Author Topic: A Solid Design: The Enforcer  (Read 1870 times)

Vonshroom

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 462
  • (Zeus mech by AntarcticanPiranha)
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #30 on: 04 August 2017, 14:03:38 »
???

Did you forget to paste something there at the end of that post?

Somehow It got lost in translation.... well here it is retyped. haha
For The Archon!

Vonshroom

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 462
  • (Zeus mech by AntarcticanPiranha)
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #31 on: 04 August 2017, 14:09:36 »
Thinking more about it, the Lineholder and Marshal 2L would also be very good lance mates for an Enforcer. Especially from a militia or Mercenary standdpoint. Both mechs have STD engines which make them survivable, both have decent firepower that is mainly based on energy weapons, and both feature LRM's to exploit holes punched by an Enforcer. The Marshall carries machine guns for use against infantry and could reasonable be found in a mercenary unit or a Fedsuns unit working along the periphery border, or Cappie march.
For The Archon!

MarauderD

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 456
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #32 on: 04 August 2017, 14:13:30 »
5D Enforcers have the XL engine and with Single heat sinks. While I like Enforcers, that seems like a double whammy of mistakes. Somehow the Enforcer III seems more acceptable with the DHS to me.

Getz

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 478
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #33 on: 04 August 2017, 14:56:49 »
5D Enforcers have the XL engine and with Single heat sinks. While I like Enforcers, that seems like a double whammy of mistakes. Somehow the Enforcer III seems more acceptable with the DHS to me.

Without the XL engine you can't get the speed boost and extra jump jet and going form 4/6/4 to 5/8/5 is no small thing.  The single heat sinks are certainly a mistake - but if you want to be fast, well armed and well armoured you've got no choice but to use an XL engine...

I fell out of favour with heaven somewhere, so I'm here for the hell of it now...

MarauderD

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 456
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #34 on: 04 August 2017, 15:21:54 »
Without the XL engine you can't get the speed boost and extra jump jet and going form 4/6/4 to 5/8/5 is no small thing.  The single heat sinks are certainly a mistake - but if you want to be fast, well armed and well armoured you've got no choice but to use an XL engine...

Agreed, just saying that in 3069, I'd rather have an XL toting 6M than a 5D with those SHS.

Vonshroom

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 462
  • (Zeus mech by AntarcticanPiranha)
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #35 on: 04 August 2017, 15:58:53 »
You guys are really onto something there. I would have loved to see an upgraded Enforcer using DHS, Endo and FF instead of what they went with. That would make it more survivable and still "modernize it" allowing for case, different loadout, etc.
For The Archon!

Daryk

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3322
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #36 on: 04 August 2017, 16:19:39 »
It gets pretty tight with both Endo and Ferro... Endo and DHS alone can get you an ER PPC, LB-10X (with 2 tons of ammo protected by CASE) and a Small Pulse Laser.

(SMD)MadCow

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 595
  • 1st Earl of the Bixby Duchy
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #37 on: 04 August 2017, 16:45:05 »
The Enforcer III is where it gets modernized, the 7D is pretty interesting.

Challenger

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 463
  • Six or Styx
    • My Fanfiction Stories
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #38 on: 08 August 2017, 12:55:20 »
Without the XL engine you can't get the speed boost and extra jump jet and going form 4/6/4 to 5/8/5 is no small thing.  The single heat sinks are certainly a mistake - but if you want to be fast, well armed and well armoured you've got no choice but to use an XL engine...

I genuinely think that the speed boast was a mistake with the Enforcer

Ignoring for a moment that there are standard engine mechs with similar firepower and speed, (Starslayer, Griffin, Crab) IMO it made the mech too difficult for the average pilot to use properly. (NB pilot not player)

Making the mech faster but fragile more or less mandates keeping the speed up to survive and to keep the range open for the same reason. That pushes the to hit numbers for a average pilot up to 8+ as a minimum. Include enemy movement and a smattering of terrain and we are up to 11/12's as a rule. Works fine one on one, but in a larger game, it can easily make the Enforcer an irrelevance. Sure you could slow down to shoot more accurately, but if you do, why did you bother with the XL engine?

