18 replies to this topic

[Kaylos Thex]

I have been doing some training grounds testing of SRM combos.

My conclusion is that SRM 4's at 130m is the best combination of accuracy, crit space, and ammo efficiency.

At 130m, the criss cross nature of SRM shots tends to land all the missiles on the same spot. Any more and you spray them, and they don't seem to group up again until almost point blank range.

I had been using streaks and SRM 6's on my DDC builds until recently. But I found I needed to be able to aim the SRM's to disarm mechs, and I wanted to save weight by not going full SRM6 heavy.

Of course, if you are hard point limited, then an SRM 6 might be more firepower, but I find that they tend to waste missiles for more heat buildup.

What are your thoughts?

[Dusty Sandals]

Agree with you totally. I ran 2 SRM6 with arty on a centurion AL and found the to be a bit lacking for eight tons of weaponry. I dropped down to two SRM4 without arty and found them to be a much better combo. For four tons I can target a single part on an enemy mech out to about 150m or so. 8 rockets still pack a punch especially when packed together like that. SRM4>SRM6

Cheers

[sh4rpedge]

I find it easier to hit with the SRM4s due to less spread. Haven't measured the meters where it is effective , but with artemis and SRM4s, the job gets done.

[Lyoncet]

I know someone did an in-depth analysis a while back, if anyone can provide the link.

Generally I've switched to SRM 4 because the heat from those two errant missiles and the extra tonnage. However, on a few mechs I run 6s. My CN9-A, when I run it without ballistics, packs a 275 standard engine, so it's sturdy enough and quick enough to pretty much ram the enemy and alpha strike at point blank. I also often use the 6 on my DRG-1C if I have the tonnage, mostly because it's there to help me shotgun lights that are biting my ankles, so the extra spread can help me nick them without getting shut down by ECM and while still helping when I find a nice Atlas who's not paying me any mind. Also on some brawler builds, I tend to like SRM 6A, if they can spare the tonnage and if they're too slow to reliably close (like the CTF-2X).

But yeah, in general I've switched to 4s for the same reasons you mentioned.

[John MatriX82]

My rule is generally is:
-I'm piloting a slow mech (assault) with 2-3 missile hardpoints, I have room and weight for them, then I place ASRM6's. They allow you to engage big and nearly static targets up to 200m

-I'm piloting a fast or very fast brawler mech (striker/harasser), I go for vanilla SRM6. This because I can close in (the spread isn't a problem), retaining the punch and maybe I don't have slots or tons (or both) to store Artemis FCS

-I'm piloting a slow to mid-speed mech, I'm strict on tons and room or ammo space and yet I need to engage at least from 200m or under, then vanilla SRM4's are the best.

-I'm piloting a mech that isn't fast enough to let me close in for vanilla SRM6's, I don't have many launchers, then I like ASRM4s. Later on I'm using them on the 4SP and they pack a very, very tight punch, that when you lead and aim well it's devastating on single sections.

SRM2's.. either I have 4 or 5 of them or I'd rather take Streaks over them even without having ECM capability. Of course artemis is worthless with SRM2s, for the same tonnage you place a single SRM4.

Edited by John MatriX82, 11 April 2013 - 08:07 AM.

[Jay Z]

I ran 2 SRM4s on my Jenner JR7-D for a while. Quite powerful although at this speed, I prefer Streaks. SRM4s also reload slightly faster which helps it catch up on the SRM6.

[Raso]

I run 4 SRM4s on my Jagermech. With out Artemis SRM4s have a better spread than SRM6s so they seem to be more useful to me.

[Royalewithcheese]

You should try them with Artemis - best of both worlds (That said, when I ran SRM4s I liked the spread quite a bit.)

[Kaylos Thex]

I guess I should mention that I do find that if a mech has a static (no model changing) SRM 4 launcher, then I do consider replacing it with a SRM 6. I get the shot grouping of the 4 with the extra alpha of a 6. CTF-2X and Atlas RS are good examples of this.

I suppose that in the future we will not be able to do this, since they are going to retrofit the older mechs with wyswyg (what you see, what you get) hardpoints like the Highlander and Jagermech.

[TruePoindexter]

Mechspecs did an analysis on this:

If I don't mount Artemis I use SRM4s or SSRM2s. If I can mount Artemis I will use SRM6s.

[Ghost Inc]

Very interesting thread.

After the SRM Nerf, I toyed around with my Brawler DDC and didn't use my 4SP anymore.

After you suggestions, I will try 2xSRM4 with Artemis, 1 LL, 3 ML on a 245 Std Engine for the Hunchback.
Good Idea?

With the ATLAS I used 3xSRM6 with Artemis, 2 Medium Lasers, 1 AC20 and a 325 Engine.
Now I load 2 LL, 3xSSRM2 and the AC20.

While the former performed absolutely stellar pre-Patch, the latter performs well enough post patch. The Artemis SRM6 Build seems to be very inconsistent due to the lack of range. Should there be any buff to SRMs in the future, I will most certainly return to the good old Brawler DDC.

What did you do with your DDC?

[Ryebear]

The amazing video ignores the real world issue of the way PGI implemented SRMs to give them a flashy Macross Missile Massacre flight path. The missiles salvo flies apart and attempts to converge where the crosshairs are. But this doesnt take into account attempting to hit a moving target by leading the shots and having the missiles attempt to converge way off in the horizon.

Edited by Ryebear, 14 April 2013 - 09:28 PM.

[Hex Pallett]

In short, SRM4+Artemis for better accuracy and better heat efficiency, SRM6 without Artemis for b*tch slappin'.

Since now SRM has lower numerical damage and better splash, it's basically a quid pro quo.

[Ghost Inc]

Helmstif, on 14 April 2013 - 09:32 PM, said:

In short, SRM4+Artemis for better accuracy and better heat efficiency, SRM6 without Artemis for b*tch slappin'.

Since now SRM has lower numerical damage and better splash, it's basically a quid pro quo.

So no SRM6 + Artemis for Atlas DDC ?

[Hex Pallett]

IncorporeaL GhosT, on 15 April 2013 - 08:33 AM, said:

So no SRM6 + Artemis for Atlas DDC ?

Purely personal preferences. This is what I run on my DDC.

[EvangelionUnit]

IncorporeaL GhosT, on 14 April 2013 - 03:45 PM, said:

Very interesting thread.

After the SRM Nerf, I toyed around with my Brawler DDC and didn't use my 4SP anymore.

After you suggestions, I will try 2xSRM4 with Artemis, 1 LL, 3 ML on a 245 Std Engine for the Hunchback.
Good Idea?

i have a 250 std engine in my 4SP, 5 med laser, 2 SRM4+A, 4 tons ammo for said missiles and some DHS
with the extra ammo and the bit faster reload i don't have to think about the missiles i waste left and right

Helmstif, on 15 April 2013 - 09:27 AM, said:

Purely personal preferences. This is what I run on my DDC.

no heatsinks in the engine ?

Edited by EvangelionUnit, 15 April 2013 - 09:41 AM.

[NRP]

Always run Artemis if you can.

[Hex Pallett]

EvangelionUnit, on 15 April 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

no heatsinks in the engine ?

I always fill the engine HS slots at last. Filling the crit slots with DHS gives a chance for them to be destroyed first instead of the weapons.

[Salis777]

Another point to consider with SRMs is the mech specific layout. For example, ASRM6s on a Cent-A i find way way better than on a Treb 3C, due to the split hardpoints. Its not just a question of 6v4. Although 4 can certainly mitigate bad missile layouts.