45 replies to this topic

[Frostiken]

An oft-overlooked aspect of mech design, mostly because it's irrelevant in tabletop, is the physical size of a mech.

MWLL learned this lesson the hard way, with several units simply being so large (and in the case of the Shadowcat, so small) that you were at a massive disadvantage / advantage by piloting physically larger / smaller mechs or vehicles.

This is hardly a matter of 'intentional design', as mechs have to look like their original drawings (otherwise what's the point), and they just drew whatever they wanted back then. However, we ended up with mechs like the Uziel, which had massively oversized side torsos and were impossible to miss, making it a deathtrap. The Owens design made it laughably easy to leg, as from the side it was leg almost the entire way up. The Mad Dog's missile racks, like the Uziel, are such a huge target you literally cannot miss them.

MWLL redesigned a couple but in general refused to 'fudge' armor just armor values to balance them out, so the Shadowcat is still ridiculous hard to hit.

Is there any consideration for this in MWO?

[Redshift2k5]

The Dragon's jutting torso will be a bit of an issue.

I really wish I knew exactly what part of the meck counts as head and CT hitboxes for the mechs. There will certainly be some with large hitboxes in some areas than others (Dragon's large CT, Atlas's large head compared to a Hunchback, etc)

Players will be able to mitigate this a little by allocating more armor to any easier-to-hit sections, but it may factor the meta-game somewhat if it is discovered that particular mechs have more (or less) exploitable hit locations.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

The different classes of mechs that we have seen in game so far do have differing sizes. Whether this is pronounced enough or too much we won't know until we can play. Individual mech geometry and how the "hitboxes" are modelled will go a long way to making all designs viable.
Having said that there's not much that you can do about the Cats ears.

[Pvt Dancer]

I am not worried about it at all. There have been several threads on hitboxes already, I suggest you do a search for them.

[Frostiken]

The Catapult's ears are one thing, I wonder how they're going to handle the Timberwolf's ears, because they can't count as arms like the Catapult's do.

Again, in MWLL they picked the debatable route of making them 'equipment' slots, giving it separate damage zones. On one hand, this meant the L/RT couldn't be cored by shooting the ears. On the other hand, they had to dump armor from the rest of the chassis into the ears to protect them, which meant less armor on the rest of the mech.

[Redshift2k5]

Nik Van Rhijn, on 06 June 2012 - 11:02 AM, said:

The different classes of mechs that we have seen in game so far do have differing sizes. Whether this is pronounced enough or too much we won't know until we can play. Individual mech geometry and how the "hitboxes" are modelled will go a long way to making all designs viable.
Having said that there's not much that you can do about the Cats ears.

Well, the Catapult's very high-mounted arms give it an advantage when cresting a hill (or jumping up from behind cover) in that the weapons will crest the hill before the more vulnerable head section. If you're cresting a hill with a Hunchback or K2, your big guns are going to crest that hill sooner, and with less exposure to yourself, than an Atlas's belly-slung autocannon mount or a Centurion's arm-cannon mounted AC

[Chuckie]

Redshift2k5, on 06 June 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

The Dragon's jutting torso will be a bit of an issue.

I really wish I knew exactly what part of the meck counts as head and CT hitboxes for the mechs. There will certainly be some with large hitboxes in some areas than others (Dragon's large CT, Atlas's large head compared to a Hunchback, etc)

Players will be able to mitigate this a little by allocating more armor to any easier-to-hit sections, but it may factor the meta-game somewhat if it is discovered that particular mechs have more (or less) exploitable hit locations.

If you will look at FDs. designs the cockpits and glass areas look remarkable similar, and about the same size depending on mech size. Mechs that had huge windows now how smaller ones, and vice versa. So I think a HEAD shot would be hitting the actual glass of the cockpit, otherwise its a CT shot. That said the Hunchback and Catapult have a bit bigger and more exposed cockpits.. that said, looking at the screens, they also have better visibility.

So in MWO you may trade off more exposed head for better view.. etc..

[Havyek]

I think the easiest thing to do for the "pods" of certain 'Mechs is have their armor included in LT/RT armor.

The Catapult doesn't really follow this model, since it has no arms the missile pods are just considered arms. TWolf, Vulture and other designs that have missile pods on their shoulders or shields on their arms (MW4's Black Knight) should just have those considered extensions of the torso/arm they're attached to.

IMO.

[Roland]

Honestly, based on what I've seen, the relative sizes of mechs in game seems to be much better than I've seen in previous mechwarrior releases.

In MW4, one of the big weaknesses of assault mechs is that they were simply GIGANTIC compared to other mechs. The Daishi's nose was the size of an entire light mech. It was impossible to miss its CT.

[Steel Talon]

Mechs like Madcat & Warhammer need additional hit area, called L & R extension in MWLL
its like second arm on each side, lower HP than arm

[Redshift2k5]

Chuckie, on 06 June 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:

If you will look at FDs. designs the cockpits and glass areas look remarkable similar, and about the same size depending on mech size. Mechs that had huge windows now how smaller ones, and vice versa. So I think a HEAD shot would be hitting the actual glass of the cockpit, otherwise its a CT shot. That said the Hunchback and Catapult have a bit bigger and more exposed cockpits.. that said, looking at the screens, they also have better visibility.

So in MWO you may trade off more exposed head for better view.. etc..

Here we can see the HEAD section of the Hunchback



Clearly not 'just the glass', it includes the top and sides of the head (where would logically expect any registered hits to count as 'head') and it also counts the small laser; The s.laser is not mounted in the side torso, it is literally slotted in the head, so any hits there need to register as head as well.

I am desperate for similar shots showing the head and CT designation areas for the rest of the mechs.

[Oswin Aurelius]

Redshift2k5, on 06 June 2012 - 12:56 PM, said:

I am desperate for similar shots showing the head and CT designation areas for the rest of the mechs.

