155 replies to this topic

[Omigir]

Barhaid - I dunno about that.. it would be a whole other model and not just a skin, man. Neat idea but I dont know how well it will be able to be pulled off.

[Roughneck45]

BarHaid, on 26 January 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

This is a hope that I have (and I need to get off my backside and make it an official suggestion). Let us buy skins for the mechs that give us historical variability. Do you want a sleek new Centurion fresh off the updated line, or one that rolled off a centuries-old automated factory? Something for the future, after we get settled into the game.

I think they will implement this eventually. Skins are one of the main things i can think of for them to make money with, but im sure they will have something else up their sleeve.

The only problem i can think of is that when they make the skins, people have to want to buy them. Making a skin for the centurion to look like the TRO would sell to the battletech diehards probably, but i dont think it would have a lot of mass appeal, mainly cause of how silly it looks. Thats why they are rebooting all the mechs, to fit their new art style and to appeal to newer generations of mechwarriors.

There will definitely be a variety of unique skins and ways to pimp out your mech, but i wouldnt count on to many of them to be accurate to the original TRO.

[Chuckie]

Roughneck45, on 26 January 2012 - 11:45 AM, said:

There will definitely be a variety of unique skins and ways to pimp out your mech, but i wouldnt count on to many of them to be accurate to the original TRO.

Like fake wood paneling for my Awesome AWESOME ..?

Because when it comes to PIMPING My Mech I got some crazy BA ideas

[Orzorn]

It always seemed odd to me how many battletech fans are quick to hate on Japanese mechs when so many of Battletech's most beloved designs are Japanese (Maruader, Warhammer, Battlemaster, etc).

In addition, I think some Battletech fans have been exposed to the absolutely god awful designs of the previous TROs that they've gotten used to them, nay, came to love them, despite their awful overall design. I expected to see some serious redesigning from MWO, and I'm glad to see it. The designs are over twenty years old now, they need some serious love and attention to bring them out of the 80's.

[Morashtak]

No necks - *Rejoices*

Said it in another post so will recap - unneeded complexity and weight for a military machine that has other ways to target it's opponents.

[Dakkonn]

Was going to post a long discuss in favor of no neck and sighed at my inner nerd when it comes to mech design. Regardless I am in favor of the redesign by quite a bit.

O and as far as the "shield" on the L arm of the Centurion if you look how big the R arm AC/10 is I'd say its just for balance purposes LOL but it ALSO makes an effective shield

[Nick Makiaveli]

Chuckie, on 26 January 2012 - 08:55 AM, said:

No you will always have the chance to hit the head/cockpit..

But if you have it on a stick at the top of the mech it does make it a much easier kill shot that shooting for cockpit buried between two big shoulders in the center of the torso..

My thinking was along the lines of people hate getting headshot, especially in a game where you don't respawn (assuming this part, but feel it's very likely). Changing the design would be a way to have the game mechanics mirror the mechs as opposed to being a glaring contrast.

But since no one else seems to think this, I guess it was just a caffeine induced flight of fantasy

[Omigir]

Nick Makiaveli, on 26 January 2012 - 02:14 PM, said:

My thinking was along the lines of people hate getting headshot, especially in a game where you don't respawn (assuming this part, but feel it's very likely). Changing the design would be a way to have the game mechanics mirror the mechs as opposed to being a glaring contrast.

But since no one else seems to think this, I guess it was just a caffeine induced flight of fantasy

If you dont his a mech in the cockpit, head counts as a TC hit. Atleast in MW4 it does.

[Solis Obscuri]

CapperDeluxe, on 26 January 2012 - 06:28 AM, said:

I can see why a neck with a head sticking out wouldn't be good, because its that much easier to just pop it off with a halfway decently aimed shot. Its interesting the different things different people have criticisms about. I think my first impression was it looks mean, but that the shield arm did slightly irk me... at least at first. Then as I looked at the articulation of the arm and hand I realized that it was probably the best way to keep that arm protected from fire so you wouldn't lose complete functionality of that hand after the first round that made its way into it.

