Mechwarrior 5: Volumetric Scaling Done Right?!?
#1
Posted 06 April 2018 - 07:15 AM
At around the 1:09 mark of the video, there is a shot of an Atlas with a Shadowhawk side by side on a dropship. And regarding a recent thread on volumetric scaling, (if you haven't seen that one, please go see it, it's one of the best threads in the past few months) it would appear that PGI has gotten the scale to conform with the rule of volumetric scaling.
Mainly... Assaults are not ginormously bigger than a medium, despite almost twice the weight. (Which according to volumetric scaling, the size would not be as drastic as they are now in MWO)
So it seems like the new design team at least took that to heart, and really stick in the correct scaling, mech to mech wise.
I still think Mechs are too big compared to the environment (aka vs size of tanks and jeeps and cars... which mind you, is quite big IRL), but at the very least, they seem to have gotten the mech to mech size relativity correct.
As for mech vs environment, well... I have discussed before in topics that I started that a more realistic mech vs environment scaling would drastically alter the tone and feel of the franchise, and reinvent into something with more grit. But I do understand why they went the route they went, it's to put the focus on mechs and mech pilots as opposed to the larger universe, like previous mechwarrior games. I don't necessary agree with sticking to the old path, but at least it's nice to see PGI carving out consistency in a direction that they chose.
All in all, my hype sense is growing. I think MW5 might be a boost in the niche genre, and might actually grow the franchise beyond how much MW4 grew from MW3. Which, is quite a lofty goal, but if the epicness can continue to grow and the gameplay/storyline live up to the hype? I am going to call that MW5 will be even bigger than MWO.
(which may be a good jumping point to MWO2, with more resources this time to put together a real time elapse player controlled destiny like in EVE)
#2
Posted 06 April 2018 - 08:18 AM
At least the good artists tend to get this right. But nit-picking CBT artwork (and PGI, too) is more than a full-time job.
#3
Posted 06 April 2018 - 11:09 AM
MW5 can only get away with that level of insanity because it's going to be heavily based on logistics such that assault mechs are objectively superior units but you can't afford to run them very often (thus you use inferior mechs like the Shadow Hawk, because you're too poor to use anything else). Maybe they even made the SHK that large on purpose just to emphasize the intended inferiority of the mech.
#4
Posted 06 April 2018 - 11:12 AM
#5
Posted 06 April 2018 - 11:20 AM
Edited by Dogstar, 06 April 2018 - 11:21 AM.
#6
Posted 06 April 2018 - 11:47 AM
That being said, there is some truth to it, a lot of people that complain about the scaling on some of the mechs only look at it from one angle, not front and side to get an idea of depth...
For example the Phoenix Hawk is very, very tall, but she is also very, very narrow from the side, with huge gaps between the limbs and the torso, not to mention a thigh gap that one could drive a mack truck through....
#7
Posted 06 April 2018 - 12:22 PM
gh0s7m3rc, on 06 April 2018 - 08:13 AM, said:
Too early to be expecting these models to be final, anyway. I'm expecting everything to be subject to change until about 4-to-2 weeks off from official launch date.
Slightly flexed? The images I've seen, including these, show that the poor thing is crunched up.
Furthermore... while this has nothing to do with volumetric scaling, it does have to do with source scaling and I thought it interesting.
Purple center (the height of the dropship, the mini image is not scaled perfectly but approximately using a uniform shrink to 25% and is a little bigger than the actual sizes so instead compare the human figures side by side).
Left, the tallest classic battletech mech of the invasion era, 14.4 meters tall (Executioner, 95 tons). Right, 18.8 meters Atlas from MWO.
So, uh, yeah. Interesting, no?
#8
Posted 06 April 2018 - 01:03 PM
#10
Posted 06 April 2018 - 07:23 PM
Also you might say, "If a Shadow Hawk is going to almost be as large as an Altas, why not just use an Altas?", well the reason for that is simple. You could build and maintain 4 Shadow Hawks for the same cost as that Atlas. Additionally 4 Shadow Hawks would be tactically much more effective than a single Atlas as well. See what people forget is that from a lore perspective anyway, the reason medium mechs were the most numerous weight class used on the battle field was because of cost. If your Star Nations economy is trying to support 100 mech regiments, then you had bettered keep your costs in check and you don't do that by trying to field all Assault mechs in every lance (unless your insanely wealthy like the Lyran Commonwealth).
