198 replies to this topic

[Lily from animove]

DivineEvil, on 04 December 2015 - 05:04 AM, said:

Yes. Every mech in Battletech is described as "N-ton battlemech", which is a rough estimate of total mass of it's exoskeleton, myomere assembly and structurual frame attached to it, power grid, modular ammo transfer lines, sensor arrays, heat distribution network, weapon hardpoints, life-support systems and electronics.

None of this items are included into the actual tonnage (effective carry capacity). Tonnage is what provides the mech's functionality as a moving combat machine. When you strip a mech completely, you only see 10 or 5% of the tonnage, that is occupied either by standard or endo-steel structurual feinforcement (not the frame itself, as replacing the entire frame is likely harder, than building the whole new mech), whic provides mech's durability when armor is breached.

Same with Engine - by itself is just a fusion reactor, that is plugged into the existing power grid and working with myomeres, weapon hardpoints and subsystems, that are already in place. Placing heavier engine with larger shielding allows it to maintain larger voltage, and larger voltage means better myomere performance. Both on STD and XL engines there's a weight jump of 1 ton for each 25 rating units, which signified an additional heatsink hard-wired to the reactor. It also includes the gyro and a cockpit weight in MWO, because PGI probably chose to not allow gyro/cockpit modifications originally.

So the total weight of a mech is the double of it's tonnage, not considering for potential deviations which are very likely to be in place, but which are rounded-up for convenience.

ah ok, thx for clarification.

[Kaeb Odellas]

DivineEvil, on 04 December 2015 - 05:04 AM, said:

Yes. Every mech in Battletech is described as "N-ton battlemech", which is a rough estimate of total mass of it's exoskeleton, myomere assembly and structurual frame attached to it, power grid, modular ammo transfer lines, sensor arrays, heat distribution network, weapon hardpoints, life-support systems and electronics.

None of this items are included into the actual tonnage (effective carry capacity). Tonnage is what provides the mech's functionality as a moving combat machine. When you strip a mech completely, you only see 10 or 5% of the tonnage, that is occupied either by standard or endo-steel structurual feinforcement (not the frame itself, as replacing the entire frame is likely harder, than building the whole new mech), whic provides mech's durability when armor is breached.

Same with Engine - by itself is just a fusion reactor, that is plugged into the existing power grid and working with myomeres, weapon hardpoints and subsystems, that are already in place. Placing heavier engine with larger shielding allows it to maintain larger voltage, and larger voltage means better myomere performance. Both on STD and XL engines there's a weight jump of 1 ton for each 25 rating units, which signified an additional heatsink hard-wired to the reactor. It also includes the gyro and a cockpit weight in MWO, because PGI probably chose to not allow gyro/cockpit modifications originally.

So the total weight of a mech is the double of it's tonnage, not considering for potential deviations which are very likely to be in place, but which are rounded-up for convenience.

Do you have a source for this info? I've never heard any of this before.

[Triordinant]

Homeskilit, on 03 December 2015 - 06:39 PM, said:

There is nothing keeping a Battlemech from performing like a human would other than people's perception of what a Battlemech is.

That's the point. WE signed up for the big, the slow and the lumbering. If YOU want a game of speed, agility and jumping around like monkeys, you have to find another game. There are a hundred such games out there.

[Bishop Steiner]

Kaeb Odellas, on 04 December 2015 - 07:56 AM, said:

Do you have a source for this info? I've never heard any of this before.

Not even entirely sure what he is specifically trying to claim.

[Strum Wealh]

Kaeb Odellas, on 04 December 2015 - 07:56 AM, said:

Do you have a source for this info? I've never heard any of this before.

It's self-evident from the BattleMech Construction Rules found in the rulebooks (currently, pgs. 44-59 of TechManual).

• The skeleton/frame of the BattleMech represents 10% (or 5%, if made from Endo Steel) of the final design's operating weight.
  
