81 replies to this topic

[Star Captain Obvious Kerensky]

Because this a a real time game where players aim at the 3d rendering of the mech, mech size matters, Individual hitbox size and location matters.

It is imperative that PGI is cognizant of these factors when adding new mechs.

It should never be just dumb luck over how the artists choose to draw the hitboxes or scale the mech that determines how viable a mech is in a competitive environment.

Is it balance killing? No. That is hyperbole. But it matters, and it will eventually make some newly added mech Dead on Arrival.

[Trauglodyte]

THe one thing that you need to take into account is the fact that both the Cataphract and Catapult do not have "head on shoulder" cockpits.

[AdamBaines]

I will agree that sometimes the sizes don't seem quite right, but one thing I think people tend to focus on is height and its perceived effect on tonnage when in reality, you also need to take into account width...and depth along with density. There are times when a mech that is a lighter tonnage mech might be the same height as a high tonnage mech because maybe the design requires a larger base (width and depth), or conversely, the higher ton mech is small but the armor is thicker....hence the density.

I think the OP is slightly going down the path of "the sky is falling" with the level he thinks that size is effecting balance, but I will also conceed that there is a small effect. Maybe he is not intending to be a troll, but it comes off that way to me.

[Star Captain Obvious Kerensky]

AdamBaines, on 18 June 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

I will agree that sometimes the sizes don't seem quite right, but one thing I think people tend to focus on is height and its perceived effect on tonnage when in reality, you also need to take into account width...and depth along with density. There are times when a mech that is a lighter tonnage mech might be the same height as a high tonnage mech because maybe the design requires a larger base (width and depth), or conversely, the higher ton mech is small but the armor is thicker....hence the density.

I think the OP is slightly going down the path of "the sky is falling" with the level he thinks that size is effecting balance, but I will also conceed that there is a small effect. Maybe he is not intending to be a troll, but it comes off that way to me.

I agree that width and depth are important when factoring in the overall density of a mech.

However, Because this game has mechs firing weapons out of the "Front" of the mech, and it is difficult (or impossible on some) to fire exclusively from the side, the dimensions that matter the most are the front facing ones. (height and width).

If all that mattered was density, I'd design a mech to be a walking pencil, with the tip facing forward. Easy to hit from the sides, but very difficult to hit when it looks directly at you.

[Waking One]

AdamBaines, on 18 June 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

I will agree that sometimes the sizes don't seem quite right, but one thing I think people tend to focus on is height and its perceived effect on tonnage when in reality, you also need to take into account width...and depth along with density. There are times when a mech that is a lighter tonnage mech might be the same height as a high tonnage mech because maybe the design requires a larger base (width and depth), or conversely, the higher ton mech is small but the armor is thicker....hence the density.

I think the OP is slightly going down the path of "the sky is falling" with the level he thinks that size is effecting balance, but I will also conceed that there is a small effect. Maybe he is not intending to be a troll, but it comes off that way to me.

We clearly see a lot of dragons, trebs and awesomes in games. They're everywhere. Their sizes and hitboxes are spot on.

Oh wait.

[AdamBaines]

Eldragon, on 18 June 2013 - 01:10 PM, said:

I agree that width and depth are important when factoring in the overall density of a mech.

However, Because this game has mechs firing weapons out of the "Front" of the mech, and it is difficult (or impossible on some) to fire exclusively from the side, the dimensions that matter the most are the front facing ones. (height and width).

If all that mattered was density, I'd design a mech to be a walking pencil, with the tip facing forward. Easy to hit from the sides, but very difficult to hit when it looks directly at you.

Well its not quite as straight forward as you propose because there is also a relationship between density and high, width and depth, but you make a valid point.

In the end...the QD is probably too tall by a good measure. But, im my OPINION, the OP is giving too much to the efect of size in the overall game balance.

I think LordBraxton makes some good points about design, and that not everything is supposed to be a good design....but in general I cant get behind most of his statements as he comes off, to me, as just as trollish as the OP original statements seemed, to me even if not intended to be so.

[AdamBaines]

Waking One, on 18 June 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

We clearly see a lot of dragons, trebs and awesomes in games. They're everywhere. Their sizes and hitboxes are spot on.

Oh wait.

Id say its more about their possible load outs then just their sizes.

One thing that annoys me about peoples arguments here. Its not just one thing that makes a design good or bad, its a multitude of things. So when you make that statement above, it makes me think "is he just being a troll, or does he/she really believe that's the only reason why people dont drive a mech?"

Personally I love the Dragon 1N and do pretty good with it. But then again, I use it as it should be used and stay within its roll.

