Author Topic: Asset size montage  (Read 3166 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Frostiken

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1909
  • Karma: 194
Asset size montage
« on: December 12, 2010, 05:07:37 PM »



Organized by chassis weight. Yes, the Osiris is that fat, and the Shadowcat is pretty much the smallest mech.

Oh and the ASF pictures are kinda fapped, I wouldn't put too much stock in those.

I'm sure you can draw lots of interesting observations from this... like why is a 25T hovercraft bigger than an 85T tank?
« Last Edit: December 12, 2010, 05:18:26 PM by Frostiken »

Offline ~SJ~ Blhurr

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1905
  • Karma: 48
  • ~SJ~
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #1 on: December 12, 2010, 05:18:02 PM »
Those are to scale?  Seems off to me.  What's the source for those outlines?  If they are to scale, then I guess we can safely say that tonnage is a loosely defined metric used more to balance load-outs than one having any real bearing on asset profile and hit vulnerability.  The glaring contrasts are the SCat to Uziel and the Osiris to Atlas.  Every IS asset screams, "Kick Me!"  One might hope that the vast disparity in surface area might actually correspond to vast disparity in, well, armor. 

It's an interesting perspective.  Thanks.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2010, 05:46:45 PM by ~SJ~ Blhurr »
Mechwarrior Blhurr - Smoke Jags - Delta Star - The 331st Feral Fangs

"Damn these RCTs! 'Mech combat is bad enough, let alone the  combine d arms of 'Mechs, vehicles, infantry, and fighters."

Offline Frostiken

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1909
  • Karma: 194
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #2 on: December 12, 2010, 05:25:30 PM »
That's to scale?  Seems off to me.  What's the source for those outlines?

Yes. I did this by placing each of the vehicles in the same place on the Sandbox and taking a picture, so perspectives are similar across asset types. Photoshopped out the background (sketch mode made this so much easier), leaving a silhouette. Since the perspectives gave them feet a lot longer than they really are, I had to lop off the toes of every mech. To ensure sizes were still accurate, I lined up all the mechs in the editor and compared them to their neighbors as I positioned them on the strip.

Quote
Osiris to Atlas

I think there was a bit of 'creep' in the sizes, but maybe not as much as you might think:



In 'reality', the red line neatly cuts between the autocannon and the laser. In the silhouette it kind of cuts halfway through the laser. Comparing them side-by-side may have led to the Atlas being a couple of pixels too short, but the Osiris pilot still would be staring firmly at the Atlas crotch. It's not a REALLY tall mech, it's just the big stupid boxy body. It's just so god damn wide.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2010, 05:46:14 PM by Frostiken »

Offline (TLL)CapperDeluxe

  • MWLL Developer
  • Living Legend
  • *
  • Posts: 2466
  • Karma: 127
  • Life is cheap, mechs are expensive.
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #3 on: December 12, 2010, 05:28:45 PM »
I'm with Blhurr, I'm pretty sure the shadow cat is actually bigger than the Uller
Play my free open source web game MiniMek - Urbie Defense!  Its "mega fun" but with mini meks!

Offline ~SJ~ Blhurr

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1905
  • Karma: 48
  • ~SJ~
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #4 on: December 12, 2010, 05:35:51 PM »
Do one from the side.  ;D
Mechwarrior Blhurr - Smoke Jags - Delta Star - The 331st Feral Fangs

"Damn these RCTs! 'Mech combat is bad enough, let alone the  combine d arms of 'Mechs, vehicles, infantry, and fighters."

Offline Frostiken

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1909
  • Karma: 194
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #5 on: December 12, 2010, 05:39:17 PM »
I'm with Blhurr, I'm pretty sure the shadow cat is actually bigger than the Uller




You would be wrong :D The Shadowcat is the anorexic of the mech world. The Uller's failing in this regard is the fact that the CT on the Shadowcat is as slim as it needs to be, whereas on the Uller it's a big spacious bubble. The little 'ears' on the Uller make it a TINY bit higher than the Shadowcat in that regard, but it's pretty much spot-on in the silhouette. I was actually extremely surprised by the Shadowcat's size myself.

Quote
Do one from the side.  ;D

This already took me forever, especially since Photoshop blew up twice, once wiping out everything and the second time just wiping out the strip :p NOT looking forward to doing it again.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2010, 06:18:06 PM by Frostiken »

Offline ~SJ~ Blhurr

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1905
  • Karma: 48
  • ~SJ~
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #6 on: December 12, 2010, 05:43:35 PM »
Poop.  Many of these assets have considerable 'depth' to them and it would be interesting to see from that perspective.  Actually, if someone wants to give us surface area numbers for comparison that would be cool too.  ???  Then we could do a regression and see how surface area correlates with tonnage.


At least you had the decency to cover their privates.
Mechwarrior Blhurr - Smoke Jags - Delta Star - The 331st Feral Fangs

"Damn these RCTs! 'Mech combat is bad enough, let alone the  combine d arms of 'Mechs, vehicles, infantry, and fighters."

