Anyone else a big fan of Artemis FCS?

[abou]

At some point I realized that I was trying too hard to tinker with designs by putting Artemis IV FCS on them.  For example, I made an AXM-2N variant that swapped the large pulse laser for an ER model in the center torso, removed a medium laser, and added Artemis IV for both launchers and an extra ton of LRM ammo.

I imagine that Artemis is not always economical for every launcher, but on the larger LRMs I love it -- particularly for Inner Sphere designs.  That +2 seems to work wonders for me.

Thoughts?

[Jim1701]

Used to be a big fan but as ECM becomes more and more prolific my enthusiasm has dimmed. 

[martian]

Artemis IV is useful when used on larger launchers (LRM-20, LRM-15 or even LRM-10 sometimes, from SRMs only SRM-6 is worth it).

Problem is that ECM negates it.

[Terrion]

Artemis IV is useful when used on larger launchers (LRM-20, LRM-15 or even LRM-10 sometimes, from SRMs only SRM-6 is worth it).

Problem is that ECM negates it.

If you want to look at the numbers, there's a table at http://i53.tinypic.com/t9zj8h.jpg. I think it was originally attached to a forum post, but that seems to be gone now.

Personally, my main complaint is the incompatibility with Semi-Guided LRMs, which I prefer when available. +2 (usually more) to hit > +2 on the cluster chart IMO. Having said that, Artemis is pretty good in the Clan Invasion when there is no SG and less ECM. One of the first things I look at when customizing mechs from that era is going from an LRM-20 to an Artemis LRM-15 - nearly the same damage, but two tons lighter per launcher (plus lower heat and more ammo longevity).

[Jim1701]

If you want to look at the numbers, there's a table at http://i53.tinypic.com/t9zj8h.jpg. I think it was originally attached to a forum post, but that seems to be gone now.

Personally, my main complaint is the incompatibility with Semi-Guided LRMs, which I prefer when available. +2 (usually more) to hit > +2 on the cluster chart IMO. Having said that, Artemis is pretty good in the Clan Invasion when there is no SG and less ECM. One of the first things I look at when customizing mechs from that era is going from an LRM-20 to an Artemis LRM-15 - nearly the same damage, but two tons lighter per launcher (plus lower heat and more ammo longevity).

You can still fire SG LRM's from a Artemis equipped launcher.  You just can't combine the two abilities which would be hideously broken if you could IMO. 

[Terrion]

You can still fire SG LRM's from a Artemis equipped launcher.  You just can't combine the two abilities which would be hideously broken if you could IMO.

True, but then the Artemis tonnage is dead weight. I suppose you can mix ammo types, but then you aren't getting the most out of either your TAG either, so meh. I don't disagree that they would likely be broken if you could benefit from both though; I should probably have said it was the main oppurtunity cost rather than phrasing it as a complaint.

[Wildonion]

Used to be a big fan but as ECM becomes more and more prolific my enthusiasm has dimmed.

+1, AIVFC was awesome until the proliferation of C3 and C3i necessitated an increase in ECM coverage. I will say that, if you are using TacOps, it is easier to get around that through the use of ECCM, but then it becomes an electronic warfare arms race. Sometimes it just gets to be a headache when you have to keep track of who is covering whom. Easier to just try annihilating the guy who is throwing up the bubble in the first place. Thankfully, there is Artemis V now (love the Mad Cat III!) to try and keep missiles competitive in an ECM-heavy environment. Plus it is a nice way to balance against the power of some of the newer laser weapons.

[Martius]

Artemis is nice but I usually try to avoid it.

I use special ammunitions a lot and are also fond of indirect fire- I prefer TAG or Narc. Too bad that there are so few good Narc platforms out there...

[Fallen_Raven]

I like having it when I can get it. Unfortunately, any time I run with a large amount I end up in an ECM nightmare or a forest that cuts line of sight to less than 6 hexes.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Artemis IV is fun but not overwhelmingly great.

Artemis V almost makes me feel bad when I use it if my opponent doesn't have an AMS or ECM.

[willydstyle]

If you want to look at the numbers, there's a table at http://i53.tinypic.com/t9zj8h.jpg. I think it was originally attached to a forum post, but that seems to be gone now.

Personally, my main complaint is the incompatibility with Semi-Guided LRMs, which I prefer when available. +2 (usually more) to hit > +2 on the cluster chart IMO. Having said that, Artemis is pretty good in the Clan Invasion when there is no SG and less ECM. One of the first things I look at when customizing mechs from that era is going from an LRM-20 to an Artemis LRM-15 - nearly the same damage, but two tons lighter per launcher (plus lower heat and more ammo longevity).

I like the semi-guided/TAG combo, but the problem is that you generally have to have two different mechs to do it, so the bonuses inherent are reliant on the TAGing mech to be funtional and in position when you're ready to fire your LRMs.  In addition, if the TAG mech can't hit with TAG, then you're not going to be getting any bonus at all with your LRMs.  It's a cool combo when you can take advantage of it for indirect fire, but I find it to be underwhelming much of the time.

[Terrion]

I like the semi-guided/TAG combo, but the problem is that you generally have to have two different mechs to do it, so the bonuses inherent are reliant on the TAGing mech to be funtional and in position when you're ready to fire your LRMs.  In addition, if the TAG mech can't hit with TAG, then you're not going to be getting any bonus at all with your LRMs.  It's a cool combo when you can take advantage of it for indirect fire, but I find it to be underwhelming much of the time.

