776 replies to this topic

[orcrist86]

On point as usual Bishop.

[Afuldan McKronik]

StaggerCheck, on 19 June 2016 - 07:14 AM, said:

Hey there Bishop... thanks for this. I asked in the other thread for this... an Atlas vs. Locust overlay so that we can see the 80 ton difference. That would be fantabo, thanks.

An overlay isn't really needed. The Locust head barely clears the crotch of the Atlas.

[Bishop Steiner]

StaggerCheck, on 19 June 2016 - 07:10 AM, said:

1. What does it matter if the same volume measurements are being applied to every chassis in the game... it should all come out in the wash, no?

2. Bishop, could you please do the same thing with the Locust and the Atlas, overlapped? I'd love to see what an extra 80 tons looks like, according to the PGI math.

3. To the OP... Mechs as represented in game have three dimensions. Just a heads up.

you mean according to volume? Yeah, might be a little bit, juggling a few things this morning... But an Atlas on Locust Rollerskates should be fun!

I am curious though....was the volume decided with or without weapons?

Eh... got too curious to delay...


lol

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 19 June 2016 - 07:32 AM.

[Cy Mitchell]

I do not understand why people think that every Mech must be balanced against every other Mech. That has never been the case in BattleTech. It has never been the case in MechWarrior games. It has never been the case in the novels. There is no bases for it in the fictional world of BattleTech. There is no basis for every weapon system to be balanced against other systems in real life.

These fictional machines are made in different sizes and configuarations. Some are supposed to be better than others. Some were notably bad designs. You cannot make a bad design good no matter how much you quirk it. People that think all these Mechs will be balanced really need to wake up. The fact that MWO gives us the ability to customize the Mechs extensively just makes matters worse.

There is only one way to have perfect balance is to only have one Mech that everyone uses with only one weapon loadout. That is it. Under any other circumstances there is going to be imbalance.

Trying to quirk everything to death to achieve balance is bad for the game. Sizing Mechs to arbitrary sizes just to make a bad Mech good is an even worse idea. PGI did the right thing to normalize the sizing in MWO. They should use the quirks sparingly to correct major issues with some Mechs but the should not attempt to balance the Mechs against one another with quirks. It will never, ever work.

[Roughneck45]

Sheesh Bish, you are so full of ****!

There is no way you felt bad writing that post...

lol

Edited by Roughneck45, 19 June 2016 - 07:27 AM.

[Mystere]

Roughneck45, on 19 June 2016 - 07:26 AM, said:

Sheesh Bish, you are so full of ****!

There is no way you felt bad writing that post...

lol

Ahem! There is a reason why he used the word "almost".

[STEF_]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2016 - 06:49 AM, said:

Speechless would be preferable to actually disseminating inaccurate information. I am hoping, NOT intentionally.

From the Patch Notes:
"Just in case, please note that these silhouettes are captured using an orthographic camera, whereas the Re-Scale comparison images in the above links are taken with the standard MechLab perspective camera. As a result of that difference, scales may appear slightly different if comparing 'Mechs between the two images"



An overlay using their Orthographic camera comparison

100% debunks the OP, and pretty much every similar one I have seen.

I'm sorry to call you out, but I'm "speechless" at the Trump-like levels people seem to want to go on this, when "the truth is out there" for everyone.

I'm still speechless if you think (I hope you don't) new catapult and the PXH can perform at same lavels.

Because you know....with this gamestyle pgi gave us, any mech should be able to perform at least quite the same level.
And only Trump-like people can think this.

Mister Blastman, on 19 June 2016 - 06:59 AM, said:

To be fair...

a. Catapult torso volume is pretty big considering the external surface area
b. Catapult legs were bent significantly to give a greater impression of size reduction when truth be told, isn't even close to what it standing there makes it seem like

Read my post: I don0t care about this, because when someone shoots, it's the dimension of the silouette that matters.
That's why months ago I stated that volumetric rescale would be plain $h1t.

New catapult can be next meta.
PXH will be a circus mech, trust me.

[Trauglodyte]

Roughneck45, on 19 June 2016 - 07:26 AM, said:

Sheesh Bish, you are so full of ****!

There is no way you felt bad writing that post...

lol

With 39,000 posts, I'm not sure he feels bad about anything, short of how overworked his keyboard is.

[Bishop Steiner]

StaggerCheck, on 19 June 2016 - 07:14 AM, said:

Hey there Bishop... thanks for this. I asked in the other thread for this... an Atlas vs. Locust overlay so that we can see the 80 ton difference. That would be fantabo, thanks.

[Ultimax]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2016 - 06:57 AM, said:

An overlay using their Orthographic camera comparison

100% debunks the OP, and pretty much every similar one I have seen.

By this overlay, the Phoenix Hawk is horribly overscaled from a mech balance perspective.


It doesn't matter that it's legs are thinner, it doesn't matter that it's arms are thinner - it's overall front profile is too large and will make it easy to target and kill.