Yeah, I like that it looks a little more functional. The old Centurion looked a bit rinky-****, like some robot soldier from an old low-budget sci-fi, made out of boxes, with spindly legs. This looks more formidable, which is good... though making it sooo bulky through the legs and shoulders really makes it look like a different 'mech altogether!

Chuckie, on 26 January 2012 - 08:42 AM, said:

That said, I disagree with Mechs having hands AND holding weapons in the hands (Defeats the purpose of having hands..) If a weapon is in the arm of a Mech with a hand it should be incorporated into the arm of the Mech not be "held".

Quiet, I'm fantasizing about bludgeoning an Axman to death with a SRM carrier clutched in my Centurion's hand actuator...

Tsen Shang, on 26 January 2012 - 10:12 AM, said:

The problem I have with this mech is that it doesn't LOOK like a Centurion.

Yeah, I know what you mean - the Centurion was always typified with a more slender silhouette, a bit long of a torso, without bulky legs or arms. The new concept has a short torso, huge arms and legs, and a narrow waist flaring to broad shoulders, more like a Crusader or a Whitworth. It looks sort of like someone strapped the arms of an Awesome and the legs of a Ghost Bear Grizzly onto a Whitworth torso.

I do like the lower-profile cockpit, however, and the addition of the distinctive head "crest" and the style of armor for the arms and shoulders, though. I just think the proportions need to be adjusted a bit.

[Kaemon]

Orzorn, on 26 January 2012 - 01:21 PM, said:

It always seemed odd to me how many battletech fans are quick to hate on Japanese mechs when so many of Battletech's most beloved designs are Japanese (Maruader, Warhammer, Battlemaster, etc).

In addition, I think some Battletech fans have been exposed to the absolutely god awful designs of the previous TROs that they've gotten used to them, nay, came to love them, despite their awful overall design. I expected to see some serious redesigning from MWO, and I'm glad to see it. The designs are over twenty years old now, they need some serious love and attention to bring them out of the 80's.

i've always loved the Macross series stuff, but it's a separate universe for me, I think the Armored Core stuff is a bit more acceptable in design, except it's got the over exaggeration that animae mechs always do with features and weapons (Final Fantasy Syndrome).

I mean, the gun shouldn't be 3x the size of the mech....that's a bit much.

Not knowing FD's roots I'll assume some of that will bleed in a bit (it's everywhere, how can it not?) but I don't feel these designs are straying that far from the original concepts (not art) of the mechs, it's just his take on them (which I enjoy).

Edited by Kaemon, 26 January 2012 - 08:34 PM.

[Lycan]

I actually like the look of the "reimagined" Centurion better than the "Old School" one.

As mentioned, it looks more war machiney to me . . .

Kinda makes me wonder what the reimagined Battlemaster will look like . . .

[Tifalia]

I am hoping that when it comes to the Mad Dog design, that it stays the same as when it was featured in the ending Battle of Tukayyid clip of MechWarrior 2: Mercenaries. That was a really cool look for it but I always felt that it was cheapened, when MechWarrior 3 and 4 were released. They looked more like childish toys than awesome weapons of war they were meant to be, personally speaking with those two games.

[coach z]

Ya know this discussion is like listening to two gear-heads debate which Corvette looks better... (There's like over 20+ not including the classics and one-offs...)

I hardly believe everyone will be particularly fond of every design... I can name probably a dozen of the original designs right off the top of my head, that I think border on looking down-right ridiculous.

With that I have to give a nod to the reboot designs and can truly appreciate the functional design decisions being made... It takes a person with big brass Myomer sacks to tinker with such subconsciously embedded designs...

Kudos!

[Nebfer]

Well the new centurion is good, but it has the lest amount of visual ques to the original mech than the other mechs so far, which is disapointing.


Technicly is it realy a centurien? It looks nothing like the canon mech...

[Dlardrageth]

Nebfer, on 26 January 2012 - 09:33 PM, said:

Technicly is it realy a centurien? It looks nothing like the canon mech...