Yeah, the number of mechs that can self-designate is not impressive (pretty much just the Eyleuka, Sling, Owens and Perseus, right?). I tend to randomly stick TAG on custom mechs, so that may skew my perspective compared to canon units.

[willydstyle]

Yeah, the number of mechs that can self-designate is not impressive (pretty much just the Eyleuka, Sling, Owens and Perseus, right?). I tend to randomly stick TAG on custom mechs, so that may skew my perspective compared to canon units.

Even if you can self-TAG, the range bands of TAG and LRMs just don't work well together.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

And you're not getting the full use out of Semi-guided rounds if you're self TAGging.

[willydstyle]

And you're not getting the full use out of Semi-guided rounds if you're self TAGging.

What do you mean?

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Because the biggest benefit of Semi-Guided LRMs is the elimination of the penalties when indirect firing or by being able to pass the TMM off to a different mech (basically, give your spotter a better gunnery score so that it can hit with the TAG, while your fire support doesn't need the better gunnery score), and you can't do that if the mech that's using the TAG is firing the LRMs as well.

[willydstyle]

Because the biggest benefit of Semi-Guided LRMs is the elimination of the penalties when indirect firing or by being able to pass the TMM off to a different mech (basically, give your spotter a better gunnery score so that it can hit with the TAG, while your fire support doesn't need the better gunnery score), and you can't do that if the mech that's using the TAG is firing the LRMs as well.

But if you successfully TAG the target, you don't need to "spot" as well.  TAG effectively allows you to spot without the usual restrictions and penalties for spotting.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Yes, that's one of the penalties that's reduced.

[willydstyle]

Yes, and you can fire your weapons as well.  Like, if I'm running an Owens (hate the mech, love the mini) I would give it semi-guided just to work with its own TAG, but would probably fire my LRMs with minimum range penalties to increase the chance to hit with TAG for the rest of the force to use.

[SCC]

If you want to look at the numbers, there's a table at http://i53.tinypic.com/t9zj8h.jpg. I think it was originally attached to a forum post, but that seems to be gone now.

The weights used in that chart are off, they seem to include ammo, but not a constant amount, the ammo amount is not stated and they way it's used distorts some figures, plus endurance numbers don't seem to come into it (apart from upping the ammo to larger launchers)

[martian]

...
Thankfully, there is Artemis V now (love the Mad Cat III!) to try and keep missiles competitive in an ECM-heavy environment.

Are you sure? It seems that Artemis V cab be jammed by using Guardian ECM. At least this is my impression from the description of the equipment in Tactical Operations.

Artemis V almost makes me feel bad when I use it if my opponent doesn't have an AMS or ECM.

Yes, but there's only a half dozen of canon 'Mechs and vehicles that actually use it.

[Terrion]

The weights used in that chart are off, they seem to include ammo, but not a constant amount, the ammo amount is not stated and they way it's used distorts some figures, plus endurance numbers don't seem to come into it (apart from upping the ammo to larger launchers)

I'm guessing the ammo amounts are the subjective judgement of whoever made it as to what is "enough". Having said that, except for the -15, the ammo endurance for the LRMs is the same (the LRM 15 has 16 shots while all the others have 12, not sure why). But yeah, holding ammo endurance constant for weapons of the same type would have been a better approach.

Also, I was mistaken about the original post apparently being gone, it's at http://www.solaris7.com/fiction/FictionInfo.asp?ID=845.

[MoneyLovinOgre4Hire]

Are you sure? It seems that Artemis V cab be jammed by using Guardian ECM. At least this is my impression from the description of the equipment in Tactical Operations.

Mine too.

Yes, but there's only a half dozen of canon 'Mechs and vehicles that actually use it.

For now.

[Mohammed As`Zaman Bey]

Artemis FCS.

No thanks.

[TigerShark]

It's a throw-away piece of tonnage, IMO. I can't think of a single 'Mech it truly improves. Kind of like the AC/5 in 3025.

[NoOnesShowMonkey]

An upgraded Highlander with a Gauss Rifle and an LRM-20 with Artemis IV can really teach a man to love A4.

[Reaver]

I have a love-hate relationship with the Artemis IV system.  Which side is dominant depends mostly on who I'm playing as.  If it's a regular military with supply lines, the Artemis is one of my favorite pieces of 3050 equipment, since it in essence increases the power of the launcher to the next higher level.  LRM-10's become LRM-15s, LRM-15s become LRM-20s, etc.  Moreover, as I usually have a bad case of Hellbie dice, anything that adds pluses to my rolls is welcome.

If I'm a mercenary, however, they're one of the first things I get rid of.  The problem is not so much the effectiveness so much as the cost:  LRM munitions are expensive enough as is, and Artemis-guided munitions are twice that.  In other words, it's a cost in dead-weight tonnage on my mech or a cost in ridiculously high ammo bills eating into my profit margin.

[willydstyle]

An upgraded Highlander with a Gauss Rifle and an LRM-20 with Artemis IV can really teach a man to love A4.

Now, what we have here isn't just any ol' Highlander [salesman spits on the ground], but this here is a brand, spankin', only-been-refurbished-once Highlander IIC fresh from Operation Bulldog.

[theothersarah]

I like to use NARC or semiguided missiles for enhanced indirect fire so Artemis IV feels like a wasted ton. However if ammo reserves allow I'll run with a ton or two of Artemis IV ammo for use in direct-fire situations.

[Kobold]

I absolutely love the Archer ARC-4M, both because it has the simple DHS upgrade and A4 for added missiley goodness.