62 replies to this topic

[Hit the Deck]

LordKnightFandragon, on 08 June 2016 - 06:38 PM, said:

The Warhawk is going to look odd as hell if given the Mad Dog treatment, a skinny *** tall mech with high mounted arms, its gunna look like a Rifleman put through a press....

It's supposed to be skinny indeed.



I oddly prefer this look compared to ours (the 3D model and to a certain extent, the concept art).

[LordKnightFandragon]

Hit the Deck, on 08 June 2016 - 07:00 PM, said:

It's supposed to be skinny indeed.



I oddly prefer this look compared to ours (the 3D model and to a certain extent, the concept art).

Yeah, id be ok with that.

[The Amazing Spider Man]

Tarogato, on 08 June 2016 - 04:07 PM, said:

Spider: I expect them to make the Spider larger. Even if they do adjust the quirks, I expect this to be a straight up nerf.

I regretfully agree. Would anyone argue the Spider is not underutilized? If they're going to give the Spider another nerf (5V last pass) without addressing jump jet shortcomings, then I'm going to have to do some serious reflecting on why I would want to continue playing.

[Tarogato]

LordKnightFandragon, on 08 June 2016 - 07:38 PM, said:

Hit the Deck, on 08 June 2016 - 07:00 PM, said:

It's supposed to be skinny indeed.I oddly prefer this look compared to ours (the 3D model and to a certain extent, the concept art).

Yeah, id be ok with that.

Yeah, I would really hope that PGI revisits this mech and gives it a little slimming up. Just look at the difference:















The MWO model is a bloated fat monstrosity with really saggy arms. Quite disappointing.

[Xetelian]

The most egregious of the sizes are the mediums.

Crab is about what I think a medium should be

GRF is HUGE, compare it tot he black knight, the GRF is damn near it in size and 20 tons lighter. The 55 tonners already have sad jump jets so being as large as a 75 tonner is all kinds of screwed up.


The assaults are next in line after mediums for their ridiculousness. The stalker is as tall as a king crab and about as wide (not counting the arms) but 15 tons lighter.

The warhawk looks like a DWF at first glance, sometimes I'm round a corner like OH SH...*blink* oh just a warhawk, it shouldn't be this way. The warhawk is as big as a KGC and 15 tons lighter.

The AWS is as big as a KGC too, not counting the KGC arms and its 20 tons lighter.


I could do this all day. I'm in the store right now looking at things, bouncing back and forth between models and it disappoints me big time.

Edited by Xetelian, 08 June 2016 - 09:22 PM.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Except for the most extreme resize cases (like the Catapult), I don't expect the resize to change things much. A mech changing size +/-1% or 2% shouldn't make a noticeable difference. We will see though I suppose.

[Raso]

From my understanding the uber-comp try-hard gods who populate tier 1 and know everything never ever miss (except when the engine or network acts against them but that's why it's hit scan lazors for days).
Since balancing the game to that minority is the only way to properly balance the game does making some mechs smaller really change the game enough to warrant taking off some of the existing quirks?

[LordKnightFandragon]

Tarogato, on 08 June 2016 - 09:01 PM, said:

Yeah, I would really hope that PGI revisits this mech and gives it a little slimming up. Just look at the difference:















The MWO model is a bloated fat monstrosity with really saggy arms. Quite disappointing.

Sagging? The MWO model is pretty much like 30 years older then the other one.

[jss78]

I dunno, I'm actually expecting that only a few will be rescaled to the extent that it'll make a huge difference one way or the other. For most it's like a few % percent here or there, and I think it won't be the kind of a game-changer people expect.

Since it's a volumetric rescale, I'm going to assume that they're more or less precisely the correct volumes after the whole process. This'll result in 'mechs with upright postures and lanky structure to be inherently disadvantaged. They'll be relatively bigger targets, take for example the Shadow Hawk which was always OK scaled, just with all that mass set into a tall barndoor shape. Conversely the Locust with a far more optimal shape (twice doubled over to make a small target) will benefit of the volumetric approach.

Then again they're adjusting quirks also, and that in itself might make a far bigger difference.

[ScarecrowES]

Fat-hawk is getting some love, thank goodness. 8% is a LOT of volume to trim on such a compact model. And since PGI doesn't want to significantly change overall dimensions and doesnt want to differentiate the legs from the Dire Wolf (which is actually a good thing for the WH), most of that weight will have to come out of the torso.

Thinning up that torso should go a long way to increase the survivability of this mech. If you can bring the arms up to alongside the torso, as in source, they'll be able to shield a bit too.

