Jump to content

Streaks and Regular SRMs (IN CANON)


121 replies to this topic

Poll: SRMs (298 member(s) have cast votes)

Whats the difference between regular SRMs and Streaks? (IN CANON)

  1. They both lock on, Streaks MUST be locked on to fire IN CANON. (138 votes [45.54%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 45.54%

  2. Voted ONLY Streaks lock on IN CANON. (165 votes [54.46%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 54.46%

If you answered ONLY Streaks lock on, did you MAINLY play MW4?

  1. Voted Yes (39 votes [13.54%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 13.54%

  2. No (139 votes [48.26%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 48.26%

  3. Both lock on. (110 votes [38.19%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 38.19%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#61 CCC Dober

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,881 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 10:12 AM

View Post3rdworld, on 16 July 2012 - 09:57 AM, said:


I was unable to find a direct mention in The Decision at Thunder rift concerning the targeting method of SRMs. I only found they are "direct" fire missiles. Even if it does mention it, this book cannon relevancy for targeting method is questionable. In several locations in talks about getting targeting locks for energy weapons. Example:
...


That's why I gave two sources that were several years apart. They state the same thing: SRMs are unguided. If you doubt the 'canonicity' of the novels, now that is your opinion. That they are canon is a fact beyond any reasonable doubt. Feel free to argue against this.

#62 Nazraith

    Member

  • Pip
  • 14 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 10:13 AM

The only truly unguided racks in canon i.e. TT are the Rocket Launchers. RL-10, -15, and -20 are are cheap, unguided, one-shot missile launchers. http://www.sarna.net...ket_Launcher_15

Naz

#63 Teirdome

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 180 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 16 July 2012 - 10:17 AM

View PostBlack Rock Shooter, on 16 July 2012 - 08:25 AM, said:

* SRMs are fire-and-forget missiles with dumb processors that could in theory just lock themselves onto a target but in reality would have problems actually identifying said target once it moved, occasionally hitting the tree next to a BattleMech rather than the 'Mech itself because they thought the tree was the 'Mech. This is because they're radar guided. Why do I think this? Because the NARC Beacon can "call" standard missiles to target, so the SRM's primary sensor must be radio-based.


This is an incorrect assumption unfortunately. NARC-sensitive ammo for SRMs and LRMs is a different ammo type that costs double the amount of normal ammo. It is the NARC ammo type that adds the NARC homing capability to SRMs. This means we cannot make assumptions about the SRM's native guidance systems based off of NARC.

#64 Kelthar

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 75 posts
  • LocationCA

Posted 16 July 2012 - 10:23 AM

View PostDamascas, on 15 July 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:


Then why do they not have a to-hit penalty?


Better to ask why MRMs have one. SRMs predate MRMs by 400 years in BT. Range perhaps?

I believe, by Canon, LRMs don't have guidance either, until you get the Artemis IV system.

#65 Kodiak Knight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 102 posts
  • LocationRuhr-Area, NRW, Germany

Posted 16 July 2012 - 10:24 AM

View PostBurnsidhe, on 15 July 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

Note the word "sophisticated." It doesn't say it lacks *any* guidance systems, just that the guidance systems aren't sophisticated.

SRMs have rudimentary guidance systems, basic telemetry guidance from the mech's targeting computer and sufficient avionics to get them to fly towards the target over a short distance. Accuracy and the limited amount of propellant fuel are why the missiles are short ranged compared to LRMs.

Both SRMs and Streak SRMs can lock on. Streak SRMs require a lock on to fire.

It comes down to this; In tabletop, weapons fire is declared before the results of the hits are known. If a player wants a mech to fire SRMs, the SRMs will fire and generate heat whether they hit or miss. Streak SRMs will only fire and generate heat if the dice indicate that the missiles will hit. Otherwise, they will not fire.

This conserves ammunition and reduces overall heat generated during the battle.

QFT

#66 3rdworld

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,562 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 10:27 AM

View PostCCC Dober, on 16 July 2012 - 10:12 AM, said:

That's why I gave two sources that were several years apart. They state the same thing: SRMs are unguided. If you doubt the 'canonicity' of the novels, now that is your opinion. That they are canon is a fact beyond any reasonable doubt. Feel free to argue against this.


