Jump to content

Black Knight And Grasshopper


49 replies to this topic

#41 Revis Volek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 7,247 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationBack in the Pilots chair

Posted 29 June 2016 - 11:53 AM

View PostHit the Deck, on 28 June 2016 - 10:00 PM, said:

Posted Image

Night Gyr will join the tall bots squad when it arrives :3




So according to this scale pic the mech is only 50ft high?

#42 Jables McBarty

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,035 posts
  • LocationIn the backfield.

Posted 29 June 2016 - 01:39 PM

View PostCaptain Artemis, on 29 June 2016 - 11:18 AM, said:


Firstly, It's the answer to out little discussion lad.

Secondly, this discussion is mainly about Black Knight and Grasshopper, so my statements are either about their efficiency or changes made to them.

If you increase the size of the 75 mech, that will be in pair in hight with Mauler or Atlas assault mech, you need to know that that it will not share same structure and armor points, either it can.

Black Knight become much bigger, which means it's bigger target. Means it can be killed faster, that's it. it need to have more structure points. I don't care about light mech gameplay, this argument is invalid, because this game does not support the role that they should have.


My response was to the idea that you should be able to kick or punch a locust. If that was intended as a rhetorical flourish, then I apologize...but it really did sound like you were saying that you need to be able punch/kick locusts to be able to increase TTK.

As for the BLKNT, it got hit by the nerfbat, but it had also been amply endowed by the buffwand before that. It's a lot at once--hence all the outcry--but I do think that where it is now is closer to balanced than where it was before.

I guess the question is, how much structure? It already gets 12/17/12 to the torsos, and unlike an Atlas can go up to 89kph, and gets the agility buff that goes along with larger engines.

#43 smokytehbear

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 268 posts
  • LocationThe Heat Lab

Posted 29 June 2016 - 02:06 PM

View PostAlistair Winter, on 26 June 2016 - 08:39 AM, said:


PGI did not consider balancing at all when they rescaled the mechs.

View PostPhra, on 29 June 2016 - 08:39 AM, said:


They did.


Yep. Actual volume does not correlate to mech tonnage perfectly, they used other criteria too for balance reasons.

Once again, for better or worse, PGI believes it knows better than math, and stuck its fingers into the equations.

Edited by smokytehbear, 29 June 2016 - 02:06 PM.


#44 Jables McBarty

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,035 posts
  • LocationIn the backfield.

Posted 29 June 2016 - 02:30 PM

View Postsmokytehbear, on 29 June 2016 - 02:06 PM, said:


Yep. Actual volume does not correlate to mech tonnage perfectly, they used other criteria too for balance reasons.

Once again, for better or worse, PGI believes it knows better than math, and stuck its fingers into the equations.


I have to wonder how much "Judgement" was"ehhh, the Catapult needs to be a teeny bit smaller, the GHR a bit bigga" and to what extent it was actually "Okay, how do we deal with the fact that EBJ, TBR, MAL and TDR get substantially bigger when they carry missiles?"

It's particularly obvious with the EBJ as hardpoint placement can dramatically change the volume of the 'mech. So they had to choose a loadout to use for the sizing.

#45 Hit the Deck

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,677 posts
  • LocationIndonesia

Posted 29 June 2016 - 04:15 PM

View PostRevis Volek, on 29 June 2016 - 11:53 AM, said:

So according to this scale pic the mech is only 50ft high?

The knight is almost 18m or 59ft high and the GHR is around 17m or 56ft high but with legs more bent.

#46 Nightmare1

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 7,636 posts
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationPeeking over your shoulder while eating your cookies.

Posted 29 June 2016 - 05:07 PM

PGI should have scaled them based on exposed surface area rather than volume.

#47 SuomiWarder

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Raider
  • The Raider
  • 1,661 posts
  • LocationSacramento area, California

Posted 29 June 2016 - 05:17 PM

In the paper based rules it didn't matter. The chance to hit a light was the same as the chance to hit an assault. So when they did the size comparison charts I doubt they worried much about comparative size. One could argue that being a tall light mech meant you could shoot over stuff.

If they scaled up in height based on a ratio, most people would just accept it. Intuitively it "feels" right that a 55 tonner is a little bit bigger than a 45 tonner, etc.

They could also choose to go with exposed hit box surface area. A mech of any given tonnage has X amount of size exposure and then fit the model into that calculation.

There are other options than volume. Although I understand what the idea of volume would appeal.

#48 Captain Artemis

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • The Formidable
  • The Formidable
  • 67 posts

Posted 30 June 2016 - 09:01 AM

View PostJables McBarty, on 29 June 2016 - 01:39 PM, said:


My response was to the idea that you should be able to kick or punch a locust. If that was intended as a rhetorical flourish, then I apologize...but it really did sound like you were saying that you need to be able punch/kick locusts to be able to increase TTK.

As for the BLKNT, it got hit by the nerfbat, but it had also been amply endowed by the buffwand before that. It's a lot at once--hence all the outcry--but I do think that where it is now is closer to balanced than where it was before.

I guess the question is, how much structure? It already gets 12/17/12 to the torsos, and unlike an Atlas can go up to 89kph, and gets the agility buff that goes along with larger engines.


So we misunderstand each other, fine, lets start from the beginning. :)

It's the same discussion as it was with "Victor and Atlas" back in the days when my old friend got hit by the hammer. Here is the same. It's still 25 tons, it's more than AC20 difference. A heavy BattleMech is not an assault BattleMech, nor it should, the bigger one in this case eat smaller.

I bring here Atlas, not because I want my beauty to become one, but they share their role and characteristics, as BattleMechs with lower placed hardpoints, but in the different categories.

Mechs should be designed with specific pattern from the beginning, and I'm disappointed that even most resent mechs, like Black Knight, Warhammer, Marauder, Rifleman, Mauler were not created in the proper scale. In case of Knight, rescale should not involve making him bigger, proper rescale of this BattleMech should be about making his arms bigger, just like in the concept art, those shield arms would suit it's roll greatly.

#49 Revis Volek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 7,247 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationBack in the Pilots chair

Posted 30 June 2016 - 09:08 AM

View PostHit the Deck, on 29 June 2016 - 04:15 PM, said:

The knight is almost 18m or 59ft high and the GHR is around 17m or 56ft high but with legs more bent.



Wow that guy at the bottom for scale is taller then i thought then. :P

He makes up two boxes and the grasshopper is about 17 boxes tall. So i was guessing 6ft avg, 3ft per box which is 51'.

But it seems that guys is more like 7'0"!

#50 Hit the Deck

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,677 posts
  • LocationIndonesia

Posted 30 June 2016 - 01:10 PM

View PostRevis Volek, on 30 June 2016 - 09:08 AM, said:

....
But it seems that guys is more like 7'0"!

PGI used an elemental warrior because he just fits the boxes better Posted Image





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users