42 replies to this topic

[Felbombling]

What I'd like to see would be the art team come up with stock sizes for the weapons themselves, then work with those weapon volumes when modeling the Mechs and weapon configurations. Lots of work, though... and probable hit box issues after customization. Would be pretty cool if they could pull it off, though, from an immersion standpoint.

[GreyGriffin]

Machinegun Hollander go?

[Bishop Steiner]

Roland, on 18 May 2014 - 08:42 AM, said:

Laser lens sizes wouldn't really change with different power lasers.

really depends on what method one is using to power ramp. You either need more lenses, and thus a longer focal tube, or a wider apparatus to allow more, lower intensity energy through. Mind you, one can technically always ramp down the power, but at a certain aperture size, lens and capacitor point one does have a high end ceiling, which one can safely assume each weapon type, Small, Medium and Large maxes out. Regardless if it's aperture width, focal tube length, capacitor size, the only way a .5 Small Laser, and a 7 Ton Large Pulse Laser take up the same amount of real estate is if the small laser is in a grossly inefficient, massively oversized housing. And while size alone can be deceiving, I really have trouble envisioning those barrels on the Kit Foxes left arm at 4+ tons.

[Bishop Steiner]

Jin Ma, on 18 May 2014 - 10:03 AM, said:

Barrel sizes have always been determined by concept art. Examples; Awesome, Raven, actually all mechs. only exceptions are custom visuals to show weapon switch-ins(because nobody does concept for those, and they are just sized by the modlers) and also Kitfox oddly enough (maybe they are reserving the longer barrel art for larger ballistic weapons) there maybe a couple others, but otherwise all stock barrel sizes are determined by the concept art.

and since concept art is loosely based on TRO art, barrel sizes are also loosely determined by their original TRO art. (as someone above me posted)
so if you cant convince alex to size the weapons "correctly" maybe take it up with Battletech?

And while i agree that the same weapons varying hugely among different weight classes doesn't make sense from a realism point of view.
Scaling the weapons exactly the same isn't realistic from a programing/game design/modeling i.e general game production point of view.

And trust me i am on the dev's case as much as the next guy with things that they can achieve, and are just too lazy to do (like scaling mechs right for gods sakes). But asking them to scale the weapons exactly the same while still giving us hardpoint customizations is just too much.

can you show me the concept art where the Firestarter has PPCs?



how it SHOULD look


and a Ghetto-Panther

And also, the PPCs alex put on the K2 originally were things of beauty. Now they look like the nipples off of baby bottles. I should blame Alex for the modelers butchering that?

Let's keep it real, brah.

[Jin Ma]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 May 2014 - 03:11 PM, said:

can you show me the concept art where the Firestarter has PPCs?



how it SHOULD look


and a Ghetto-Panther

And also, the PPCs alex put on the K2 originally were things of beauty. Now they look like the nipples off of baby bottles. I should blame Alex for the modelers butchering that?

Let's keep it real, brah.

you neglected to read this part

Quote

only exceptions are custom visuals to show weapon switch-ins(because nobody does concept for those, and they are just sized by the modlers) and also Kitfox oddly enough (maybe they are reserving the longer barrel art for larger ballistic weapons) there maybe a couple others, but otherwise all stock barrel sizes are determined by the concept art.

And while i do think those large PPCs look really cool. there is no way 2 PPCs of that size can fit on 1 arm of the firestarter. And they can't just throw their hardpoint system out the window. There are technical limitations of the system that say 1 hardpoint has 1 origin point from the mech. So all weapons be it ballistics, missiles, laserse need to come out of that hole.

problem with small mechs, is that the 2 holes(forexample in the firestarter below) are spaced so closely that if you make the PPC massive, the PPC barrels will overlap. And no they can't move or space apart the holes with the current system sadly.

To put it in anotehr way, the reason the firestarter's PPCs are so small is because they have to be spaced together. The reason they have to be spaced together is because the original 2 medium lasers on the firestarter are that close together.

Edited by Jin Ma, 18 May 2014 - 03:27 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Jin Ma, on 18 May 2014 - 03:19 PM, said:

you neglected to read this part

no, not entirely. But the weapons, in the Concept art are actually mostly scaled correctly, with the exception of mechs like the KitFox. PPCs, for instance on the K2, Awesome and BNC-3S all look pretty synonymous.

