14 replies to this topic

[BlackDeathLegion]

Hi, PGI/Devs....

I was wondering if you plan/will make this change to Artemis IV FCS.

Currently you "buy an Artemis UPGRADE" in the mechlab.

Will you instead make Artemis a 1 ton, 1 crit ITEM you buy as a single item for X-amount of C-bills?

And make it so for example:

My Stalker can have Artemis IV FCS mounted to its ARM MOUNTED LRM 10's, but NOT have them (wasted crit/weight) for its SRM6's in the left/right torsos?

I want to use Artemis on my mechs LRM's but NOT on my SRMs.....

According to Battletech rules ... http://www.sarna.net.../Artemis_IV_FCS

[Otto Cannon]

+1

Also can you remove the C-bill sink when removing/reapplying upgrades? By the time we're rich enough to need a waste of money we don't make mistakes with builds and need to change basics much anyway- it's new poor players that suffer.

'Service charge' is just insulting our intelligence, endo might be slightly harder to change than the entire engine (which costs nothing) but artemis certainly wouldn't.

[Escef]

Artemis is an all or nothing deal, has been since 1989. Either all Artemis compatible launchers are equipped with it or none of them are.

Another thing to keep in mind is that Artemis compatible missiles do not cost you twice as many c-bills.

It's good as is.

Also, this would belong in Feature Suggestions, not Mechs & Loadout.

[Sephlock]

No, because if you ask for LRMs to be improved in any way, it's like you're asking for more soup.

[BlackDeathLegion]

I'd love to be able to save the crit/weight on Artemis on my "SRM's" to give me more ammo for either my Artemis LRM10's or PLAIN SRM6's.... but I guess i will just have to use Artemis LRM10's and use STREAK SRM2's instead.

Battletech rules dont make a CLEAR statement saying "All Missle Launchers on the mech HAVE to use Artemis". The example says if you have an LRM15 and an LRM5, you would have to use Artemis on BOTH of those weapons. IT CLEARLY DOESNT say you need to use Artemis on SRM's ALSO IF LRMS ARE ON YOUR MECH TOO!

[BlackDeathLegion]

Escef, on 11 November 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

Also, this would belong in Feature Suggestions, not Mechs & Loadout.

*Mechs and Loadout*
"Discuss the 'Mechs, upgrades and weapons available in MechWarrior® Online™"

Your wrong, my topic BELONGS in "Mechs and Loadout".

[Escef]

BlackDeathLegion, on 11 November 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:

Battletech rules dont make a CLEAR statement saying "All Missle Launchers on the mech HAVE to use Artemis".

As per Techmnaual, page 207:

"The Artemis IV FCS may only be combined with standard long-range missile (LRM) and short-range missile (SRM) launchers and the multi-missile launcher (MML). One Artemis system must be installed on the unit for every applicable launcher—including one-shot launchers, if any. (Streak SRMs, MRMs, rocket launchers and Narc beacons may not use Artemis, and so do not count toward this requirement, even though they can be installed on a unit that uses Artemis-enhanced launchers.)"

Furthermore, just in case that still seems ambiguous (and I know it can), we have the official errata:

"For example, if a unit has one Artemis IV equipped LRM launcher, then every single standard LRM, SRM and MML launcher on the unit must have Artemis IV."

So, yes, the clear statement is indeed there.

[Escef]

BlackDeathLegion, on 11 November 2013 - 08:45 PM, said:

*Mechs and Loadout*
"Discuss the 'Mechs, upgrades and weapons available in MechWarrior® Online™"

Your wrong, my topic BELONGS in "Mechs and Loadout".

You are not discussing the system itself, what it does, the pros and cons of the system, etc. You are discussing the way the system is implemented in the mechbay UI. But I tell you what, I'll just bring the thread to the attention of the moderators and let them decide the proper place for it.

[BlackDeathLegion]

Escef, on 11 November 2013 - 08:53 PM, said:

As per Techmnaual, page 207:

"The Artemis IV FCS may only be combined with standard long-range missile (LRM) and short-range missile (SRM) launchers and the multi-missile launcher (MML). One Artemis system must be installed on the unit for every applicable launcher—including one-shot launchers, if any. (Streak SRMs, MRMs, rocket launchers and Narc beacons may not use Artemis, and so do not count toward this requirement, even though they can be installed on a unit that uses Artemis-enhanced launchers.)"

Furthermore, just in case that still seems ambiguous (and I know it can), we have the official errata:

"For example, if a unit has one Artemis IV equipped LRM launcher, then every single standard LRM, SRM and MML launcher on the unit must have Artemis IV."

So, yes, the clear statement is indeed there.

Ok, well I dont have any of my old Battletech Board game stuff anymore, so i cannot look up what was printed by FASA within those TRO's, etc.

I was just going by what was on Sarna.net!

Anyhow, Since PGI "bends" some rules from Battletech, I still STAND BY my OP* IDEA of a possible change to Artemis.
SRMs in MWO DONT get a great big old BUFF with Artemis. It is NOT WORTH the extra ton/crit for me and IMHO!

