42 replies to this topic

[Lazy Eye]

Slashmckill, on 08 August 2013 - 03:02 PM, said:

As stated multiple times Above; lore, fluff and realism take a backseat to game balance and game design. (you have to make the game fun and balanced first and then layer all the lore and fluff on top of it otherwise you get a horrible game filled with bad gameplay and bad design choices)

All the current designs of 'mechs are absolutely perfectly balanced. That Spiders particularly are SO MUCH smaller than other 'mechs is not an unbalancing factor.

It's not about realism, it's about:

• Internal consistency.
  
• Suspension of disbelief / immersion.

Classic games, like chess and backgammon are internally consistent. The "best" video games score highly for internal consistency. The current 'mech scaling has many negative impacts on the internal consistency.

Excluding the head, almost all 'mechs 60 tonnes or under have the same hit points per tonne of structure. So, if everything was the same size, a 60 ton would be twice as durable as a 30. But because lighter 'mechs are smaller, they're harder to hit, which has the effect of inflating their effective hits/tonne of structure.

"Yeah, but they have less guns." Which is why survivability is so important: if a 30t 'mech survives 4 times longer than a 60, the 60 needs 4 times the firepower to match the effectiveness of a 30.

But then shouldn't a 60 BE better than a 30? If not, why bother building a 60 if a 30 is just as effective? Doesn't make sense. Unless you're thinking in terms of "ordinary" FPS where "all classes are equal". MechWarrior isn't supposed to be like that. MechWarrior is supposed to be "if you go up against an Atlas in anything under 80 tons you get ROFLstomped." (Assuming, of course, pilots of equal skill).

This last point cuts into immersion/suspension of disbelief, which is *almost* an antonym of confusion. Confusion is, psychologically speaking, a polar opposite of fun. That is to say, if you break the suspension of disbelieve, you're almost certainly increasing confusion; breaking immersion/suspension of disbelief reduces fun.

Not withstanding the fact that I was talking about BattleMechs, not tanks. MODERN battle tanks are all approximately the same dimensions: compare Abrams, Challenger 2, Leopard 2. This is because they're the optimal balance between survivability, maneuverability and firepower. All the MODERN tanks that deviate from the norm, do so at the significant compromise of one of these criteria for another, without necessarily being dramatically different in size.

Compare: Abrams MBT vs. M3 Bradley CFV

Tonnage: 61.3 vs. 23-28
Hull Length: 9m vs 6.5
Hull Width: 3.6m vs 3.2m
Height: 2.5m vs 3m (yes, Bradley is taller).
Speed: 67kph, 66kph (Bradley likely has better acceleration, due to smaller mass).
Crew: 4 vs. 3 + 2.

Bradley is a bit smaller and weighs half as much... but doesn't even have CLOSE to half the firepower or survivability of an Abrams (probably closer to 1/4 for both).

That is why they built Abrams AND Bradley.

Apply the same logic to MWO and... you can't, because it breaks. Having all these different walking tanks of different weights doesn't make sense, because of the issues that can all be draw back to how the 'mechs are scaled at dramatically different sizes (and inconsistently: Kintaro).

Scaling really matters. Current scaling is inconsistent and illogical AND hinders balance, rather than contributing to it. It is hurting both fun and fairness.

[Nasty McBadman]

see: suspension of disbelief
see: sci-fi fluff

some folks like to have fun at this angle. It is often reflected in literary and conversational environments with others that enjoy it. this is a thread on a board about giant space robots in the future. Why would anyone with a sense of community try to derail or belittle another's fun?

[tenderloving]

Lazy Eye, on 08 August 2013 - 02:28 PM, said:

Real-world examples blah blah blah

The only fallacy is letting realism trump gameplay. Just stop it. This is a gameplay balance forum, not a "justify game problems with natural physics" forum.

Edited by tenderloving, 15 August 2013 - 06:37 AM.

[Unbound Inferno]

Victor Morson, on 08 August 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:

You're talking about a game where you can store 1,280+ guided missiles in an area the size of a VW Bug.

Hm... I don't think my Catapult's Side Torso is quite that big...

[Thirdstar]

Nasty McBadman, on 15 August 2013 - 06:27 AM, said:

see: suspension of disbelief
see: sci-fi fluff

some folks like to have fun at this angle. It is often reflected in literary and conversational environments with others that enjoy it. this is a thread on a board about giant space robots in the future. Why would anyone with a sense of community try to derail or belittle another's fun?

I don't think the gameplay balance sub forum is the place to attempting to have fun about a touchy topic concerning mech size balancing.

[Thirdstar]

Joseph Mallan, on 08 August 2013 - 03:01 PM, said:

Yes we should be ashamed of wanting a little Science with our Fiction!

We've had this discussion before Joe. Btech is 90% fi and 10% sci. You just can't use real world logic on the gameplay in MWO.

[Tskeet]

Yeah, this discussion might have been better placed somewhere else. I love lore and I love quality gameplay, and often they conflict (in all games).

