177 replies to this topic

[C E Dwyer]

Sitting here right now, wondering how much Russ regrets the licence deal P.G.I cut with H.B.S for use of the mech assets.

While at first it must have seemed a great idea, to join forces against Harmony and flip a collective bird, in their direction, which most of us here applauded, these days with endless HBS battle tech references, and how people are looking forward to it, calling it the future of the franchise, and endless and for the most part justified criticism, of his product, it must really stick in his throat.

[Gas Guzzler]

I wish they would post more screenshots and previews to hype up all the rescales...

[Cy Mitchell]

Cathy, on 07 June 2016 - 12:17 PM, said:

Sitting here right now, wondering how much Russ regrets the licence deal P.G.I cut with H.B.S for use of the mech assets.

While at first it must have seemed a great idea, to join forces against Harmony and flip a collective bird, in their direction, which most of us here applauded, these days with endless HBS battle tech references, and how people are looking forward to it, calling it the future of the franchise, and endless and for the most part justified criticism, of his product, it must really stick in his throat.

What HBS is making is a turned based BattleTech type game. Because I was sucked into the franchise as a MechWarrior PC game player and a fan of the BattleTech novels a turned based game does not appeal to me that much. I am sure that there will be some migration to that game when it is released but I do not see it satisfying anyone who is looking for a Mech sim type game. MWO is far from perfect but it does give you some of the feel of the older MW PC games.

Edited by Rampage, 07 June 2016 - 12:30 PM.

[Cy Mitchell]

Gas Guzzler, on 07 June 2016 - 12:28 PM, said:

I wish they would post more screenshots and previews to hype up all the rescales...

I think they are afraid to hype anything at this point. The backlash on FP Phase 3 was pretty brutal. You know there will be a bunch of really unhappy people screaming at the top of their keyboards not matter what PGI does. Heck, we have already heard it with that Blackjack thread.

I think I have seen about three screenshots on twitter of the re-scaled Mechs. Those were the Nova, Catapult and the Dragon (I think). Phil from NGNG said that there would be some information forthcoming before June 21st. I hope that is the case.

[C E Dwyer]

Rampage, on 07 June 2016 - 12:29 PM, said:

What HBS is making is a turned based BattleTech type game. Because I was sucked into the franchise as a MechWarrior PC game player and a fan of the BattleTech novels a turned based game does not appeal to me that much. I am sure that there will be some migration to that game when it is released but I do not see it satisfying anyone who is looking for a Mech sim type game. MWO is far from perfect but it does give you some of the feel of the older MW PC games.

I do see your point, I think there will be some here not interested, I think some will play both, though how many will continue to support it with hard cash, is going to be the critical point, and some you won't see there backside for dust.

I would be worrying if I was running P.G.I as steam gives a dimishing return each month, and more of the vets either spend far less or nothing at all, free play is ok, if that's how people want to play, but there has to be enough to keep the lights running and I don't mean locusts

[ScarecrowES]

LT. HARDCASE, on 06 June 2016 - 03:55 PM, said:

Picked a density, yes, but we literally have no idea what densities they chose per tonnage, or why they chose what they did.

Could've been chosen for the reason you said, could've chosen what presented them with the least amount of work. They could've chosen the numbers at random, throwing sharp things at a dart board, over a case of beers.

We'll never truly know, because they won't tell us. All we can do is live with the results.

Well, there is ONE density... density being a measurement of mass per volume. There are not different densities per tonnage category. There is one density for all mechs.

And make no mistake, I absolutely believe they chose a value that would result in the least amount of work. That would only be common sense. You'd want to select a value that renders the largest possible group of mechs near the bullseye. Picking any value, even arbitrarily, would yield the same relative result... I mean that all mechs would end up being the same size compared to each other no matter what starting density you picked.

But picking one with a lot of mechs coming out at or near goal volume ratios offers a lot of bonuses. First, you know your end result will not significantly shift the average size of mechs in relation to your game environment, which will then not cause problems with map design and movement code. It also gives you the largest possible baseline to provide expectation of post-rescale performance - if you have more ideal models to compare to, you'll know whether a post-rescale mech might perform compared to those more ideal models.

