200 replies to this topic

[CtrlAltWheee]

Tennex, on 06 October 2015 - 05:26 PM, said:

I agree. Its definitely a small mech

The 50 ton mech is quite a bit smaller than the 45 ton Shadow Cat

Whoever did this I love you

[Lightfoot]

Strange that the Shadow Cat and Crab came out about the same time but the Crab is smaller and tougher, but 5 tons heavier, carries more weapons, goes 24 kph faster, mastered. Meanwhile, MASC should get the basic Shadow Cat to 121 KPH from 97 kph, but only gets to 109 kph. And you can't miss the Shadow Cat CT so it's a lot bigger than the Crab's. It should at least go the Battle Tech 97-121 kph with MASC. Oh well at least I didn't by the Executioner.

[Funkin Disher]

Lightfoot, on 07 October 2015 - 03:16 PM, said:

Strange that the Shadow Cat and Crab came out about the same time but the Crab is smaller and tougher, but 5 tons heavier, carries more weapons, goes 24 kph faster, mastered. Meanwhile, MASC should get the basic Shadow Cat to 121 KPH from 97 kph, but only gets to 109 kph. And you can't miss the Shadow Cat CT so it's a lot bigger than the Crab's. It should at least go the Battle Tech 97-121 kph with MASC. Oh well at least I didn't by the Executioner.

The shadow cat is well sized when compared to other medium mechs, the Crab is well sized when compared to other weight classes.

Edited by Funkin Disher, 07 October 2015 - 04:13 PM.

[White Bear 84]

Bors Mistral, on 06 October 2015 - 07:52 PM, said:

The simple fact is that most of the other mediums are a bit oversized.
Some more than others..
Trebuchet...

I'm just going to put this here...


I would have put up something more amusing, but I don't have the time :/

The crab is a bit small, but I like the size it's at. It does suffer from long nose syndrome & most people agree the raven and a number of lights need a down scale anyway...

[KodiakGW]

White Bear 84, on 07 October 2015 - 04:17 PM, said:

I would have put up something more amusing, but I don't have the time :/

It was pretty amusing anyway. Can never go wrong with The Princess Bride.

My only issue with the Crab is this:
We all know PGI will NEVER go back and resize the other mediums to be in line with it. Only the ones that get "voted" for a resize will ever be touched, and who know when that will happen. Many have stated that it is in line with the size mediums should be. It just rubs me the wrong way that they release a new mech sized this way, and currently only available for pack purchase, before addressing any of the existing ones that need to be resized, which we have been requesting long before this was even announced.

[White Bear 84]

KodiakGW, on 08 October 2015 - 03:14 AM, said:

My only issue with the Crab is this:
We all know PGI will NEVER go back and resize the other mediums to be in line with it.

Couldn't resist

Edited by White Bear 84, 08 October 2015 - 03:21 AM.

[xXBagheeraXx]

Rather it be too small that oversized like the Awesome or the Deadapult.

[pbiggz]

KodiakGW, on 08 October 2015 - 03:14 AM, said:

It was pretty amusing anyway. Can never go wrong with The Princess Bride.

My only issue with the Crab is this:
We all know PGI will NEVER go back and resize the other mediums to be in line with it. Only the ones that get "voted" for a resize will ever be touched, and who know when that will happen. Many have stated that it is in line with the size mediums should be. It just rubs me the wrong way that they release a new mech sized this way, and currently only available for pack purchase, before addressing any of the existing ones that need to be resized, which we have been requesting long before this was even announced.

Yeah im not expecting much as usual but dennis said in the last dev vlog that they were doing a full re-scale of all the mechs.

[KodiakGW]

White Bear 84, on 08 October 2015 - 03:21 AM, said:

Couldn't resist

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

pbiggz, on 08 October 2015 - 06:34 AM, said:

Yeah im not expecting much as usual but dennis said in the last dev vlog that they were doing a full re-scale of all the mechs.

Good news. I'll be waiting on further word.

[Tennex]

"no ETA on rescale" - Russ

https://twitter.com/...102851238768640

[Sarlic]

Knew it. My gut feel. Told ya so. New content get most priority, older less or zero. Its hardly content. Pure marketing.

All they want is your money and screw the rest. Look at the retweets from Russ. Says pretty much it. They will do things.. as long its min effort.

How about this little gem: https://mobile.twitt...207981430804480
https://mobile.twitt...243752959291392

Means we still have enough plenty stupid people forking huge sums of money at them despite acknowlegding the failure of rebalance.

Edited by Sarlic, 08 October 2015 - 12:39 PM.

