87 replies to this topic

[Anjian]

Quads are the New Age Unseen of the franchise it seems. I would think the biggest reason for not having them is the removal of IK in the game as well as the complex articulation of the leg joints that results in multiple radii of movements. The hitboxes can simply shadow the IK generated movements. And then you have the left right, forward backward movements, and not to mentioned raised up and down movements.

Also need to breakdown between spider vs. mammalian type leg architectures.

From another game.

Edited by Anjian, 27 December 2017 - 08:33 PM.

[Dr Hobo]

Quads in TT were evil little buggers if you thought in 3D instead of 2D.

I'd like to see quads. Not many mech games have done quads well.

And maybe,just maybe,it would pull most folks opinions of PGI out of the gutter if they delivered good qualtiy quads.

[Yarumai]

How would it be, if (some) quads can crouch und move around like that. just nit as fast. Torsotwisting would become groundhumping.

Also, Teabagging would be possible.

[NRP]

Ovion, on 26 December 2017 - 08:40 PM, said:

The biggest concern that you didn't list, is cost.
Quads are not Economically Viable.
They would cost at least $500,000 to $1,000,000 to implement, on top of producing regular packs during, with a return of only 12-15 mechs to then provide a return AND cover running costs.

Essentially - as much, if not more work than implenting the Clans / Omnimechs in MWO, with less potential return than the first 2-3 Clan Packs.

Which, as much as I would love to see them, is the biggest nail in the coffin though.

Well presented thread though, and I'll keep an eye on it and give more 'topical' commentary when it's not almost 5am.

How do you know quad mechs would not sell? I for one would be pretty much "all in" on quads just for cool factor alone.

Think of it this way, quad mechs have twice the "cool stompy robot" factor as biped mechs.

[MischiefSC]

NRP, on 03 January 2018 - 09:38 AM, said:

How do you know quad mechs would not sell? I for one would be pretty much "all in" on quads just for cool factor alone.

Think of it this way, quad mechs have twice the "cool stompy robot" factor as biped mechs.

Would you sell over 25,000 of just the basic packs or more?

Cuz that would be the bare minimum to break even price of the lowest projected cost to implement.

[Dogstar]

MischiefSC, on 03 January 2018 - 10:25 AM, said:

Would you sell over 25,000 of just the basic packs or more?

Cuz that would be the bare minimum to break even price of the lowest projected cost to implement.

Let's see those projections please.

[MischiefSC]

Dogstar, on 03 January 2018 - 10:42 AM, said:

Let's see those projections please.

https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__5984203

[Ovion]

NRP, on 03 January 2018 - 09:38 AM, said:

How do you know quad mechs would not sell? I for one would be pretty much "all in" on quads just for cool factor alone.

Think of it this way, quad mechs have twice the "cool stompy robot" factor as biped mechs.

I didn't say they wouldn't sell.
I said there'd only be the return of 12-15 mech packs.

This would lead to a cap on projected return.

For example, running costs for PGI with MWO and development atm with current systems are around $500,000 per month (probably more with MWV production now, but running on confirmed numbers here).
They'd need to keep that going, then pull / add staff to produce quads on top.
If we say it would then cost an additional $500,000 over 6 months to make quads, on top of regular production, and round it a tad, that's +$85,000 a month for the development period. then after that, you'd switch to making quads as part of the regular rotation. Then say you have 4 initial quad mechs, that's +4 months where the mech sales have to cover operating costs too.

This means the quad mechs need to make at least $2.5 million+ to break even on cost (before profits).
That means each of those 4 mechs would need to sell at least an average of 32,000+ 'units' each (a unit being a basic pack, or an upgrade) (125,000 units+ total)
To make it properly worth it, they'd need to sell +30%+ that.

If you run it over a full 12 quads and average dev cost over it, you'll be looking at $6,500,000+, and each pack would need to sell around an average of 28,000 units to break even (325,000+ total).

