176 replies to this topic

[Tombstoner]

Bishop Steiner, on 16 October 2013 - 09:41 AM, said:

is it too large?

Yeah. it is.


Doe sit have a hunch, which stays even if you un-equip the AC.

Guilty as charged.

Do I have a 5/1 KDr in my SHS-2D2?

Yup.

So what gives? At the end of the day, I think most people having issues are the same who never figured out the Quickdraw (maybe not all, but most). It is NOT a toe to toe fighter, though it can fight it's own weigh quite well. It's not a fabulous support mech, though it can do so with the right build. It is a mobile, generalist mech, that like the Quickdraw, works best in the Cavalry role, sweeping in on engaged enemies, disengaging, using cover and doing it again.

Not every mech will fit every player or every playstyle. I see too many SHADs, and see too many people like myself, having a blast driving them, to feel the Mech itself is at any horrible disadvantage. And it will only get better with unlocked pilot skills.

That said, I WOULD like to see it a lil shorter (like 2 meters or so). But I gotta say, the number of times I could poke my ac and head over a ridge or building, and lay some UAC suppression love down range and pretty much not get hit back, is kinda handy, too.

Nice summary. i see the size alteration as a means of balancing the placement of the AC hard point. Very easy to ridge hump so the extra height is to give it a clear disadvantage. the thunder bolt would have the been bigger if it didn't use lrms.

So mech scaling might be related to weapon hard point heights. so we may never see this guy http://www.sarna.net/wiki/UrbanMech cause he would be scaled up to the point of DOA or just be too OP ridge humping.

[oldradagast]

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

Says it all really.

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

Madness... it's almost as big as Highlander and can probably displace as much space as an 80-ton Victor. I have no idea why this is so difficult to get right. Just line the mech up next to other mechs and if your shiny, new medium is looming over the heavies and competing with the assaults in size, there's a problem. I know they artificially scaled down lights, so maybe it's time to down-tweak the Mediums to give them some hope of not being under-armored targets.

Edited by oldradagast, 18 October 2013 - 08:22 AM.

[BillyM]

Size be darned, the things are pretty darn survivable. I'd say the best medium mech out today. They take more shots to drop than the Thunderbolts from what I've seen.

--billyM

[Alex Warden]

BillyM, on 18 October 2013 - 08:33 AM, said:

Size be darned, the things are pretty darn survivable. I'd say the best medium mech out today. They take more shots to drop than the Thunderbolts from what I've seen.

--billyM

agree, SHD is fine... first medium i really enjoy

Edited by Alex Warden, 18 October 2013 - 08:41 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

oldradagast, on 18 October 2013 - 08:20 AM, said:

Madness... it's almost as big as Highlander and can probably displace as much space as an 80-ton Victor. I have no idea why this is so difficult to get right. Just line the mech up next to other mechs and if your shiny, new medium is looming over the heavies and competing with the assaults in size, there's a problem. I know they artificially scaled down lights, so maybe it's time to down-tweak the Mediums to give them some hope of not being under-armored targets.

well, form a game play perspective, I almost see the issue.

From a reality perpective, looking at how much thinner, flatter and less bulky the components are, the SHD is actually pretty close to IRL scaling against a 100 tonner, since the Atlas is looking close to 1/3 wider and deeper, slightly taller, and certainly bulkier across the board.
People need to know how size vs mass actually scales, and very few people on here do. And even less understand the maths (I have trouble with that one unless I have the formulas and a handy calculator in front of me)

But back to the game play part, which in the end, is probably the most important part.

Guess what? It's easily the best, most survivable mech in the Phoenix package, and is really putting my beloved 4G at risk as my favorite medium, while in my opinion being possibly TOUGHER than my Centys. I come out of most matches looking like I tangled with a sharknado, with almost everything breached. Have lost an arm or two. But that Hunch and height have never cost me a ST death, and virtually every time I do die, it's from overwhelming focus fire, which kills my THUDS and BLRS at least as fast, and those Thuds don't even have XLs. My 5 to 1 KDr says they pass with flying colors, and I have done far higher top damage, and average damage with my 2D2 than anything else in the PHX pack, while my other 2 are more than holding their own.

