776 replies to this topic

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Jables McBarty, on 24 June 2016 - 12:52 PM, said:

wait, wut?


....not sure what you're trying to say at all now that i reread the whole post, but you do realize the rescale is based on the premise that all 'mechs have an (approximately) equivalent density, right? Same basic materials, etc. Like people have been saying that every third post.

and this is a stupid nonsense idea , with this is the Rescaling a nonsense stupid idea..what have the Mechs for a Dense ? the dense of Steel?, PVC?Myomer? Copper?Have a DVD Pklayer the same dense of a Car ,a Peterbilt Truck the same dense of a M1 Abrams or Apache Heli

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 24 June 2016 - 08:26 PM.

[Jables McBarty]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 24 June 2016 - 08:20 PM, said:

and this is a stupid nonsense idea , with this is the Rescaling a nonsense stupid idea

[BigBenn]

Old MW4 Ranger, on 24 June 2016 - 08:17 PM, said:

and a ´65 t Mech with no Arms and Misslelauncher get very very smaller like a 30t Mech ,as a 75t Mech (Timberwolf ) with Misslelauncher AND Arms (have Arms not Tonnage ? put in Madcat Arm a Large Laser ...the Laser alone have 4t..2x8t only with for the Armweapons

The Catapult has similar height to the Panther, Wolfound, and Firestarter, yes. But the depth and width more than make up for the differences in height. The Catapult is far more wide and deep. Compare the legs first, maybe that will help people see the differences.

[Mekwarrior]

Inner sphere Jenner ruined totally with the large rescale and speed nerf.

It's now a very weak medium sized mech with very low firepower.

Edited by Mekwarrior, 24 June 2016 - 10:51 PM.

[L3mming2]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 June 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

It's a concept many have trouble grasping. Apparently mechs are really 2D cardboard cutouts with their front profile always facing the enemy, with no ability to move, twist or turn, and no one ever shoots their side profiles, thus only their static frontal torso profiles are of any significance.

Apparently when you discover the UberPro settings levels and tactics, MWO looks like this:


Because that makes total perfect sense. Really.

i fully expected this to be a flach game instead of a pic was suprised when my croshair did not move ...

[Ghostrider0067]

Why has no one dropped the Michael Jackson eating popcorn GIF yet? It would seem fitting given the amount of bickering going on in here.

You're wrong! No, YOU'RE wrong! Nah, man. You're wrong and here's my opinion why. I don't value your opinion but am going to give mine even though you won't value it either.. and you're still wrong!

That's pretty much how this has gone. There's been some constuctive commentary but all the bickering seemingly for the sake of it accomplishes nothing. Just providing my opinion on the discussion, mind you.

I think some aspects of the rescale are decent and others less so. Will they change any of it? That's something we will have to wait and see.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

BigBenn, on 24 June 2016 - 08:40 PM, said:

The Catapult has similar height to the Panther, Wolfound, and Firestarter, yes. But the depth and width more than make up for the differences in height. The Catapult is far more wide and deep. Compare the legs first, maybe that will help people see the differences.

the Catapult have not more wide and deep as the Timber (put away the Arms from the Timberwolf ,and now is it more like a Catapult)

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 26 June 2016 - 03:22 AM.

[Chados]

That doesn't look out of line to me. The Mad Cat is ten tons more heavy and is an Omnimech to boot.

I'm grateful for the rescale. It made the Catapult usable. Of my top three mechs in number of drops, two are Catapults. The third, and the one in second place, is a Marauder 3R. That happened because it was much more survivable. Now I'm running Catapults again and I bought the BB on Day 1. It's just nice to have them able to work. They were the size of an assault mech before and fragile. Now they are still fragile but they are small enough not always to be noticed in the scrum.

Jenners are still hard to hit and sneaky backstabbers. They just are mortal now. Thank God. Long may they be nerfed. I carry 15 armor on my back and I was still getting one-shotted in the back by one of a jillion of the little pests on every map and on the few times I could get turned around I could barely see the damn things. Now the only ones that do that are Locusts and they don't have the one-shot, one kill firepower of every missile Jenner. Cut their hardpoints and set Jenner max firepower in the 20s, and maybe I could live with making them invisible again.

[East Indy]

I just see a whole lot of carping from the usual 2-3 suspects about how their life has been turned upside down. That, and screenshots telling us nothing except that the depicted 'Mech isn't the size they wanted it to be.

How about footage demonstrating in some way that your effectiveness as a player has categorically suffered?

[AeusDeif]

East Indy, on 26 June 2016 - 04:41 AM, said:

I just see a whole lot of carping from the usual 2-3 suspects about how their life has been turned upside down. That, and screenshots telling us nothing except that the depicted 'Mech isn't the size they wanted it to be.

How about footage demonstrating in some way that your effectiveness as a player has categorically suffered?

How about anyone can look at the player population stats after rescale and see how the percentage of light mechs dropped. And see how common the downscaled mechs are, vs how the upscaled mechs became more rare.

It is not just among competitive, consistent players. The general population base has responded behaviorally. Many just don't waste time posting about it anymore. They have voted with their pilot boots, either not playing the upscaled mechs, or not playing at all.

[Mcgral18]

BigBenn, on 24 June 2016 - 08:40 PM, said:

The Catapult has similar height to the Panther, Wolfound, and Firestarter, yes. But the depth and width more than make up for the differences in height. The Catapult is far more wide and deep. Compare the legs first, maybe that will help people see the differences.