If it takes the upper (which might still be a low estimate tbh), that's potentially +2,100 to +7,000 units to sell *per* pack.
As opposed to current production, which requires 25,000 units to break even, and 32,000+ for a good profit.

So by conservative estimates, it'd cost at least 25% more to do, and would need to shift more units than average to make that worth it (if it sells the 'usual' numbers that's a loss).

On top of that, it's a limited potential of return, with less than 30 Quads *ever* with time jumps and a bunch of new tech, without significant PGI homebrew.

[Andi Nagasia]

a simple solution to adding quads would be to just give them the Nova Treatment,

add a waist and Pelvis, and give them 360* torso rotation like the UM,
and to make them viable as all their weapons are torso mounted and they have less CritSlots?
make them tanks, give them large armor bonuses and weapon buffs(much like the Urbie)
also give them an insane hill climb angle so they arnt limited by terrain and their you go,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 03 January 2018 - 11:36 AM.

[NRP]

You may be right, but is it really that much more expensive to make a quad versus a biped? Where is all that extra cost? The modeling and animation would certainly be more involved. Who knows, maybe they already have prototyped a quad design so some of that extra work has already been done?

Anyway, I imagine a problem PGI is facing is that we have so many biped mechs that there is little reason to buy any more (especially mech packs). It is unlikely that they can come up with a novel biped design we haven't seen before. It's just more of the same.

On the other hand, allocating some resources to "alternate mech development" seems like a wise business strategy. And if they run out of "cannon" quad mechs, PGI can certainly make their own variants. I think quads are a good opportunity to take a little risk.

[Ovion]

NRP, on 03 January 2018 - 11:46 AM, said:

You may be right, but is it really that much more expensive to make a quad versus a biped? Where is all that extra cost? The modeling and animation would certainly be more involved. Who knows, maybe they already have prototyped a quad design so some of that extra work has already been done?

Anyway, I imagine a problem PGI is facing is that we have so many biped mechs that there is little reason to buy any more (especially mech packs). It is unlikely that they can come up with a novel biped design we haven't seen before. It's just more of the same.

On the other hand, allocating some resources to "alternate mech development" seems like a wise business strategy. And if they run out of "cannon" quad mechs, PGI can certainly make their own variants. I think quads are a good opportunity to take a little risk.

Needs a new skeletal and animation structure. New movement system, controls and HUD. Requires inverse kinematics to not be horrificly wonky and actually match the terrain.
Different crit / damage transfer / leg destruction rules.

These are all systems that simply don't exist in MWO, and require people to code it, implement it, test it, design and model it.
These things cost time and money.

There's another 220+ Battle and Omnimechs they can make, plus any they make themselves, all of which work within the existing framework and won't require additional systems and cost, for 12-20.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Quad mechs in MWO, I like them and I intend to model more myself, but I understand entirely why we won't see it in MWO.

Have a Xanthos.

[Juodas Varnas]

Ovion, on 03 January 2018 - 12:27 PM, said:

Have a Xanthos.

Ah yeah, love the Xanthos.

[Mole]

Tarogato, on 26 December 2017 - 08:29 PM, said:

Balius 65-ton Clan omnimech




IT'S A HORSEY-MECH. I CAN'T EVEN.

I'd just like to point out, if someone has not already, that the reason this is a thing is because it's a totem 'mech for Clan Hell's Horses. When the clans make a totem 'mech it usually resembles whatever animal they have named themselves after. For example, the Kodiak is a Clan Ghost Bear totem 'mech.

Edited by Mole, 03 January 2018 - 01:30 PM.

[CARNA6E]

Juodas Varnas, on 03 January 2018 - 12:38 PM, said:

Ah yeah, love the Xanthos.

This pic gives an idea of possible controls. So in it you see its legs not locked, so "prone" imagine hitting space bar to lock its legs so "standing" and then using space to collapse. Also for sidestepping, who triple taps their A,W,S,D keys to move?