I honestly preferred the mini-Warhammer that was the 4R, it was guarantied to make its firepower count. I find the 5D either wastes its firepower or wastes its speed.

Challenger

Vonshroom

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 462
  • (Zeus mech by AntarcticanPiranha)
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #39 on: 08 August 2017, 13:44:19 »
I genuinely think that the speed boast was a mistake with the Enforcer

Ignoring for a moment that there are standard engine mechs with similar firepower and speed, (Starslayer, Griffin, Crab) IMO it made the mech too difficult for the average pilot to use properly. (NB pilot not player)

Making the mech faster but fragile more or less mandates keeping the speed up to survive and to keep the range open for the same reason. That pushes the to hit numbers for a average pilot up to 8+ as a minimum. Include enemy movement and a smattering of terrain and we are up to 11/12's as a rule. Works fine one on one, but in a larger game, it can easily make the Enforcer an irrelevance. Sure you could slow down to shoot more accurately, but if you do, why did you bother with the XL engine?

I honestly preferred the mini-Warhammer that was the 4R, it was guarantied to make its firepower count. I find the 5D either wastes its firepower or wastes its speed.

Challenger

This....

Pretty much my exact thoughts on the "upgrades" to the 4R.
For The Archon!

Getz

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 478
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #40 on: 08 August 2017, 15:33:31 »
I genuinely think that the speed boast was a mistake with the Enforcer

Ignoring for a moment that there are standard engine mechs with similar firepower and speed, (Starslayer, Griffin, Crab) IMO it made the mech too difficult for the average pilot to use properly. (NB pilot not player)

Making the mech faster but fragile more or less mandates keeping the speed up to survive and to keep the range open for the same reason. That pushes the to hit numbers for a average pilot up to 8+ as a minimum. Include enemy movement and a smattering of terrain and we are up to 11/12's as a rule. Works fine one on one, but in a larger game, it can easily make the Enforcer an irrelevance. Sure you could slow down to shoot more accurately, but if you do, why did you bother with the XL engine?

I honestly preferred the mini-Warhammer that was the 4R, it was guarantied to make its firepower count. I find the 5D either wastes its firepower or wastes its speed.

Challenger

What can I say, this makes no sense to me.  The fault in the Enforcer 5D is the heatsinks, not the speed.

I fell out of favour with heaven somewhere, so I'm here for the hell of it now...

Ruger

  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2774
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #41 on: 08 August 2017, 16:00:26 »
What can I say, this makes no sense to me.  The fault in the Enforcer 5D is the heatsinks, not the speed.

The original Enforcer was a trooper...it fought as part of the line, and could loose a side torso and arm, and only loose half of its firepower, but it could stay in the fight if needed.

The 3050 upgrade to the Enforcer changed it to more of a skirmisher...it could no longer absorb the same amount of punishment as its parent design, as losing a side torso also means the 'Mech becomes a battle loss because its engine is destroyed.

Therefore, you need to be sure to not take hits that you could once take, which means you have to keep up your mobility (armor was not strengthened) to avoid the hits. This changes how the 'Mech functions in the game.

Ruger
"If someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back." - Malcolm Reynolds, Firefly

"Who I am is where I stand. Where I stand is where I fall...Stand with me." - The Doctor, The Doctor Falls, Doctor Who

glitterboy2098

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6650
    • The Temple Grounds - My Roleplaying and History website
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #42 on: 08 August 2017, 16:21:32 »
i see the speed increase as part of a general trend at the time.. advanced tech was bringing a lot more fast mediums and heavies, and a 4/6 on anything smaller than a heavy really struggles when the average speed of the opposition goes up. an Enforcer would typically be seeing a lot of 5/8 and 6/9 mediums post-clans, many of them jumping, as well as more 5/8 heavies, and if it stayed at 4/6 Enforcers would no longer be able to do the jobs they were designed to fill. at least, not effectively.