Can you point me to the location these books mention SRM's being unguided? Direct fire means they travel straight at the target, not that they are not guided. The Dying Time I did not respond to, because I only found it mentioning SRMs being guided by Artemis which you covered in your original post.

There is a difference between me stating a book isn't canon, and saying the relevancy of a certain aspect of the book is questionable. I never said the novels are not canon. But the book does clearly state that energy weapons "lock" on to their targets. If you want to cherry pick its SRM method (that until you give me a chapter number, i do not concede exists) out of the book with clear targeting inaccuracies be my guest. Warrior: En Garde states that SRM's lock in chapter 3.

EDIT:

Actually The Dying Time does mention non-Artemis SRMs. Chapter 33

"Suddenly, the rest of the Skye Separatists charged the bay doors. Michael Taylor and Roger Karns stepped up beside their company commander, showering the enemy 'Mechs with long-range missiles. Jason Fry's Panther blasted a rebel Assassin with its PPC and semi-guided short-range missiles. A howl of rage cut across the comm channel. Brewer looked up just in time to see Dale Ross' Grim Reaper charging the onrushing rebel 'Mechs. That seemed to be a signal. Almost as one, Brewer's Mech Warriors flung their machines into a wild assault on the enemy."

Edited by 3rdworld, 16 July 2012 - 10:40 AM.


#67 CCC Dober

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,881 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 10:33 AM

View Post3rdworld, on 16 July 2012 - 10:27 AM, said:


Can you point me to the location these books mention SRM's being unguided? Direct fire means they travel straight at the target, not that they are not guided. The Dying Time I did not respond to, because I only found it mentioning SRMs being guided by Artemis which you covered in your original post.

There is a difference between me stating a book isn't canon, and saying the relevancy of a certain aspect of the book is questionable. I never said the novels are not canon. But the book does clearly state that energy weapons "lock" on to their targets. If you want to cherry pick its SRM method (that until you give me a chapter number, i do not concede exists) out of the book with clear targeting inaccuracies be my guest. Warrior: En Garde states that SRM's lock in chapter 3.


Look, I would love to quote directly, but I can not assume that you speak german, can I?
Therefore you are free to look up the definitions in the last pages of the sources I have mentioned. If I were to trust google to translate it back to English, what would you assume would happen? Google translator is notorious for a reason and I really don't trust it with details such as these. Besides, the page numbers would be different, so it's moot anyway. You need the physical book or a PDF file of both sources, if you have them.

#68 3rdworld

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,562 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 10:45 AM

View PostCCC Dober, on 16 July 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

Look, I would love to quote directly, but I can not assume that you speak german, can I?
Therefore you are free to look up the definitions in the last pages of the sources I have mentioned. If I were to trust google to translate it back to English, what would you assume would happen? Google translator is notorious for a reason and I really don't trust it with details such as these. Besides, the page numbers would be different, so it's moot anyway. You need the physical book or a PDF file of both sources, if you have them.



SRM: Abbreviation for "Short-Range Missiles", direct-trajectory missiles with high-explosive or armor-piercing explosive warheads. They have a range of less than one kilometer, and are accurate only at ranges of less than 300 meters. They are more powerful, however, than LRMs.

That is what my copy of Decision at Thunder Rift states. My copy of The Dying Time does not have definitions.

#69 Kodiak Knight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 102 posts
  • LocationRuhr-Area, NRW, Germany

Posted 16 July 2012 - 10:46 AM

I would be happy to offer my services as a translator if you can send me the relevant passage.
However I would debate that the novels in any language other than the original do not actually count as canon, because translation errors are quick to happen. So we would have to cross-check the relevant sections with the original novel.

#70 Bloodweaver

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 890 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 11:06 AM

View PostCCC Dober, on 16 July 2012 - 08:13 AM, said:

Look guys, I know you want your cookies, but plain and simple SRMs are indeed unguided. You can replace the warheads and add Artemis, but then you are not talking about the same thing... The only statement on sarna regarding SRM guidance refers to Artemis and Streaks. Also the fact that basic SRMs are immune to Electronic Warfare basically says it all. There is simply no guidance system to confuse because they have none. It's all there, so don't even try to sneak in free guidance systems when you actually have to pay for them.

