Jump to content

Pgi, Artemis-Streaks?


17 replies to this topic

#1 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 21,199 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 08:46 AM

You've demonstrated the ability to remove unintentional lockon enhancements on ATM by Artemis and spread enhancements on MRMs by Artemis.

Streaks still get a lockon enhancement by Artemis, and have had this enhancement since Artemis was first introduced. Since they do not get a 'weight' tax from Artemis, they should now be Fixed, too. You have the ability, you have already developed a way to fix it without having to create a whole different lock-on system. Time to fix Artemis-Enhanced Streaks.

Edited by Koniving, 09 July 2017 - 08:49 AM.


#2 Mad Porthos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 475 posts
  • LocationChicago, Illinois

Posted 09 July 2017 - 10:11 AM

Hey Kon, just want to point out that they have not demonstrated that at all. The MRMs never used missile LOCK/Guidance code, just the code dealing with pattern spread which of course is how Artemis was effecting MRMs, creating tighter SPREAD not tracking. In the case of streak missiles, the missiles share guidance code tracking from firing to impact and depends not on "pattern spread" but instead on that much older streak/lrm code where I think artemis's advantage is seen differently as tighter turning/tracking/course correction. THAT code was the old legacy code they said they could not alter, which meant artemis would help streaks on a mech that had artemis equipped, even if it had no other lrm style tracking weapons, or even any short range spread weapons.

Edited by Mad Porthos, 09 July 2017 - 12:23 PM.


#3 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,372 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 09 July 2017 - 11:20 AM

What Pothos said.

Also, missile locks code is a single beast, it doesn't care what missiles you have equipped. Lock times affect streaks because it's not the streaks locking on, it's the game engine making a missile lock. It'd be impossible to have lock times not be affecting streaks.

Even if you code it to require ALRM's to have Artemis give you faster lock times (theoretically possible but messy)...

Consider: you have 1 A-LRM5 and 4 Streak 6's. There only one missile lock; you've got Artemis on the 5, so you get a fast lock, that'll affect the streaks. Nothing you can do about that, so you may as well just leave it.

Edited by Wintersdark, 09 July 2017 - 11:21 AM.


#4 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 21,199 posts

Posted 09 July 2017 - 01:38 PM

View PostMad Porthos, on 09 July 2017 - 10:11 AM, said:

Hey Kon, just want to point out that they have not demonstrated that at all.

I know what you mean, but they made the claim.
"ATM"
Lock on code, etc.

I admit they claim they fixed that aspect under the claim that they stopped Artemis from enhancing MRMs and ATMs (there wasn't a caveat stating "We didn't fix ATM lock on code."

Granted their specific phrase is: "Artemis upgrade no longer improperly applies a bonus to MRM's, ATM's, and Rocket Launchers."

The bonuses it applies are spread, lock on time acceleration, missile course correction counts ("tracking strength"), and whatever else it might be.

PGI should not and cannot make the claim, unless they fixed "ALL" the bonuses that Artemis applies. If they haven't, they really need to get on that band wagon, otherwise they will nerf ATMs completely unnecessarily due to the bonuses that Artemis gives to ATM, gimping non-Artemis users.

Much the same as they have done to Streaks by way of Streaks receiving numerous unnecessary changes for exactly the same reason (the infamous "CT-only" streaks missed about 20% of the time, but because of Artemis enhanced Streaks always hitting their target, we got the "random spread" Streaks and a new "never miss, physics defying" mechanic just prior.)

Now I know this goes into asking too much despite the years of play and hundreds of dollars, but I really miss the pre-'Classic' LRMs. You know the ones... Those were awesomely useful yet beautiful, insanely fast yet dodgeable, spread yet very deadly, slow to reload yet tactically viable. Those were what LRMs should be. Those are what LRMs were. And then PGI did what PGI does, which is redoing what they already did and making it worse in the process, all because they went with 180 missiles per ton instead of the canon 120 missiles and then threw in 80% free R&R on ammo, which meant it was the only cost effective way to play, leading to a long string of completely unnecessary nerfs and tweaks and code rewrites just to drop R&R anyway.

Edited by Koniving, 09 July 2017 - 01:53 PM.


#5 Wintersdark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,372 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationCalgary, AB

Posted 09 July 2017 - 02:47 PM

View PostKoniving, on 09 July 2017 - 01:38 PM, said:

I know what you mean, but they made the claim.
"ATM"
Lock on code, etc.

I admit they claim they fixed that aspect under the claim that they stopped Artemis from enhancing MRMs and ATMs (there wasn't a caveat stating "We didn't fix ATM lock on code."

Granted their specific phrase is: "Artemis upgrade no longer improperly applies a bonus to MRM's, ATM's, and Rocket Launchers."

The bonuses it applies are spread, lock on time acceleration, missile course correction counts ("tracking strength"), and whatever else it might be.