[zagibu]

I have started a new investigation into the scale matter, basically redoing Tennex work to verify his profile values. I do it by taking orthographic shots of the front and side profiles, then count the pixels. This is actually a very good indicator about mech "size", if you think about it, because it's basically what you shoot at.

I then add the pixels of both profiles, and normalize this area over the tonnage the mech is supposed to have. I do this by dividing the square root of this area by the cubic root of the tonnage (since tonnage increases linearly with volume, if density is constant, which it is for this comparison). This is the value "PPT adjusted" (PPTA = pixels per ton adjusted with the square/cubic law). Then I take the Hunchback's PPTA value as ideal value and compare the other mechs' PPTA values with it, which is PPTA/HBK.

This PPTA/HBK value is the surface area per tonnage compared with the Hunchback mech (the one with the big shoulder cannon mount). As you can see, the differences are not THAT extreme so far:



Yes, the crab has the smallest profile per ton of the mechs in the list so far, and yes, the Catapult has the largest one.

There are also PPT (pixels per ton) and SAHBK (surface area compared to the HBK) values, which are of less importance, but are somewhat useful to make inter-mech comparisons. You can see that the poor Catapult has almost the same profile area as the Stalker, which has 20 tons more (and isn't especially small, actually pretty close to the HBK, when adjusted for tonnage). So yes, the Catapult is indeed much too large.

I am trying to do this for all mechs, and then compare it with Tennex's findings, to make sure no user errors crawled in.

Edited by zagibu, 08 October 2015 - 02:07 PM.

[stjobe]

In the history of MWO, have PGI ever rescaled a 'mech?

The only thing they've done is minor adjustments to hitboxes (RVN legs, various CT/ST adjustments), but IIRC they have never even attempted to rescale a 'mech.

Sadly, I don't think they ever will, and the "no ETA" from Russ kind of says it all. It's not a priority for them.

[Matthew Ace]

stjobe, on 18 October 2015 - 02:51 PM, said:

In the history of MWO, have PGI ever rescaled a 'mech?

The only thing they've done is minor adjustments to hitboxes (RVN legs, various CT/ST adjustments), but IIRC they have never even attempted to rescale a 'mech.

Sadly, I don't think they ever will, and the "no ETA" from Russ kind of says it all. It's not a priority for them.

The earliest ETA from them is after the IIC pack is released, which means about the start of '16 before they start.

We should probably remind them once in a while before that, and then give them flak if they failed to start on it by then.

Edited by Matthew Ace, 18 October 2015 - 03:14 PM.

[Sug]

Matthew Ace, on 18 October 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

We should probably remind them once in a while before that, and then give them flak if they failed to start on it by then.

They probably all have flak jackets by now.

[Tarogato]

"does its scale present balance issues?"

Since the Crab is small, and small is good thing, we need to ask ourselves the question "Is the Crab OP?"

If it's not, then we shouldn't need to scale it any differently. And that's where I stand on the 'issue.'

[Sarlic]

Tarogato, on 18 October 2015 - 06:47 PM, said:

"does its scale present balance issues?"

Since the Crab is small, and small is good thing, we need to ask ourselves the question "Is the Crab OP?"

If it's not, then we shouldn't need to scale it any differently. And that's where I stand on the 'issue.'

I think the Crab has great scale, but i am absolutely dissappointed that the rescale program is only a few mechs by Community poll / demand. PGI should have start working on rescales after the first cracks appeared in scaling.

Because just like the balance it will end up in another vicious circle of both balance and scaling problems and PGI sure takes the time to respond. (For example gauss/lasers has been going on too long)

Why would you choose mech X while mech Y can do the same job with less firepower but better hitboxes and scaling.

It's not about OP, it's about having common sense why this mech is proper scaled while we have tons of mechs left in the dust of wrong scaling which will probaly never see the daylight again.

But the incredible derpy management probaly prevents this from doing it.

Edited by Sarlic, 20 October 2015 - 06:37 AM.

[Tennex]

Nova and Catapult needs rescale

[Juodas Varnas]

Tennex, on 20 October 2015 - 07:11 AM, said:

Nova and Catapult needs rescale

And they won the re-scale votes. (Nova was number 1, if i recall correctly)
So they will get re-scaled. I think PGI had stated that they'll work on it, AFTER the IIC mechs come out.

Shame the bloody Uller knocked the Centurion out of the top-5.
Damn clans.

[L1f3H4ck]

Haha! Yes, we are tiny critters, here to annoy the crap out of you. Yes we have large sides but you will never get to SEE them, cuz we just keep fixing our greedy stares at your crown jewels

So... Will we have this argument again when the Champion gets released?

Edited by Frechdachs, 12 January 2016 - 03:21 PM.