181 replies to this topic

[Bloodweaver]

mikethemutt, on 19 April 2015 - 09:47 AM, said:

I agree it should be more squat 100%. It was one of the things the Ebon Jag was most well known for. Is it just me or in the concept art did it look much more squat than the model they provided?

The pelvis wasn't as tall, the arm's weren't slung so low, and the legs weren't as long OR as straight. So no, it's not just you.

[LordBraxton]

Every piece of MWO concept art has been godlike, every 3D model has been a bad-to-terribad translation.

The centurion is the earliest offender... look how slim and predatory the concept looks vs the model.

[DrSlamastika]

YES PLEASE

[Ferrit]

It feels like it doesn't even look like the original? I know I'm not the only one who buys mechs based off appearance even if thats not popular. But this isn't the mech I paid for in the original screen shot :/ so it seems unfair to me to pay for a product and get something else completely different.

Plus it definetely doesn't look as good with the longer stick legs

[Damocles]

Yes

[Tarogato]

Ultimatum X, on 19 April 2015 - 09:54 AM, said:

Those are basically quirks, negative quirks. That limited torso twist is one of the things that have held Battlemasters back as a chassis.

I personally think the source art is awful looking, I think what is in that video looks better than anything else put forward from original artwork. I think the only thing that looks better is the MWO concept art, and moving the fuselage forward is the part I agree with to make it look more aggressive - other than that the concept art is art, and it's a dynamic pose - it's hard to compete with that using a static model with no pose.


So I don't see the need to artificially create balancing issues* to satisfy an appeal to older artwork that just looks bad to me to begin with.

*A situation where where we either accidentally nerf or buff a mech and then follow through with more nerfs or buffs to off-set that.

You're right about the Battlemaster, but the Battlemaster doesn't have the clear cut advantages to make up for it, like high mounted weapons combined with maneuverability of a Clan heavy combined with a low profile combined with tonnage efficient weapons combined with Clan XL. Actually, it does have the high mounted hardpoints, but I find it strange that it's not utilised more as a ridge peeker. Perhaps because the Stalker outclasses it at the same tonnage and more STK builds can stick with a STD engine and have really favourable hitboxes making them incredibly tanky.

I think the Cauldron Born is very likely to have the inherent advantages needed to make up for some less than striking base stats, or chassis quirks. I also think the need to have a mech that just looks so darn sexy and mean that people **** in their pants and money falls out of their wallets more easily. Quite a few people are easily swayed by aesthetics, well... more than quite a few, and that's why I created this thread - to gauge community consensus. You can't deny the overwhelming majority of support the suggestion is receiving. Even if...

Quote

... a bunch of posters who agree with you giving zero actual thought to the matter isn't worth nearly as much weight as you are giving it.

The posters who agree with you and then give some kind of real, concrete reasons to support why it will be good and why it won't be a balance issue is the kind of feedback we should consider.

10 posters giving what is effectively a "+1!" and nothing else, is pretty empty feedback.

Completely relevant! Thank you, I'll adjust my OP to encourage positive feedback beyond an empty "thumbs up!"

Also, to be fair, HPG subreddit has been as a whole much more critical of the idea, but a large portion of them are doing a similar thing: leaving a "-1!" and nothing else - empty feedback. Either their votes are just as invalid as the overwhelming majority over here on the forums, or our votes here are just as valid as theirs over there - you can't pick just one.

[Mad Strike]

Tarogato, on 19 April 2015 - 04:33 AM, said:

Which would you rather have?





We've been given a sneak preview of the Cauldron Born in-game model as it stands: a work in progress. Hopefully we can use this opportunity to provide constructive feedback to the modeler(s) on how to improve the model so that it can fully meet our expectations. It already looks damn sexy, as does almost every model developed from Alex's art. But it could look even sexier.

I know many people are happy with it, but there seems to be significant amount of people who do think it could be improved. You can find examples here:

• http://mwomercs.com/...pdate-04182015/
  
• http://mwomercs.com/...ron-born-model/
  
• http://www.reddit.co...auldron_born_3d

---

The requested changes:

1. more aggressive angle in the leg joints
2. upper body positioned slightly more forward on the hip
3. scaling legs, torso, or whole to achieve better proportions (might not even be necessary)



Here is a more sophisticated illustration of the differences:




The hip (or highest point on the leg/thigh) should be about the halfway point along the total height of the model, which is to say it should divide the mech in half, resulting in a 50/50 torso-to-legs proportion. The WIP model currently has about a 35/65 torso-to-legs proportion. Shown by red horizontal lines.

I would be willing to accept a compromise between Image #1 and Image #2 as illustrated above, but obviously the closer to Image #2 it becomes, the more it will resemble the source material and the more the true character of the mech will be apparent. It should be low, mean, and aggressive... not tall, mild, or prude.

---

State your opinion in this thread whether or not you'd like to see adjustments like this made to the model before it's too late and we can't go back!

Yes or no?

Here we go again........

[Tarogato]

strikebrch, on 19 April 2015 - 10:29 AM, said:

Here we go again........

Sorry, I had to be "that guy."