When you consider the general angle you shoot the robots, and the hitpoint differential...
plz stahp




I should make one with the Jenner VS Stalker and Pult, as they share the similar construction (while the Panther would be taller)

[VorpalAnvil]

AeusDeif, on 05 October 2016 - 10:15 PM, said:

How about anyone can look at the player population stats after rescale and see how the percentage of light mechs dropped. And see how common the downscaled mechs are, vs how the upscaled mechs became more rare.

It is not just among competitive, consistent players. The general population base has responded behaviorally. Many just don't waste time posting about it anymore. They have voted with their pilot boots, either not playing the upscaled mechs, or not playing at all.

This right here. I own most of the lights available for cbills. I used to play the WLF and Jenner2C quite a bit, and planned on picking up the IS Jenner (as soon as their is a bay sale, ggclose ). Now my choices are quite limited. I can still run the Spider, a mech I've always enjoyed, but when I need to carry all the terribads with the wonderful PSR we've been given I have only 1 choice; ACH. My favorite part about the rescale and the impending ED is that we just came out of the most diverse period in the games history; build, mech and meta wise and we are quickly moving into another period of stagnation. A place where only a few mechs and weapon types matter. The irony of course is that quite often the same crowd who constantly whines about meta, OP mechs and the lack of choices to compete with them are the ones who forumed and twittered us to this point. Remember, every time I core out a lore build in my ACH, a comp player gets his wings.

Edited by VorpalAnvil, 06 October 2016 - 03:25 AM.

[mogs01gt]

Bishop Steiner, on 24 June 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

It's a concept many have trouble grasping. Apparently mechs are really 2D cardboard cutouts with their front profile always facing the enemy, with no ability to move, twist or turn, and no one ever shoots their side profiles, thus only their static frontal torso profiles are of any significance.

Apparently when you discover the UberPro settings levels and tactics, MWO looks like this:


Because that makes total perfect sense. Really.

That is exactly what you are shooting at in MWO. Each side of the mech is a flat surface that you shoot at. Its that simple. There is no depth, there is no volume. If there was, then armor would act like armor(only the point of impact has damage) and not a set number across each section of a mech.

[Mystere]

Mcgral18, on 05 October 2016 - 11:05 PM, said:

When you consider the general angle you shoot the robots, and the hitpoint differential...
plz stahp




I should make one with the Jenner VS Stalker and Pult, as they share the similar construction (while the Panther would be taller)

I just do not trust the visual geometry anymore, and have not for a very long while. Using the actual hit boxes would be a very much better comparison.

VorpalAnvil, on 06 October 2016 - 01:21 AM, said:

This right here. I own most of the lights available for cbills. I used to play the WLF and Jenner2C quite a bit, and planned on picking up the IS Jenner (as soon as their is a bay sale, ggclose ). Now my choices are quite limited. I can still run the Spider, a mech I've always enjoyed, but when I need to carry all the terribads with the wonderful PSR we've been given I have only 1 choice; ACH. My favorite part about the rescale and the impending ED is that we just came out of the most diverse period in the games history; build, mech and meta wise and we are quickly moving into another period of stagnation. A place where only a few mechs and weapon types matter. The irony of course is that quite often the same crowd who constantly whines about meta, OP mechs and the lack of choices to compete with them are the ones who forumed and twittered us to this point. Remember, every time I core out a lore build in my ACH, a comp player gets his wings.

Meh! I just switched to vipers and haven't looked back since ... except for my Urbies, of course.

[Mcgral18]

Mystere, on 06 October 2016 - 08:04 AM, said:

I just do not trust the visual geometry anymore, and have not for a very long while. Using the actual hit boxes would be a very much better comparison.

PGI doesn't give us those (and player created items may have resolution differences, causing false readings)

Raven's legs would be bigger, I know that

[DrxAbstract]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 June 2016 - 04:09 PM, said:

Laughter.

Because the MWO playerbase is so butthurt, with or without cause that we keep bengay in business, singlehandedly


here..in the name of at least a small chance of semi accurate QQ....

I dare you to rub bengay on a sore ****... Triple double dog dare you.

[FupDup]

It's only made worse by the fact that PGI hasn't lived up to their promise of buffing the mechs that got negatively affected by the rescale (i.e. made very large).

[Trollfeed]

What I have observed since rescale, 35 ton lights have pretty much dropped from queue. There's occassional raven and jenner IIC but that's it. Other endangered species are IS mediums, even griffins are quite rare nowadays because they just got so huge.

Linear volumetric scaling linked to weight is just completely retarted. Much less retarted way would have been balance each mech size individually using some common sense.

Edited by Trollfeed, 06 October 2016 - 10:48 AM.

[MerryIguana]

FupDup, on 06 October 2016 - 10:47 AM, said:

It's only made worse by the fact that PGI hasn't lived up to their promise of buffing the mechs that got negatively affected by the rescale (i.e. made very large).

Its only been like 5 months jeez. Cut them some slack.

[Bishop Steiner]

mogs01gt, on 06 October 2016 - 07:58 AM, said:

That is exactly what you are shooting at in MWO. Each side of the mech is a flat surface that you shoot at. Its that simple. There is no depth, there is no volume. If there was, then armor would act like armor(only the point of impact has damage) and not a set number across each section of a mech.

except it's still not because you can turn your mech as a 3D object and spread damage, it's not a stationary 2D object. You fire your laser at my front, I turn damage is spread across a 3D item. End of story.

The game is not played with 2 sets of stationary targets facing each other the whole game. Depth, etc DOES matter.

DrxAbstract, on 06 October 2016 - 10:25 AM, said:

I dare you to rub bengay on a sore ****... Triple double dog dare you.

you first.