75 replies to this topic

[Jun Watarase]

Was looking at them in the store earlier, and they are clearly larger than some assaults. The grasshopper/black knight are so tall that their head touches the quick play button. That's literally as tall as an Atlas. These are 70-75 ton mechs and they are the size of 100 ton assaults.

Wasn't the re-scale supposed to address issues like these? Look at the thunderbolt/jagermech, they seem pretty appropriately sized, and then there's suddenly a massive jump in height when you get to the 70-75 ton range.

[Battlemaster56]

Jun Watarase, on 22 November 2016 - 07:39 AM, said:

Was looking at them in the store earlier, and they are clearly larger than some assaults. The grasshopper/black knight are so tall that their head touches the quick play button. That's literally as tall as an Atlas. These are 70-75 ton mechs and they are the size of 100 ton assaults.

Wasn't the re-scale supposed to address issues like these? Look at the thunderbolt/jagermech, they seem pretty appropriately sized, and then there's suddenly a massive jump in height when you get to the 70-75 ton range.

The thinner the mech the taller they get, fatter the smaller pretty simple and not really that big of the issue unlike 35 tonners being nearly the size of a Cicada or viper.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Those mechs are rather skinny, so when there was a volume adjustment, they became taller. A lot of assaults are fairly wide and stocky, so they didn't grow in height as much.

[Davers]

Battlemaster56, on 22 November 2016 - 07:43 AM, said:

The thinner the mech the taller they get, fatter the smaller pretty simple and not really that big of the issue unlike 35 tonners being nearly the size of a Cicada or viper.

So 35 ton mechs being nearly the size to 40 ton mechs is an issue? Should the mathematical formula for volume change just because one is labeled a light mech?

Not saying that lights are in a good place, or that gameplay decisions shouldn't have factored more in size, but a 35 ton mech should be similar to a 40 ton mech in size.

[MeiSooHaityu]

Many on the forums often equate size only to height (even though there is a lot more at play).

The biggest offenders are those that point to a humanoid mech being as tall or taller than a heavier aircraft torso style mech. They don't look at the fact that the aircraft torso style mech carries it's volume in length vs height like humanoid mechs.

Each chassis style has it's own set of +/- attributes, and humanoids is tall, but skinny to help spread damage and shield better with it's sides, whereas an aircraft torso mech is shorter, but can't shield it's side torsos as well and often has a larger target CT.

Point is, there is more to it than just height.

Edited by MeiSooHaityu, 22 November 2016 - 08:02 AM.

[Battlemaster56]

Davers, on 22 November 2016 - 07:51 AM, said:

So 35 ton mechs being nearly the size to 40 ton mechs is an issue? Should the mathematical formula for volume change just because one is labeled a light mech?

Not saying that lights are in a good place, or that gameplay decisions shouldn't have factored more in size, but a 35 ton mech should be similar to a 40 ton mech in size.

Well seeing that most of the matches I've played when I came back to MWO, I only seen at least 3 35 tonners within my week, and the increase size made it more difficult for them to keep their already meek surivablity and I'm noticing they are easier to hit than before.

I can't say to much as being a light pilot since most of the time I'm leveing up most my mediums and new linebackers since I came back haven't even finish basicing my jenner IIC's but the size increase really hurt the 35 ton bracket by a large amount.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MeiSooHaityu, on 22 November 2016 - 08:01 AM, said:

Point is, there is more to it than just height.

Yep, there is surface area, and this is where mechs that aren't giant cubes like the Whale got shafted and why lights are so huge.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 22 November 2016 - 08:31 AM.

[cazidin]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 22 November 2016 - 08:31 AM, said:

Yep, there is surface area, and this is where mechs that aren't giant cubes like the Whale got shafted and why lights are so huge.

I'm fairly confident that PGI is determined to ruin the light class, leaving only the elite veteran pilots playing them, so that people stop asking for a light mechpack.

[Tarogato]

The Grasshopper is supposed to be one of the tallest mechs in Battletech. It's one of the few that I think PGI nailed.


I believe it was in TRO: 3025 that somebody found this line: "Ugly and foreboding are two apt descriptions for the Atlas. Though some 'Mechs might be taller and heavier, none have the Atlas' aura."