Well, as soon as you load up the game, you'll be able to check them out in the mechlab like the picture of the Hunchie.

[Orion Pirate]

Mech size concerns...


Are unfounded. No matter what you do, something will be easier to hit then something else, unless all the mechs look exactly the same.

Is that what you want?

[Name140704]

I'm mnot concerned about 'mech sizes, watch the game play videos:

http://mwomercs.com/media/videos/

[Cerlin]

I am personally happy with the way MWLL did sizes. In previous games all the mechs were within a certain size which made little difference between lights and assaults. I really think there should be a size difference of the classes or there is less advantages to small mechs.

[Zack Delphirian]

It's normal that there's a size difference, after all there is a 1.5 at least between the smallest and the largest mech. If my memory is correct, the smallest is around 10 meters high and the tallest over 15m...

It terms of gameplay and targeting, it should show, but I wonder what they're gonna do about the head hitbox because, if my memory is correct (it might not be...), no matter the tonnage and size of the mech, the cockpit is ALWAYS the same size. So even if the head of the Atlas is very large, the chances of hitting the pilot should be the same as for a commando.

Si it'll interesting to see what they do about that !

[Frostiken]

Orion Pirate, on 06 June 2012 - 01:24 PM, said:

Mech size concerns...


Are unfounded. No matter what you do, something will be easier to hit then something else, unless all the mechs look exactly the same.

Is that what you want?

Stop being so dramatic. Nobody said all the mechs have to look exactly the same, and if you're so thick that that's the only solution you can think of, your hyperbole isn't welcome here.

Did you play MWLL? Differing mech hitboxes made some unplayably awful. The original Atlas was trivial to decapitate because the 'head' area was the actual size of the head, and you could blast it off at any range. The Uziel was useless as well, as the side torsos were practically the size of an entire light mech torso.

Most of the mechs were within the same size / proportion, however, and any advantage / disadvantage in their shape and size was negligible. The difference between hitting a Thanatos left torso and hitting a Warhammer left torso might be about 5% easier, but the difference between hitting the Uziel side torso and the Thanatos side torso was on the magnitude of 30%. For a mech with so little armor, being a medium, this was a death sentence.

Since you have so much useless drivel to add here, I'm inclined to believe you did NOT play MWLL, and thus your opinion is meaningless. This was a huge problem and on certain mechs it still is.

[Ghogiel]

There will be less of an issue in MWO as you must destroy the center torso, head or both legs iirc to bring a mech down, currently there being no damage transfer between sections means targeting a side torso would mostly be for taking out a dangerous weapon system quickly. You can't kill the mech that way, making sides more expendable than in MWLL, where they are vital to survival.

This issue isn't hitting a big target per say. Noobs can hit a mauler ear, from basically any distance and any direction. Good players can hit anything they want more or less, unless the other player is tactically minded and is making defensive manoeuvres to shield damaged or vulnerable components, ie a scats arm is a juicy target by any criteria, but it can be shielded, at the least you can make it harder on the guy who is shooting it off, but the mauler just can't really do that with those side torsos. The Madcat had the same issue, now being separate pods that can be destroyed taking out the weapon, kinda makes it more like how it might behave in the current MWO model.

At the point of heavies though, unless it has ears or something that can be targeted from all angles and poke up above the mech, the issue mostly evaporates because the key factors of accuracy, speed and overall size of target are stacked against all heavies to the point it becomes negligible to everyone besides green players.

So currently the concern is very low. until they add madcats and maulers, which are the only 2 I can think of having issues, and as long as side torso destruction doesn't kill you, there is no damage transfer it won't matter so much because people will be gunning for your head/CT and not so much the side torsos anyway,< it may have an opposite effect actually, meaning you can use those big sides to shield areas like the head/CT...

Edited by Ghogiel, 06 June 2012 - 11:12 PM.

[Orion Pirate]

Frostiken, on 06 June 2012 - 08:56 PM, said:

Stop being so dramatic. Nobody said all the mechs have to look exactly the same, and if you're so thick that that's the only solution you can think of, your hyperbole isn't welcome here.

Did you play MWLL? Differing mech hitboxes made some unplayably awful. The original Atlas was trivial to decapitate because the 'head' area was the actual size of the head, and you could blast it off at any range. The Uziel was useless as well, as the side torsos were practically the size of an entire light mech torso.

Most of the mechs were within the same size / proportion, however, and any advantage / disadvantage in their shape and size was negligible. The difference between hitting a Thanatos left torso and hitting a Warhammer left torso might be about 5% easier, but the difference between hitting the Uziel side torso and the Thanatos side torso was on the magnitude of 30%. For a mech with so little armor, being a medium, this was a death sentence.

Since you have so much useless drivel to add here, I'm inclined to believe you did NOT play MWLL, and thus your opinion is meaningless. This was a huge problem and on certain mechs it still is.

This is not MWLL. And you have never played this game. So stop trying to compare the two, or draw correlations from one to the other.

Talk about drama? You have called me names now, have called other people names in other threads, and create posts that are hyperbole. I am sick of your negative attitude and how you look down on people who don't agree with you.

Where is the ignore button? My life will be better without you... And I have a feeling the forum would be better without you, but I can't make those decisions...

Edited by Orion Pirate, 07 June 2012 - 06:45 AM.

[Roland]

Mech geometry provides another additional balancing mechanism.

In MW4, pretty much the only thing that kept the madcat from being the ultimate death machine was the fact that it had a huge CT that you could hit from almost any angle.

It was an awesome mech because it could carry an assault mech's weapons loadout without issue.. but unless you knew how to drive it, you'd be killed very quickly.

Those kind of tradeoffs are what make mechwarrior a great game.