Wait till Paul Inouye makes his art department repaint the Centurion in Gundam-style to cause a few borderline heart attacks!!! That will be even more... hm... "different".

[Kyone Akashi]

Orzorn, on 26 January 2012 - 01:21 PM, said:

It always seemed odd to me how many battletech fans are quick to hate on Japanese mechs when so many of Battletech's most beloved designs are Japanese (Maruader, Warhammer, Battlemaster, etc).

I agree, that is confusing to see. As is this whole imagined distinction between "Western mecha" and "Japanese mecha" design. Apart from the connection outlined in the quote, I have the impression that a lot of people seem to think that there is some unique aspect to each that will identify them as clearly originating in either culture. To me, this sounds more like said people not having watched a lot of anime and conjuring up cliché and bias out of thin air due to some sort of "wounded pride".

Just to clarify what I mean, here are a couple other anime mechas:

Spoiler

Anyhow, back to the topic at hand ...

So far, I don't mind the redesigns as much, though I will admit that they really shouldn't diverge a lot from their original look. I do hope that not all 'mechs will loose their neck.

Someone mentioned concerns regarding the realism concerning exposed heads and hands, but there I have to point out that these things are easily justifiable:

The hands, or "hand actuators" are not only used in close combat but mentioned in the books to have a number of other uses, in essence being some kind of multi-tool often allowing the Mechwarrior to improvise on the spot. Stuff like picking up a roof to build an impromptu bridge for allied vehicles, grabbing a fleeing VTOL with a fugitive onboard, or simply picking up an ejected pilot on the go - all these things would not be possible without a hand actuator, and this is just a few examples off the top of my head.

The exposed head/cockpit on the other hand is a mixture of low-tech vestiges as well as reliability over luxury. Yes, you can put a dozen little cameras all over your 'mech, but in any given skirmish, how long do you believe it'd take for them to get disabled by enemy weapons fire or feedback overload? Suddenly it would become somewhat more awkward losing your only way to take a look to your left without turning the entire torso, wouldn't it?
And this issue only grows worse when you consider that even things such as dust or smoke can already render your precious electronic optics useless. The most reliable means to look at something is still to "eyeball it", and for this, a movable head remains not necessary, but at least useful.

Otherwise you may as well take the entire cockpit and hide it in the torso, windowless and shielded behind slabs of armour. And yes, I am aware that this is actually done in one of the later eras of the franchise, but I do believe that a lot of people might not like losing famous models such as the MadCat due to such a "realistic" design philosophy.

Personally, I believe in limited suspension of disbelief. When you really like something in a setting as fleshed out as BattleTech, there is almost always a way to explain why it might make sense (see above).

[Chuckie]

I think the thing I am noticing in this conversation that most all Mech designs are Japanese from birth. So lets say the Japanese designed ALL the mechs (true or not) in one way or the other.

The BIG difference here is between those that like the more War Machine "realistic" style vs those that like the exaggerated Anime cartoon style..

Either style can be applied to many different mech styles.. a good example is the Marauder. I have see it drawn two ways, One has the look of a big mechanical and balanced war machine, and the other I have seen has looking overly exaggerated, elongated and smooth like a cartoon with arms that look heavier than the body. The first one I like, the second one looks like it would spend more energy trying to stay vertical and it wouldn't be a very good mech.

I think that is the true differences we are talking about.. not necessarily where they originated from.

I also think MW:O is going for the more "War Machine" style, then the more exaggerated "Anime" style.

Which to me is a good thing.

Edited by Chuckie, 27 January 2012 - 04:50 AM.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Omigir, on 26 January 2012 - 02:54 PM, said:

If you dont his a mech in the cockpit, head counts as a TC hit. Atleast in MW4 it does.

If I follow you, you are saying a head hit that misses the cockpit counts as a Center Torso hit? Which is what I was trying to say earlier. Basically that the cockpit (pitiful armor etc) is not a actual hit location. If you hit the head, then it just damages the CT and we move along. Maybe have it to a bit more damage due to structural weaknesses around the cockpit etc, but in short you can't really sniper the larger mechs with one shot.

