126 replies to this topic

[Lord Perversor]

New vs Old catapult... ok who forgot to read the don't wash it may shrink label!!

[Bors Mistral]

Holly Cow, the Grasshopper got hit hard by the growth hormones...
Not just taller, but a slightly thicker side profile?
Maybe the stance could have been adjusted a little so it doesn't tower as much...

[Reno Blade]

Here is another detailed comparison between all weight classes for the height.
Notice the 70 tonners are mostly as tall as the 80 tonners here, but usually a lot skinnier (especially the hopper).

[Zodie]

Marauder size increase lookes like a buff

[Zodie]

Hydrocarbon, on 17 June 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

I can see making some OP mechs bigger but jeeez...the Hopper is STILL taller than an Atlas!

Hopper has became a REAL LOCUST

[Countess]

Any questions?

[Miles McQuiston]

Catapult is deceptively short because of the chicken legs (virtual squat). The Catapult was probably a wild card to scale because some variants have box ears some have almost no ears so the "volume" of the mech was likely scaled off the variant with "ears". There is a lot of complaints about the height of mechs, but this tends to be a non factor in my aiming. For instance when shooting a target from the side you are typically tracking it in the horizontal direction not the vertical, hence tall thin mechs tough to hit short long/fat mechs easy to hit. When firing at the front the "target" is the exposed portion of the mech. The exposed portion is relative to the location of weapons (how high mounted) and not a function of the actual surface area in trades at range. Picking the right cover for your mech may be a learning process based off it getting a bit taller or shorter.

To comment nearly everyone considers an LRM Atlas a joke and prefer to go AC20/SRM/Lasers. The Atlas has almost no ability to favorably trade at range (low mounted weapons, gigantic, and slow) which is why the preference is to have an extreme close quarters engagement where fire-twist-soakdamage-twist-fire.... repeat are the standards. Now the Atlas got slightly bigger, who cares, it was stupid simple to hit before and at the ranges it is effective it was already hard to miss it. The only thing an Atlas can do at range effectively is fire LRMs (high cockpit, limited exposure of head and shoulders to acquire targets). It will likely take more damage than it deals exposing to fire direct fire weapons at range (hard point placement relative to cockpit). I am not making an argument for the LRM Atlas, just pointing out that the hard point location relative to the "pilot/cockpit" location is the predominant driving factor in how hard a mech is to hit.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Quote

Its supposed to be. The mech sizes are being changed to reflect a real mass/shape/size relation and then they're being rebalanced in terms of gameplay after.

what weight has a ferro F.Panzerung in Atlas and in Panther? have them there the same armor strengths? all autocannon by all manufacturers the same dimensions at the same weight ???? all cockpits have the same weight, but very different volume

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 20 June 2016 - 08:17 AM.

[Koniving]

tetefroid, on 17 June 2016 - 05:25 PM, said:

*Facepalm* Gawd I sooo want a mechwarrior game with out TT rules or lore fixed hardpoints. and preferably made by people who dont do stoopid s**t like this. amen.

We already have one.
It's called MWO.

It threw out the TT rules (all weapons fire 3 to 38 times their TT ratings, mechs can't climb, go prone or settle Hull Down, mechs can't punch or kick or use improvised weapons or melee equipment, there is no infantry, tanks, actively participating conventional aircraft or aerotech fighters a severely restricted set of weapons where TT in the same time period has about 3 times as many weapons and ammo types, no out-of-mech experiences or Grand Theft Mech, there are no knockdowns for 20 damage, heatsinks no longer melt down from thermal abuse, alpha strikes are pinpoint and have no consequences beyond shutting down for a half second -- as opposed to being shutdown for as long as thirty seconds in extreme cases with 20 seconds as an average and possible pilot injury, death or blackout, mech joints fusing etc. A hit to the cockpit fails to cause any injury to the pilot, there is no pilot fatigue, there is no throwing objects, objectives are effectively meaningless rather than a requirement of progression, planetary cannons do not shoot down dropships before they make deliveries....or shoot at anything. Bases lack destructable walls and gates or capital-class defenses [20 damage capital class = 200 damage against a mech], no enemies inside buildings or ambushes from trees, no slowing down to a crawl in water or quad mechs, no building collapsing from standing on it or no building destruction, no slipping on wet pavement or barrel rolls from taking sharp turns at full speed, no sense of continuity between matches with repair and rearm and the risk of unrepairable damage...the list goes on.)

And fixed hardpoints have nothing to do with lore, not to mention there's such a ridiculous amount of them. You could turn an Atlas D-DC into an Atlas K and then into an Atlas S-2. All you needed was large amounts of time and about 4 to 5 times more money than it would have taken to just buy an Atlas S-2.

Edited by Koniving, 20 June 2016 - 10:53 AM.

[Chados]

Someone please tell Wintersdark that Gyrok is using his account, LOL!

