95 replies to this topic

[AntiSqueaker]

FupDup, on 05 January 2014 - 08:51 PM, said:

About the scale...most of the problems are within the medium class. A large proportion of the mediums are currently on par with heavies for size or larger...and that simply should not be so. Making mediums like the Trench Bucket not go up to an Atlas's head would help them keep a lower profile in battle (stealthier) as well as make them harder to hit (more durable). There are also some heavies that could use shrinking (mostly Quickdraw, the Dragon and Catapult could use a bit of a reduction as well) and the Awesome too. For lights, maybe the Raven could be made slightly closer to Jenner size (but still slightly taller).

I'm fairly certain that they wouldn't have to readjust every map to accommodate mediums that aren't the size of assault mechs, seeing how the maps already cope with smaller mechs like the Jenner and Locust.

Oh god yes. Centurions/Trebuchets shouldn't be the size of 70 ton mechs, Hunchbacks hunch shouldn't be the size of an Atlas's side torso. Etc Etc, it goes on and on. Mediums (and some lights) need a scaling pass for them to be even be considered competitive.

Also, Hunchbacks could *really* use a hitbox tweak to make their Hunch less of a bullet magnet. Even cutting it in half would still make it a decent sized target.

[luxebo]

Make the Hunch similar to the 4Js on each mech depending on the gun (maybe AC20 on 4G or 4H somewhat large or 4xppc on 4P large, but otherwise no). That should be pretty well done.

[Alaskan Nobody]

AntiSqueaker, on 09 January 2014 - 06:17 PM, said:

Oh god yes. Centurions/Trebuchets shouldn't be the size of 70 ton mechs,

This complaint always bothered me.

You know how tall the Firemoth/Dasher 20 toner is in the lore and TT?
Less than half a meter shorter than the DireWolf/Daishi 100 toner.

[Koniving]

luxebo, on 03 January 2014 - 05:03 PM, said:

Ideas.

Space reserved for positive and negative critique, backing (for ideas agreed with), counter ideas (for the ones disagreed with), and merging of ideas (for a better product overall).

Check back tomorrow!

[FupDup]

Shar Wolf, on 05 February 2014 - 06:09 PM, said:

[/size]
This complaint always bothered me.

You know how tall the Firemoth/Dasher 20 toner is in the lore and TT?
Less than half a meter shorter than the DireWolf/Daishi 100 toner.

The problem with the TT/lore argument is that TT used a dice-roll system to determine if you hit and where you hit. A battlemech's physical size had no effect on its survivability. Here, though, it does have an effect because you makes you easier to hit and easier to see. Mediums already have less armor and less firepower, I think it's fair to make them have a lower battlefield profile even if it means deviating from a dusty rulebook.

Edited by FupDup, 05 February 2014 - 06:17 PM.

[Alaskan Nobody]

FupDup, on 05 February 2014 - 06:12 PM, said:

The problem with the TT/lore

I understand that - but at the same time, it is very easily argued that TT/Lore is what "Should" be for the base designs.

Keep in mind that, I have never once in my life played TT, so that is not why I am stating that.

Edit: Keeping in mind also that "should" is a detail that changes drastically from person to person - to the point that after digging through the forums for any period of time I physically cringe every time I see the word used here - before even seeing how it is used.

Edited by Shar Wolf, 05 February 2014 - 06:27 PM.

[Koniving]

AntiSqueaker, on 09 January 2014 - 06:17 PM, said:

Oh god yes. Centurions/Trebuchets shouldn't be the size of 70 ton mechs, Hunchbacks hunch shouldn't be the size of an Atlas's side torso. Etc Etc, it goes on and on. Mediums (and some lights) need a scaling pass for them to be even be considered competitive.

Also, Hunchbacks could *really* use a hitbox tweak to make their Hunch less of a bullet magnet. Even cutting it in half would still make it a decent sized target.

In truth, the Hunchback can't hold a pilot with its current size. At least not where it's supposedly placed. The Centurion can.

