200 replies to this topic

[Revis Volek]

Livewyr, on 07 October 2015 - 09:33 AM, said:

Just looked through the cockpit of a Kitfox... into the cockpit of the Crab.


If you think this mech is the right size.. you are out of your bloody mind. (OR, it's your favorite mech and you just want to make sure you can still be the OddJob to everyone else's Jaws)

Gas Guzzler, on 07 October 2015 - 09:38 AM, said:

The Crab seems appropriately sized next to a Hunchback, its a little skinnier but has that long nose. Close enough for government work.

The whole "I looked at it through my cockpit" argument is pretty weak, perspective is a thing you know. Not too mention, Kit Fox is too big compared to other 30 tonners.

Seriously.. its not a big deal, stop complaining.

Everyone knows the KTF is too big tho, Hence why its won the remodel vote.

So bad comparison... the Crab is right, most other mechs are wrong. And i agree with Gas guzzler, its not some OP meta overlord so who cares?

Edited by DarthRevis, 07 October 2015 - 10:05 AM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Livewyr, on 07 October 2015 - 09:07 AM, said:

I'd just like to point out that nobody is even trying to compare the crab to the Hunchback, which was considered the decent size when comparing the Cent and Treb when they came out.

Crab isn't even in that league...

The Hunchback is the wrong body type to compare against a Crab. Humanoids aren't shaped the same as aircraft shaped mechs. A humanoid will ALWAYS be taller than an aircraft shaped torso mech.

Humanoid designs are tall and have a narrow side profile. Aircraft style torsos (like the Crab, Ebon Jaguar, Catapult, Raven, etc...) Are shorter in height, but longer in length making them appear broader from the side.

All that said, we can compare a Hunchback to a Crab if you want, it will just be wonky.

*OK, hunchback is taller than the Crab like it should be. That makes sense, because it is a humanoid mech with a head and a big hump that stands upright and holds it's mass vertically. It has a larger surface area compared to the Crab from the front.

*Crab is much longer in length than a Hunchback. As an aircraft torso design, it lays flatter and it's mass is spread out length wise. It gives it a far larger surface area from the side.

Verdict:??? They seem to share similar surface area with each other but exposure depends on the angle...just like every humanoid vs aircraft style torso mech compares. How close are they? Really can't tell because they are so different is design style and proportion.

Like I said, poor comparisons really. That's why I picked the Cicada (and even the Shadow Cat in a way) for comparison. They are the same design philosophy, and that is why a Hunchback is a poor mech to compare it too.

[Jaeger Gonzo]

zagibu, on 07 October 2015 - 07:39 AM, said:

Here is some data I extracted from the game models by using the NeuroMorph Toolkit addon for Blender:



As you can see, the Crab has a smaller volume than all other medium mechs, however, it's still much more voluminous than a Raven.

Spoiler

Here is the text (didn't manage to align properly):

Raven 550.5489866232 98.8096264457
Crab 758.9547283455 149.3568865063
Cicada 782.7011830193 168.9651143839
Blackjack 880.1774743373 168.7722013022
Hunchback 757.7846339652 171.7266517645

That`s data that really matter, all rest is just biased opinion, usually from the guys who lives in 2 dimensional world.
So... 50t Crab is smaller then 45 Cicada? GG PGI, my mind just blow out.
Can we have this sort of accurate data for all meks around? So we all know about quality of PGI work.

[RoboPatton]

The court of public opinion has spoken. The crab is a well sized mech, and model citizen to all mediums. All such mediums should aspire to a stature like that of the Crab.

[Wadesin]

Can the OP please add "I think " to the beginning of his post to avoid people like me having to write posts like this.

[Jin Ma]

Stefka Kerensky, on 07 October 2015 - 09:41 AM, said:

It's only me or the ones wanting a big Crab want another big sub-par medium easy to instagib?

Does it seem smart to you, qquing whiners?

no. We just want correctly scaled mechs. I'm not going to be a hippocrite like some ppl and complain only when the mech is too big. Very self serving

If its small i calls it like i sees it. The data says it like it is. If even in the face of overwhelming evidence ppl can say its "perfectly sized" then there isn't much to say anymore

Edited by Jin Ma, 07 October 2015 - 10:06 AM.

[Livewyr]

"It's not too small, EVERY OTHER medium mech is too big!"

-Crab Owner.

[Tennex]

Rational Players: Looks at mech, says its small
Crabbies: Oh thats just the front profile, the side is long

Rational Players: Make chart incorporating side profile into calculation
Crabbies: Oh thats just the profiles, not volumes

Rational Players: Makes volume comparisons
Crabbies: Covers ears, repeat same arguments

Edited by Tennex, 07 October 2015 - 10:12 AM.