[Roland]

crossflip, on 18 May 2014 - 10:09 AM, said:

Different lasers have different ranges. If the small lasers and large lasers had the same lens sizes as the medium lasers then their effective range would be around 270m and their intensity would vary hugely. For lasers with different lenses I'd have to conclude that either lens number or size needs to vary.

No, not really.
The difference in range would stem from the power put into the beam, not the size of the laser lens.

Lasers don't work by focusing light onto a specific range.

[RedDragon]

FupDup, on 18 May 2014 - 08:12 AM, said:

It's a carryover from the TRO art.





They did have different shape, but their overall size was basically the same. Note that I'm not saying I like it this way, I'm just saying that there's a precedent. At the very least I would like a blue or purple lens for the ERLL and a green or yellow one for the ERSL.

Just as a note here: The schematics for the Clan mechs mostly did only show the weapon pods not the actual weapons, so the TRO art did mostly illustrate the chassis, not the actual configuration. The Kitfox for example doesn't have the missiles drawn. Hellbringer, Summoner, and Madcat only have those hexagonal weapon pods in the arms etc.

[Koniving]

Morbid ideas.

Spoiler

Big missile racks.


Dual AC/20 Rifleman.


Don't think this is Battletech, but when you compare the newer Hollander images and their Gauss Rifle.... this suddenly makes a boatload of sense as a triple Gauss mech.


A tank equipped with 3 SRM-6, two large lasers, 2 machine guns (the little gatling gun turrets) and a small laser turret.


Just some food for thought.









Smaller and larger lasers?


Locust with disposable rocket pods.


...I'd kinda freak out if I saw this in MWO.

Knowing PGI they'd front load the sword damage (one of the few things they should)....actually they'd probably turn it into a damage over time weapon like the flamer...and just as useless.

From BT's website.




Adder


Laser, AC, some ST weapon.

LB-2s.

o.O;

Edited by Koniving, 18 May 2014 - 04:16 PM.

[Dymlos2003]

Oh jeez it's this stupid thread again.

Haven't you already got an answer from the artist? Shut up already.

Edited by Dymlos2003, 18 May 2014 - 04:57 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Dymlos2003, on 18 May 2014 - 04:56 PM, said:

Oh jeez it's this stupid thread again.

Haven't you already got an answer from the artist? Shut up already.

If it bugs you buttercup...... skip to the next post. And feel free to make me shut up, internet tough guy.

[Merit Lef]

It would be nice to see some variety with all the weapons. Not every PPC/AC/Laser were manufactured by the same corporation through the whole of the I.S. Throw in some originality, not much but some. Keep it simple at first. Idea: Depending on which House/Clan was the larger/original manufacture of the mech have said weapon mimic that House's style when able (not always). Example: Davion- uses square focusing lenses, Kurita- uses triangle, Lio- uses circle. Baby step with the simple then expand from there. Plus it will bring just a touch and feel of the enormity of the I.S./lore into the game.

[Reitrix]

Merit Lef, on 18 May 2014 - 07:42 PM, said:

It would be nice to see some variety with all the weapons. Not every PPC/AC/Laser were manufactured by the same corporation through the whole of the I.S. Throw in some originality, not much but some. Keep it simple at first. Idea: Depending on which House/Clan was the larger/original manufacture of the mech have said weapon mimic that House's style when able (not always). Example: Davion- uses square focusing lenses, Kurita- uses triangle, Lio- uses circle. Baby step with the simple then expand from there. Plus it will bring just a touch and feel of the enormity of the I.S./lore into the game.

They did mention a while back that they'd like to implement different manufacturers for our weapons/engines. We may see differences in weapon models associated with that.

Side note: please gimmie back my chunky K2 barrels T_T I'm terrified of what my beloved Awesome 9M will look like after it gets its art pass >_<

[Bishop Steiner]

Reitrix, on 18 May 2014 - 08:49 PM, said:

They did mention a while back that they'd like to implement different manufacturers for our weapons/engines. We may see differences in weapon models associated with that.

