73 replies to this topic

[MW Waldorf Statler]

has the right Arm from a Centurion with large Ac the same density an weight as the same sized Left arm with no weapon...all the Volume Calculation very abstract and away all realism Calcualtion (seeing Sized from Tanks)
.each Mech has Parts from other Factories ...the AC5 from a Marauder is a differnet model as from a Rifleman ,with other Density, other caliber other Ammunition Parts ..a left Torso for Hold a Large weapon has other Density a a left Torso with Space for a XL Engine or a standard Engine or only Heatsinks.
A Tososide with a AC 10 has a other densitiy as a Torso with 2 Small lasers.
The Rescale from the Lights is ok , from heavys and assaults ist very far away from the lore(a level 2 Bulding with 12 m Height give all mechs full cover) ..biggest Mech in lore Atlas with 16m now up to 20m a BlackKnight with 70 t is height like a 100t assault (thats 30 t Different) and a 65 t Catapult is small like a 35t medium (30t Different)and a Halfsized dwarf against the only 5t !!!! Larger Black Knight.
is a 16 Wheeled Truck Loades bigger as a no Loaded Truck ?and to a M1 Abrams ???or a Humvee..ist a full amored Humvee newest generation very bigger as the Old Humvees, now with Tons more armor ?!

mechs not Humans with the same Bonestructure and organs, each Mech is build around his specific Weaponssystems ...and a catapult is large , with many empty Space for large LRM 20 +Ammunition and has a other density as medium Mechs with only a LRM 5 Launcher and has not to many Arm Activators and Myromer Musles like a Mech with Full modeled Arms.
Wear a Human a 12 kg Full Plate Armor , he is now Bigger in size?

And Cockpits ...all have 3t CPs ...shrunk and expands the Pilot now with the mechs ? or has the Atlas and Black Knight pilot now a dancehall ,and the Locust pilot a Coffinsized CP?!

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 02 June 2017 - 09:07 AM.

[Ade the Rare]

Requiemking, on 01 June 2017 - 11:16 PM, said:

Alright people, lets face it. The Rescale was a complete and utter disaster that hurt balance more than any other event in recent time. That last month before the Rescale was the most balanced the game has ever been, and here is why

[Sjorpha]

PhoenixFire55, on 02 June 2017 - 06:55 AM, said:

Uh, so instead of arbitrary scaling we are gonna do ... *drumroll* ... arbitrary scaling! Much amaze.

I suggested a volume based formula with a linear density increase from heavy to light, so nope that's not arbitrary, it would generate a scale for each mech according to the density at that tonnage, which would give a consistent relation in size between mechs.

Now obviously you'd have to decide a starting point for your scaling and how much more dense a 20 ton mech should be than a 100 ton mech, there is no way around having to decide the base parameters for whatever formula you use, but the scaling of each mech would not be arbitrary.

You seem to just be randomly trolling though.

[Coolant]

just make the locust bigger and wham! balance

[Appogee]

Pjwned, on 02 June 2017 - 06:52 AM, said:

Where's the evidence that they did that?

The patch notes at the time they introduced the new scaling said there were three factors, and the third of those factors explicitly said something like "we modified the scaling based on our judgement".

Pjwned, on 02 June 2017 - 06:52 AM, said:

Because that's pretty much the opposite of what they said they were doing

I guess that was their position at the time.

Pjwned, on 02 June 2017 - 06:52 AM, said:

and as far as I can tell each mech is about the size it should be.

Some Mechs (eg. Firestarter) are way bigger than they should be based on their tonnage, volume and surface area.

Edited by Appogee, 02 June 2017 - 10:03 AM.

[Deathlike]

Appogee, on 02 June 2017 - 09:59 AM, said:

Some Mechs (eg. Firestarter) are way bigger than they should be based on their tonnage, volume and surface area.

They are yuge.

Making a mech visually bigger than it's intended class is what this rescaling taught us about PGI.