• The weight of the Engine is determined by the Master Engine Table (TechManual, pg. 49).
  
• The weight of the Myomers (equal (or negligible difference) for standard and TSM) is included with the Engine.
  
• The weight of the Gyro is a function of the Engine rating (TechManual, pg. 50).
  
• The weight of Jump Jets is determined by the Jump Jets Table (TechManual, pg. 51).
  
• The weight of the Cockpit is determined by the BattleMech Cockpit Table (TechManual, pg. 52)
  
• The weight of MASC is determined by the operating weight of the 'Mech (5% for IS tech, 4% for Clan tech) (TechManual, pg. 52).
  
• The weight of Heat Sinks is determined by the Heat Sinks Table (TechManual, pg. 54) & how many HS are desired.
  
• The weight of Armor is determined by the BattleMech Armor Table (TechManual, pg. 56) and how much armor is desired.
  
• The weights of weapons, ammunition, and other equipment is determined by the appropriate tables (found in TechManual), and the desired loadout.

A 'Mech can be sent into the field without ammunition or missing armor - not an ideal situation, but necessary of the supplies are simply not available. However, it cannot (safely) be sent out carrying (significantly) more than its listed operating weight in weapons/ammo/armor/etc, where the operating weight is determined by the carrying capacity of the 'Mech's skeleton/frame.

[Bishop Steiner]

Triordinant, on 04 December 2015 - 07:57 AM, said:

That's the point. WE signed up for the big, the slow and the lumbering. If YOU want a game of speed, agility and jumping around like monkeys, you have to find another game. There are a hundred such games out there.

But dude.... I want all my characters to use be able to use the force and lightsabers, not just my jedi ones! And why can't my wookie be a Mandolorian turned Imperial Guardsman?

Strum Wealh, on 04 December 2015 - 08:59 AM, said:

It's self-evident from the BattleMech Construction Rules found in the rulebooks (currently, pgs. 44-59 of TechManual).

• The skeleton/frame of the BattleMech represents 10% (or 5%, if made from Endo Steel) of the final design's operating weight.
  
• The weight of the Engine is determined by the Master Engine Table (TechManual, pg. 49).
  
• The weight of the Myomers (equal (or negligible difference) for standard and TSM) is included with the Engine.
  
• The weight of the Gyro is a function of the Engine rating (TechManual, pg. 50).
  
• The weight of Jump Jets is determined by the Jump Jets Table (TechManual, pg. 51).
  
• The weight of the Cockpit is determined by the BattleMech Cockpit Table (TechManual, pg. 52)
  
• The weight of MASC is determined by the operating weight of the 'Mech (5% for IS tech, 4% for Clan tech) (TechManual, pg. 52).
  
• The weight of Heat Sinks is determined by the Heat Sinks Table (TechManual, pg. 54) & how many HS are desired.
  
• The weight of Armor is determined by the BattleMech Armor Table (TechManual, pg. 56) and how much armor is desired.
  
• The weights of weapons, ammunition, and other equipment is determined by the appropriate tables (found in TechManual), and the desired loadout.

A 'Mech can be sent into the field without ammunition or missing armor - not an ideal situation, but necessary of the supplies are simply not available. However, it cannot (safely) be sent out carrying (significantly) more than its listed operating weight in weapons/ammo/armor/etc, where the operating weight is determined by the carrying capacity of the 'Mech's skeleton/frame.

That's not what I'm confused about, it's the "total weight of a mech is double it's tonnage" thing?


Are we just arguing semantics based on a Mech being it's "internal structure" and not it's total loadout? Or am I just too short on caffeine to get what he is trying to say?

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 04 December 2015 - 09:04 AM.

[Lily from animove]

Strum Wealh, on 04 December 2015 - 08:59 AM, said:

It's self-evident from the BattleMech Construction Rules found in the rulebooks (currently, pgs. 44-59 of TechManual).

• The skeleton/frame of the BattleMech represents 10% (or 5%, if made from Endo Steel) of the final design's operating weight.
  