I believe it was the Banshee that was supposed to be the tallest mech in the universe (at least up until around the Clan Invasion), and there's a graphic here depicting its height, along with the Grasshopper which is noted for its extreme height:



If I did my calculations correctly, then the Banshee is somewhere around 16m tall, the Grasshopper is ~14m, the Enforcer at 12m, and the Commando at ~9m. The Atlas is usually cited as being between 13m and 16m tall, being a stockier and fatter mech, not so much with the height. So having the Grasshopper being around that height seems appropriate according to lore (and it's also appropriate volumetrically, since the Grasshopper is modeled to be so lanky)

I used to have the measurements for the MWO in game models, but the rescale shuffled that around... I should redo those numbers some day. I do think the MWO Banshee is too short, though. Should look more like this:

Edited by Tarogato, 22 November 2016 - 09:08 AM.

[Weeny Machine]

Davers, on 22 November 2016 - 07:51 AM, said:

So 35 ton mechs being nearly the size to 40 ton mechs is an issue? Should the mathematical formula for volume change just because one is labeled a light mech?

Not saying that lights are in a good place, or that gameplay decisions shouldn't have factored more in size, but a 35 ton mech should be similar to a 40 ton mech in size.

You sound as if a light mech touched you in the wrong place. Sorry...

Point is: the light mechs have nothing going for them - except they are...err should be harder to hit.
Also, if you link volume to tonnage...you assume automatically that all parts are fashioned the same, the materials are the same etc. This is, according to the TROs, simply wrong when it comes to battlemechs.

[Lyoto Machida]

Bush Hopper, on 22 November 2016 - 09:29 AM, said:

You sound as if a light mech touched you in the wrong place. Sorry...

Point is: the light mechs have nothing going for them - except they are...err should be harder to hit.
Also, if you link volume to tonnage...you assume automatically that all parts are fashioned the same, the materials are the same etc. This is, according to the TROs, simply wrong when it comes to battlemechs.

What exactly is biased against lights with what he said? Based on actual math, a 35 tonners is going to be close in size to a 40 tonner. Arbitrary weight class designations shouldn't play into it.

[Davers]

Bush Hopper, on 22 November 2016 - 09:29 AM, said:

You sound as if a light mech touched you in the wrong place. Sorry...

Point is: the light mechs have nothing going for them - except they are...err should be harder to hit.
Also, if you link volume to tonnage...you assume automatically that all parts are fashioned the same, the materials are the same etc. This is, according to the TROs, simply wrong when it comes to battlemechs.

I pilot lights and mediums exclusively, so can the snark.

I was against the idea of normalizing all mechs based on volume, but that's what the players wanted. Now we are stuck with it. Do lights need help? Yes. Is PGI going to do another rescale? No. Is complaining about mech sizes going to change anything? No. This is a one dimensional game based solely on dealing damage where anything other than heavy/assault mechs are purely suboptimal choices.

[Dogstar]

Personally I think they should have rescaled IS and clan mechs with different factors. You would expect that clan mechs, because they have omnipods would occupy more volume than the equivalent IS weigh mechs by at least 10%.

After all an omnipod that can fit two UAC10 has to be pretty big, so when its fitted with 4 medium lasers there's got to be a lot of wasted space

That 'free' CASE has to go somewhere too - PGI really should have considered I when resizing the mechs

Edited by Dogstar, 22 November 2016 - 10:20 AM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Cuz PGI likes really tall oversized mechs....

[ChapeL]

Dogstar, on 22 November 2016 - 10:18 AM, said:

Personally I think they should have rescaled IS and clan mechs with different factors. You would expect that clan mechs, because they have omnipods would occupy more volume than the equivalent IS weigh mechs by at least 10%.

After all an omnipod that can fit two UAC10 has to be pretty big, so when its fitted with 4 medium lasers there's got to be a lot of wasted space

That 'free' CASE has to go somewhere too - PGI really should have considered I when resizing the mechs

They don't take the weapon out of the pod and fit in something else... the entire pod hits the ground and another one put in its place. So technically, the pod with 2 UAC10 would be called large and the one with 4 meds would be much smaller. Now if the game actually modeled that dynamic ...

[B L O O D W I T C H]

LordKnightFandragon, on 22 November 2016 - 10:19 AM, said:

Cuz PGI likes really tall oversized mechs....