Mattlov

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1100
  • Fnord.
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #43 on: 08 August 2017, 16:24:52 »
The Enforcer, in almost all time lines, is the ultimate lance mate.  It isn't going to break and enemy line by itself, it isn't going to the the thing your opponent is scared of, and it isn't the focus of your own forces.  It is a team mate.  And a very strong one in that role.

Worst luck I've ever seen was an Enforcer moving through rubble, falling down, hitting that rear torso on the fall, and exploding.  Never shot, never even SAW the enemy, but completely dead anyway.  :D
"The rules technically allow all sorts of bad ideas." -Moonsword


Vonshroom

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 462
  • (Zeus mech by AntarcticanPiranha)
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #44 on: 09 August 2017, 03:22:19 »
What can I say, this makes no sense to me.  The fault in the Enforcer 5D is the heatsinks, not the speed.

Getz,

I had posted this before, and I really think it outlines exactly the faults with the speed increase, sure, the heatsinks are a flub too, but personally the engine boost is what kills the design for me.

To me the Enforcer really loses a lot of its flavor after the introduction of 3050 tech and all of the new units leading up to the year 3069. Frankly after this point there are many better units than a 4R Enforcer, but it is still a solid design for a militia force. The 5D is in my opinion a worse version of the 4R. It does some things right, but it plugs in an XL engine that doesn't allow the mech to move fast enough to offset its new vulnerability. Yes, you might be able to stick me in with them STD engine cartel guys... but frankly STD engines make sense for "line" units. Which is in my opinion, what the Enforcer is intended to be. The Enforcer III proposes some unique new variants that I very much like, but still suffers from that XL engine. On front line medium designs, XL's aren't my cup of tea. Where an XL shines is when it gives a mech a very high level of maneuverability for its weight. 5/8/5 on a medium in 3069 doesn't fit the bill for "high level of maneuverability for its weight".

I make some exceptions to this rule for medium "line" designs that just outright work with XL engines, such as the Lynx, Bushwacker, Grim Reaper, or Shockwave in later eras. All of these designs bring something the "upgraded" Enforcer just doesn't bring to the table, raw damage output. In each case, these mechs move as fast as the upgraded Enforcer, are just as survivable (or more so) and can deal twice the amount of damage or more from good range. Allowing them to greatly contribute to the fight before they go down.

With all of this in mind, the Enforcer really only brings two things to the table in 3050+ games.

1. Cheaper, lighter playmate for heavier nasty units that need a little buddy
2. Member of a dedicated "flanker" lance that is going to use its decent firepower/speed ratio to outmaneuver other units

As stated by Mattlov, the Enforcer is the ultimate lance mate.
For The Archon!

Challenger

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 463
  • Six or Styx
    • My Fanfiction Stories
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #45 on: 09 August 2017, 11:47:21 »
i see the speed increase as part of a general trend at the time.. advanced tech was bringing a lot more fast mediums and heavies, and a 4/6 on anything smaller than a heavy really struggles when the average speed of the opposition goes up. an Enforcer would typically be seeing a lot of 5/8 and 6/9 mediums post-clans, many of them jumping, as well as more 5/8 heavies, and if it stayed at 4/6 Enforcers would no longer be able to do the jobs they were designed to fill. at least, not effectively.

I don't think the Enforcer needed the speed boast to do its job. Even in 3025 it was slow for a medium. But, its job wasn't to zip around with the Wolverines, its job was to stand in line next to the Warhammer because the plan called for two Warhammers but damn it I only have the one!

As Ruger said the 4R is a trooper. The 5D is a skirmisher, which is fine except if I upgrade my 4R to a 5D I now need to go buy another trooper mech to replace the Enforcer that can nolonger do the job I brought it to do in the first place!

Challenger

Challenger

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 463
  • Six or Styx
    • My Fanfiction Stories
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #46 on: 09 August 2017, 12:40:36 »
What can I say, this makes no sense to me.  The fault in the Enforcer 5D is the heatsinks, not the speed.

In short my experience of cavalry/skirmisher mechs like the 5D is unless they have a veteran pilot, their fire is so inaccurate they might as well not be on the field.

