27 replies to this topic

[Tie Ma]

The newly introduced Quickdraw at 60 tons is the 3rd tallest mech in the game. After a 95 and 100 tonner.


This is a plead to have the mechs Centurion, Trebuchet, Stalker, and Quickdraw's sizes looked at

Ghogiel, on 20 June 2013 - 03:24 PM, said:

Here are 2 mechs, that aren't the same weight class, but are whacky in size, that were assembled from the in game geometry (not the fat torso catapult model that is never used in game you see often).




These numbers should be fairly accurately measured. It's not completely 100% exact, as making the enclosed model in the space of 5mins instead of possible hours brings in a small inaccuracy of the surface, this is the level of inaccuracy >

Which is way closer than they should be. There is at most a 6 ton difference between the in game catapult and stalker models. Even though the in game tonnage difference is 20 tons.

Edited by Tie Ma, 21 June 2013 - 12:35 PM.

[Tie Ma]

people are willing to hold off on new mechs until scaling is fixed. thats how big of a problem is. no new mechs.

http://mwomercs.com/...aling-is-fixed/

[The Black Knight]

There was a poll for this a while back. The results overwhelmingly showed that most of us think scaling is a problem. I understand this can't be an easy thing to fix, but it needs to be done. Will the shadowhawk be taller then the battlemaster?

[Odlig Shadowborn]

We'll investigate this issue. Thanks for the feedback

[TheFlyingScotsman]

FullMetalGC, on 28 June 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

We'll investigate this issue. Thanks for the feedback

Good! It's nice to see an official response on this subject. I stopped playing the trebuchet, quickdraw and spider for this very reason. Scaling is off, and alongside the typical universal speed caps for lights, taking a smaller vehicle over a large one is that much less of a good idea. If theyre all the same size and speed, but several have much less armor and weaponry, how could the average player not go along with the current max-size max-weight meta.

Lower weight chassis within any weight tier are the same size, but much more vulnerable for almost no speed increase (if any at all) and die far more often than their heavier counterparts. Many of these chassi (SDR, TBT, DRG, QKD, AWS) are actually the same size or in many cases a larger target than heavier chassi.

On top of this, mechs like the RVN, JR7, CN9 and other skinnybone mechs enjoy far greater survival than their lighter counterparts because they have smaller target boxes located all in one area away from the almost unhittable legs, while the faster and smaller mechs all seem to be very tall and humanoid.

TLDR: Why should a player choose a smaller chassis weight when said mech will be just as large or larger, have less guns and less armor, and run the same speed or even slower.

Edited by TheFlyingScotsman, 28 June 2013 - 09:36 AM.

[Tie Ma]

FullMetalGC, on 28 June 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

We'll investigate this issue. Thanks for the feedback

:')

[Tannhauser Gate]

Yep, they are simply not to proper scale. Its unfair in terms of hit boxes and makes the game look generic as a whole. This is worth fixing to be as different from MA as possible.

[John MatriX82]

FullMetalGC, on 28 June 2013 - 07:32 AM, said:

We'll investigate this issue. Thanks for the feedback

Good to know, many mechs are totally off scale by date..

[Cubivorre]

Tie Ma, on 28 June 2013 - 10:30 AM, said:

:')

That's a pinocchio nose, right? Yeeeeeah, that's a pinocchio nose.

[Tie Ma]

Cubivorre, on 28 June 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

That's a pinocchio nose, right? Yeeeeeah, that's a pinocchio nose.

thats a happy tear noob

[ManDaisy]

Whats that old saying? A stitch in time saves 9.... meaning get it right the first time please.

[ManDaisy]

:^) pincchio nose

[Colby Boucher]

Thank god, and official admittance that sizes are way off. In the mean time, I also hope they make grass and such smaller so that it isn't about 6-7 feet tall. (just look at the grass next to the doors of modular buildings on Forest Colony, it's the size of the door itself.)

[Tie Ma]

the black knight, on 28 June 2013 - 07:13 AM, said:

There was a poll for this a while back. The results overwhelmingly showed that most of us think scaling is a problem. I understand this can't be an easy thing to fix, but it needs to be done. Will the shadowhawk be taller then the battlemaster?

you mean thiiiis poll?

http://mwomercs.com/...-and-quickdraw/

[Ilithi Dragon]

THIS. TOTALLY THIS.

This is a huge reason why Lights and especially Mediums are not played - they are WAY too easy to hit, and they do not have the armor to take the hits.