This will make the WH a much more viable mech. They really just need to add the F-variant. This mech would be top tier with the WHK-F RT.

[Ultimax]

Probably very accurate based on the snippets of info we've gotten.

My prediction:

Lights as a class become unarguably weaker, as one of their key survival elements (size) will be nerfed.

Mediums as a class will also be negatively affected. Mediums that have been considered, by the community, as too large for years are either not getting smaller and may even (inexplicably) gain volume - lighter tonned mediums getting bigger is one of the worst balance decisions we've seen in a while.


Heavies as a class will remain mostly unchanged. They will indirectly be made stronger as other classes will be made weaker (lights & mediums). A few key mechs might be noticeably improved (Quickdraws) or noticeably worse (Grasshopper).

Many Assaults will not change at all - some of them that needed enormous structure quirks to be viable because they were big, and had big hitboxes are bizarrely going to get even larger.


This is the opposite of the direction this rescale should be going.

Mechs across the board should mostly be getting smaller.

Whatever mechs they arbitrarily chose as their goldilocks zone of "just right" were wrong, they should have chosen mechs that were somewhat smaller on the volume scale and scaled everything else down to meet them.


They have been harping on they want to lengthen TTK and then they work against that goal by making mechs larger and easier to shoot, 6 months after nerfing their agility and mobility.

[Alistair Winter]

Can't wait for the Griffin to lose its quirks. It's sad that my favourite IS Medium has become the most popular one. I've been running SRM-boating Griffins since they were released and now people think I'm just following the trend. Losing my hipster status.

On a negative note, it will be sad to see everyone running around in Novas when people realize how awesome they are. 12xSPL Novas everywhere

However, I think I'm starting to realize more and more that this really won't have a big effect on the game. It's going to be positive for most of my mechs, but it's ultimately not going to make the game feel fresh and different. My Catapults and Victors may be more viable, my Centurion too. My precious Warhawk will sadly become more mainstream. Otherwise, it's business as usual.

The big question is the quirkening, which is always scary. Because the quirks probably won't make any underperformers more balanced, they're just going to reduce the number of viable mechs, I fear. We'll see though. Hopefully, I'm wrong.

[ScarecrowES]

Ultimax, on 09 June 2016 - 08:41 AM, said:

Probably very accurate based on the snippets of info we've gotten.

My prediction:

Lights as a class become unarguably weaker, as one of their key survival elements (size) will be nerfed.

Mediums as a class will also be negatively affected. Mediums that have been considered, by the community, as too large for years are either not getting smaller and may even (inexplicably) gain volume - lighter tonned mediums getting bigger is one of the worst balance decisions we've seen in a while.


Heavies as a class will remain mostly unchanged. They will indirectly be made stronger as other classes will be made weaker (lights & mediums). A few key mechs might be noticeably improved (Quickdraws) or noticeably worse (Grasshopper).

Many Assaults will not change at all - some of them that needed enormous structure quirks to be viable because they were big, and had big hitboxes are bizarrely going to get even larger.


This is the opposite of the direction this rescale should be going.

Mechs across the board should mostly be getting smaller.

Whatever mechs they arbitrarily chose as their goldilocks zone of "just right" were wrong, they should have chosen mechs that were somewhat smaller on the volume scale and scaled everything else down to meet them.


They have been harping on they want to lengthen TTK and then they work against that goal by making mechs larger and easier to shoot, 6 months after nerfing their agility and mobility.

If you have 2 people staring at each other, those 2 would appear the same size to each other no matter what scale you use to measure them. If one is 6-foot tall and the other is 4-foot, their relative size would still be the same even if you reduced their scale to 3 feet and 2 feet respectively. No matter how large or small you make them, if you make them the same size relative to each other, then they'll present the same size target to each other.

So what difference does it make which "arbitrary" standard they used? If they used any standard at all, their relative results would be the same. If you picked a 45-ton mech to set the standard for all mechs, no matter which one you picked, the relative sizes for all other 45-ton mechs would always come out the same.

The Blackjack would always be getting bigger relative to the Vindicator getting smaller.

The Grasshopper would always need to get bigger related to other mechs of similar tonnage.

[Felio]

Tarogato, on 08 June 2016 - 09:01 PM, said:

The MWO model is a bloated fat monstrosity with really saggy arms. Quite disappointing.

One of my favorite things to do in MWO is make "yo mamma" jokes in response to things people say.

