43 replies to this topic

[PwnStars]

I know that many people say it is a rather terrible combo, but from the MWO wiki, it states that it provides a 20% accuracy boost (confirm?).

http://mwowiki.org/wiki/Artemis

Assuming that at ranges 100-200m, maybe 1/3 of your missiles will hit. With a salvo of 18 missiles (3 SRM6's), 6 will hit, on average.

With Artemis 20% more accuracy means that the spread should be 20% tighter, and thus 20% more missiles (out of 18) should hit; 20% of 18 is 3.6 missiles.

Adding the 3.6 missiles the original 6, you get a 60% increase in damage done at ranges that aren't pointblank.

Disclaimer: It's 4am and my math may be off (though atm, it looks... alright). Also, I don't have the funds to actually test this out.

I've also heard that the sine-wave pattern of the missiles is consistent, and thus you can also increase your accuracy that way, thus negating the benefits of Artemis. However, I don't actually know at which specific distances the missiles converge (if someone could list them, I will have learned something, yay!)

[Zero Neutral]

Negative, imo. The only time that I would recommend using Artemis for SRM are when you have extra tonnage and slots to spare with nothing else to gain.

Edited by Zero Neutral, 12 February 2013 - 04:04 AM.

[thegimp73]

You can do all the number crunching you want, but eventually it will all come down to in game effectiveness. Therefore I would suggest trying them out without artemis for now since you are low on funds, and when funding is available try them with. Then make your decision for yourself.

[SmoothCriminal]

There was an awesome clip on the forum a few weeks back about how they were switching up the missile spread of LRMs and SRMs with artemis. In essence, instead of going all over the place the missiles would fire in a spiral, and keep that spiral for most of their flight.

So at the moment it's not really a good idea, though when they introduce the modified trajectories it might be something to look into...

[PwnStars]

Zero Neutral, on 12 February 2013 - 04:04 AM, said:

Negative, imo. The only time that I would recommend using Artemis for SRM are when you have extra tonnage and slots to spare with nothing else to gain.

I was kind of playing around with the mech builder, but I'd only have to trade off 1 DHS and 10 engine size (3 slots and 3 tons, for 3 SRMs) to accommodate the Artemis. Now, if it's really that big of a damage boost, it'd be worth it. If not, then I'll probably forget about Artemis for a long, long time.

[Eggs Mayhem]

I would say it depends purely on how fast the mech that carries it is. It's certainly useful on assault and slow heavies, but anything else can save the tonnage (and c-bills) because it can gain the same clustering bonus by just getting closer to the target.

[Zero Neutral]

PwnStars, on 12 February 2013 - 04:09 AM, said:

I was kind of playing around with the mech builder, but I'd only have to trade off 1 DHS and 10 engine size (3 slots and 3 tons, for 3 SRMs) to accommodate the Artemis. Now, if it's really that big of a damage boost, it'd be worth it. If not, then I'll probably forget about Artemis for a long, long time.

Artemis does not increase the damage of SRM in any way.

Artemis decreases target lock time, (SRM do not lock,) and tightens the grouping of missiles. This effect is not very noticeable, imo, for SRM.

[WildeKarde]

Depends on the mech. Might be worth on DC atlas but not on centurion for example. Wouldn't bother on mechs with arm mounted launchers either personally.

[PwnStars]

thegimp73, on 12 February 2013 - 04:07 AM, said:

You can do all the number crunching you want, but eventually it will all come down to in game effectiveness. Therefore I would suggest trying them out without artemis for now since you are low on funds, and when funding is available try them with. Then make your decision for yourself.

I already am running 3xSRM6 on my DDC, but upgrading to Artemis would a) require a new engine and the Artemis upgrade. Current build works alright (75 damage alpha), but it's quite apparent the missiles miss quite a bit at longer ranges on anything that isn't an assault.

SmoothCriminal, on 12 February 2013 - 04:07 AM, said:

There was an awesome clip on the forum a few weeks back about how they were switching up the missile spread of LRMs and SRMs with artemis. In essence, instead of going all over the place the missiles would fire in a spiral, and keep that spiral for most of their flight.

So at the moment it's not really a good idea, though when they introduce the modified trajectories it might be something to look into...

Oh, that's interesting!

Though, I think someone should test the specific ranges that SRMs (and LRMs?) converge (ie. 50m, 100m, 150m, etc.) then I won't need Artemis at all!

