BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat
Catalyst Game Labs => BattleTech Game Errata => Topic started by: Xotl on 28 July 2015, 16:11:04
-
This thread is for all error reports and suggestions for the MUL online database, as found at:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/
Some notes - read before posting:
- How do I log in? You can't. The login is only for site administrators.
- As this covers suggestions as well as errors, discussion is allowed in this thread.
- This database does not include Dark Age availabilities for units published prior to TR 3085.
- The entire Camospecs/Iron Wind Metals feature is still being worked on (as in: the entire way it works could change). We're not going to be dealing with individual issues on this for a while.
- Corrections not touching on the above are welcome. However, please provide a page number and/or direct quote to support your case. "Faction X should have this because I said so" is less than helpful and will likely be ignored.
- If you have corrections for a unit entry, include a direct MUL link to the unit in question in your report.
- If it's a BV or Alpha Strike stat correction, please enclose or attach your entire calculation and how you made it (by hand, SSW, MML, Heavy Metal etc; include version number of any software used).
Please keep your posts concise and polite. Posts that do not follow these rules will be deleted. Thank you.
WHAT IS THE MUL?
- The Master Unit List is a free product that contains the latest Battle Values, Alpha Strike stats, faction availabilities, and introduction dates for as many units in BattleTech as we can manage.
- The MUL is official and fully canonical. At the same time, it's a living document, continually being updated to best reflect all available sources.
- If a unit appears on the MUL, then it exists. This does not mean that said unit will ever see its stats published.
- That something is not on the MUL does not mean it doesn't exist. Not every factory, vehicle and handgun in the universe has been documented, nor will they ever be. The MUL is what we know to date: what has been documented in canon.
- Unlike the MUL, Sarna.net is not a canon source. If Sarna lists a unit and the MUL doesn't, then the MUL is most likely correct (though we certainly do make mistakes, which this thread is here to collect and correct). The MUL has access to internal information that Sarna does not.
Project Updates:
Homeworld Clan and Late Succession Wars data is now available.
Star League and Early Succession Wars data is now available.
Alpha Strike PVs have been updated to the newest version.
-
Thanks for these, Mordel. If you think you know where the error is, that would be helpful in our analysis. Often these turn out to be bugs in the code for MML or SSW.
Now that you say it, I only compared my calculations against MML. Checking SSW did help with a couple as they match what is in the MUL. They are as follows:
Grand Dragon DRG-9KC
You can ignore this one. I didn't notice the legs had different amounts of armor. When I change the right leg armor to 22 per the record sheet, my calculation is likewise 1,147. So the MUL is correct (sorry).
Hatamoto-Chi HTM-28T (Shin)
SSW calculates the sword BV to be 15.53. My calculations and MML calculate it to be 31.05. I don't believe SSW accounts for the TSM, doubling the damage of the sword and thus doubling the BV.
Mauler MAL-2R
Unfortunately, the BV for this between my calculations, SSW, and MML all match at 1,586. So perhaps what is in the MUL was just a typo?
-
The Banshee BNC-8S (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/250/banshee-bnc-8s) has its Battle Value listed as 2,369 (which matches SSW). According to my calculations (as well as those from MML), the BV for this unit should be 2,408. The calculations are as follows:
==============================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 288 x 2.5 x 1 720.000
Internal Structure (Standard w/ XL Engine): 145 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 108.750 = 828.750
Gyro (XL): 95 x 0.5 (+) 47.500 = 876.250
Defensive Equipment:
Guardian ECM Suite (+) 61.000 = 937.250
Explosive Ammunition: 2 Critical Spaces (-) 30.000 = 907.250
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (*) 1.30 = 1,179.425
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,179.425
==============================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Large Laser 163.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 62.000 = 225.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 62.000 = 287.000
ER Small Laser (+) 8.500 = 295.500
Hatchet (+) 57.000 = 352.500
LB 10-X AC (+) 148.000 = 500.500
LB 10-X AC (Ammo 10) (+) 19.000 = 519.500
LB 10-X AC (Ammo 10) (+) 19.000 = 538.500
Medium Laser (+) 23.000 = 561.500
Medium Laser (+) 23.000 = 584.500
Small Laser (+) 4.500 = 589.000
Snub-Nose PPC (+) 165.000 = 754.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 142.500 = 896.500
Speed Factor: 8 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.370 = 1,228.205
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,228.205
==============================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,179.425
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,228.205 = 2,407.630
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 2,408
The difference appears to be due to the fact that SSW calculates the hatchet at a BV of 28.50, whereas MML and myself have it calculated at a BV of 57.00. It appears SSW is not accounting for the increased damage due to TSM.
-
[Snip]
Verified and updated. Thanks mordel.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6977/uni-atae-70m-cargomech-mod
This is listed as the "Uni ATAE-70M MilitiaMech" in the RSVA IndustrialMechs and Exoskeletons pdf on page 95. On page 228 of TRVA Revised, its also called a "MilitiaMech" rather than a "CargoMech MOD"
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/884/deva-c-dva-o-achilleus
On page 45 in Wolf and Blake (and on other pages, that's just the main), the character's name is "Achillius" His mech is named the same way. Change the name from "Achilleus" to "Achillius"
-
This is listed as the "Uni ATAE-70M MilitiaMech" in the RSVA IndustrialMechs and Exoskeletons pdf on page 95. On page 228 of TRVA Revised, its also called a "MilitiaMech" rather than a "CargoMech MOD"
changed.
On page 45 in Wolf and Blake (and on other pages, that's just the main), the character's name is "Achillius" His mech is named the same way. Change the name from "Achilleus" to "Achillius"
I left this one alone for now. The record sheet has it as Achilleus. I also found it in other places in the book as that. There is one more reference with it spelled as Achillius than Achilleus. There is no errata for it. I dropped a question for Ben in the ask the writers forum. Once we get confirmation either way, we can put it in the errata thread and, if needed, change the MUL.
-
OK, with Homeworld Clan data now available during the Civil War and Jihad eras I've taken a look at the availabilities for all ProtoMechs and compared them with notes of my own. I found a few discrepancies which might be worth looking into. Keep in mind that most of my "sources" were RATs, since ProtoMechs were never really fluffed out one way or another.
ProtoMech Era Missing Faction
Satyr Jihad Snow Ravens (sources: Wars of Reaving Supplemental, FM:3085)
Satyr 2 Jihad Snow Ravens (sources: Wars of Reaving Supplemental)
Satyr 4 Jihad Snow Ravens (sources: Wars of Reaving Supplemental, FM:3085)
Centaur Jihad Hell's Horses (sources: Wars of Reaving Supplemental, FM:3085, Obj:Clans - mentioned as being in production)
Chrysaor 2 Jihad Nova Cats (source: FM:3085)
Chrysaor 2 All Wolf-in-Exile (source: Combat Equipment)
Roc Jihad Hell's Horses (source: Wars of Reaving Supplemental, FM:3085)
Roc 2 Jihad Nova Cats (source: FM:3085)
Roc 2 Jihad Society (source: Wars of Reaving Supplemental)
Delphyne Jihad Snow Ravens (source: Wars of Reaving Supplemental)
-
Found a simple typo tonight regarding the Batu [Z] (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3809/batu-z).
Among the listed specials is "VTOL"... which is not a valid Special.
suggested change: "VSTOL" (to match the other variants on the MUL)
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5278/trident-trn-3v
This is listed as "Introductory" but the Record Sheet on page 319 of the RS3050U-C has it armed with ER and Pulse lasers.
Fix is to make it atleast Standard. That's what the Record Sheet says (or atleast it doesn't say anything other than "Inner Sphere"). The problem is the RS doesn't say how to make the design exactly, and the Fuel is listed as "3 points" which is obviously wrong. If that 3 points means tons instead, then I THINK the design has to be made with a small aerospace cockpit, which would make the design Advanced until 3081.
-
"If rumors of a high-performance teleoperated version are to be believed, it is quite possible that the additional room normally taken by the cockpit could allow another laser system or even higher-grade weapons."
Drone perhaps? Checking, but yes, I'm thinking it needs Advanced at least.
-
Found a simple typo tonight regarding the Batu [Z] (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3809/batu-z).
Fixed
GreekFire: I'll look into them.
-
The Highlander HGN-694 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5493/highlander-hgn-694) has its Battle Value listed as 2,358 (which matches MML and SSW). According to my calculations, the BV for this unit should be 2,369. The calculations are as follows:
===========================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 279 x 2.5 x 1 697.500
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ Light Fusion Engine): 138 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.75 (+) 155.250 = 852.750
Gyro (Standard): 90 x 0.5 (+) 45.000 = 897.750
Explosive Equipment: 2 Critical Spaces (-) 2.000 = 895.750
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (*) 1.20 = 1,074.900
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,074.900
===========================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Gauss Rifle 320.000
Gauss Rifle (Ammo 8) (+) 40.000 = 360.000
Gauss Rifle (Ammo 8) (+) 40.000 = 400.000
Gauss Rifle (Ammo 8) (+) 40.000 = 440.000
Heavy Gauss Rifle (+) 346.000 = 786.000
Heavy Gauss Rifle (Ammo 4) (+) 43.000 = 829.000
Heavy Gauss Rifle (Ammo 4) (+) 43.000 = 872.000
Heavy Gauss Rifle (Ammo 4) (+) 43.000 = 915.000
Heavy Gauss Rifle (Ammo 4) (+) 43.000 = 958.000
Large Laser (+) 123.000 = 1,081.000
Large Laser (+) 123.000 = 1,204.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 90.000 = 1,294.000
Speed Factor: 5 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.000 = 1,294.000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,294.000
===========================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,074.900
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,294.000 = 2,368.900
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 2,369
The difference is due to the fact that MML and SSW both calculate the explosive equipment penalty as -11 whereas I calculate it as -2. The reason for this is because only 2 critical slots of the HGR is located in the CT. The other 9 are located in the LT, which is protected by CASE. This situation is covered under the Critical Hits sub-section on page 136 of TW. Since the explosion happens in the side torso only (because of CASE), the damage would not transfer, and thus the 9 HGR slots in the side torso should not be considered for explosive equipment.
-
The Highlander HGN-694 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5493/highlander-hgn-694) has its Battle Value listed as 2,358 (which matches MML and SSW). According to my calculations, the BV for this unit should be 2,369. The calculations are as follows:
Thanks. Corrected and updated.
-
I'd like the Intro dates checked for the Rifleman RFL-3N and Rifleman II RFL-3N-2.
RFL-3N: 2770
RFL-3N-2: 2720
It seems to me that the RFL-3N should be around LONG before a "II" version of it is invented. The gap between the -2N's intro date of 2556 and the -3N's of 2770 seems pretty profound. This should perhaps be changed to around the time the RFL-3N-2 was introduced, with proliferation to the Member States at the original date of 2770.
-
The Wolverine WVR-9K (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3581/wolverine-wvr-9k) has its Battle Value listed as 1,397 (which matches SSW). According to my calculations (as well as those from MML), the BV for this unit should be 1,420. The calculations are as follows:
==========================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 185 x 2.5 x 1 462.500
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ Light Fusion Engine): 91 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.75 (+) 102.375 = 564.875
Gyro (Compact): 55 x 0.5 (+) 27.500 = 592.375
Defensive Equipment:
Anti-Battle Armor Pod (+) 2.000 = 594.375
Anti-Battle Armor Pod (+) 2.000 = 596.375
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (*) 1.30 = 775.288
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 775.288
==========================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Light Machine Gun (Ammo 100) 0.500
Light Machine Gun (Array) (+) 8.350 = 8.850
Light Machine Gun (Array) (+) 8.350 = 17.200
Light Machine Gun (Array) (+) 8.350 = 25.550
Snub-Nose PPC (+) 165.000 = 190.550
SRM 4 (+) 39.000 = 229.550
SRM 4 (Ammo 25) (+) 5.000 = 234.550
Sword (+) 24.150 = 258.700
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 82.500 = 341.200
Speed Factor: 9 (Run) + 3 (Jump) (*) 1.890 = 644.868
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 644.868
==========================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 775.288
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 644.868 = 1,420.156
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,420
This is due to the fact that SSW did not factor in the modified damage for the sword as a result of TSM.
-
Minotaur P2 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4643/minotaur-p2), per TRO:Prototypes it has Magnetic Clamps, so it's AS card should have the MCS special ability.
-
Minotaur P2 fixed. thanks.
-
The Wolverine WVR-9K (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3581/wolverine-wvr-9k) has its Battle Value listed as 1,397 (which matches SSW). According to my calculations (as well as those from MML), the BV for this unit should be 1,420. The calculations are as follows:
Verified and updated. Thank you very much.
-
crosscut (RL) and Crosscut (flamer) need 0* stats. (their weapons are weak, but do exist.)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6973/crosscut-ed-x2-rl
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6972/crosscut-ed-x2-flamer
severla crosscut variants need cards generated.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4024/crosscut-ed-x4-loggermech
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7168/crosscut-ed-x4b-demolitionmech
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4025/crosscut-ed-x4d-demolitionmech
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7169/crosscut-ed-x4m-loggermech-mod
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4026/crosscut-ed-x4x-loggermech
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7170/crosscut-ed-x5m-loggermech-mod
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7171/crosscut-ed-x5m-b-demolitionmech-mod
(not sure if they're just waiting for cards or got overlooked)
-
Most of vehicle annex IMs needs stats except those already in Operation Klondike.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6392/rokurokubi-rk-4t (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6392/rokurokubi-rk-4t)
Please review the Rokurokubi RK-4T damage line. I believe it should be zero for the long range bracket. It has a long range damage of 1, but is only equipped with a light AC/5 which does damage up to medium range.
If this correction is valid the point value should come down to 25 as well.
Thanks
-
The Raven RVN-4LC is stealth armor on the reconrdsheet but not Stealth on the AS stats.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2667/raven-rvn-4lc
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/173/awesome-aws-11m (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/173/awesome-aws-11m)
Hello,
Another request for review. The Awesome 11M has a OV value of 2, I believe this should be zero.
The design has a max heat of 42 (x8 LPPC @ 5 heat each, plus 2 running heat) and carries 20 DHS.
This would reduce the point value to 42 if it is correct.
Thank you
-
AWS-11M fixed, thanks.
-
The Raven RVN-4LC is stealth armor on the reconrdsheet but not Stealth on the AS stats.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2667/raven-rvn-4lc
STL added, PV adjusted to 26.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6392/rokurokubi-rk-4t (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6392/rokurokubi-rk-4t)
Please review the Rokurokubi RK-4T damage line. I believe it should be zero for the long range bracket. It has a long range damage of 1, but is only equipped with a light AC/5 which does damage up to medium range.
If this correction is valid the point value should come down to 25 as well.
Thanks
Correct, L and PV, thanks.
-
The Seraph C-SRP-OR (Ravana) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2875/seraph-c-srp-or-ravana) has its Battle Value listed as 1,941 (which matches SSW). According to my calculations (as well as those from MML), the BV for this unit should be 1,957. The calculations are as follows:
=========================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 256 x 2.5 x 1 640.000
Internal Structure (Standard w/ Light Fusion Engine): 130 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.75 (+) 146.250 = 786.250
Gyro (Standard): 85 x 0.5 (+) 42.500 = 828.750
Defensive Equipment:
Laser Anti-Missile System (+) 45.000 = 873.750
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (*) 1.20 = 1,048.500
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,048.500
=========================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Large VSP Laser 123.000
Retractable Blade (+) 31.050 = 154.050
Snub-Nose PPC (+) 165.000 = 319.050
Thunderbolt 20 (+) 305.000 = 624.050
Thunderbolt 20 (Ammo 3) (+) 38.000 = 662.050
Thunderbolt 20 (Ammo 3) (+) 38.000 = 700.050
Thunderbolt 20 (Ammo 3) (+) 38.000 = 738.050
Thunderbolt 20 (Ammo 3) (+) 38.000 = 776.050
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 127.500 = 903.550
Speed Factor: 6 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.120 = 1,011.976
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,011.976
=========================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,048.500
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,011.976 = 2,060.476
Cockpit (Small): (*) 0.95 = 1,957.452
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,957
This is due to the fact that SSW did not factor in the modified damage for the retractable blade as a result of TSM.
-
AWS-11M fixed, thanks.
I believe that the OV2 was correct. The 11M has 4 ppc capacitators and it overheats considering them
-
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/alpha-strike-101/ppcs-with-capacitor-conversion/ (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/alpha-strike-101/ppcs-with-capacitor-conversion/)
Based on this conversation I found nothing about PPC with capacitors having special rules. As such the conversion table in the AS companion lists LPPCs as 5 heat with 0.5 damage each.
I did suggest one possible change
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/fan-designs-rules/as-heat-for-ppcs-with-capacitors/ (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/fan-designs-rules/as-heat-for-ppcs-with-capacitors/)
Thanks
-
I believe that the OV2 was correct. The 11M has 4 ppc capacitators and it overheats considering them
I thought so as well (hence why it had OV2 in the first place). But both SO and ASC list the light ppc with capacitor as 5 heat.
-
The Basilisk Quad-B (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5835/basilisk-protomech-quad-b) has an AS card with a 1/1/0 damage rating. Given that BQ-B is unarmed save for the melee weapon(WoR Supp, pg 43), shouldn't the damage be 0/0/0?
-
Wulfen [E] (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6261/wulfen-e)
Current Damage for Alpha Strike 3/3/0*.
Suggested Change: I believe the damage band should be 4/3/0*, which retroactively increases the PV by 1 (from 26 → 27)
Weapons
. 2@ATM3 (10 shots each) for 4 subtotal Heat
. . Damage Bands = 1.2/0.8/0.4
. 2@ERMedium Laser for 10 subtotal Heat
. . Damage Bands = 1.4/1.4/0
. . . Targeting Computer modifier x1.1
. . . . adjusted Damage Bands = 1.54/1.54/0
. MicroPulse Laser for 1 subtotal Heat
. . Damage Band = 0.33/0/0
. . . Targeting Computer modifier x1.1
. . . . adjusted Damage Bands = 0.363/0/0
. Base Damage = 3.103 / 2.34 / 0.4
. . or "4 / 3 / 0*"
15 Total Heat for Weapons
(Not enough heat to modify the damage down, but for clarity...)
(. 22 total dissipation {11 double heatsinks})
(. 15 weapon heat)
(. 10 stealth heat)
(. 2 engine heat) correction: 4 engine heat (2 x 2; thank you Moonsword)
(. . 27 total heat 29 heat )
(. . . Short Range [4*22] / [27-4] [29-4)
(. . . . ~3.82608 ~3.52 )
Edit: corrections for heat
-
3.103 damage at short range, * 22 heat sink dissipation, /23 (27 heat build up -4) = 3.0. That is enough to drop the 4 to a 3.
-
The text is actually rather vague for calculating Heat-modified damage: the main problem is that it says to modify the "base damage values", (ASC p. 115) but there's no definition as to what that is. On p. 99, where you first calculate your damage values, it says "At the most basic level" you round when calculating damage (ASC p. 99), and then, right after that, it says "the damage values determined here" are used if you have to modify for heat.
I can easily see why some would round up to the nearest whole number before applying heat, rather than after. I'll see about adding clarifying notes to p. 99 and p. 115 (and I have to update my conversion spreadsheet, since I made the same mistake).
-
There's two different points at which you round.
as part of heat modification (p115) = round up to nearest tenth.
final value (p99) = round to whole number. (Up for standard damage values, normal for special abilities).
-
I've clarified my post, but it's more a question of the text being unclear as to when you make that first rounding at all, rather than a question of in what way you round.
-
Ah, gotcha. Yes, the rounded to whole number values should not then be heat-modified. Heat-modification comes first.
It should also clarify the rounding to tenth in heat-modification happens even if the unit is otherwise not heat modified.
1. Total up all damage values.
2. Heat Modify as necessary for heat modified damage values.
3. Round damage values up to nearest one-tenth (even if not heat modified)
4. Round (up for standard, normal for special abilities) to nearest whole number for final damage values.
Step 3 is necessary even if damage values do not qualify to be heat modified because otherwise it's possible for heat to actually raise a damage value. That would be silly :).
-
Hmmm
I don't mean to argue with the process here, but I'd like point out that "OV" values have always been whole numbers. The reason I think the way I converted is correct is because there isn't enough "heat reduction" to warrant an OV value.
In this example...
. Heat Multiplier = 22/23 ~ 0.9565217... lets just go with "0.957" 22/25 ~ 0.88
. Short Range Base Damage [SBD] (not-rounded) = 3.103
. . SBD x Heat Multiplier = 2.97 2.73064 ~ 2.731
. . 3.103 - 2.97 = ~0.133 3.103 - 2.731 = 0.372
I didn't think 0.133 0.372 was enough to grant "OV1"... nor reduce the damage below its original value (3.103 ~ 4)
And I'm not trying to be snarky, just speculative.
-
Is that heat total supposed to use movement heat? If so, maybe it should be 6 on the Wulfen, not 2 - it has an XXL engine.
I'm not able to look at my books right now so take that with a grain of salt.
-
Is that heat total supposed to use movement heat? If so, maybe it should be 6 on the Wulfen, not 2 - it has an XXL engine.
I'm not able to look at my books right now so take that with a grain of salt.
oh crap, I missed that. Sorry all :(
<recalculating...>
EDIT: +2 heat didn't really change where I rounded (double engine heat for the conversion, page 115. I will edit my previous posts. Thank you MoonSword
-
I didn't think 0.133 was enough to grant "OV1"... nor reduce the damage below its original value (3.103 ~ 4)
And yet, that 0.133 is more than the .103 that would have given a 4 in the first place. If anything, it shouldn't have overheat OR a 4 damage value by this logic. :)
-
And yet, that 0.133 is more than the .103 that would have given a 4 in the first place. If anything, it shouldn't have overheat OR a 4 damage value by this logic. :)
yeah. I'm giving myself a headache over this one. I'm sorry I'm not being very helpful guys :(
-
yeah. I'm giving myself a headache over this one. I'm sorry I'm not being very helpful guys :(
Don't worry about it: you made me realize I had made a mistake, and ensured the wording would be clearer in the future.
-
Short damage has nothing to do with calculating OV. OV is calculated based on whether or not Medium damage changes due to heat modification. It doesn't matter if Short does or doesn't change.
-
Short damage has nothing to do with calculating OV. OV is calculated based on whether or not Medium damage changes due to heat modification. It doesn't matter if Short does or doesn't change.
Yup. I was going off the presumption that "OV 0" meant "full Short Range damage" which was (previously) 3.103... thus my initial post about the Wulfen.
I can see that I was wrong now (in my calculations). Please disregard my request to update the unit.
-
Will do, and don't worry about asking questions. I only know what I know because people (Alexander Knight and others) kept pointing out my mistakes.
-
And as for me....waayyy too much time staring at the numbers and various conversions. #P
-
(http://i743.photobucket.com/albums/xx72/LouieN/Misc/Wulfen%20E.jpg)
This is what I get for the Wulfen E.
The long range is a 0* because it is only .4 damage. The OV is zero as it is based ONLY on the medium range calculation.
So I have 3/3/0*
-
The Basilisk Quad-B (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5835/basilisk-protomech-quad-b) has an AS card with a 1/1/0 damage rating. Given that BQ-B is unarmed save for the melee weapon(WoR Supp, pg 43), shouldn't the damage be 0/0/0?