PGI should not and cannot make the claim, unless they fixed "ALL" the bonuses that Artemis applies. If they haven't, they really need to get on that band wagon, otherwise they will nerf ATMs completely unnecessarily due to the bonuses that Artemis gives to ATM, gimping non-Artemis users.

it no longer affects the other elements of ATM's / MRM's. They can't fix the lock on issue - or won't - because that's incredibly complex and would require extensive rewrites.

Missiles don't lock on. Mechs do. And it's complex - what happens if you have multiple missile types? See my post above.

This is never going to get fixed, because it's not a big deal (just equip Artemis for faster missile locks if you want) and because fixing it would be a huge, complicated mess.

#6 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 21,794 posts
  • LocationStranded on Isla Nublar

Posted 11 July 2017 - 02:17 AM

please dont complain about this

because whats gonna happen is PGI will increase lock-on time for all missiles

and then theyll add skill nodes deep within one of the skill trees that reduce lock-on time

and youll have to take a bunch of useless skills to get them

#7 Robauke

    Rookie

  • Fire
  • Fire
  • 4 posts

Posted 22 February 2018 - 03:09 AM

So do I understand this right, a pure ssrm-build wouldnt profit from artemis, you would need e.g. a lrm launcher on that chassis as well?

#8 Throe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 812 posts

Posted 22 February 2018 - 04:43 PM

View PostKhobai, on 11 July 2017 - 02:17 AM, said:

please dont complain about this

because whats gonna happen is PGI will increase lock-on time for all missiles

and then theyll add skill nodes deep within one of the skill trees that reduce lock-on time

and youll have to take a bunch of useless skills to get them


So, they'd add them at the bottom of the Jump Jets tree?

#9 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 5,304 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 24 February 2018 - 10:32 AM

View PostWintersdark, on 09 July 2017 - 11:20 AM, said:

What Pothos said.

Also, missile locks code is a single beast, it doesn't care what missiles you have equipped. Lock times affect streaks because it's not the streaks locking on, it's the game engine making a missile lock. It'd be impossible to have lock times not be affecting streaks.

Even if you code it to require ALRM's to have Artemis give you faster lock times (theoretically possible but messy)...

Consider: you have 1 A-LRM5 and 4 Streak 6's. There only one missile lock; you've got Artemis on the 5, so you get a fast lock, that'll affect the streaks. Nothing you can do about that, so you may as well just leave it.

You can also equip and benefit from Artemis with only Streak launchers; but since they'd have to rewrite an entire section of the game system to fix it, well... I'd rather they focus on MW5 and the prospect of a full engine upgrade.

#10 Throe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 812 posts

Posted 26 February 2018 - 05:46 PM

View PostRobauke, on 22 February 2018 - 03:09 AM, said:

So do I understand this right, a pure ssrm-build wouldnt profit from artemis, you would need e.g. a lrm launcher on that chassis as well?


So far as I'm aware, Artemis being equipped on a 'Mech has always benefited lock-on time for SSRMs. I believe the reference was pointing out that there is no easy way to separate the lock-on time of a missile like the LRM from that of an SSRM unit, so there is no functional way to make it so that SSRMs *do not* benefit from Artemis being equipped, and to do so would require a substantial overhaul of the core engine for 'Mech lock-on mechanics(since, as was stated, *missles* do not perform the actual lock-on, rather the 'Mech itself does).

I'm not really sure how they affected such a change for ATMs. Indeed my hunch is that they did not, in fact, unless perhaps the situation is as you describe, where equipping something like a single LRM5+A would "enable" the ATMs equipped on the same 'Mech to benefit from Artemis, where they otherwise would not. Since that seems rather silly in the first place, I'm tempted to say lock on times are *not* different for ATMs. Some testing in the Training Grounds or Academy is probably in order.

#11 Throe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 812 posts

Posted 26 February 2018 - 05:53 PM

View PostKoniving, on 09 July 2017 - 01:38 PM, said:

... I really miss the pre-'Classic' LRMs. You know the ones... Those were awesomely useful yet beautiful, insanely fast yet dodgeable, spread yet very deadly, slow to reload yet tactically viable. Those were what LRMs should be. Those are what LRMs were.


I never got to experience those LRMs, but I like what I see there. Super high angle of approach means they can effectively deal some damage despite the existence of hard cover, but are still able to be dodged if you respond to the launch quickly enough. Obviously, Lights would have a far easier time doing so, which is probably appropriate. And since this strongly mitigates most of the hard cover present in the game today, AMS would become valuable and useful as a result.

#12 Void Angel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 5,304 posts
  • LocationParanoiaville

Posted 27 February 2018 - 06:13 PM

I've held that LRMs (and ATMs, now) need a rework for a while now. Say decreasing the tracking strength and/or spread of indirect fire while speeding up non-locked missiles, for example. I don't have a fully theorycrafted idea of what the end result would look like, but I think it would help balance the weapon system.

#13 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,724 posts

Posted 12 March 2018 - 11:58 AM

Quote

[color=#959595]otherwise they will nerf ATMs completely unnecessarily due to the bonuses that Artemis gives to ATM, gimping non-Artemis users. [/color]


Actually, when they nerfed Artemis, they ended up nerfing ATM spread at the same time- and I think that might have been because they were getting Artemis bonuses. Certainly was happening early on before the first big patch along with the 180m deadzone leftover from LRM coding.