Offline ~SJ~ Wolf

  • Penalty bench
  • Star Colonel
  • *****
  • Posts: 1342
  • Karma: 147
  • The HNIC of Toast is too baller for avatars.
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #7 on: December 12, 2010, 05:46:25 PM »
These are mechs not fat kids.

Meh size really doesn't mean much when talking about weight. The materials, and thickness of armor, and weapon systems will determine weight.

Offline ~SJ~ Blhurr

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1905
  • Karma: 48
  • ~SJ~
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #8 on: December 12, 2010, 05:48:36 PM »
I have to giggle anytime someone says, "Size doesn't matter".  Unless she loves you.  Size matters.  We're talking about metal here aren't we?  These aren't carbon fiber armored mechs are they?
Mechwarrior Blhurr - Smoke Jags - Delta Star - The 331st Feral Fangs

"Damn these RCTs! 'Mech combat is bad enough, let alone the  combine d arms of 'Mechs, vehicles, infantry, and fighters."

Offline Frostiken

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1909
  • Karma: 194
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #9 on: December 12, 2010, 05:51:12 PM »
These are mechs not fat kids.

And thank god they're not. The Uziel and the Thanatos would have a complex from what they'd have gone through in gym class.

Oh and the Nova Cat looks like it really really likes working lats.

Offline =KoS= Saber15

  • Alphatester
  • Star Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 1802
  • Karma: 119
  • RIP AND TEAR
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #10 on: December 12, 2010, 05:54:34 PM »
Ugh, no wonder the Shadow Cat is such a pain in the ass to kill; it's the smallest mech in the game, yet has 1k more armor points than the larger light mechs.

"Concentrate on the moment, each moment is its own reality. It has a particular thisness. You can't predict, but you can explain. Or try. If you are observant, and lucky, you can say, this is why this is happening! It's very interesting!"

Offline Frostiken

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1909
  • Karma: 194
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #11 on: December 12, 2010, 06:02:13 PM »
Ugh, no wonder the Shadow Cat is such a pain in the ass to kill; it's the smallest mech in the game, yet has 1k more armor points than the larger light mechs.

It's not the fact that the Shadow Cat is too small - it's that the lights are too big. Compare the Shadow Cat to the Bushwacker and you see what I mean. The torsos of both are actually kind of the same size. I'd say the Shadow Cat is spot-on for its weight.

The Osiris, Kit Fox, Owens, and Raven should be shrunk to be far closer to the Adder in height, I don't think anyone will disagree here. I remember the first mech you come across in MW3 was an Owens, and the thing was quite small and spindly. You start the game in a Bushwacker, I do recall it being considerably smaller than myself.

Actually looking at the picture again, I would even say the Adder could lose a couple of feet. It's supposed to pretty much be the lowest mech in the game, it's actually a tiny bit taller than the Cougar.

THIS should be what the first part looks like. First four mechs shrunk, Osiris and Owens shrunk the most. Adder shrunk a bit to be 'lower'. Hollander shrunk a bit to not be so damn tall. Shadowcat grown a bit. Uziel shrunk significantly. Bushwacker and Cougar unchanged.



By the way I threw up a better Shadowcat to Kit Fox comparison, with the Scat merged inside the other so you can see exactly how much bigger it is.
« Last Edit: December 12, 2010, 06:41:46 PM by Frostiken »

Offline =KoS= Saber15

  • Alphatester
  • Star Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 1802
  • Karma: 119
  • RIP AND TEAR
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #12 on: December 12, 2010, 06:27:52 PM »

THIS should be what the first part looks like. First four mechs shrunk, Osiris and Owens shrunk the most. Adder shrunk a bit to be 'lower'. Hollander shrunk a bit to not be so damn tall. Shadowcat grown a bit. Uziel shrunk significantly. Bushwacker and Cougar unchanged.
You'd still need to squeeze pilots in there; it probably wouldn't be a problem in mechs like the Osiris with its huge cockpit, but the Owens would have the guy's face pressed right up against the windshield

"Concentrate on the moment, each moment is its own reality. It has a particular thisness. You can't predict, but you can explain. Or try. If you are observant, and lucky, you can say, this is why this is happening! It's very interesting!"

Offline Frostiken

  • Star Colonel
  • ****
  • Posts: 1909
  • Karma: 194
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #13 on: December 12, 2010, 06:39:16 PM »
The Owens would have the guy's face pressed right up against the windshield

Well, that's how the Scat works, doesn't it? :D

Offline Freeborn_Toad

  • Lance Sergeant
  • **
  • Posts: 373
  • Karma: 26
Re: Asset size montage
« Reply #14 on: December 12, 2010, 06:39:28 PM »
I'm sure you can draw lots of interesting observations from this... like why is a 25T hovercraft bigger than an 85T tank?

This is actually the least interesting observation.

An M1A2 Abrams is smaller in volume than an SR.N5.





The M1A2 weights 67 tons. The SR.N5 weighs 7 tons.

Even an armored hovercraft will be vastly larger than a tank of the same weight.