23 replies to this topic

[Salticidae]

Sept Wolfke, on 07 July 2012 - 09:55 PM, said:

you make good points about fire support mechs - I would use an XL engine on a catapult for example, after hearing you guys' responses, but I think that on a scout mech, which has such light armor, I would rather find tonnage in other ways because the chances of losing side torsos if things go sideways seems like a pretty huge risk. I'd rather have the survivability of the non-XLs on a scout mech I think.

XL engines are great in light mechs, the speed they can go is key to their survivability, you just don't have time to aim for the torso on a light mech doing 150kph plus, alot of the amage they take is strafe damage, and your normally legged before your torso gets put through

[Gun Bear]

Why do people only talk about the downside of the XL engine as if it is the only thing about them that matters. You must also remember that an XL engine provides massive weight savings on top of that. The engine on a 'mech is the single heaviest part of it in 9/10 cases; the weight of the engine is a major factor in how many lights and mediums are handicapped in the armor, weapon, or speed department thus putting an XL engine in many cases allows you to maximize the potential of your model, and it does not always actually make your 'mech more vulnerable.

I like to use the Cicada as an example - it mounts 2 tons of armor, a hit in the back from a medium laser has the potential to kill it under normal circumstances. If you switch out the engine for the XL engine of the same rating you have enough space to maximize the armor and then some - I would rather a Cicada with 3 extra engine slots per torso and 8 tons of armor than the standard one with only 2 tons; 8 tons of armor takes a while to get through especially when you consider the speed and maneuverability of a 'mech of its design.

The point I'm trying to make is the XL engine is not all bad, it is not a death sentence like some people seem to think it is; it is viable tech that can if used in the right 'mech and proper role and setting provide an edge that is needed to win. Don't count them out just because they make you more vulnerable to torso shots, all equipment has an upside and a downside.

[Tezkat]

In tabletop BattleTech, XL engines are often more trouble than they're worth. You have comparatively little control over hit locations, and the extra crit danger is quite pronounced. The liability is generally not worth having space for an extra weapon or two. XL engines do not belong on brawlers or relatively immobile firing platforms. They are most useful when for pushing speed levels up into the extreme ranges where you're moving so quickly that very little incoming fire actually lands.


I foresee XL engines being a lot more useful in MWO, especially for playstyles like mine that favour skirmishing or mobile fire support over direct, in-your-face engagements. You'll have significantly more options for exploiting terrain advantages compared to tabletop. You can use the extra speed to get off shots as you dart between cover locations, take advantage of your mobility to keep damaged sides positioned away from the enemy, and employ information warfare to conceal your position. XL engines can give you the firepower and armour to straight up outfight those faster than you and the mobility dictate the terms of the engagement to those slower.

Edited by Tezkat, 08 July 2012 - 02:55 PM.

[Glythe]

Like the previous thread on the XL engine (try the search option?) most everyone has agreed that the weight savings make the most difference on light mechs and anything heavier than that starts to become a huge liability. But if you have a strong lance and are playing a support mech like the Catapult you can probably get away with an XL engine.

/thread?