I mean does it feel like you are in a massive war machine if you get taken out by one shot? Especially if it comes from a light mech who gets lucky.....

[Omigir]

Nick Makiaveli, on 27 January 2012 - 07:02 AM, said:

If I follow you, you are saying a head hit that misses the cockpit counts as a Center Torso hit? Which is what I was trying to say earlier. Basically that the cockpit (pitiful armor etc) is not a actual hit location. If you hit the head, then it just damages the CT and we move along. Maybe have it to a bit more damage due to structural weaknesses around the cockpit etc, but in short you can't really sniper the larger mechs with one shot.

I mean does it feel like you are in a massive war machine if you get taken out by one shot? Especially if it comes from a light mech who gets lucky.....

Yup, you got it. I think im going to leave it that way just so people can spend an extra few seconds re reading that post to figure out what was stuttering out of my fingers.

Any way, that is how MW4 did as well as the games of the past who had limited hit boxes. Trying to keep the game 'slim' and simple so it wont destroy computers of their times. At the same time (And NGNG #12 touched on this) This is CryEngine 3 and we should be able to make more individual parts to represent as 'hitable' rather then just grouping the head and waist in with the torso to make a CT. Another example is that AC20 on the atlas! it sits on the hip! why shoot at the RT to take out the whole thing before I can shoot that AC20 which is relatively out on the side on its own.

So Cockpits of the past were represented by a T shape at the top of the CT shape. no reason to not divide the TC up into Head, Chest, Stomach, and waist now.

[Alaric Wolf Kerensky]

Before I make my point, let me explain where I come from. I got into MechWarrior 10 years ago, both the miniatures and the books. I have played MW4: Mercs, Chromehounds, and Armored Core. I LOVE bulky, militarized designs, and as I hate the term "Mecha" with a heated passion, not a surprise that I dislike nearly every single scrap of Japanese-inspired mechs, which are too skinny and are typicly far too fast (like a Core could perma-fly and zip all over the place...). Having come into BattleTech so late, I am used to seeing bulky 'new' Dark Age 'Mechs, and going onto Sarna and seeing 30 year old drawings of pencil-thin and maximumly humanoid 'Mechs is a real turnoff. I like the new art that is coming out, that Centurion is one heck of a good looking 'Mech now, with thicker and more modern legs, with all of the features squared-off as you would expect of most armored vehicles, unlike the rounded TRO drawings. It is no surprise that the majority of my favorite designs are never versions of Clan 'Mechs, such as the MW4 Timber Wolf and Dire Wolf. They look purpose-built, powerful, and seem almost entirely "Mecha"-free. I can not wait to see the revamped Timber Wolf, as the one thing I cannot stand about it is the "pipe" arms in the TROs. The thing is just asking to take a hit from a Micro-Laser, which could easilly knock an arm off, and with it a pair of lasers...

Back on track, I am excited over these concepts. They look very sturdy and with military lines. The Western feel of the 'Mechs is impressive, and if the trend means that the majority of the new designs are going to be chopping off extended heads and layering more metal over the rest of the body, so much the better. I understand some older fans are going to feel pained by seeing beloved designs get changed after decades, but lets face it, we all have those 'Mechs close to heart, and the whole spread need a long-overdue modern update by a true artist. I an excited for more of them.

Edit: And the weaponry remodel is fantasic, making things look like true cannons instead of the old pop-cans. The old TRO Centurion AC/10's bore-size is so large, the recoil would topple the 'Mech, and there would be virtually no room for ammunition! How would a weapon that size reload, and be able to move shells as big as it would need from the R Torso, through the arm and to the cannon? This is one of the biggest things I want to see updated, as many 'Mechs carry cannons of such size, and so many of them that it kills any sense of realism (Try plotting where the ammo and how some arm-mounted weapons would reload in the next TRO pic you see, I dare you) or immersion. You don't have to fire a small bus to do damage!

Edited by Alaric Wolf Kerensky, 27 January 2012 - 07:47 AM.