[Juodas Varnas]

Livewyr, on 07 October 2015 - 10:07 AM, said:

"It's not too small, EVERY OTHER medium mech is too big!"

-Crab Owner.

"It's not too small, it's fine along with the Hunchback and Enforcer.
However, Centurion, Trebuchet and Nova are too big"

-Sincerely, a Centurion pilot.

[MeiSooHaityu]

zagibu, on 07 October 2015 - 07:39 AM, said:

Here is some data I extracted from the game models by using the NeuroMorph Toolkit addon for Blender:



As you can see, the Crab has a smaller volume than all other medium mechs, however, it's still much more voluminous than a Raven.

Spoiler

Here is the text (didn't manage to align properly):

Raven 550.5489866232 98.8096264457
Crab 758.9547283455 149.3568865063
Cicada 782.7011830193 168.9651143839
Blackjack 880.1774743373 168.7722013022
Hunchback 757.7846339652 171.7266517645

Ok, if we go by data (how ever valid this data might be), the Crab supposedly has the same surface area as a Hunchback. The surface is what a weapon can hit to inflict damage. Volume (the inside of a mech) plays no real part in defining the part of hitboxes a weapon can hit.

So, if the Hunchback and the Crab has the about same surface area, and are about the same tonnage, then I guess we are good. The Cicada is probably listed a bit bigger because of the large flat shield arms would add to it's visible surface area pretty easily.

It's ok though, we will ignore the surface area part and only look at volume (kind of useless for weapon impacted area) because the thread is a witch hunt against the Crab...for some odd reason.

[Gas Guzzler]

Livewyr, on 07 October 2015 - 09:42 AM, said:

The torso is not long enough to justify it being the same height and width as a Jenner...

Juodas Varnas, on 07 October 2015 - 09:46 AM, said:

Good thing it's not the same height and width as a Jenner, then.

Seriously, you are really reaching.

Tennex, on 07 October 2015 - 10:10 AM, said:

Rational Players: Looks at mech, says its small
Crabbies: Oh thats just the front profile, the side is long

Rational Players: Make chart incorporating side profile into calculation
Crabbies: Oh thats just the profiles, not volumes

Rational Players: Makes volume comparisons
Crabbies: Covers ears, repeat same arguments

Its a little small, but who cares? This is more QQ than there is about mechs that are WAY too big. If you look at a Crab next to Hunchback or Enforcer, it looks "okay", a little small and squat.

Are you really having that much trouble shooting at it? Are the crab overloads so much for you that they must be nerfed and become the same size as a Nova? While your at it, The Ebon Jaguar is about the same size as a Nova, better QQ until that thing is the size of a Catapult or Thunderbolt too!

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 07 October 2015 - 10:29 AM.

[STEF_]

Jin Ma, on 07 October 2015 - 10:03 AM, said:

no. We just want correctly scaled mechs. I'm not going to be a hippocrite like some ppl and complain only when the mech is too big. Very self serving

If its small i calls it like i sees it. The data says it like it is. If even in the face of overwhelming evidence ppl can say its "perfectly sized" then there isn't much to say anymore

Livewyr, on 07 October 2015 - 10:07 AM, said:

"It's not too small, EVERY OTHER medium mech is too big!"

-Crab Owner.

Esactly!
Then let's ask PGI to rescale those medium or.....is that ANOTHER broken promise?
Crab is just fine as it is.

[Baba Yogi]

imgur is currently giving an error so i cant upload it, but there is an image i took inside game where it shows crab is much smaller than even a shadow cat, hell my side profile is even bigger than crabs big belly. And that is a shadow cat we'r talking about, not a wolverine or anything. And crab is 50 tons ffs, that profile fits a 40 ton at best

[Gas Guzzler]

Lordhammer, on 07 October 2015 - 10:46 AM, said:

imgur is currently giving an error so i cant upload it, but there is an image i took inside game where it shows crab is much smaller than even a shadow cat, hell my side profile is even bigger than crabs big belly. And that is a shadow cat we'r talking about, not a wolverine or anything. And crab is 50 tons ffs, that profile fits a 40 ton at best

You must be forgetting about the back pack, and the fact that those double jointed legs have a longer total length. Could feasibly make up the 5 tons between those two things. Oh, and the arms are longer and have claws on the end.

Better question, is why is this such an issue? Nobody is whining about how a Thunderbolt is bigger than an Ebon Jaguar.