Bottom line, political correctness, playing nice and all that being chucked to the wayside, if you can't do good in the SHAD, you quite simply have no place driving Medium mechs, period.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 18 October 2013 - 10:51 AM.

[Jin Ma]

bait and switch

[C E Dwyer]

XX Sulla XX, on 16 October 2013 - 07:22 PM, said:

I wounder if we are not getting to worried about exact size of mechs. Yes it would be nice if Medium mechs were really small. But if you look at tanks tonnage and size to not always correlate like you would think. http://fc03.devianta...by_Sanity_X.jpg

This...is the most relevant post i've seen in this thread

[Koniving]

Inypt, on 16 October 2013 - 09:39 AM, said:

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.

Mixed here. The volume isn't entirely in the bodyshape but also includes what can be attached to it. The Shadowhawk protrudes more than the Atlas as more is stored outside instead of inside. Examples, the cannons.

That said I do agree here.

I'll quote something I've said some time ago.

Koniving, on 02 August 2013 - 11:58 AM, said:

Following my basic rules for mech design:

The Flea is going to be taller than the Locust, which puts it at about the height of a Jenner or maybe a little taller depending on how 'thin' the Flea really is.

The way I see it:
The wider your front profile and the longer your side profile, the shorter you should be (Jenner for example. Locust fits in this category too).
If your front profile is wide but your side profile is stubby, you should be average height. (Commando)
If your front profile is narrow but your side profile is long, you should be average height. (Raven)
If your front profile is narrow and your side profile is narrow, you should be taller. (Flea).

So despite being 20 tons, the Flea should be as tall as a 25 ton mech of average height (the commando), which is still shorter than a Raven. Meanwhile, with so much more surface area horizontally on both axis (wide and long), the Locust should thusly be shorter than an average 20 ton mech.

But that's just how I would have done it.

Now that said, the Centurion's sort of pushing it. It was usually a tall, skinny thing. Now it's a tall, wide thing.

Edited by Koniving, 18 October 2013 - 11:13 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Cathy, on 18 October 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

This...is the most relevant post i've seen in this thread

I've tried to use that argument so many times. Gamers want FPS "reality" not anything remotely correlating to IRL reality, which is of course, somewhat understandable, given giant stompy robots make no sense anyhow, lol. That said, for me seeing the stupid Protomech sized spider scooting around screws my immersion and enjoyment even before the stupid hit registration invincibility kicks in.

Koniving, on 18 October 2013 - 11:11 AM, said:

Mixed here. The volume isn't entirely in the bodyshape but also includes what can be attached to it. The Shadowhawk protrudes more than the Atlas as more is stored outside instead of inside. Examples, the cannons.

That said I do agree here.

I'll quote something I've said some time ago.



Now that said, the Centurion's sort of pushing it. It was usually a tall, skinny thing. Now it's a tall, wide thing.

I would agree with the last part, except that it has in no way hurt the mechs viability in the game. Aesthetically, I would prefer it to have a less silly left hand, a centurion crest, not a shark fin, and indeed, basically just be slimmer. Then it would be one sexy beast.

[Inflatable Fish]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 October 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:

I would agree with the last part, except that it has in no way hurt the mechs viability in the game. Aesthetically, I would prefer it to have a less silly left hand, a centurion crest, not a shark fin, and indeed, basically just be slimmer. Then it would be one sexy beast.

you kidding me? the shield arm looks totally badass, especially with the built-in battle scars

[Koniving]

DirePhoenix, on 16 October 2013 - 09:11 PM, said:

On the first scale, it looks mostly better thought out, but the Uller and Puma would probably still have issues trying to get the pilot and controls crammed into the space that looks like it should be the cockpit.

Historically, not every tank or mech requires the person to be sitting. The commando even in the scale in MWO (note the 'cockpit' is MUCH larger than the head) would require the pilot to stand inside and the "cockpit" window would go from lower-chest up on a 6' person.

I imagine that puma would be piloted by someone who is laying down. There's MORE than ample space if that is the case.

Bishop Steiner, on 18 October 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:

I would agree with the last part, except that it has in no way hurt the mechs viability in the game. Aesthetically, I would prefer it to have a less silly left hand, a centurion crest, not a shark fin, and indeed, basically just be slimmer. Then it would be one sexy beast.

