176 replies to this topic

[Tundara]

I find the Hawks height to not be an issue. Smart use of terrain even makes it an advantage.

[GODzillaGSPB]

Tundara, on 16 October 2013 - 07:06 AM, said:

I find the Hawks height to not be an issue. Smart use of terrain even makes it an advantage.

"What's that...oh, just a treestump sticking out of that tall rock." *phew*

*treestump shoots an ac/20 projectile*

[M4NTiC0R3X]

Yesterday I was too busy playing pokemon to even care about MW:O

Today, I will be too busy, playing pokemon. (and I was excited for months about PP)

Not going to bash on anything, other than the fact the patch notes (which I didn't bother to read yesterday) were very, very slim.

[Azmaat]

Totally agree with OP. This mech is to large for its tonnage. And ballistic hardpoint to close to cockpit. If u use machine-gun - u are one eye blind (not to mention cockpit view is awful). If Sabre mechs will have same flaws... well it will be really sad.

[Shadey99]

Tundara, on 16 October 2013 - 07:06 AM, said:

I find the Hawks height to not be an issue. Smart use of terrain even makes it an advantage.

Terrain is very situational. It's fien to ridge hump where that is possible, but what if your team doesn't setup where a ridge is that you can use? Or the enemy flanks you and comes from the same side of the ridge your on? For a good example of this...

Frozen City map, base on theta corner side, SHD AC2 fire support build. Your side decided to setup mostly along the crash dropship. The enemy flanks and gets into the city on our side (with a andful left at the dropship). Well yes, I setup on the nice ridge and start taking pot shots as they come (and my team slowly realigns). They ignore my shots and simply press me into CQB and come right up over the ridge, forcing me to try to fall back as they advance.

I do escape, but now I'm sort of out of place as I cannot support our brawlers without a good spot and when my team moved they lost the dropship to the press of the 4 mechs that had been keeping my team held off their so I was under fire from the side. The buildings are generally to tall to 'peek over' and much like a Jager it exposes alot of itself to peek out from the side of a building. In fact that is what I did do, but enemy snipers and harrasing lights kept me ineffective.

And frankly a light mech pilot has to be drunk to miss a SHD or just unable to hit the broad side of a barn..

[MeiSooHaityu]

Azmaat, on 16 October 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

Totally agree with OP. This mech is to large for its tonnage. And ballistic hardpoint to close to cockpit. If u use machine-gun - u are one eye blind (not to mention cockpit view is awful). If Sabre mechs will have same flaws... well it will be really sad.

LOL, I like the cockpit .

It makes me feel like I am using a mailbox for a helmet LOL. Just peering through 1 square tube.

The size seems good to me, it doesn't feel too large. I suppose that is subjective though.

[PropagandaWar]

Shadey99, on 16 October 2013 - 04:59 AM, said:

It isn't really 'thin' in the same way as a Cent or Spider is 'thin'. And it can be 'tall' without being 'Bigger than the Jager or Tbolt' tall. Being the same height as a cent would make it 'tall' for a medium and it would still be somewhat wider.

It is way to easy to hit a SHD and this is why most of the best SHD builds stay at range to fight rather than getting close. Getting close means you are way to easy to hit and it is simplistic to hit where you want.

Cents not thin and why is a spider thin and small?

[Otto Cannon]

Says it all really.

So this is '55 ton size' according to Russ...

Edited by Otto Cannon, 16 October 2013 - 08:26 AM.

[Mechwarrior413183]

I keep picturing the Attack on Titan scene where the colossal titan's head is looking over the wall, just replace the people with Atlases and the Colossal Titan with a Shadowhawk, the normal titans would be Trebuchets and Quickdraws.

[Prezimonto]

William T Riker, on 16 October 2013 - 06:31 AM, said:

Lol there will never be a rescaling pass. In fact get ready for some more supersized 55 tonners!

Well, I HAD been pondering getting the Sabre pack. Now I can save that cash for something else.

[Marauder3D]

Otto Cannon, on 16 October 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

Says it all really.

So this is '55 ton size' according to Russ...

Well, I have been spreading damage around my Shawks pretty well by torso twisting, so I thought that maybe they were a bit too big but nothing terrible. That picture of the Atlas and the Shawk standing on level concrete side by side is pretty damning.

[Vassago Rain]

I don't wanna say 'I told you so,' but I'm gonna have to say 'told you so.'

[Draconis March]

In the earlier games I played, whenever I saw Shadowhawk's, I thought I was fighting a heavy until I read its name, because they were so freakin' huge.

This is an online game--canon be damned.

Mockeryangel, on 16 October 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

I keep picturing the Attack on Titan scene where the colossal titan's head is looking over the wall, just replace the people with Atlases and the Colossal Titan with a Shadowhawk, the normal titans would be Trebuchets and Quickdraws.

LOOOOOOOOOOOOL

Edited by Draconis March, 16 October 2013 - 08:43 AM.

[Shadey99]

PropagandaWar, on 16 October 2013 - 08:15 AM, said:

Cents not thin and why is a spider thin and small?

Proportionally the Cent (quite liekly the best 'zombie' in the game) is 'thin' in the same proportion as the Spider, if you shrunk a Cent down it would look alot like a Spider does. This has been discussed many times when describing why a Spider can take damage so well. The Cent btw is also 'to tall'. These 'heavy sized mediums' all need reduced. Even the Cicada needs to be smaller, it's 5 tons heavier than a Jenner but a good bit a good bit larger than one.