[Glythe]

I want to chime in here and say it is total BS that the atlas is not able to bend more to shoot little guys. I know that is a little off topic but they never would have made the mech that way. It is a part of that mechs model and it's just dumb to pay for that much size and not have better articulation.

Size matters.... but not as much as say PPC imbalance. People dont use dragons because the weapons are bad and that mech requires a mixed bag to work.

[Appogee]

At the end of the day, the Mechs just don't seem the right size (ie combination of height, width and depth) relative to each other.

The OP's scale looks much more in line with the way the various chassis are supposed to compare to each other.

Sadly, I can't envisage PGI ever re-doing them at the right scale, because of the huge amount of re-work which this would require on the models, animations, camo specs etc.

Edited by Appogee, 18 June 2013 - 01:28 PM.

[keith]

Syllogy, on 18 June 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

Where is your proof that it is killing balance?

take a dragon. proof is right there. if mech was scaled down smaller ct may not be hit as much and mech may be used.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Syllogy, on 18 June 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

Where is your proof that it is killing balance?

All I hear is lip smacking when you post. Is that you kissing the dev's butt? I just wanted clarification on that.

Mech sizes and hitboxes are a huge issue on top of the 50 other major issues.

But hey, we are going to be released in 3 months. Who cares ?!

[Syllogy]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 18 June 2013 - 01:42 PM, said:

All I hear is lip smacking when you post. Is that you kissing the dev's butt? I just wanted clarification on that.

Mech sizes and hitboxes are a huge issue on top of the 50 other major issues.

But hey, we are going to be released in 3 months. Who cares ?!

Oh, I'm sorry. Asking for a logical and reasonable explanation must be OP, and therefor must be nerfed.

Edited by Syllogy, 18 June 2013 - 01:46 PM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Syllogy, on 18 June 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

Oh, I'm sorry. Asking for a logical and reasonable explanation must be OP, and therefor must be nerfed.

See I thought it was a stupid question. I think most people posting would agree. But what do I know.

[Trauglodyte]

keith, on 18 June 2013 - 01:35 PM, said:

take a dragon. proof is right there. if mech was scaled down smaller ct may not be hit as much and mech may be used.

Wispy did damned well in his Dragon. Maybe, JUST MAYBE, it is the driver and not the mech. That isn't to say that having a Bob Hope nose for a CT is a great thing or that easy to overcome. Hell, the BJ CT sticks out almost as bad and I can't shield that thing to save my life because of no arms in the needed areas. Just saying that sometimes, you can get around those things if you're really good at wielding it.

[Syllogy]

[KuruptU4Fun]

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Syllogy, on 18 June 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

Yup, that's pretty much it in this case.

And please Traug, never use Wispy as an example of why something is fine. Wispy is a major outlier. He's a REALLY great player.

You could stick him in any mech and he'd excel. I'm just glad he's not a full time "Best Meta Only" player.

I mean can anyone sit here and say the Awesome isn't a major liability due to its size and hitboxes?

Or that Mediums aren't too big?

The Quickdraw is huge.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 18 June 2013 - 02:15 PM.

[RG Notch]

They've said (I don't remember where and I'm too lazy and the search function here sucks too much for me to look) they aren't going to resize mechs as it would be too much work. Now I know they said we wouldn't have 3rd person or coolant, but they tend to stick to the things that we don't want while changing course on what we don't. I guess they can't make more money from re sizing but coolant sells and 3rd person will bring in the hordes of people that can't handle torso twisting. I guess IGP doesn't think balance will sell.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I have 0 expectation that they will ever fix the size issues.

Along with about 30 other things I doubt they will ever fix.

But won't keep me from voicing that it's messed up. And smacking Syllogy upside the head when he tries to deny it's a problem.

[Akulakhan]

Syllogy, on 18 June 2013 - 01:44 PM, said:

Oh, I'm sorry. Asking for a logical and reasonable explanation must be OP, and therefor must be nerfed.

PGI Defense Force, ASSEEEEEEEMBLE!

Anyway, back to grown-up talk. The model sizes have been ridiculous for a while, and the hitbox issue is a recurring one (anyone remember the Cataphract launch? that was awesome), and seeing the Quickdraw for the first time now...damn.

That thing's as big as an assault but 20 tons less. It's an oversized Trebuchet, only slower. This is also known as a walking target. The only explanation is the devs are high literally all the time. It's the only explanation for the inconsistent and haphazard way the simplest things are introduced into the game. 3PV, ahoy!

Good thread, OP. I've been surprised for a while now that more people haven't brought attention to the fact the most basic things in the game (models) cause balance issues because they're simply not thought through.

Edited by Akulakhan, 18 June 2013 - 02:30 PM.