#14 Anton Fetladral

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Universe
  • The Universe
  • 21 posts

Posted 12 March 2018 - 10:41 PM

Streaks and SRMs have never mixed in Mechwarrior or Battletech. Not sure about MRMs since I generally didn't play much of either after the 3058 or so timeline. So mixing streaks and artemis would be a significant deviation from lore.

Edited by Anton Fetladral, 12 March 2018 - 10:42 PM.


#15 GX9900 Gundam X

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 80 posts

Posted 30 March 2018 - 12:59 AM

View PostKoniving, on 09 July 2017 - 08:46 AM, said:

You've demonstrated the ability to remove unintentional lockon enhancements on ATM by Artemis and spread enhancements on MRMs by Artemis.

Streaks still get a lockon enhancement by Artemis, and have had this enhancement since Artemis was first introduced. Since they do not get a 'weight' tax from Artemis, they should now be Fixed, too. You have the ability, you have already developed a way to fix it without having to create a whole different lock-on system. Time to fix Artemis-Enhanced Streaks.


No, absolutely not.
The Streak guidance system is specifically stated to not be compatible with Artemis guidance. I don't know why you even mentioned it.

#16 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 21,199 posts

Posted 30 March 2018 - 05:19 AM

View PostGX9900 Gundam X, on 30 March 2018 - 12:59 AM, said:


No, absolutely not.
The Streak guidance system is specifically stated to not be compatible with Artemis guidance. I don't know why you even mentioned it.


Because LORE and BUGS are NOT the same.

Dude, seriously, I have video proof of it across 5 years.

You get a 25% faster lock on time with ARtemis enabled, using Streaks.

Why? There is ONE lock on code, shared by all equipment.

Take lock on code, equip something that gives 25% faster locks, bam, you get 25% faster locks. Regardless of whether you have the weight or not.

Now if there were TWO SEPARATE LOCK ON CODES, one for Streaks, and one for NOT STREAKS,... then boom, problem solved.

But there isn't.

Side note: PGI actually did not fix the unintentional lock enhancements for ATMS. They fixed the spread enhancements.

Still get 25% faster locks using ATMs with Artemis "enabled".

#17 Koniving

    Welcoming Committee

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 21,199 posts

Posted 30 March 2018 - 05:35 AM

The difference is extremely visible when targeting a soft-countered ECM user. One way to test:

Take CAP/BAP/LCAP and put it on a FRIEND's Mech.
Send friend to counter ECM. It hard counters for him, soft counters for you. You get a 25% slower lock time due to a soft counter.

Now do this with Artemis equipped (and NO ARTEMIS EQUIPMENT, i.e. ATM or Streak), and do this without Artemis Equipped.

You will get a normal lock time with Artemis equipped/enabled, even without Artemis-enabled equipment.
You will get a SLOW AS BALLS lock time, that if you and your enemy are moving too fast, will almost never finish the lock. It can sometimes take over 2 seconds to accomplish the lock depending on conditions.

Demonstration. Two Locusts, both have streaks. BAP user can get locks. Non-BAP user cannot get locks. This demonstrates the hard counter ECM versus soft counter ECM difference.
Neither user has Artemis.

This Locust does not have Artemis, but has BAP.

So, this proves the difference between soft and hard counters.
Which if you have your friend bring the BAP instead, you'll see a huge difference in lock times between you using Artemis and you not using it. You could also do this with the BAP equipped, but the difference is less noticeable. This is why if you soft counter the enemy and then use no-Artemis-enabled streaks as opposed to Artemis-enabled mech with streaks, you have undeniable proof that Artemis is giving streaks a 25% faster lock time, as it will negate the 25% slower lock time resistance of soft countered ECM, while non-Artemis Streaks struggle to get a lock as that 25% resistance proves incredibly difficult to get around.

#18 GX9900 Gundam X

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 80 posts

Posted 30 March 2018 - 08:06 PM

View PostKoniving, on 30 March 2018 - 05:19 AM, said:


Because LORE and BUGS are NOT the same.

Dude, seriously, I have video proof of it across 5 years.

You get a 25% faster lock on time with ARtemis enabled, using Streaks.

Why? There is ONE lock on code, shared by all equipment.

Take lock on code, equip something that gives 25% faster locks, bam, you get 25% faster locks. Regardless of whether you have the weight or not.

Now if there were TWO SEPARATE LOCK ON CODES, one for Streaks, and one for NOT STREAKS,... then boom, problem solved.

But there isn't.

Side note: PGI actually did not fix the unintentional lock enhancements for ATMS. They fixed the spread enhancements.

Still get 25% faster locks using ATMs with Artemis "enabled".


The additional lock speed for streaks is useful but hardly gamebreaking, we shouldn't look at this as an opportunity to actually introduce a new Streak Artemis weapon into the game.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users