[LordKnightFandragon]

ScarecrowES, on 09 June 2016 - 08:19 AM, said:

Fat-hawk is getting some love, thank goodness. 8% is a LOT of volume to trim on such a compact model. And since PGI doesn't want to significantly change overall dimensions and doesnt want to differentiate the legs from the Dire Wolf (which is actually a good thing for the WH), most of that weight will have to come out of the torso.

Thinning up that torso should go a long way to increase the survivability of this mech. If you can bring the arms up to alongside the torso, as in source, they'll be able to shield a bit too.

This will make the WH a much more viable mech. They really just need to add the F-variant. This mech would be top tier with the WHK-F RT.

Not to mention we should be able to see the guns out of the cockpit. Longer lasers and PPCs please and thank you. They did it for the Rifleman and Warhammer, now do it for the Warhawk. Warhawk should be a somewhat decent hill humper with a rather slim torso profile. Nothing like the "Broadside of a barn" we have now. I cant wait to see what they do and prepare to be disappointed with the result, but hope to be pleasantly surprised.

[Hit the Deck]

ScarecrowES, on 09 June 2016 - 10:46 AM, said:

If you have 2 people staring at each other, those 2 would appear the same size to each other no matter what scale you use to measure them. If one is 6-foot tall and the other is 4-foot, their relative size would still be the same even if you reduced their scale to 3 feet and 2 feet respectively. No matter how large or small you make them, if you make them the same size relative to each other, then they'll present the same size target to each other.

So what difference does it make which "arbitrary" standard they used? If they used any standard at all, their relative results would be the same. If you picked a 45-ton mech to set the standard for all mechs, no matter which one you picked, the relative sizes for all other 45-ton mechs would always come out the same.

The Blackjack would always be getting bigger relative to the Vindicator getting smaller.

The Grasshopper would always need to get bigger related to other mechs of similar tonnage.

Yes, but because the speed of everything else stay the same, 'Mech size affects how hard it's to hit them.

[Pariah Devalis]

Raso, on 09 June 2016 - 04:53 AM, said:

From my understanding the uber-comp try-hard gods who populate tier 1 and know everything never ever miss (except when the engine or network acts against them but that's why it's hit scan lazors for days).
Since balancing the game to that minority is the only way to properly balance the game does making some mechs smaller really change the game enough to warrant taking off some of the existing quirks?

If a mech is scaled down in size, like in the case of the Nova, Dragon, or Catapult, the total area for each component is smaller. The smaller the size of each part, the easier it is to spread damage between it and adjacent components. As such, all other things being equal, the smaller the mech the more durable it becomes.

[C E Dwyer]

Volthorne, on 08 June 2016 - 06:53 PM, said:

Some of the predictions in the OP - specifically in the Medium category - are so hilariously bad that I would put money down on them being wrong, and not a small amount either.

but this is P.G.I so O.P is probably correct

[Ultimax]

ScarecrowES, on 09 June 2016 - 10:46 AM, said:

If you have 2 people staring at each other, those 2 would appear the same size to each other no matter what scale you use to measure them. If one is 6-foot tall and the other is 4-foot, their relative size would still be the same even if you reduced their scale to 3 feet and 2 feet respectively. No matter how large or small you make them, if you make them the same size relative to each other, then they'll present the same size target to each other.

So what difference does it make which "arbitrary" standard they used? If they used any standard at all, their relative results would be the same. If you picked a 45-ton mech to set the standard for all mechs, no matter which one you picked, the relative sizes for all other 45-ton mechs would always come out the same.

The Blackjack would always be getting bigger relative to the Vindicator getting smaller.

The Grasshopper would always need to get bigger related to other mechs of similar tonnage.

No, you are wrong.

If they make all of those smaller mechs bigger, they will clearly be WORSE than they are now because larger targets are easier to hit in this game.

All of the lights, all of the mediums are GETTING BIGGER relative to mechs that ARE NOT CHANGING IN SIZE.

Heavies and Assaults are not changing, therefore all of the mechs getting larger will be worse off.


If all mechs got smaller relative to mechs that are currently slightly smaller volumetrically then that would be a buff to survivability of those mechs.


Its not an arbitrary standard, we have clear and definitive proof right now that smaller mechs have smaller hitboxes that are harder to hit and larger mechs have larger hitboxes that take up more pixels on our screens and are therefore easier to targets.

You have continually missed the forest for the trees on this issue - and its irrelevant whether you are being purposefully obtuse or are simply just obtuse by nature.

Edited by Ultimax, 09 June 2016 - 12:32 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Ultimax, on 09 June 2016 - 12:31 PM, said:

Heavies and Assaults are not changing, therefore all of the mechs getting larger will be worse off.

source?

I know of several Heavy and Assaults changing.