• The weight of the Engine is determined by the Master Engine Table (TechManual, pg. 49).
  
• The weight of the Myomers (equal (or negligible difference) for standard and TSM) is included with the Engine.
  
• The weight of the Gyro is a function of the Engine rating (TechManual, pg. 50).
  
• The weight of Jump Jets is determined by the Jump Jets Table (TechManual, pg. 51).
  
• The weight of the Cockpit is determined by the BattleMech Cockpit Table (TechManual, pg. 52)
  
• The weight of MASC is determined by the operating weight of the 'Mech (5% for IS tech, 4% for Clan tech) (TechManual, pg. 52).
  
• The weight of Heat Sinks is determined by the Heat Sinks Table (TechManual, pg. 54) & how many HS are desired.
  
• The weight of Armor is determined by the BattleMech Armor Table (TechManual, pg. 56) and how much armor is desired.
  
• The weights of weapons, ammunition, and other equipment is determined by the appropriate tables (found in TechManual), and the desired loadout.

A 'Mech can be sent into the field without ammunition or missing armor - not an ideal situation, but necessary of the supplies are simply not available. However, it cannot (safely) be sent out carrying (significantly) more than its listed operating weight in weapons/ammo/armor/etc, where the operating weight is determined by the carrying capacity of the 'Mech's skeleton/frame.

Ok, if that is the case, what about hip, and Hand, upper and lower arm actuators? realistically they can not be "free of tonnage" are they part of the Structure? Or does it mean an Atlas for example woutl in total weight 120t yet the contsruction rules are only about the 100t because those other 20t cannot be affected (and therefore are not important to be mentioned)?

And what about MWO in specific with the cockpit? if i take off the engine ther eis only the tructure (ES or normal) left. So in MWO the weight of the cockpit is where?

Bishop Steiner, on 04 December 2015 - 09:03 AM, said:

But dude.... I want all my characters to use be able to use the force and lightsabers, not just my jedi ones! And why can't my wookie be a Mandolorian turned Imperial Guardsman?


That's not what I'm confused about, it's the "total weight of a mech is double it's tonnage" thing?


Are we just arguing semantics based on a Mech being it's "internal structure" and not it's total loadout? Or am I just too short on caffeine to get what he is trying to say?

I think, Divine means that a battletech is basically 2x its tonnage where half the tonnage is used for stuff like structure wepaons etc .... while there is still soem kind of empty frame where you slap this stuff onto (wepaos, armor equip) and into (engine, strurcture in askeleton liek fashion). And this frame basically weighting as much as the battletech again if it were fully equipped. That sounds written in itself logically, but still strange strange, thats why I asked for a source.

Triordinant, on 04 December 2015 - 07:57 AM, said:

That's the point. WE signed up for the big, the slow and the lumbering. If YOU want a game of speed, agility and jumping around like monkeys, you have to find another game. There are a hundred such games out there.

in that case he should go hawken, it delivers this quite nice.

Edited by Lily from animove, 04 December 2015 - 09:14 AM.

[Almond Brown]

and the bigger they get.... LOL!

http://www.sbnation....atest-race-ever

[oldradagast]

There are countless games out there already where people run around - like people - killing each other either in battlesuits or simple uniforms. We don't need MWO to become yet another one.

Second of all, MWO is not anime and is based on the table-top rules in which it is rather clear that battlemechs are not as nimble as people. More flexible and capable than a tank, yes, but they are not able to dart around, flip, turn, roll, and whatever like people can.

Sure, sure - some Battletech authors may have written such events, and maybe the anime that inspired Battletech had such nimble robots, but the rules of game vote against human-level agility and flexibility. More importantly, a game like that would NOT BE FUN OR UNIQUE. It would just be "robot shooter number 348589" where we all basically act like people in robot suits. Pointless. The mass and inertia of the Battlemechs gives them a much-needed feel of size and weight and helps make MWO something different than all the other twitch-shooters out there.

