69 replies to this topic

[Horned Bull]

Tabletop scale is a huge mess, and PGI artists did a wonderful work with clarifying it.

Some proofs:










As I said before the original scale is nothing more but a huge mess. People can blame PGI for the bad netcode, small number of maps, not enough playable mechs, balance issues. Yet PGI artists do wonderful work and blaming them for fixing something that was actually broken in tabletop because "they aren't orthodox enough!" makes me feel bad.

Feel free to blame them, because your commando isn't as tall as catapult.

[stjobe]

Korm, on 07 January 2013 - 07:38 AM, said:

*snip*

OMG, what happened to your Thunderbolt?!?

[Horned Bull]

stjobe, on 07 January 2013 - 07:45 AM, said:

OMG, what happened to your Thunderbolt?!?

That's how his old plastic mold looked like.

http://www.sarna.net...stic_Miniatures

Edited by Korm, 07 January 2013 - 07:50 AM.

[stjobe]

Korm, on 07 January 2013 - 07:48 AM, said:

That's how his old plastic mold looked like.

http://www.sarna.net...stic_Miniatures

Well, let's just say that's an interesting way of showing how great PGI's models really are

That thing looks like it's taken a harsh beating by the ugly stick. And then fell out of the ugly tree, hitting every branch on the way down.

Edited by stjobe, 07 January 2013 - 07:58 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Fact of the matter is, the scale, both in it's basis, is off, and in comparison, mech to mech, VERY off. It doesn't affect my game enjoyment much, but here is a scale comparo, taken from the in game models, by Adridos (many thanks my cunning Capellan adversary!)
front view



side view


Also please note, according to Catalyst Game Labs, owner of the IP, humanoid battlemechs range from 8 - 14 meters in height, so even the basic size of the mechs in the game (I need to find the scale Flying Debris worked up, but the Catapult's launchers were at 17 meters, I believe, making the Atlas well over 20, as is easy to see by the scale against the Oil rig/Drop Base and it's helipad.

A mix media/scale piece Nacon posted in fan art


Simply stated, a Catapult should not be as massive or MORE than a Stalker (especially since they really shortened the length of the Stalker. A 50 ton Centurion should not be 1/2 again as large as a 50 ton Hunchback, and equal to a 70 ton Cataphract. Viewed from the front, the differences in the 35 ton Raven and Jenner seem minor, yet the side view would put the Raven closer to 45 tons. (Not stating the obvious that almost ALL of these designs would actually be 2-3x their "game mass" at the current scale)
here is a 153 ton Bulldozer scale comparison





Obviously, Mechs, being humanoid, are not as dense as a tank or dozer, but the difference is still pretty staggering.

will edit that into post when I find it.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 07 January 2013 - 08:16 AM.

[Sayyid]

Look up the Technical Readout : 3039 General Size Comparison Chart.

It has the "official" size comparison chart by FASA/Wizkids.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sayyid, on 07 January 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

Look up the Technical Readout : 3039 General Size Comparison Chart.

It has the "official" size comparison chart by FASA/Wizkids.

yes, though sadly, it is JUST a comparison, with no actual stats posted like" the Banshee pictured here is 14 meters tall......" As for "Offical", I will leave you with a post from Herbert Beas, current Battletech line developer for Catalyst Game Labs, who are the current owner of the IP (Since while FASA did occasionally show a "scale" they never really got into specifics other than mechs averaged about 10 meters tall)
http://bg.battletech...hp?topic=6374.0

[Elkarlo]

@ Korm.
Please don't refer to the Plastic Mold Figures, they are simply bad. Here are some REAL Bt Figures.
(And still some of mine are not painted) i putted in the Commando High line for Comparison reason.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us


As you can see the Pewter Catapult is much higher than the Thunderbolt, or a Stalker or Dragon.

Didn't putt the revised pewter Atlas in but there is a Pewter Atlas about 20% bigger because the first modell now looks smallish compared to the others, especially Clan Modells.

Edited by Elkarlo, 07 January 2013 - 08:27 AM.