That is a target size no one even halfway decent at this game will have trouble hitting.


It's not even the worst offender of the bunch.

[Bishop Steiner]

Roughneck45, on 19 June 2016 - 07:26 AM, said:

Sheesh Bish, you are so full of ****!

There is no way you felt bad writing that post...

lol

For writing it, in and of itself? You are correct. Because it means I have to shoot down some people I genuinely like in the process, I do feel a bit bad. But friends don't let friends believe and spread bullcrap.

[DaZur]

Amen...

It's times like this when I appreciate the **** retentive over-reaching efforts of our resident QA departments.

[Bishop Steiner]

Ultimax, on 19 June 2016 - 07:34 AM, said:

By this overlay, the Phoenix Hawk is horribly overscaled from a mech balance perspective.


It doesn't matter that it's legs are thinner, it doesn't matter that it's arms are thinner - it's overall front profile is too large and will make it easy to target and kill.

That is a target size no one even halfway decent at this game will have trouble hitting.


It's not even the worst offender of the bunch.

As noted before, many time, scale should NEVER be used as a balancer (nor hitboxes). It simply IS: It's a baseline that allows one to build the variables around it.

If we are going to start subjectively balance mechs by scale, the Victor, Archer and Summoner would have to be scaled down to the size of the OLD Firestarter.

Also, with the frequency of legging, yeah, legs matter. Arms matter as they determine if the chassis can block incoming shots. if every mech just stood, add stared, like in the old MW2 and Crescent Hawk days, then indeed, using 2D scaling, would work. It doesn't. Different mechs have different speeds and agility. People twist, you take shots at side profiles. LRMs may not matter in Compland, but being built like a slow moving dinner plate definitely does impact the KGC vs LRMs for the other 98% of the playerbase.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 19 June 2016 - 07:40 AM.

[Ultimax]

Yellonet, on 19 June 2016 - 01:04 AM, said:

Yes, volume is a very difficult concept to comprehend I guess.

No it's an easy concept, what seems to be the harder concept is that the volume is not as important as the front and side profiles of a mech for targeting them and killing them.

The Phoenix Hawk with a 45 tonners armor and that size will be an easy target.

[Trauglodyte]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2016 - 07:33 AM, said:

That's what I call balls deep (or tall)

Edited by Trauglodyte, 19 June 2016 - 07:39 AM.

[TechChris]

Oh come on BS! That's BS!

1. You didn't feel squat but an explainable urge to "beat ya head against ya desk, and or strangle some forum warriors" as ya wrote that....... Cause ya know no matter how right you may be, they'll still be plenty more people to try n prove how "right" you aren't! :-D

2. You of all people know that there are Plenty of forum warriors who stay forum warriors just so they can b***h about s**t because this isn't "There Perfect MWO"......... Why ya got take away one the few things that gives meaning to there, um," existence" by throwing out facts n information like that again? You must get some kinda sick giggle by taking away those poor forum warriors one "usefulness" in the community! :-D

[Yellonet]

Ultimax, on 19 June 2016 - 07:34 AM, said:

By this overlay, the Phoenix Hawk is horribly overscaled from a mech balance perspective.

Nope. Just look at the image and consider how much easier it will be to for instance hit the Catapults' CT from all aspects.

[Ultimax]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2016 - 07:37 AM, said:

As noted before, many time, scale should NEVER be used as a balancer (nor hitboxes). It simply IS: It's a baseline that allows one to build the variables around it.

If we are going to start subjectively balance mechs by scale, the Victor, Archer and Summoner would have to be scaled down to the size of the OLD Firestarter.

Scale has to be included in balance considerations, or PGI will need to start doling out armor and structure quirks by the truckloads.

Mech size, scale and profile are some of the first things players look at and test to decide if a mech is going to be survivable or easy to kill - it is intrinsically linked to performance whether we like it or not.

It would be irrelevant in a game like HBS is creating, but in a FPS shooter like this it is undeniably critical.

[Bishop Steiner]

Trauglodyte, on 19 June 2016 - 07:33 AM, said:

With 39,000 posts, I'm not sure he feels bad about anything, short of how overworked his keyboard is.

basic mechanical keyboards, simple, reliable.

Laptops...not so sure.

Trauglodyte, on 19 June 2016 - 07:39 AM, said:

That's what I call balls deep (or tall)

sadly, no the locust can't just run between the Atlas' legs.....

[Ultimax]

Yellonet, on 19 June 2016 - 07:40 AM, said:

Nope. Just look at the image and consider how much easier it will be to for instance hit the Catapults' CT from all aspects.

The Catapult is also 20T heavier, which means it has more armor and structure, and more firepower.

On top of that, we don't really shoot mechs from the top frequently enough for the top down view to be as heavily weighed in performance as the front and side profiles.


This isn't theory craft, this experience is the reality in game right now and has been since its inception.