SYSTEM TEST: SRM/SSRM Comprehensive Breakdown

Discussion in 'Mech Build and System Tests' started by Michael, Mar 26, 2013.

  1. Michael

    Michael Grand Poobah Staff Member

    4,793
    796
    234
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JZ9AUgR4qA
     
  2. Jacob Ling

    Jacob Ling Benefactor

    220
    35
    58
    LOVING it!

    Wow interesting that the SRM6 isn't the king of unguided missiles but that the SRM4 is? I might have to re-do some of my mech builds. No problem for me cause the SRM4 has better heat and a faster Rate of Fire!

    Do you have any plans for doing LRMS?

    You know, you should join our clan! We'd love to help with all the testing and you are a pretty good pilot from what I have seen (you have killed me several times but I almost got you once!!)
     
  3. skribs

    skribs Legendary Member

    1,623
    142
    48
    It would appear that with Artemis, the SRM6 is better per missile slot, but without Artemis the SRM4 is better.

    I just put the chart at 2:07 into a spreadsheet, and then multiplied the number of salvos based on the number of tons the base weapon costs (didn't factor in ammo, although ammo would go up in terms of the number of missiles per salvo).
    Weapon : 270m Salvos * Tons : 135m Salvos * Tons : 65m Salvos * Tons
    SRM2 : 39 : 26 : 27
    SRM4 : 42 : 24 : 24
    SRM6 : 96 : 24 : 27
    ASRM2 : 44 : 36 : 50
    ASRM4 : 42 : 33 : 33
    ASRM6 : 40 : 24 : 28
    SSRM2 : 27 : 30 : 25.5

    It would appear that 135m and under, all non-artemis SRMs and ASRM6 are good. ASRM2 is definitely not worth it and ASRM4 probably isn't (unless you already have Artemis and can't fit 6's). At 270m, all ASRMs and SRMs (except 6) are about the same. SSRM2s are slightly worse up close (assuming perfect aim, they would pick up as accuracy fell) but are better at 270m than any of the other options here.

    My conclusion (and now I'll watch the rest of the video) is that you should go SRM4, ASRM6, or SSRM2.

    This means my 2xSRM6 treb gets 2 free tons (probably going to DHS) and it was a good decision to keep my Dragon 1N as my dragon that kept SRMs when I varietized my builds, as it has 2xSRM4 instead of 1xSRM6.
     
  4. Mythweaver

    Mythweaver Advanced Member

    400
    1
    22
    Excellent Video Michael. Thank You for taking so much of your time to bring us something so helpfull.

    Myth.
     
  5. Darkblood

    Darkblood Active Member

    50
    0
    12
    What worries me about this analysis is that the target is also a Catapult and the head box on those things is gigantic.

    That may (not sure) make the number of "salvos to kill" more sensitive to spread, since you end up putting more "random damage" to the head (by random damage I mean you are aiming on the torso but getting head shots). On your video you can see that the head is being hit a lot. I didn´t watch them all, but I saw one where the head was red right before the kill shot. Aren´t you getting lots of head-shot kills?
     
  6. Michael

    Michael Grand Poobah Staff Member

    4,793
    796
    234
    It's possible however the important part of the testing was consistency. Whether it's a head kill shot or a chassis kill shot or whatever the baseline is there and the factors within each test group are consistent.
     
  7. skribs

    skribs Legendary Member

    1,623
    142
    48
    I just wanted to let you know how much this guide has helped me, Michael. I dropped the ASRM6s on my Stalker 5M for SRM4s, because per-ton they're basically the same effectiveness, and grabbed myself 10 additional heat sinks. My first drop with this build was my best drop yet with this chassis. I've also played around with it on my Trebuchets with great results.
     
  8. skribs

    skribs Legendary Member

    1,623
    142
    48
    Another thing I'm curious about is the difference in spread between SRM6 launchers with varied amounts of tubes. Are they more accurate when fired through 2 tubes instead of 6?
     
  9. Michael

    Michael Grand Poobah Staff Member

    4,793
    796
    234
    That is a variable which could be endless depending on which mechs have which tubes etc and is something that individuals should feel free to test finding in which mechs they want to use.
     