And of course, it allows you to accomplish the massive task of doing a comprehensive scale normalization with the least amount of wasted effort. If you can reach a normalization while only affecting a dozen chassis by more than 3%, another dozen by 1.5-3%, and minor tweaks to the rest, rather than doing major rescaling to most mechs altogether... why wouldn't you go the easier route?

Now, in terms what actual results PGI's gotten, we know a lot more than a lot of people think, though much of it takes a bit of thought to pull out.

For instance... you want to get an over-all idea of what mech scaling is going to be like post-patch? At least 8 chassis were found close enough to their ideal volume to not require modification. It has been implied that the Atlas and Hunchback were in this "ideal" category already. Some mechs that players though were too large, like the Centurion and Shadowhawk, were found to be less than 2% from ideal. So don't expect them to be appreciably smaller. Many mechs were found to be much too big... the Nova (about 18% at last I checked), Catapult (13%), Locust (12%), Dire Wolf (8%), Warhawk (8%), Dragon (7%) etc. We've seen the results of the Nova and Dragon rescales. That 7% reduction makes the Dragon a much smaller mech.

We also know that, even though PGI likely took the path of least resistance with their density selection (expected), they're not doing the same with rescales themselves. The Catapult will be all-new. The Awesome is getting a major remodel. Warhawk and Dire Wolf are getting minor remodels. Many mechs are having their volumes increased or reduced by selectively adjusting certain body parts preferentially. The Grasshopper needs to get bigger, but PGI isn't going to make it any taller to do it, so it's started some weight training - leg days not optional. Many rescales are coming with geo and hitbox changes. Choices are being made on a chassis by chassis basis.

A one-size-fits-all process, to be sure... but different solutions for different mechs.

[ScarecrowES]

Rampage, on 07 June 2016 - 12:35 PM, said:

I think they are afraid to hype anything at this point. The backlash on FP Phase 3 was pretty brutal. You know there will be a bunch of really unhappy people screaming at the top of their keyboards not matter what PGI does. Heck, we have already heard it with that Blackjack thread.

I think I have seen about three screenshots on twitter of the re-scaled Mechs. Those were the Nova, Catapult and the Dragon (I think). Phil from NGNG said that there would be some information forthcoming before June 21st. I hope that is the case.

Russ said they wanted to wait til around when the patch released to discuss the exact process, reasoning, and results, but that there would be a LOT of information and picture examples coming out before the patch.

Buuuuuuut... that was BEFORE PGI went dark.

[InspectorG]

Im waiting a for a new batch of pointless quirks for my Summoners. NARC cooldown, MG heat, 1% ERPPC heat, 50% ERPPC cooldown, JJ thrust nerf, arm agility buff, etc etc etc...

[cazidin]

ScarecrowES, on 07 June 2016 - 03:05 PM, said:

Russ said they wanted to wait til around when the patch released to discuss the exact process, reasoning, and results, but that there would be a LOT of information and picture examples coming out before the patch.

Buuuuuuut... that was BEFORE PGI went dark.

I think Russ is still going to do that. Wait until they release the patch notes, which will be a day or two before the patch itself gets released and THEN we'll be flooded with a LOT of information. Maybe he hopes that we'll have so much to go through that we won't get a chance to complain about everything AND deliberately putting it off until the last minute gives PGI more time to "hotfix it" in the next major patch.

I HAVE become jaded, haven't I?

[Andi Nagasia]

its very Possable that Russ is you know Working!
remember his Twitter isnt just MWO but his Personal Twitter,
and he hasnt Posted anything from Space-X ether, which he follows Vigerisly,

i think hes just swamped with things and getting ready for Patch release thats it,
remember he said people would get side by sides of every mech and how smaller they have gotten,
the full rescaling line up, the Command wheel tutorial, Frozen City rework and Expansion Comparisons,
as well as a Requirking of many of the rescaled Chassis, and some tagged on weapon balances,

[Thorqemada]

I am curious how it will work out though i already know that the Centurion will suffer as they already stated it has almost perfect volume to size value which means it will stay way to big for a Medium.
Centurions are the Mechs i like the most...well...