[Ripwolfram]

Black knight needs to be down-scaled. IT's just stupid. He is so big, his head scratches that ceiling in HPG Manifold. He is bigger than most of 85t mechs. If you use zoom and shoot that low located lasers you can easily hit your short teammate in front of you, because you cannot see him. IMO, Black knight is currently the worst mech in the game, it can perform good only because of laser vomit, which is OP anyway.

[Jiang Wei]

I sold my jenners. Nuff said.

[Tordin]

RestosIII, on 01 June 2017 - 11:47 PM, said:

Last year's greatest mistake was not releasing the Flea/Quadrupeds/colorblind support/HTAL/IK, all put together. I guess while they're at it they could also give the Warhawk a touch-up and move it's LRM launcher to the correct position.


(but seriously colorblind support and HTAL PGI. SweetFX can only do so much for me.)

This. So much this.
Want my FLEA so bad, PGI, you can do it! I know you can smell some money on that chassi.
Or else... the new BT game is my only hope to see that bugger of a light chassis again. I then want to use a lance of Fleas and Locusts
The rescale didnt bother me. A few mech might have been too big/ small but overall it made sense. For example the Wolfhound are now as tall, note: not WIDE, as it should be. As in MW4 and such. Also one of the tankiest lights youll find.

[Ade the Rare]

Ripwolfram, on 02 June 2017 - 10:57 AM, said:

Black knight needs to be down-scaled. IT's just stupid. He is so big, his head scratches that ceiling in HPG Manifold. He is bigger than most of 85t mechs. If you use zoom and shoot that low located lasers you can easily hit your short teammate in front of you, because you cannot see him. IMO, Black knight is currently the worst mech in the game, it can perform good only because of laser vomit, which is OP anyway.

Don't forget the Grasshopper!

[Kalleballe]

Appogee, on 02 June 2017 - 09:59 AM, said:

Some Mechs (eg. Firestarter) are way bigger than they should be based on their tonnage, volume and surface area.

Hint: its side profile is much smaller.

https://mwomercs.com...232382-rescale/

[Deathlike]

Kalleballe, on 02 June 2017 - 12:50 PM, said:

Hint: its side profile is much smaller.

https://mwomercs.com...232382-rescale/

Yea, because you shoot from your sides? No?

[PhoenixFire55]

Sjorpha, on 02 June 2017 - 09:26 AM, said:

I suggested a volume based formula with a linear density increase from heavy to light, so nope that's not arbitrary, it would generate a scale for each mech according to the density at that tonnage, which would give a consistent relation in size between mechs.

That is arbitrary because it makes no sense. It is neither dictated by real world physics, nor by lore. You came up with that yourself based on nothing but your opinion/preference etc.

Sjorpha, on 02 June 2017 - 09:26 AM, said:

Now obviously you'd have to decide a starting point for your scaling and how much more dense a 20 ton mech should be than a 100 ton mech ...

A 20t mech shouldn't be any more dense than a 100t mech. Or any more dense than a 1000t mech. Because there is no point in leaving empty space within your mech, you maximize density, thus decreasing the volume, i.e. making your mech a smaller target. Anything else is counter productive at best and again makes zero sense.

Sjorpha, on 02 June 2017 - 09:26 AM, said:

there is no way around having to decide the base parameters for whatever formula you use, but the scaling of each mech would not be arbitrary.

And again ... arbitrary "base parameters" for arbitrary scaling progression. As long as your formula isn't dictated by some sort of unquestionable logic it never will be more than that.

[BumbleBee]

Deathlike, on 02 June 2017 - 01:23 PM, said:

Yea, because you shoot from your sides? No?

Stop staring.
Twist and *POOF* Mech is MUCH harder to hit

Height does NOT = bigger

Seriously, this is taught in primary school. I learned this as a 10yr old.

If you have a 10cm cube and make it 20cm along each axis, it does NOT double the size, it will actually be QUADRUPLE the size.

