22 replies to this topic

[Water Bear]

As per the title.

For example the Trebuchet would have significant armor buffs because it's as large as a heavy 'mech, the Awesome would get buffed, the Bushwhacker would get nothing and like it, etc.

Reasonable idea or nah? I think it's a better idea than applying rando offensive quirks. Hitbox sizes directly determine how survivable a 'mech is, so larger hitboxes really need more armor to justify their existence.

[Nightbird]

Depends on which mech you use as the baseline. If you use the 25 T commando as baseline, then the 100 T Atlas, having 8x the volume, would need +100% armor quirks. If you use the Atlas as the baseline, then the Commando being 1/8 the size would need -50% armor quirks... based on the suggestion as stated.

Edited by Nightbird, 13 March 2018 - 08:07 AM.

[Spheroid]

I don’t see the point. Armor perfectly scales with weight. Volume post rescale roughly scales with weight. Your replacement would be cruder than the existing system. Also the Trebuchet has a front profile problem not a volume problem. Quirks are based on combat telemetry. Much easier to bring outliers into the norm via constantly adjusted quirks than to redesign the whole armor paradigm.

[Nightbird]

Spheroid, on 13 March 2018 - 08:17 AM, said:

Volume post rescale roughly scales with weight.

It hurts!

[Water Bear]

Spheroid, on 13 March 2018 - 08:17 AM, said:

I don’t see the point. Armor perfectly scales with weight. Volume post rescale roughly scales with weight. Your replacement would be cruder than the existing system. Also the Trebuchet has a front profile problem not a volume problem. Quirks are based on combat telemetry. Much easier to bring outliers into the norm via constantly adjusted quirks than to redesign the whole armor paradigm.

It is true that the Treb suffers mostly from the front. I thought it was commonly known / accepted that some 'mechs were far larger than other members of their own weight class.

As Nightbird observes, your hypothesis that volume is "roughly" proportional to weight is questionable. It is the entire reason I started this thread.

Nightbird, on 13 March 2018 - 08:05 AM, said:

Depends on which mech you use as the baseline. If you use the 25 T commando as baseline, then the 100 T Atlas, having 8x the volume, would need +100% armor quirks. If you use the Atlas as the baseline, then the Commando being 1/8 the size would need -50% armor quirks... based on the suggestion as stated.

"baselines" would be within tonnage. Decide which 50 ton mech should get no armor quirks and then adjust. Eg., if the Trebuchet is found to have a side torso that is 140% the size of an ENF side torso, and if the ENF is your base line, then give the treb +40% ST armor (or + (some constant) times 40%).

Edited by Water Bear, 13 March 2018 - 01:13 PM.

[Khobai]

I think it would be better if medium mechs were actually medium mech sized

if a 50 tonner is bigger than a hunchback you did it wrong

if you start giving medium mechs like the trebuchet massive amounts of free armor, you just undermine the heavy/assault mechs that actually pay tonnage for the same amount of armor.

the better solution is for PGI to do a rescaling pass on all the mediums. make them the right size.



fixt

Edited by Khobai, 13 March 2018 - 01:28 PM.

[r4zen]

Water Bear, on 13 March 2018 - 01:12 PM, said:

"baselines" would be within tonnage. Decide which 50 ton mech should get no armor quirks and then adjust. Eg., if the Trebuchet is found to have a side torso that is 140% the size of an ENF side torso, and if the ENF is your base line, then give the treb +40% ST armor (or + (some constant) times 40%).

I feel like this would perma-shelf 'mechs that didn't get the boost, though. Especially with skill tree bonuses.

ex. ENF has 50 base armor for a ST, so TBT would get 70

Why would anyone take an ENF at that point?

[MechaBattler]

I think it would be a good idea as a baseline for defensive quirks. Further adjusted by hardpoint placement, low mounts get more. Then adjusted based on data. As it stands it's just them being like "This mech sucks, we're giving it armor so it doesn't."