Sarna's articles on MRMs, rocket launchers, and dead-fire missiles are all specifically described as not having guidance systems. Its article on SRMs states they are less sophisticated than LRMs - not that they lack guidance systems. The article on dead-fire missiles, in fact, specifically states that SRMs do have guidance systems. And the fact that SRMs benefit from Artemis IV and NARC necessitates they have some sort of guidance system.

View PostTeirdome, on 16 July 2012 - 10:17 AM, said:

This is an incorrect assumption unfortunately. NARC-sensitive ammo for SRMs and LRMs is a different ammo type that costs double the amount of normal ammo. It is the NARC ammo type that adds the NARC homing capability to SRMs. This means we cannot make assumptions about the SRM's native guidance systems based off of NARC.

The fact you have to use more expensive ammo to get the benefit of homing SRMs seems damning at first - until you realize that the same requirement applies to LRMs as it does to SRMs. They both need the pricier ammo. Therefore it makes no sense to say that because they need more expensive ammo in order to benefit from Artemis/NARC, that means that standard ammo is unguided - the same property applies to LRMs just as much as it does to SRMs. Unless LRMs are unguided too, the costlier ammo does nothing to indicate SRMs are unguided.

View PostWardenWolf, on 16 July 2012 - 08:33 AM, said:

It depends what you consider in-canon. I have played MW2 (original+GB exp+mercs), MW3 (original+exp), MW4 (original+mercs) and in *none* of them did SRMs ever lock-on. They were always dumb-fire, straight-shooting missiles.

SRMs did lock on in MW3. So did MRMs, for that matter(which was a mistake).

#71 CCC Dober

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,881 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 11:13 AM

View Post3rdworld, on 16 July 2012 - 10:45 AM, said:



SRM: Abbreviation for "Short-Range Missiles", direct-trajectory missiles with high-explosive or armor-piercing explosive warheads. They have a range of less than one kilometer, and are accurate only at ranges of less than 300 meters. They are more powerful, however, than LRMs.

That is what my copy of Decision at Thunder Rift states. My copy of The Dying Time does not have definitions.


Okay, you're asking for it, there you go:

Spoiler


@Blood
I have done some research and have sources to back it up that date back to a time before sarna probably even existed (1986) and it's funny that the same sources are consistent up to 2002. In both of them it is clearly stated that they are unguided. You have to translate it or just take it as a given. The fact that SRMs can be made to lock on target requires special munitions and/or upgrades to the launcher. The basic system is as dumb as they come. Less sophisticated is just an euphemism for the same thing. It just sounds nicer but the result is the same. Bone stock SRMs are dumb, LRMs are not.

Edited by CCC Dober, 16 July 2012 - 11:19 AM.


#72 3rdworld

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,562 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 11:17 AM

View PostBloodweaver, on 16 July 2012 - 11:06 AM, said:

Sarna's articles on MRMs, rocket launchers, and dead-fire missiles are all specifically described as not having guidance systems. Its article on SRMs states they are less sophisticated than LRMs - not that they lack guidance systems. The article on dead-fire missiles, in fact, specifically states that SRMs do have guidance systems.


We can argue novels round and round. But I find this the best evidence for a rudimentary guiding system on SRMs. Dead-Fire would be the same as normal warheads if SRMs did not contain some guidance system.

#73 Teirdome

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 180 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 16 July 2012 - 11:22 AM

View Post3rdworld, on 16 July 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:


We can argue novels round and round. But I find this the best evidence for a rudimentary guiding system on SRMs. Dead-Fire would be the same as normal warheads if SRMs did not contain some guidance system.


This is completely incorrect.

All dead-fire show is that Kurita is a bunch of crazies who removed all guidance from missiles.

This means that the dead-fire missiles cannot adjust mid-flight for factors such as wind and gravity. It does not mean that SRMs natively have the capability to lock-on or track a target.

#74 CCC Dober

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,881 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 11:31 AM

MRMs and Rocket launchers have nothing to do with SRMs, so the best thing you can do is to keep things separated as intended.
Apples and Oranges, really ...

#75 WardenWolf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • 1,684 posts
  • LocationTerra

Posted 16 July 2012 - 11:33 AM

View PostBloodweaver, on 16 July 2012 - 11:06 AM, said:

SRMs did lock on in MW3. So did MRMs, for that matter(which was a mistake).

