7 replies to this topic

[EasyPickings]

It seems that the Annihilator is too tall for its bulk. In the comparisons with the Atlas and Kodiak, the volume displaced by the Annihilator appears to be much greater than the other two 100-tonners.






The biggest culprit is the massive shark nosed centre torso on the Annihilator. It's an easy target.

Perhaps a reduction in height is called for, to bring it more in line with the other 100-ton mechs.

Edited by EasyPickings, 24 July 2017 - 04:35 PM.

[Mike Barnes]

The annihilator is tall and handsome, leave it as it is, I freaking love that mech just the way it is. Besides it is much narrower than its buddies in the 100 ton category, I think it might even be narrower than the EXE and BNC.

[BTGbullseye]

Yes, leave it alone... I like to be able to shoot the cockpit over obstacles that it can't hit me through, and that's one of the balances countering the 100t tank.

[Mechteric]

It's not as wide as either of those other two 100 tonners though

[Leopardo]

i can only say that it colud be bettar - from design point of view but not smaller)

[Rick T Dangerous]

Whaddaya expect? The tummy shows she's gonna give birth to an urbie any minute.

[Youshallgofo]

the ANH's gut is what makes it so hard to bring down. You only have to turn a few degrees to one side and you can protect a ST. The KDK and AS7 have to almost turn 90* to roll the dmg because of how wide they are. Yeah it's tall, but its also very imposing. I love watching 80 ton mechs run for their lives when I catch them in the tunnel at Crimson.

[John McHobo]

The Annihilator´s waistline and shoulders are much thinner in the frontal profile.
Fatlas and Carebear have huuuge shoulders and no discernible waistline to speak of.