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Water Bear, on 13 March 2018 - 07:53 AM, said:

As per the title.

For example the Trebuchet would have significant armor buffs because it's as large as a heavy 'mech, the Awesome would get buffed, the Bushwhacker would get nothing and like it, etc.

Reasonable idea or nah? I think it's a better idea than applying rando offensive quirks. Hitbox sizes directly determine how survivable a 'mech is, so larger hitboxes really need more armor to justify their existence.

The mechs are volumetrically scaled for 3 dimensions. The Trebuchet is tiny from the side, thus its *not* as large as a heavy mech. Meanwhile Bushwacker is the opposite, its tiny from the front but a huge target from the side.

What you seem to be asking for is if there could be quirks for mechs based on the area of a mech's silhouette from the front.

[Nightbird]

Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood, on 13 March 2018 - 01:37 PM, said:

The mechs are volumetrically scaled for 3 dimensions. The Trebuchet is tiny from the side, thus its *not* as large as a heavy mech. Meanwhile Bushwacker is the opposite, its tiny from the front but a huge target from the side.

What you seem to be asking for is if there could be quirks for mechs based on the area of a mech's silhouette from the front.

Sorry to post a link in your thread! This is why I created my thread, mechs are not scaled volumetrically... in any way or form!
https://mwomercs.com...metric-scaling/

[Grus]

Volume does not dictate density or permeability...

I'll reference WW2 German (thick armor) vs Russian angled (thinner armor)

[WarHippy]

Nightbird, on 13 March 2018 - 08:05 AM, said:

Depends on which mech you use as the baseline. If you use the 25 T commando as baseline, then the 100 T Atlas, having 8x the volume, would need +100% armor quirks. If you use the Atlas as the baseline, then the Commando being 1/8 the size would need -50% armor quirks... based on the suggestion as stated.

Atlas with +100% armor quirks? Sounds good to me. Sign me up!

[Nightbird]

In MWO it does! Since armor is explicity exchangeable between the same type (i.e. standard with standard, ferro with ferro). Of couse, if the Atlas had half the armor thickness of the Commando, the math works out!

[Grus]

********** Copied from another post it did *****************

ok so on the STR/Armor bit; for reference;
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Endo_Steel
http://www.sarna.net...o-Fibrous_Armor
http://www.sarna.net...Combat_Vehicles)&_Vehicles=
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Chassis



1) STR: Now with standard vs Endo for example. The std version takes up less space but is heavier and the Endo is lighter but bulkier.. So to expand the STD structure uses a more compact construction but has more weight. (1kg of steel (see vid)) vs the Endo using similar materials but in a different manufacturing technique to make it lighter. (1kg of feathers(see vid)) So with that the size dosnt necessarily make it "heavier" just means it takes up more space. A 10cm cube of DU will be heavier than a 10cm cube of aluminum even though they take up the same volume.

2) so for the STD armor vs the FF. its really down to the bulk. From what ive read and how i understand it there is a "cap" to the armor value you can put on a mech. so if youve got the tonnage to max out said value the only thing FF will do is give you that same max rating for less tonnage but more space. so again we have a lighter item that provides the same armor "value" per ton but is less heavy (dense) than its counter part.

So bringing this together. if you are going to change the size of a mech then that's fine, but you cant dictate how much or why just off the weight of the mech, let alone its "bulk".

You have to think of a Battlemech... like a bottle. (Bear with me) take a water bottle, if its empty did you change the volume of the bottle? No, you did change its mass. but if you fill it up again you didnt change its volume but you did make it gain mass.


***********************************************************************

Edited by Grus, 13 March 2018 - 04:11 PM.

[East Indy]

Well, a few issues here.

