25 replies to this topic

[Victor Morson]

Koniving, on 17 February 2014 - 12:27 PM, said:

In MWO ARtemis tightens the spread of SRMs and LRMs. It accelerates the lock on LRMs (intended) and Streaks (unintended). For the weapons it is meant to affect, there is additional cost and weight penalties for using it. There are no such penalties on streaks. Thus, it is a bug.

It also improves the missile's "tracking strength" (i.e. turn rate) by 50%. Combined with TAG, that's a 100% buff to it. So it's a very important thing to bring up.

Many people aren't aware of this, and focus just on the also useful group tightening. But it makes a massive impact when fighting faster 'mechs with LRMs.

However, in the context of Streaks & SRMs that this thread was posted about, I don't believe they actually give that bonus to Streak missiles as they weren't the intention in the first place, and have a different firing system. Just LRMs. But it's still worth noting.

[Koniving]

Was more focused on what Artemis does for SRMs and streaks, not so much the benefits to LRMS.

But yes. LRMs get the benefits of what Victor mentioned.

Streaks get a supposed bonus from TAG but since I don't run that combination I don't know. The bonus is only reduced lock-on time, and even then "against ECM". With a BAP I never try to lock on outside of bap's range, so I don't use or try this. No reason to.

I know that Streaks display no behavioral differences between Artemis and non-Artemis. The streaks and LRMs only share the lock on script. Beyond that they run on two very different flight codes.

Edited by Koniving, 17 February 2014 - 01:04 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Koniving, on 17 February 2014 - 01:03 PM, said:

Streaks get a supposed bonus from TAG but since I don't run that combination I don't know. The bonus is only reduced lock-on time, and even then "against ECM". With a BAP I never try to lock on outside of bap's range, so I don't use or try this. No reason to.

It's not something many serious builds run, but yeah, it's just about the lock time pretty much. Generally speaking getting a lock at Streak range is never a problem so unless that's an issue for a newer pilot, just skip the TAG with Streaks for sure.

Though that said, if you are pugging with a Streak 'mech running TAG, you're likely to get a lot of little XP and Cbill bonuses from LRM 'mechs chiming in.

Edited by Victor Morson, 17 February 2014 - 01:13 PM.

[Koniving]

Actually, considering the "Spot" bonuses I frequently get when I'm alone and isolated just firing streaks on a random person, I have the feeling that "TAG/NARC" bonuses would also apply while using streaks. TAG/NARC as in the cash bonuses for "spotting" with them. And when other people are also looking at that target, I get double or more bonuses for spotting when the first streak hits after they see it. So that might rack up with TAG.

So even if there are no LRM boats it could benefit financially to run a tag anyway. I just don't because about 90% of the time I'm running streak-ready builds my energy hardpoints are slim to none and every ton counts.

Well then. Hm. Looks like my next Kintaro will be a streak rig to try it out.

Edited by Koniving, 17 February 2014 - 01:22 PM.

[Victor Morson]

If I ever were to write a power-leveling guide to MW:O, it'd involve lots of Streaks whenever possible, TAG, and UAVs. Lots of UAVs. BAP is nice too for C-ECM but my God can you rake in XP with the right module setup.

On a 2X bonus first drop of the day on a 2X weekend it is literally possible to get ludicrous MXP in a single drop; I'm talking over 10k. It's insane, if hard to pull off. Even without TAG and just UAV one of my teammates has managed 8600XP without a 2X weekend, but that was an insanely good run.

More realistically you'll pull an average of 2k XP a round without premium time, which is still pretty killer.

Edited by Victor Morson, 17 February 2014 - 10:42 PM.

[RG Notch]

Koniving, on 17 February 2014 - 10:10 AM, said:

Long story short: It's a bug.

Short story long: PGI has put any solutions to the matter on the back burner as it would 1) require a separate lock on system and/or code and 2) take away from development time on any of the other strongly needed features.

I.E it's not a bug, it's a feature.