But, what is hugely different is the starting armor of the Centurion and the Hunchback. The Hunchback's armor is vastly superior. With the variants currently available, the Hunchback is standardized with 320 points of armor (in MWO's rating). This rating was basically the doubling of the standard tabletop ratings by doubling how many points are given per ton of armor. In this same system, the Centurion A and D only gets 272 points of armor (an inferiority of 48 points of armor and identical to the Blackjack's armor), while the under performing Centurion AL gets superior armor to the Hunchback line at 338.

Known is the fact that a Centurion is taller than a Hunchback; this is true in lore as well as in MWO. What ~is~ actually wrong with the scale of the Centurion isn't so much its height but its width. Those extra wide arms are far wider than even the concept art. An extra Hunchback fist in width has been added to each shoulder to make them stick out more. The reasoning behind this is unknown. But most likely related to the SRM and LRM splash damage which was a problem at the time. Most likely if it was 'too skinny' then it'd receive extra damage. Also hitbox design back then was overly simplified with the CT as nothing more than the strip with the lasers on it, and the head including the entire mohawk. Far as lore, art, etc., the Centurion is about as skinny as MWO's Trebuchet is (if you're counting only the body). The arms were more Hunchback-sized. And that pelvis; an obscenely oversized monstrosity. But the height. Depending on the source, Centurions would occasionally depicted as tall as Highlanders. Thank god we avoided that bullet.

One thing I plan to address at some point is how the armor of the various variants was part of what defined them and is now lost.

For example, know how the Shadowhawk "obsoletes" the Hunchback? If armor differences were preserved even at maximum armor, it would be the other way around. In simple terms of armor the Hunchback would obsolete the Shadowhawk with the drawback of being terribly, horrifically slow.

Two of the three main variants of Jagermech actually have armor inferior to that of the Blackjack to start with. And the Jenner D and the 3 available Locusts have the same amount of armor.

My favorite thing, though, is with MWO's 65 ton mech armor limits... the Thunderbolt 9SE can't even equip it's stock armor. I'm serious, look at it on Smurfy. See that left over tonnage? That would've been additional points of armor. It falls short of the supposed armor weight it carries.

Edited by Koniving, 05 February 2014 - 06:30 PM.

[FupDup]

Shar Wolf, on 05 February 2014 - 06:23 PM, said:

I understand that - but at the same time, it is very easily argued that TT/Lore is what "Should" be for the base designs.

Keep in mind that, I have never once in my life played TT, so that is not why I am stating that.

The keyword there is "base" designs. Sometimes we might need to tweak something here and there if it doesn't work out so well in a real-time FPS. For this specific issue, IMO the mech scaling isn't really a core element of TeeTee. It's mostly just a fluff thing that doesn't really impact its gameplay (but in MWO, it does have an impact). Now, if we did some kind of drastic lore change like making the Large Laser into a missile weapon that required ammo, or making Kerensky come back from the dead and take command of the Lyran Commonwealth, then we'd have some serious issues. But reducing medium mech size...we can probably get away with.

I haven't played it either. (Closest I've gotten is MW:T).

[Alaskan Nobody]

FupDup, on 05 February 2014 - 06:29 PM, said:

...........

Take another look at my post- I clarified more on what was bothering me about the post I quoted.

[luxebo]

I think I'll also edit the Griffin and Wolverine. Thanks for the comments guys.

@Koniving I've seen that armor suggestion from you quite a few times. I personally think it's a good idea but it really can't be 100+ from the stock armor directly, at the same time it can't be a percentage as others mentioned. I think what should go for this is a certain limit placed on each mech depending on it's supposed role and quirks, therefore making maybe the Hunchie more armored than the Shadow Hawk (not a ton more but quite a bit more), Thunderbolt more armored than the Jagermech, etc. Good idea in general, but making a universal limit would be dangerous, as certain mechs would be overbuffed, and certain mechs would be overnerfed causing a giant shift in balance. Same thing goes for the ghost heat limit, I really think it should go away totally, but if not maybe let certain mechs have a quirk to extend the ghost heat limit (Awesome allowed for 3 PPCs, maybe 4, Hunchie 4P allowed 8 med lasers, maybe 9, etc.)