Can someone skilled with photoshop please photoshop the entire torso of the Crab (from backpack to nose) mounted with its rear on the top of the legs pointed upwards, with some arms coming off of it?

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 07 October 2015 - 10:56 AM.

[Revis Volek]

The funny thing is all the mechs everyone keeps comparing the Crab to are WAY TO BIG already and some are on the list to be re scaled (smaller).

Like the RVN and NVA, I guess you guys forgot about that whole thing where PGI had a pole and pretty much admitted to us that those mechs were not scaled properly. Closest thing i have ever seen to them saying "sorry, we messed up/rushed it because reasons".

[Jin Ma]

Stefka Kerensky, on 07 October 2015 - 10:30 AM, said:

Esactly!
Then let's ask PGI to rescale those medium or.....is that ANOTHER broken promise?
Crab is just fine as it is.

thats the point tho. Crab isn't fine. It isn't the worst offender, and probably not even a priority. But it definitely isn't scaled correctly. if you want to say that those mediums are overscaled (they are), then you have to be willing to accept that the crab also underscaled.

Its not a one way street, that somehow only points out overscaled mechs

Gas Guzzler, on 07 October 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:

Can someone skilled with photoshop please photoshop the entire torso of the Crab (from backpack to nose) mounted with its rear on the top of the legs pointed upwards, with some arms coming off of it?

I don't think moving the pixles will change the number of pixels lol

[MeiSooHaityu]

This is the funny thing...

I think we can all agree it is on the small side. I even said, yea it is a bit small.

However, is it small enough to complain about and demand it be resized? Does this mech deserve to be the soap box to stand on to MF PGI for poor scaling? No, not even close. It's pixels smaller in stature than a Cicada, yet about 30% longer and it supposedly has the same surface area as a Hunchback. The size can't be THAT obscenely far off. Even if we want to make any comparison to the Hunch (again wrong chassis type), the Crab's arms are as wide and sit in the same position as the Hunchback. Where a Hunch has a high mount ballistic or energy array to make up for this, the Crab has 1 head laser.

Ok, for the benefit of the doubt, let's stand back and say the Crab is too tiny to the point it has an unfair advantage over all other mediums. How had this translated into battlefield performance? Is the Crab the new IS Stormcrow? Is it the new Tier 1 medium for the IS drop deck?

Well, it can't hill hump because it's main hard points are low, it has no ECM variant, it carries very little weapon quirks, it has one JJ variant (so does Cicada now). It has no ballistic for FLD like almost all of it's IS medium counterparts, it doesn't have good PPC quirks (PPCs can't be high mount anyway), it is energy, but at most can only carry 6 (most variants 5) unlike a Hunchback carrying 9,.. *sigh*

Ok, so why is the scale of this mech such a threat? It's not. it's a small mech that might or might not be too small for it's tonnage (so close it is debatable).

I guess the reason it's an issue is because it is great fuel to complain about PGI scaling. It sure as heck isn't because it is the new IS Stormcrow, that is for sure.

[Tennex]

MeiSooHaityu, on 07 October 2015 - 10:16 AM, said:

Ok, if we go by data (how ever valid this data might be), the Crab supposedly has the same surface area as a Hunchback. The surface is what a weapon can hit to inflict damage. Volume (the inside of a mech) plays no real part in defining the part of hitboxes a weapon can hit.

So, if the Hunchback and the Crab has the about same surface area, and are about the same tonnage, then I guess we are good. The Cicada is probably listed a bit bigger because of the large flat shield arms would add to it's visible surface area pretty easily.

Rational Players: Looks at mech, says its small
Crabbies: Oh thats just the front profile, the side is long

Rational Players: Make chart incorporating side profile into calculation
Crabbies: Oh thats just the profiles, not volumes

Rational Players: Makes volume comparisons
Crabbies: Volume isn't important. Area of the mech is more important (profile)

So we have come full circle.

Well, at least lets all be happy its not massively oversized

Edited by Tennex, 07 October 2015 - 11:22 AM.

[zagibu]

Gas Guzzler, on 07 October 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:

Can someone skilled with photoshop please photoshop the entire torso of the Crab (from backpack to nose) mounted with its rear on the top of the legs pointed upwards, with some arms coming off of it?

What for? What matters in game is front and side profile. Top profile is rarely relevant. Anyway, here you go:

[MeiSooHaityu]

zagibu, on 07 October 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

What for? What matters in game is front and side profile. Top profile is rarely relevant. Anyway, here you go:

You want to know why that is relevant? Because that is basically the surface area of the side of the mech just stood up instead of laying flat.

Since some players can only understand certain aspects of size in height only, it helps them visualize better.

Thanks for posting it.