Yep. Fixed. Should update within the next 24 hours.
-
Please review the Wulfen D and E based on the latest errata for XXL engine movement heat.
The D model I calculate a .53 damage at medium range. This would allow it to have 1 damage.
The model E alters from my post above to a 3/2/0* with a 1 OV.
Point cost may alter to 25.
All other models were unchanged by the new heat.
Thanks
Any other XXL mechs to check?
-
The errata is the way the MUL team had been doing XXL engines.
-
Still, I think he's right on both counts. It looks like the Wulfen D would be 0*/1/0*, and the Wulfen E 3/2/0* with OV1.
Granted I'm still double-checking to make sure my sheet is right after the changes, but I'm getting the same numbers he is.
-
I'm matching those values as well. I'm getting point values for the D and E as 20 and 26 respectively.
-
[Pre-Errata] The XXL engine only counted for double Movement Heat, not +6 (as Walking MP in Standard BT)
On the Wulfen E, Movement Heat would be 4 (Engine +2, x2)
At Medium Range, the MicroPulse laser doesn't count (max range = short) which is why I calculated at Short Range to start with (mistakenly not Calculating Medium Range default)
. Medium Range Damage = 2.34
. Total Heat @Medium Range = 28
. Heat Dissipation = 22
. . Damage Multiplier = 22/(28-4) = 0.91666 ~ 0.9
. . . 2.34 * 0.9 = 2.106
2.1 rounds up to 3 @ Medium Range, OV 0.
[Post errata]
...22/(30-4) = 0.856 ~ 0.9... rounds the same? 0.846 ~ 0.8 (rounds down). Finger slipped... thanks for the correction, Louie
-
For the Wulfen E it is...
22/26 = .846 X 2.34 = 1.98
Thanks
-
Sooo... it looks like Wulfen "E" should have Damage Bands: 3/2/0*, OV1 ?
Retroactively changes the PV from 26 to 25?
-
Note the micro pulse laser still counts for heat at medium range. So it's 31 heat (-4). But yeah, that just makes the medium range damage even lower. So PV 25, 3/2/0*, OV1, changes coming up.
-
First thanks to the MUL team as always, the above stats are correct
Just to provide the backup calculations on the little Wulfen E, nasty little guy, so people can see how we got to the above.
(http://i743.photobucket.com/albums/xx72/LouieN/Misc/Wulfen%20E.png)
Thanks
-
the Micro Pulse laser's heat still counts toward medium range calculations. All weapons count toward short and medium, regardless of their own range limitations.
-
Coyotl A http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/713?skill=4
Move should be 14"j. Not sure at this point if it affects the PV.
Xotl: updated. Costs raises to 34 points.
-
the Micro Pulse laser's heat still counts toward medium range calculations. All weapons count toward short and medium, regardless of their own range limitations.
nckestrel,
I am sorry. I did not understand your statement earlier. Now I see what you are saying. I would just ask that this be clarified, because nothing in the AS companion suggest weapons contribute heat outside their range band. Or at least I have not found it.
Thanks for the clarification.
-
It's not so much that it specifically states to use all weapons for non-Long-range OV as much as it says only to separate out Long and always refers to "maximum heat output" rather than any sort of segregated heat output. But yes, it could be clearer.
-
I agree. It could use more clarity for the crazy number cruchers.
The "Heat-Modified Damage" paragraph talks about developing the modified damage per each range bracket
With the "calculating Overheat Value" saying you use the medium, if avaliable, to determine the OV.
Also the "Determining Overheat" talks about it it "at a given range bracket"
Thanks
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5228/thug-thg-11e-reich
Thug THG-11E (Reich): I believe the listed source TRO, Technical Readout: 3050 Upgrade, is incorrect as I can find no mention of it on the Thug's entry, p. 216. Source should be Field Manual: Mercenaries Supplemental 2, p. 64.
-----
http://masterunitlist.info/Source/Details/268
Cover picture for Field Manual: Mercenaries is incorrect. That is the cover of Field Manual: Mercenaries Revised.
-----
Also, I don't know if it's an error or just a limitation of the system, but searching for "Rubinsky" only brings up the Scorpion SCP-1N (Rubinsky) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4994/scorpion-scp-1n-rubinsky) and Archer ARC-2R (Rubinsky) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3722/archer-arc-2r-rubinsky). To find the Rifleman variants Rubinsky 1 and Rubinsky 2, you have to search for "Rubinsky 1" and "Rubinsky 2" respectively. Meanwhile, searching for "cat" brings up every unit with the letters c-a-t in the name. (unchecking the BV box worked. my bad.)
-
The Rifleman entries do not have BV. Uncheck the box for only units with BV
-
quo
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5228/thug-thg-11e-reich
Thug THG-11E (Reich): I believe the listed source TRO, Technical Readout: 3050 Upgrade, is incorrect as I can find no mention of it on the Thug's entry, p. 216. Source should be Field Manual: Mercenaries Supplemental 2, p. 64.
correct. fixing. thanks.
-
Getting back to the faction data from GreekFire:
Satyr Jihad Snow Ravens (sources: Wars of Reaving Supplemental, FM:3085) - added
Satyr 2 Jihad Snow Ravens (sources: Wars of Reaving Supplemental) - added
Satyr 4 Jihad Snow Ravens (sources: Wars of Reaving Supplemental, FM:3085) - added
Centaur Jihad Hell's Horses (sources: Wars of Reaving Supplemental, FM:3085, Obj:Clans - mentioned as being in production) - added
Chrysaor 2 Jihad Nova Cats (source: FM:3085) - added
Chrysaor 2 All Wolf-in-Exile (source: Combat Equipment) - added Jihad only (give it at least a year before they make it to them)
Roc Jihad Hell's Horses (source: Wars of Reaving Supplemental, FM:3085) - added
Roc 2 Jihad Nova Cats (source: FM:3085) - added
Roc 2 Jihad Society (source: Wars of Reaving Supplemental) - they do not have the Roc 2. They have the Roc Z
Delphyne Jihad Snow Ravens (source: Wars of Reaving Supplemental) - added
-
*snip*
Hey, thanks a lot for the update cavingjan! Greatly appreciated.
-
Field Manual Mercs cover image fixed.
-
the Picaroon CSR-F100 is missing its image from TRO 3145 FWL
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6517/picaroon-csr-f100
-
Looks like the picture was moved. It's fixed now.
-
Arctic Wolf II
As per this Errata: http://bg.battletech.com/forums/errata/record-sheets-3085-unabridged/30/
And this Errata: http://bg.battletech.com/forums/errata/technical-readout-3085-supplemental/
The Arctic Wolf II Prime should be swapped with the Arctic Wolf II A configuration. Both the BV and the AS Cards should be swapped.
Thank you!
-
Both the Uziel UZL-3S (Jacob) and the UZL-3S (Jacob II) are missing the Wolf's Dragoons from their faction availability. Even as a Unique machine, their respective affiliation is pretty concrete. The Jacob is also listed as "Extinct" in its era, which seems... odd, despite the existence of the Jacob II. There has to be a better way to indicate that they never existed simultaneously than that.
-
Most of the Jihad era Uniques do not have their secondary faction. I'm working on them (unfortunately slowly). I already have the Wolf and Blake mechs tagged.
(I'm also cleaning up and entries that are tagged as Extinct and Unique. They should just be Extinct. Dead is dead even if you were one of a kind.)
Thank you for bringing it up.
-
There's gotta be a better way to mark that. I hate to suggest adding more work for you guys, but perhaps an "Extinct" date, as well as an introduction date? The way the MUL reads now, the Jacob never... actually existed. It just popped as "Extinct" one day.
-
In the case of Jacob, it would not kick in until the next era. No worries there. A unit doesn't get extinct in its first era of its existence. (Now that it is written I'm sure we will find some exception out there.)
Using Butterbee as an example,
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/479/catapult-cplt-c1-jenny-butterbee
The Unique tag should be removed for the Jihad and Extinct should be added to all later eras. That is how they will be handled.
-
Yep, that's what I was hoping for. I just noticed it while writing an article for the Uziel, and had to bring it up.
-
Hey all, hope this is going in the right place, and not sure if its errata or just something I don't understand yet. Was in the process of putting together a Call to Arms force, and in picking the Naginata (any of the variants), there is no LRM#/#/# value in the special abilities. Thanks for the answer when you get a chance, cheers!
-
The Artemis makes it ineligible for LRM (or SRM in the case of Artemis with SRMs)
-
The Lumberjack, specifically the MilitiaMech version (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7177/lumberjack-lm5m-militiamech) has some sort of error with the Alpha Strike card. It won't display, and the direct link doesn't work.
-
Looks like the only stats it has are the size. It shouldn't be trying to display a card.
-
The Lumberjack, specifically the MilitiaMech version (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7177/lumberjack-lm5m-militiamech) has some sort of error with the Alpha Strike card. It won't display, and the direct link doesn't work.
Same here:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7175/uni-atae-70t-cargomech
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7176/jabberwocky-jaw-67-militiamech
Something with those three unit numbers? (7175, 7176, and 7177)
-
I don't think any AS stats were generated for Vehicle Annex except the ones that were found in Operation Klondike. I'll see if we can get some generated and we'll get them posted.
-
So I love the MUL, it's been very handy as a returning Battletech player getting into Alpha Strike!
Would it be possible to tweak/expand the search and results though? When I'm trying to build a new force right now (I'm really new) the MUL is great for providing unit cards and filtering sources and such, but doesn't really help me narrow down unit choices.
So I wanted to build an Assault Lance, and I need 3 mechs of SZ 3+, all with at least 5 Armor, plus one Juggernaught or 2 Snipers.
All I can narrow down is the SZ (80-100 tons) and the role. Using the 3050U as the only source, that kicks back 39 Juggernauts from 80-100 tons. But I have no idea how much armor they have. I can add each one to a force and then see a list of them that shows [A-S] S/M/L (OV), but that's tedious as heck, plus I still won't know their TMM, MV, or Special Abilities. I'll have to open each unit individually just to see those stats on their card.
Frankly it makes the idea of building a force very off-putting.
Two changes I'd love to see to the MUL: First would be to expand what you can filter by with Alpha Strike. At the very least, TMM would be nice, but the more options the better. Second, I really wish the results were more useful for picking units--meaning if they showed the stats that are listed when you add them to your force, including TMM/MV and Specials.
Even if we couldn't get the narrower filters, just having results that included those stats would make it a lot less daunting to pick out units for a force. :)
-
And I just noticed this, the PV numbers are not showing on the faction/era view. The column is there but it is not being populated. Regular search results populate that column properly.
-
Quick question about Royals and their kin: would it be possible to give them a "reintroduction" date to go along with the original date they were introduced? It would be pretty handy for fluffy era play.
-
~~I would LOVE to have the ability to search for special abilities of each mech. I have been trying to build a command lance where each member uses C3I or maybe C3M/C3S. To do this with MUL, I have to filter down to the list of mechs that seem to fit the role I want and then open every single one and check their specials.~~
*EDIT: Thanks Cavingjan and Moonsword.
-
Use the Alpha Strike ability to find a lot of stuff. (C3, C3i, ECM, PRB, etc.)
-
Specifically, go to Units from the nav menu, click the Alpha Strike box, and you'll see an AS Abilities text field as in the screenshot below.
-
The STL ability should be added to the assassin ASN-99 Alpha Strike card
The mech uses stealth armor according to RS3050U Inner Sphere.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/130/assassin-asn-99
Xotl: Corrected, PV increased to 24. Thanks.
-
I believe some of the "Salamandar Battle Armor" PVs somehow got played with (I have previously printed values that no longer match the MUL, but after inspecting the ASC errata, there should not have been a change).
[Anti-Infantry]: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2787/salamander-battle-armor-anti-infantry
10 PV for all 3 "CAR#" values (4, 5, 6)*
[Standard]: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2789/salamander-battle-armor-standard
11 PV for all 3 "CAR#" values (4, 5, 6)
[Laser]: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2788/salamander-battle-armor-laser
10 PV for "CAR4" and "CAR5" cards, [and CAR6]
11 PV for "CAR6"; this card should also have a Short Range Damage value of 3. **
* = [Anti-Infantry] PV calculation (all 3 CAR#s)
. OFV = 4
. . (3+ 0.5*2 + 0) = 4
. DFV = MF + DSAF + DIR = 9.75
. . MF = 1.25
. . . 6"/8" = 0.75 + 0.5 (jump)
. . DSAF = 0.5
. . . 0.5 ~ Fire Resistant "FR" special
. . DIR = 8.0
. . . [(1*2) + (2*2)] * {1 + [1 + 1 (TMM) + 1 (Jump)]/10}
. . . . (6) * (1.3) = 7.8 ~ round to nearest half, or 8
Subtotal = OFV + DFV
. 4 + 9.75 = 13.75
Multiply subtotal by 0.75 (moves less than 10", doesn't deal at least 1 point of damage at Medium)
. 10.3125, round normal (down)
Total PV = 10
** = [Laser] CAR6 value calculation
. Damage = 0.52 @ Short Range
. Troop Factor = 4.5
. . Damage x Troop Factor = 2.34 ~ 3 damage @ Short Range
OFV = 5
. (3 + 0.5*2 + 0) + 1 HT
DFV = MF + DSAF + DIR = 9.75
. MF = 1.25
. . 6"/8" = 0.75 + 0.5 (jump)
. DSAF = 0.5
. . 0.5 ~ Fire Resistant "FR" special
. DIR = 8.0
. . [(1*2) + (2*2)] * {1 + [1 + 1 (TMM) + 1 (Jump)]/10}
. . . (6) * (1.3) = 7.8 ~ round to nearest half, or 8
Subtotal PV = OFV + DFV = 14.75
. 5 + 9.75
Multiply subtotal by 0.75 (moves less than 10", doesn't deal at least 1 point of damage at Medium)
. 11.0625, round normal (down)
Total PV = 11
EDIT: corrected by having values pointed out. Thank you Pa Weasley!
[/size]
-
Recently found this errata that has not made it into the MUL. The Cavalry (Infantry) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/503/cavalry-attack-helicopter-infantry) needs to be corrected and the Cavalry (BA) needs an entry.
Cavalry (Infantry), p. 21
duplicate the sheet, then modify the two:
- remove 1 ton of infantry, increase MG ammo to 200
- rename (BA) variant, remove 1 MG
-
[Snip]
With the errata to p.138
Page 138, Determine Unit's Offensive Value
Count all minimum damage values (0*) as 0.
Change to:
For a minimum damage value (0*) at Short or Long range, add 0.5. For a minimum damage value at Medium Range, add 1.
Damage amounts of 0* count as doing damage. Per ASC p. 141, units like all variants of the Salamander BA, that move 6" and can deliver damage at medium range do not need to have their final point values modified. There's no requirement that the unit can deliver a minimum of 1 damage, just that it delivers damage. A recent update to battle armor listings in the MUL (you'll notice that there are BVs for 4, 5, and 6 man squads) caught these discrepancies and updated them.
** = [Laser] CAR6 value calculation
. Damage = 0.52 @ Short Range
. Troop Factor = 4.5
. . Damage x Troop Factor = 2.34 ~ 3 damage @ Short Range
The Salamander (Laser) BA are equipped with a flamer, and ER micro laser, and a SRM 1 (OS) which do 0.2, 0.2, and 0.02 damage respectively for a total of 0.42. Times the troop factor for CAR6 (4.5) the raw damage value is 1.89 which rounds to 2.
-
With the errata to p.138:
Damage amounts of 0* count as doing damage. Per ASC p. 141, units like all variants of the Salamander BA, that move 6" and can deliver damage at medium range do not need to have their final point values modified. There's no requirement that the unit can deliver a minimum of 1 damage, just that it delivers damage. A recent update to battle armor listings in the MUL (you'll notice that there are BVs for 4, 5, and 6 man squads) caught these discrepancies and updated them.
...
I have already made that edit to my copy of the ASC. The way I had interpreted it, however, was that the "0.5" remains throughout all three range bands, and that the "1" for Medium Range was supposed to just be short-hand for "0.5 + 0.5" (since Medium range is added twice when summing for OFV). Have I assumed wrong?
-
...
The Salamander (Laser) BA are equipped with a flamer, and ER micro laser, and a SRM 1 (OS) which do 0.2, 0.2, and 0.02 damage respectively for a total of 0.42. Times the troop factor for CAR6 (4.5) the raw damage value is 1.89 which rounds to 2.
You... are correct. That's what I get for using old spreadsheets. I will edit my previous post. (sorry for the headache)
-
I have already made that edit to my copy of the ASC. The way I had interpreted it, however, was that the "0.5" remains throughout all three range bands, and that the "1" for Medium Range was supposed to just be short-hand for "0.5 + 0.5" (since Medium range is added twice when summing for OFV). Have I assumed wrong?
Actually, that part you assumed completely correctly. *I* however, made an error and have gone and recalculated the PV of all BA with a medium range damage value of 0*. I've recalcualted the PV of all affected units and will have them all entered ASAP.
*EDIT* Battle armor units with a medium range damage of 0* previously had an incorrect PV. All affected units have been corrected. Cards should update in the next 24 hours.
However, if a unit has a damage value of 0* at a particular range it counts as being able to do damage at that range for the purposes of any final PV modification based on a units speed and maximum range. In other words, none of the Salamander BA are subject to any final PV modifications noted in Step 3 on ASC p. 141.
You... are correct. That's what I get for using old spreadsheets. I will edit my previous post. (sorry for the headache)
If that's from one of my old sheets, I sincerely apologize.
-
The weapon listing for the [Laser] variant of the Salamander you gave is the correct listing (verified when I opened up my 3058 pdf). The only excuse I have is, beside writing the wrong values down, that I included the Anti-Personnel bonus (since the box is unchecked, this error is mine).
I will respect that "might do damage" is a qualifier to negate the PV reduction as you outlined. [I'm not happy about it, but that's an opinion ;) ] Something more clear and definitive should be added to page 141 so someone else doesn't follow my mistake.
And speaking of my mistake, in undoing the *0.75 for all my calcs, I get the following:
. Salamander BA [Standard] 15 PV; OFV = 5 (2 Short, 0.5*2 Medium, 0 Long, 2 HT), DFV = 9.75 (8 DIR, 1.25 MF, 0.5 DSAF)
. Salamander BA [Anti-Infantry] 14 PV; OFV = 4 (3 Short, 0.5*2 Medium, 0 Long), DFV = 9.75 (8 DIR, 1.25 MF, 0.5 DSAF)
. Salamander BA [Laser] 14 PV; OFV = 4 (2 Short, 0.5*2 Medium, 0 Long, 1 HT), DFV = 9.75 (8 DIR, 1.25 MF, 0.5 DSAF)
I hope this helps.
-
If you add multiple identical units, e.g. in the alpha strike force builder they are often reduced back down to a single unit of each type. Some ways to cause this after adding duplicate units:
* Press F5 (refresh page) in the alpha strike force builder
* Navigate from the AS Builder to another page on the master unit list site, then back to the AS builder.
Which means you can't make use of the awesome full paramatised search capability after entering the AS builder if you have any duplicates in your force.
-
Since it was asked elsewhere, I'll ask it here, any idea when the new artwork for the unseens will be used on the MUL and AS cards? Is that something where we need to wait for the artwork to appear in a published product or is the preview artwork good enough?
-
Since it was asked elsewhere, I'll ask it here, any idea when the new artwork for the unseens will be used on the MUL and AS cards? Is that something where we need to wait for the artwork to appear in a published product or is the preview artwork good enough?
When its published, or TPTB tell us to, whichever is sooner. I don't recall an instance of the second happening yet though, so unless something surprising happens, when it's published.
-
Could I put in a feature request? I think it'd be fantastic to be able to choose the number of cards the AS Force Builder prints per sheet. 8 per sheet in two columns is easy enough to organize for IS units, but Clan, C*/WOB, Marian, and other odd balls get left out in the ease of access. Being able to choose whether 3, 4, or 5 cards printed per column would be fantastic.
-
Could I put in a feature request? I think it'd be fantastic to be able to choose the number of cards the AS Force Builder prints per sheet. 8 per sheet in two columns is easy enough to organize for IS units, but Clan, C*/WOB, Marian, and other odd balls get left out in the ease of access. Being able to choose whether 3, 4, or 5 cards printed per column would be fantastic.
The same goes for Battle Armor formations when using the Force Builder. Unless I missed it, all the BA formations default to 4-man squads.
-
I've done a search on posts in this forum, and can't see this reported previously, so here goes:
The Fa Shih TAG variant doesn't have the "LTAG" special ability. Each suit in the squad carries a Light TAG, so I'd expect it to be present.
Link to MUL here: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1018/fa-shih-battle-armor-tag
Recommended fix - add LTAG to this suit.
Cheers, and thanks for the hard work,
W. O0
-
Sorry about that. All squad sizes have been corrected. CAR4 should update in the next 24 hours.
-
Thank you.
Thank you, thank you, thank you.
And thanks!
Nckestrel just pointed out that I can search on AS role via the Basic Filters. So if I need a Capellan Brawler available during the Jihad, it's but a moment's work.
This is, indeed, wonderful.
So thanks to all the people who munge the data and shepherd the bytes.
Thanks!
W.
-
The Vindicator VND-1X is missing special ability IF* from its Alpha Strike card. http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3425/vindicator-vnd-1x
The VND-1R does have it, as do other Vindicator variants that mount an LRM-5.
-
When its published, or TPTB tell us to, whichever is sooner. I don't recall an instance of the second happening yet though, so unless something surprising happens, when it's published.
OTOH, wasn't the lineart for the Marauder and Whammie "published" in the recent Alpha Strike Quick Start Rules? Or does it have to be in an actual print publication for it to count as published?
-
Reporting a bug: AlphaStrike cards for Protomechs are not listing "Skill" and their values on the individual Unit Cards
These values still appear on the list generated when using the Force Builder tool and cost an appropriate amount of PV.
-
Reporting a bug: Rommel (Howitzer) and the Howitzer prototype AlphaStrike cards are missing the ARTLTC-1 in their respective TUR specials. (The card does list the special, they're just not listed in the turret)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4934/rommel-tank-howitzer
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4933/rommel-tank-howitzer-prototype
Xotl: fixed, thanks!
-
I'm working on a (personal) project involving the MUL and noticed this.
Possible availability bug. The Cephalus Omni has some that seem 'off'.
Cephalus <Base>; Cephalus Prime; Cephalus A - Availability in Jihad AND Early Republic
Cephalus B; Cephalus C; Cephalus D; Cephalus E; Cephalus U - Available ONLY in Jihad Era
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
As a side note, though I'm not very far through the MUL, I've noticed that nothing seems to have availabilities in the Age of War, Star League, Early Succession Wars, and Late Republic Eras. (I read that most won't have a Dark Ages availability). Is this something that's being worked on or just not available yet?
-
The Cephalus does not have any availability data for Republic Era. It is To Be Announced.
The other areas are being worked upon but they take time. The volume of units and in the early eras, tracking down information takes a lot of time.
-
The Cephalus does not have any availability data for Republic Era. It is To Be Announced.
