.

[haesslich]

I'd think hard about using RELL or REMLs on units like fast mechs or VTOLs who I expect to serve as backstabbers, especially against the DCMS.  They've got a lot of units which play with the specialty armors (the Kishi BA, Zou BA, Narukami heavy tank, Mamano IFV, Rokurokubi, Shiro, and Wendgo immediately come to mind), and with light or fast mediums who already have limited tonnage for guns I'd want a single gun or two that'll work against everything. Or if I've got a lance of Omnis, then I could spare the tonnage on one or two of them to switch out to one of those lasers to give them a gun that'll punch through those armors quickly without spending precious ammo.

They're a niche weapon, but if I'm using (or fighting) ASFs or dealing with front-line DCMS mechs or vehicles, they can be useful. They're certainly cheaper than getting a bunch of Clan tech ERPPCs, which would be my other option for dealing with hardened or reflective armor.

[Scotty]

Yes there's a loss of range but if getting into physical combat is an argument against RE lasers, range doesn't matter.

I compared Large and RE Large lasers on the previous page.  Range is directly (and painfully, in many cases) linked to accuracy.  Large lasers are hitting at 10 hexes at +2, Medium RE lasers don't get to shoot.  Large lasers are hitting at 5 hexes at no penalty, Medium RE Lasers are at +2.  That adds up fast on 2d6.

[Alexander Knight]

By that same token Scotty, you should hold the view that 4 ML tied to a TarCom will not blow through armor locations faster than two REML because of the +3 penalty for aimed shots.

[Scotty]

By that same token Scotty, you should hold the view that 4 ML tied to a TarCom will not blow through armor locations faster than two REML because of the +3 penalty for aimed shots.

Now you're just saying things that I've never said.  Stop putting words in my mouth, stop making silly straw man arguments, and we might be able to have a good conversation.

[Alexander Knight]

Now you're just saying things that I've never said.  Stop putting words in my mouth, stop making silly straw man arguments, and we might be able to have a good conversation.

No, I'm just trying to get all you anti-RE laser guys on the same page and to stop contradicting each other.  AW made the claim about the TarCom-assisted lasers being better than 2 RE-ML for blowing through armor locations.

[Scotty]

No, I'm just trying to get all you anti-RE laser guys on the same page and to stop contradicting each other.  AW made the claim about the TarCom-assisted lasers being better than 2 RE-ML for blowing through armor locations.

There hasn't been a contradiction, and trying to force us all into saying the same thing so you can try to dismiss it all at once is frankly a little  insulting.  Have a fun thread, I won't be continuing with it.

[Bosefius]

Locked pending review