172 replies to this topic

[mogs01gt]

volume? 3d? what??

We are shooting a 2d panel with a set amount of hitpoints for the armor and internal structure. There is no depth, there is no "volume". This is why there has to be a clear distinction between weight classes and there isnt. This is why 80t mechs suck, most mediums suck and lights require massive speed to be effective.

You cant compared MWO to lore since weapons affected armor differently.

[Bishop Steiner]

cazidin, on 02 August 2016 - 09:25 AM, said:

The irony here is that in making Medium Mechs almost as tall as Heavy Mechs does bring MW:O closer to a true "Battletech Game" according to the original size graph.

mechs tended to get wider, and thicker, not taller. 8-14 meters is the spread from the Stinger to the Banshee. Most Mechs Hovered between 10-12 meters.

[Chemie]

PGI made lights the size of mediums so they HAD to make mediums taller.

[mogs01gt]

Chemie, on 02 August 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

PGI made lights the size of mediums so they HAD to make mediums taller.

huh???

[Y E O N N E]

AWOL 01, on 02 August 2016 - 08:09 AM, said:

This thread though...
I wanted to stay away but I have to make a couple points.

1. The difference between a 20 ton mech and a 30 ton mech is going to be bigger than the difference between a 60 ton mech and a 70 ton mech because the 10 ton difference is half the 20 tonner's mass, but only 1/6th the 60 tonner's mass. Going up 5 tons is going to be a much more noticeable difference when comparing lights, and much less noticeable when comparing assaults.

2. Choosing to scale volumetrically was probably the best choice PGI has made in a long time. The other 2 options were to scale based on how big they "feel" the mech should be, or scale based on Battletech lore. Scaling based on feel would've gotten worse and worse - just look at how PGI tries to quirk mechs before they come out. Do you want your favorite mech's size getting changed as often as the quirks? The other option would've been even worse. First, there aren't official heights and sizes for every mech, and when you look at the ones they do have it makes you cringe. Seriously, a Firemoth that's taller than a Dire Wolf...

3. Y'all need to go back to high school and take a geometry class or something. At least Google the Square-Cube Law. I'm a mechanical engineer so I admit I have a better grasp on this sort of thing, so I'll give an example. Recently, because the government likes to stick its nose where it doesn't belong, we had trouble getting 1/2 inch manganese plate for a machine. However, we were offered a discount on 5/8 inch plate because of the inconvenience. Adding 1/8th of an inch to all the weldments on the machine increased its weight from 138,000 pounds (69 tons) to 150,000 pounds (75 tons) with no noticeable increase in size. Changing one dimension by 1/8th of an inch in a machine that is 81 feet x 4 feet x 14 feet added 5 tons.

I know this probably won't change anyone's mind but I had to say it or I'd pull my hair out...

1. Yes...if you assume all Mechs are constructed of exactly the same materials in similar quantities and with the same mission requirements, all of which is technically unknowable.

2. Changing scale is a lot more involved than changing quirks. That is why they rescaled everything in the first place; the hope was that they would make it all right and never have to do it again. Quirks, however, were always intended to be fluid. Come on now, this one should have been a "duh" moment.

3. The Square-Cube law works both ways as an argument. You are defending an arbitrary decision to decide that it means to err on the side of 'Mechs being bigger rather than smaller in the absence of having an externally defined material density of any sort and without there being any change to the precision of the weapons in the game.

When handing someone a gun, make sure you know where he'll point it.

From one engineer to another...you should have looked at the system design specs some more.

Edited by Yeonne Greene, 02 August 2016 - 01:07 PM.

[AWOL 01]

Yeonne Greene, on 02 August 2016 - 01:06 PM, said:

1. Yes...if you assume all Mechs are constructed of exactly the same materials in similar quantities and with the same mission requirements, all of which is technically unknowable.

We don't need to assume, we know that Battlemechs are made from the same materials, whether it's endosteel, ferro-fibrous armor, myomer muscle etc. and that these take up the same relative space on the mech, so they have (about) the same density. Density is equal to mass divided by volume. Density is fixed. The mech determines the mass. There you have it. Solve for volume. Once you have the volume, scale the model so that it's volume equals the volume you solved for. It's math. It's objective. It's fair.

I can't really see what your other two points had to do in response to mine so... yeah.