The other areas are being worked upon but they take time. The volume of units and in the early eras, tracking down information takes a lot of time.
Gotcha, and yeah I COMPLETELY understand about the time factor. There is just about a metric ton of sourcebooks to go through, what's been done so far is already amazing!
On that note though, I noticed something else:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3979/commando-com-7x
This Commando variant doesn't seem to have any TRO or RS link or product info and it's BV and PV are listed as N/A. It does have availability info though.
-
That is not uncommon.
-
This might be more of a question than an errata at this point. Didn't really know whereas to ask, but since I caught this while doing BV checks, I figured I'd ask here.
The Rifleman IIC 6 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2715/rifleman-iic-6) is listed as having a BV of 2,251, which matches the unit pre-loaded in SSW.
My calculation has the BV at 2,220, which matches the unit pre-loaded in MML.
The difference appears to be due to the fact that SSW version has an ER Small Laser mounted in the head. The unit as it appears in Record Sheets: 3085 Unabridged — Project Phoenix does not have this ER Small Laser, but it is half a ton underweight. I could not find errata anywhere which stated the RS in the official product is incorrect. So, do you know if the RS is correct, at which point the MUL is wrong?
-
The BV for the Jenner JR10-X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1686/jenner-jr10-x) is listed incorrectly as 1,269. I've actually no idea where this number comes from. The number in SSW matches the record sheet with 1,452. This number is also incorrect, however. My calculations (below) show the BV as 1,419, which also matches that in MML.
==================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Light Ferro-Fibrous): 139 x 2.5 x 1 347.500
Internal Structure (Composite w/ XL Engine): 58 x 1.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 (+) 21.750 = 369.250
Gyro (Compact): 35 x 0.5 (+) 17.500 = 386.750
Defensive Equipment:
Angel ECM Suite (+) 100.000 = 486.750
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (w/ Null-Signature) (*) 1.60 = 778.800
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 778.800
==================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Medium Laser 46.000
Medium Laser (+) 46.000 = 92.000
Medium Laser (+) 46.000 = 138.000
Medium Laser (+) 46.000 = 184.000
Medium Laser (+) 46.000 = 230.000
Medium Laser (+) 46.000 = 276.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 35.000 = 311.000
Speed Factor: 11 (Run) + 4 (Jump) (*) 2.300 = 715.300
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 715.300
==================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 778.800
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 715.300 = 1,494.100
Cockpit (Torso-Mounted): (*) 0.95 = 1,419.395
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,419
-
The 1,269 value is correct. Per this (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=48436.msg1127538#msg1127538) TacOps errata, the heat from the Null-Signature System is now factored into BV calculations. Same goes for the Chameleon Light Polarization Shield and the Void-Signature System. All parts of your calculations were correct except that due to the above errata, three of the six medium lasers have their BVs halved due to the cumulative heat exceeding the 'Mechs calculated heat efficiency.
-
OTOH, wasn't the lineart for the Marauder and Whammie "published" in the recent Alpha Strike Quick Start Rules? Or does it have to be in an actual print publication for it to count as published?
And Marauders and Warhammers are updated....
-
Two changes I'd love to see to the MUL: First would be to expand what you can filter by with Alpha Strike. At the very least, TMM would be nice, but the more options the better. Second, I really wish the results were more useful for picking units--meaning if they showed the stats that are listed when you add them to your force, including TMM/MV and Specials.
Even if we couldn't get the narrower filters, just having results that included those stats would make it a lot less daunting to pick out units for a force. :)
I'm running into similar issues now. I'd like to add that it would also be helpful to see each unit's full set of specials. Comparing units and weighing options comes with so much overhead when I have to open every single unit.
I also have been cross referencing every unit in sarna.net, since there I can find helpful writeups about each unit's history and usage in canon. If there were a simple url link to the sarna page, that would speed up my process significantly.
-
The 1,269 value is correct. Per this (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=48436.msg1127538#msg1127538) TacOps errata, the heat from the Null-Signature System is now factored into BV calculations. Same goes for the Chameleon Light Polarization Shield and the Void-Signature System. All parts of your calculations were correct except that due to the above errata, three of the six medium lasers have their BVs halved due to the cumulative heat exceeding the 'Mechs calculated heat efficiency.
Thanks. I should've known this since I was the cause (or at least asked the question that sparked the change) of the heat now being factored into the BV!! :)
-
The BV for the Goliath GOL-5W is listed incorrectly as 2,030. My calculations, along with those of MML and SSW, all come to 2,006. So I'm not sure where the calculation may be off (perhaps not factoring heat for Stealth??). Here is my breakdown:
================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Stealth): 263 x 2.5 x 1 657.500
Internal Structure (Standard w/ Fusion Engine): 130 x 1.5 x 1 x 1 (+) 195.000 = 852.500
Gyro (Standard): 80 x 0.5 (+) 40.000 = 892.500
Defensive Equipment:
Guardian ECM Suite (+) 61.000 = 953.500
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (w/ Stealth) (*) 1.40 = 1,334.900
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,334.900
================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Medium Laser 46.000
Medium Laser (+) 46.000 = 92.000
Medium Laser (+) 23.000 = 115.000
Plasma Rifle (+) 210.000 = 325.000
Plasma Rifle (+) 210.000 = 535.000
Plasma Rifle (Ammo 10) (+) 26.000 = 561.000
Plasma Rifle (Ammo 10) (+) 26.000 = 587.000
Plasma Rifle (Ammo 10) (+) 26.000 = 613.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 80.000 = 693.000
Speed Factor: 6 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.120 = 776.160
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 776.160
================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,334.900
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 776.160 = 2,111.060
Cockpit (Small): (*) 0.95 = 2,005.507
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 2,006
-
The BV for the Vindicator VND-3LD (Dao) is listed incorrectly as 1,657. My calculations, along with those of MML, come to 1,639. SSW calculates it as 1,814, which also matches the record sheet. So I'm not sure where the calculation may be off. Here is my breakdown I have:
===================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Ferro-Fibrous): 153 x 2.5 x 1 382.500
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ Compact Engine): 75 x 1.5 x 1 x 1 (+) 112.500 = 495.000
Gyro (Compact): 45 x 0.5 (+) 22.500 = 517.500
Defensive Equipment:
Laser Anti-Missile System (+) 45.000 = 562.500
Explosive Ammunition: 1 Critical Space (-) 15.000 = 547.500
Explosive Equipment: 3 Critical Spaces (-) 3.000 = 544.500
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (*) 1.30 = 707.850
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 707.850
===================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER PPC 515.000
Mech Taser (+) 50.000 = 565.000
Mech Taser (Ammo 5) (+) 5.000 = 570.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 54.000 = 624.000
Speed Factor: 8 (Run) + 2 (Jump) (*) 1.630 = 1,017.120
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,017.120
===================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 707.850
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,017.120 = 1,724.970
Cockpit (Small): (*) 0.95 = 1,638.722
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,639
-
I noticed the Ti Ts'ang TSG-9H (Jason), as detailed in Dossiers: Jason Zaklan (http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=2747) is not listed in the MUL. Is this an omission or is this intentional for some reason?
-
Hmm. I thought i had them all up there. This would be an omission. I'll see about adding them this week.
-
The BV for the Goliath GOL-5W is listed incorrectly as 2,030. My calculations, along with those of MML and SSW, all come to 2,006.
You're spot on. Updated.
The BV for the Vindicator VND-3LD (Dao) is listed incorrectly as 1,657. My calculations, along with those of MML, come to 1,639.
Once again spot on. Updated.
Thank you much mordel.
-
The BV for the Rifleman RFL-9T (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2707/rifleman-rfl-9t) is listed incorrectly as 1,416. My calculations, along with those of MML, come to 1,503. SSW also calculates it as 1,416. Part of the difference appears to be due to heat from Stealth armor, but the totals for weapon BV don't even come close to adding up right. So probably multiple things going on with SSW. Here is the breakdown I have:
===============================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Stealth): 152 x 2.5 x 1 380.000
Internal Structure (Standard w/ Fusion Engine): 99 x 1.5 x 1 x 1 (+) 148.500 = 528.500
Gyro (Standard): 60 x 0.5 (+) 30.000 = 558.500
Defensive Equipment:
Guardian ECM Suite (+) 61.000 = 619.500
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (w/ Stealth) (*) 1.40 = 867.300
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 867.300
===============================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Medium Laser 77.500
ER Medium Laser (+) 38.750 = 116.250
Light AC/5 (+) 77.500 = 193.750
Light AC/5 (+) 77.500 = 271.250
Light AC/5 (Ammo 20) (+) 8.000 = 279.250
Light AC/5 (Ammo 20) (+) 8.000 = 287.250
Light PPC (+) 110.000 = 397.250
Light PPC (+) 110.000 = 507.250
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 60.000 = 567.250
Speed Factor: 6 (Run) + 0 (Jump)(*) 1.120 = 635.320
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 635.320
===============================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 867.300
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 635.320 = 1,502.620
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,503
-
The BV for the Rifleman RFL-9T (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2707/rifleman-rfl-9t) is listed incorrectly as 1,416. My calculations, along with those of MML, come to 1,503.
You're spot on. Updated. Thank you.
-
I'm not sure what the picture is, but it doesn't seem to be the Clan Interface Armor (which shares an image with the Machina Domini version of the Interface Armor).
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7387/clan-interface-armor-standard
Fix: Change the picture :) What is that anyway, the Space Station from HB:CapCon or something?
-
It appears that out default image was changed to the space station. It doesn't really matter as I just added the images. The AS cards should regenerate tonight with the images.
-
The FLE-4 is missing Wolf's Dragoons faction availability. It was introduced (in canon sources, anyway) in the WD sourcebook, is noted as being manufactured for them under contract, and the FLE-15 is available to the Dragoons.
-
Two minor requests:
Datatable sorting
It'd be nice to be able to sort by columns on the Alpha Strike Force Builder search results because sometimes the results list can be a bit long and they're not usually in alphabetical order. I'd like to see at least the Name, Intro (Era) and PV columns being sortable.
Since it appears that the JQuery DataTables class is being used it should be a trivial (one or two lines of Javascript) feature addition :)
(http://jdgwf.com/bt/screenshots/mul-feature-request-sorting.png)
Alpha Strike Card Point Cost
I've noticed that the pricing on the Alpha Strike cards preview images doesn't change with the skill level, but the skill rating on the card does. Could this be fixed? It's probably a non-issue since the PDF creator does the calculations correctly, though and these images are for preview for the most part.
(http://jdgwf.com/bt/screenshots/mul-awesome-skill4.png)
(http://jdgwf.com/bt/screenshots/mul-awesome-skill3.png)
-
The FLE-4 is missing Wolf's Dragoons faction availability. It was introduced (in canon sources, anyway) in the WD sourcebook, is noted as being manufactured for them under contract, and the FLE-15 is available to the Dragoons.
It looks like the new Fleas made for the dragoons were not the -4 but the -15 model. It looks like they should probably have access but only for the LosTech era. Two FLE-4 mechs doesn't justify access to it in the post 4SW eras.
-
Some Alpha Strike Force Builder requests:
1. As unit skill values are changed, it would be nice to have an average computed and the Point Value Skill Rating for the force displayed (i.e, Regular, Veteran, Elite, etc.). This would allow folks creating forces based on the new Combat Manual books to know they're in compliance for the unit they're modeling.
2. Allow reordering of units after they've been added to the list to facilitate grouping into Formations to be printed together. For example, if a choice is changed and the 3rd unit added to the force is deleted and a replacement added, the new unit appears at the bottom of the list and an entire force of 12 must be rebuilt in order to get the Lances to print together.
3. Once a Formation has skills assigned and units grouped into Lances (or Stars or Level IIs), it would be nice to be able to assign SCAs and SPAs and perhaps have cards generated with those reference descriptions. Alternatively, SCA and SPA descriptions could appear on the Unit List summary page if formatting them on cards is undesirable for some reason.
4. Save / Load ability to avoid regenerating Formations from scratch every time. Perhaps a simple XML file with Unit IDs and Skill ratings would do. Everything else could be requeried or recomputed from the database upon Load.
Thanks for all the truly EXCELLENT work on this to date. It's an amazing resource.
-
I think the BV for the Lich UABM-2R (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7385/lich-uabm-2r) is incorrect. It's difficult to tell because the BV calculations for this unit in MML and SSW are all over the place and don't match what is listed in the MUL nor what my calculations come out to. The MUL lists the BV as 1,719. My calculation yields 1,712. I know the calculation is tricky because of how the armor multiplier is applied per location. Here's my calculation:
==========================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 272 x 2.5 x 1 (w/ HarJel) 711.750
Internal Structure (Endo-Composite w/ XL Engine): 146 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 109.500 = 821.250
Gyro (Standard): 90 x 0.5 (+) 45.000 = 866.250
Defensive Equipment:
Angel ECM Suite (+) 100.000 = 966.250
Explosive Equipment: 3 Critical Spaces (-) 3.000 = 963.250
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (*) 1.20 = 1,155.900
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,155.900
==========================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Large Laser (C) 198.400
ER Large Laser (C) (+) 198.400 = 396.800
Light Gauss Rifle (+) 63.600 = 460.400
Light Gauss Rifle (+) 63.600 = 524.000
Light Gauss Rifle (Ammo 16) (+) 16.000 = 540.000
Light Gauss Rifle (Ammo 16) (+) 16.000 = 556.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 90.000 = 646.000
Speed Factor: 5 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.000 = 646.000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 646.000
==========================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,155.900
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 646.000 = 1,801.900
Cockpit (Drone): (*) 0.95 = 1,711.805
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,712
-
The BV for the Raptor II RPT-2X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2657/raptor-ii-rpt-2x) is incorrectly listed as 936. My calculations along with those of MML generate a BV of 896. I believe the discrepancy could be related to the recent errata concerning the Void-Signature System and its heat impact towards BV. My calculations are as follows:
===================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Light Ferro-Fibrous): 118 x 2.5 x 1 295.000
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 67 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 50.250 = 345.250
Gyro (Standard): 40 x 0.5 (+) 20.000 = 365.250
Defensive Equipment:
Guardian ECM Suite (+) 61.000 = 426.250
Explosive Ammunition: 2 Critical Spaces (-) 30.000 = 396.250
Explosive Equipment: 3 Critical Spaces (-) 3.000 = 393.250
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (w/ Void-Signature) (*) 1.40 = 550.550
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 550.550
===================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Mech Taser 20.000
Mech Taser (Ammo 5) (+) 5.000 = 25.000
Mech Taser (Ammo 5) (+) 5.000 = 30.000
Medium VSP Laser (+) 56.000 = 86.000
Medium VSP Laser (+) 56.000 = 142.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 40.000 = 182.000
Speed Factor: 14 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 2.160 = 393.120
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 393.120
===================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 550.550
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 393.120 = 943.670
Cockpit (Small): (*) 0.95 = 896.487
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 896
-
The BV for the Raptor II RPT-2X1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2658/raptor-ii-rpt-2x1) is incorrectly listed as 1471. My calculations along with those of MML generate a BV of 1274. I believe the discrepancy could be related to the recent errata concerning the Void-Signature System and its heat impact towards BV. My calculations are as follows:
===================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Light Ferro-Fibrous): 118 x 2.5 x 1 295.000
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 67 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 50.250 = 345.250
Gyro (Standard): 40 x 0.5 (+) 20.000 = 365.250
Defensive Equipment:
Bloodhound Active Probe (+) 25.000 = 390.250
Guardian ECM Suite (+) 61.000 = 451.250
Explosive Ammunition: 1 Critical Space (-) 15.000 = 436.250
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (w/ Void-Signature) (*) 1.40 = 610.750
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 610.750
===================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Large Laser 163.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 31.000 = 194.000
ER Small Laser (R) (+) 4.250 = 198.250
Streak SRM 6 (+) 89.000 = 287.250
Streak SRM 6 (Ammo 15) (+) 11.000 = 298.250
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 40.000 = 338.250
Speed Factor: 14 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 2.160 = 730.620
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 730.620
===================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 610.750
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 730.620 = 1,341.370
Cockpit (Small): (*) 0.95 = 1,274.302
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,274
-
I think the BV for the Lich UABM-2R (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7385/lich-uabm-2r) is incorrect. It's difficult to tell because the BV calculations for this unit in MML and SSW are all over the place and don't match what is listed in the MUL nor what my calculations come out to. The MUL lists the BV as 1,719. My calculation yields 1,712. I know the calculation is tricky because of how the armor multiplier is applied per location. Here's my calculation:
The 1,719 is correct. You applied the 0.8 BV modifier to the Light Gauss Rifle's ammo which p.381 of TacOps notes not to do.
I suspect your Raptor II calculations are correct and I mis-clicked with I updated affect BVs with the Void Sig errata. I'll be able to verify a bit later tonight.
-
The 1,719 is correct. You applied the 0.8 BV modifier to the Light Gauss Rifle's ammo which p.381 of TacOps notes not to do.
You are correct (of course). Sorry about that. I usually manage to figure out what's wrong with my calculation or the MUL based on what I see in MML and/or SSW. But because these were way off this time, I was stumped. The more you know...
-
mordel - Both of your Raptor II calculations check out and both entries have been updated. Thanks for catching those.
-
Another Raptor BV issue, this time with the Raptor II RPT-3X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2659/raptor-ii-rpt-3x). This one does not appear to be related to the Void-Signature System though as my calculations; as well as those from MML, come out to 1304. The BV listed in the MUL is 1301. SSW is way off, so not 100% sure where the discrepancy is. Here is my BV breakdown.
===================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Light Ferro-Fibrous): 127 x 2.5 x 1 317.500
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 67 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 50.250 = 367.750
Gyro (Standard): 40 x 0.5 (+) 20.000 = 387.750
Defensive Equipment:
Guardian ECM Suite (+) 61.000 = 448.750
Explosive Ammunition: 2 Critical Spaces (-) 30.000 = 418.750
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (w/ Void-Signature) (*) 1.40 = 586.250
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 586.250
===================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Medium Laser 62.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 62.000 = 124.000
Streak SRM 6 (+) 89.000 = 213.000
Streak SRM 6 (+) 89.000 = 302.000
Streak SRM 6 (Ammo 15) (+) 11.000 = 313.000
Streak SRM 6 (Ammo 15) (+) 11.000 = 324.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 40.000 = 364.000
Speed Factor: 14 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 2.160 = 786.240
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 786.240
===================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 586.250
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 786.240 = 1,372.490
Cockpit (Small): (*) 0.95 = 1,303.866
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,304
-
Also correct and the entry has been updated. Thanks again.
-
It would be really nice to have a filter feature that resulted in a list of Units UNIQUE to a Faction in a given period. Put another way for example, the option to select Capellan Confederation and exclude all other Faction affiliation.
That would really help new players quickly give a distinctive faction flavor to their builds.
-
The D-M3D-3 Diomede (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/901/diomede-d-m3d-3-constructionmech)'s Alpha Strike card lists it as having basic fire control, while TRO 3085 page 111 has a note specifically saying the Diomede has advanced fire control. The Diomede-4 is also listed with BFC, though the TRO has no note clarifying this issue for that variant, and their record sheets don't say anything either way. Might have to ask whoever designed the thing.
-
The BV for the Stealth STH-5X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5130/stealth-sth-5x) is incorrectly listed as 2222. My calculations along with those of MML come to 2155. I believe the issue may be due to the recent errata regarding the Chameleon LPS and its impact on heat efficiency ratings. Below if my calculation:
=================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Ferro-Fibrous): 143 x 2.5 x 1 357.500
Internal Structure (Composite w/ XL Engine): 75 x 1.5 x 0.5 x 0.5 (+) 28.125 = 385.625
Gyro (Standard): 45 x 0.5 (+) 22.500 = 408.125
Defensive Equipment:
Active Probe (C) (+) 12.000 = 420.125
ECM Suite (C) (+) 61.000 = 481.125
Explosive Ammunition: 1 Critical Space (-) 15.000 = 466.125
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (w/ Chameleon LPS) (*) 1.60 = 745.800
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 745.800
=================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Flamer 8.000
ER Flamer (+) 8.000 = 16.000
ER Medium Laser (C) (+) 108.000 = 124.000
ER Medium Laser (C) (+) 108.000 = 232.000
ER Medium Laser (C) (+) 108.000 = 340.000
Streak SRM 6 (C) (+) 118.000 = 458.000
Streak SRM 6 (Ammo 15) (C) (+) 15.000 = 473.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 45.000 = 518.000
Speed Factor: 14 (Run) + 4 (Jump) (*) 2.720 = 1,408.960
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,408.960
=================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 745.800
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,408.960 = 2,154.760
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 2,155
-
Correct, entry updated. Thank you again.
-
I noticed that all units with a single AC 5 do not have the AC ability listed (AC0/1/1). This appears to be an error in rounding for the AC ability as the Companion states "As a general rule, the attack values for damage-delivering special unit abilities such as AC#/#/#, LRM#/#/#, and SRM#/# are computed by adding together the specific damage values for all of the appropriate weapons involved, then rounding the result normally."
I have found no relevant errata to explain this.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3514/warrior-attack-helicopter-h-7a
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6664/scapha-hovertank-f
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3395/vedette-medium-tank-standard
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2898/shadow-hawk-shd-1r
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2899/shadow-hawk-shd-2d
-
A unit must have at least 10 damage in AC (or SRM or LRM) to qualify. (Or 1 if using the Alpha Strike Companion tables that are already divided by 10).
-
Then is this an errata? Because this is not what the Companion states. According to the Companion P116, the damage should be rounded normally.
Special Unit Ability Damage Values
As a general rule, the attack values for damage-delivering
special unit abilities such as AC#/#/#, LRM#/#/#, and SRM#/# are
computed by adding together the specific damage values for all
of the appropriate weapons involved, then rounding the result
normally.This is similar to how a unit’s normal attack values
are computed, except that these values include only those for
the weapons specified by the ability, and are not subject to
heat modification. The special unit ability that applies for any
given weapon system is noted in its entry on the appropriate
conversion tables.
-
The conversion rules for AC on pg 120 specifically states that it must deliver at least 1 point of damage at medium range after heat reduction to qualify.
-
ASC p. 120 Autocannons (AC#/#/#)
A unit receives this special if it carries any number of light or standard autocannons that can deliver 1 or more points
of damage at Medium range after heat-modification and before final damage value rounding.
ASC p.126 Long-Range Missiles (LRM#/#/#)
A unit receives this special if it carries any number of standard or enhanced LRM and/or MML launchers that, when
combined, are capable of delivering 1 or more points of damage at Medium range after heat-modification and before final damage value rounding.
ASC p. 131 Short-Range Missiles (SRM#/#)
A unit receives this special if it carries any number of standard SRM and/or MML launchers that, when combined, are capable of delivering 1 or more points of damage at Medium range after heat-modification and before final damage value rounding.
So if there isn't at least one point of damage for a particular special ability at medium range prior to final rounding, the unit doesn't qualify for that particular type of special ability.
-
Both variants of the scarabus have TSM which only works when a mech hits a heat scale of 1 or more but neither scarabus has an OV value. Neither is able to activate their TSM
-
Both variants of the scarabus have TSM which only works when a mech hits a heat scale of 1 or more but neither scarabus has an OV value. Neither is able to activate their TSM
This is covered in the current AS errata, which allows them to activate it.