Edited by Shadey99, 16 October 2013 - 09:22 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

Shadey99, on 16 October 2013 - 09:03 AM, said:

Proportionally the Cent (quite liekly the best 'zombie' in the game) is 'thin' in the same proportion as the Spider, if you shrunk a Cent down it would look alot like a Spider does. This has been discussed many times when describing why a Spider can take damage so well. The Cent btw is also 'to tall'. These 'heavy sized mediums' all need reduced. Even the Cicada needs to be smaller, it's 5 tons heavier than a Jenner but a good but a good bit larger than one.

It is the best zombie due to the way damage transfer works, and its huge debris models. If either ever were to change, it'd be useless. Even if it's super good at taking damage to the torso, you should always shoot for the legs.

[redreaper]

SH is ok not chassis breakingly over sized however it does make the hunchback obsolete .

[Viper69]

haha

[Silence Jin Mang]

In response to hose who say that the shadow hawk isn't big, if it isn't big then why are assault mechs small compared to the shadow hawk. And I`m pretty sure atlas are pretty big and imposing, yet they come up almost to the top of one. Also they are pretty damn wide. I realize the Shadow Hawk has always been canonically tall for a medium, but this is ridiculous. Its the only reason I bought the phoenix package. It`s absolutely gorgeously modeled (TY PGI for that at least), and its weapon loadouts are some of the best for the medium weight. But come on, the size of the mech puts a shadow hawk to my chin in a highlander. And those are tall freakin mechs. I mean wtf. Something is not right. If you disagree otherwise show me some hard evidence that this mech should be that tall. As to the fact that I`m pretty sure cataphracts, which are 15 tons heavier, are suspose to be at least the same height, not shorter. Along with the fact they are wide too. So unless I`m missing something in my great knowledge of lore that makes the shadow hawk that big, please explain to me what it is. Because I can not find it, nor believe it exists. One more thing, how is it a 55tonner being that large? I`d think it`d be a 65 tonner at least.

[Finn McShae]

I am a staunch believer that the scale issue is WAY overblown on these forums. That said, watching a Shadowhawk run alongside a Battlemaster last night... they could stand to lose a few feet. Danged thing reallly ARE almost as big as several assaults.

Didn't get a chance to pilot mine last night but I shot at quite a few of them and I'd have to say that they seem pretty durable. Got to the point where I was kinda happier facing off against a Battlemaster or Orion over a Shawk. Locusts though, ha, awesome. They pop so easy. Can't wait to get mine mastered.

[Inypt]

Malleus011, on 16 October 2013 - 06:58 AM, said:

This would be a good TL:DR summary of my post. I concur.

Respectfully, those of you who believe the Shadow Hawk is 'about the same size as a Thunderbolt' need to have a friend driving a 'Hawk stand next to various large mechs on level ground in game. While I cannot be exactly accurate, I believe the photoshopping of the SHD as the same height as a BLR is quite close to correct.

As for the Locust being smaller than pictured; you are correct it varies from the concept art; however, it does not do so in a manner which harms it in gameplay.

Wait so let me get this right, if the concept art (and remember it's concept art, AKA not final) shows something you feel is better then final product it's a travesty and the designers don't know what there doing. But if another something else that is you deem "better" then the concept art, it's no problem and ignore it.

Bring attention to all problems with scaling seems to be very one directional. Which I know everyone wants to complain about mediums, but the most out of scale mechs at the moment are actually the light, which are to small. But no one wants to complain about them since they benefit from this problem.

I believe the forgotten aspect of scaling is that tonnage refers to weight, not height. What we should be looking at is the volume difference of the Mechs since height is a very bad indicator. The picture placed of the Atlas and Shadow Hawk next to each other is actually a strong indicator that the Shadow hawk actually has a very well made model. Assuming there is not large empty pockets in most mechs which only the light Mechs chose to get ride of. Look at it this way, were looking at a 55 ton Mech and a 100 ton Mech. So a 45% difference. You can see the volume of the chest, legs, and arms of hte Shadow Hawk are all significantly smaller (more than half) the volume of the Atlas.

I'll give a super simple example:
A Square 10'x10'x10' has a volume of 1000.

If you were to half the square, like everyone seems to want to do for a 50 ton Mech vs a 100 ton Mech you would get :
5'x5'x5' for a volume of 125 (a 88% decrease from the original).

So if you wanted only a 45%reduction as would be appropriate, is would only shrink the sides of the square to roughly 8.2'
Since 8.2'x8.2'x8.2' = ~550

So only a 18% decrease in every demention is needed. And as can be easily seen in the picture the width and length of the limbs and torso were more than 18% cut back. So the Height would have to remain relatively unchanged.

Conclusion : The Shadow Hawk is actually to small for only a 45% decrease.

I'm sorry for bringing math into a flame thread... but this band wagon is something people have to get off of. If the argument is just from a game play perspective, and modeling/physics be damned then fine. But don't use the difference in tonnage as an excuse/reason because it's highly flawed.

Otto Cannon, on 16 October 2013 - 08:19 AM, said:

Says it all really.

So this is '55 ton size' according to Russ...