36 replies to this topic

[Johnny Z]

45 tons



30 tons



65 tons





What is going on here? The head of the Phoenix Hawk is as large s the entire rear torso of the Ebon Jaguar. The Phoenix Hawk has a larger profile than the STK which is an 85 ton mech.

Someone making a joke?

Edited by Johnny Z, 28 November 2016 - 04:57 PM.

[Deathlike]

Johnny Z, on 28 November 2016 - 04:55 PM, said:

40 tons

That's 45 tons, not that you've noticed.

[Johnny Z]

Ok what ever. The Phoenix Hawk is massive. No way its to scale. They forgot to add the head which is as large as a Locust, or maybe they forgot the torso side pieces or something.

Edited by Johnny Z, 28 November 2016 - 04:58 PM.

[RestosIII]

Looks like pixels that, when combined, form several images that were taken of Mechwarrior Online to me.

[Fox With A Shotgun]

The MechBay doesn't show mechs to the actual scale that they would be in-game. Or at least, that was what was said to us quite a while back.

[Johnny Z]

I'm not kidding the head of the Phoenix Hawk is comparable to the entire CT RT LT of the Locust. Its clearly not as large, but its close.

Edited by Johnny Z, 28 November 2016 - 05:13 PM.

[Unnatural Growth]

They.

Are.

Not.

To.

Scale.


Does that help? Btw, they are not to scale. Those pics. In those mech bays. Are not to scale.

OK?

[Bud Crue]

If you really want to make the point, get a friend and take an image of the mechs in question, standing right next to each other from various perspectives, in game.

I'm not disputing your assertions, but merely noting what others have: mech lab is misleading.

[RestosIII]

OldOrgandonor, on 28 November 2016 - 05:17 PM, said:

They.

Are.

Not.

To.

Scale.


Does that help? Btw, they are not to scale. Those pics. In those mech bays. Are not to scale.

OK?

But are they to scale?

[Unnatural Growth]

Lol,

Well he seemed to have trouble grasping it when Fox told him, so I thought I might have to slow it down for him.

Reading Is Fundamental.

RIF

[zagibu]

The mechs are to scale in the mechlab. The only reason the mechlab is not a good way of comparing mechs is because the perspective camera view doesn't lead to a linear increase in height for the projection. This creates the illusion of big mechs being smaller than they are, because height increase is faster closer to the middle of the camera, and tapers off towards the lower and upper bounds. So it's not a good way to compare the height of two different mechs. But the models are all loaded with the same scale factor and are thus "to scale" in this way.

Comparing the volume (we have to assume the same density, which makes mass directly comparable by looking at volume) of two mechs by looking at screenshots that show the frontal profile only is beyond useless anyway, so the whole point of the OP is garbage, needless of whether the mechlab screenshots are useful as a comparison or not (which they are not).

[PPC Principal]

I am not really sure anymore that the mechbay images dont show at least the relative scale of mechs.
Look at what has happened to the Grasshopper after rescale, everyone was joking about how it did not even fit in the screen anymore. But duh, the size shown is not to scale.
And Boom, now you almost do not fit under the HPG dish on the top section of HPG Manifold.

Anyway, mechbay scales right or wrong, the size of some mechs is ridicolous.
I feel like the whole concept of scaling per volume was not the right choice.

[FupDup]

Mediums being the size of heavies is not a new concept, both before and after the rescale.

The only new thing is 35-ton lights being the size of mediums.

[zagibu]

PPC Principal, on 28 November 2016 - 05:45 PM, said:

Anyway, mechbay scales right or wrong, the size of some mechs is ridicolous.
I feel like the whole concept of scaling per volume was not the right choice.

Of course it was not the right choice. But it's the only way we can be sure PGI is not making it worse. If they have to adhere to volume based measurements, there will at least be SOME guidelines, even if they are not optimal. What we had before was completely out of whack scaling, and mechs got smaller and smaller (relative to their tons) in order to make the newest mechs more viable. If you compare pre-rescale Spider and Catapult, you'll see what I mean. One missile box of a Catapult was more massive than the Spider's whole torso.

[Deathlike]

FupDup, on 28 November 2016 - 05:51 PM, said:

Mediums being the size of heavies is not a new concept, both before and after the rescale.

The only new thing is 35-ton lights being the size of mediums.

Most of the upscaled Lights can't crawl under the ramps in the middle section of HPG. I think it's limited to like Lolcust and Commandoes now (maybe an MLX and ACH as well).

Edited by Deathlike, 28 November 2016 - 05:52 PM.

[ArandomSTD]

All this guy does is complain, moving along...................

Edited by ArandomSTD, 28 November 2016 - 05:56 PM.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

You JUST noticed this?

[Carl Vickers]

Taller is fine, wider is bad, are you calling the mechs cheats now, as well as the players that kill you?

[Johnny Z]

Carl Vickers, on 28 November 2016 - 06:13 PM, said:

Taller is fine, wider is bad, are you calling the mechs cheats now, as well as the players that kill you?

The pictures show it plain as day. So glad a cheerleader for cheating is trolling even this.

Ya that's what you are, you replies say it also plain as day.

Edited by Johnny Z, 28 November 2016 - 06:19 PM.

[VorpalAnvil]

Bud Crue, on 28 November 2016 - 05:20 PM, said:

If you really want to make the point, get a friend

JohnnyZ

Friends

Huehuehue