[ReXspec]

The current problems with the so-called "obsolete" 'mechs we are being faced with is because of the mutilated heat and slot mechanics we see in MWO.

This problem of obsolete 'mechs would be able to be fixed (or, at least, significantly reduced) if design quirks were more accurate and the design quirks that are already present in the game for each 'mech were more pronounced or made noticeable (turn radii, convergence speeds, turn speeds, 'mech scaling, etc.). It may also help to make a special tooltip, or description of a selected 'mechs design quirks, flaws, strengths, and weaknesses.

U.I. 2.0 was supposed to solve this problem, but, another problem is, there is currently no way to make a comparison of stats between 'mechs or weapons without using a third-party program.

Another issue is that the current 12-6 slot cap has to go... they did away with this cap in MW4 and the RPG, and replaced it with slot numbers that reflected 'mech design...

Edited by ReXspec, 05 February 2014 - 08:34 PM.

[Kaeb Odellas]

They really ought to decouple max armor and internals from tonnage, and allow more variation on where you can put armor.

For instance, the Hunchback has the same max armor profile as the Centurion. However, the Hunchback has tiny arms and huge torso sections, and the Centurion has the opposite.

Wouldn't it make sense then, for the Hunchback to have lower max armor and internals in the arms and more in the torso? If you remove 12 points of max armor and 6 points of internals from each arm and move them to the side torsos, they'll be that much more survivable and easier to keep in play. For the Centurion, you can strip a little bit of armor and internals from the head, torsos, and legs and add them to the arms to improve the viability of ballistic Centurions.

Reallocating armor internals from the heads of Commandos and Locusts would also help their survivability. The Locust's cockpit, fully armored, is tougher than its legs and arms, and only slightly less durable than its side torsos. What sense does that make?

[luxebo]

Kaeb Odellas, on 05 February 2014 - 08:53 PM, said:

They really ought to decouple max armor and internals from tonnage, and allow more variation on where you can put armor.

For instance, the Hunchback has the same max armor profile as the Centurion. However, the Hunchback has tiny arms and huge torso sections, and the Centurion has the opposite.

Wouldn't it make sense then, for the Hunchback to have lower max armor and internals in the arms and more in the torso? If you remove 12 points of max armor and 6 points of internals from each arm and move them to the side torsos, they'll be that much more survivable and easier to keep in play. For the Centurion, you can strip a little bit of armor and internals from the head, torsos, and legs and add them to the arms to improve the viability of ballistic Centurions.

Reallocating armor internals from the heads of Commandos and Locusts would also help their survivability. The Locust's cockpit, fully armored, is tougher than its legs and arms, and only slightly less durable than its side torsos. What sense does that make?

Actually the Centurion's torsos are gigantic as well, just not as pronounced as the Hunchie. The problem with Commandos and Locusts are their weight in comparison to Jenners, Cicadas, now Firestarters, Ravens, Spiders, etc.

[Kaeb Odellas]

luxebo, on 05 February 2014 - 08:57 PM, said:

Actually the Centurion's torsos are gigantic as well, just not as pronounced as the Hunchie. The problem with Commandos and Locusts are their weight in comparison to Jenners, Cicadas, now Firestarters, Ravens, Spiders, etc.

The Centurion's arms are enormous, however, and far larger than the side torsos. Even when destroyed, the stump they leave behind still blocks a lot of incoming side-torso damage. Rarely do I see a Centurion go down without at least one of its arms destroyed, and even then it's usually after they're legged.

Commandos and Locusts are basically screwed when compared to the bigger lights, but seriously, they do not need that much cockpit durability. There is no reason for a Locust's tiny head to be tougher than most of the rest of the mech.

[Noesis]

Some mediums have scaling issues with size, noted and confirmed by PGI but reluctant to make changes due to economical concerns.

[luxebo]

Noesis, on 06 February 2014 - 12:22 AM, said:

Some mediums have scaling issues with size, noted and confirmed by PGI but reluctant to make changes due to economical concerns.

And time issues (it would probably take quite an effort to rescale mechs.)