16 replies to this topic

[Ruar]

Gave MRMs another spin since the velocity was boosted. My Quickdraw and ST gives me 400 +8 velocity with a max range of 476 and a missile spread of 6.2 -.31

The velocity feels good now. Using them in matches I was able to lead targets and get some hits.

Using Artemis due to the bug and having the 5% ST bonus makes the spread pretty much perfect. Firing at a stationary Awesome at 475m resulted in the missiles primarily hitting the CT, some bleed over to the ST, and a couple of missiles into the legs. The arms didn't get hit.


There is only one thing I could suggest to change.

Increase range to 525m. 450m just doesn't feel like medium range, It feels more like the edge of brawling, especially since medium lasers hit out to 500+. We really need a non-locking missile system that can be used at something beyond close range. 450m just doesn't fill the void.

Edited by Ruar, 30 June 2017 - 06:34 PM.

[Gentleman Reaper]

I have the feeling you're not aware of the bug where having no Artemis negatively impacts the spread of MRMs, Chris said that the correct spread only applies with Artemis active.

Edited by Gentleman Reaper, 30 June 2017 - 06:20 PM.

[Ruar]

Gentleman Reaper, on 30 June 2017 - 06:19 PM, said:

I have the feeling you're not aware of the bug where having no Artemis negatively impacts the spread of MRMs, Chris said that the correct spread only applies with Artemis active.

I did not, but I see it in the notes now. I'll add artemis and test some more. Thank you.

I updated the OP to reflect the bug changes.

Edited by Ruar, 30 June 2017 - 06:34 PM.

[Gentleman Reaper]

Ruar, on 30 June 2017 - 04:04 PM, said:

Using Artemis due to the bug and having the 5% ST bonus makes the spread pretty much perfect. Firing at a stationary Awesome at 475m resulted in the missiles primarily hitting the CT, some bleed over to the ST, and a couple of missiles into the legs. The arms didn't get hit.

Not sure how I honestly feel about this, MRMs should be a saturation weapon, where it heavily spreads damage but has impressive overall DPS. If most of the damage is hitting the CT then I feel this might make them a superior SRM, what are your opinions on this?.

[Ruar]

Gentleman Reaper, on 30 June 2017 - 06:41 PM, said:

Not sure how I honestly feel about this, MRMs should be a saturation weapon, where it heavily spreads damage but has impressive overall DPS. If most of the damage is hitting the CT then I feel this might make them a superior SRM, what are your opinions on this?.

I think they are saturating an area, both ST and the CT. On the Awesome test one ST was into structure by the time the CT popped so it is still a pretty big dispersion, but it feels right.

I've been using SRMs a lot over the past few months and they are still better in close than MRMs. I just like having the ability to engage in the fight at 500ish meters instead of having to wait until 300m or closer.

[Gentleman Reaper]

Ruar, on 30 June 2017 - 06:44 PM, said:

I think they are saturating an area, both ST and the CT. On the Awesome test one ST was into structure by the time the CT popped so it is still a pretty big dispersion, but it feels right.

I've been using SRMs a lot over the past few months and they are still better in close than MRMs. I just like having the ability to engage in the fight at 500ish meters instead of having to wait until 300m or closer.

Yeah, just tested a Roughneck with MRM20s and it feels accurate to lore while being fairly balanced. I'm surprised that spread is mostly normalized across all launchers, given the issue we have with LRMs and SRMs.

[Carrioncrows]

I ran a cicada with a MRM40.

And that's it.

Ended up with 387 dmg at the end of the match with 1 kill.

I was sure to have artemis on the build to get proper spread.

it definitely sandblasts the target and even pointblank spreads it out over 3 locations, but it's a step in the right direction.

I would actually be fine with a longer stream provided there was a smaller spread.

Or at the very least allow the stream to be dictated by the number of tubes.

[charliedelta76]

Are you guys happy with the MRM's Heat generation?

[Ruar]

charliedelta76, on 01 July 2017 - 05:33 PM, said:

Are you guys happy with the MRM's Heat generation?

I have only used the 10s and 20s. The heat is a little high for 450m. If they are going to be more of a short range weapon then they need to be a bit cooler. I like everything about the MRM except the range. It needs more reach and leave the heat at the current value.

[Weepy Wanebow]

are MRMs finally following the targeting reticle with the update or are they still all firing towards the initial point when the trigger was pulled regardless of mech movement?

[Ruar]

Wendigo Waltz, on 01 July 2017 - 06:25 PM, said:

are MRMs finally following the targeting reticle with the update or are they still all firing towards the initial point when the trigger was pulled regardless of mech movement?