Huh, several playthroughs of the campaign on that and I never noticed! Granted, I generally don't take SRMs on my configs... sorry for the mis-statement.

#76 Teirdome

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 180 posts
  • LocationColorado

Posted 16 July 2012 - 11:34 AM

View PostBloodweaver, on 16 July 2012 - 11:06 AM, said:

The fact you have to use more expensive ammo to get the benefit of homing SRMs seems damning at first - until you realize that the same requirement applies to LRMs as it does to SRMs. They both need the pricier ammo. Therefore it makes no sense to say that because they need more expensive ammo in order to benefit from Artemis/NARC, that means that standard ammo is unguided - the same property applies to LRMs just as much as it does to SRMs. Unless LRMs are unguided too, the costlier ammo does nothing to indicate SRMs are unguided.


Agreed. That's the point I was trying to make. That NARC can't be used as a baseline because it neither shows that SRMs have built-in homing capabilities or do not.

#77 3rdworld

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,562 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 11:38 AM

View PostCCC Dober, on 16 July 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:


@Blood
I have done some research and have sources to back it up that date back to a time before sarna probably even existed (1986) and it's funny that the same sources are consistent up to 2002. In both of them it is clearly stated that they are unguided. You have to translate it or just take it as a given. The fact that SRMs can be made to lock on target requires special munitions and/or upgrades to the launcher. The basic system is as dumb as they come. Less sophisticated is just an euphemism for the same thing. It just sounds nicer but the result is the same. Bone stock SRMs are dumb, LRMs are not.


That just isn't true. I gave you a source where it says that SRM's lock coming from a commando written in 1988. The books time frame is before the clan invasion and the first Commando with an Artemis system wasn't produced until 3050. Additionally your source in The Dying Time states that a Panther fired semi-guided SRMs and a PPC.

#78 CCC Dober

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,881 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 11:39 AM

No gentlemen, you don't get free guidance because the upgrades to enable that are supposed to be paid for. Furthermore, if they would lock, they would also become susceptible to Electronic Warfare. As it stands, they are immune. Deduction: no guidance systems to jam.
Common sense. It really must be a super power >.>


View Post3rdworld, on 16 July 2012 - 11:38 AM, said:


That just isn't true. I gave you a source where it says that SRM's lock coming from a commando written in 1988. The books time frame is before the clan invasion and the first Commando with an Artemis system wasn't produced until 3050. Additionally your source in The Dying Time states that a Panther fired semi-guided SRMs and a PPC.


It's funny how you pick on obvious mistakes that were set straight in the definitions at the end of the book. How about accepting the fact that even authors can miss stuff even after repeated proofreading? If you are adamant about this, I suggest you find more consistent 'mistakes' that may actually prove a point, not an exception.

Edited by CCC Dober, 16 July 2012 - 11:51 AM.


#79 Nebfer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 248 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 16 July 2012 - 12:08 PM

