Asset size montage

[Frostiken]

Uzi looks way too small in that one

How do you figure? The cockpit area should be about on-par with the Shadow Cat. It's the fact that the side torsos are so ridiculously oversized that is the problem.

Hmm... That way some mechs are smaller than they should be, but I like the way you think, Frosty. Making most of light mechs a little smaller would be good. I'd say, shrink Osiris and Kit Fox as you suggested but leave Owens, Raven and Adder as they are, they have small enough profile as it is.

Problem is the Adder and Cougar are really, really wide mechs which is what counts the most against a chassis design. I actually find the Adder to be one of the easier ones to shoot, especially since the rear torso is the size of a bus. However, the Adder carries ridiculous weaponry so that's fine by me. The Cougar? Maybe not so much. Very tepid loadouts on it, nothing that I would say is particularly good.

I think we'd just have to disagree on the Raven size reduction aspect. It's a colossally tall mech for its weight right now and considering there's almost zero combat application of the chassis I think being smaller would be a nice incentive. Though I do believe the Raven already does have pretty decent armor?

[Spanish Inquisition]

The special materials used by the clans are not only metal. Ferro-Fibrous implies a ferrite nature (iron) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrite and a fibrous structure (something akin to the composites of today). Also in the lore I remember armor being described as ceramic in nature (plausible). Looking at only steel today it is incredible how many different types there are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SAE_steel_grades.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Ferro_Fibrous

Ferro-steel (wat), ferro-titanium (why), and diamond (carbon) fiber (ok).

My contribution to this thread.


[attachment deleted by admin]

[xInVicTuSx]

Holy god the Uzi is as wide as the Mcat....
Nice work Frost. I approve of your observations that some assets need to be shrunk down.
Though... Not sure if that is even possible, resizing things can really screw up animations in my experience.. though I have none with Cryengine.


LoL at massive harasser. I will say, at least from the side, the Har is stupidly easy to bring down even when traveling at 168KH simply because its so huge.
The armor is ok imo, its just so big its stupidly easy to hit. Only thing that helps is you can run over BA in it.

Though I do believe the Raven already does have pretty decent armor?

Too much imo, it needs to be lowered a bit and meet with the Osiris in the gap, though much closer to the Raven now than the Osiris.

Nothing like being able to hurpdurp your way through an entire assault group of mechs, tanks, and BA... Narc someone, and waltz away with orange armor at worst....

[Frostiken]

Keep in mind though that these are Spheroid mechs we're using as scale, which do stand taller than Clan mechs, mostly due to leg shape and overall chassis design.

Also lol @ Banshee boobies.

[(TLL)Siilk]

Though I do believe the Raven already does have pretty decent armor?

Too much imo, it needs to be lowered a bit and meet with the Osiris in the gap, though much closer to the Raven now than the Osiris.

Nothing like being able to hurpdurp your way through an entire assault group of mechs, tanks, and BA... Narc someone, and waltz away with orange armor at worst....

 My concern with Raven is that it's just too robust for it's speed and size(same with Owens, BTW). Making it smaller would mean that it would be almost impossible to bring down before it escapes. And while none of them are too dangerous, with 2-3 Owenses attacking simultaneously or Raven doing NARC-and-fade, it would be quite imbalanced.

[Frostiken]

Though I do believe the Raven already does have pretty decent armor?

Too much imo, it needs to be lowered a bit and meet with the Osiris in the gap, though much closer to the Raven now than the Osiris.

Nothing like being able to hurpdurp your way through an entire assault group of mechs, tanks, and BA... Narc someone, and waltz away with orange armor at worst....

 My concern with Raven is that it's just too robust for it's speed and size(same with Owens, BTW). Making it smaller would mean that it would be almost impossible to bring down before it escapes. And while none of them are too dangerous, with 2-3 Owenses attacking simultaneously or Raven doing NARC-and-fade, it would be quite imbalanced.

On the other hand light mechs are a joke once the average weight on the battlefield is 60T.

[(TLL)Sky_walker]

Ok, so the major issue is scale difference, not anything Mech-specific. It's just that the difference between average light Mech size and average assault mech class isn't just big enough.

BTW: Tanks in MWLL are 2-3 times the size they should be

[Taemien]

Though I do believe the Raven already does have pretty decent armor?

Too much imo, it needs to be lowered a bit and meet with the Osiris in the gap, though much closer to the Raven now than the Osiris.

Nothing like being able to hurpdurp your way through an entire assault group of mechs, tanks, and BA... Narc someone, and waltz away with orange armor at worst....

 My concern with Raven is that it's just too robust for it's speed and size(same with Owens, BTW). Making it smaller would mean that it would be almost impossible to bring down before it escapes. And while none of them are too dangerous, with 2-3 Owenses attacking simultaneously or Raven doing NARC-and-fade, it would be quite imbalanced.

On the other hand light mechs are a joke once the average weight on the battlefield is 60T.

I dunno if they are a total joke. When I get in a raven late game, I must be a serious threat to peeps, I get lit up like a x-mas tree when out in the open.

