Jump to content

Erppc Should Have Minimum Range


40 replies to this topic

#41 hercules1981

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 307 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 04:29 PM

View PostCyke, on 10 March 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

They'll be a completely non-viable option without that added feature.

Without the no-minimum range for ER PPCs, they would have no advantage over regular PPCs between 90-540m, but the huge disadvantage of massively increased heat.

I'm assuming you're referring to six-PPC boats, and those should be balanced in other ways (for example, putting slot limits on some of the individual hardpoints so that the small Energy Hardpoint holes on certain 'Mechs can't mount PPCs, and the tiny near-microscopic machine gun ports on some 'Mechs can't mount a Gauss or AC20, etc).

Personally run a 'Mech with only two ER PPCs, and if they lost their minimum range, I'd just junk them for regular PPCs.


Lastly, and I fully understand that this is no part of the argument whatsoever, it's worth stating that in BattleTech fiction/tabletop/stories/fluff/universe/whatever, ER PPCs have no minimum range either.

This Is y I don't understand y the hardpoint system isn't like mw4 was then the size of a hard point comes into play instead of just the location on the mech. Mayb a stalker could really hold only 4ppcs and the other 2 energy slots where 2 small to fit a big weapon like the ppc in that slot. Splat cats the same thing. Bring in the size of the hard point location on a mech and load outs will change real fast and more mech versions would be used.
But to actually comment on the er vs regular ppc thing the way it is now is fine. Heat is there counter they shoot a lot and miss they over heat.

Edited by hercules1981, 20 March 2013 - 04:39 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users