As has been said, some Mechs have thin limbs and/or a thin torso from the side, these Mechs will be taller to compensate for a much smaller side profile. If your side is facing the enemy, they will have a harder time hitting you. These Mechs benefit from using FLD weapons like PPC and big bore IS AC's. Just twist as soon as you get the shot off.

[Deathlike]

BumbleBee, on 02 June 2017 - 02:27 PM, said:

Stop staring.
Twist and *POOF* Mech is MUCH harder to hit

Height does NOT = bigger

Seriously, this is taught in primary school. I learned this as a 10yr old.

If you have a 10cm cube and make it 20cm along each axis, it does NOT double the size, it will actually be QUADRUPLE the size.

As has been said, some Mechs have thin limbs and/or a thin torso from the side, these Mechs will be taller to compensate for a much smaller side profile. If your side is facing the enemy, they will have a harder time hitting you. These Mechs benefit from using FLD weapons like PPC and big bore IS AC's. Just twist as soon as you get the shot off.

In 99+% of actual combat, you will be staring your enemy to shoot at them (even if you are using freelook for your arms). When you're not shooting, you are free to look/torso away... but inevitably you will have to get a visual on your target to shoot at it.

I'm not sure what you're missing there.

[BumbleBee]

You are harder to hit from the side. Flank a Mech like the Timberwolf and pop its side torso, now try that against a Grasshopper.

[Mawai]

Appogee, on 02 June 2017 - 09:59 AM, said:

The patch notes at the time they introduced the new scaling said there were three factors, and the third of those factors explicitly said something like "we modified the scaling based on our judgement".



I guess that was their position at the time.



Some Mechs (eg. Firestarter) are way bigger than they should be based on their tonnage, volume and surface area.

Here is the orthographic picture of the rescaled mechs that PGI produced.

https://static.mwome...ff2ad0e3cd8.png

The firestarter is NOT "way bigger than they should be based on their tonnage". It actually fits pretty much in line with every other mech. It is a bit taller but also narrower and has a smaller side profile. There are a lot of heavier mechs that are the same height as a firestarter but they are also typically wider or deeper.

You can argue that certain dimensions are more significant for game balance than others but overall ... most of the mechs fit pretty well into the scaling that they produced. None of them are "way bigger" or "way smaller" than they should be. However, if you have a spindly mech with thin arms, legs and torso it will end up taller and wider than a more compactly built mech like the catapult.

Here are the patch notes ...

https://mwomercs.com...73-21-jun-2016/

There were three basic components to the re-scale evaluation for each ‘Mech.
• Cubic Measurement
• Gameplay
• Pragmatism

I have no idea what they mean by gameplay and pragmatism. I don't think it means arbitrary judgement but who knows ... if it was actually gameplay I suspect that there would have been some additional changes.

[Requiemking]

Mawai, on 02 June 2017 - 04:19 PM, said:

I have no idea what they mean by gameplay and pragmatism. I don't think it means arbitrary judgement but who knows ... if it was actually gameplay I suspect that there would have been some additional changes.

I'm pretty sure if they playtested any of the changes they made they would have pulled it back for "further work". Not to mention, that diagram you showed only shows just how stupid this was. The ACH was always more skimpy than the FS9, and yet the FS9 got enlarged while the Cheetah went untouched.

[Humpday]

cazidin, on 02 June 2017 - 06:40 AM, said:

Last year's greatest mistake...

...was not making me Grand Poobah of PR.

I would've been cruel but fair.

I have no idea what that means, but the funniest part is you liked you're own post!!! lololol

I literally stopped and chuckled.

Edited by Humpday, 02 June 2017 - 05:07 PM.

[Pjwned]

Requiemking, on 02 June 2017 - 04:28 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure if they playtested any of the changes they made they would have pulled it back for "further work". Not to mention, that diagram you showed only shows just how stupid this was. The ACH was always more skimpy than the FS9, and yet the FS9 got enlarged while the Cheetah went untouched.

That could have something to do with the cheetah being 30 tons while the firestarter is 35 tons.

Just a thought.