-
Not sure if this is the place to post this but:
The Chameleon TRC-4B (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/546/chameleon-trc-4b) in the MUL shows the unit is available in the RS 3058 Uu-I but when I check the actually book that unit doesn't exist.
But there is a Chameleon CLN-4V which is missing from the MUL. I'm wondering if these are different units or the same. If they are the same which would be the correct designation.
Thanks
-
Chameleon designation was errata'd.
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=5933.msg173715#msg173715
-
Chameleon designation was errata'd.
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=5933.msg173715#msg173715
Thanks. Missed that one.
-
Hello
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3110/stuka-stu-k5
On the Aerospace fighter cards the Engine Hit critical is listed as "1/4" move. The Critical hit as described in Alpha strike page 58 says...
Engine Hit (Aerospace Fighters, Conventional Fighters, and Fixed-Wing Support Vehicles):
The unit’s power system is damaged. For fighters and fixed-wing support vehicles, the first engine hit reduces the unit to half its Thrust rating (round down, to a minimum of 1 Thrust lost).
Is the 1/4 move is error and should be corrected to one half.
Thanks
-
Although I know it's still a "draft" era, the availabilities for the Skandi VTOL seem funky for the Early Republic time period.
-
Although I know it's still a "draft" era, the availabilities for the Skandi VTOL seem funky for the Early Republic time period.
You are going to have to be more specific.
Note the intro date of 3099, and the Early Republic era ends in 3100. It didn't spread to everyone that first year.
Or is there a specific faction that should or should not be listed?
-
You are going to have to be more specific.
Note the intro date of 3099, and the Early Republic era ends in 3100. It didn't spread to everyone that first year.
Or is there a specific faction that should or should not be listed?
Sorry, right. It was first produced by the Jade Falcons on Pandora (they're missing from the faction list), but I'd also be surprised if the Republic of the Sphere were to buy it from them. Then the Lyrans took control of the planet at some point, but I'm not sure when that happened.
-
Yeah. It looks like its production got moved during development of 3145...checking to make sure I'm not missing anything else...
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5610/battle-taxi-nl-43
This is listed as being 200 tons, but this is in fact the 100 ton Fighter from XTRO Phantoms. The rest of the data is correct (it shows up under Fighters in the MUL). However, the image is wrong as it should use the image of the NL-42 according to XTRO Phantoms.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5610/battle-taxi-nl-43
This is listed as being 200 tons, but this is in fact the 100 ton Fighter from XTRO Phantoms. The rest of the data is correct (it shows up under Fighters in the MUL). However, the image is wrong as it should use the image of the NL-42 according to XTRO Phantoms.
Tonnage fixed. Unless I'm missing some errata somewhere, that is the image out of the XTRO and directly from the record sheet.
-
Entry 2978, "Sniper House Dai Dai Chi Snipers."
Problem/solution: As above, this is listed (and on its card) as "House Dai Dai Chi." Per TR3085 (and other sources), should be "Dai Da Chi."
-
Entry 2978, "Sniper House Dai Dai Chi Snipers."
Problem/solution: As above, this is listed (and on its card) as "House Dai Dai Chi." Per TR3085 (and other sources), should be "Dai Da Chi."
fixed
-
Sorry, right. It was first produced by the Jade Falcons on Pandora (they're missing from the faction list), but I'd also be surprised if the Republic of the Sphere were to buy it from them. Then the Lyrans took control of the planet at some point, but I'm not sure when that happened.
Yep, I missed the change. Skadi is Clan Jade Falcon only for the Early Republic era.
-
according to the MUL the Grenadier II D configuration is available only to the RoTS and not to the FS.
However we have the following description from XTRO:Republic volume 3 page 16 "Having self-supporting artillery deployed by battle armor also added to the Capellans’ confusion
on Marlette."
According to TRO 3150 the defending unit that fought on this FS world was the 5th Crucis Lancers, a FS unit.
It seems to me this configuration should also be available to the FS.
-
The Battle Value for the Wendigo C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6406/wendigo-c) appears to be incorrectly listed as 2,548. My calculations along with those from MML come out to 2,623. The calculations are as follows:
================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Laser Reflective): 182 x 2.5 x 1.5 682.500
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 83 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.75 (+) 93.375 = 775.875
Gyro (Standard): 50 x 0.5 (+) 25.000 = 800.875
Explosive Equipment: 4 Critical Spaces (-) 4.000 = 796.875
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (*) 1.40 = 1,115.625
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,115.625
================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Small Laser 15.500
Improved Heavy Large Laser (+) 296.000 = 311.500
Improved Heavy Medium Laser (+) 93.000 = 404.500
Improved Heavy Medium Laser (+) 93.000 = 497.500
Streak LRM 15 (+) 259.000 = 756.500
Streak LRM 15 (Ammo 8) (+) 32.000 = 788.500
Streak LRM 15 (Ammo 8) (+) 32.000 = 820.500
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 50.000 = 870.500
Speed Factor: 12 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.890 = 1,645.245
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,645.245
================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,115.625
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,645.245 = 2,760.870
Cockpit (Torso-Mounted): (*) 0.95 = 2,622.827
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 2,623
-
The Battle Value for the Wendigo C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6406/wendigo-c) appears to be incorrectly listed as 2,548. My calculations along with those from MML come out to 2,623. The calculations are as follows:
Looks correct to me. Entry has been corrected.
-
Hi!
The MUL stat cards for Nephilim battle armour - http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=nephilim - all show movement 4".
Other non-jumping BA, such as the Shedu, Se'irim, or (for the heretics) Grenadier, show their movement as being foot mode - eg. 6"f, 6"f, and 4"f respectively.
Suggested correction - update the Nephilim entries to show movement 4"f.
Cheers,
W.
-
Nice catch, all Nephilim entries corrected. Thank you much.
-
The Battle Value for the Quickdraw QKD-8X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2617/quickdraw-qkd-8x) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,580. My calculations along with those from MML come out to 1,612. Not quite sure where the discrepancy may lie. The calculations are as follows:
=================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Stealth): 232 x 2.5 x 1 580.000
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ Fusion Engine): 99 x 1.5 x 1 x 1 (+) 148.500 = 728.500
Gyro (Compact): 60 x 0.5 (+) 30.000 = 758.500
Defensive Equipment:
Guardian ECM Suite (+) 61.000 = 819.500
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (w/ Stealth) (*) 1.50 = 1,229.250
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,229.250
=================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Medium Laser (R) 23.000
Medium Laser (R) (+) 23.000 = 46.000
PPC (T) (+) 176.000 = 222.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 90.000 = 312.000
Speed Factor: 9 (Run) + 0 (Jump)(*) 1.500 = 468.000
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 468.000
=================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,229.250
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 468.000 = 1,697.250
Cockpit (Torso-Mounted): (*) 0.95 = 1,612.388
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,612
-
The Battle Value for the Violator VT-U1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6503/violator-vt-u1) appears to be incorrectly listed as 926. My calculations along with those from MML come out to 928. Not quite sure where the discrepancy may lie. The calculations are as follows:
=================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 144 x 2.5 x 1 360.000
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ Fusion Engine): 75 x 1.5 x 1 x 1 (+) 112.500 = 472.500
Gyro (Standard): 45 x 0.5 (+) 22.500 = 495.000
Armored Components:
Cockpit (+) 5.000 = 500.000
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (*) 1.30 = 650.000
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 650.000
=================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Claws 8.925
Mining Drill (+) 6.000 = 14.925
MRM 10 (Ammo 24) (+) 7.000 = 21.925
MRM 10 (Ammo 24) (+) 7.000 = 28.925
MRM 10 (+) 64.400 = 93.325
MRM 10 (+) 64.400 = 157.725
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 45.000 = 202.725
Speed Factor: 8 (Run) + 0 (Jump)(*) 1.370 = 277.733
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 277.733
=================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 650.000
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 277.733 = 927.733
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 928
-
The Battle Value for the Tenshi TN-10-OA (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6422/tenshi-tn-10-oa) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,830. My calculations come out to 1,829 (a small difference). MML appears way off because they subtract 15 for some reason. Probably just some rounding error, my calculations are as follows:
===============================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 293 x 2.5 x 1 732.500
Internal Structure (Endo-Composite w/ Light Fusion Engine): 145 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.75 (+) 163.125 = 895.625
Gyro (Compact): 95 x 0.5 (+) 47.500 = 943.125
Explosive Equipment: 2 Critical Spaces (-) 2.000 = 941.125
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (*) 1.20 = 1,129.350
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,129.350
===============================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Large VSP Laser 123.000
Large VSP Laser (+) 123.000 = 246.000
Large VSP Laser (+) 123.000 = 369.000
MRM 30 (Ammo 8) (+) 21.000 = 390.000
MRM 30 (Ammo 8) (+) 21.000 = 411.000
MRM 30 (+) 193.200 = 604.200
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 95.000 = 699.200
Speed Factor: 5 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.000 = 699.200
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 699.200
===============================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,129.350
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 699.200 = 1,828.550
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,829
-
The Battle Value for the Beowulf BEO-14 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/328/beowulf-beo-14) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,265. My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 1,287. My calculations are as follows:
=============================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Ferro-Fibrous): 152 x 2.5 x 1 380.000
Internal Structure (Standard w/ XL Engine): 75 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 56.250 = 436.250
Gyro (Standard): 45 x 0.5 (+) 22.500 = 458.750
Defensive Equipment:
Beagle Active Probe (+) 10.000 = 468.750
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (*) 1.40 = 656.250
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 656.250
=============================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Medium Laser 62.000
ER Small Laser (+) 17.000 = 79.000
ER Small Laser (+) 8.500 = 87.500
Medium VSP Laser (+) 56.000 = 143.500
Medium VSP Laser (+) 56.000 = 199.500
Small Laser (+) 4.500 = 204.000
Sword (+) 20.700 = 224.700
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 67.500 = 292.200
Speed Factor: 11 (Run) + 3 (Jump) (*) 2.160 = 631.152
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 631.152
=============================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 656.250
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 631.152 = 1,287.402
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,287
-
The Battle Value for the Ti Ts'ang TSG-9C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3252/ti-tsang-tsg-9c) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,950. My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 1,989. My calculations are as follows:
===============================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 200 x 2.5 x 1 500.000
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 99 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 74.250 = 574.250
Gyro (Standard): 60 x 0.5 (+) 30.000 = 604.250
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (*) 1.40 = 845.950
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 845.950
===============================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Medium Laser 62.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 62.000 = 124.000
ER Small Laser (+) 8.500 = 132.500
ER Small Laser (+) 8.500 = 141.000
Hatchet (+) 36.000 = 177.000
Plasma Rifle (+) 210.000 = 387.000
Plasma Rifle (Ammo 10) (+) 26.000 = 413.000
Plasma Rifle (Ammo 10) (+) 26.000 = 439.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 90.000 = 529.000
Speed Factor: 11 (Run) + 3 (Jump) (*) 2.160 = 1,142.640
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,142.640
===============================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 845.950
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,142.640 = 1,988.590
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,989
-
I'm not sure if I should ask here or make an update elsewhere.
The Vulture Mk III (Prime, A-D variants) are all listed as Advanced Rules on the MUL (linky thingy (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6271/vulture-mk-iii-prime))
Per TRO3145: Clans p.40-41, and RS3145_unabridged p.450-454... I don't see any advanced equipment among any of the appropriate variants.
Should these all be "Standard" Rules level? Or is there another reason they've been labeled "Advanced" ?
-
The MUL used to list unit cost (where available) in the table format (I think), is there a way to display this field while searching the MUL?
Thanks in advance.
-
There currently isn't a way to add the cost to the table without doing it for everybody. I'm not sure we have room for cost without replacing another column (or at least for screen resolutions of 1920 or less.) The mobile version is even more pressed for space.
Side note on the subject: Less than half of the units in the MUL actually have a CBill cost so I'm not sure if it will really be useful to add it only to see a lot of 0s.
The Vulture Mk III (Prime, A-D variants) are all listed as Advanced Rules on the MUL (linky thingy (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6271/vulture-mk-iii-prime))
I suspect it was in error when it was entered. It is fixed.
-
The Battle Value for the Thunder Stallion 3 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3226/thunder-stallion-3) appears to be incorrectly listed as 2,667 (which matches MML). My calculations come out to 2,631. I believe the discrepancy is due to the fact that the ammo in the right front leg is not being counted as explosive whereas it should as per the latest BV rules. My calculations are as follows:
================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 279 x 2.5 x 1 697.500
Internal Structure (Standard w/ Fusion Engine): 138 x 1.5 x 1 x 1 (+) 207.000 = 904.500
Gyro (Standard): 85 x 0.5 (+) 42.500 = 947.000
Defensive Equipment:
ECM Suite (+) 61.000 = 1,008.000
Explosive Ammunition: 2 Critical Spaces (-) 30.000 = 978.000
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (*) 1.20 = 1,173.600
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,173.600
================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Medium Laser 108.000
Hyper-Assault Gauss 40 (+) 535.000 = 643.000
Hyper-Assault Gauss 40 (Ammo 3) (+) 67.000 = 710.000
Hyper-Assault Gauss 40 (Ammo 3) (+) 67.000 = 777.000
Hyper-Assault Gauss 40 (Ammo 3) (+) 67.000 = 844.000
Hyper-Assault Gauss 40 (Ammo 3) (+) 67.000 = 911.000
Hyper-Assault Gauss 40 (Ammo 3) (+) 67.000 = 978.000
Hyper-Assault Gauss 40 (Ammo 3) (+) 67.000 = 1,045.000
LB 20-X AC (+) 237.000 = 1,282.000
LB 20-X AC (Ammo 5) (+) 30.000 = 1,312.000
LB 20-X AC (Ammo 5) (+) 30.000 = 1,342.000
LB 20-X AC (Ammo 5) (+) 30.000 = 1,372.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 85.000 = 1,457.000
Speed Factor: 5 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.000 = 1,457.000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,457.000
================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,173.600
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,457.000 = 2,630.600
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 2,631
-
All Hollander III variants (BZK-D1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6333/hollander-iii-bzk-d1), BZK-D2 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6334/hollander-iii-bzk-d2), and BZK-D3 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6335/hollander-iii-bzk-d3)) are listed as being Standard. However, due to the fact each has Laser Reflective armor, they should be listed as Advanced.
-
The Battle Value for the Scarecrow UCU-F4 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6336/scarecrow-ucu-f4) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,410. My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 1,475. Discrepancies could be due to BV rule changes for Chameleon LPS? My calculations are as follows:
======================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 128 x 2.5 x 1 320.000
Internal Structure (Endo-Composite w/ XL Engine): 67 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 50.250 = 370.250
Gyro (Compact): 40 x 0.5 (+) 20.000 = 390.250
Defensive Equipment:
Anti-Battle Armor Pod (+) 2.000 = 392.250
Anti-Battle Armor Pod (+) 2.000 = 394.250
Bloodhound Active Probe (+) 25.000 = 419.250
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (w/ Chameleon LPS) (*) 1.50 = 628.875
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 628.875
======================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Flamer 8.000
ER Flamer (+) 8.000 = 16.000
ER Medium Laser (C) (+) 108.000 = 124.000
ER Medium Laser (C) (+) 108.000 = 232.000
ER Medium Laser (C) (+) 108.000 = 340.000
Light Machine Gun (Ammo 100) (C) (+) 0.500 = 340.500
Light Machine Gun (Array) (C) (+) 8.350 = 348.850
Light Machine Gun (Array) (C) (+) 8.350 = 357.200
Light Machine Gun (Array) (C) (+) 8.350 = 365.550
Light Machine Gun (Array) (C) (+) 8.350 = 373.900
Light Machine Gun (Array) (C) (+) 8.350 = 382.250
Light Machine Gun (Array) (C) (+) 8.350 = 390.600
Light Machine Gun (Array) (C) (+) 8.350 = 398.950
Light Machine Gun (Array) (C) (+) 8.350 = 407.300
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 24.000 = 431.300
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 48.000 = 479.300
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 40.000 = 519.300
Speed Factor: 8 (Run) + 2 (Jump) (*) 1.630 = 846.459
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 846.459
======================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 628.875
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 846.459 = 1,475.334
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,475
-
All Hollander III variants (BZK-D1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6333/hollander-iii-bzk-d1), BZK-D2 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6334/hollander-iii-bzk-d2), and BZK-D3 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6335/hollander-iii-bzk-d3)) are listed as being Standard. However, due to the fact each has Laser Reflective armor, they should be listed as Advanced.
Fixed
-
Thanks mordel. All have been the units you noted have been double checked and updated.
-
The Battle Value for the Templar III TLR2-OB (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6355/templar-iii-tlr2-ob) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,918. My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 1,919. It's only a 1 point discrepancy, so it may have just been a rounding thing My calculations are as follows:
===========================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 263 x 2.5 x 1 657.500
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ Light Fusion Engine): 130 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.75 (+) 146.250 = 803.750
Gyro (Heavy-Duty): 85 x 0.5 (+) 85.000 = 888.750
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (*) 1.30 = 1,155.375
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,155.375
===========================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Chain Whip 5.175
ER PPC (+) 229.000 = 234.175
ER Small Laser (+) 8.500 = 242.675
Hatchet (+) 25.500 = 268.175
Small X-Pulse Laser (+) 21.000 = 289.175
Small X-Pulse Laser (+) 21.000 = 310.175
Small X-Pulse Laser (+) 21.000 = 331.175
Small X-Pulse Laser (+) 10.500 = 341.675
Small X-Pulse Laser (+) 21.000 = 362.675
Small X-Pulse Laser (+) 21.000 = 383.675
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 85.000 = 468.675
Speed Factor: 8 (Run) + 2 (Jump) (*) 1.630 = 763.940
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 763.940
===========================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,155.375
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 763.940 = 1,919.315
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,919
-
The Battle Value for the Jenner JR7-K (Grace) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1696/jenner-jr7-k-grace) appears to be incorrectly listed as 737. My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 702. My calculations are as follows:
=============================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Ferro-Fibrous (Prototype)): 80 x 2.5 x 1 200.000
Internal Structure (Endo Steel (Prototype) w/ Fusion Engine): 58 x 1.5 x 1 x 1 (+) 87.000 = 287.000
Gyro (Standard): 35 x 0.5 (+) 17.500 = 304.500
Explosive Ammunition: 3 Critical Spaces (-) 45.000 = 259.500
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (*) 1.40 = 363.300
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 363.300
=============================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Medium Laser 46.000
Medium Laser (+) 46.000 = 92.000
Narc Missile Beacon (+) 30.000 = 122.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 35.000 = 157.000
Speed Factor: 11 (Run) + 3 (Jump)(*) 2.160 = 339.120
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 339.120
=============================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 363.300
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 339.120 = 702.420
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 702
-
Unit: Behemoth II Heavy Tank (Standard)
Link: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6447/behemoth-ii-heavy-tank-standard
Sources:
TRO3145 Capellan Confederation p.24-25 (unit info)
Alpha Strike Companion p.107 (weapon table), 137 (role), 139 (conversion)
Issue: the Alpha-Strike card for the Behemoth II appears to be missing an "IF" value per the conversion information in the ASC.
. [8x Thunderbolt_5 = 2.34/4.0/4.0 damage; IF# = Long Range damage, or 4.0]
Suggested changes:
. Add "IF4" to the listed specials
. Adjust "TUR" special to include "IF4"
. Adjust "PV" to 50
. . PV calculations: 26 OFV + 24.25 DFV + 0 GFB
. Adjust Role to "Missile Boat" (over 50% of the damage at Long Range is dealt by the missile systems)
fixed downthread.
-
The Battle Value for the Gurkha GUR-8G (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5664/gurkha-gur-8g) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,229 (which matches SSW). My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 1,241. The discrepancy appears to be a result of SSW not factoring in TSM for the BV of the retractable blade. My calculations are as follows:
===============================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 119 x 2.5 x 1 297.500
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 58 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 43.500 = 341.000
Gyro (Standard): 35 x 0.5 (+) 17.500 = 358.500
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (*) 1.40 = 501.900
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 501.900
===============================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Medium Laser 62.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 62.000 = 124.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 62.000 = 186.000
ER Small Laser (+) 8.500 = 194.500
Retractable Blade (+) 13.800 = 208.300
Snub-Nose PPC (+) 165.000 = 373.300
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 52.500 = 425.800
Speed Factor: 12 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.890 = 804.762
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 804.762
===============================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 501.900
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 804.762 = 1,306.662
Cockpit (Small): (*) 0.95 = 1,241.329
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,241
-
The Battle Value for the Chimera CMA-2K (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5667/chimera-cma-2k) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,507 (which matches SSW). My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 1,528. The discrepancy appears to be a result of SSW not factoring in TSM for the BV of the sword. My calculations are as follows:
===============================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 120 x 2.5 x 1 300.000
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 67 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 50.250 = 350.250
Gyro (XL): 40 x 0.5 (+) 20.000 = 370.250
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (*) 1.40 = 518.350
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 518.350
===============================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Medium Laser 46.000
Medium Laser (+) 46.000 = 92.000
Medium Laser (+) 46.000 = 138.000
Medium Laser (+) 23.000 = 161.000
Small Laser (+) 4.500 = 165.500
Small Pulse Laser (+) 6.000 = 171.500
Snub-Nose PPC (+) 165.000 = 336.500
Sword (+) 17.250 = 353.750
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 60.000 = 413.750
Speed Factor: 12 (Run) + 4 (Jump) (*) 2.440 = 1,009.550
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,009.550
===============================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 518.350
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,009.550 = 1,527.900
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,528
-
I noticed something a few minutes ago on the MUL. I went to the Unit page, and searched for "lament" using the Unit Search on the left side of the screen.
Surprisingly, nothing turned up, with the following URL generated.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=lament&HasBV=true&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasRole=&HasBFAbility=&MinPV=&MaxPV=&Role=112&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=
However, when I searched using the search bar in the upper right, 5 Laments showed up with no problem and the following URL was generated
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Lament
I *think* what's going on, is that its the Alpha Strike Filter that's messing things up. Even after telling the MUL to Clear the filters, the default filter for AS seems to be Ambusher. That's the following part of the first URL posted.
&Role=112
I'm pretty sure this shouldn't be the default behavior of the Unit search as it seems rather..counterproductive.
-
The data is currently being migrated. We'll have to see if it is still behaving that way when we are done.
-
Any idea when we might see faction availability for the various units from Record Sheets 3145: New Tech New Upgrades?
-
I don't know if your migration is done... if so I'd suggest you look at the advanced search options.
One cannot leave the role unspecified, and "None" doesn't mean the same thing as unspecified.
Example: one cannot search for any unit without respect to role for the presence of a given special.
-
The Alpha Strike stats for the Mad Cat Mk IV (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=mad+cat+mk+iv) family are off. As per Alpha Strike Companion pg 98, the Structure Value for a 75 ton Clan 'Mech with an XXL engine should be three; the MUL Alpha Strike Card gives it as two
-
Is there a way to add a custom-generated alpha strike card to the force builder?
