169 replies to this topic

[Kyle Polulak]

You can see the latest Command Chair post from the Dev Team here: http://mwomercs.com/...ork-to-artemis/

Spoiler

A Rework to Artemis

While working through the rules of Mech Lab, we revisited the implementation of Artemis and how it was handled in terms of your inventory.

Currently, when you upgrade a Mech to Artemis, we would automatically convert your missile launchers to Artemis enabled launchers. You would then be able to remove those Artemis launchers and use them as regular launchers on other Mechs. This was never the intention and upon further reflection, it would make more sense to have Artemis and non-Artemis launchers be their own unique items.

That being said, what we are planning to do is the following:

• The cost of upgrading Artemis is being significantly reduced. (750,000 CB to 250,000 CB)
  
• Artemis and non-Artemis launchers are now unique items and cannot be mixed and matched.
  
• Artemis missile ammunition is already its own item type and will not change.
  
• Any Artemis equipped Mech in your current inventory will have its launchers automatically converted to the new Artemis Missile Launcher item type.
  
• Removing Artemis from a current Artemis enabled BattleMech will require a repurchase of standard missile launchers if you so wish to use them.
  
• The cost of the two missile launcher system types (Artemis/Standard) will not change (Artemis version being 100,000 CB more).

TL;DR – Artemis upgrades will be cheaper. Removing Artemis will require you to repurchase the non-Artemis launchers if you still want to use those weapon systems.


e.g. Your BattleMech has an Artemis-SRM4 launcher. If you want to rebuild your BattleMech to have non-Artemis weaponry, you will have to buy a standard SRM4 launcher if you don’t have one in your inventory.

SPECIAL NOTE: The current UI2.0 build being made for Public Test contains this new Artemis functionality if you’d like to see how it works.

Please tell us what you think!

[FupDup]

So, does this mean that Artemis might not affect Streak SRMs any longer, because there are no unique Artemis-Streak launchers available?

[DragonsFire]

Edustaja, on 19 November 2013 - 03:46 PM, said:

Stop messing around with LRM's and make more content.

This isn't a change to the LRM's specifically but to the Mechlab side of the system. Either way, it's part of UI 2.0, which is where the content will be coming from once it is done.

[Homeless Bill]

On one hand, it makes more sense and I'm happy. On the other hand, I wish we'd get these small fixes for more pressing things. Pulse lasers have been bad for a stunning amount of time, toggles for TAG/AMS can't be that hard, HUD icons (in 3D space - not on the compass) for objectives and commander orders would be super useful, and the list goes on.

Though it's nice, I would have put it farther down on the priority list considering it really wasn't broken. Either way thanks for the fix. And most importantly, thanks for the heads up. You guys are still rocking communication in terms of keeping us updated. No matter what, that's a win.

Edit: After some more thought, I also think Artemis should be removed entirely as an upgrade. Why shouldn't I be able to mix and match Artemis/non-Artemis launchers? In my mind, there is literally no other reason to make this change.

Edited by Homeless Bill, 20 November 2013 - 01:56 PM.

[LauLiao]

Why do we need to pay an upgrade cost if we are going to pay more for the launchers too? Isn't that double taxation? Also, will players who have already paid for Artemis upgrades be receiving a refund for the difference?

[Arkadash]

I like the idea of reducing the cost to install Artemis systems. Hopefully this will make players feel more comfortable experimenting with Artemis builds (so long as the increased cost of maintaining inventory is not prohibitive).

[Corvus Antaka]

this seems fine to me, but would it not simply be easier to have lrm 20 normal & lrm 20 artemis shown as 2 different items in mechlab and if in fact the mech has artemis enabled to then force the pilot to install artemis launchers rather than convert them forcing a constant repurchase of standard missiles instead?

[Edustaja]

DragonsFire, on 19 November 2013 - 03:50 PM, said:

This isn't a change to the LRM's specifically but to the Mechlab side of the system. Either way, it's part of UI 2.0, which is where the content will be coming from once it is done.

Yeps. It came out from the frustration the LRM fixes have caused in the past.
Maybe a good thing to come out of this would be alternate ammo for LRM's and the fix for the streak bug.

[Carrioncrows]

Does this mean I can have both Non Artemis and Artemis launchers on a mech?

Say i want standard SRM's but I want my LRM's to be Artemis, can I do that now?

If not why even bother?

I realize this may step into something else but at this point in time it seems like a waste in time and effort on PGI's part

[DragonsFire]

Homeless Bill, on 19 November 2013 - 03:51 PM, said:

<snip>

I definitely agree on some of the other in-game fixes/tweaks that could be added that you mentioned, but since UI 2.0 is the big push right now I can see why this is also being picked up as a change to be pushed out in the near term.

LauLiao, on 19 November 2013 - 03:51 PM, said:

Why do we need to pay an upgrade cost if we are going to pay more for the launchers too? Isn't that double taxation? Also, will players who have already paid for Artemis upgrades be receiving a refund for the difference?

The upgrade cost AND the launcher cost has always been there. With this change the upgrade cost will be less per mech and now you will have 2 *types* of launchers, Standard/Artemis.

Edited by DragonsFire, 19 November 2013 - 04:01 PM.