[Y E O N N E]

AWOL 01, on 02 August 2016 - 01:37 PM, said:

We don't need to assume, we know that Battlemechs are made from the same materials, whether it's endosteel, ferro-fibrous armor, myomer muscle etc. and that these take up the same relative space on the mech, so they have (about) the same density. Density is equal to mass divided by volume. Density is fixed. The mech determines the mass. There you have it. Solve for volume. Once you have the volume, scale the model so that it's volume equals the volume you solved for. It's math. It's objective. It's fair.

I can't really see what your other two points had to do in response to mine so... yeah.

You know what the frame, locomotion, and armor are made from. You have no idea what the gyros, computers, weapons, reactors, seating, linings, fasteners, etc. are made from. Also, objectivity implies an objective. If your objective is to make all of the 'Mechs have normalized sizing, sure, it is fair. If your objective is to improve how the game plays by reducing the impact of unfavorable geometry or weight, you are basically Morgoth, cursed be his name because in no way is that fair.

As for the rest, that is willful ignorance on your part; they are directly addressing your numbered entries, quite plainly.

[FupDup]

Yeonne Greene, on 02 August 2016 - 01:56 PM, said:

You know what the frame, locomotion, and armor are made from. You have no idea what the gyros, computers, weapons, reactors, seating, linings, fasteners, etc. are made from. Also, objectivity implies an objective. If your objective is to make all of the 'Mechs have normalized sizing, sure, it is fair. If your objective is to improve how the game plays by reducing the impact of unfavorable geometry or weight, you are basically Morgoth, cursed be his name because in no way is that fair.

As for the rest, that is willful ignorance on your part; they are directly addressing your numbered entries, quite plainly.

Some more points:

A. Items like armor, engines, etc. have different manufacturers, which are unlikely to all be 100% identical.

B. Some mechs like the Orion were stated in the lore as being "filled with open space," which in the Orion's case made it easier to maintain/repair/stuff. There are also some mechs that have the "compact" design quirk, which means the mech is more tightly packed and therefore more dense than the average mech.

[cazidin]

Chemie, on 02 August 2016 - 12:50 PM, said:

PGI made lights the size of mediums so they HAD to make mediums taller.

Honestly, the lights were brought in line. The changes were either negligible, brought very undersized light mechs up to par, or affected a chassis that nobody plays anyway.

[ComradeHavoc]

Mediums atm feel like a poor man's heavy. Slow, undergunned, and with a lot less armor. When I invested into mediums, I thought I would be playing a tank-hunter role. Nope, that goes to the light nascars. Instead I feel like an obese basketball player getting sloppy seconds.

[Zolaz]

Streak boat Shadow Cat. Fast, agile and sneaky. Use those JJs to get above the enemy when you fire so that more missiles hit the torsos.

[Foxwalker]

Zolaz, on 02 August 2016 - 05:23 PM, said:

Streak boat Shadow Cat. Fast, agile and sneaky. Use those JJs to get above the enemy when you fire so that more missiles hit the torsos.

Yeah, that is how I leveled mine, I felt so dirty. LOL

[Revis Volek]

FupDup, on 02 August 2016 - 02:00 PM, said:

Some more points:

A. Items like armor, engines, etc. have different manufacturers, which are unlikely to all be 100% identical.

B. Some mechs like the Orion were stated in the lore as being "filled with open space," which in the Orion's case made it easier to maintain/repair/stuff. There are also some mechs that have the "compact" design quirk, which means the mech is more tightly packed and therefore more dense than the average mech.

Honestly it doesn't make sense at all. The Engines we put in Light mechs also fit in Huge assault mechs, if you compare the torso sizes most Heavies and Assaults would have TONS of open space in them. Sure bigger engines would get a bit bigger and smaller ones smaller but a Atlas with a Engine that fits in a CDA would have to have like a house worth of space inside the engine compartment.

ComradeHavoc, on 02 August 2016 - 04:16 PM, said:

Mediums atm feel like a poor man's heavy. Slow, undergunned, and with a lot less armor. When I invested into mediums, I thought I would be playing a tank-hunter role. Nope, that goes to the light nascars. Instead I feel like an obese basketball player getting sloppy seconds.

You have to stand around the net and just wait for rebounds to dunk.

Edited by Revis Volek, 02 August 2016 - 08:05 PM.