XL engines
#21
Posted 15 July 2012 - 05:08 PM
How could I deny myself memories like this by taking an XL engine and losing my mechs before things got REALLY interesting? I just can't do it. Maybe I love to limp
#22
Posted 15 July 2012 - 05:15 PM
Sept Wolfke, on 15 July 2012 - 05:08 PM, said:
How could I deny myself memories like this by taking an XL engine and losing my mechs before things got REALLY interesting? I just can't do it. Maybe I love to limp
Man, I remember those days, luck is just part of them game, mechs get shredded, and you have just try to get your *** home with the cockpit and CT still intact.
#23
Posted 15 July 2012 - 05:21 PM
#24
Posted 15 July 2012 - 05:29 PM
#25
Posted 15 July 2012 - 06:20 PM
I am not saying, I will not use an XL. I will, it is only that I would use them spairingly. The fragility of XL engines only compunds the issue.
*Most engagements on TT revolve around balanced Battle Value than any sort of cbill costs.
#26
Posted 15 July 2012 - 06:28 PM
It's going to be much better to go with the XL and either mount more weapons to core the other mech first, or go for more speed in an attempt to keep from getting cored yourself.
If the scouts are able to tell other mechs that an enemy is running XL, then there's a potential drawback there...but they're going to have some serious explaining to do on what type of sensor is going to be able to determine engine type. Thermals would be worthless due to the intensity of heat provided by a fusion reactor...it would overload the sensor, with just a big blob of white that would overrun the sensor's maximum values and thereby expand beyond it's actual size limit.
#27
Posted 15 July 2012 - 06:34 PM
Shoklar, on 15 July 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:
It's going to be much better to go with the XL and either mount more weapons to core the other mech first, or go for more speed in an attempt to keep from getting cored yourself.
If the scouts are able to tell other mechs that an enemy is running XL, then there's a potential drawback there...but they're going to have some serious explaining to do on what type of sensor is going to be able to determine engine type. Thermals would be worthless due to the intensity of heat provided by a fusion reactor...it would overload the sensor, with just a big blob of white that would overrun the sensor's maximum values and thereby expand beyond it's actual size limit.
I plan on aiming at side torsos since I do not plan on taking enemy mechs head and therefore will probably be firing somewhat from the side so the side torso is an easier hit and by taking out the side torso with it's inferior armor the CT the enemy mech is much easier as it is down an arm and torso section full of weapons.
#28
Posted 15 July 2012 - 06:34 PM
Shoklar, on 15 July 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:
no but shot can go wide and people can just fire shots off with out fully aiming.
so it feel like it will be most the same as random hits.
#29
Posted 15 July 2012 - 07:21 PM
#30
Posted 15 July 2012 - 07:32 PM
Shoklar, on 15 July 2012 - 06:28 PM, said:
Yes this is going to be a very interesting difference between TT and MWO: how big are the side and centre torsos relative to each other?
This is completely in the hands of the devs, I wonder what it'll be like?
From memory, the side torso on the Hunchback in the mechlab video looks very large...
#31
Posted 15 July 2012 - 08:46 PM
#32
Posted 15 July 2012 - 08:51 PM
Thorn Hallis, on 15 July 2012 - 01:35 PM, said:
This is my thinking too. If you are a long range sniper 'mech or a fire support 'mech, feel free to use that XL engine and try not to get too close to the action or have some pesky little scout sneak up on you, but for Blake's sake if you are running in as a hunchback or something that has nothing but short ranged weapons keep that standard fusion engine. You want to be a damn zombie as a brawler.
#33
Posted 15 July 2012 - 09:29 PM
#34
Posted 15 July 2012 - 10:51 PM
ScrapIron Prime, on 15 July 2012 - 08:46 PM, said:
Surely it will? How could it not?
#35
Posted 15 July 2012 - 11:03 PM
4 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users