[Zero Neutral]

AS7-D-DC

By removing Artemis, I free myself enough space for at least a STD 325 engine for the extra heat sink... I suppose it is personal preference. I use a BAP just cus.

Edited by Zero Neutral, 12 February 2013 - 04:16 AM.

[PwnStars]

EmperorMyrf, on 12 February 2013 - 04:10 AM, said:

I would say it depends purely on how fast the mech that carries it is. It's certainly useful on assault and slow heavies, but anything else can save the tonnage (and c-bills) because it can gain the same clustering bonus by just getting closer to the target.

Good point, I probably should have clarified I'm thinking of this purely from a Atlas Brawler point of view (I'm slow, so softening my target up at further ranges could be beneficial).

Jake Hendricks, on 12 February 2013 - 04:12 AM, said:

Depends on the mech. Might be worth on DC atlas but not on centurion for example. Wouldn't bother on mechs with arm mounted launchers either personally.

Are arm mounted weapons treated different in how they fire?

Zero Neutral, on 12 February 2013 - 04:11 AM, said:

Artemis does not increase the damage of SRM in any way.

Artemis decreases target lock time, (SRM do not lock,) and tightens the grouping of missiles. This effect is not very noticeable, imo, for SRM.

Yeah, but more missiles would hit, thus increasing the damage done at range. Of course, Artemis is useless at pointblank.

If the tightening of the grouping is not noticeable, then I guess my OP is kind of moot.

[Zero Neutral]

PwnStars, on 12 February 2013 - 04:19 AM, said:

Yeah, but more missiles would hit, thus increasing the damage done at range. Of course, Artemis is useless at pointblank.

If the tightening of the grouping is not noticeable, then I guess my OP is kind of moot.

That's just it, for LRM usage I recommend Artemis, but at SRM range, the grouping is so un-noticable as to make it pointless to add.

[PwnStars]

Zero Neutral, on 12 February 2013 - 04:15 AM, said:

AS7-D-DC

By removing Artemis, I free myself enough space for at least a STD 325 engine for the extra heat sink... I suppose it is personal preference. I use a BAP just cus.

This is my build:

Atlas-D-DC

Very deadly as is, but in PUGs (I mainly PUG) sometimes keeping a little distance from your enemies (as opposed to in their face and smashing CTs) can be a lifesaver when your teammates decide to ****** out. Which is why I thought of the Artemis.

[Knobby]

I find that using 2xsrm4 + artemis on my Cent-AL actually lands more missiles on target than 2xsrm6 w/o artemis, or allows me to focus damage into specific parts of the mech.
I usually hit with all 8 missiles even at longer ranges of ~200-240m while at the same distance using srm6 w/o artemis i usually miss with 1/3 to 1/2 of the missiles. So at this range the difference is i either do the same damage while wasting less ammo, or i actually land more hits.
Now at this range the damage will be spread all over the enemy mech of course.
At shorter ranges however, srm4 + artemis actually allows you to focus that damage into two, or even a single, body part(s), raising the effective damage significantly.

Now this all comes down to personal preference and playstyle of course, and if you have trouble landing hits on fast mechs you may actually be helped by the large shotgun spread of the srm6 w/o artemis.
So at the end of the day the only real answer you will get is try it out for yourself

[GODzillaGSPB]

It depends on

- what you want to shot AT
- what mech you're driving WITH

For instance, in my Hunchback 4SP, who is quick and has adequate lasers to chase lights, I usually use my srm6s against bigger targets. And since they are big (and have potentially more firepower) I want to shoot at them from the max distance possible while still hitting them in more or less one spot. When I'm near, I want to concentrate on the CT or other single mech parts. I need precision and have generally no problem with fast turning to aim at quicker mechs.

Plus, since my tonnage is limited I'm a bit more conservative on ammunition and don't want to waste ammo by spreading it too much.

--> That's why I chose artemis for my srm6.

When you're a bigger mech, maybe an Atlas, you may have bigger lasers, medium lasers "at best", but are generally too slow to really get lights with that. If you have srms you want them to spread out for a bigger chance to hit lights. You need that bigger hit chance, knowing you can't turn as fast as a smaller mech. Your aim is not to hit certain spots with it, but to hit at all.

Since you usually carry more ammo as a bigger mech, you can risk to waste some of it.