[Mole]

Let's be real here people. Many 'mechs are in this game such as the Nova, Linebacker, and Kit Fox, that should not have torso twist. But PGI, just to make them fit with their game's movement model, rested their torsos on a swivel instead of nestling it right between the legs like the TRO did just to give them torso twist ability. And I don't really think that's a bad thing. I'm not going to be totally amazed if we ever get quads but if we do, I am going to be totally amazed if they have not raised the cockpit and guns onto a swivel mount with the legs underneath just as they did to the aforementioned 'mechs.

Edited by Mole, 03 January 2018 - 02:21 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Ovion, on 03 January 2018 - 12:27 PM, said:

Needs a new skeletal and animation structure. New movement system, controls and HUD. Requires inverse kinematics to not be horrificly wonky and actually match the terrain.
Different crit / damage transfer / leg destruction rules.

These are all systems that simply don't exist in MWO, and require people to code it, implement it, test it, design and model it.
These things cost time and money.

There's another 220+ Battle and Omnimechs they can make, plus any they make themselves, all of which work within the existing framework and won't require additional systems and cost, for 12-20.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see Quad mechs in MWO, I like them and I intend to model more myself, but I understand entirely why we won't see it in MWO.

well technically Chicken-Walkers(TBR), Humanoids(Archer), and Double-Reverse-Jointed(Huntsman)
each have different skeletal rigging sets, so i dont see this as much as a problem, which ill cover below,

much like the NVA/VPR/KFX/ADR, give these mechs a pelvis & 360Torso Rotation,

so you could take this,


and Convert it into this(sorry for shotty Photoshop, whipped it up in 5 minutes)



the only think that would be needed is to make a Quad Animation Skeleton and a Pelvis,
(not saying that those are the only problems but things can be worked around)

[Anjian]

Ovion, on 03 January 2018 - 10:59 AM, said:

I didn't say they wouldn't sell.
I said there'd only be the return of 12-15 mech packs.

This would lead to a cap on projected return.

For example, running costs for PGI with MWO and development atm with current systems are around $500,000 per month (probably more with MWV production now, but running on confirmed numbers here).
They'd need to keep that going, then pull / add staff to produce quads on top.
If we say it would then cost an additional $500,000 over 6 months to make quads, on top of regular production, and round it a tad, that's +$85,000 a month for the development period. then after that, you'd switch to making quads as part of the regular rotation. Then say you have 4 initial quad mechs, that's +4 months where the mech sales have to cover operating costs too.

This means the quad mechs need to make at least $2.5 million+ to break even on cost (before profits).
That means each of those 4 mechs would need to sell at least an average of 32,000+ 'units' each (a unit being a basic pack, or an upgrade) (125,000 units+ total)
To make it properly worth it, they'd need to sell +30%+ that.

If you run it over a full 12 quads and average dev cost over it, you'll be looking at $6,500,000+, and each pack would need to sell around an average of 28,000 units to break even (325,000+ total).

If it takes the upper (which might still be a low estimate tbh), that's potentially +2,100 to +7,000 units to sell *per* pack.
As opposed to current production, which requires 25,000 units to break even, and 32,000+ for a good profit.

So by conservative estimates, it'd cost at least 25% more to do, and would need to shift more units than average to make that worth it (if it sells the 'usual' numbers that's a loss).

On top of that, it's a limited potential of return, with less than 30 Quads *ever* with time jumps and a bunch of new tech, without significant PGI homebrew.

I don't know where you get this thing about quad mechs being more costly to develop. It should not matter at all if you got a development team worth their salt.

Battle of Titans for example, had an initial seed capitalization of $1 million dollars to produce a playable beta that includes a handful of different designs, including two quad-hexa mechs. And all that with IK.

[Ovion]

Andi Nagasia, on 03 January 2018 - 03:20 PM, said:

well technically Chicken-Walkers(TBR), Humanoids(Archer), and Double-Reverse-Jointed(Huntsman)
each have different skeletal rigging sets, so i dont see this as much as a problem, which ill cover below,

the only think that would be needed is to make a Quad Animation Skeleton and a Pelvis,
(not saying that those are the only problems but things can be worked around)

All existing mechs are bipedal.
Meaning they can all use the same skeletal, rigging and code for movement.
The movement system is the same.