Catapult might want to have a word with you.


Rescale wasn't done so the mechs get more uniform.

It was done to nerf certain mechs and buff others.

That's why the "hello kill me" catapult got scaled down to almost light proptions.
That's why overperforming mechs like the warhammer, grasshopper and blackknight got their hitboxes increased.

Granted, with the hardpoint location of the warhammer and grasshopper, it wasn't such a big deal for them.
The blackknight on the other hand, with most of its weaponry on waist level, it became very noticeable.
Then again, it's a fing 75 ton, XL "friendly" laserboat.

[xVLFBERHxT]

Tarogato, on 22 November 2016 - 09:03 AM, said:

The Grasshopper is supposed to be one of the tallest mechs in Battletech. It's one of the few that I think PGI nailed.


I believe it was in TRO: 3025 that somebody found this line: "Ugly and foreboding are two apt descriptions for the Atlas. Though some 'Mechs might be taller and heavier, none have the Atlas' aura."

I believe it was the Banshee that was supposed to be the tallest mech in the universe (at least up until around the Clan Invasion), and there's a graphic here depicting its height, along with the Grasshopper which is noted for its extreme height:



If I did my calculations correctly, then the Banshee is somewhere around 16m tall, the Grasshopper is ~14m, the Enforcer at 12m, and the Commando at ~9m. The Atlas is usually cited as being between 13m and 16m tall, being a stockier and fatter mech, not so much with the height. So having the Grasshopper being around that height seems appropriate according to lore (and it's also appropriate volumetrically, since the Grasshopper is modeled to be so lanky)

I used to have the measurements for the MWO in game models, but the rescale shuffled that around... I should redo those numbers some day. I do think the MWO Banshee is too short, though. Should look more like this:

Nice Banshee.

[RestosIII]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 22 November 2016 - 08:31 AM, said:

Yep, there is surface area, and this is where mechs that aren't giant cubes like the Whale got shafted and why lights are so huge.

I still feel shafted as a Warhawk pilot. 'grumbles about being the same size as a Dire Wolf, getting focused like one, and getting melted way faster than one'

[LordKnightFandragon]

Toha Heavy Industries, on 22 November 2016 - 10:39 AM, said:

Catapult might want to have a word with you.


Rescale wasn't done so the mechs get more uniform.

It was done to nerf certain mechs and buff others.

That's why the "hello kill me" catapult got scaled down to almost light proptions.
That's why overperforming mechs like the warhammer, grasshopper and blackknight got their hitboxes increased.

Granted, with the hardpoint location of the warhammer and grasshopper, it wasn't such a big deal for them.
The blackknight on the other hand, with most of its weaponry on waist level, it became very noticeable.
Then again, it's a fing 75 ton, XL "friendly" laserboat.

Yeah, the rescale was a joke lol. It shoulda been an overall rescaling to shrink them, since the mechs in this game are HUUUUGE.

How could you even come close to properly armoring something 100t and the size of the Atlas?

Its like the difference between the AMX50B French tank, 60t yet armored like a Sherman, being like 50mm on the front and like 30mm on the sides and rear.

Then you take the T32 US Heavy tank. Its only like 52t, but its turret alone has like 1200mm worth of armor on it, when you factor in all the sides. The hull is 127mm and 76mm on the sides and rear.

The Atlas in this game would be like an utter joke armor wise, being its more like a 135t model, not 100t. The Warhammer? Yeah, its scaled to the point itd be more like the MKI Male tank from WWI....its HUGE as hell, 70t, but no armor to cover it sufficiently.

The Catapult is the only properly sized mech in the game.

RestosIII, on 22 November 2016 - 11:27 AM, said:

I still feel shafted as a Warhawk pilot. 'grumbles about being the same size as a Dire Wolf, getting focused like one, and getting melted way faster than one'

Yeah, really....wonder when the Warhawk will get slimmed down some. Yes, its a house on legs, but its actually more an upside down triangle shaped torso, being wider on the top, with high mounted arms tucked in tight to the torso, which would actually allow it much greater degrees of hill humping and sniper ability. The legs are fat and wide, not just a mini Direwolf...

[mogs01gt]

God damn size threads!!!!

Size will always be an issue in MWO until we get real armor that has real thickness/depth. Until then, just assume the mechs are hallow.