#11
Posted 06 April 2018 - 07:27 PM
Viktor Drake, on 06 April 2018 - 07:23 PM, said:
That's not a good comparison because the Bradley needs to have open space to transport troops. The Abrams does not.
#12
Posted 06 April 2018 - 07:27 PM
Viktor Drake, on 06 April 2018 - 07:23 PM, said:
https://mwomercs.com...metric-scaling/
FupDup, on 06 April 2018 - 07:27 PM, said:
Yep, you should assume the mechs have no cargo capacity, also the density of materials is the same. The depleted uranium armor of the Abrams is much heavier than the aluminum armor the Bradley uses. (Probably the difference between hardened armor versus ferro armor in battletech)
Edited by Nightbird, 06 April 2018 - 07:34 PM.
#13
Posted 07 April 2018 - 11:36 PM
amor make a Vehicle not really bigger ...here the armored Mercedes Limosine..and each Mech has empty places ..a Atlas for a AC20 ...when you put now a AC5 in this room ? all filled or empty space .? ...we reading to abstract Parts with unrealistic Fantasy Sizes and Weights ...Weapons thats not having Loading Mechanism and Mechs thats carrys 1000 LRM Missles
Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 07 April 2018 - 11:36 PM.
#14
Posted 08 April 2018 - 10:19 AM
Old MW4 Ranger, on 07 April 2018 - 11:36 PM, said:
amor make a Vehicle not really bigger ...here the armored Mercedes Limosine..and each Mech has empty places ..a Atlas for a AC20 ...when you put now a AC5 in this room ? all filled or empty space .? ...we reading to abstract Parts with unrealistic Fantasy Sizes and Weights ...Weapons thats not having Loading Mechanism and Mechs thats carrys 1000 LRM Missles
Well, in non-armored cars, the doors are stuffed with foam insulating material and plastic. They replaced those with solid armor, and only the windows are noticeably thicker. There's also the question of how heavy the opposition it's designed for, being a what 4ton (8000 pounds) vehicle? Yes. it's only armored against weapons 200pound people can carry. 2.5% of it's own weight. Vehicles armored against it's own weight class will have a lot thicker armor, this wouldn't really count as an armored vehicle at in all in vehicle-to-vehicle combat.
#15
Posted 08 April 2018 - 11:16 AM
Long story short, I do get tired of claims that Locusts should be almost as big as the Atlas, or over-reliance on some of that goofy, old artwork where practically every mech was about the same size... I guess the lighter ones were full of air, or the heavier ones just violate the laws of physics... but it is annoying since huge lights simply will not work in a game where you can aim.
The only reason none of this mattered in table-top was that everything was done with dice rolls, so you had the same chance to hit every component (after hitting) regardless of mech size. In a game where you can actually AIM, huge lights would die in a heartbeat. Yeah, some people are fine with that, but it makes for bad mechanics and illogical game play... because why would lights exist in such a world?
#16
Posted 09 April 2018 - 02:25 AM
Edited by Old MW4 Ranger, 09 April 2018 - 02:28 AM.
#17
Posted 09 April 2018 - 11:00 AM
#18
Posted 09 April 2018 - 06:40 PM
#19
Posted 10 April 2018 - 05:25 AM
Then it gets you mechs like the 70 ton Grasshopper looking down on an Atlas. Grasshopper still manages to get a big Center Torso though. So Volumetric does not always jibe with mech design needs and weight class balancing. You need logic to be addressed as well. In this case, the Grasshopper should be smaller than the 100 ton Atlas.
As has been mentioned the mechs have empty space, they are not solid metal. If they were solid metal then volumetric scaling would be accurate, they are not, so you assume Mech CLASS has an affect on Mech SCALE. Someone tell PGI, but it is too late, we have goofy scale.
Edited by Lightfoot, 11 April 2018 - 12:06 PM.
#20
Posted 10 April 2018 - 06:02 AM
Lightfoot, on 10 April 2018 - 05:25 AM, said:
MWo does not have pure volumetric scaling. They also take the weapons into account. The weapons have consistent sizes, it's the rest of the mech which gets volumetrically scaled. Take awesome, remove PPCs (which weigh 21 tons in total) and you have the basis which then gets scaled up to the 59 tons.
Anyway, if they're going to allow you to enter the actual cockpit of the mech, then they will have to drastically scale up a lot of mechs, especially the lights which (following BT standard) could never fit an adult person inside unless we assumed all IS pilots had a prerequisite of being born with dwarfism.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users