Jump to content

Arty Should Not Have Los Attached


25 replies to this topic

#1 CrushLibs

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 546 posts

Posted 31 May 2015 - 12:41 PM

I don't play with LRMs Iam a more SRM / UAC kinda player but I used to do my fair share of LRMs with my Stalker 5M back in the day.

I have to admit LRMs are sucking wind.

1. horrible damage spread
2. easy to lose lock due to counters
3. slow to target 160 m/s

but one thing is stupid and should be changed is the LOS for artemis to work.

Artemis only decreases spread 10-15% which makes a small difference but for this small increase in localized damage you give up:

1. Cbills to add it to the mech
2. 1 ton additional per weapon
3. Losing 1 ton of ammo per weapon
4. Increase of 1 crit space which limited LRM rack size and can effect ammo count too.
5. loss of DHS space and tonnage if ammo is sufficient

So after investing all that or giving up all that you Arty is meaningless and useless without LOS.

This isn't a laser driven tag its better electronics on the missles thus LOS should not matter.

Please consider this to help offset the suckage LRMs are currently.

Edited by CrushLibs, 31 May 2015 - 01:05 PM.


#2 dario03

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Galaxy Commander
  • 3,636 posts

Posted 31 May 2015 - 12:44 PM

Your usage for the word arty is strange and confusing to me...

#3 Burktross

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 3,663 posts
  • LocationStill in closed beta

Posted 31 May 2015 - 12:55 PM

View Postdario03, on 31 May 2015 - 12:44 PM, said:

Your usage for the word arty is strange and confusing to me...

QFT... op...clarify?

#4 Templar Dane

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 1,057 posts

Posted 31 May 2015 - 01:00 PM

View PostBurktross, on 31 May 2015 - 12:55 PM, said:

QFT... op...clarify?


I believe he's talking about artemis, and wanting the LOS requirement removed.

#5 CrushLibs

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 546 posts

Posted 31 May 2015 - 01:03 PM

Arty = Artemis

#6 Burktross

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 3,663 posts
  • LocationStill in closed beta

Posted 31 May 2015 - 01:06 PM

View PostCrushLibs, on 31 May 2015 - 01:03 PM, said:

Arty = Artemis

Ah, okay.
Yeah, I can get behind this.

#7 Levi Porphyrogenitus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 4,763 posts
  • LocationAurora, Indiana, USA, North America, Earth, Sol, Milky Way

Posted 31 May 2015 - 01:23 PM

An Artemis IV rework would be part of any comprehensive ECM fix. It's not really worth dealing with until such a fix actually happens.

#8 Mcchuggernaut

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 838 posts
  • LocationYour core

Posted 31 May 2015 - 01:27 PM

On my ultimate missile boat I don't run Arty because 90% of the time it is useless, and the space and ammo lost is ridiculous for the tiny spread reduction. It is a worthless piece of equipment for LRM boating right now, and is even questionable for streak boats.

#9 Alistair Winter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 10,823 posts
  • LocationBergen, Norway, FRR

Posted 31 May 2015 - 02:17 PM

Yeah, the whole LRM / SSRM / ECM system needs to be completely reworked, from the ground up. Enough with the soft counters and minor tweaks.

But right now, PGI's view on this subject tends to be...

Spoiler


#10 bad arcade kitty

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 5,100 posts

Posted 31 May 2015 - 02:25 PM

imagine arrow-4 working like wot arty... brrr

#11 omessiaho

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 128 posts

Posted 31 May 2015 - 03:44 PM

View Postdario03, on 31 May 2015 - 12:44 PM, said:

Your usage for the word arty is strange and confusing to me...


Posted Image
???

#12 Kiiyor

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 5,565 posts
  • LocationSCIENCE.

Posted 31 May 2015 - 03:58 PM

View PostCrushLibs, on 31 May 2015 - 01:03 PM, said:

Arty = Artemis


Arty actually = artillery in just about all western speaking military circles, hence the confusion.

I'm actually of the opinion that LRM's are OK where they are. Gloriously overpowered against anyone who makes a mistake or doesn't understand cover, and borderline useless against a well entrenched foe. Feast or famine.

My dedicated boats are still my biggest money earners (when I deign to dust them off).

#13 Kyynele

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Vicious
  • The Vicious
  • 973 posts

Posted 31 May 2015 - 04:53 PM

Oh yeah, Artemis also reduces spread. I primarily use Artemis on mechs to reduce the lock-on time. For me, that's a gift from the gods. Ok, LRMs aren't that great weapons at the moment, but

View PostMcchuggernaut, on 31 May 2015 - 01:27 PM, said:

and is even questionable for streak boats.

why would you not have sped up locking on streaks, when it adds no weight, no crits, and costs only a measly 250k? I thought that one was a no-brainer.

Edited by Kyynele, 31 May 2015 - 04:54 PM.