-
The Battle Value for the No-Dachi NDA-3S (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5692/no-dachi-nda-3s) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,679. My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 1,706. I'm guessing it's related to the damage adjustment of the Mace due to TSM. My calculations are as follows:
================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 216 x 2.5 x 1 540.000
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 107 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 80.250 = 620.250
Gyro (Standard): 70 x 0.5 (+) 35.000 = 655.250
Defensive Equipment:
Guardian ECM Suite (+) 61.000 = 716.250
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (*) 1.30 = 931.125
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 931.125
================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Medium Laser 62.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 62.000 = 124.000
Mace (+) 36.000 = 160.000
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 48.000 = 208.000
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 24.000 = 232.000
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 48.000 = 280.000
Medium VSP Laser (+) 56.000 = 336.000
Medium VSP Laser (+) 56.000 = 392.000
Small Laser (+) 4.500 = 396.500
Small Laser (+) 4.500 = 401.000
Small Laser (+) 4.500 = 405.500
Small Pulse Laser (+) 6.000 = 411.500
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 105.000 = 516.500
Speed Factor: 9 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.500 = 774.750
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 774.750
================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 931.125
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 774.750 = 1,705.875
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,706
-
The Battle Value for the Mad Cat (Timber Wolf) Z (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5822/mad-cat-timber-wolf-z) appears to be incorrectly listed as 3,003 (which matches SSW). My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 2,923. The discrepancy appears to be related to the weapon BV modification due to the heat efficiency calculation. My calculations are as follows:
=================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Ferro-Fibrous): 230 x 2.5 x 1 575.000
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 114 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.75 (+) 128.250 = 703.250
Gyro (Standard): 75 x 0.5 (+) 37.500 = 740.750
Defensive Equipment:
Nova CEWS (+) 68.000 = 808.750
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (*) 1.30 = 1,051.375
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,051.375
=================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Large Laser 248.000
ER Large Laser (+) 248.000 = 496.000
ER Medium Pulse Laser (+) 58.500 = 554.500
ER Medium Pulse Laser (+) 58.500 = 613.000
Improved ATM 9 (+) 231.000 = 844.000
Improved ATM 9 (+) 231.000 = 1,075.000
Improved ATM 9 (Ammo 7) (+) 54.000 = 1,129.000
Improved ATM 9 (Ammo 7) (+) 54.000 = 1,183.000
Improved ATM 9 (Ammo 7) (+) 54.000 = 1,237.000
Improved ATM 9 (Ammo 7) (+) 54.000 = 1,291.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 75.000 = 1,366.000
Speed Factor: 8 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.370 = 1,871.420
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,871.420
=================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,051.375
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,871.420 = 2,922.795
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 2,923
-
Question: the Sortek Assault Craft (standard) has SRCH property; the Sortek Assault Craft (Interdictor) doesn't.
Two possibilities:
- the Interdictor also deserves the SRCH property;
- the Interdictor can only be used during daylight hours.
I'm guessing the first ;)
Cheers,
W.
-
Some re-engineered laser errata
The Ebony MEB-13 should have the REL special ability
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6943/ebony-meb-13
The Spider SDR-10K should have the REL special ability
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6934/spider-sdr-10k
The Emperor EMP-8L should have the REL special ability
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6851/emperor-emp-8l
The Sagittaire SGT -14D should have the REL special ability
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6835/sagittaire-sgt-14d
The Sagittari SGT-4R should have the REL special ability
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6817/sagittarii-sgt-4r
The Night Stalker NSR-K7 should lose the REL ability because according to the conversion rules from AS companion you have to cause 1 unit of damage in the medium range bracket (may be we need to errata it to short range or small re-engineered lasers will never give the REL ability)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6720/night-stalker-nsr-k7
-
Any suggestions? I can't get any Alpha strike force to print. I've turned off my pop up blocker. I've updated adobe. I've tried chrome and edge. I'm out of ideas.
-
The PDF printing tool needs to be rewritten after the move to the new host. No ETA at this time.
-
Any suggestions? I can't get any Alpha strike force to print. I've turned off my pop up blocker. I've updated adobe. I've tried chrome and edge. I'm out of ideas.
In the meantime, expanding the default card, or customizing the card to include changing skill (and skill based PV increases/decreases) and then copying the image into an image editing software of your choice to save as -> insert into word document -> arrange -> print works, but is incredibly cumbersome and irritating.
Ask me how my last official game went. We had 72 'Mechs. #P
-
The cost of the Warhammer 6R (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3488 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3488)) appears to be off by one C-Bill.
The TechManual's formula: (Structural Cost + Weapon/Equipment Cost) * (Omnimech Cost) * (1 + [Total Tonnage / 100])
Applied to the WHM-6R: 3,543,166.667 * 1 * 1.7 = 6,023,383.3339, which rounds down to 6,023,383.
The value for the Structural Cost + Weapon/Equipment Cost is a bit lengthy, but the only item without a nicely rounded cost is the 280 Fusion Engine, which has a cost of 1,306,666.667 (rounded for brevity per the errata). My theory is that the cost was rounded up before plugging it into the Final Unit Cost Formula, which results in a final value of 6,023,383.9, which rounds up to 6,023,384.
-
Seems like the Print/PDF function for Alpha Strike cards is timing out.
Also, can we have an API or perhaps a CSV download for Alpha Strike stats and point costs - no need for calculation for non-4 pilot skills, that's easy enough at the client end.
-
The PDF printing tool needs to be rewritten after the move to the new host. No ETA at this time.
-
The PDF printing tool needs to be rewritten after the move to the new host. No ETA at this time.
Thanks for repeating that for me, cavingjan :)
-
No problem. For the other suggestion, it is above my pay grade. I think the answer will stay no but TPTB can see it and confirm or change their answer.
Edit: I should have included this in the prior message. For a work around, save the cards as either jpgs or pngs. You can then use your OS print feature to print several on a page. That printing could be paper or if you want that pdf, a free pdf printer that are readily available.
-
I found a mention of the 'HH-1 compact mobile shipyard' in Wars of Reaving (page 35).
Could this unit please be added to the MUL, with more details if possible?
-
The Battle Value for the Jenner JR7-K (Grace) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1696/jenner-jr7-k-grace) appears to be incorrectly listed as 737. My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 702. My calculations are as follows:
BV per the RS listed would be 706 with 81 points of armor though that put it 0.5 tons overweight. 80 points of armor brings the weight back into line though I couldn't find any errata after a quick search. With 80 points of armor, the BV would be 702.
The Battle Value for the Gurkha GUR-8G (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5664/gurkha-gur-8g) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,229 (which matches SSW). My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 1,241. The discrepancy appears to be a result of SSW not factoring in TSM for the BV of the retractable blade. My calculations are as follows:
Correct and MUL updated.
The Battle Value for the No-Dachi NDA-3S (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5692/no-dachi-nda-3s) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,679. My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 1,706. I'm guessing it's related to the damage adjustment of the Mace due to TSM. My calculations are as follows:
Correct and MUL updated.
The Battle Value for the Chimera CMA-2K (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5667/chimera-cma-2k) appears to be incorrectly listed as 1,507 (which matches SSW). My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 1,528. The discrepancy appears to be a result of SSW not factoring in TSM for the BV of the sword. My calculations are as follows:
Correct and MUL updated.
The Battle Value for the Mad Cat (Timber Wolf) Z (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5822/mad-cat-timber-wolf-z) appears to be incorrectly listed as 3,003 (which matches SSW). My calculations (as well as those from MML) come out to 2,923. The discrepancy appears to be related to the weapon BV modification due to the heat efficiency calculation. My calculations are as follows:
Correct and MUL updated.
All relevant units have had their BVs updated after the re-engineered laser BV adjustments.
-
No problem. For the other suggestion, it is above my pay grade. I think the answer will stay no but TPTB can see it and confirm or change their answer.
Edit: I should have included this in the prior message. For a work around, save the cards as either jpgs or pngs. You can then use your OS print feature to print several on a page. That printing could be paper or if you want that pdf, a free pdf printer that are readily available.
Thx for the hint. Print function still isnt working. I thought it was a problem with my computer ;D
-
* VERSION: MUL Online
* LOCATION: Mad Cat Mk II (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4565/mad-cat-mk-ii-standard)
* THE ERROR: MUL Online says that the Intro date of Mad Cat Mk.II (Standard) is 3066. However, Technical Readout: 3067 (Corrected Fourth Printing) with in-universe date of 3067 clearly says that "the Mad Cat Mk II has now been in production for more than half a decade" (p.132, the right column). So if "more than half a decade" is approximately six years, that means that the Intro date is 3067-6=3061.
* THE CORRECTION: The Intro date of Mad Cat Mk.II should be changed to 3061.
-
Thanks. Changed to 3062 to keep the Civil War era, and TR 3067 in universe date is Dec 3067. So 5 years would be Dec 3062, and the more than that would be however many months they started production earlier than Dec in 3062. The TR also has them starting the new project "at the beginning of the decade" and to full-scale production in less than 15 months. If they started late 3060, that could put them in to 3062 as well. And I'd rather not change the era if I don't have to.
-
OK, thanks.
-
**bump**
Unit: Behemoth II Heavy Tank (Standard)
Link: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6447/behemoth-ii-heavy-tank-standard
Sources:
TRO3145 Capellan Confederation p.24-25 (unit info)
Alpha Strike Companion p.107 (weapon table), 137 (role), 139 (conversion)
Issue: the Alpha-Strike card for the Behemoth II appears to be missing an "IF" value per the conversion information in the ASC.
. [8x Thunderbolt_5 = 2.34/4.0/4.0 damage; IF# = Long Range damage, or 4.0]
Suggested changes:
. Add "IF4" to the listed specials
. Adjust "TUR" special to include "IF4"
. Adjust "PV" to 50
. . PV calculations: 26 OFV + 24.25 DFV + 0 GFB
. Adjust Role to "Missile Boat" (over 50% of the damage at Long Range is dealt by the missile systems)
-
Thanks, Behemoth II corrected.
-
The Alpha Strike stats for the Mad Cat Mk IV (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=mad+cat+mk+iv) family are off. As per Alpha Strike Companion pg 98, the Structure Value for a 75 ton Clan 'Mech with an XXL engine should be three; the MUL Alpha Strike Card gives it as two
Thanks. Fixed. PVs also went up 1 due to Structure increase.
-
Some re-engineered laser errata
The Ebony MEB-13 should have the REL special ability
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6943/ebony-meb-13
The Spider SDR-10K should have the REL special ability
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6934/spider-sdr-10k
The Emperor EMP-8L should have the REL special ability
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6851/emperor-emp-8l
The Sagittaire SGT -14D should have the REL special ability
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6835/sagittaire-sgt-14d
The Sagittari SGT-4R should have the REL special ability
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6817/sagittarii-sgt-4r
The Night Stalker NSR-K7 should lose the REL ability because according to the conversion rules from AS companion you have to cause 1 unit of damage in the medium range bracket (may be we need to errata it to short range or small re-engineered lasers will never give the REL ability)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6720/night-stalker-nsr-k7
REL added/removed as listed above.
-
Pendragon PDG-1X
Pendragon PDG-1R
Pendragon PDG-2R
All units should have the CASEII ability, not CASE.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4799/pendragon-pdg-1r
NCKestrel: corrected, thanks.
-
Cost is still shown as something you can Filter by, but no longer shows up in the columns once sorting is complete. Is this a recent removal, or am I using the wrong browser?
-
You're not scrolling far enough to get past the ones with no cost.
-
The Jihad era data is listed as Complete, but its missing two 'Mechs, both of which can be found in the Total Chaos book.
AWS-10KM Awesome (Cameron)
AS7-D-H Atlas II (Devlin)
Also, will the MUL be reconfigured so the eras match eras as listed in IO?
-
You're not scrolling far enough to get past the ones with no cost.
No, some of the lists I get back (eg. Only Mechs that cost between 1,000,000 to 3,500,00 C-Bills, only from inner sphere, only age of war, Star League, and Early Succession Wars) return a list of around 20 or so, and there's no column for price shown. And I know there used to be, 'cause I've used the MUL before to prove to my players that a certain 'Mech costs X not Y to resolve arguments.
-
The Jihad era data is listed as Complete, but its missing two 'Mechs, both of which can be found in the Total Chaos book.
AWS-10KM Awesome (Cameron)
AS7-D-H Atlas II (Devlin)
Added. The Jihad may be marked as complete for faction data but this can happen when a product adds new units if we don't get them put in right away. Eridani Epsilon are also added. Alpha Strike stats will be entered this weekend.
Thank you for bringing it to our attention.
-
All of the Zeus-X designs from TR3145LC should be renamed "Zeus X" to match the Record Sheets and fluff from said product.
The 9WD and 9WD (Stacy) should remain "Zeus-X" as that's how their RS and writeups in Wolf and Blake are done.
-
If we make that change, the 9WD models will no longer show as a variant of the other ones. The MUL will treat it as a completely separate base unit. It will probably be more appropriate to change them all to Zeus X.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6631/zeus-x-zeu-x
The DC didn't even start working on prototype Reactive armor until 3058. The write up in TR3145LC states "whose limited production during the Civil War merely served propaganda." The date should be bumped up to 3062+
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7346/hunchback-hbk-7s
Card is not generating.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7346/hunchback-hbk-7s
Card is not generating.
We haven't created/entered AS stats for it yet.
EDIT: Now we have.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6631/zeus-x-zeu-x
The DC didn't even start working on prototype Reactive armor until 3058. The write up in TR3145LC states "whose limited production during the Civil War merely served propaganda." The date should be bumped up to 3062+
Time for that yearly debate....OK, it's off to discussion by the MUL team. Hopefully we'll have an answer sometime. (Last year we agreed that 3054 was wrong, but couldn't settle on 3059 versus 3063).
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4787/panther-pnt-9r-tanaka
Needs AS card
-
Whenever you try to customize an existing card, even just to change the picture, the type and the skill level go blank and have to be re-filled in.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4994/scorpion-scp-1n-rubinsky
Need AS card
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4994/scorpion-scp-1n-rubinsky
Need AS card
If there is no Record Sheet listed, then an AS card might not be possible. Please do not list units that don't have an RS listed, thanks.
-
If there is no Record Sheet listed, then an AS card might not be possible. Please do not list units that don't have an RS listed, thanks.
If there is no record sheet, then how does it have a BV listed? If there really isn't one, please pass that along up the chain to someone who can make one, rather than just asking me to stop asking about it.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5810/warhammer-whm-6k-yorinaga
Needs AS card
-
If there really isn't one, please pass that along up the chain to someone who can make one, rather than just asking me to stop asking about it.
We are striving to fill in all units, eventually. However, you are being told how the process works, by one of the major people behind the process. Please follow the instructions.
-
I'm just trying to save you the work of filling out posts that won't change anything. If it doesn't have an RS, there's no point in filling out post that says there is no AS card.
-
Sorry if I sound snarky, but I don't have access to all the record sheets. So there is no way for me to know if one unit doesn't have one.
I'm just seeing a hole and letting you know it needs plugging, if that's not possible at this time, that's fine.
-
The "TRO/RS" category tells you where the record sheet can be found. If it is listed as "None", then no record sheet exists.
Here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Source/Details/192) is a convenient list of all units on the MUL that currently have "None" as their record sheet source to reference when you come across something like this again.
-
I see a lot of Omnimech base models, so those would obviously not have cards.
Yet, mysteriously, some of those other units do have cards....
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4556/mackie-msk-7a
So, what gives? How does that work for some units but not others? ???
-
I see a lot of Omnimech base models, so those would obviously not have cards.
Yet, mysteriously, some of those other units do have cards....
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4556/mackie-msk-7a
So, what gives? How does that work for some units but not others? ???
You got a bonus. You're welcome.
-
You got a bonus. You're welcome.
It was incorrectly tagged as no record sheet. That is fixed now.
-
I see a lot of Omnimech base models, so those would obviously not have cards.
Yet, mysteriously, some of those other units do have cards....
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4556/mackie-msk-7a
So, what gives? How does that work for some units but not others? ???
The record sheets collection for TRO: Prototypes is still in the works. While the stats are published in the book, there's no published sheets. The same goes for all units associated with Historical: Reunification War; published stats but no published record sheets. Incorrectly tagged units have been mostly corrected. :) Others are being looked into.
-
Pendragon PDG-1X
Pendragon PDG-1R
Pendragon PDG-2R
All units should have the CASEII ability, not CASE.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4799/pendragon-pdg-1r
NCKestrel: corrected, thanks.
Second issue with Pendragons. All have composite structure, so structure value should be 2, not 4.
-
Second issue with Pendragons. All have composite structure, so structure value should be 2, not 4.
Corrected along with appropriate PVs.
-
I don't know much about Alpha Strike, but I *think* the HBK-7S and TSN-X-4 should have the RCN ability.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7346/hunchback-hbk-7s
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5549/tessen-tsn-x-4
Xotl: correct. Updated along with PVs.
-
The Assassin Model 99 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/130/assassin-asn-99) should have the ECM special.
Xotl: correct. Updated along with PV.
-
Not exactly an errata but more of a question.
What about faction use lists from 3 sources:
RS 3145 NTNU
TRO: 3145 RoTS
XTRO: Republic vol 1?
-
On the To Do list. I'll poke around to see if someone has any notes on these.
-
On the To Do list. I'll poke around to see if someone has any notes on these.
Thank you very much.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/495/cauldron-born-ebon-jaguar-h
None of the pictures for the Ebon Jaguar are loading.
Might I suggest using this pic?
http://operationbulldog.blogspot.com/2010/12/nova-cat-dossier-ebon-jaguar-cauldron.html
-
Cauldron-Born (Ebon Jaguar) pictures are loading now, thanks for pointing that out. (Using the TR3058 picture though, not the older FM picture you linked too).
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5856/cheetah-ii-f-12a
Missing AS card
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4565/mad-cat-mk-ii-standard
TRO 3067 pg. 132-133
http://i.imgur.com/k6eop2R.png
http://i.imgur.com/of5Z3lC.png
Would Jade Falcon and Clan Wolf or more clans be able to be added to the MUL for the Mad Cat Mk.II
It says in TRO3067 "Clans Wolf and Jade Falcon, both obvious candidates for sales, have purchased none; neither has Clan Ice Hellion or even Clan Steel Viper (though all field a few won through various Trials).
So Ice Hellion is included on the MUL though but not the other 3.
For the Role?
Are you sure it is a Brawler? Is the base variant more a sniper or at least mid range platform rather then brawling? I could see the Mk.II 2 being a brawler but the original?
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/ExtensionCard/952?extensionid=1043
Squad size reads as 0 for 5 man unit.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1722/jump-platoon-rifle
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2239/motorized-platoon-rifle
Need AS cards
-
In reverse order:
Ballistic and Rifle are redundant with each other. We haven't had a chance to remove the extra one.
I'll see if I can get the 0 changed to a 5 on the Elemental when I get home from the hospital tonight.
The Mad Cat is more of a mid range brawler. Brawlers are not short ranged units. Brawlers are also called troopers. The CIH entry for the Civil War era is most likely in error. I'll confirm and update.
-
Much appreciated thank you!
If it ends up not an error can you look into seeing if Wolf and Falcon are maybe missing if using the same sentence I quoted as backing for CIH?
-
Jinggau JN-G7L, MUL entry http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1707/jinggau-jn-g7l
Comes up as available in Clan Invasion period. As per the MUL, introduction date 3068, Era Jihad, with the note "There was one protoype in 3059 that failed. ".
Problem: if the only existing unit in 3059 - singular - failed, then there's no unit available in Clan Invasion period.
Fix: remove from Clan Invasion availability.
-
But how can I start that secret Liao super army? Looking through the working files, it had a date of 3059. I have no clue when that got changed as more recent files have the correct date. It is fixed now.
-
Problem: Prototype misspelled in that Jinggau entry. Huge problem, I know.
-
But how can I start that secret Liao super army? Looking through the working files, it had a date of 3059. I have no clue when that got changed as more recent files have the correct date. It is fixed now.
I think there was a placeholder entry for a "JN-G6L" prototype with the 3059 date from back when I was inventing dates for everything, since I wasn't sure if it would see the light of day or not. This was well before it was decided to have the MUL track faction availability, and we were including everything and the kitchen sink just in case it was useful down the road. Perhaps its entry just got merged with the JN-G7L by accident. My working files are long-gone, of course, but this was probably my mistake.
-
You can take the blame for the typo of prototype. The date and faction data is mine. ;)
-
"Construction of the JN-7GL was sidelined by the decision to restart an OstBosch construction line. Following the disturbing revelations accompanying that failed exercise, the technicians involved volunteered spontaneously to undergo tequila therapy to remove their memories, before spending their remaining days atoning in the proof-reading mines of Capella ..."
-
Fiddling with Watchdog CEWS units, or "WAT" Special, the following units are missing the "ECM" "LPRB" specials and their requisite conversion cost (Ground Force Bonuses, Alpha Strike Companion table p.140), or +3 PV each.
Hankyu F : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6940/hankyu-arctic-cheetah-f
Parash 2: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2427/parash-2
Tiburon (Standard) : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6552/tiburon-standard
Wight -4NC Dezgra : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5600/wight-wgt-4nc-dezgra
Beowulf IIC PR : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7294/beowulf-iic-pr
Ursus 3 : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5329/ursus-3
Gladiator G : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6841/gladiator-executioner-g
Daishi E : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6833/daishi-dire-wolf-e
Sulla F : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6816/sulla-f
Ostrogoth D : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6810/ostrogoth-d
Jengiz X : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4398/jengiz-x
Scytha F : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6808/scytha-f
Scytha X : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5003/scytha-x
Edit Calculations were done by hand for Daishi E, Gladiator G, Hankyu F, Parash 2, Beowulf IIC (PR and Standard), and Scytha (F and X) via their respective record sheets/TROs
...
The Hankyu [F] also should have a Jump value of 12", {currently 8"}; though this should not change it's MF calculation (not it's top speed, still uses jump movement)
...
Beowulf IIC (Standard) -- Among the listed Specials, it's missing the WAT special (per RS_Prototypes), and should be added for Search Result purposes.
-
Something I discovered when making a custom card for a small craft:
A threshold value will only display on the card if the type is "AF" or "CF". I know DropShips and such with multiple firing arcs are beyond the scope of that tool, but small craft (SC) should be able use the same card as fighters.
Addendum: In addition to losing TH values, putting SC under type also removes the aerospace extreme range band.
-
Fiddling with Watchdog CEWS units, or "WAT" Special, the following units are missing the "ECM" "LPRB" specials and their requisite conversion cost (Ground Force Bonuses, Alpha Strike Companion table p.140), or +3 PV each.
I'll attempt to tackle these tonight. Thanks.
EDIT: All done. Thanks again.
-
Something I discovered when making a custom card for a small craft:
A threshold value will only display on the card if the type is "AF" or "CF". I know DropShips and such with multiple firing arcs are beyond the scope of that tool, but small craft (SC) should be able use the same card as fighters.
Addendum: In addition to losing TH values, putting SC under type also removes the aerospace extreme range band.
Units small craft sized or larger are not supported by the MUL at this time. It's not just the custom card generator, we can't do canon units of those types correctly either. I don't expect to see that capability added any time soon unfortunately.
-
Infantry BV calculations are incorrect for Total Warfare units.
It would appear that they are using the older infantry weapon tables rather than from the newer errata tables.