[stjobe]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 January 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

yes, though sadly, it is JUST a comparison, with no actual stats posted like" the Banshee pictured here is 14 meters tall......" As for "Offical", I will leave you with a post from Herbert Beas, current Battletech line developer for Catalyst Game Labs, who are the current owner of the IP (Since while FASA did occasionally show a "scale" they never really got into specifics other than mechs averaged about 10 meters tall)
http://bg.battletech...hp?topic=6374.0

Some easy googling gave me this thread, which contains this:

Quote

So now enter the "General Size Comparison Chart" from Technical Readout: 3039 (2009), that's pretty recent.

We have a couple of Mechs from the different weight classes, Vehicles from the various weight classes, a couple of Dropships (Leopard, Union, Overlord) and a 'standard' man. If we measure the 'standard' man at ~1.8m tall (and the height of the Dropships confirms that approximation) we get heights for the Mechs listed.

Mechs (height)
Light => Commando (25 ton) = 9m
Medium => Enforcer (50 ton) = 12m
Heavy => Grashopper (70 ton) = 14m
Assault => Banshee (95 ton) = 15.2m

[Horned Bull]

stjobe, on 07 January 2013 - 07:57 AM, said:

Well, let's just say that's an interesting way of showing how great PGI's models really are

That thing looks like it's taken a harsh beating by the ugly stick. And then fell out of the ugly tree, hitting every branch on the way down.

Actually it's just partially the sculpt's fault. Fasa produced a lot of sets out of one mold set, and that resulted in kind of horrid quality.

[Mavairo]

The Mini version of the Awesome looks like phail.

Yeah I said it.

The PGI models have always looked better than TT, or the sarna art.
The Awesome looks cool in game. It's a shame that it's an Assault Mech, and thus is too fat for mav to drive

[Bishop Steiner]

stjobe, on 07 January 2013 - 08:27 AM, said:

Some easy googling gave me this thread, which contains this:

the difference being that was one compiled by a random user (could he be an employee? sure, but doesn't say so) whereas Mr Beas is the man in charge of the whole game line. Pretty sure he has a more "offical" answer than the other guy. In fact, the reason I discounted his thread (which as you say is easy to come across) is because of no official link to FASA/WizKids/Fan Pro or CGL.

It's a nice piece of speculative work by the poster but then he goes into the realm of pure speculation such as the Atlas at 16 meters due to being 5 tons heavier than the Banshee, despite the fact that the atlas is also MUCH broader than the Banshee chassis, and hence is likely shorter (a detail generally confirmed in canon descriptions depicting the Atlas as squat,and even the TRO says it's not the tallest (and this is pre any of the Super Mechs being designed)

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 07 January 2013 - 08:46 AM.

[Horned Bull]

Elkarlo, on 07 January 2013 - 08:24 AM, said:

@ Korm.
Please don't refer to the Plastic Mold Figures, they are simply bad. Here are some REAL Bt Figures.
(And still some of mine are not painted) i putted in the Commando High line for Comparison reason.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us


As you can see the Pewter Catapult is much higher than the Thunderbolt, or a Stalker or Dragon.

Didn't putt the revised pewter Atlas in but there is a Pewter Atlas about 20% bigger because the first modell now looks smallish compared to the others, especially Clan Modells.

Actually the figures used in introductory set are the same (sans material - cheap plastic vs metal) as used in mech packs like this one: http://ironwindmetal...roducts_id=4061

Also I agree - revised models look great, but it doesn't change the fact that old sculpts sometimes look quite funny (yet the catapult from plastech looks great).

And about figures - being old doesn't make them any less "real" or "original". Actually the modern changes and "revised" models makes it obvious that IWM guys are aware of the old scale problem and they're trying to fix it.

Edited by Korm, 07 January 2013 - 08:49 AM.

[Gregore]

Centurions are wiry.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gregore, on 07 January 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

Centurions are wiry.

if that was a reference to "the Replacements" I endorse this message.......

Korm, on 07 January 2013 - 08:44 AM, said:

Actually the figures used in introductory set are the same (sans material - cheap plastic vs metal) as used in mech packs like this one: http://ironwindmetal...roducts_id=4061

Also I agree - revised models looks great, but it doesn't change the fact that old sculpts sometimes look quite funny (yet the catapult from plastech looks great).