[Wintersdark]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 20 June 2016 - 08:12 AM, said:

what weight has a ferro F.Panzerung in Atlas and in Panther? have them there the same armor strengths? all autocannon by all manufacturers the same dimensions at the same weight ???? all cockpits have the same weight, but very different volume

I said it before, when they announced volumetric scaling, and I'll say it again now.

There where TWO ways to do the rescale.

1) Pick a fixed mech density. All mechs are this dense. Scale all mechs to that density (keeping in mind density=volume*mass). PGI did this. Pros: All mechs are scaled properly under these guidelines, with no room for argument. It's purely a matter of one-and-done, and new mechs will automatically conform. Cons: mechs get bigger or smaller relative only to their volume and mass, with no concerns for how good or bad the mech was before/after.

2) Rescale By Paul. Pick mechs that appear too small, or are just too powerful, or have killed Paul, and make them bigger. Pick mechs that look too big, are to weak, and/or smell funny, make them smaller. Pros: You can adjust scale including balance as a consideration. Cons: PGI would never get it right, because they don't really understand balance in the game (see: KDK1, KDK5 get no quirks because OMGLAZERZ, while KDK3 get the sexy quirks cuz it's harmless dakkaboat). See also: the whole quirk system. This would end up being random, inconsistent, and not guaranteed to continue to be used well into the future.

No matter how wonderful you can imagine 2, it would be a clusterfsck from the start and never get better.

It was always 1 or nothing.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Quote

I said it before, when they announced volumetric scaling, and I'll say it again now.

There where TWO ways to do the rescale.

1) Pick a fixed mech density. All mechs are this dense. Scale all mechs to that density (keeping in mind density=volume*mass). PGI did this. Pros: All mechs are scaled properly under these guidelines, with no room for argument. It's purely a matter of one-and-done, and new mechs will automatically conform. Cons: mechs get bigger or smaller relative only to their volume and mass, with no concerns for how good or bad the mech was before/after.

volume/mass is by a Komplex machine with many elements nonsense (thats not only a single Cube )...have the Arms of the Rifleman the same dense of the arms from the Jaegermech? has the rifleman Torso the same weight and dense like the Jaegerman Torso , have the Rifleman Torso a Higher dense and Volume with a larger Engine and the Arms a Lower volume with 1xAc2 or 1xAC5 or 2 x MG

Abrams tank

Lenght 9,83 m width 3,66 m height 2,86 m Mass 61,3 t


Maus Tank

Lenght 10,09 m width 3,67 m height 3,80 m Mass 188 t
Maus has 188t against 61,3t of the Abrams and not 3x more Volume

with mathematical, we can make all mechs with the same height ,or the Locust of the Height of the Atlas or with only 4m Height ...or we can make it with a concept of visual Art

wich has more voliume/weight ? a Boing 727 or the Hindeburg Zeppelin

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 20 June 2016 - 10:04 AM.

[DemonRaziel]

Wintersdark, on 20 June 2016 - 09:25 AM, said:

There where TWO ways to do the rescale.

1) Pick a fixed mech density.
2) Rescale By Paul.

Nah, this is exactly the "rescale by Paul" option.

"Normalizing" something, this time by a fixed density, when there are reasons not to - not just balance-wise, but also explainable from a logic POV with arguments such as MW4 Ranger's.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

[crashlogic]

MrVei, on 18 June 2016 - 12:30 PM, said:

NOPE the 5D lost 10% lrm cooldown and that was it. i was really hoping they would tone down the side intakes that get hung up on everything in the bog, nice to see that was fixed by making it bigger lol. better weapon perks would have been fun but oh well i guess. only time will tell if this nerfs this mech much or not.

Because lrms are so op they have to nerf that quirk?

[Solis Obscuri]

Nice to see the Quickdraw and Dragon get adjusted down, but why did the Cataphract shrink again? It was already pretty damn compact for a 70 tonner...

[Gwydion Ward]

oh wow.... Thunderbolt really shrunk!

[Gernot von Kurzmann]

I dont have a Catapult 60t.

But i see that he looks a little bit to small for his tons. Only a little.

On this map:

https://static.mwome...ff2ad0e3cd8.png

Edited by Gernot von Kurzmann, 21 June 2016 - 01:31 AM.

[Lupus Aurelius]

Grasshopper - 70 tons
Timberwolf - 75 tons

And the Grasshopper is taller than an Atlas, and with wider legs than before?!?!?!?! Timby comes up to about chest level to it?!?!?!? Terrible change for Grasshopper, seriously, when you originally scaled these, you volume data must have been way off, there is no way a Grasshopper would have the relative size it does now.

Other than the Thunderbolt and Catapult, all the other heavies rescaling ridiculously big in comparison to to clan mechs and IS Assaults.

[Lungbutter]

Hydrocarbon, on 17 June 2016 - 03:34 PM, said:

I can see making some OP mechs bigger but jeeez...the Hopper is STILL taller than an Atlas!

This. Why did PGI make an already too-tall mech even taller?

Also, why is the black knight as tall as an atlas now?