Verified by hand and by MegaMek Lab
-
Total Warfare Foot Platoon (Flamer) BV calculated using single support weapon while TW shows the platoon as using two.
-
House Davion Gauss Infantry:
Not sure where this one fits. HB House Davion, TechManual, or MUL.
According the HBHD Gauss Infantry are supposed to carry 6 M345B3 Thunderstroke II Gauss rifles.
The MUL gives this unit an intro date of 3061
TechManual has an intro on the rifle of 3062
Which needs errata. Should the rifles intro be changed? Does the intro for the three infantry units on the MUL need to change to 3062?
Based just on HBHD I would think that the MUL intro should be changed to 3062. This may be a simple change for the MUL or may require further discussion among TPTB
-
Fiddling with Watchdog CEWS units, or "WAT" Special, the following units are missing the "ECM" "LPRB" specials and their requisite conversion cost (Ground Force Bonuses, Alpha Strike Companion table p.140), or +3 PV each.
Gladiator G : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6841/gladiator-executioner-g
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/ExtensionCard/952?extensionid=1043
Reads squad 0 instead of 5
Have these been corrected?
-
The three units from OTP: Capellan Crusades are missing
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/ExtensionCard/952?extensionid=1043
Reads squad 0 instead of 5
Have these been corrected?
It has now.
-
House Davion Gauss Infantry:
Not sure where this one fits. HB House Davion, TechManual, or MUL.
According the HBHD Gauss Infantry are supposed to carry 6 M345B3 Thunderstroke II Gauss rifles.
The MUL gives this unit an intro date of 3061
TechManual has an intro on the rifle of 3062
Which needs errata. Should the rifles intro be changed? Does the intro for the three infantry units on the MUL need to change to 3062?
Based just on HBHD I would think that the MUL intro should be changed to 3062. This may be a simple change for the MUL or may require further discussion among TPTB
Date changed on Gauss infantry to 3062. Thanks.
-
How reliable is the Faction Force table in Combat Operations (10979)? Just curious if this is held in same view as a RAT or more reliable source? We talked about wondering if Clan Ice Hellion was a mistake, I think I found where they got the idea to place them on the MUL for the Mk.II though in the first place, among CIH also on that list for Clans is ironically again Jade Falcon and as well Wolf in Exile.
Page references.
For Clan
Diamond Shark(Pg.112)
Ice Hellion (Pg.115)
Jade Falcon (Pg.116)
Nova Cat (Pg.116)
Wolf-In-Exile (Pg.119)
For IS
Kurita (Pg.125)
Davion (Pg.127)
Steiner (Pg.132)
Star League-3061 (Pg.133)
Also Star League guessing from use with in Nova Cat as well as the few house units but worth adding maybe as well if there is enough to back the other clans?
-
Faction Availability has no rules. It's a brawl between various conflicting sources, opinions, bizarre rituals and occasionally direct intervention by powers beyond the MUL team.
Usually we try to take all sources in to account. If there is a direct conflict (same unit, same time, different answers), then we often prioritize either a current Technical Readout or more recently published source.
But none of those are rules. Thirty years of sourcebooks and dozens if not hundreds of different authors means we can write specific rules, but have to take each case as it comes. You are welcome to make suggestions, that's why this errata thread specifically allows suggestions. We don't require a definitive answer before you ask, because there often isn't one.
-
Alright thanks! Just trying to help, I kinda understand why reluctant due to the TRO stating that the only ones that would have been in service with Wolf, Jade Falcon, Ice Hellion, and Steel Vipers as noted were only obtained in winning them through various trials. It only says a few so I think there is a little conflict by what a few actually means in terms of numbers. -edit: miss read TRO thought made mention of unknown amount in the Lyran forces.-
I just am a bit surprised by only Diamond Shark and Nova Cat on the MUL I guess for clans. Was expecting or hoping for a few more Clans on that list, at least Wolf in Exile during the Civil War. Find it odd though that Falcon is mentioned both on the RAT and FFT while they despised the mech supposedly.
I just linked those if it was worthy to note them or not for the MUL at least maybe in Jihad and later years. The only source we have for Mk.II in Fedcom Civil war is in 3067 stuff right at the end of it all.
-
For the Mad Cat Mk.II (I am not trying to push this to much)
Clan Ghost Bear: Could the argument that since the RAT in Field Manual: Updates does list Ghost Bear with them on the 2nd line battlemechs? I know some in the RAT is contradicted by the TRO (AKA Jade Falcon having them though hating them ect.) BUT Ghost Bear was never mentioned in the TRO at having or not having the mech OR objecting to the mech (at least as far as my research has found). They were business partners with Diamond Shark as mentioned in Field Manual portion of Diamond Sharks. The mech does kinda fit the Ghost Bear profile in fast,agile, firepower, decent protection. They would have been rebuilding a bit after the border conflicts between DCS/Nova Cat and Hells Horses. But it is still on a list for units available somewhat to that faction for selection right?
Clan Wolf In Exile: They are listed as posted above in the Combat Operations installment of rules (3067), they do have the Mad Cat Mk.II in their Faction Force Table (still a bit confused if this is worthy or not). There is no contradiction between the TRO and this installment and similar to the Ghost Bear's situation of rebuilding.
Thoughts? Or is the Mk.II pretty set in stone for the Fedcom era?
-
Information that was reviewed at the time that the faction data for that era was compiled.
-
How reliable is the Faction Force table in Combat Operations (10979)?
Not at all really. That was the first attempt at a faction availability list, and it's now over a decade out of date.
-
Alright, I just was curious I guess about all this, looks like any changes will not happen unless a new TRO is done up, that I don't think will change anything as added, sorry to question it a little bit.
-
Would it be possible to get some images for the infantry platoons and points? Right now they are blank.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1147/foot-platoon-rifle
I was thinking some higher resolution pics from pg.23 of total warfare might serve the purpose.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5242/ti-tsang-tsg-9ddc
This should actually be called the TSG-9DDC Ti Ts'ang DDC.
I'm honestly not sure if its a "Ti Ts'ang DCC" with a variant number of TSG-9DDC, or if the extra DDC is an extra identifier, much like a character's name would be, but both XTRO Liao and TRO Prototypes are definitive about the extra DDC
-
Making it a "Ti Ts'ang DDC" would keep it from appearing in the variants list on any other Ti Ts'ang due to how those are handled (at least, that's my understanding).
-
Making it a "Ti Ts'ang DDC" would keep it from appearing in the variants list on any other Ti Ts'ang due to how those are handled (at least, that's my understanding).
That's why the MUL lists it as it does. It's an exception to general MUL naming rules.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4935/rook-nh-1x-rook-x
I assume the name change from Rook-X to Rook is for the same reason as the Ti ts'ang DDC? But if you have the extra name "Rook-X" on it, why the change from NH-1B to NH-1X?
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4935/rook-nh-1x-rook-x
I assume the name change from Rook-X to Rook is for the same reason as the Ti ts'ang DDC? But if you have the extra name "Rook-X" on it, why the change from NH-1B to NH-1X?
Because there was already a different NH-1B.
-
I see that the ASN-21 has IF0* and the ASN-101 doesn't, is there a reason for that?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/127/assassin-asn-21
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/126/assassin-asn-101
-
Because there was already a different NH-1B.
Sure, but there are 4 JR7-K Jenners, and that's not a problem, because they all have different names after them, why is that different for the Rook-X? And are these official name changes, or just MUL changes?
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1011/eyleuka-eyl-4a
Has an intro date of 3068, but the era seems to be set for the Civil War. Not really sure which is correct to be honest.
-
There one JR7-K and three modified JR7-Ks. That's not the same as two different Rooks with the same designation. Yes, it's errata to XTR Retrotech. It should be in the errata thread for it ( if not, should be added).
-
I'll leave that up to you, along with the report on the Ti Ts'ang DDC.
Here's an oddity for the coders
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=3068&MaxIntro=3075&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasRole=&HasBFAbility=&MinPV=&MaxPV=&Role=None+Selected&Types=18&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=
If you click that, you get a page that shows all BattleMechs, with intro dates from 3068 to 3075. But if you sort it from lowest to highest, two things interesting pop up.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7398/atlas-ii-as7-d-h-devlin
Which has no date (Still) so I'm not really sure why its being pulled, but maybe the mul recognizes its supposed to be in the Era that the intro years chosen follow..or something like that.
But the big weird one is
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/298/battlemaster-blr-6x
Which has an intro year of 3085. There's no way this should be showing up in the search, and yet it does. It also sort of seems to hang out there. I've changed the parameters on the Years to 3068-3076 and it shows up again. But a search of 3075 to 3084, it doesn't show up.
-
What you don't see is that there are two date fields. The visible one can be blank or even use text. The internal one for search purposes is strictly numbers. I would guess the dates are mismatched on the battlemaster. I'll have to check.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/752/crusader-crd-3r
Shouldn't this be 2572 instead of 2752? The writeup in TR3039 states that it fought in the Reunification War and was introduced in the late 26th Century. Could be a transposing of numbers?
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/752/crusader-crd-3r
Shouldn't this be 2572 instead of 2752? The writeup in TR3039 states that it fought in the Reunification War and was introduced in the late 26th Century. Could be a transposing of numbers?
The Crusader was introduced (the 1R) in the late 26th century, not the 3R. The discussion was years ago so I don't remember the specifics, but the 3R couldn't have been the late 26th century model. That's why the 1R entry was created.
Ah, I think I remember why now. The 3R is the 2R without the streak and artemis (ancient battletech lore). But Streaks didn't exist in the late 26th century. So the 1R was a 2R without Streak SRM-2s. The 2R then switched to Streaks. The 3R was then the downgrade model. It didn't go 3R, then 2R, then back to 3R.
-
Okaleedokalee. Though I could've thought of easier fixes that didn't screw up previous fluff :) But I'll digress.
-
Okaleedokalee. Though I could've thought of easier fixes that didn't screw up previous fluff :) But I'll digress.
Go for it.
-
Well, since the 1R doesn't exist yet, I'm left off the hook for the not knowing about it. :) But still. This seems to only be an issue because whoever wrote up the 2R didn't read the fluff on the 3R. I would've thought the simplest answer would've been to issue errata and change the name of the 2R to the 4R, then you keep the 3039 fluff intact, and don't have to try to explain why the Star League suddenly started to produce downgraded Crusaders at the height of their technological prowess.
So you get the 3R at 2572 (or something similar) that matches the fluff from 3039
Introduced in the late twenty-sixth century, the CRD-3R Crusader became the workhorse of the SLDF’s line regiments as they battled Periphery troops during the Reunification War.
Then you have the 4R at 2649, which is a few years after Streak technology was invented. Which makes sense. Its an advanced version of one of the SLDF's "workhorse" design.
And then after the fall of the Star League as technology declined, the 3R was put back into production as an introtech design as "other manufacturers continued to churn out Crusaders, making them one of the most common heavy BattleMechs in existence." (3039).
I mean, its not like 3075 wasn't already filled with errata (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,5936.0.html). And we're just talking about a single number change (and really, its not like we haven't seen odd numberings before, but hey, TR3075 can take a bit more errata to keep people from pulling their hair out over it). So this way you match the fluff and don't have to try to explain why the Star League downgraded their design at the height of technology.
The way it is now, it seems like the decision was made to ignore the fluff from 3039, create a whole new 'Mech that's never been mentioned as existing before, and create a downgraded 'Mech when they have no reason to really exist. Its like the decision took the most complicated way possible WITH the added bonus of ignoring specific fluff from not all that old of a product.
-
You didn't go back far enough. TR 3025 talks about the "original Crusaders" superior long range (Phoenix) and short range (hawk) missiles. That had long supposed to mean Artemis and Streak. The 2R just made that official.
But Streaks didn't exist in the 26th century (late or otherwise). TechManual lists them as around 2650?
Therefore the 2R couldn't have been the original in the late 26th century either.
We were going to have to break canon somewhere. We decided interpreting 3039 to be referring to the Crusader in general, and not the 3R in specific, was the less damaging of breaks.
There is no solution that doesn't break at least some fluff.
-
Nope, I went back. :) I just considered the specific of TR3039 to trump the apocryphal, non-specific of TR3025, which was a flawed product.
I mean, there's a reason that CGL rewrote all those entries and did 3039, rather than just reprinting TR3025. To give priority to 3025 seems odd to me. But you've explained your position, and y'all are in charge, so that's that :)
-
Pursuant to the linked ruling: (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=52024.msg1200628#msg1200628)
Should the Bolla Stealth Tank's Specials be amended to not have C3S (and C3M where appropriate) and their PVs suitably recalculated, since by the ruling they can never use C3? There is no way to turn STL off, and no critical hit, damage, or opponent's action that can disable STL.
I lament the loss of the most hilarious combo in Alpha Strike (now that I'm aware of it), but the points are still being paid for the C3.
This would also affect the the WOB version of the Bolla, the Raven 4LC (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2667/raven-rvn-4lc), Mongoose II 267 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2217/mongoose-ii-mon-267), the Sha Yu 4B (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5027/sha-yu-syu-4b), the Nexus II NXS2-B (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2262/nexus-ii-nxs2-b), Raijin II 200-B (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2629/raijin-ii-rjn-200-b) and C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2630/raijin-ii-rjn-200-c), Cronus TD9 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5680/cronus-cns-td9), Goliath 5W (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1236/goliath-gol-5w), both the Hunter Killer [C3/HRR] (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6740/grenadier-battle-armor-hunter-killer-c3hrr) and Grenadier II (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7391/grenadier-ii-battle-armor-b), the Kobold X-C3 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5561/kobold-battle-armor-x-c3), and finally the Tortoise II (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7359/tortoise-ii-battle-armor-c3) battle armor suits.
Similarly, a number of units (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=&HasBV=true&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasRole=&HasBFAbility=STL+PRB&MinPV=&MaxPV=&Role=None+Selected&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=) have both STL and PRB. PRB likewise does not work under an ECM field.
-
Wasp LAM WSP-110 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5391/wasp-lam-wsp-110)
No weight listed; as per Wasp chassis, & other record sheets, this should be 30 tons.
Side question - all LAMs are listed as role NONE. I believe LAMs should qualify for role SCOUT (ASC, p135):
Scout units are the speedsters of any force. Designed to serve in the forefront of any action, where they act as reconnaissance elements, Scouts favor mobility over all other considerations. Most Scouts, therefore, tend to be small, lightly armored, and barely armed. Because of this, these units should avoid combat unless in swarms.
Thanks in advance,
W.
-
Behemoth (Stone Rhino) variants 2-6 lack art
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/319/behemoth-stone-rhino-2
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/320/behemoth-stone-rhino-3
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3814/behemoth-stone-rhino-4
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3815/behemoth-stone-rhino-5
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3816/behemoth-stone-rhino-6
Behemoth (Stone Rhino) (Standard) has the silhouette
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/318/behemoth-stone-rhino-standard
but the (Prototype) has the unseen art
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3813/behemoth-stone-rhino-prototype
-
Prototype deleted, it got canonized as the Matar.
(Standard), 5 and 6 have silhouette. 2-4 have the Reseen image.
Thanks.
-
Wasp LAM WSP-110 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5391/wasp-lam-wsp-110)
No weight listed; as per Wasp chassis, & other record sheets, this should be 30 tons.
Looks like somebody already fixed this.
Side question - all LAMs are listed as role NONE. I believe LAMs should qualify for role SCOUT (ASC, p135):
Assigned Wasp and Stinger LAMs as Scouts, Phoenix Hawk LAMs as Strikers, and Shadow Hawk LAMs as Snipers.
-
Commando COM-1D (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/669/commando-com-1d) appears to be missing art.
-
Looks like somebody already fixed this.
Assigned Wasp and Stinger LAMs as Scouts, Phoenix Hawk LAMs as Strikers, and Shadow Hawk LAMs as Snipers.
Thankee! That works well, albeit I would have been happy with the Pheenies as Scouts also. Means my Marik Guard company won't be all Support lances ;)
W.
-
The Uller (Kit Fox) I is incorrectly listed with a ground speed of 10''.
Should be:
6 (base) x 1.25 (supercharger) -1 (modular armor) = 6.5 (rounds up to 7, or 14'').
Because of this, the TMM should be +3.
PV should be recalculated accordingly.
-
The Uller (Kit Fox) I is incorrectly listed with a ground speed of 10''.
Should be:
6 (base) x 1.25 (supercharger) -1 (modular armor) = 6.5 (rounds up to 7, or 14'').
Because of this, the TMM should be +3.
PV should be recalculated accordingly.
Thanks. We missed the supercharger. Move, TMM and PV updated.
-
Apologies in advance if my math is off, but I think I might have spotted a couple wrong stats on the Surat (Gray Death) Solahma Suit:
For a 4-man (and 5-man) squad, Short Range Damage should be 3, not 2:
( 5,7 (Heavy Small laser) + 0,5 (AP Weapon) ) x 3,5 (Troop Factor) / 10 = 6,2 x 3,5 /10 = 2,17 (rounds up to 3)
For a 4-man squad, Armor should be 1:
9 (armor of a single trooper) x 4 / 30 = 36 / 30 = 1,2 (rounds normally to 1)
To get an Armor value of 2, you would need a 5-man squad:
9 (armor of a single trooper) x 5 / 30 = 45 / 30 = 1,5 (rounds normally to 2)
By my math, the PV of a 4-man squad with the updated stats should remain at 9 points:
( 9 (Defensive value) + 3 (Offensive Value) ) x 0,75 (movement of 6'' and only S damage) = 12 x 0,75 = 9
-
@Adgar76 - Your damage calculation looks good to me (I have 2.17 as well, which rounds UP to 3).
I think because the Surat are "CAR5" the 2 Armor bubbles is correct; the "Squad 4" should probably be "Squad 5" (defaults to Clan formation, being a Solahama). ...However, when putting my own formulas in...
a "CAR4" should be 8 PV
both "CAR5" and "CAR6" should both be 10 PV
"Surat" Gray Death Solahma Suit (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7307/surat-gray-death-solahma-suit-standard)
reference: XTRO_Republic I, p.14
AlphaStrike Companion p.90-141
(my work is offline, pending TPTB using their own tables/values)
-
Surat has been updated.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7395/ti-tsang-jason
Should have "()" around the name "Jason" to match up with other designs.
Also, the abbreviation for the Battletech Dossiers: Jason Zaklan (http://masterunitlist.info/Source/Details/418) should most likely be "BD:JZ" rather than "BT:JZ" to match with the other Battletech Dossiers.
-
Thanks, (Jason) and the source abbreviation corrected.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2578/preta-c-prt-oe-eminus
Should be advanced (Thunderbolt Launcher)
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1325/grigori-c-grg-oe-eminus
Should be advanced (Thunderbolt Launcher)
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1319/grigori-c-grg-o-tamiel
Should be advanced (Thunderbolt Launcher)
Edit
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1826/koschei-ksc-5x
Should be Advanced as well, the only non-Tourney tech it has on it (At that time) are Claws, which are Advanced :)
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1197/gladiator-keller
According to RS3075u-AoW, page 100, this should be called the GLD-1R Gladiator (Keller).
Also, the BV should be 1553
Defensive BV Calculation Breakdown
(Note: BV Calculations include defensive BV for armored components.)
________________________________________________________________________________
Total Armor Factor (185) * Armor Type Modifier (1.0) * 2.5 462.50
Total Structure Points (91) * Structure Type Modifier (1.0)
* Engine Type Modifier (0.75) * 1.5 102.38
Mech Tonnage (55) * Gyro Type Modifer (0.5) 27.50
Total Defensive BV of all Equipment 5.00
Excessive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Explosive Ammunition Penalty -30.00
Explosive Item Penalty -3.00
Subtotal 564.38
Defensive Speed Factor Breakdown:
Maximum Ground Movement Modifier: 1.30
Maximum Jump Movement Modifier: 1.30
Defensive Speed Factor Bonus from Equipment: 0.00
Minimum Defensive Speed Factor: 0.00
(Max of Run or Jump) + DSF Bonus = 1.30
Total DBV (Subtotal * Defensive Speed Factor (1.30)) 733.69
Offensive BV Calculation Breakdown
________________________________________________________________________________
Heat Efficiency (6 + 22 - 3) = 25
Adjusted Weapon BV Total WBV 398.50
-> Snub-Nose PPC + PPC Capacitor 252.00
-> ER Medium Laser 62.00
-> ER Medium Laser 62.00
-> MML-5 22.50
Non-Heat Equipment Total NHBV 12.00
-> Improved C3 Computer 0.00
-> @ MML-5 (LRM) 6.00
-> @ MML-5 (SRM) 6.00
Excessive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Mech Tonnage Bonus 55.00
Subtotal (WBV + NHBV - Excessive Ammo + Tonnage Bonus) 465.50
Offensive Speed Factor Breakdown:
Adjusted Running MP (8) + ( Adjusted Jumping MP (6) / 2 ) - 5 = 6.00
6.00 / 10 + 1 = 1.600
1.60 ^ 1.2 = 1.76 (rounded off to two digits)
Total OBV (Subtotal * Offensive Speed Factor (1.76)) 819.28
Total Battle Value (DBV + OBV, round off) 1,553
The record sheet says 1557, but I get 1553. The discrepancy between the MUL and the sheet is perhaps using a previous sheet, or an incorrect MM file (MM shows 1517, but the armor is incorrect).
edit
Fixed a number, oops. Like, the most important number. Smooth!
/edit
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1197/gladiator-keller
According to RS3075u-AoW, page 100, this should be called the GLD-1R Gladiator (Keller).
Also, the BV should be 1153
The record sheet says 1557, but I get 1553. The discrepancy between the MUL and the sheet is perhaps using a previous sheet, or an incorrect MM file (MM shows 1517, but the armor is incorrect).
1,553 is correct, entry updated. Thanks.
-
Legionnaire 2D (And other variants) are using the art from 2X1 Muse Fire variant.
Should be using the art from TRO: 3075
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1863/legionnaire-lgn-2d
-
I see that the ASN-21 has IF0* and the ASN-101 doesn't, is there a reason for that?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/127/assassin-asn-21
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/126/assassin-asn-101
?
-
Legionnaire images fixed. Thanks.
-
?
It needs to be changed, it hasn't yet.
-
dunno if this is an intentional omission or not
the clan Battle Cobra omni has a <base> entry. The ComStar-adapted IS BTL-C-2O chassis does not.
-
RFL-3N Rifleman "Legend Killer"
RFL-3N Rifleman "Legend Killer 2"
RFL-3N-2 Rifleman II "Legend Killer"
whose RS are on pages 117-119 of the 3055U RS Print book are missing from the MUL
-
The MUL currently prints built forces with BVs in the force list, but no PVs. Could we please have the force PV total back on the first page? It was incredibly helpful. O:-)
-
When searching for the sub unit 'LAM', only the following units show up
Pwwka
Yurei
Waneta
Screamer
the Wasp, Stinger, and Shadow Hawk LAMs do no appear.
-
Uncheck the only show units with BV
-
Uncheck the only show units with BV
wow. nice work by me. sorry about that
-
The Mad Cat Mk II 4 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6850/mad-cat-mk-ii-4) has a Light Active Probe on its record sheet, but the MUL card lacks both LRPB and RCN. Recommend adding LPRB and RCN to the card, and recalculating PV as necessary.