  10. skribs

    skribs Legendary Member

    1,623
    142
    48
    I think the Raven 3L with a pair of SRM6s would be a good test. I'll play with it later.

    I just tested it on River City Night testing ground. Test point was the dark patch on the ground on the C4/D4 line, firing at the Atlas from 216m away. I only did one test for each, but it was all I needed. With the single tube, I used 9 volleys, each volley was a stream of missiles that hit pretty darn close to where I was aiming. With the 6-tube launcher, it took me 26 volleys, and they were hitting all over, sometimes even missing. This actually changes my mind on using less tubes for SRMs...it might not be as good in terms of DPS or for hitting lights, but it makes assault-killers even better.
     
  11. Durant Carlyle

    Durant Carlyle Space Pimp

    114
    4
    125
    Using an SRM6 in a Jenner is a good idea. The Jenner only has four tubes, so it fires a volley of four and then a volley of two. They are more accurate that way, but the drawback of having to accurately aim for that much longer can sometimes be a killer.
     
  12. Scaarz Fodder

    Scaarz Fodder New Member

    18
    0
    2
    I run two SRM6s in my X5 [two sets of launchers, two tubes each]. I get very accurate shots. I think I have a vid laying around I'll post up later today. Takes a bit of practice to hit on the run, but once you get it down it's great. It is a different experience from a normal SRM wad blowing blast and takes a bit more finesse.
     
  13. Chalkman

    Chalkman New Member

    22
    0
    2
    Has the effectiveness of various SRM launchers changed relative to each other since the missile nerf? Is the SRM-6 now better than the SRM-4? Just wondering if anyone has done testing with this. I might have to do some if no one has updated this information.
     
  14. Michael

    Michael Grand Poobah Staff Member

    4,793
    796
    234
    No changes have been made to launchers since the missile nerf patch.

    In the future, when there is another patch affecting these weapon systems, MechSpecs will conduct another test (this time with a live partner in a fully outfitted Battlemech) to determine the current top of the line / best system.
     
  15. skribs

    skribs Legendary Member

    1,623
    142
    48
    Pardon me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this testing done after the damage nerf? Or was it pre-nerf?
     
  16. Michael

    Michael Grand Poobah Staff Member

    4,793
    796
    234
    This video was done on March 25, 2013 as per the clip inside the video itself.
     
  17. phoenix182

    phoenix182 New Member

    2
    0
    1
    I loved seeing this test, but wanted to look at things a bit differently, so I conducted my own tests. Here's what I did:

    First of all, I wanted to know if using multiple launchers at once mattered, and exactly how the number and location of launcher mattered, so I ran all of the tests using a 2 launcher commando, a 3 launcher centurion, a 6 launcher catapult, and a 4 launcher stalker. All the mechs used had 6 or greater missile tubes on each hardpoint location because I personally hate follow up salvos due to restricted tubes (too much harder to stay on target during a firefight at 130kph).

    I ran each test at 3 different ranges (250m, 150m, 50m), 5 times each, and I made sure that the elevation between me and my target was equivalent because it seems that firing from well below or well above sometimes changes the numbers. My target each time was a testing grounds atlas (because I wanted the big center torso with no odd angles), and I always lined up on his center chest piece.

    What I found after all of that was that neither the number of launchers, nor the type of mech (light, medium, heavy, assault) seemed to matter. The number of missiles fired to get a kill were always roughly the same. In order to get a single set of workable data I decided to focus on the 3 launcher results, but remember that the overall rates are roughly the same, regardless of how many launchers are used.

    I averaged the number of salvos fired at each range with each type of srm, and computed the results as found here:

    SRMs vs Atlas

    So on average I had to fire 87 missiles to kill an atlas overall. It was 95 at 250m, 88 at 150m, and 78 at 50m. That's ~8% fewer at 150m than 250m, and ~11% fewer at 50m than 150m (~18% at 50m than 250m). In other words, there's a roughly 20% difference between killing at 50m than at 250m (all other things being equal, which they're usually not), and roughly half that (10%) in between.