Though, if it's any consolation, I promise to not be unhappy or overcritical of any models released for the remainder of the next two mech packs (or more... ), including the rest of Clan Wave III. Personally, I think the rest of the designs are hard to mess up and I have faith in PGI to model them well, especially given the concept art. The Cauldron Born, unfortunately, it's a bit of a finicky monster, and it's clear that people feel strongly about it. More than I expected, actually.

Edited by Tarogato, 19 April 2015 - 10:34 AM.

[Side Step]

This edit posted in the reddit thread being linked from the OP seems pretty much spot on.

The aggressive stance is mostly what's lacking from the model shown in the Weekend Update.

[LordBraxton]

Side Step, on 19 April 2015 - 10:40 AM, said:

This edit posted in the reddit thread being linked from the OP seems pretty much spot on.

The aggressive stance is mostly what's lacking from the model shown in the Weekend Update.

legs from the knee down are far too long and thin

EDIT: nope.. the whole leg is far too long

Edited by LordBraxton, 19 April 2015 - 10:43 AM.

[Selene Lunaris]

I like the legs. The torso proportions, not so much.

[Ultimax]

Tarogato, on 19 April 2015 - 10:27 AM, said:

You're right about the Battlemaster, but the Battlemaster doesn't have the clear cut advantages to make up for it, like high mounted weapons

It has very good energy hardpoint placement.

Tarogato, on 19 April 2015 - 10:27 AM, said:

...combined with maneuverability of a Clan heavy combined with a low profile combined with tonnage efficient weapons combined with Clan XL.

It won't have a low profile if nothing gets changed.


I just don't trust player theory crafting here, and I don't think the legs being as they are look bad - nor is it important enough to mess with them.

Tarogato, on 19 April 2015 - 10:27 AM, said:

Actually, it does have the high mounted hardpoints, but I find it strange that it's not utilised more as a ridge peeker. Perhaps because the Stalker outclasses it at the same tonnage and more STK builds can stick with a STD engine and have really favourable hitboxes making them incredibly tanky.

STK has more critical slots available to it (no actuators), and the energy hardpoints are in the arms.

The STK does not have "really favorable hitboxes".

That is a misnomer that people will not let die.

Stalkers only have good hitboxes if you are shielding with a side and sacrificing it.

For Symmetrical builds, mechs with arms are much tankier and can use their arms to absorb damage. The Banshee is a massively more tanky mech than the Stalker is - people confuse "Shield side asymmetric Misery build" with "All Stalkers".

The reason the BLR is bad at that is...because it has poor built in torso twist angles.


So as you can see, something tiny like poor torso range can take a mech and instead of making it good - work against it.

I'd rather not roll the dice here.

Tarogato, on 19 April 2015 - 10:27 AM, said:

Also, to be fair, HPG subreddit has been as a whole much more critical of the idea, but a large portion of them are doing a similar thing: leaving a "-1!" and nothing else - empty feedback. Either their votes are just as invalid as the overwhelming majority over here on the forums, or our votes here are just as valid as theirs over there - you can't pick just one.

I wouldn't give -1 downvotes with no critical assessment any weight either.

[C E Dwyer]

I would rather have the shorter squat version.

Why

It looks meaner, more aggressive,
The tall one just looks like a gangly stork likely to trip over its own feet.

I think the squat one would be easier to damage hit, being shorter it would be easier to hide, but also less capable, in combat, people that want it to look right, over ability are going to want to shorter imo

[Lord Perversor]

Ovion, on 19 April 2015 - 04:48 AM, said:

I agree completely.

Though the simple fix is just having the legs less extended.

Yep it shouldn't be hard to keep them flexed as king crab ones.

[Mystere]

Tarogato, on 19 April 2015 - 04:33 AM, said:

Which would you rather have? And why?

<good stuff>

So what you're asking for is a low-profile Clan Mech with high weapon hardpoints, just what the Cauldron Born is supposed to be? Well I have very bad news for you. PGI has launched a preemptive strike. They have done so in anticipation of the high volume and extremely loud forum crying that will ensue upon their release. IS players can't have such an opponent, you know, and as such will run to the forums. And PGI can't have that, you know.

The player base is the problem. That is why JJs are junk. That is why we have Ghost Heat. That is why we are about to have 1/1/1/1 if all accounts of their introduction are correct.

<If someone hasn't already noticed yet, I woke up on the wrong side of the bed. As such I am pissed.>

Edited by Mystere, 19 April 2015 - 11:08 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

Bloodweaver, on 19 April 2015 - 08:04 AM, said:

Nonsense. Not only can it be done, since this is a game and real life rules do not apply, but it already has been done:

kapusta11, on 19 April 2015 - 08:29 AM, said:

You saw how it's animated? The leg swing amplitude is way too high to look at least somewhat beliveable.

We can see the MW3 animation for both the Cauldron-Born (which much more closely follows the artwork/miniature design) and the Puma (which follows the same design philosophy):


The leg movement is ungainly & awkward (notice how far both 'Mechs have to thrust their legs forward relative to leg length, and how far upward the knee has to go in the rear in order to accommodate the stride (including, notably, how it must clip the Puma's thigh through its body in order to do so)), and makes the 'Mech appear cumbersome and poorly-balanced (and, thus, poorly-designed).