[Nasty McBadman]

Thirdstar, on 15 August 2013 - 06:50 AM, said:

I don't think the gameplay balance sub forum is the place to attempting to have fun about a touchy topic concerning mech size balancing.

Maybe "Mechs and Loadout" would be a better forum? I understand the desire to have it in a "Balance" thread though

[oldradagast]

While it's true at the low end that you can't just keep shrinking the mech since you'll eventually run out of room for the pilot, beyond that point, the mech really should scale with tonnage. Of course, that means all 3 dimensions (X, Y, and Z) scale, not just height and width, though wide, flat mechs are at a large disadvantage in a game with actual aiming vs. rolling dice to hit.

I don't buy into the notion of vast, "empty space" in mechs, or "cream-filled" ones like the Quickdraw and Kintaro that are just grossly oversized for their mass because they are filled with absurdly light-weight material, apparently. From a game balance viewpoint, the oversized mechs are badly gimped, and they just look sloppy because of their out-of-scale size.

[PEEFsmash]

Holdon Holdon guys I'm just waking up from a quick nap cuz I'm going to be late for work....

Now, balancing mechs by size is like baseball....you have a pitcher and catcher but no fielders....

[Steelgrave]

Royalewithcheese, on 08 August 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

I like how anybody thinks density matters in battletech.

Did you perhaps mean mass?

Mass =/= density.

[Xanquil]

There is a term that has bee used as long as battletech stopped being battledroids, and that term is battletech physics. MechWarrior/battletech does not use real world physics, it uses it's own set. That being said even in the battletech universe lighter is almost always smaller. Untill you start dealing with Clan tech everything the Clans have is smaller even the mechs of the same tonnage as the IS. (a 50t clan mech is more the size of a 40t is mech)

Edited by Xanquil, 15 August 2013 - 10:01 AM.

[Braggart]

I would absolutely support making variable parts for mechs.

Slapping that AC20 on a side torso on an atlas should give it a bigger hunch to hit, and taking an ac20 out of a hunchback side torso should also decrease its size..

Stuff like that will never happen. So we absolutely balance mechs by weight and size.

[Mister Blastman]

RG Notch, on 08 August 2013 - 03:07 PM, said:

Well that went out the door with FTL travel in this universe so why bother? Nevermind, all Fusion engines being the same size and around that of a fridge seems very scientific. I'll let you experts get back to theorizing how that all works.

FTL is completely possible (in theory) provided the proper context and implementation. Remember, light might not be able to go faster but the universe itself can propagate faster (including gravity).

[Joseph Mallan]

Thirdstar, on 15 August 2013 - 07:04 AM, said:

We've had this discussion before Joe. Btech is 90% fi and 10% sci. You just can't use real world logic on the gameplay in MWO.

Catgirls... Yeah, I know!

[Angel of Annihilation]

Honestly the only reason I can see that mechs are as big as they are is that they can't get the weapons smaller otherwise there is absolutely no need to have a 18m tall mech.

This is one of the reasons I always liked the Heavy Gear universe, Their mechs are 4-5m in height which I think is a realistic protrayal of what mechs will be once they finally start building them for the military. Anything bigger is just to easy to see and target, not to mention being constrained greatly by terrain.

As far as Battletech is concerned, there are just some things you have to take with a grain of salt and just dismiss and have fun despite of. Mech size is one of them.

[Royalewithcheese]

Steelgrave, on 15 August 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:

Did you perhaps mean mass?

Mass =/= density.

Either, really - I think of it as a mass:volume thing. It's the whole "50 ton metal thing is as tall as a multi-story building" issue. Take a look at a 50 ton tank and try to imagine it next to a Centurion.

Edited by Royalewithcheese, 15 August 2013 - 08:43 PM.

[wolf74]

If we think all mechs are the same weight to mass ratio. They just need a VR tank of water to rescale the mech to have the same displacement to tonnage ratio.

[GingerBang]

I hate to break it to everyone, but apparently nobody here realizes two things.


PGI has acknowledged they did an awful job scaling mechs (going against their earlier 2012 excuse saying it's "empty space")

PGI has also acknowledged it has given up, and will not be working (at least for a very long time) on re-sizing the mechs. They just don't care enough about actually balancing the game. Straight from the horses mouth, they just are not going to spend the time on it.

[Noesis]

[cynical]

"Assuming" the OP wants to keep Mediums as easy to hit pinatas then the presented speculations make a lot of sense.

After all why do we want to encourage Mediums as being anything as being beneficial to game play in this Assault rich meta that is MWO. I'm "assuming" everyone is obviously happy with the diversity and lively tactical game play that enriches our experience of piloting big stompy robots and of course as a result nothing needs to change to ensure that the game continues to best accommodate Assault Mechs with long range direct support fire weaponry whilst standing still. *yawn*

[/cynical]

Edited by Noesis, 17 August 2013 - 03:51 AM.