#14 DukeRustfield

    Member

  • PipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 1
  • 43 posts

Posted 31 May 2015 - 05:10 PM

Artemis is really good with SRMs. With LRMs they are map-dependent. Because my main LRM boat doesn't have Artemis I don't bother to get in LOS. But on my other boat, it can TRACK and kill scouts. My non-artemis boat will just be splashing missiles into the ground. It's not just tightness of groups, it's tracking and changing direction. Lock time is also a big deal.

#15 Nightmare1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,636 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationPeeking over your shoulder while eating your cookies.

Posted 31 May 2015 - 06:01 PM

Arty as in Artemis guys, not Artillery Strikes.

I know, I know; I thought the same thing when I clicked it, lol.,

#16 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,375 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 31 May 2015 - 06:30 PM

Ok, yeah. Arty = Artillery. Try to be a little clearer, and at least use the word you're going to randomly shorten once in full so people have some idea what you're talking about.


As to the topic... No.

Artemis only works in LOS, but it makes the LRM's much more powerful. Making Artemis work outside of LOS increases the strength of LRM's for indirect fire, and that's not a good way to go.

They'd still be useless at medium-high and above Elo's (that's going to happen either way because ECM etc), but at lower Elo's LRM's are very powerful particularly because of indirect fire. As things currently stand, Artemis increases the strength of LRM's when you have LOS (and thus, your opponents have LOS to you) and it should remain that way.

This means, when designing a mech, you have Interesting Choices to make. If you intend to hide in the back (*mutter* like a coward *mutter*) then Artemis is a waste of time for you, and your LRM's will be less powerful.... But you'll have more room for ammo/bigger engine/backup weapons. The player who decides instead to push up with his allies, and takes risks? His ALRM's will do much more useful damage.

This is a good tradeoff.


But, as Mr. Winter said above, LRM's and ECM and all that desperately need a full rework. Being a "Feast or Famine" weapon is a terrible design.

#17 WrathOfDeadguy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Pest
  • The Pest
  • 1,951 posts

Posted 31 May 2015 - 06:41 PM

Missile accuracy goes to **** when firing on targets out of LOS because the primary guidance system is the 'Mech's targeting computer, not the missile's onboard electronics. The 'Mech that fired the missiles sends updates on the target's position and velocity and tells the missiles what course corrections they need to make to hit the target. We know this is true because the missiles lose their locks and fly to the target's last known position as soon as the firing 'Mech no longer has a lock.

Artemis IV Fire Control System improves the quality of the targeting data being relayed between the firing unit and the missiles- nothing more, nothing less. This results in better accuracy when the firing unit has LOS to the target. Missiles fired without LOS should receive no benefit.

The trouble is that when you're relying on a spotter for locks, your missiles are getting their data second-hand. The spotter relays data to you, you get a lock, you fire your missiles. Okay... but your missiles are not communicating with the spotter, they're communicating with you. Your targeting computer has become the middleman, and the quality of the targeting information it passes on to the missiles is limited by the quality of the data coming in from the spotter and the communications equipment relaying information between the two 'Mechs (which does not benefit from Artemis IV). Which means that your Artemis is doing- or should be doing- a whole lot of nothing when you use LRMs in indirect fire mode.

Compounding this is the way MWO handles indirect fire, which in lore would be a matter of the spotter calling a target's position and velocity over the radio- the firing 'Mech would not have a target lock at all. What we see in MWO is something that should only be possible with C3 master/slave hardware (which is entirely different from the command console), which most 'Mechs simply don't have. In fact, as of right this minute, there isn't a single 'Mech in MWO that has C3. The only lore-friendly means of acquiring non-LOS target locks without C3 are TAG and NARC.

Basically, don't ask for Artemis to improve your indirect fire, because indirect fire should be less accurate than it is at present and require a lot more effort in order to score any hits at all. That's not what Artemis IV does.

Edited by PS WrathOfDeadguy, 31 May 2015 - 06:43 PM.


#18 Mechteric

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 7,308 posts
  • LocationRTP, NC

Posted 01 June 2015 - 06:45 AM

edit: I'm stupid, its not about artillery.


I guess my 2 cents is that Artemis used be a very worthwhile addition if you wanted it, but now it doesn't feel like it adds quite as much benefit as it should.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 01 June 2015 - 06:59 AM.


#19 Lightfoot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 6,612 posts
  • LocationOlympus Mons

Posted 01 June 2015 - 06:57 AM

Artemis is supposed to give a 35% accuracy buff with LoS. So I guess MWO's should only weigh a quarter ton?

#20 Leiska

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 239 posts

Posted 01 June 2015 - 08:11 AM

It's kind of funny how in the lore they've mastered walking robots, miniature fusion reactors and high energy weapons, but they can't make their missiles track heat. /facepalm





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users