Challenger


Kidd

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1513
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #47 on: 09 August 2017, 15:27:05 »
I always preferred the Enforcer over the Centurion, mainly because of aesthetics but also because I don't much fancy LRMs.

Where an XL shines is when it gives a mech a very high level of maneuverability for its weight. 5/8/5 on a medium in 3069 doesn't fit the bill for "high level of maneuverability for its weight".

I make some exceptions to this rule for medium "line" designs that just outright work with XL engines, such as the Lynx, Bushwacker, Grim Reaper, or Shockwave in later eras. All of these designs bring something the "upgraded" Enforcer just doesn't bring to the table, raw damage output. In each case, these mechs move as fast as the upgraded Enforcer, are just as survivable (or more so) and can deal twice the amount of damage or more from good range. Allowing them to greatly contribute to the fight before they go down.

With all of this in mind, the Enforcer really only brings two things to the table in 3050+ games.

1. Cheaper, lighter playmate for heavier nasty units that need a little buddy
2. Member of a dedicated "flanker" lance that is going to use its decent firepower/speed ratio to outmaneuver other units

As stated by Mattlov, the Enforcer is the ultimate lance mate.
I see where you're getting at, but the examples you picked here aren't very convincing. Two of them are 5 tons heavier than the ENF-5D, and don't have the arguably 'deliberate' fault of the 2 SHS. The Bushwacker is functionally identical but for a pair of LRM-5s, the Shockwave's main claim to superiority is the RAC-5 which wasn't available to the 5D at the time, and the Grim Reaper is a ranged Mech that I wouldn't bet on in a close fight with the 5D. The kicker in the fight will be the 5D's jump jets, which it could use to get into better position to backstab and nullify these Mechs' torso-mounted weapons.

The main reason the Enforcer's upgrade doesn't look good is that it is a TRO 3050 monkey model and was quickly discarded in favour of the Enforcer IIIs, which would give those Mechs above a much tougher fight. In 3069 that's the Mech you ought to be looking at... and all said and done, the 5D is not the worst upgrade out there. Just ask a PNT-10K driver ::)

I don't think the Enforcer needed the speed boast to do its job. Even in 3025 it was slow for a medium. But, its job wasn't to zip around with the Wolverines, its job was to stand in line next to the Warhammer because the plan called for two Warhammers but damn it I only have the one!

As Ruger said the 4R is a trooper. The 5D is a skirmisher, which is fine except if I upgrade my 4R to a 5D I now need to go buy another trooper mech to replace the Enforcer that can nolonger do the job I brought it to do in the first place!
The Enforcer is a jack-of-all-trades, and such Jacks tend to become "troopers" by dint of not excelling at anything else. The real trooper of the AFFS's 3025 medium lineup is the Centurion, and that should be the one standing next to the Warhammer... if the Enforcer is standing and not making use of those jump-jets to close with the enemy, it's wasting those jumpers.

Its upgrades actually sort of switch places with the Centurion - post-Revival, 5/8 is the new "trooper" standard and Enforcer IIIs are now the troopers while it is the Centurion that gets the extra manoeuvreing boost up past 6/9 and more. A medium Mech running 4/6 in 3067 is not a "trooper", it's lunch ;D

CrossfirePilot

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1523
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #48 on: 10 August 2017, 01:42:28 »
Funny thing about the Enforcer.  When I am stressed trying to fall asleep and not wanting to let my mind get too wrapped up in the days issues.  I always just think about being in a city fighting with an Enforcer.  Never anything else, and I don't even like them that much!

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11151
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #49 on: 10 August 2017, 03:35:02 »
Yeah, the Bushie has 5 tons on the Enforcer . . . the only real difference though is the DHS and instead of the Enforcer's JJ is those pair of LRM5s and MGs.  Not a huge fan of cav mechs jumping, that is just me, but that is where you get that difference coming in.  And with SHS, those JJs are a must for when you need to hold the triggers down for a bit.
Colt Ward

Beware the vengeance of a patient man.

