31 replies to this topic

[Noonan]

So it was decided to to just re-label feet per second to meters per second and call it a day.

The math for this is beyond comical. According to this 'new math' mechs are virtually unbreakable.

Light mechs will now take damage only when they hit the ground at 37 meters per second it says in the patch notes.

That is 133 kph.

ASSAULT MECHS SPEED THRESHOLD IS 108 KPH!!!!! I wish I had a 100+ kph assault mech lol.

A 50m fall will get you up to about 110kph splat at the bottom for the record.

PGI, I will save you the work of looking it up, the conversion factor is 0.3048 meters per foot.

[Redshift2k5]

I'm pretty sure the original system was never reporting actual feet to begin with.

[Shlkt]

The game uses a gravity value of about 36 m/s^2 (compared to 9.8 m/s^2 on Earth), so be sure to take that into consideration when doing fall calculations.

The falling velocity was already being displayed in meters per second. The previous ft/s label was just wrong.

[Sean von Steinike]

Redshift2k5, on 29 July 2014 - 11:17 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure the original system was never reporting actual feet to begin with.

Likely so, since I think every other measurement in the game is based on meters.

[Sephlock]

You guys are making a big deal out of nothing.

I don't see how this sort of thing could ever POSSIBLY cause any problems.

Especially not in a game set in the Space Age .

[Adiuvo]

Honestly, who gives a ****? You're piloting things that would collapse under their own weight anyways. A Cataphract somehow weighs about the same as an Abrams. Battletech does NOT correlate well with real life whatsoever.

[Noonan]

Adiuvo, on 29 July 2014 - 11:27 AM, said:

Honestly, who gives a ****? You're piloting things that would collapse under their own weight anyways. A Cataphract somehow weighs about the same as an Abrams. Battletech does NOT correlate well with real life whatsoever.

I care, because I am Smarter than a Fifth Grader and math is simple. Sorry you did not make it that far.

It would be nice if PGI could do things right the first time and not misdirect energy doing the same thing over and over. We would have CW by now if more was done to avoid these kind of minor lapses in attention to detail.

[Adiuvo]

Noonan, on 29 July 2014 - 11:44 AM, said:

I care, because I am Smarter than a Fifth Grader and math is simple. Sorry you did not make it that far.

It would be nice if PGI could do things right the first time and not misdirect energy doing the same thing over and over. We would have CW by now if more was done to avoid these kind of minor lapses in attention to detail.

The math also doesn't work out at all when it comes to mech density. It's still a completely stupid thing to complain about.

[Sandpit]

op, you do realize that a mech's speed has nothing to do with gravity and fall speed right?

Noonan, on 29 July 2014 - 11:03 AM, said:

ASSAULT MECHS SPEED THRESHOLD IS 108 KPH!!!!! I wish I had a 100+ kph assault mech lol.

[CeeKay Boques]

I'm pretty sure an An Atlas can fall at 108kph.

[Gyrok]

Technoviking, on 29 July 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure an An Atlas can fall at 108kph.

Considering terminal velocity is ~130 mph on earth (drag limited), it should be able to hit somewhere around ~210 kph not withstanding drag limitations...

[Alistair Winter]

Adiuvo, on 29 July 2014 - 11:27 AM, said:

Honestly, who gives a ****? You're piloting things that would collapse under their own weight anyways. A Cataphract somehow weighs about the same as an Abrams. Battletech does NOT correlate well with real life whatsoever.

A 100 ton battlemech falling 100 meters while running 60 kph and landing on a pile of snow on Frozen City, without sinking an inch into the snow, keeps running almost without missing a beat, like a boss.

Do not question MWO physics.

[DEMAX51]

In most FPS games, characters run around at about 30 mph.

Mario can jump a distance of like 30 meters.

Some game characters can jump while they're already in midair.

Video game physics =/= real world physics.

[WarHippy]

Noonan, on 29 July 2014 - 11:03 AM, said:

So it was decided to to just re-label feet per second to meters per second and call it a day.

The math for this is beyond comical. According to this 'new math' mechs are virtually unbreakable.

Light mechs will now take damage only when they hit the ground at 37 meters per second it says in the patch notes.

That is 133 kph.

ASSAULT MECHS SPEED THRESHOLD IS 108 KPH!!!!! I wish I had a 100+ kph assault mech lol.

