12 replies to this topic

[Voivode]

Here's my thoughts on Artemis.

1) Forget the current effects. TAG and Narc should be the things that enhance LRM fire.

2) Artemis is a fire control system, so let the user who equips it...control their fire. What I mean is, with artemis equipped, the user should have a toggle that changes the arc path the missiles take.

For example: the user can toggle between a low arc-


or a medium arcing path -



or a high arcing path -



Having this kind of control would increase the utility of LRMs. A low arc could be used in a place like the under the garage on Crimson Straight. A higher path could help your missiles get over some cover and make them a more effective indirect fire weapon. The mid path could be used when there are a few buildings in the way but you want the LRMs to get there quickly.

The point is, a fire control system that lets you actually control the fire would be a huge benefit to the game.

[Lykaon]

There is a potential to end up with undesired effects when altering flight paths.One of the previous LRM adjustments altered the flight path into a high arcing path.As a result we got "Lurmageddon II" where LRMs were arcing over most points of cover and landing a disproportionate number of head hits.

This being said,if an eye is kept on this potential issue I do like the idea.

[Joseph Mallan]

I was a LRMboat cap'n when that came to be. I even felt cheap and tawdry.

[Voivode]

I do agree they need to test the high arc carefully, but its potential to help act as a counter balance the pop tart sniper is tantalizing. I'd rather they balance the game by introducing something that acts as a counter to something else rather than nerfing things.

[Voivode]

Perhaps two options instead of three? A mid-high flight path and a low flight path? That way the LRMageddon of yesteryear could be avoided and greater LRM flexibility could be achieved.

Edited by Voivode, 14 March 2014 - 10:17 AM.

[CarlBar]

Honestly a higher arc would mean nothing, if their behind cover you aren't hitting because you can't maintain a lock, if they're not behind cover the arc isn;t going to matter outside of a couple of specific map's, (Tourmaline and HPG both have lots of high points all over the map interdicting the incoming fire well before the target).

Edited by CarlBar, 14 March 2014 - 10:31 AM.

[Trauglodyte]

Voivode, on 14 March 2014 - 08:16 AM, said:

Here's my thoughts on Artemis.

1) Forget the current effects. TAG and Narc should be the things that enhance LRM fire.

2) Artemis is a fire control system, so let the user who equips it...control their fire. What I mean is, with artemis equipped, the user should have a toggle that changes the arc path the missiles take.

For example: the user can toggle between a low arc-


or a medium arcing path -



or a high arcing path -



Having this kind of control would increase the utility of LRMs. A low arc could be used in a place like the under the garage on Crimson Straight. A higher path could help your missiles get over some cover and make them a more effective indirect fire weapon. The mid path could be used when there are a few buildings in the way but you want the LRMs to get there quickly.

The point is, a fire control system that lets you actually control the fire would be a huge benefit to the game.

I appreciate what you're thinking here. The problem is that PGI can't seem to figure out how to properly code it so that UACs and LBs can fire in different modes or with different ammo (why are UACs firing UAC ammo when it is the same as AC ammo?).

What PGI needs to do is to apply the Artemis coding to all launchers. That is NOT to say that all launchers should come with Artemis. Rather, what I'm saying is that there should be a flight path change based on whether the launcher has LOS or not. You get the permanent high arc like you'd have if your target was 1000m away if you have NO LOS. If you do have LOS, the arc changes to like a 5-10 degree launch (ie, near flat). That means that LRMs would be allowed to fire properly when done so indirectly and with better efficiency as a direct fire weapon. It would also go a long way to preventing missiles from flying into the backs of friendlies, buildings, or mountains when your target is 180-300m away but you're at a lower elevation compared to your target.

[SerratedBlaze]

I am for this idea. Adding user choices is fun, and it would make arty feel more worth the space. As it is, the system pretty much says "trust me, in the long run I'm better" but is hard to notice firsthand how many more missiles hit from it. Especially since we can't un/equip it back and forth without a cbill penalty for personal comparision.

[Khobai]

You want to fix LRMs? The three main problems are overpowered ECM, the stackability of AMS, and the slow travel speed. The flight arc of missiles is fine and doesnt need to change; changing it only risks unbalancing LRMs by making them ignore terrain again.

Artemis, TAG, and NARC also need some serious buffs to justify their extra tonnage/crits. An LRM10 with Artemis and TAG should be significantly more powerful than a PPC based on its greater tonnage/crits and having to meet a number of situational requirements.

Another option to help LRMs might be to add different ammo types for LRMs to give LRMs some additional utility. Swarm LRMs and Thunder LRMs being two possibilities.

Edited by Khobai, 14 March 2014 - 12:24 PM.

[H Seldon]

I'd like to see SRMs and LRMs have longer range. When you get past max range they still do damage but the spread of the missles is pretty large. With Artemis, the spread would be tighter past max range.

Then Artemis would have some purpose for the added weight and crit slots.

[Kjudoon]

Khobai, on 14 March 2014 - 12:15 PM, said:

You want to fix LRMs? The three main problems are overpowered ECM, the stackability of AMS, and the slow travel speed. The flight arc of missiles is fine and doesnt need to change; changing it only risks unbalancing LRMs by making them ignore terrain again.

Artemis, TAG, and NARC also need some serious buffs to justify their extra tonnage/crits. An LRM10 with Artemis and TAG should be significantly more powerful than a PPC based on its greater tonnage/crits and having to meet a number of situational requirements.

Another option to help LRMs might be to add different ammo types for LRMs to give LRMs some additional utility. Swarm LRMs and Thunder LRMs being two possibilities.

Next patch NARC gets buffed. Not only will it not get knocked off and stay on the full time (currently 30 seconds) it is possibly going to get increased time. That is not clear yet. Secondly, it will short out ECM on the mech it hits for the same duration!

Next, increasing LRM speed is being tested. We could see an increase from 120m/s currently to 200-250m/s. This would effectively halve or better the time it took to hit the target. No more having up to 8 seconds to find cover or break lock, you'd get at most 4, which is STILL far slower than all other weapon types.

Although I really like the idea of High Arc/Low Arc being based on LOS, the idea of selectibility using Artemis would be a neat one.

But over the next 1-4 patches, LRMs are going to start acting much more different with the NARC and Speed buffs. Let's see what they do. I guarantee people will begin the QQ over how OP the NARC will be and not being able to just dodge/ignore LRMs anymore in hopes to get LRMs nerfed back into worthless catagories for anything balancing the power of ACs and PPCs.

IMNSHO: There needs to be a better balance drawn, not between skill = high damage but between Missiles vs Energy vs Ballistics. If you go LRM centric, you should be able to compete with a Ballistic centric team or Energy centric. It's kinda there but the Electronic Warfare pillar broke it because it's all affecting ONE of the three types of weapons: Missiles. So either there needs to be similar counters with ECM to ACs and Energy or something has to be done for Missiles.

Edited by Kjudoon, 14 March 2014 - 02:41 PM.

[Davers]

Lykaon, on 14 March 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:

There is a potential to end up with undesired effects when altering flight paths.One of the previous LRM adjustments altered the flight path into a high arcing path.As a result we got "Lurmageddon II" where LRMs were arcing over most points of cover and landing a disproportionate number of head hits.

This being said,if an eye is kept on this potential issue I do like the idea.

Yeah, the difference between 'finger of god' and 'paint scratcher' seems to only be a few degrees.

[Bobzilla]

I wish aiming up, or to the sides, caused the volley to head in that direction for 100ish meters before it creates it's flight path.