Getz

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 478
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #50 on: 10 August 2017, 04:57:20 »

Therefore, you need to be sure to not take hits that you could once take, which means you have to keep up your mobility (armor was not strengthened) to avoid the hits. This changes how the 'Mech functions in the game.

Ruger

Yes it was.  The 5D has 161 points of FF armour vs the 4R's 144 points of standard plate.

In my experience a medium mech with it's side torso stripped isn't long for this world irrespective of whether it has an XL engine or not.  Couple that with the ability to generate better defensive modifiers and in my experience (and historically I've used both variants a lot, the Enforcer is one of my very favourite mechs) the 5D is at least as survivable as the 4R, perhaps more so.

In short my experience of cavalry/skirmisher mechs like the 5D is unless they have a veteran pilot, their fire is so inaccurate they might as well not be on the field.

Challenger

Again, this makes absolutely no sense to me.  You get exactly the same attack modifiers jumping 5 as you did jumping 4, Same goes for walking 5 vs 4 or running 8 vs 6.  There is no circumstance where the extra speed makes your fire less accurate and there is one (walking 5 vs running 5) where your fire actually should be more accurate.

I fell out of favour with heaven somewhere, so I'm here for the hell of it now...

Ruger

  • Battletech Volunteer
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2774
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #51 on: 10 August 2017, 05:19:59 »
Yes it was.  The 5D has 161 points of FF armour vs the 4R's 144 points of standard plate.

Oops...for some reason I was thinking it went down to 143 pts of armor...

 :-[

Ruger
"If someone ever tries to kill you, you try to kill 'em right back." - Malcolm Reynolds, Firefly

"Who I am is where I stand. Where I stand is where I fall...Stand with me." - The Doctor, The Doctor Falls, Doctor Who

Challenger

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 463
  • Six or Styx
    • My Fanfiction Stories
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #52 on: 10 August 2017, 17:13:19 »
Again, this makes absolutely no sense to me.  You get exactly the same attack modifiers jumping 5 as you did jumping 4, Same goes for walking 5 vs 4 or running 8 vs 6.  There is no circumstance where the extra speed makes your fire less accurate and there is one (walking 5 vs running 5) where your fire actually should be more accurate.

Expected pilot behaviour changes.

With a 4/6/4 your probably not moving about too much, the jump jets in particularly are not really for use while shooting. Odds are you walk a lot.

With a 5/8/5, moving about more makes sense. In the Enforcer's case you've sacrificed toughness to get that speed (I appreciate our experiences diverge here) and you paid BV for that speed so if you don't use it your going to be outgunned by a slower opponent. Odds are you run a lot.

That extra +1 to hit is a huge deal for a regular pilot. At medium range, against a moderately mobile target (say +2 to hit) with even a single wood hex in the way, a running mech needs a 11 to hit. A walking mech is twice as likely to hit its target, a stationary one 3 times as likely.

A 5D can slow to a walk to engage, but then you are wasting your speed advantage and making yourself more vulnerable. That is my complaint with this type of mech, with a regular pilot you are given a choice of using your speed or using your firepower, you can't use both effectively at the same time.

A veteran pilot changes that somewhat.

Challenger

MarauderD

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 456
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #53 on: 10 August 2017, 17:48:12 »
The 5D still seems like a challenging mech to use well, because you can only. Use your ER LL 2 out of 3 rounds before needing a cooling break. I'd rather the Enforcer III or 7D for this reason alone.

Vonshroom

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 462
  • (Zeus mech by AntarcticanPiranha)
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #54 on: 13 August 2017, 03:27:58 »
I see where you're getting at, but the examples you picked here aren't very convincing. Two of them are 5 tons heavier than the ENF-5D, and don't have the arguably 'deliberate' fault of the 2 SHS. The Bushwacker is functionally identical but for a pair of LRM-5s, the Shockwave's main claim to superiority is the RAC-5 which wasn't available to the 5D at the time, and the Grim Reaper is a ranged Mech that I wouldn't bet on in a close fight with the 5D. The kicker in the fight will be the 5D's jump jets, which it could use to get into better position to backstab and nullify these Mechs' torso-mounted weapons.