Its ok, I just offered a suggestion.

Its OK!
I will use Artemis on my LRMs and enjoy the usefulness of the shorter lock-on times and possible damage bonus while I have LOS on target, but I will only use STREAKS on the other missle hardpoints at this time. I would advise other players to forget about SRMs and use STREAKS at this time in MWO!!!

[DrxAbstract]

Otto Cannon, on 11 November 2013 - 06:16 PM, said:

+1

Also can you remove the C-bill sink when removing/reapplying upgrades? By the time we're rich enough to need a waste of money we don't make mistakes with builds and need to change basics much anyway- it's new poor players that suffer.

'Service charge' is just insulting our intelligence, endo might be slightly harder to change than the entire engine (which costs nothing) but artemis certainly wouldn't.

Hold on - Did you just say changing the endo might be harder... ? It requires a complete strip-down of every component, armor plate, wire and weapon while the entire frame of the mech is rebuilt and everything put back. Better yet, go out to your car and open the hood - with a lift and a couple of wrenchs you could pull that engine out. Now compare that process to removing the frame... There is no 'might be' about it, and the distance between the difficulty of performing either is a pretty wide gap - The former can be done with basic automotive experience, the latter requires a much higher degree of knowledge and considerably more time.

[Otto Cannon]

DrxAbstract, on 12 November 2013 - 08:10 AM, said:

Hold on - Did you just say changing the endo might be harder... ? It requires a complete strip-down of every component, armor plate, wire and weapon while the entire frame of the mech is rebuilt and everything put back. Better yet, go out to your car and open the hood - with a lift and a couple of wrenchs you could pull that engine out. Now compare that process to removing the frame... There is no 'might be' about it, and the distance between the difficulty of performing either is a pretty wide gap - The former can be done with basic automotive experience, the latter requires a much higher degree of knowledge and considerably more time.

You're forgetting something. Your example is taking out the engine and putting it back again. My example is removing a 1.8 engine and installing a new 3litre V8 instead... try getting your local garage to do that this weekend.

[Randalf Yorgen]

BlackDeathLegion, on 12 November 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

Ok, well I dont have any of my old Battletech Board game stuff anymore, so i cannot look up what was printed by FASA within those TRO's, etc.

I was just going by what was on Sarna.net!

Anyhow, Since PGI "bends" some rules from Battletech, I still STAND BY my OP* IDEA of a possible change to Artemis.
SRMs in MWO DONT get a great big old BUFF with Artemis. It is NOT WORTH the extra ton/crit for me and IMHO!

Its ok, I just offered a suggestion.

Its OK!
I will use Artemis on my LRMs and enjoy the usefulness of the shorter lock-on times and possible damage bonus while I have LOS on target, but I will only use STREAKS on the other missle hardpoints at this time. I would advise other players to forget about SRMs and use STREAKS at this time in MWO!!!

Althought I do still have all my books I go here for speed http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Main_Page research. All the books are there you just have to search. Or you can search by article/item/mech/weapon/year etc etc. It's a really good resource site.


Cheers

[HammerSwarm]

Nope. No. No no no.

Artemis is designed to do what it does the way it is designed to work. What it does is improve missiles when you have LOS on a target making a straight run at a support mech a little bit more dangerous than a tactical maneuver.

The correct answer is to either increase it's usefulness so that you want it on every type of missile, or decrease missiles usefulness when not using Artemis. Or you could do nothing because it's fine as is.

I am with fine as is.

I support re balancing missiles though so that teamwork makes them better than solo work can alone, but balancing that team work improvement so that the solo work stays at the level it is currently.

[DrxAbstract]

Otto Cannon, on 12 November 2013 - 08:17 AM, said:

You're forgetting something. Your example is taking out the engine and putting it back again. My example is removing a 1.8 engine and installing a new 3litre V8 instead... try getting your local garage to do that this weekend.

Only if the chassis wasnt designed to change engines, which many can if you stay within reason... Exchanging a 1.8l for a 3.0l would be a pretty drastic alteration, like sticking a 350XL in a Jenner which was designed for 300XL max (You would need to garage it for a while to make those modifications). Mechs are designed to swap engines and utilize universal mounting systems. So sure, in the vent of going overboard when swapping engines is time consuming and requires extensive skills, however if you stay within the specifications of the chassis, it's a weekend job at most. Changing frames is not, in any scenario.

[Otto Cannon]

DrxAbstract, on 14 November 2013 - 10:04 AM, said:

Mechs are designed to swap engines and utilize universal mounting systems

I would love to know where you got that from. Even clan omnimechs can't change their engine between missions in lore. The only reason it's so easy in this game is that it's arbitrarily designated a non-cashsink modification.

It doesn't matter how you look at it. Regardless of how easy or otherwise you assume it is to change weapons or engines there's absolutely no excuse for one change being hideously expensive and another being entirely free of charge. Since the 'realistic' option of making any changes ridiculously time consuming and expensive would be no fun, the best option is for all changes and upgrades to be free in this game.