[MerfMerf]

On the other hand light mechs are a joke once the average weight on the battlefield is 60T.

I dunno if they are a total joke. When I get in a raven late game, I must be a serious threat to peeps, I get lit up like a x-mas tree when out in the open.

Light mechs (as in the entire collection) is not a joke late game.
The Adders are a huge asset (Thinking mostly of the Prime and the CERMBL variant). I have also seen people being very successful with the Kitfox C (Though I can in no way reproduce this myself). Pending on map and how the actual battle plays out the Cougar B is also a mech to count on in certain pilots hands. These are just for purely combat purposes. If we go on to more support like functions the Raven is always appreciated on teams with LRMs and Arrow IV systems. Like already pointed out that thing can often waltz right into the think of it, place a NARC and get away. The Owens variants with C3 should not be disregarded as scouts for Long Tom artillery either. The Owens B can also be used for actual fighting if used purely to support other units already in combat. That rocking from SRM impacts now and then can be a serious annoyance.

In my opinion lights have a fairly good place in combat if we take their price into consideration. I do agree however that the a little more size difference would be good. Teh difference portrayed in that BT pic is a good indication I think of a desirable difference (in general, individual mechs might very well vary) in size. Granted I have not felt the lights being as big an issue as Uziel in mediums and Thanatos and Maddog in heavies. Probably due to the fact that a small percentile size difference scale and become a larger disadvantage the larger the asset is.

/Merf - Would have offered a "thank you" for the size comparison chart if not for the fact the button for that is missing.

[sgnl05]

Ok, so the major issue is scale difference, not anything Mech-specific. It's just that the difference between average light Mech size and average assault mech class isn't just big enough.

BTW: Tanks in MWLL are 2-3 times the size they should be

I think it is mech specific because AFAIK there aren't hit modifiers in CBT for individual mechs. So in CBT it makes no difference that a shadowcat is smaller than a uziel, and so 1 point of armour on a shadowcat is equivilent to 1 point of armour on a uziel. But in MWLL 1 point of armour on a uziel isn't worth as much as one point of armour on a shadowcat, because the uziel is going to be taking more hits because it's bigger, so the armour doesn't last as long.

Does that make sense? What I was getting at is that in CBT there's no need for armour ratings to take mech size into account, but in MWLL there is.

[(TLL)Sky_walker]

well, looking this way all units should have same volume to make them equally easy to hit. Including all tanks, ASF, hover, vtol.

[MerfMerf]

well, looking this way all units should have same volume to make them equally easy to hit. Including all tanks, ASF, hover, vtol.

Incorrect. You would simply have to compensate for the size difference. Be that in the form of a price reduction or in the form of an armour upgrade or whatever. In MWLL size (easy to hit) is a factor. In CBT it is not (has hit modifiers, but not in regards to individual mech profile). THus something should be done to bridge the gap. I would certainly not advocate making them all the same size. I suspect it is size normalization that may what caused FatDog and Largeathos.

/Merf - Omnomnom - Maddog side torso - nom nom.

[(TLL)Sky_walker]

well, IMO we shouldn't go so much in details. There are dozens of factors which are not taken in account in CBT due to it's simplicity. It'd work if we'd aim in making an arcade game with hit effects randomized and each shot towards target counting as potential hit, no matter the player skill. But as MWLL is a simulator - there should be no such weird factors added.

CBT doesn't make any difference in accuracy whatever enemy moves towards you or from left to right, while in MWLL it's far more difficult to hit enemy moving sidewards than it's to hit the enemy moving towards you - you want to compensate this too?

Let's be serious. Size and shape of Mech is a factor in gameplay but it's nothing that we'd need to compensate unless it leads to some ridiculous imbalances (sparrowhawk, I'm looking at you).

[~SJ~ Blhurr]

In a game where marksmanship is the main and most highly prized of player skills, how can we say that the size of the target is not worth accounting for when it comes to balance?  I'd venture that the only reason we haven't heard more on the subject is that asset size has been really hard to quantify up until this point and that it is next to impossible for a pilot to attribute and assess the cause of incoming damage to one factor or another.  I can tell you that after reading this thread the assets that people are grumbling about already have become even less attractive.  Veteran warriors smell this type of thing from miles away and won't touch those chassis that they suspect come with inherent disadvantages. I think it would be a mistake to ignore surface area as a balanceable variable because my guess is warriors are already selecting for it like any good evolutionary trait.

[(TLL)Sky_walker]

It is accounted, sure, but not to a degree where we make multipliers depending on a volume of target, than few percent added for Mechs with exposed heads, etc. cause it leads to the point where you'd have to account target velocity on your screen Target moving towards/away from you is significantly easier to hit than the target moving from left to right, and it doesn't depend on the size. I dare to say that light Mech moving towards you is an easier target than Heavy moving left to right. <- you gonna account that too? I doubt, I hope not, but if you don't than there's no point in getting into very numeric multipliers depending on a size of Mech.
Especially when units size differences are still off-road to what we seen on BTU units scale reference graph.