Xotl: Done.
-
The the Hi-Scout carrier has a drone bay to carry the drones before launching them into battle. It has the bay listed on it's card, but the drones do not have the cargo ability that allows them to technically be carried.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1530/hi-scout-drone-napfind
Needs CAR2
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1531/hi-scout-drone-pathtrak
Needs CAR3
-
DCC (Drone Carrier) can carry units with DRO (Drones). CAR is for Infantry, to be carried with IT (infantry transport).
-
Conventional SRM infantry are able to equip inferno munitions (TW Pg. 42).
Should they gain the HT special? Or should they have the SRM special?
And I still think conventional infantry needs art.
-
Found a couple of issues with the AlphaStrike conversion of the Hellbringer (Loki)... possibly a discrepancy that wasn't "recomputed" from the recent errata regarding Heat Modified Damage (posted Here (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=40232.msg1117187#msg1117187))
Hellbringer (Loki) Prime (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1929/loki-hellbringer-prime):
OVL should be omitted (based on the following:)
Long Range Damage should be "4"
. Unmodified Base Damage = 3.3
. . 2x ERPPC = 3.0 damage
. . . x1.1 Targeting Computer = 3.3 Unmodified Base Damage
. Total Heat @ Long Range = 33
. . Weapon Heat = 30, AMS Heat = 1, Engine Heat = 2;
. 3.3 x 26 (DHS) / (33-4) = 29.5862
. . 3.3 - 2.95 = 0.341 ~ less than 1 --> Use Unmodified Base Damage, round normal (Up)
PV should be adjusted accordingly (decrease in OVL cost, increase in Long Range Damage = roughly 41 PV)
Role: Currently "Striker" though I Recommend changing to "Sniper" due to damage profile and Defensive Equipment (ECM, AMS)
Hellbringer [Loki] A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1923/loki-hellbringer-a):
Long Range Damage should = 4
. 3.65 = Unmodified Base Damage @Long
. . 1x UAC5 (100% damage) = 0.75 damage, 2 Heat
. . 2x ERLarge = 2.0 damage, 24 Heat
. . 1x LRM20 (75% damage) = 0.9 damage, 6 Heat
. Total Heat @ Long Range = 34
. . Weapon Heat = 32, Engine Heat = 2
. 3.65 x 26 DHS / (34 - 4) = 3.1633
. . 3.65 - 3.163. = 0.48667 ~ less than 1 --> use Unmodified Base Damage, round normal (up)
Hellbringer (Loki) [E] (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1927/loki-hellbringer-e):
OVL should be omitted (based on the following:)
**ALL** Range Damage Values should be "4"
. Unmodified Base Damage = 3.8
. . HAG20 = 4 heat, 1.328/1.2/1.2
. . 2x ERLarge = 24 heat, 2.0/2.0/2.0
. . LRM10 = 4 heat, 0.6/0.6/0.6; IF1
. Total Heat @ Each Range = 39
. . Weapon Heat = 34, Jump Heat = 3 (minimum);
. 3.8 x 26 (DHS) / (39-4) = 2.9939
. . 3.8 - 2.9939 = 0.80606 ~ less than 1 --> Use Unmodified Base Damage, round normal (Up)
PV should be adjust accordingly (I have around 36 PV)
Other variants may require attention. These few were just what I've done to confirm a pattern. (sorry in advance for the headache)
-
You round before doing the check for 1. Without hear, the long range would be 4. With heat, it would be 3. Thus it gets OVL.
-
You round before doing the check for 1. Without hear, the long range would be 4. With heat, it would be 3. Thus it gets OVL.
...That's not how I've been reading the errata. Rounding has been done after determining final modified damage values, and the difference between the two values must exceed "1" in order to receive an Overheat Value [at any range]. Otherwise, no Overheat?
Plus-- the "Hellbringer (Loki) Prime" should not be getting an OVL value of 3 ...it only hits with the 2 ERPPCs at that range. Max Damage at Long should be 4, and not 5.
***EDIT***(It *should* have an OV3 from its other weapon systems at Short and Medium Ranges; just not a different value and bonus damage at Long Range)
-
I wrote the rule, so I know the intent. If you think there's a better way to word it, I'm open to exceptions. But as for the intent, I'm certain on that one.
OV is a single value. It's based on medium range. If a unit has OVL, it uses the OV value as calculated by the medium range.
-
I wrote the rule, so I know the intent. If you think there's a better way to word it, I'm open to exceptions. But as for the intent, I'm certain on that one.
OV is a single value. It's based on medium range. If a unit has OVL, it uses the OV value as calculated by the medium range.
I apologize in advance if you felt offended - it was not my intent (nor will it ever be).
I believe the initial calculation on the MUL was done pre-errata as indicated, and that, now that we are calculating Long-Range Overheat differently and separately, the errata takes precedence and the values on the MUL should be changed. (reasons posted in my initial post upthread).
As for how *I* would reword/calculate for Modified Heat? ...Where is the best place to post this (I know this is not the thread) **edit: figured it out**
-
The stats are post errata. Without heat, it would do 4 damage at long range. With heat, it does 3. This it gets long range 3 and OVL. There is no OVL value. There is only an OV. It's calculated at medium range. OV is 3.
-
GoldBishop: The part where you check for missing damage happens after all rounding.
Without heat: 4 damage at long range.
With heat: 3 damage at long range.
There is a difference between those numbers, therefore the unit gets OVL.
-
Currently, the Long Range value of my focus (Hellbringer-Prime)is "2"... which is 2 points below the potential/maximum damage value we have both just calculated (as "4")
Regardless of how we reached our values, with OV3 coming from Medium range affecting the OVL, the unit card is still sporting the wrong value:
Long Range: 2, +3 OV = 5 potential max damage.
The Hellbringer-Prime needs to be updated. The question is: how? I'll PM you my Heat Calc info instead of hashing things out here.
-
I understand what your issue is, but the way you want it to work is not how it works, and not something I (or anybody else on the MUL team) can change. OV is a single value based on medium range. The long range damage values don't affect the OV value. The decision was made that OV would be a single value, and the Hellbringer being able to get OV3 at long range with its OVL was deemed acceptable collateral damage.
Your welcome to propose/discuss other opinions or house rules elsewhere in the forums, but this isn't a MUL issue.
-
GoldBishop: The part where you check for missing damage happens after all rounding.
Without heat: 4 damage at long range.
With heat: 3 damage at long range.
There is a difference between those numbers, therefore the unit gets OVL.
See, that's just it. If I'm reading the Errata(s) right, there is No Rounding until the values are compared/attained.
Therefore, I get the following...
. Without Heat: Unmodified Damage = 3.3 [Do Not Round]
. With Heat: Modified Damage = 2.985 [Do Not Round]
. Difference = 0.314, which is < 1 [Disqualified from OVL]
. Long Range Damage = UnmodifiedDamage (Round Up), or 3.3 ~ 4
What makes the most sense to me is that "rounding" comes when determining final values... . I'm really not trying to stir the pot here, guys... but there's no way my Loki Prime deals 5 damage at Long.
-
See, that's just it. If I'm reading the Errata(s) right
You're not. nckestrel wrote it and has already said that in this thread.
-
I'm taking it to PM. Sorry for the fuss, fellas.
-
I'm taking it to PM. Sorry for the fuss, fellas.
Please don't. It's my responsibility to ensure that errata is readily understood by readers. If it's unclear, it needs to be clarified, regardless of original intent.
I'll take a look at the wording and see if we can sharpen it.
-
As Xotl said, no need to apologize. We're just trying to clarify where the issue is. It's not the Hellbringer, it's as intended. If the wording of the OVL calculation isn't clear enough, that can be worked on. (The conversion process is a pain to keep everything clear).
-
I don't like stepping on toes - and it seemed like I was doing that (with the defensive posts countering and counter-countering). I have full confidence we're all on the same side of trying to find balance and fairness. I'm also seeing that this discussion doesn't belong on the errata thread, respectfully.
...
After writing a heap (still pending), I think I might have found something... so, please... forgive me for the long post
I have NOT been Rounding the "initial Unmodified Damage"
I have not seen an instruction to perform such immediate rounding (as of 11pm CST, 27 April 2016). (posting for clarity, not trying to be snide) ...the values I have calculated (and saved) are as raw numbers.
The Errata says to "use the Unmodified Damage value" to find the Heat Modified Value. I believe this is where the errors are popping up on my end.
For my Example: the Hellbringer (Prime) has a Long-Range unmodified damage value of 3.3 (2 ERPPCs = 3.0 damage, x1.1 for Targeting Computer) Its heat at this range is 33 (30 weapon, 1 AMS, 2 Movement)
With only 13 DHS to dissipate the heat, I have 26 Disp, or a Long Range Heat Modifier = 26/(33-4) or 0.89655~
Currently, the Hellbringer's Unmodified Long Range Damage is "3.3". I have not rounded this value to 4 because it is not the Final Damage Value (...yet!).
The way it has been explained to me (in the previous posts), I should be Rounding the initial value (3.3), and then multiply the base un-rounded value (3.3) to find the Heat-Modified Value - then take the difference as the Overheat Value (if any):
3.3 -> 4 [new Unmodified Damage]
3.3 x 0.89655 = 2.95862~ (Heat Modified)
4 - 2.95862 = 1.04138
...in my eyes, this is what you guys are telling me. "Long Range Damage" = 3 , "OVL" = Yes, (1) (for now at Long)
I believe the "error" I'm experiencing... is in clarity of the "un-Rounded" Shouldn't we be using the same base number when applying the Heat Modifier?
In this example, the difference is a staggering 0.7...
Calculating as explained to me first, with a twist: Rounding all Values immediately, then multiplying and Round again the values at Range by the Heat Modifier:
3.3 -> 4 [rounding Unmodified Damage Value]
4 x 0.89655 = 3.58262 [Multiplying Rounded Unmodified Damage Value by Heat Modifier]
4 - 3.58262 = 0.41738 [Difference from Unmodified and Modified]
...Since 0.41738 is less than 1, (per the errata)...
"Long Range Damage" = 4
"OVL" = "No"
Seems reasonable. Still dealing 4 damage at long, so no real issue.
Now... if I were to go back to how I was doing it ...without rounding:
3.3 x 0.89655 = 2.95862~ [Unmodified Long Range Damage]
3.3 - 2.95862 = 0.341~ [Difference between the Unmodified and Modified]
...Again, this value is less than 1, (per the errata) so now that the "Unmodified" value becomes the Long Range Damage value, it's time to round up (nearest whole):
"Long Range Damage" = 3.3 -> 4,
"OVL = No"
...Granted, I have not tested this method on other units - just the Loki so far - I believe my method provides values "closer" to the feel of their Classic/TotalWarfare counterparts. The Hellbringer Prime doesn't really overheat that much in Classic, so there's little reason (in my opinion) that it should get to deal a whooping 50 damage in AlphaStrike when it's only capable of 30; leaving it "as is" just felt wrong so I made it my mission to try and fix it. (and yes, this is an opinion. Sorry. Again.)
-
Unmodified in the OVL calculation is supposed to be meaning unmodified by heat. But it should go through the entire rest of the process to come up with a final damage value, then compare to the results with heat modification.
So perhaps "non-heat modified final damage value" and "heat modified final damage value" should be the wording of what we are comparing to check for OVL?
-
...
So perhaps "non-heat modified final damage value" and "heat modified final damage value" should be the wording of what we are comparing to check for OVL?
No. "non-heat final damage value", sounds too ...final... to me.
I think it should instead be "Initial Damage Value" (after all, we just finished summing damage at a particular range bracket)
However... shouldn't we wait to round until after we modify for heat?
Otherwise, we are just comparing a rounded (up) value to it's non-rounded value... which seems awfully more abstract than normal.
{in my example above... the difference between 3.3 and 4 is 0.7... which is more than enough to "push" a smaller value over the threshold into Overheat territory}
-
final damage value is after rounding. That's the point of using that term. It's final.
Why final? Because it's the results that matters. If the hypothetical unit's long range damage is not reduced by heat (the one that it will actually use in the game), then it does not get OVL. You can't not be penalized by heat and get the OVL. The only way to know if it's penalized by its heat (at long range), is to do the entire calculation and arrive at the final values for long range, without heat modification and with heat modification. If there is a difference in what the final value would be, then you get OVL.
Hellbringer, ignoring heat, would be a 4 at long range. Hellbringer, with heat, would be a 3. So it is penalized by its heat, so it gets OVL. Intermediate steps are meaningless, only what the final damage values would be have any meaning. for example, if it were 4.0 without heat and rounding to the final damage value, and 3.1 with heat, that's a 0.9 difference. It doesn't matter, because the actual result is 4 and 4. My example, regardless of intermediate steps, does not have it's actual AS stats affected by the heat. So it can't have OVL.
EDIT: And a reminder, we're trying to figure out how to make the wording more clear on what it is (the current intent), not change it to something else (different intent). If you want to discuss your opinion on what it should be, that discussion should go elsewhere.
-
Starting at the 3rd paragraph
To begin, find the unit’s maximum heat output. This is the heat generated by firing all weapons, including defensive equipment such as anti-missile systems, and the special-case heat rules described further below. ’Mech units must also add the maximum heat generation possible for their most heat-intensive movement mode. This added movement heat is +2 if the unit is a BattleMech that lacks jump jets, or +1 per 2 inches of jumping Move if the unit is a BattleMech or IndustrialMech that has jump jets (to a minimum of +3 heat for such jumping units). None of the other heat-tracking units covered by these rules (including nonjumping IndustrialMechs) add heat for their movement actions.
Next, determine the unit’s heat dissipation rate by adding up all of the heat modifiers shown in the Heat Dissipation Table. Note that the heat modifiers for heat sinks and coolant pods are applied for each sink or pod the unit mounts, while the heat modifiers for other special equipment like the partial wing, radical heat sink system, and RISC the emergency coolant system apply only once. For example, a unit with 10 double heat sinks and a coolant pod would have a heat dissipation rate of –21 ([10 double heat sinks x –2] –1 [coolant pod] = –21).
No Rounding indicated.
**Long-Range Weapons: The above heat-modification process applies to all heat-generating units for attacks made in the Short and Medium range brackets. If the unit can deliver damage at Long range (or better), a separate Long-range heat output must also be calculated. This follows the standard rules for calculating a unit's heat output, except that the only weapons included are those with a Long-range damage value.
Calculate the unit's Long-range damage value without modifying for heat, and then calculate its Long-range damage value modified using the above Long-range heat output. If, after all rounding is applied, the heat-modified Long-range damage is lower than the unmodified Long-range damage by at least 1 point, then the unit receives the OVL (Overheat Long) special ability. This calculation is used solely to check if the unit qualifies for the OVL special ability. If it does qualify, the unit's actual Long-range damage value is calculated by modifying for heat using the exact same procedure and unit heat output as for the Short and Long range brackets, including weapon heat generated by weapons that cannot reach Long range.
If the unit does not qualify for OVL, its Long-range damage value is unmodified by heat and the full damage value is used.**
[emphasis added for clarity]
Rounding indicated.
Which one is correct? and should it apply to ALL ranges (not just Long).
-
All OV and OVL checks should be using final values. As final as final there is. (I'm being silly, but I'm mocking the complexity of AS conversions and its use of "final" for various steps when its not really final). The intent is you must do all the work to a final damage value. You can't stop part way and do the comparison then.
p116, Determining Final Damage Values.
This defines what a Final Damage Value is. It's after the rounding to a whole number. If you don't have a whole number, you don't have a final damage value. That's why I suggested changing the wording to final damage values, because they have a definition, and it's after rounding.
so p115, starting at 3rd paragraph is talking pre-final damage values. It doesn't say anything OV. that's why it doesn't say anything about rounding. That comes later (p116).
the errata for p115 Long-Range Weapons, already specifies after all rounding, for the OVL check. For OV and OVL checks, you need to have finished the entire calcuation(s).
p116, Calculating Overheat Value
"To find a unit’s Overheat Value, compare its maximum Alpha Strike damage at Medium range before and after it has been adjusted for heat using these rules."
This should also mention final damage values.
And then under that for Long-Range Weapons
"if this same comparison." and then this would be referencing final damage values as well.
-
This discussion makes me wonder whether or not you guys could talk to Rick Raisley about including Alpha Strike stats in his Heavy Metal programs?
The reason I ask is because he did make calculations for Battleforce 2 integral to the software, so the work might already be halfway completed.
Also, yay or nay on SRM infantry being able to carry inferno munitions in AS? If so, how do we note that on the card?
Thanks
-
The MUL Force Builder doesn't seem to be taking into account skill increases. All of my cards are printing as the default 4, regardless of how I alter the skills in the list.
-
Scapha "I" Variant
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6667/scapha-hovertank-i
[TRO3145_RotS p.21]
This unit should also have the "TAG" Special (thanks to it's C3M)
However, as this equipment is listed to be mounted in a "Body" location, it should not be added to the turret "TUR" specials.
Xotl: corrected, thanks.
-
First of all I would like to say a big thank you to the MUL guys for publishing the availability lists for TR3145RoTS!
Now for the errata business .
The Quirinius and the Celerity 04-R and 05-X don't have faction availability
-
That is intentional for the moment. They would be Comstar. I'm just trying to avoid break several internal processes until we are closer to having complete data in for the later eras.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
-
The Galleon 200 (RL) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1180/galleon-light-tank-gal-200-rl) is listed as a Sniper despite doing exactly zero damage at Long range. And... somehow has TUR1/0*/- despite having a flat 0 (without the star) at Medium.
-
First of all I would like to say a big thank you to the MUL guys for publishing the availability lists for TR3145RoTS!
This makes me think I should ask, would it be possible for you to post an announcement on the page's news blurb whenever you add a new source to the MUL?
Now that I've gone and printed a card of every variant of every unit I own, I'd like to be informed when new variants are added, so that I can keep my cards current.
It would also help us errata checkers to know when there are a fresh bunch of files to go over.
Thanks
P.S. Still wondering about those inferno SRM infantry for AS.
-
That depends upon what you want. Units get added in different stages. Lately I have been adding the base info when I finally get the book. Someone else has been doing the AS stats sometime later.
When we do faction data for a new era, we will make a big announcement. Minor updates for faction data probably aren't worth filling the new feed that the important stuff gets lost in a wall of words.
Wouldn't inferno infantry just be srm infantry that use alternative ammo?
-
Wouldn't inferno infantry just be srm infantry that use alternative ammo?
No SRM special on SRM infantry :(
-
I guess it didn't make the threshold which means heat probably wouldn't make it either.
-
I suppose you could create custom cards and give the HT1/1 ability. Flamer infantry got the HT special afterall in the conversion process.
-
That depends upon what you want. Units get added in different stages. Lately I have been adding the base info when I finally get the book. Someone else has been doing the AS stats sometime later.
What I would want would be once all the units from a new source are added, say Operational Turning Points: Alshain or Record Sheets 3175: Ununabridged, a simple notice is put up on the news blurb so that we see it when we go to the front page.
That way we can go to the "sources" tab, look at the units, and make cards or point out corrections.
And if the SRM infantry can do 1 damage, shouldn't they be able to do 1 HT? Doesn't make much sense otherwise.
-
In Alpha Strike, the infantry do not use any alternative munitions, there's no exception given for Infernos and SRM infantry.
-
The Galleon 200 (RL) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1180/galleon-light-tank-gal-200-rl) is listed as a Sniper despite doing exactly zero damage at Long range. And... somehow has TUR1/0*/- despite having a flat 0 (without the star) at Medium.
I went through a did the weapon conversions on this one. I came up with a damage profile of 1/0*/0*. I also found out that the Companion does not have an entry for the Rocket Launcher (PP) found on the Galleon in question. However, even if it does modify the damage values, none of the final values would change (they ended up being 0.88/0.48/0.24 before rounding). The TUR values should not change.
Due to the nature of the weapon system in question and the vehicle mounting them, I suggest changing the role to "Brawler", and raising the PV by 3 points to accompany the change from 0 to 0* on the Medium and Long range entries.
-
There was an issue when RS: Operation Klondike was entered where we couldn't set 0* as a damage value. I just went through and edited a bunch of the combat vees and lighter 'mechs from that book to add the 0*s back. PVs for those were also updated.
GAL-200 (RL) was set to Scout.
Griffin 2N (and 2N2) was set to Skirmisher.
-
That is intentional for the moment. They would be Comstar. I'm just trying to avoid break several internal processes until we are closer to having complete data in for the later eras.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
Thank you for the answer but what about the Quirinius?
Unlike the Celerity it has no connection to Comstar and we can readily infer it's faction availability from the text:
"It was produced on Terra and found ready markets
in the former Free Worlds League territories.
Many mercenaries of the early thirty-second
century also accept Quirinus suits in lieu of
payment from its many users."
I guess it means Republic, former FWL states and mercenaries
-
Hmm. I seemed to have missed those. Repub, merc, and three of the fwl states. I'll get them in tonight. Sorry about that.
-
The Wolverine-7K (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3575/wolverine-wvr-7k) doesn't have the Draconis Combine on its availability list. The lore in TRO:3050 places this model's production at Marduk. It'd be rather strange, IMO, that the mech be built solely for export.
Is the availability for that model in the MUL in error, or correct?
-
Phalanx D lists availability as former FWL. According to RS:3145NTNU "This support variant is immensely popular
in Republic forces, and is even surfacing in Oriente infantry formations."
I believe that the Republic of the Sphere should be added to the faction availability.
Spider 10K is listed as a RotS design but the ballistic reinforced and K designation make me believe it's a Kuritan design (and the design uses RE lasers that the DC began salvaging as with the Nyx 110)
-
Phalanx D and Spider 10K fixed. Data entry issue on my end. Sorry about that.
Wolverine 7K we will discuss internally. It wouldn't be the first mech to be made solely for export and it has been sans Kurita for a long time. We'll see what our internal discussion yields.
Edit: Wolverine is DC for clan invasion and civil war eras. The remainders were all converted by the Jihad.
-
There are some entries that I can't be sure but I believe might be in error:
Vedette V9 is listed as Hell Horse, Wolf and Jade Falcon design but should be Lyran.
The reasoning is that it's an IS tech design and that the V7 is a Lyran design (used by the LC FS RotS). The text implies
that this design is a successor to the V7 "While swapping its bombast laser for a Gauss rifle
increased range and effectiveness,".
griffin 6S2 is listed as a LC and DC design but I think FS should be added (perhaps instead of DC)
This design seems to be a modification of the Griffin 6S which was produced by the FS and LC, Unlike the DC which had produced the 1DS and later the 5K. Also this
mech uses a boosted C3 slave which seems to be rather common in FS designs of this era.
Gallant 10-0 should be added to the FS. This mech uses RE lasers that were debuted by the FS in 3130 and the mech was introduced in 3130.
Also the FS produces the chassis (along with the LC and the RotS). It's possible the technology has spread pretty quickly but it seems to me a bit odd
-
We'll take a look.
The key to the vedette is when arcturus fell to the wolves and if there was enough time to build up a sizeable quantity before production switched to the clans.
-
https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/mul-images/BattleMechs/Scorpion.jpg
Is blank?