Side note: please gimmie back my chunky K2 barrels T_T I'm terrified of what my beloved Awesome 9M will look like after it gets its art pass >_<

or

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 18 May 2014 - 09:21 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 18 May 2014 - 10:14 AM, said:

For lasers, this is how they currently look all the time...




This is a crappy mock-up of how I would like my 2 ER Larges and 1 Medium to look...

good start, but I would prefer more akin to this

[Wolfways]

Reitrix, on 18 May 2014 - 08:49 PM, said:

They did mention a while back that they'd like to implement different manufacturers for our weapons/engines. We may see differences in weapon models associated with that.

Didn't they already start to do that...with modules?

[Dirus Nigh]

I starting to hate the module weapon parts as well. They look cheep and tacked on my mech. The modeling team should have took the extra time to have a different lay out for weapon placements depending on the number mounted.

For example, you know that when the treb gets it's modeling pass the devs will just tack on a laser/ppc mount underneath the the right arm. Instead of changing the placement form an over under to a triangle.

I really hate the laser boxes. They just look like tacked on blocks. The old Jenner arms looked so much better, now they have boxes sticking out of them. The jenner F adds in a tacked on box under the arm. It looks like crap. All the devs had to do was add a third laser lens right below the old mounting set up. A thin PPC barrel like the firestarter had could have worked very well.

Auto cannon barrels just look ridiculous. They need to be shortened up on a lot of the mechs. The victor looks like it is waving around a lance, not an AC barrel. Same with the Battlemaster.

Dont get me started on missile boxes. What they did with the catapult should have never gotten past the concept stage.

I honestly do not mind weapons being different sizes for different mechs. I just assume that they are made by different manufacturers. The old PPC barrels on the K2 did not have to be sized down. You could easyelly assume that the large barrel was really an armored sheath, and the particular design for that model PPC had a different capacitor and coolant system. If the new PPC barrel for the K2 was for a large laser, then that would have been awesome.

Keep in mind that weight does not equate to volume. Even though a large laser is four tons and a medium one ton it does not mean that the actual laser box needs to be four times bigger. The weight is not all contained in the actual weapon either. That four tons could be focusing lens, the frame for the weapon, extra power cables, insulation, larger actuators used for the find movement for targeting, some of which would be housed in the structure around the weapon. That said, I do think that a large laser should be noticeably bigger than a medium laser. I think the laser mount on the commandos left arm is a good size for one.

[627]

Jin Ma, on 18 May 2014 - 03:19 PM, said:

you neglected to read this part



And while i do think those large PPCs look really cool. there is no way 2 PPCs of that size can fit on 1 arm of the firestarter. And they can't just throw their hardpoint system out the window. There are technical limitations of the system that say 1 hardpoint has 1 origin point from the mech. So all weapons be it ballistics, missiles, laserse need to come out of that hole.

problem with small mechs, is that the 2 holes(forexample in the firestarter below) are spaced so closely that if you make the PPC massive, the PPC barrels will overlap. And no they can't move or space apart the holes with the current system sadly.

To put it in anotehr way, the reason the firestarter's PPCs are so small is because they have to be spaced together. The reason they have to be spaced together is because the original 2 medium lasers on the firestarter are that close together.

Not quite correct as the battlemasters ballistic arm shows us. if you mount 2-3 MGs like stock they are very tight together on the arm. if you dhange that to some ACs, those are big and all around the arm to fit. So it is possible. Imho it is just a question of time and costs

[Dirus Nigh]

627, on 18 May 2014 - 10:00 PM, said:

Not quite correct as the battlemasters ballistic arm shows us. if you mount 2-3 MGs like stock they are very tight together on the arm. if you dhange that to some ACs, those are big and all around the arm to fit. So it is possible. Imho it is just a question of time and costs

Funny thing about the Battlemaster. You can get two AC2s mounted on the MG slots on the fore arm, You have to put an MG on second, and it will show up in between the AC barrels. unless PGI fixed that sense I discovered that.

[FupDup]

Bishop Steiner, on 18 May 2014 - 09:41 PM, said:

good start, but I would prefer more akin to this

I can't really see the difference, did you enlarge the ERLL slightly?