Edited by oldradagast, 04 December 2015 - 09:26 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

GUYS GUYS guys...

There is no scientific reason to go either way. We have no knowledge of how effective mech's gyros are, or how responsive myomer is, or how much power their fusion reactors are putting out. We can't use science to justify how nimble these mechs are, especially in the range we are talking about. The reason is simple. Proponents of the agility nerf want to think and react slower and typically do not effectively use their torso twisting to spread damage, so it seems unfair to them that someone else will spread damage while they can't be bothered, so if agility were nerfed they would have an easier time.

That's all it is guys, the "mechs should feel sluggish and unresponsive" argument has no basis whatsoever and is an opinion not a fact. It is simply an easy to swallow justification, rather than the real reason...


And BTW, MWO is no where near the level of agility of Halo, CoD, etc, especially in heavy/assault mechs. All you need to combat inertia is more force.

Edited by Gas Guzzler, 04 December 2015 - 09:39 AM.

[oldradagast]

Gas Guzzler, on 04 December 2015 - 09:36 AM, said:

GUYS GUYS guys...

There is no scientific reason to go either way. We have no knowledge of how effective mech's gyros are, or how responsive myomer is, or how much power their fusion reactors are putting out. We can't use science to justify how nimble these mechs are, especially in the range we are talking about. The reason is simple. Proponents of the agility nerf want to think and react slower and typically do not effectively use their torso twisting to spread damage, so it seems unfair to them that someone else will spread damage while they can't be bothered, so if agility were nerfed they would have an easier time.

That's all it is guys, the "mechs should feel sluggish and unresponsive" argument has no basis whatsoever and is an opinion not a fact. It is simply an easy to swallow justification, rather than the real reason...

You think nerfing agility is something wanted by some mysterious group of people who "don't know how to torso twist?" If people don't know how to torso twist, they aren't doing it right at all - regardless of speed - and thus the speed at which they are failing to twist does not matter.

As for the rest, we've been over this a million times:

- The table-top rules do NOT support human levels of agility, and that forms the basis of the game, unless you are regularly having to make pilot checks to avoid tripping over your own feet when doing anything more complicated than walking at a brisk jog in reality.
- A game with big robots jumping, running, ducking, and rolling like people would just be another generic twitch shooter - something the world does NOT need - and would not really look or feel like what people expect of a game with big robots.

Edited by oldradagast, 04 December 2015 - 09:43 AM.

[Cizjut]

I just hope for someday having melee and some kind of use for hands. The hands on a battlemech are mostly utilitary, and thus not used a lot in Mech vs Mech warfare, but if you manage to get close, and have one of those hand able chassis, you should be able to ******* punch the **** out of someone, just because it's awesome.

We have the hand actuator slot, I always thought there should be a "lock/unlock arms and elbows" from aim mode to free hand mode, lorewise and maybe gameplay wise.

I mean, there's no WAY PGI would implement picking up trees with your hands and bashing another mech, we know it's not worth the effort for such feature, but what if this mode switched the arms into melee mode for attacks? Arms resting now and swaying when walking like a normal person, and then performing punch with left and right arm to knock people.

[Gas Guzzler]

oldradagast, on 04 December 2015 - 09:42 AM, said:

You think nerfing agility is something wanted by some mysterious group of people who "don't know how to torso twist?" If people don't know how to torso twist, they aren't doing it right at all - regardless of speed - and thus the speed at which they are failing to twist does not matter.

As for the rest, we've been over this a million times:

- The table-top rules do NOT support human levels of agility, and that forms the basis of the game, unless you are regularly having to make pilot checks to avoid tripping over your own feet when doing anything more complicated than walking at a brisk jog in reality.
- A game with big robots jumping, running, ducking, and rolling like people would just be another generic twitch shooter - something the world does NOT need - and would not really look or feel like what people expect of a game with big robots.