Random offensive quirks are Exhibit A of PGI missing the point and the cat chasing its tail. Quirks originally helped inferior 'Mechs compete. As time went on, rather than using quirks to balance first and distinguish second, PGI went overboard with endlessly varied, exotic and useless quirks. Players understandably didn't like "5% NARC range" and the like. PGI, unfamiliar with its own game, interpreted "players don't like quirks" and removed most of them.

Quirks should be mostly invisible, allowing a player to define themselves through their choice of chassis ("I'm an Archer pilot!") rather than raw performance power.

So, first take defense. Since people expect a 'Mech to look like its dramatic illustrations, a lot of 'Mechs have unavoidably bad geometry. The Atlas' torsos are impossible to miss, yet carry nearly 100% of its firepower. Does the AS7-D need tons of bonus armor on every location? No, it just needs tons of armor — more than currently — on the right, left and center torsos. Why? Again: invisible quirks. With those oversized torsos absorbing the proper amount of incoming damage, a player intelligently rolling won't notice much of a difference between an Atlas and, say, a Mad Cat Mk. II.

Second, offense. 'Mechs offer different hardpoint types, number and locations. They don't need layers and layers of additional granularity with +5% this and +2.5% that. Back to the Atlas: low hardpoints, few hardpoints, limited build options. Which quirks might add the most power in the simplest, easiest to understand way? Cooldown and heat generation. Throw 30% to each. 30% universal cooldown, 30% universal heat generation. (Big quirks, and yet the Atlas is probably still an average performer.) How about a signature weapon? Maybe two? Okay, let's pick the AC/20 (any variety) and SRM-6. Add all the things that make them great: bonus to cooldown, heat, range. Done!

Are you bothered that the AS7-D only rewards the AC/20 and SRM-6? Well, by George, you have no fewer than 5 other variants with characteristic loadouts and accompanying quirks to satisfy that need for variety.

Simple, simple, simple. Quirk to bring 'Mechs to the baseline, and make them special a clear, specific way. Simple.

[PocketYoda]

I'll use atlas when it moves and is the same size as a commando.

[Water Bear]

Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood, on 13 March 2018 - 01:37 PM, said:

The mechs are volumetrically scaled for 3 dimensions. The Trebuchet is tiny from the side, thus its *not* as large as a heavy mech. Meanwhile Bushwacker is the opposite, its tiny from the front but a huge target from the side.

What you seem to be asking for is if there could be quirks for mechs based on the area of a mech's silhouette from the front.

No, what I was asking was for scaling based on volume. If they are, indeed, all equal in volume, then frankly scratch the idea. (Up to the observation that being slim from the side is obviously not as good as being slim from the front).

Is the ENF really the same volume as the treb?

Edited by Water Bear, 13 March 2018 - 06:47 PM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

how many Treads to one Theme ?...seeing this tread:)

https://mwomercs.com...metric-scaling/

the Models pure Fantasy ...alone 100 LRM missles after the TT construction rules have never Place in the Models ...nothing by the model have a realistic Factor only the Pilotseat...Amor ...Slotsystem ..all only Paperdoll Rules.
The models have no real volumes while only Artist Fantasy ...a Ton Ammunition with Loading mechanism has the same as one Heatsink ? and Ammunition come magical from the left Arm and feet to the right Shoulder?the models Harry Potter Magical Mechs


Who have the hollander his Ammunition and why is the Ac5 from a Vendette Tank now a Toy against the AC5 of a Shadowhawk and the MGs of the SH bigger as the Tank Maingun

and Amor is a man in a 15 century Plate Amor very Bigger as a man in a Astrounaut Suit ? or a naked Man

Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 13 March 2018 - 08:56 PM.

[blood4blood]

If armor = volume, then some players eP33nz™ would be utterly indestructible. Next question.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Amor is only a very thin second Skin ..what 10mm or 60mm Armor against a 10 m Tall Mech! Mechs have 3 Layers of Armor ...how strong this layers???? each 10 mm or 20 mm ??? and the models ..each Artist build his own Model with his own Proportions