And about figures - being old doesn't make them any less "real" or "original". Actually the modern changes and "revised" models makes it obvious that IWM guys are aware of the old scale problem and they're trying to fix it.

Yeah, the miniatures, of ANY era, were wildly inconsistent in size. My Battlemaster was much larger than my DireWolf, for instance. (Aside from how poorly sculpted the old Partha ones often were, I do think IWM is trying to improve overall quality, but it's going to be dang near impossible to make a reasonable scale for them.)

[Joseph Mallan]

Gregore, on 07 January 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

Centurions are were wiry.

new Artist new artistic Licence. The MMO's Centurions are not the House Davion Mech of ol, But I kinda like the new look. It's a touch more imposing.

[Sayyid]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 January 2013 - 08:22 AM, said:

yes, though sadly, it is JUST a comparison, with no actual stats posted like" the Banshee pictured here is 14 meters tall......" As for "Offical", I will leave you with a post from Herbert Beas, current Battletech line developer for Catalyst Game Labs, who are the current owner of the IP (Since while FASA did occasionally show a "scale" they never really got into specifics other than mechs averaged about 10 meters tall)
http://bg.battletech...hp?topic=6374.0

The trueth is the mechs are 4 stories tall. This is why a level 1 building is 6m and is about 2 stories in height. Which works out great when you use the average of 10m tall. But I found in research years ago, that an AS7-D Atlas is the tallest battlemech in the game, standing 19.5m tall! The other mechs were pretty short by comparison, it always lead to the joke how does a Commando punch a Atlas in the head, or for that matter how does any mech punch the Atlas in the head.

[Navid A1]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 January 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

..........
Simply stated, a Catapult should not be as massive or MORE than a Stalker (especially since they really shortened the length of the Stalker. A 50 ton Centurion should not be 1/2 again as large as a 50 ton Hunchback, and equal to a 70 ton Cataphract. Viewed from the front, the differences in the 35 ton Raven and Jenner seem minor, yet the side view would put the Raven closer to 45 tons. (Not stating the obvious that almost ALL of these designs would actually be 2-3x their "game mass" at the current scale)
here is a 153 ton Bulldozer scale comparison





Obviously, Mechs, being humanoid, are not as dense as a tank or dozer, but the difference is still pretty staggering.

will edit that into post when I find it.

you do know that mechs are not built (specially in the year 3000 onwards) from the same crude steel as your bulldozer.
in fact... that bulldozer would have been much lighter if it was built from carbon fiber, aluminium and other polymers while maintaining all of its rigidness.
you know why the bulldozer is so heavy?... its intentional. that machine MUST be heavy to do its job which is pushing things around, properly... they would have made it over 500T if they could...
mechs must be built as light as possible to maintain agility.

also when i move up from a 35ton raven to a 70ton phract... the scale is not doubled in the process... because the main thing that is upgrading is the engine... and internal power systems which are much denser than the mechs' armor or internal framing.

Edited by Navid A1, 07 January 2013 - 09:10 AM.

[CDLord HHGD]

The only scale issue I have is with the Commando, should be taller imo..... I'll get some pics of minis





EDIT: Pics

Edited by cdlord, 07 January 2013 - 09:19 AM.

[stjobe]

Bishop Steiner, on 07 January 2013 - 08:44 AM, said:

the difference being that was one compiled by a random user (could he be an employee? sure, but doesn't say so) whereas Mr Beas is the man in charge of the whole game line. Pretty sure he has a more "offical" answer than the other guy. In fact, the reason I discounted his thread (which as you say is easy to come across) is because of no official link to FASA/WizKids/Fan Pro or CGL.

It's a nice piece of speculative work by the poster but then he goes into the realm of pure speculation such as the Atlas at 16 meters due to being 5 tons heavier than the Banshee, despite the fact that the atlas is also MUCH broader than the Banshee chassis, and hence is likely shorter (a detail generally confirmed in canon descriptions depicting the Atlas as squat,and even the TRO says it's not the tallest (and this is pre any of the Super Mechs being designed)

Oh I wasn't disagreeing with either you nor Mr. Beas, I was just pointing out that there had been estimates made on that height comparison chart.