10 replies to this topic

[Crazycajun]

It makes no sense at all to run an artemis system with the current over the top repair/rearm mechanics in game

If i win a game with 2 kills and rack up bonuses i still go BACKWARDS with cbills.. not forward

god forbid if i lose a match... 3 steps more backwards..

all the while the afk/dc's make cbills


whats the point in trying to win and run the system i like it all it going do is break me...

[Voidsinger]

Okay, there are several other threads on this issue, but let me make a few points in this one.

Firstly. In the Battletech universe, just like in real life, guided weapons cost. They are far better for precise work. If you remember all the pretty televised pictures of laser guided bombs from Dersert Storm in 1991, also remember that 98% of ordnance used was dumb ordnance. The double cost of Artemis IV rounds has always been in tabletop right from the start.

Next up. Artemis may not have been meant for everybody. The only mech currently in game that comes equipped with it default is the Centurion D, which has a single LRM10 with 2 tons of ammunition. Under the current system the Centurion D would pay 30600 total for reloads after the 75% free, hardly a bankbreaker and about the same effect the XL engine has on repairs, probably less.

One thing Artemis does extremely well is make mechs with small launchers much more effective. I just had a quick run through the Technical Readout 3050 (original). The only mech above 50 tons that employs Artemis IV in the listed variant above 50 tons is the ARC-4M Archer, a dedicated LRM platform that carries a grand total of 4 tons of ammunition for 2 LRM20 launchers. Some other subvariants may use it. Total increase of rearm costs for the Arc-4M under the MWO system to use Artemis IV 30600.

The problems of MWO come from people becoming so specialised that a sensible control becomes a bankbreaker. Streaks were meant for small mechs and mechs with heat issues. The strengths were ammunition conservation, and no heat buildup unless the weapon fired and both missiles hit. It was never designed to be carried in groups of 6 launchers as a mech's only weapon. Sure, later launchers were increased in size by the Clans and subsequently the IS, but the intent of the Streak was never what has become a monster in MWO. Tabletop price of Streaks 54 000 (same as MWO).

People need to understand the cost has always been there. It is their choice to run an overspecialsed too expensive to reload mech. Part of being a mech owner is to control costs associated with running it in battle. If Artemis IV loses money, don't cry for the price of reloads to be dropped, drop the Artemis IV. Just remember, the counter to cost of reloads for missiles in energy weapons is heat. The ER and pulse weapons exemplify that. Can't put in enough heat sinks for an ER PPC, you choose a different weapon.

[Pocket Psycho]

Voidsinger, on 03 December 2012 - 07:09 PM, said:

[snip]

Well written sir, have +1 internets.

[Zirand]

It's like saying you've got a few sandboxes you can play in, one is just ok, but not the one you want to play in. The one you really want to play in you have to get kicked in the nuts repeatedly to be able to play in it. Just because that's how it's done.

The die hard fans hate any sort of deviation from the Battletech universe it seems, which is fine if it was only the die hard tabletop fans playing this game. I personally have never played the tabletop game, nor do I care to. What I do know is paying so much for ammunition that I can't progress is not fun.

[Sean von Steinike]

Zirand, on 03 December 2012 - 09:20 PM, said:

It's like saying you've got a few sandboxes you can play in, one is just ok, but not the one you want to play in. The one you really want to play in you have to get kicked in the nuts repeatedly to be able to play in it. Just because that's how it's done.

The die hard fans hate any sort of deviation from the Battletech universe it seems, which is fine if it was only the die hard tabletop fans playing this game. I personally have never played the tabletop game, nor do I care to. What I do know is paying so much for ammunition that I can't progress is not fun.

Special gear ceases to be special if everyone uses it.

[Zirand]

Sean von Steinike, on 03 December 2012 - 09:31 PM, said:

Special gear ceases to be special if everyone uses it.

Why does it have to be special? There's a weight cost, that's enough. Balancing in game by increasing post game costs is a unhealthy practice in my opinion.

[Ursh]

I carry 900 rounds for 2 lrm15 with artemis. It's over 70k to refill.

That's more expensive than a Jenner with a 300xl who gets their mech blown to pieces.

Good to know that guided missiles are more expensive than rebuilding a destroyed battlemech.

[Voidsinger]

Zirand, on 03 December 2012 - 09:42 PM, said:

Why does it have to be special? There's a weight cost, that's enough. Balancing in game by increasing post game costs is a unhealthy practice in my opinion.

You might like to note that the weight cost is the same, no matter the size of the launcher, therefore an LRM20 derives far more benefit from Artemis IV than an LRM5 or LRM10.

They haven't increased post game costs at all. The values for ammunition costs are straight out of TT for campaigns.

Now, you have to remember that Tabletop also has another balancing mechanism used for single games. Battle Value (BV). Now Battle Value increases by 20% for a launcher equipped with Artemis IV. They also add BV for each ton of ammunition (not affected by Artemis installation, that's in the launcher) depending on the weapon.

The issue right now is that PGI has no real balancing system, beyond basic weight class right now. What this means is that cost is the only way to balance low heat weapons that are less restricted by heat (note DHS is nerfed at 1.4, so don't think Energy weapon users have it easy, they shutdown on the battlefield, less a problem for support mechs)

[SaltiestRaccoon]

I absolutely agree with the OP. Fielding missile heavy mechs is not viable unless you are paying for a premium account. You won't make any money win or lose. I am a diehard fan and I think concessions in this area need to be made for balance sake. What Piranha Games is doing is punishing players for selecting specific roles on a team. Roles most people see as rather necessary. Essentially that makes the game 'pay-to-win' which Piranha has been trying to avoid, since free players can't really run Artemis+LRM mechs (or even really LRM mechs) viably and paying players can still play such builds and turn a profit.

[Naeron66]

Fielding missile heavy mechs with Artemis is not excessively viable with a premium account.

But that is fine because we can make up any c-bill losses by playing a cheaper mech for a while. Anyone can play an expensive build if they want to they just may not be able to play it all the time. If I want to build up c-bills to buy a new mech I don't do it in my Atlas Artemis LRM boat, I play a light or a medium.

[White Bear 84]

Crazycajun, on 03 December 2012 - 05:02 PM, said:

It makes no sense at all to run an artemis system with the current over the top repair/rearm mechanics in game

If i win a game with 2 kills and rack up bonuses i still go BACKWARDS with cbills.. not forward

god forbid if i lose a match... 3 steps more backwards..

all the while the afk/dc's make cbills


whats the point in trying to win and run the system i like it all it going do is break me...

I have two builds that are artemis heavy, an A1 and an Atlas. I often use up most of my LRM's by the end of the round and never earn less than 100,000.. ..so really for the life of me have no idea what the fuggles your doing