A Quadruped needs a new skeleton (the easy part) and the code and animations to support it (the time consuming and harder part) to animate the mech.

It's all extra work and cost.

Anjian, on 04 January 2018 - 12:07 AM, said:

I don't know where you get this thing about quad mechs being more costly to develop. It should not matter at all if you got a development team worth their salt.

Battle of Titans for example, had an initial seed capitalization of $1 million dollars to produce a playable beta that includes a handful of different designs, including two quad-hexa mechs. And all that with IK.

In short, because CryEngine.

They are held by a horrible contract they were forced into by IGP with Cry.
Because of all the crap with IGP and the early days, as well as being CryEngine, it's a janky piecemeal mess at its core.
Additionally, they need to do everything they are doing now to develop MWO, PLUS the development of the Quad mech systems (that's where the extra cost comes in, because it's assets that could be doing something else, or need to be brought in).

It's ultimately a LOT of extra work, for little to no extra return.

[The Basilisk]

Well nice work up of the quad mechs...good efford.

But I increasingly I got the impression that talking to the Quadlovers is like talking to the Ufo theorists and conspirancy theoretics.

@opening Post:

1) while Russ simply got annoyed over the years and may deem quads as just hillarious the initial reason was a logical one not to work on the needed accomodations to be able to bring quads into the game.
3025 - 3049 there where only 2 Quad models and both did not conform to the rule of 3 variants per chassis.

2) Just adjust some code ... the breathless desperate lough of hillarity is killing me man.

-- Implement a entirely new line of movement models (light medium heavy assault) and control layouts and overcome the torso twist problem and and and..... for what ? There are maybe 5 Quadmechs in 3061.
-- Remove the HSR and make MWO client authoritative to alow for Mech terrain interaction without bloating the client server communication to levels of a medium bank.
You see atm the colision scan and positioning of mechs in MWO is more of a slow ping and not a split second scan that would allow for half way nonhillarious physical behavior on a terrain.
-- Now rewrite the entire netcode, since it is was made for MWO in the current state, to accomodate above changes.
-- Now create an anticheating software that does not impare gameply and used gaming hardwar to much to compensate for MWO beeing now clientsided.

3) There are no Vehicles in MWO because of no IK.

Your argument is like saying there have to be aliens because the aliens that you see all the time when you smoke wheed are telling you that they are there.

They tried to implement them (vehicles and Quadmechs not the aliens ) and droped it because there is no remotely acceptable way, in respect of ingame behavior, to implement them just through animation.
Most vehicles would be partially burried in hillslopes or clip through smal ground features most of the time.
Remember same thing that goes for mechs also goes for vehicles.
Volume weight relation.
A boxy tank on tracks will be a pretty compact object flat on the ground.
That means it would fire its weapons into the ground most of the time because its gun would be burried in some hillslope or blocked by minor terrain features.
A Quadruped would have less problems but imagine a scorpion trying to hillhump on turmaline without a functioning physics environment for him to interact closely with the mapfeatures.

As much as I would enjoy driving a Barghest or a Tarantulla without recreating MWO from scratch it will not be possible.

Edit: Why are you contradicting your own table of Quadmechs and their Variants.....
When I read it it it clearly sayst that there are infact NO QUADMECHS with 3 valid variants up to 3061 wich is now.

Edited by The Basilisk, 04 January 2018 - 02:21 AM.

[Weeny Machine]

Bombast, on 26 December 2017 - 08:30 PM, said:

Somewhere, a man named Juodas has tight pants and doesn't know why.

My bet: he is wreathing on the ground with pleasure groaning lustfully.


Ok, let's be cruel: Juoads - Paul said: Quardruped won't be in. Never ever. It cannot be done.

Edited by Bush Hopper, 04 January 2018 - 02:51 AM.