They go to the intial firing point, but with the decreased spread with the artemis bug and the increased velocity it works.

[Twinkleblade]

Wendigo Waltz, on 01 July 2017 - 06:25 PM, said:

are MRMs finally following the targeting reticle with the update or are they still all firing towards the initial point when the trigger was pulled regardless of mech movement?

So far not fixed but they are investigating the issue.
Source:
https://www.reddit.c...changelog_here/
look for DestructicusDawn's comment and PGI_Chris answer.

[Jackal Noble]

I'm not seeing this anywhere, so I'll say it; in order to properly differentiate the roles of SRMS and MRMs and not outright leave SRMs in the dust, MRMs need to be given the mechanic where at close range (sub 200m) they 'sandblast a target akin to CSRM6 without Artemis. From 200 to 400 start to tighten, and from 400 on make them nice and accurate to better reflect their role. I also think SRMs shouldn't have a minimum range per se, but terrible spread past 300 m.

[Tarl Cabot]

The patch note appears to have not been proof read., and has there been any further updates via Twitter or such to clarify that paragraph's ambiguity meaning?

I see in the first sentence Artemis is UNINTENTIONALLY boosting to those weapons attributes. While the second sentence is what is being posted in this and other threads since it says "TO TAKE" the Artemis. If the first sentence is saying unintentionally boosting the attributes, then the last sentence should be to NOT TAKE (bad wording) instead it should have been to REMOVE.

Quote

First round PTS feedback alerted us to a current bug on PTS in which the Artemis Mech upgrade is unintentionally boosting MRM, ATM, and Rocket Launcher spread attributes. This will be fixed for the final feature release, but it still remains within this current PTS. It is advised that anyone wishing to test the new Missile weapon systems on PTS to take the Artemis Guidance Mech upgrade to test currently intended spread test values.

Even in Chris's tweet at the time of the update, the special notes are identical to what he tweeted. There is a bug when Artemis is active that is affecting the weapons' attributes, then he turns around and say to take Artemis to test currently intended spread test values???

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 01 July 2017 - 07:10 PM.

[Ruar]

JackalBeast, on 01 July 2017 - 06:43 PM, said:

I'm not seeing this anywhere, so I'll say it; in order to properly differentiate the roles of SRMS and MRMs and not outright leave SRMs in the dust, MRMs need to be given the mechanic where at close range (sub 200m) they 'sandblast a target akin to CSRM6 without Artemis. From 200 to 400 start to tighten, and from 400 on make them nice and accurate to better reflect their role. I also think SRMs shouldn't have a minimum range per se, but terrible spread past 300 m.

The spread for MRMs is pretty much instant and the stream results in them pretty much having a sandblast effect.

Why would I use SRMs over MRMs? Mainly it's the little things. SRM 6 vs MRM10 gives me almost 3 more damage for the same heat, weight, and slots. It also has a better firing pattern concentrating the damage more towards the center firing point. At 100m against an Awesome the MRMs spread damage over three and four different hit boxes while the SRMs consistently hit two or three.

If I already have good mid range weapons then I'll probably go SRMs to give me in close punch. If I'm rolling in-close weapons I'll go MRMs to help me reach out some.

Tarl Cabot, on 01 July 2017 - 07:01 PM, said:

The patch note appears to have not been proof read., and has there been any further updates via Twitter or such to clarify that paragraph's ambiguity meaning?

I see in the first sentence Artemis is UNINTENTIONALLY boosting/beneficial to those weapons. The second sentence is what is being posted in this thread to TAKE Artemis. If the first sentence is saying unintentionally boosting the attributes, then the last sentence should be to NOT take (bad wording) instead it should have been to REMOVE.

I'm certain what they are saying is the intended MRM spread is what you see when using Artemis. When they fix the bug it will mean Artemis gives no boost and the MRM spread will be what we currently see if we have Artemis equipped. Without Artemis the spread is too big and not what is intended which is what is bugged.

[Tarl Cabot]

Okay, had to dig through some more into his tweets made after the PTS patch notes. It almost sounds like they are not able to exclude Artemis from affecting those attributes, just as they have not fixed it for Streaks, so may be adjusting the final values based on Artemis being active to meet their goals.

Quote

Replying to @Wintersdark
We recommend to use it for now if you are testing new Missiles. We are taking into account artemis use or absense for our numbers.


Replying to @Chris_C_Lowrey @Wintersdark
The bug will be fixed for final release, and we will decide upon final spread values based on findings from testing.

[P10k56]

MRMs for now are rather support armor stripping weapon more then killer.
I like it that way but range for this role is too short at least 100 or 150m range buff is needed.