1. As yourself the question "Who get's effected more by agility nerfs? People who don't torso twist and don't know how to spread damage, or people that do?" Maybe some people actually just want the game to be more simulation like or think this is how it should be, but I think the primary reason is it closes the gap between the good and the bad.

2. This isn't table top. The fact that you have to say "make pilot checks" is a red flag that that sort of thing isn't going to apply in a game like this. And to be honest, we didn't have close to human levels of agility before the patch.. not even close, except maybe in fast lights, so I don't understand that comments place in your argument, unless someone else is arguing that they SHOULD have human levels of agility. Besides, how many mechs actually feel like they are running? Lights feel like they are running, some mediums do, others feel like more of trot, heavies either walk or trot, assaults mostly walk. You say "brisk jog", well that is what most mechs do in this game.

3. Ducking, rolling etc I agree would be silly in this game, as would jumping in the absence of jump jets. I would even be for cutting agility down terrain dependent... for instance, on hard surfaces in cold maps, there's probably ice there, which would correspond to some slipping.. that would be cool!

[Lyoto Machida]

Cizjut, on 04 December 2015 - 09:49 AM, said:

I just hope for someday having melee and some kind of use for hands. The hands on a battlemech are mostly utilitary, and thus not used a lot in Mech vs Mech warfare, but if you manage to get close, and have one of those hand able chassis, you should be able to ******* punch the **** out of someone, just because it's awesome.

We have the hand actuator slot, I always thought there should be a "lock/unlock arms and elbows" from aim mode to free hand mode, lorewise and maybe gameplay wise.

I mean, there's no WAY PGI would implement picking up trees with your hands and bashing another mech, we know it's not worth the effort for such feature, but what if this mode switched the arms into melee mode for attacks? Arms resting now and swaying when walking like a normal person, and then performing punch with left and right arm to knock people.

PGI should at least give mechs with hand actuators a hill climb profile one less lower than the mech's stock category to simulate better climbing ability through the use of hands...would be SOMETHING, at least.

[Nightmare1]

I agree with the OP and have been saying similar things for years. The novels had a lot of great examples of nimble Mech action as well.

[Kraftwerkedup]

Actually....

Mechs can do backflips, turn into jets, throw javelins, wrestle, dance, do a hand stand, and even box.

Mech Olympics were a thing.

The lore in some parts is pretty silly. Thats the issue with "ITS ALL CANON!" that happened around the time of MaxTech (mostly fan suggestions).

Personally id be happy if that stuff, along with X lasers, Protomechs and Rotary ACs never existed.

[Kraftwerkedup]

Though the one piece of agility I wish we had...

The side step.

Strafing.

Thats really, really annoying to not have, and one of the few post Clan editions I really liked.

Quads could do it with no PSR IIRC or didnt force it to walk, I cant remember which.

[Valar13]

More or less, the most agility ever really described in BT is the ability to sidestep and the ability for a decent, desperate, and lucky pilot to throw a kick at the shins of another 'Mech in a pinch.

[WarHippy]

El Bandito, on 03 December 2015 - 06:54 PM, said:

Yet in the novels there are plenty of examples of Medium and Light mechs falling down after trying to make a tight turn a human being would otherwise do it without issue. And even Kai Allard-Liao cannot to a backflip with his Yen Lo Wang.

Battlemechs are only unique in the fact that it can climb rough terrain other vehicles cannot traverse.

There are also plenty of examples in the novels of mechs doing all sorts of crazy maneuvers like Daniel Allard in his Valkyrie jumping and landing into roll and springing back to its feet again in one continuous series of movements. The point is while some have indeed had the impression that they are slow lumbering machines others have a different impression. Neither are wrong, but I do tend to favor the idea that what we have here isn't nimble enough. As for the physics of it all that is pretty much irrelevant as pretty much nothing about this universe makes sense from a physics standpoint so I'm not sure why we should be drawing a line in the sand on this particular example of what is or isn't possible.

