|
Member Review - Rudel Gurken : 09-May-2006 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
3.00 |
| Comment: |
A good mech with strong armor and a good speed but it has some flaws that hadn´t to be made!
With a 280 rating engine it would have no problem to put 10 DHS in (compared to the XL that wouldn´t be much difference in cost) and that fixed electronics take away much of its versatility as an omni! But nevertheless that electronic package makes it a premier scout.
The weapon loadout shows that the "prime" variant is ment as a scout and not a combat mech. With the LRM´s it can support from afar without risking too much returnfire and the lasers are for pure self defense (but i would have taken another medium instead of that lights). |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
Member Review - Blackhand : 30-Mar-2005 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
2.00 |
| Comment: |
Oh the Owens, how I hate thee.
Its a decent chassis but every time I see one, I wonder what makes it useful enough to replace all other scout mechs. Especially since it doesn't jump in this variant.
Its got the firepower of a 20 tonner, and some nice armour to boot. But, even 7 tons won't save if you someone gets a lucky hit on you and crits the XL. Which is the only reason I'd advocate doubles.
Its a good scout mech but you have to wonder why it needs to move faster than the standard Jenner with an XL engine. Instead of just keeping the 7/11 profile.
Twin LRM 5s isn't exactly a killer weapon setup, but at least you know they can't get much worse. Right? |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
Member Review - McBride : 04-Mar-2005 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
3.50 |
| Comment: |
While the OW-1 doesn't look like much at first, my personal experience with it has proved otherwise. The C3 system and BAP make it an excellent addition to any light scout lance, but the it also makes a good addition to a support or hunter-killer lance if it maintains its speed. Furthermore, the TAG allows it to quickly run in, paint a target and run out before the enemy can tear it apart.
While the Owens lacks DHS, there's a reason for it. It doesn't need them to dissipate heat and so there's no point to adding the extra cost.
In short, the OW-1 makes a good addition to any company size or larger unit in a campaign setting. It also works well in lance vs. lance battles as part of Hunter-killer C3 lance. The high speed of the Owens also makes it a good choice for hit and fade style tactics.
|
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
Member Review - StarRaven : 07-Nov-2004 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
2.50 |
| Comment: |
Nothing really bad about the Owens chassis, but nothing great either. The use of single heat sinks on an expensive, XL engined, front line OmniMech is almost painful in its inconsistency. If a 'Mech deserves an XL, why not DHS and Endo Steel? Makes no sense. While not the best chassis, the Owens isn't too bad, either. Fast, and pretty well armored. The C3 slave means that its usually a good addition to a C3 lance, and the TAG/Beagle makes it a good spotter. A recon 'Mech, and nothing else.
I suppose this is a C3 sniper. There are better designs for this role, and better ways of doing it with this one too. The LRMs are light firepower, barely a threat. The small lasers would be much more impressive as a medium. Weak firepower wherever it is. |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|
Member Review - mud : 01-Nov-2004 00:00 |
|
|
0 out of 0 users (0.00%) have found this review useful
|
|
|
| Rating: |
2.50 |
| Comment: |
Somebody studied the LRM Locust before they built this 'mech. Like all XL lights, it can't take much of a hurtin', but if you use this right, it won't have too. |
| No topic has been started for this review [Start Topic] |
|
|
|
|
|