|
Member Review - Sleeping Dragon : 24-Apr-2006 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
0.50 |
| Comment: |
Just as bad as the SNT-5HR. It gained some range, but it's firepower is still too low. Medium lasers are nice, but for XL engined 100 tonner it's incredibly weak armament (not to mention that the ammo load for the RACs is low). Single heat sinks, XL engine and energy armament is the mix of things that has written inefficiency all over it. |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
Member Review - Blackhand : 07-Mar-2005 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
0.00 |
| Comment: |
They took a flawed/poor design and made it worse. Now its down to a paltry 7 and bit full rounds of firing before the barrels run dry.
The Heat sinks make no sense when your splurging 20 million on your engine you might as well tack on a few more c-bills and get doubles. Now the lack of ER or Pulsed lasers also confuses me as that was the stellar piece of work on the previous model.
I question this abortion of a mech's right to live. |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
Member Review - StarRaven : 20-Oct-2004 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
1.00 |
| Comment: |
Huh? There are few things more contradictory than a 'Mech with an XL engine and single heat sinks. You could save so much tonnage with doubles. This also has five more heat sinks than it needs. Other than that, it's a wanna be fire support 'Mech. RAC/2s don't really have the range for the sniper role in their time period; any other AC/2 will easily out range them. ER large lasers can do the job better, and for less tonnage and no ammo. |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
Rotary AC/2 5. Sensors 5.
Rotary AC/2 6. Life Support 6.
Rotary AC/2 1.
Write Review