|
Member Review - Sleeping Dragon : 02-Feb-2007 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
4.00 |
| Comment: |
Well, not bad, but not good either. the flamers certainly did not hurt the design. You are probably going to use them with SLs only in melee, when the PPCs aren't that useful, so the additional heat shouldn't be a problem. The increased survivability is especially welcome for Liao armies, which are short on resources and usually on defensive. The scorched earth tactics, for which the flamers are ideal were probably considered during the design, so the 6L Warhammer makes much more sense than I thought before. One of the better CC 'Mechs in Succession Wars era. |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
Member Review - Rudel Gurken : 11-Nov-2005 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
3.00 |
| Comment: |
This variant isn´t much worse than the -6R.
You lose some dangerous ammo while getting more heat.
But you´re able to fire all shortrange weapons without any heat (ok: don´t move! :) )and you´ll rarely fire a PPC and the flamers in one turn. |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
Member Review - Paul : 07-Nov-2004 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
3.00 |
| Comment: |
I don't know why everyone thinks that the design dropped two heatsinks to accomodate the flamers.
It dropped the MGs and ammo, it has 18 heatsinks, just like the 6R.
At any rate, this is a debatable change. Up close, where you'd use these while not firing your PPCs, you'd have the heatsinks to use them with little limitation. Nice against infantry, nice when trying to make a forest fire, nice if you'd like to add some heat to your opponent, but I think everyone would've liked to see 2 MLs instead.
In my opinion, the utility of the flamers balances out the loss in anti-infantry firepower, hence rating this at the same level as the standard Warhammer. |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
Member Review - Blackhand : 01-Sep-2004 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
1.50 |
| Comment: |
Powerful but lacking the heat sinks to do anything. And the ammo prevents you from being too nutty with your shots.
I'd prefer any other variant over this one in 3025. |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
Member Review - ralgith : 23-Feb-2004 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
1.50 |
| Comment: |
Running too hot to be as serious a threat as other warhammers, it still packs a whallop. Personallt I think the person responsible for this variant needs to be stood in front of those flamers when they are test fired. Would serve the fool right for taking a good design and hurting it's killing potential for the mediocre benefit of some fire breathers. |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
PPC 4. Heat Sink 4.
PPC 5. Sensors 5.
PPC 6. Life Support 6.
Write Review