The model presented by PGI, by contrast, is appealing because it looks like a machine that could actually walk & run and be well-balanced while doing both, which in turn is because it actually follows realistic design principles with regard to how a mechanical bipedal leg assembly would be set-up and aligned versus the (presumed) location of the torso's center-of-mass - it would have a much more normal gait and more graceful (insofar as a 65-metric-ton bipedal war machine can be "graceful") & natural-looking movements.

[Tarogato]

Ultimatum X, on 19 April 2015 - 10:57 AM, said:

It has very good energy hardpoint placement.

I know, I actually said that, haha.

Quote

STK has more critical slots available to it (no actuators), and the energy hardpoints are in the arms.

The STK does not have "really favorable hitboxes".

That is a misnomer that people will not let die.

Stalkers only have good hitboxes if you are shielding with a side and sacrificing it.

For Symmetrical builds, mechs with arms are much tankier and can use their arms to absorb damage. The Banshee is a massively more tanky mech than the Stalker is - people confuse "Shield side asymmetric Misery build" with "All Stalkers".

The reason the BLR is bad at that is...because it has poor built in torso twist angles.

So as you can see, something tiny like poor torso range can take a mech and instead of making it good - work against it.

You may be right, the BLR doesn't quite have the crits...

But if it shields so well and it's so good, why is it hindered just by torso twist angle?

Pulling up the detailed info in game, looking at Yaw Angle

STK-3F: 80+0
STK-5M: 66+0
STK-M: 65+0
STK-3H: 60+0
STK-4N: 60+0
STK-5S: 60+0

Yaw Speed is 60°/s for all except 5M at 72°/s.

BLR-1D: 80+30
BLR-1S: 80+30
BLR-3S: 80+30
BLR-1GHE: 75+30
BLR-1G: 60+30
BLR-3M: 60+30

Yaw Speed is 80°/s for all.

---

Which chassis looks better? The Battlemaster, by a landslide. Then why is the Stalker currently one of the best assaults in the game and the Battlemaster is being comparatively ignored? I think the reasons aren't related to torso twist...

Quote

I wouldn't give -1 downvotes with no critical assessment any weight either.

We need more people like you. =]

[Tarogato]

Mystere, on 19 April 2015 - 11:07 AM, said:

So what you're asking for is a low-profile Clan Mech with high weapon hardpoints, just what the Cauldron Born is supposed to be? Well I have very bad news for you. PGI has launched a preemptive strike. They have done so in anticipation of the high volume and extremely loud forum crying that will ensue upon their release. IS players can't have such an opponent, you know, and as such will run to the forums. And PGI can't have that, you know.

I am an Innersphere player and I endorse this idea.

Sorry, had to.

But really, I am an IS player through and through, don't be fooled by the Smoke Jag icon I'm wearing at the time of this posting - I'm merely visiting other factions before the CW map resets so I can earn up some free mechbays. Notice all the FRR banners in my stats, and that I'm at a really low rank for a Clanner.

I know, it's one of those things that "clans have that IS" doesn't, but...

A. At least it can't poptart PPCs with that high mount. Oh wait, that's the Timberwolf A's job. Already outclassed.
B. I'm not convinced that it's as huge an advantage as so few people are making it out to be. They've tried to convince me, and I'm willing to be convinced. It just hasn't happened yet. Keep trying.

Awesomer looking mechs is always a good thing. Models that consistently have the same issues as previous models (I'm looking at you, MDD, TBR, and even IFR legs) is a bad thing. I'd like to see PGI make amends on this and get the profile right, because we can all agree it looks better and people want to buy something that looks that good.

Heck, for all the effort I'm putting into this, I'll buy a Gladiator pack myself if they pull through and get it right based on community input. I've been kinda eyeing up that Arctic Cheetah since lights are my favourite, but I need a lot more to convince me to buy a Clan pack as an IS player...

[Krivvan]

Just from an aesthetics perspective, I rather like how it looks with the longer legs and I don't see how it's any different from the concept art. I have no issue with the body being moved a bit forwards on the hip though.

However, I also don't want it shorter for gameplay reasons. It already has strong potential for being one of the best heavy mechs in the game with more tonnage to use than the Timberwolf and high arm and torso mounts.

EDIT: I agree with strum wealh up there. The PGI proposed model actually looks more like something that could exist (it wouldn't either way, but it's closer) whereas the squat model looks ridiculous. The art for Battletech has always been awful about that, and I really like how they're re-imagining the designs to not have preposterous proportions.

Edited by Krivvan, 19 April 2015 - 11:42 AM.

[C E Dwyer]

Wrathful Scythe, on 19 April 2015 - 06:58 AM, said:

Giving this thing good hitboxes is out of question, it just packs to good of a punch. So other ways of balance must be found and making it bigger is one of the options PGI has.

bigger means nothing, its harder to hit tall and thin, than short and squat, look at all the whine about how crap the Grass hopper was going to be, its to tall you ruined it PGI..then it turned out to be one of the best heavies in the game