Not only does this mean that these mechs are not taken, and leads to a rather stale and limited meta game, it also causes serious game imbalance issues, because Lights and Mediums have several very specific roles that they, and only they can fill. They are the direct counters to fire support mechs, for example, and their limited presence, and overly-high hittability, give fire support mechs largely unfettered dominion over the battlefield, ESPECIALLY when combined with the over-powered PPCs, and under-powered SRMs and over-weighted AC/10 and LBX-AC/10.

Rescale the mechs to be sized appropriate to their tonnage (and that is not difficult at all, simply set an arbitrary density standard (kg/cubic meter), pull the volume data from the mech models, and adjust each model's scale setting until it falls within an acceptable margin of error for the kg/m^3 standard), and you will see a lot of imbalance issues (like the issues with over-powered poptarts and snipers) be significantly reduced.

[Mild Monkey]

There are (in the novels) lighter mechs that are taller than heavier mechs. Joanna's Summoner (or was it a Hellbringer) is taller than Natasha Kerensky's Dire Wolf.

[Ilithi Dragon]

Mild Monkey, on 28 June 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

There are (in the novels) lighter mechs that are taller than heavier mechs. Joanna's Summoner (or was it a Hellbringer) is taller than Natasha Kerensky's Dire Wolf.

Yes, there is nothing wrong with having some mechs be taller than others, despite being lighter. Some mechs are just short and squat, having a lot of front-to-back depth, other mechs are tall and spindly, having very little front-to-back depth, with most of their volume spread vertically (or horizontally in the case of mechs like the Cataphract).


And all of that would come out right if PGI just set an arbitrary standard for mech density, i.e. set the Atlas as a standard and divide 100,000 kg by the Atlas' model volume, and then rescale all mechs until their weight in kg divided by their volume matches that standard.

Currently, that is not the case. The Stalker and the Catapult, for example, are very similar mechs in profile - they have very similar shapes. Yet the Catapult, despite being 20 tons, 24% LIGHTER, is actually only 7.5% smaller by volume, and has an almost identical CT profile. The Catapult should be scaled considerably smaller than that, and the same goes for most, if not all of the mechs.

[ManDaisy]

Throw your stones at Dennis De Konning... but you didnt hear that from me.

[MavRCK]

Tie Ma, on 21 June 2013 - 12:09 PM, said:

The newly introduced Quickdraw at 60 tons is the 3rd tallest mech in the game. After a 95 and 100 tonner.


This is a plead to have the mechs Centurion, Trebuchet, Stalker, and Quickdraw's sizes looked at





Which is way closer than they should be. There is at most a 6 ton difference between the in game catapult and stalker models. Even though the in game tonnage difference is 20 tons.

Cool pics!!

[Genewen]

Colby Boucher, on 28 June 2013 - 11:57 AM, said:

Thank god, and official admittance that sizes are way off. In the mean time, I also hope they make grass and such smaller so that it isn't about 6-7 feet tall. (just look at the grass next to the doors of modular buildings on Forest Colony, it's the size of the door itself.)

They did not admit anything, don't put words in their mouths. They only said that they'd have a look at it. They might very well come to the conclusion that all is "working as intended".

Ilithi Dragon, on 28 June 2013 - 04:45 PM, said:

Yes, there is nothing wrong with having some mechs be taller than others, despite being lighter. Some mechs are just short and squat, having a lot of front-to-back depth, other mechs are tall and spindly, having very little front-to-back depth, with most of their volume spread vertically (or horizontally in the case of mechs like the Cataphract).


And all of that would come out right if PGI just set an arbitrary standard for mech density, i.e. set the Atlas as a standard and divide 100,000 kg by the Atlas' model volume, and then rescale all mechs until their weight in kg divided by their volume matches that standard.

Currently, that is not the case. The Stalker and the Catapult, for example, are very similar mechs in profile - they have very similar shapes. Yet the Catapult, despite being 20 tons, 24% LIGHTER, is actually only 7.5% smaller by volume, and has an almost identical CT profile. The Catapult should be scaled considerably smaller than that, and the same goes for most, if not all of the mechs.

Volume is not weight, Basic physics. The mechs are not one big blob of certain material. They have spaces in them, some have a heavier structure than others and the thickness of the plating might be totally different. I'm not saying that they shouldn't take another look at mech sizes, but this whole volume->weight argument is totally silly.