Kidd, I too see what you are getting at, but the mechs I listed have incredible advantages over the Enforcer in 3050s-3060's play.

The Pair of LRM 5's and machine guns give the Bushwacker an incredible tactical superiority over the Enforcer 5D. Allowing it twice as much long range firepower potential while also allowing for laying of minefields with Thunders. Machine Guns allow for good use against infantry, but in a mech on mech dual, sure, they are dead weight, and liabilities at that. Still, I don't see how the Enforcer 5D is better?

Fun discussion guys, Ironic that a thread I started with nothing but appreciation for the machine in 3025 has turned into a bit of a bashing on it post 3050.

I really do like the direction the Enforcer III went, and feel that it is a true upgrade to the design.

Funny thing about the Enforcer.  When I am stressed trying to fall asleep and not wanting to let my mind get too wrapped up in the days issues.  I always just think about being in a city fighting with an Enforcer.  Never anything else, and I don't even like them that much!

Ironically the other night I had a dream I was piloting an Enforcer in a city. It was raining, and I was trying to find the rest of my lance.

For The Archon!

Vonshroom

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 462
  • (Zeus mech by AntarcticanPiranha)
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #55 on: 13 August 2017, 03:35:51 »
I also personally really like units with fairly simplistic load outs.

AC/10
LLaser
Slaser for backup

really doesn't get too much more simple than that. From an in universe standpoint it makes more sense too. Having a weapon for every situation or a slew of different types of weapons may be a benefit, but under battlefield stress it seems to me having a more simplistic weapons array consisting of only one or two weapons or types of weapons makes sense.

I know I wouldn't want to have to toggle through a bunch of weapons groups in a pinch. Enforcer seems intuitive and smart to me. Anyone who has played MWO probably agrees with me on this.

Also the 4R especially seems well suited as a training mech, or a good mech for first time mechwarriors fresh from the academy. It is very cheap, durable, relatively common and should be simplistic to use. See my above comments. For a training tool, the limited ammo will teach making each shot count and ammo conservation, and heat isn't going to be too much of a concern. Which is good for a newbie, as they are more likely to make a rookie mistake like overheating too much. One could learn a lot with an Enforcer.
For The Archon!

Rorke

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1908
  • Absolute Shower
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #56 on: 13 August 2017, 13:00:56 »
I have used it a great deal over the years. 

The 3025 era R is as stated previously, delightfully solid and forgiving.  It does
really shine with Centurions, Dervishes and heavies in company to it.

It does become fiddly, when the timeline advances.  The D is yet another example
of a very odd time for mech designs.  It can and will shine, but it's HS limitation
will always hold it back.  Whereas the III, both 3060s main variants are delightful
to use and properly designed.

"you come at the king you best not miss" Omar Little

CrossfirePilot

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1523
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #57 on: 25 August 2017, 22:35:45 »
I always found that the Enforcer needed about 4 more rounds for the AC, even when I am careful and shooting on 8 or less, it still runs out when I need about 2-3 more hits to put the other guy down.

Vonshroom

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 462
  • (Zeus mech by AntarcticanPiranha)
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #58 on: 26 August 2017, 02:04:40 »
I always found that the Enforcer needed about 4 more rounds for the AC, even when I am careful and shooting on 8 or less, it still runs out when I need about 2-3 more hits to put the other guy down.

Interesting, the 10 rounds never really bothered me. I tend to have one to three rounds left over. It really depends on how you are playing and what you are playing against. Usually the Heaviest thing on the table is only 75 tons or so, and anywhere from 1-4 mechs.

Anyone have experience fielding multiple Enforcer's together?
For The Archon!

(SMD)MadCow

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 595
  • 1st Earl of the Bixby Duchy
Re: A Solid Design: The Enforcer
« Reply #59 on: 26 August 2017, 23:50:31 »
Anyone have experience fielding multiple Enforcer's together?

I'm not allowed to anymore...

 

Register