[Sable Dove]

So you've taken a good suggestion (tie Artemis specifically to launchers/ammo), but decided it wasn't a bad enough idea, so you kept the upgrade/downgrade cost. So now if I buy a CPLT-C1, instead of costing 750000 CB to upgrade to Artemis, it'll cost 1150000, plus the cost of ammo. So the cost for switching back and forth is reduced to 33%, while the initial cost of the upgrade is 50+% more.

At least make the upgrade cost one-time, if you're not willing to remove it entirely. The game does not need CBill-sinks. The grind is bad enough that it's hard to even keep a balance.

DragonsFire, on 19 November 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:

The upgrade cost AND the launcher cost has always been there. With this change the upgrade cost will be less per mech and now you will have 2 *types* of launchers, Standard/Artemis.

Except that if you take the Aretemis launchers out of a mech now, you can use them as non-artemis launchers. With the new system, you'd have to buy them all over again. Which wouldn't be so bad, but there's no reason for the upgrade cost when the system is tied to the launchers. It should be one or the other. Both is just nonsensical.

[Dirk Le Daring]

Here's a question...

I upgrade to artemis, then at a later point decide to put in a different missile loadout, say going from Artemis LRM15 to a pair of SRM6 launchers.

Usually the LRM15 taken from the mech will be in my inventory. Will the Artemis LRM system be the same ? Once removed from the mech, will that Artemis LRM15 go into my inventory ? Or will I still have to purchase the upgrade again if/when I decide to swap missiles back to previous loadout ?

[kuangmk11]

Carrioncrows, on 19 November 2013 - 03:54 PM, said:

Does this mean I can have both Non Artemis and Artemis launchers on a mech?

Say i want standard SRM's but I want my LRM's to be Artemis, can I do that now?

If not why even bother?

I realize this may step into something else but at this point in time it seems like a waste in time and effort on PGI's part

I agree its really working fine and the change other than the prices is trivial and unnecessary without mixed launchers. Mixed launchers would be great but I think artemis is tied to the whole mech/lock mechanic so it may be a big deal to change it.

Are we going to get some c-bills back? I have 8 artemis equipped mechs, 4 mil c-bills is nothing to sneeze at in this economy!

[BlackIronTarkus]

Why do you bother with things like that before UI 2.0, anyway its a good change none the less and communication is great BUT...

pulse laser are worthless. Lower heat, lower cooldown. They are suposed to be a brawling weapon right?
flamers gererate too much heat for the user and not enough on the enemy.
AC2 heat need to be drasticly lowered, it just doesnt make any sense that the smallest of ac generate the most heat.

COMMAND CONSOLE BUDDY! It doesnt do anything! Remove it already or give a purpose! Im sorry but leaving an item with absolutly no use whats so ever that isnt cosmetic is so unprofessionnal it hurts my head. At least put it in the description that it doesnt do anything so new people dont buy it and waste 1 000 000 bucks on it. I mean cmon!

SMURFY: We want the same interface for UI 2.0 when custumizing our mech. Overview, simple and effective, every meaningful information on 1 screen... IN 3D. Let us play with loadouts even if we dont have the money to buy the items, just dont let player check out.

MC: Let me buy engines already! Sucks to gring 6 000 000 just for 1 XL. It takes forever with the CB nerf so let me buy them already.

Thank you, that is all.

[Carrioncrows]

kuangmk11, on 19 November 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

I agree its really working fine and the change other than the prices is trivial and unnecessary without mixed launchers. Mixed launchers would be great but I think artemis is tied to the whole mech/lock mechanic so it may be a big deal to change it.

Are we going to get some c-bills back? I have 8 artemis equipped mechs, 4 mil c-bills is nothing to sneeze at in this economy!

It's confusing why they would feel the urge to senselessly make the game more complicated.

If they are looking to balancing things and make tweaks i've got a ton of ideas.

It's like having a car in the shop for engine trouble and them pointing out that today they are taking the time to polish the lug nuts on the left rear tire that will be covered by the hubcap anways

My reaction?

Tbhthtibabththa.....WTH? Why?

So big mystery here.

[OneEyed Jack]

It's not a big deal, but I find it to be kind of a stupid nit-picky item to worry about, considering.

[Redshift2k5]

you only have to "re-buy" if "you don’t have one in your inventory." (direct quite). This means that after making a one-time upgrade fee ( 250k per mech), and having both Artemis and non-Artemis launchers in your inventory, you will be able to swap free of charge.

Overall this will be a significant reduction of cost if you like to use more than one build and your different builds don't all use Artemis.

[DragonsFire]

From a feedback perspective Paul, you mentioned that this was going to be incorporated into the next build of PTS to mess around with, any ideas on a timeframe for that yet?

[VanillaG]

As other have said, I am not sure why you need to have an upgrade cost AND higher priced launchers and ammo. If you need to have some sort of flag on the mech to enforce the "all launchers must be Artemis" rule then make the flag have no cost.

It would also be nice to refund the difference between the change in cost of the upgrade and the change in cost for the new Artemis launchers. For example if I had a mech with 2 Artemis launchers I would get a 300k refund (500 - 2x100). In the event that a player would have to pay more, there would be no charge.

[LauLiao]

Still a little confused as to why they need to charge the upgrade cost separately. UAC/5s cost more than AC5s, but you don't need to pay $250K to make your mech able to use it. Just distribute that upgrade cost to the launchers themselves.