Sigh.
Some pointers on B-tech canon policys
The Games are not canon, at lest when it comes to mechanics, story elements can be considered canon but require other sources to confirm, even then in game details are subject to changes.
The Table top game is considered canon, in some cases more so than the novels, like wise the Novels are canon and in some cases can be more cannon than the table top game.
I believe newer is more correct as well.
Their are some items that could be conspired official but not canon, like the Old battletechnology magazines (though they once where canon).
Their are references to Mechcommander 1 & 2 in other sources (Imminent crisis even mentions the system it used)
Mechwarrior 1 and the crescent hawk series have some mention in canon (Jason Youngblood in particular)
Mechwarrior 2 GBL has some references
Mechwarrior 4 Vengeance has it's basic elements described in the Fed Com civil war book, but makes it dificult for Black knight to happen
Im not sure about Mechwarrior 3 though, but their is a short story called Trial Under Fire that recounts it, so it might be considered canon due to that.
This however has not stopped some mechs from MW4 from getting into canon products.
The Fed Com civil war time line for MW 4
Mid to late 3062
After months of protests started and encouraged by the Planetary ruler Eric Dresari, Katherine Sends Marcus Roland and elements of the 5th Donegal Guards to take control of the worlds militia and stop the uprisings. The arrive of these forces temporarily subsided the protests
However they soon started heating up again, and by October the 5th was regular forced into firing into mobs of angry citizens... Due to events Roland and his subordinates where not able to fully take control of the Militia forces until the end of October when the Militias commander was killed, When this happened he promptly cracked down on the protests. This however did not help, by November Roland ordered the militia commander to take control of the Royal palace and arrest Dresari, he refused, so Roland arrested him and his staff and assumed control of all forces on world. On November 24th 3062 He stormed the Palace and arrested the Eric Dresari and his family, the next day he executed them, By January 3063 he had arrested 4,000 people and them put them on show trials and then had them executed.
Mid 3063 Riots and unrest continued... Late 3063 to early 3064 Ian Dresari arrives with a substansole force and after three months routs Roland and his lackeys, spends much of the rest of 3064 rooting out rement forces loyal to Katherine...
Early 3065 In reprisals for early actions against the Draconis Combine the DCMS lanchs a number of attacks on Fed Duns worlds, Kentares was one of them, within weeks the DCMS had the Forces under Dresari control on the run, then the 10th Lyran Guards showed up to save the day, the Tenth had been stranded on a near by world and had managed to impress enough jumpships to get them home, and elected to help the "allied" forces along the way. A few weeks later the DCMS force on world was no more (ending up in one of the only stand up fights in the civil war).
FYI the old Cartoon is considered a in universe childrens show, as such is a bit exaggerated, but the cast are canon, Adam in parturler is the current leader of House Steiner.
---------
In regards to the Question if LRMs and SRMs have Guidance packages the answer would be yes the y do, other wise MRMs and Rockets would not need to note that they have their systems removed...
Era Report 2750 explitly mentions LRMs and SRMs have guidance systems

Quote

NARC MISSILE BEACON
The leap forward that the standard SRM and LRM systems
made over old missile systems was so great that it was not until the
late twenty-sixth century that the Terran Hegemony began research
on a wide-range EM beacon under the codename TATTLETALE. It
was to be a short-range missile that, instead of an armor-piercing
explosive warhead, would contain the TATTLETALE beacon. All SRM
and LRM missiles normally have a self-guidance system in their
noses that allow them to keep a target. The TATTLETALE system
was a small adjustment to the smart core that allowed the missile
to more accurately home in on the beacon.


It mentions the system broadcasts over a wide range of frequency's covering much of the EM spectrum, early models even had a powerful strobe light for visual, but that bit was dropped before it saw wide spread deployment. Underline is mine

Here's what it mentions on Streaks

Quote

While autocannon rounds were cheap and easy to produce,
the complex targeting, tracking and guidance systems found in
most modern missile systems were not. Efficiency and accuracy in
missile munitions was high on the priority list of the Star League, as
the SLDF consumed tens of thousands of tons in missile munitions
every year across the Inner Sphere.
A solution eventually emerged in the form of an advanced
system that used a multi-lens “compound eye” sensor mated to a
microwave targeting laser array. This targeting blister in the missile
launching system would bounce multiple coherent light pulses off
the target, accepting a positive lock only if over ninety percent of
the pulses returned a signal. Only then would the launcher’s combat
computer release the missiles with a constant feed of telemetry
to ensure optimal delivery. In practice, this multi-layered targeting
and tracking system ensured that, once the missile system fired, all
of its missiles would impact their target.

Also note that this entry also mentions missiles of the time (I.e. LRMs and SRMs) have guidance systems.


Edit:
From what I have seen on the B-tech canon policy printed materiel in Germany is not considered canon, with exception of the Founding of the Clans series.

So Sorry CCC your book references are not inherently valid

Also link on canon
http://bg.battletech...opic,586.0.html

Edited by Nebfer, 16 July 2012 - 12:14 PM.


#80 3rdworld

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,562 posts

Posted 16 July 2012 - 12:42 PM

View PostCCC Dober, on 16 July 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

It's funny how you pick on obvious mistakes that were set straight in the definitions at the end of the book. How about accepting the fact that even authors can miss stuff even after repeated proofreading? If you are adamant about this, I suggest you find more consistent 'mistakes' that may actually prove a point, not an exception.


Do you really believe the german definitions are the rule? And the actually usage in the novel and the original English definitions are the exception?





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users