You're right, but as you well know this is largely in part due to the twig-like center torso and the oversized arm hitbox remnants that remain after the arms are gone; dubbing the Centurion the Zombie Mech.

With hitboxes for the CT spread out a little bit into the sides and those remnants reduced to sizes occupying other mechs, its viability would be devastated unless the mech itself were reduced. Right now, funnily enough, the CT of a Centurion is thinner than that of a Trebuchet, which is noticeably thinner than the Centurion overall.

That said, someone made this image and I love it.


As for the shield, I would be much more content if the shield provided a protection bonus akin to "doors." Even more so if I can reposition the arm to a few presets with the push of a button. "Cover face." "Block front left high." "Block front left mid." Etc.

Edited by Koniving, 18 October 2013 - 11:38 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Inflatable Fish, on 18 October 2013 - 11:30 AM, said:

you kidding me? the shield arm looks totally badass, especially with the built-in battle scars

arm looks ok, the re-imagined cylon hand looks silly

Koniving, on 18 October 2013 - 11:34 AM, said:

Historically, not every tank or mech requires the person to be sitting. The commando even in the scale in MWO (note the 'cockpit' is MUCH larger than the head) would require the pilot to stand inside and the "cockpit" window would go from lower-chest up on a 6' person.

I imagine that puma would be piloted by someone who is laying down. There's MORE than ample space if that is the case.



You're right, but as you well know this is largely in part due to the twig-like center torso and the oversized arm hitbox remnants that remain after the arms are gone; dubbing the Centurion the Zombie Mech.

With hitboxes for the CT spread out a little bit into the sides and those remnants reduced to sizes occupying other mechs, its viability would be devastated unless the mech itself were reduced. Right now, funnily enough, the CT of a Centurion is thinner than that of a Trebuchet, which is noticeably thinner than the Centurion overall.

but the point is, the hitbox is what it is. And there is no reason to change that.

And while I rarely drive cents anymore, I honestly hope they never fix the transfer bug as it gave the mech a neat quirk. I wish more mechs had little quirks. It isn't like the transfer bug causes the issues the dang Spider hit registry does.

And while the Zombie toughness is great, the Zombie "build" is still a laughable waste of 50 tons.

[Johnny Reb]

Well, if the sabre reinforcements are any thing like the the Shadow Hawk, game play wise, I will be a very happy customer!

[Bishop Steiner]

Johnny Reb, on 18 October 2013 - 07:39 PM, said:

Well, if the sabre reinforcements are any thing like the the Shadow Hawk, game play wise, I will be a very happy customer!

WVR-6R could indeed prove a beast!

GRF-1S is probably going to be the only potentially solid Griff, unfortunately, since it at least has missiles on the LT so you don't lose it all in one shot. Still, if the Griff is as XL friendly as the Shad, should be fun, and much cooler looking head!

[Joseph Mallan]

And a House Steiner Staple!

[FearNotDeath]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 October 2013 - 10:50 AM, said:

From a reality perpective, looking at how much thinner, flatter and less bulky the components are, the SHD is actually pretty close to IRL scaling against a 100 tonner, since the Atlas is looking close to 1/3 wider and deeper, slightly taller, and certainly bulkier across the board.
People need to know how size vs mass actually scales, and very few people on here do. And even less understand the maths (I have trouble with that one unless I have the formulas and a handy calculator in front of me)

Need to agree with Bishop here height doesn't equal weight how many of us have fat friends that are twice our weight but the same height.

[Mystere]

I have a very simple question: Why are people using the fully-loaded weight for size comparisons as opposed to the stripped-down weight?

[William T Riker]

You guys can talk future fantasy mechwarrior alloys all you want, but don't try to come in here and convince us they got it right IRL too. Again, for the dense:



90 ton, 70 ton, 50 ton, 20 ton, 10 ton, 5 ton

Side view:


90 ton, 70 ton, 50 ton, 2x 20 ton, 10 ton

Step foot in a gym and you can experiment with it yourself!

Edited by William T Riker, 19 October 2013 - 07:14 AM.

[Mystere]

Who can lift 90 tons?!!!

Edited by Mystere, 19 October 2013 - 08:29 AM.

[William T Riker]

They're weights for Jaegers.