[Bishop Steiner]

WarHippy, on 04 December 2015 - 11:23 AM, said:

There are also plenty of examples in the novels of mechs doing all sorts of crazy maneuvers like Daniel Allard in his Valkyrie jumping and landing into roll and springing back to its feet again in one continuous series of movements. The point is while some have indeed had the impression that they are slow lumbering machines others have a different impression. Neither are wrong, but I do tend to favor the idea that what we have here isn't nimble enough. As for the physics of it all that is pretty much irrelevant as pretty much nothing about this universe makes sense from a physics standpoint so I'm not sure why we should be drawing a line in the sand on this particular example of what is or isn't possible.

mostly seems to be a matter of those who preferred the Battletech Universe before it jumped the shark.

Most original source text, and lore novels (1st Edition Housebooks, TRO 3205, Gray Death trilogy, Sword and the Dagger) painted a much more lumbering picture, as a bit of a "westernization" feel to the traditional Ballet Anime Mechs. While yes, laughable in terms of grasp of engineering and physics (of course, it was a game made in the early 80s, pre internet, with rules meant to allow customization but also to not get too bogged down they were somewhat generic) the lack of agility is pretty plainly seen in the actual TT game mechanics.

Research the piloting rules and rolls. Running, Jumping, Death from Above, Jump kicks (described thusly in the TRO 3025 WSP-1A Wasp entry: "With this maneuver, jump-capable light and medium 'Mechs could jump and smash their leg components into the head and upper torso of opposing units, hoping to cause more damage then they inflicted upon themselves."). modifiers for speed, running on pavement, turning at speed. So while not particularly scientifically accurate, Mechs could achieve good in line speed, but actual feats of "agility" were bloody difficult, and failed at least as often as not. And these were what you or I would consider SIMPLE actions, not complex gymnastics, or such.

NONE of them paint a picture of mechs running about like 30 ft tall pro athletes.

Later, in the literature, more and more Gundam crept in, along with "Stackpoling", and eventually due to the influx of anime in the 90s, the desire to save a sinking game company drove them to adopt totem mechs, Sword, claws, etc, and all sorts of abject silliness. And more and more flash was added to the writing to keep it fresh and exciting for the ADHD 90s Anime/Punisher/Wolverine loving masses.

The commentary is essentially thus: There are a million and one Gundam Mech games out there. Some of us would really like to see ONE game capture the just some of the original feel of Battletech again. In Closed Beta, things were originally much more lumbering. But even in CB there was a significant number who wanted to see the skill tree done away with because Mechs got too agile.

Apparently the Devs are at least partially in agreement, since they decided to reduce overall agility pretty much across the board.

I can only imagine the crying if they were ever able to reintroduce the delayed convergence, and heat affects (flickering HUD, possible ammo explosions before capping out heat scale, even more sluggish reflexes as the mech overheats, etc) that are part of actual Battletech.

Yes, there is also a group that prefer the "latter day battletech" (heck there are people who think MWDA was great). Point is, they've had their game, for MOST of the MW titles released. Why are people so biased against allowing the long time fans of the game actually have the game at least passingly resemble the one they've desired for so long (and tbh, the game the devs touted and promoted to get our founders money?).

More to the point, the agility hardly makes the game "unplayable" or whole classes DoA as some are crying (just like a huge number of MWO pilots suddenly developed motion sickness issues when jump shake was introduced. Which is odd, as motion sickness of that severity would have been triggered just by your average day piloting a jenner). It's that people don't want to have to adapt.

As for the "physics" arguments, the OP chose to "very incorrectly" try to use Handwavium Science Fantasy Physics to explain why our Mechs should be Pretty Pretty Ballerinas, so many of us used known and proven principles and laws of physics, engineering, etc, to show why that dog wouldn't hunt.

Long and short of the game, and mech agility, etc? Really it boils down to how the Devs nvision their stompy robots moving, nothing more, nothing less.