The changes alone will shuffle the ranks of the OP Mechs enough to make the game at least a while interesting enough to play until the dust settles imo.

Edited by Thorqemada, 07 June 2016 - 04:15 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Thorqemada, on 07 June 2016 - 03:48 PM, said:

I am curious how it wikk work out though i already know that the Centurion will suffer as they already stated it has almost perfect volume to size value which means it will stay way to big for a Medium.
Centurions are the Mechs i like the most...well...

The changes alone will shuffle the ranks of the OP Mechs enough to make the game at least a while interesting enough to play until the dust settles imo.

True but Russ also said it may get some Torsos love,
its very possible the torso will get thinner, and the lose volume there will go to the Shield on its arm,
which if that happens i can see it making a great many people very very happy,

[Thorqemada]

Hope - it makes you suffer so much more...

[Kaeb Odellas]

I wish they would go further than a mere resize and adjust hardpoints too. The Pretty Baby needs a ground-up overhaul. That thing is a mess. Catapults could probably use more hardpoints too.

[LT. HARDCASE]

RampancyTW, on 07 June 2016 - 11:50 AM, said:

Christ, this "community" is insufferable.

They've stated that the Centurion and Atlas are both pretty much right-on. You participated in several of the major threads on this subject, and thus already knew this.

Grow up.

What in the world does what you just said have to do with what you quoted?

I said they didn't let us in on the methodology. How is that being immature?

ScarecrowES, on 07 June 2016 - 02:58 PM, said:

And of course, it allows you to accomplish the massive task of doing a comprehensive scale normalization with the least amount of wasted effort. If you can reach a normalization while only affecting a dozen chassis by more than 3%, another dozen by 1.5-3%, and minor tweaks to the rest, rather than doing major rescaling to most mechs altogether... why wouldn't you go the easier route?

Well, the path of least resistance immediately eliminates options which may have lead to better gameplay. A lot of us think major rescaling of most mechs is actually what we need.

Edited by LT. HARDCASE, 07 June 2016 - 04:47 PM.

[Triordinant]

JC Daxion, on 07 June 2016 - 08:38 AM, said:

PS, only two more weeks... YAHOOOO!!!!

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Cathy, on 07 June 2016 - 12:17 PM, said:

Sitting here right now, wondering how much Russ regrets the licence deal P.G.I cut with H.B.S for use of the mech assets.

While at first it must have seemed a great idea, to join forces against Harmony and flip a collective bird, in their direction, which most of us here applauded, these days with endless HBS battle tech references, and how people are looking forward to it, calling it the future of the franchise, and endless and for the most part justified criticism, of his product, it must really stick in his throat.

Credit where credit is due, none of us thought UNSEEN would ever happen. Here we are.

The "this is it" for CW is what is making most people go insane. It takes priority over any good done.

[Triordinant]

cazidin, on 07 June 2016 - 03:08 PM, said:

I HAVE become jaded, haven't I?

[Felicitatem Parco]

Rampage, on 07 June 2016 - 12:29 PM, said:

What HBS is making is a turned based BattleTech type game. Because I was sucked into the franchise as a MechWarrior PC game player and a fan of the BattleTech novels a turned based game does not appeal to me that much. I am sure that there will be some migration to that game when it is released but I do not see it satisfying anyone who is looking for a Mech sim type game. MWO is far from perfect but it does give you some of the feel of the older MW PC games.

I am not the only one?! Hail, brother!

I will see you in glorious 1v1 combat once the servers are all ours!

[Yellonet]

Barantor, on 07 June 2016 - 11:35 AM, said:

I disagree, I like Deep Space 9 more

Nah, DS9 second best