--> That's why not using artemis might be a good idea.

[Sifright]

Zero Neutral, on 12 February 2013 - 04:23 AM, said:

That's just it, for LRM usage I recommend Artemis, but at SRM range, the grouping is so un-noticable as to make it pointless to add.

this guy is wrong.

with out artemis hitting targets beyond 150m is basically impossible.

[PwnStars]

Knobby, on 12 February 2013 - 04:24 AM, said:

I find that using 2xsrm4 + artemis on my Cent-AL actually lands more missiles on target than 2xsrm6 w/o artemis, or allows me to focus damage into specific parts of the mech.
I usually hit with all 8 missiles even at longer ranges of ~200-240m while at the same distance using srm6 w/o artemis i usually miss with 1/3 to 1/2 of the missiles. So at this range the difference is i either do the same damage while wasting less ammo, or i actually land more hits.
Now at this range the damage will be spread all over the enemy mech of course.
At shorter ranges however, srm4 + artemis actually allows you to focus that damage into two, or even a single, body part(s), raising the effective damage significantly.

Now this all comes down to personal preference and playstyle of course, and if you have trouble landing hits on fast mechs you may actually be helped by the large shotgun spread of the srm6 w/o artemis.
So at the end of the day the only real answer you will get is try it out for yourself

That's what I'm afraid of, I just recently purchased premium so I can grind those c-bills faster Though I will admit my priority at the moment is to get my 3rd Atlas so I can unlock the elite perks.

[KinLuu]

Artemis SRMs are great if you are fighting slow and huge targets (Atlas/Awesome/Phract) at or near the end of the SRM engagement range.

Once the ranges get shorter, the advantage of Artemis gets smaller. At point blank there is no advantage.

If you are fighting fast and small targets, the smaller spread of the Artemis SRMs might even be a disadvantage (Shotgun effect).

[Zero Neutral]

PwnStars, on 12 February 2013 - 04:23 AM, said:

This is my build:

Atlas-D-DC

Very deadly as is, but in PUGs (I mainly PUG) sometimes keeping a little distance from your enemies (as opposed to in their face and smashing CTs) can be a lifesaver when your teammates decide to ****** out. Which is why I thought of the Artemis.

I went ahead and optimized your build for survivability, take note of the placement of ECM and ammo, and the use of C.A.S.E

The way that you had your ammo loaded will get you killed more often than not.

As far as Artemis is concerned, I don't think the benefits out weigh the cost in tons and slots for you.

AS7-D-DC (optimized for survivability.)

It only costs you a few armor on each leg... still plenty left. The difference, blowing up your right or left torso won't damage your center torso any more.

Sifright, on 12 February 2013 - 04:27 AM, said:

this guy is wrong.

with out artemis hitting targets beyond 150m is basically impossible.

I can prove otherwise... but ok.

Knobby, on 12 February 2013 - 04:24 AM, said:

I find that using 2xsrm4 + artemis on my Cent-AL actually lands more missiles on target than 2xsrm6 w/o artemis, or allows me to focus damage into specific parts of the mech.
I usually hit with all 8 missiles even at longer ranges of ~200-240m while at the same distance using srm6 w/o artemis i usually miss with 1/3 to 1/2 of the missiles. So at this range the difference is i either do the same damage while wasting less ammo, or i actually land more hits.
Now at this range the damage will be spread all over the enemy mech of course.
At shorter ranges however, srm4 + artemis actually allows you to focus that damage into two, or even a single, body part(s), raising the effective damage significantly.

Now this all comes down to personal preference and playstyle of course, and if you have trouble landing hits on fast mechs you may actually be helped by the large shotgun spread of the srm6 w/o artemis.
So at the end of the day the only real answer you will get is try it out for yourself

SRM4 have a tighter grouping than SRM6 even without Artemis.

Edited by Zero Neutral, 12 February 2013 - 04:31 AM.

[PwnStars]

Hm, I can't remember ever losing my torsos before losing my arms, I'm pretty good at taking advantage of torso twisting. Though I suppose it doesn't hurt to prepare for the rare case I do. (But if I lose my entire left side, it's probably game anyways)

Also, I'd keep the AC20 ammo in the Head at least, as you're unlikely to die before you fire off 7 AC20 rounds, which frees up ammo explosions elsewhere and not losing large chunks of ammo if someone does decide to leg me.