A 50m fall will get you up to about 110kph splat at the bottom for the record.

PGI, I will save you the work of looking it up, the conversion factor is 0.3048 meters per foot.

Did you really expect them to change anything other than the f to an m? The people that complained wasted a lot of time over something that was meaningless. The only thing that mattered was the number, and you knew that 30+ equaled damage the fact that it said f or m after the number was irrelevant.

[cSand]

Noonan, on 29 July 2014 - 11:44 AM, said:

I care, because I am Smarter than a Fifth Grader and math is simple. Sorry you did not make it that far.

It would be nice if PGI could do things right the first time and not misdirect energy doing the same thing over and over. We would have CW by now if more was done to avoid these kind of minor lapses in attention to detail.

Well, that's good and dandy..

but a typo of f/s instead of m/s is hardly something to knot up your panties over

Edited by cSand, 29 July 2014 - 12:14 PM.

[dario03]

So they just changed the ft/s to m/s on the display? Or do you actually have to fall over 3 times as fast to take fall damage?
And was there a change to the fall damage equation or are light mechs still using the same formula as assault mechs but with higher minimum to start damage?

[stjobe]

dario03, on 29 July 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

And was there a change to the fall damage equation or are light mechs still using the same formula as assault mechs but with higher minimum to start damage?

This. I want to know if the formula still has lights at the same damage level as assaults. Because that's one of the more egregious nerfs to lights in the last patch.

[Tw1stedMonkey]

Adiuvo, on 29 July 2014 - 11:47 AM, said:

The math also doesn't work out at all when it comes to mech density. It's still a completely stupid thing to complain about.

How is it stupid to call out stupid logic? Battletech is crazy with all weight assignments. What the f%^& are the targeting computers made out of to weigh a freaking ton per rank? desktop computers weigh what? 20-30 pounds if you have a heavy metal case. Yes you would probly need a better computer to work it all out blah blah but then why is the price of the targeting computers so cheap? I think the mark 1 is cheaper than a DHS if i am not mistaken, which would not be the case if you needed 1000kg of processing power lol. Then how does a computer improve ballistic firing speed... Ugh my head is starting to hurt.

That said, while I'ld like it to work out logically, as long as it doesn't effect gameplay it's not a big deal. How hard would it be to use the actual gravities(sp?) (and actual temperatures for cooling efficiencies) of the planets that are displayed before the match starts instead of some made-up number roughly 3.5x 1G of gravitational acceleration? They already can change cooling efficiency based on map so it seems like it should be easy to scale fall speed at least (it could be complicated to change all of the ballistic drops and missile trajectories though admittedly.)

Edited by Tw1stedMonkey, 29 July 2014 - 01:31 PM.

[RedDragon]

Adiuvo, on 29 July 2014 - 11:27 AM, said:

Honestly, who gives a ****? You're piloting things that would collapse under their own weight anyways. A Cataphract somehow weighs about the same as an Abrams. Battletech does NOT correlate well with real life whatsoever.

Cataphract: 70 tons, about 14 m tall. Abrams: 60 tons, 8 m long. Add the fact that the Abrams is a massive box while the Cataphract is humanoid shaped, they may very well come out with with the same density.

[0bsidion]

Tw1stedMonkey, on 29 July 2014 - 01:30 PM, said:

How is it stupid to call out stupid logic? Battletech is crazy with all weight assignments. What the f%^& are the targeting computers made out of to weigh a freaking ton per rank? desktop computers weigh what? 20-30 pounds if you have a heavy metal case. Yes you would probly need a better computer to work it all out blah blah but then why is the price of the targeting computers so cheap? I think the mark 1 is cheaper than a DHS if i am not mistaken, which would not be the case if you needed 1000kg of processing power lol. Then how does a computer improve ballistic firing speed... Ugh my head is starting to hurt.

That said, while I'ld like it to work out logically, as long as it doesn't effect gameplay it's not a big deal. How hard would it be to use the actual gravities(sp?) (and actual temperatures for cooling efficiencies) of the planets that are displayed before the match starts instead of some made-up number roughly 3.5x 1G of gravitational acceleration? They already can change cooling efficiency based on map so it seems like it should be easy to scale fall speed at least (it could be complicated to change all of the ballistic drops and missile trajectories though admittedly.)

Obviously the equipment required for TCs to manipulate the laws of physics explains their density. I thought everyone knew that....