    When not taking into account slots or tons for the actual weapons themselves there's only 1 instance where srm4s are equal or superior to srm6 & Asrm6, and that's with the total missiles fired at 150m. By every other metric and in every other situation 6's will always be preferable (providing you have the slots and tons to hold them).

    This shows we can even stop talking about the number of shots per ton of ammo. Even if it was just you versus 8 atlases the differences are negligible. 640-736 missiles with an srm4, 664-808 with an srm6, and 576-720 with an Asrm6. There's never even a full ton of difference between them, though choosing at Artemis 6 over a regular 6 is very close to 1 ton difference across the board. Of course, you then lose that ton and slot for the Artemis itself, so in that respect it's a complete wash.

    That brings us down to what is, in my mind, the most critical two metrics: time to kill and the heat generated to do it. Looking at time required we see that either 6 launcher is 6-8 seconds faster to the kill. That's roughly 20-33% quicker. So if we know that the number of tons of ammo is roughly fixed, but either 6 launcher gets you kills 20-33% faster than a 4 launcher...

    Heat is less stark, 12-19% difference. Moreover, the regular srm6 is honestly not much (if any) better than the 4 in this regard. This was a big bummer to me since I had hoped to prove that the tons/spaces freed up by going with an arm4 allowed for superior heat dissipation through extra heat sinks, but this isn't the case. With 3 launchers you only gain 1 double heat sink (and 2 tons) by choosing 4 over a 6, which does even out the heat, but you lose 20% of your kill speed. With 6 launchers you gain 2 heat sinks (and 4 tons) with a 4 over an artemis 6, which is again pretty much a wash on heat. So heat for heat, they're the same, and the only salvation is the extra weight saved.

    ------------------------------------------------------

    Bottom line (for me)

    First off, SRMs should be fired at 50m or under whenever possible. That's 20% faster kills, less heat, and less ammo used.

    If you can close to 50m with an artemis-6 mech, you'll kill your enemy 33% faster than with srm4s, using 10% less ammo, and dissipating the same heat (after accounting for extra heat sinks). At 250m you'll kill them 20% faster than srm4s, using the same ammo, and dissipating the same heat (again, after extra heat sinks).

    With standard srm6's you'll still kill ~20-25% faster than with srm4s, but you'll use ~10% more missiles while dissipating the same or slightly less heat (after accounting for extra heat sinks).

    What's more, the number of shots you have to fire to accomplish this task is generally 2 less with an srm6, and 3 less with an artemis 6. That's 25-40% fewer chances to miss, have AMS snipe them down, etc. That tells me that if I have space and tonnage available, and if I'm a good enough shot, Artemis 6 is the DRASTICALLY superior choice. If I'm a good shot, but the mech is just crippled for slots and tons, then regular 6 still allows me quicker kills for equivalent costs.

    I'd much rather face an Atlas for 8 seconds in my A1 with Artemis 6's, than for 13 seconds in my A1 with SRM4s.
     
  18. Michael

    Michael Grand Poobah Staff Member

    4,793
    796
    234
    The original testing data is outdated. Weapon stats and abilities are changing so rapidly it is almost pointless doing comprehensive system analysis on video because next week Paul could change it again. Once the weapons changes settle down a bit I will do more testing.
     
  19. phoenix182

    phoenix182 New Member

    2
    0
    1
    [quote author=Michael date=1371359234 link=topic=766.msg10352#msg10352]
    The original testing data is outdated. Weapon stats and abilities are changing so rapidly it is almost pointless doing comprehensive system analysis on video because next week Paul could change it again. Once the weapons changes settle down a bit I will do more testing.
    [/quote]
    Yeah, I have a feeling that until official launch we're riding a roller coaster. I'm a missile sort of guy though, and the Artemis issue has always weighed on me so I really wanted to take a closer look. Actually I was hoping to love 4s, so I could switch and save the weight/space, but right now it just doesn't fit my idea of reasonable...at least not when boating or using srms as primary damage. If it's just a single rack or 2, supporting other weapons, then it looks a lot more attractive.
     

Share This Page