-
https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/mul-images/BattleMechs/Scorpion.jpg
Is blank?
Case sensitivity....the Scorpions should be all fixed now.
-
Hussar2: fixed with some light tweaking.
-
The Galleon 102, 103, and 104 do not have images. They should use the image found in TRO3058U and RS3058Uu-I.
-
Fixed. Sadly it only needed the extension to be changed from jpg to JPG. I hate to think how many other case sensitive issues we have.
Thanks for pointing it out.
-
Looks like the Defiance DFN-3S has the same problem, though the DFN-3C and -3T are okay. Also, the three Defiance models have FLK0/0/1; is that correct? They can only make special FLK attacks at L range?
-
That sounds like it might be a heat and/or minimum range issue, though it's... bizarre, to say the least, that they don't even get 0*.
-
That sounds like it might be a heat and/or minimum range issue, though it's... bizarre, to say the least, that they don't even get 0*.
I can't get at my books to check right now, so that's why I'm dumping it in your lap. Enjoy!
-
I can't get at my books to check right now, so that's why I'm dumping it in your lap. Enjoy!
I think that it's because FLK damage is dealt even on a standard attack if conditions are met, and subject to OV. The normal LB-10X damage of 0.6 is reduced by heat to 0.3 (24 dissipation, 52 maximum heat). It's possible that the conversion to 0* was simply missed.
-
I've been haunting this thread for awhile, ever since I printed up my AS cards, and the reason was that this is the only place I know of that I can find info on any changes made to the AS cards.
So rather than keep doing that (not that you guys aren't great) but I now know what I want for the MUL site.
An AS card change log.
I would like one of the tabs at the top of the page to be a list of whenever a card for AS has been updated in any way.
I'm not talking about things like fixing broken pictures, but I am talking about whenever a card is added or has anything updated or corrected.
I have almost 2000 AS cards printed now and I would like to be able to have an easy reference point for keeping them current.
Thanks
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/590/chippewa-iic-standard
Image displayed for the Chippewa IIC is that of the Chippewa. Replace with correct image from Era Digest: Golden Century.
-
Kanga Medium Hovertank (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1745/kanga-medium-hovertank-standard) should show 12"j on its AS card not 8"j
Per TRO 3050u (also on its RS) the TW movement for the Kanga is 8/12/6
Unless I missed something anyway...
Xotl: corrected, thanks.
-
the Gnome BA is listed as being produced in 3056 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1216/), yet it's advanced SRM-2 launcher isn't available till 3058, making the unit illegal...does this need an errata to the dates?
-
Its possible the intro for the srm has changed in errata or in IO. There were a lot of intro date changes in IO such as the Long Tom artillery. Do you have a copy of IO to double check that date?
-
Not that I could find.
Edit: I checked the original source for the Gnome BA, Field Manual: Crusader Clans. That was back when battle armor was still being constructed by fiat, rather than a unified design system, and many suits included some piece of original equipment. Anyway, the FM says 3056 for the introduction of the Gnome with its special missile launcher. The MUL is correct, and errata should be issued for TechManual or anywhere else the Advanced SRM is listed as being introduced in 3058.
...I mean, that's my opinion from what I could find on the subject. I can't make the ruling, I'm not a MUL member or developer. :-[
-
Both Foot Ballistic Rifle Hastati V, 513th Infantry Regiment (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1141/foot-ballistic-rifle-hastati-v-513th-infantry-regiment) and Motorized MG Galatean Support Wheels (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2234/motorized-mg-galatean-support-wheels) are missing an AS card.
-
Not that I could find.
Edit: I checked the original source for the Gnome BA, Field Manual: Crusader Clans. That was back when battle armor was still being constructed by fiat, rather than a unified design system, and many suits included some piece of original equipment. Anyway, the FM says 3056 for the introduction of the Gnome with its special missile launcher. The MUL is correct, and errata should be issued for TechManual or anywhere else the Advanced SRM is listed as being introduced in 3058.
...I mean, that's my opinion from what I could find on the subject. I can't make the ruling, I'm not a MUL member or developer. :-[
I, for one, am in full agreement. O0
-
Case sensitivity on MUL is likely due to running Apache for the back-end. by default it uses the unix model of case sensitivity.
add this to httpd.conf to turn on case insensitivity (if that is the problem). Note: you must have the mod_speling module already, but it is included by default with apache.
<IfModule mod_speling.c>
CheckSpelling On
CheckCaseOnly On
</IfModule>
-
I'd like to make an enhancement request. I'd like to have the ability to export the results of a filtered unit search to a file in .csv format or something similar. When I'm doing force building I'm not always online. Thanks.
-
The HPPC and LRM variants of the Brutus Assault tank appear to have incorrect values for their TUR special on their AS cards.
The Brutus Assault Tank (LRM) has a turret value of TUR(2/3/2) and should be (if I'm doing this right) of TUR(2/3/3). The unit has 2 x LRM 20 in the turret each with more than 10 rounds of ammo.
The Brutus Assault Tank (HPPC) has a turret value of TUR(2/2/2) and should be TUR(2/3/3). The unit has 1 x LRM 20 with more than 10 rounds of ammo and 1 x HPPC in the turret.
Thank you.
-
I'd like to make an enhancement request. I'd like to have the ability to export the results of a filtered unit search to a file in .csv format or something similar.
Copy - paste works. Just remember to grab the header so it brings along the columns. I do a fair amount of work that way.
-
The Saroyan Jump Bomber's role seems wrong. http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6472/saroyan-jump-bomber-standard
It is listed as Fast Dogfighter, but given the unit's capabilities (well, lack of them), it doesn't seem fitting. Attack Fighter (despite its speed criteria being far lower) or Fire Support would be more fitting for its role as pure ground-attack aircraft.
-
MUL, AS Force Builder, and permission to print.
I print all my stuff at my local office depot, which I encounter no issues, but a friend is getting his AS Force Builder printouts rejected by the store manager since it does't have a permission to reproduce for personal use labelled on it.
Is there something he can point to to get past this issue?
Thanks
-
Baleena Passenger Submarine (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3778/baleena-passenger-submarine-standard) listed as 0 tons, should be 200 tons
-
Baleena Passenger Submarine (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3778/baleena-passenger-submarine-standard) listed as 0 tons, should be 200 tons
Fixed. It was entered as 0.2 tons for some reason.
-
It seems Loki Mk II has wrong structure value for its AS cards. Both Ebon Jaguar and Hellbringer have 4 but Loki II has only 3, even though they're all same weight and use Clan XL engine, and there should not be anything else that reduces the value in Loki II.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6277/loki-mk-ii-prime
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6278/loki-mk-ii-a
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6279/loki-mk-ii-b
Xotl: corrected, thanks.
-
I was looking at the entry for the Tiger T-12 and availability has it as extinct yet the written description suggests that it was put into limited production across the IS during the succession wars?
Which is correct?
Regards
Mutantsix
-
Marauder II, specifically the MAD-5A
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2059/marauder-ii-mad-5a (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2059/marauder-ii-mad-5a)
It's on the FedCom RAT in Era Report 3052 and Era Report 3062, so it looks like availability needs to be adjusted.
The fluff in the original TRO:3050 clearly indicates sales to at least one merc unit as well.
I'm not sure if the 5B or 5C models might be impacted.
ETA: It's in the FM: Mercs RAT as well.
-
Marauder II, specifically the MAD-5A
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2059/marauder-ii-mad-5a (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2059/marauder-ii-mad-5a)
It's on the FedCom RAT in Era Report 3052 and Era Report 3062, so it looks like availability needs to be adjusted.
That might be more of an error in the RATs, unless wider distribution was deliberately intended.
The fluff in the original TRO:3050 clearly indicates sales to at least one merc unit as well.
That would be covered by the newer Common Allies/Enemies rules in Combat Manual: Mercenaries; custom units can pay points to have the Dragoons as an Ally, giving them access to Dragoons-specific machines. The MUL takes into account that handfuls of specific units may be found outside of their original factions, but unless it's a substantial number or results in new variants, then the capturing faction is not listed. Otherwise, given how widely 'Mechs end up distributed (at least in tiny numbers), listing factions at all would be pointless.
For a very specific example, look at the Capellan Death Commandos. They have the special rule that they can use any Inner Sphere 'Mech, from any faction, by choice. Does that mean that every 'Mech should have "Liao" as a listed faction?
-
Reporting a problem with the MUL:
When you hit the button to download a created force, the compiled .pdf does not include the last skill toggle you made unless it was not the last thing you did prior to hitting the download button.
In other words, if the last unit you add to your force is not a skill 4, the only way to make it show up as the skill you want on the compiled .pdf is to then add and remove a pointless extra unit before compiling.
EDIT: messing around with it further has revealed that it is ignoring ALL skill toggles after the last unit that was added or removed. If you add every unit in your list, and then go in and put in all the skills, the pdf will still print everyone at skill 4 if you don't add and remove another unit just before compiling.
-
Problem/Question: The BLR-1C BattleMaster is mentioned in canon but does not show up in the MUL.
Explicitly named the BLR-1C twice, it features in the novel Heir to the Dragon as Theodore Kurita's ComStar-supplied command 'Mech in chapters 52 and 65, FASA edition pp. 251-251 & 306-311= Roc edition pp. 287-289 & 346-351.
It is explicitly said this 'Mech came unmodified and without downgrades, i.e. the one in the novel is a factory model in original configuration. In battle it is described to use one (implicitly single) arm-mounted Donal PPC, a Holly SRM-6 launcher, DHS, paired rear-defense lasers, and it explicitly does not have machine guns.
The BLR-2C may have been meant to be this 'Mech, but it bears a wrong alphanumerical designation (and its AMS and BAP aren't mentioned in the novel).
There is a BLR-1Gc variant with a "double cockpit" mentioned in TRO:3075 that seems to be identical to the BLR-1C as described in the novel, and Sarna posits these may be the same model.
Any new insights? I was looking for the BLR-1C's intro date for a story when I found this problem.
-
We'll look at it, but Ask The Writers or (in this case) Ask the Lead Devs might give you a better chance at getting answers than here.
-
Reporting a problem with the MUL:
When you hit the button to download a created force, the compiled .pdf does not include the last skill toggle you made unless it was not the last thing you did prior to hitting the download button.
In other words, if the last unit you add to your force is not a skill 4, the only way to make it show up as the skill you want on the compiled .pdf is to then add and remove a pointless extra unit before compiling.
EDIT: messing around with it further has revealed that it is ignoring ALL skill toggles after the last unit that was added or removed. If you add every unit in your list, and then go in and put in all the skills, the pdf will still print everyone at skill 4 if you don't add and remove another unit just before compiling.
Is this with or without clicking the Save button prior to clicking Print PDF? Using the Save button before exporting the PDF seems to prevent a number of issues. (At least when I've tried it.)
-
We now have rules in Campaign Operations for having large spacecraft in your forces, and availability rolls that rely on cost and number of docking collars. Is there any chance we could have c-bill costs for dropships and jumpships (and dropship collars for jumpships in the notes?) prioritized for the MUL?
-
The Tengu C3i currently has a minimum Short-range damage value. It has no weapons: am I missing something, or should it have a 0 for damage?
-
It can still carry an infantry rifle.
-
The Aquila ASF (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6518/aquila-aqa-1m) lacks any URL that my computer is capable of displaying.
-
Could you provide some more details? The link you posted works fine for me on both computers and mobiles. I did fix the image not appearing.
Does this link also not work?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6518
-
I typed URL and meant image. Not entirely sure what I was thinking.
-
The image was fixed when I was poking around.
-
Ares Medium Tank (Standard) - http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/109/ares-medium-tank-standard
Ares Medium Tank (Plasma) - http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/108/ares-medium-tank-plasma
Both have Type "BM"... should be "CV"
I noticed this when I went to mark off Motive crits and it had the wrong boxes to check. (I'm assuming fixing BM to CV will also rectify the Crit table on the card)
-
Thanks, fixed the Ares.
-
All variants of the Buster HaulerMech (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7220/buster-bc-xxi-haulermech) were given artwork in Record Sheets: Vehicle Annex, IndustrialMechs & Exoskeletons that is different from the Powerman HaulerMech. See attached.
I believe the Buster XXI (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3882/buster-xxi-haulermech) and Buster BC XXI (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7220/buster-bc-xxi-haulermech) refer to the same machine. Suggest deleting Buster XXI as it does not contain the reference to the RS book, nor much other information.
-
Bump.
The HPPC and LRM variants of the Brutus Assault tank appear to have incorrect values for their TUR special on their AS cards.
The Brutus Assault Tank (LRM) has a turret value of TUR(2/3/2) and should be (if I'm doing this right) of TUR(2/3/3). The unit has 2 x LRM 20 in the turret each with more than 10 rounds of ammo.
The Brutus Assault Tank (HPPC) has a turret value of TUR(2/2/2) and should be TUR(2/3/3). The unit has 1 x LRM 20 with more than 10 rounds of ammo and 1 x HPPC in the turret.
Thank you.
-
I like and use the BV Piloting/Gunnery charts but if I could request a feature, would it be possible to label the two axis as piloting and gunnery? At the moment they're useful but not user-friendly.
-
I like and use the BV Piloting/Gunnery charts but if I could request a feature, would it be possible to label the two axis as piloting and gunnery? At the moment they're useful but not user-friendly.
agreed, i forget which axis is which every time i reference the chart.
-
I added it to the to do list. I'm not sure when it will be worked on.
-
Brutus HPPC and LRM fixed, thanks.
-
I added it to the to do list. I'm not sure when it will be worked on.
cool, thanks.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6636/sternensturm-stm-o-base
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6637/sternensturm-stm-o
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6638/sternensturm-stm-oa
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6639/sternensturm-stm-ob
All of these have unit types of "Aerospace-Aerospace Fighter" when they should have "Aerospace-OmniFighter"
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6636/sternensturm-stm-o-base
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6637/sternensturm-stm-o
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6638/sternensturm-stm-oa
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6639/sternensturm-stm-ob
All of these have unit types of "Aerospace-Aerospace Fighter" when they should have "Aerospace-OmniFighter"
I tried to update the first two and I received the following errors (the first for the base mode, the second for the -o):
Exception Details: System.Web.HttpRequestValidationException: A potentially dangerous Request.Form value was detected from the client (Model="STM-O <Base>").
Exception Details: System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.
-
Woohoo! Broke the MUL! :)
-
Woohoo! Broke the MUL! :)
Do you feel like a hero now?
-
They are all changed to omnifighter. You successfully changed the first two. I did the last two.
Xtol: the error was for the log file.
-
The Ares superheavy 'Mechs are missing the OMNI special.
Also, if I do a search for units with the OMNI AS ability I get 747 'Mechs, but if I do a search adding the "OmniMech" subtype I only get 720 units. I know the Omni QuadVees don't show up under the OmniMech subtype, but that's only 9 'Mechs. I'm not sure which are the rest. And neither search returns the Ares SH Omnis.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6440/shun-transport-vtol-standard
The shun transport vtol (From tro 3145 cap conf) doesn't have the STL special. It mounts stealth armor.
-
Wantec:
I see the units in question. I'll get them updated. It also looks like the Notos C is lacking the omni special.
-
Ares, Notos C, and all BattleMechs with OMNI special but not with OmniMech subtype have been fixed.
-
I don't know if this is the appropriate thread to ask, but, when will the new artwork for the Wolverine be added for the relevant MUL entries?
-
Zeus ZEU-9S2 seems to have REAR 1/1/- ability in its AS card even though the 'Mech does not have any rear-facing weapons.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5459/zeus-zeu-9s2
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/5459?skill=4
On the other hand, Zeus ZEU-9S seems to be missing REAR 1/1/- ability. I believe single rear-mounted Medium Pulse Laser is enough for that.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3644/zeus-zeu-9s
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/3644?skill=4
-
The Highlander HGN-694 is lacking introduction date but has availability for Civil War Era.
Probably should have introduction date of 3062 or 3063, considering the 'Mech is available in MechWarrior IV and other 'Mechs based on that game have similar or earlier introduction dates.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5493/highlander-hgn-694
-
Fast Recon Cavalry Point, 67th Battlemech Cluster, Iota Galaxy (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1035/fast-recon-cavalry-point-67th-battlemech-cluster-iota-galaxy)
...shows up in most Clan searches for infantry, has the word "Recon" in it... yet... their role is listed as "Ambusher".
Based on the role assignment found in the Companion, shouldn't they labeled either Scouts or Strikers?
They meet the speed, armor, and damage qualifiers (p.135-136), so I'm not sure if this is in error (needing update?) or that all Conventional Infantry units are forced to be "Ambusher" by default?
-
Fast Recon Cavalry Point, 67th Battlemech Cluster, Iota Galaxy (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1035/fast-recon-cavalry-point-67th-battlemech-cluster-iota-galaxy)
...shows up in most Clan searches for infantry, has the word "Recon" in it... yet... their role is listed as "Ambusher".
Based on the role assignment found in the Companion, shouldn't they labeled either Scouts or Strikers?
They meet the speed, armor, and damage qualifiers (p.135-136), so I'm not sure if this is in error (needing update?) or that all Conventional Infantry units are forced to be "Ambusher" by default?
Thanks, went through a bunch of MV10" listed as Ambushers and changed them (mostly to Strikers, some Scouts).
-
Record sheet source for the Wolfhound IIC "Grinner" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3570/) is listed as Record Sheets: 3050 Upgrade Unabridged, Clan and Star League. Should be Record Sheets: 3050 Upgrade Unabridged, Inner Sphere.
-
Thanks, went through a bunch of MV10" listed as Ambushers and changed them (mostly to Strikers, some Scouts).
Aww, you didn't upgrade the IS recon infantry (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2673/recon-infantry-recon-battalion-201st-pesht-assault-team-3rd-proserpina-hussars) even tho they have the 10" move. With a short range damage value of 0* I'm not sure how they were ever classified as ambushers in the first place ;)
-
Record sheet source for the Wolfhound IIC "Grinner" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3570/) is listed as Record Sheets: 3050 Upgrade Unabridged, Clan and Star League. Should be Record Sheets: 3050 Upgrade Unabridged, Inner Sphere.
Fixed.
-
Aww, you didn't upgrade the IS recon infantry (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2673/recon-infantry-recon-battalion-201st-pesht-assault-team-3rd-proserpina-hussars) even tho they have the 10" move. With a short range damage value of 0* I'm not sure how they were ever classified as ambushers in the first place ;)
Ambushers just need to be slow and short range (and low armor). They don't need to do lots of damage.
But yeah, the Recon infantry should be Scouts, I thought I had gotten them already..and clearly hadn't.
-
Is there a problem with the master unit list?
Server Error in '/' Application.
The cast to value type 'Int32' failed because the materialized value is null. Either the result type's generic parameter or the query must use a nullable type.
Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.
Exception Details: System.InvalidOperationException: The cast to value type 'Int32' failed because the materialized value is null. Either the result type's generic parameter or the query must use a nullable type.
Source Error:
Line 258: <div class="col-sm-8 col-lg-10">
Line 259:
Line 260: @if (Model.Units().Count == 0)
Line 261: {
Line 262: <p>To find units, start by entering your search terms. The more terms you enter, the smaller the list of matching units will be.</p>
Source File: d:\home\site\wwwroot\Views\Unit\Filter.cshtml Line: 260
Stack Trace:
[InvalidOperationException: The cast to value type 'Int32' failed because the materialized value is null. Either the result type's generic parameter or the query must use a nullable type.]
System.Data.Common.Internal.Materialization.ErrorHandlingValueReader`1.GetValue(DbDataReader reader, Int32 ordinal) +95
System.Data.Common.Internal.Materialization.Shaper.GetColumnValueWithErrorHandling(Int32 ordinal) +39
lambda_method(Closure , Shaper ) +1694
System.Data.Common.Internal.Materialization.Coordinator`1.ReadNextElement(Shaper shaper) +163
System.Data.Common.Internal.Materialization.SimpleEnumerator.MoveNext() +97
System.Collections.Generic.List`1..ctor(IEnumerable`1 collection) +460
System.Linq.Enumerable.ToList(IEnumerable`1 source) +58
MUL2.Models.UnitSearch.Units() +8776
ASP._Page_Views_Unit_Filter_cshtml.Execute() in d:\home\site\wwwroot\Views\Unit\Filter.cshtml:260
System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy() +197
System.Web.Mvc.WebViewPage.ExecutePageHierarchy() +104
System.Web.WebPages.StartPage.RunPage() +17
System.Web.WebPages.StartPage.ExecutePageHierarchy() +64
System.Web.WebPages.WebPageBase.ExecutePageHierarchy(WebPageContext pageContext, TextWriter writer, WebPageRenderingBase startPage) +78
System.Web.Mvc.RazorView.RenderView(ViewContext viewContext, TextWriter writer, Object instance) +257
System.Web.Mvc.BuildManagerCompiledView.Render(ViewContext viewContext, TextWriter writer) +107
System.Web.Mvc.ViewResultBase.ExecuteResult(ControllerContext context) +291
System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResult(ControllerContext controllerContext, ActionResult actionResult) +13
System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass1a.<InvokeActionResultWithFilters>b__17() +23
System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultFilter(IResultFilter filter, ResultExecutingContext preContext, Func`1 continuation) +245
System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass1c.<InvokeActionResultWithFilters>b__19() +22
System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultFilter(IResultFilter filter, ResultExecutingContext preContext, Func`1 continuation) +245
System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass1c.<InvokeActionResultWithFilters>b__19() +22
System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultWithFilters(ControllerContext controllerContext, IList`1 filters, ActionResult actionResult) +176
System.Web.Mvc.Async.<>c__DisplayClass2a.<BeginInvokeAction>b__20() +75
System.Web.Mvc.Async.<>c__DisplayClass25.<BeginInvokeAction>b__22(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +99
System.Web.Mvc.Async.WrappedAsyncResult`1.End() +50
System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncControllerActionInvoker.EndInvokeAction(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +27
System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass1d.<BeginExecuteCore>b__18(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +14
System.Web.Mvc.Async.<>c__DisplayClass4.<MakeVoidDelegate>b__3(IAsyncResult ar) +16
System.Web.Mvc.Async.WrappedAsyncResult`1.End() +50
System.Web.Mvc.Controller.EndExecuteCore(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +36
System.Web.Mvc.Async.<>c__DisplayClass4.<MakeVoidDelegate>b__3(IAsyncResult ar) +16
System.Web.Mvc.Async.WrappedAsyncResult`1.End() +50
System.Web.Mvc.Controller.EndExecute(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +26
System.Web.Mvc.Controller.System.Web.Mvc.Async.IAsyncController.EndExecute(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +10
System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass8.<BeginProcessRequest>b__3(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +25
System.Web.Mvc.Async.<>c__DisplayClass4.<MakeVoidDelegate>b__3(IAsyncResult ar) +16
System.Web.Mvc.Async.WrappedAsyncResult`1.End() +50
System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +28
System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) +9
System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +9644037
System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +155
-
^^ Seconded.
MUL throwing script errors when I try to pull anything up.
-
Huh, so it ain't just me?
By the way, i go similar error in Camospecs too.
-
It's been passed up the chain. Thanks.
-
I found a work around for the MUL problem.
If you google: Master Unit List and then the name of the unit you want to view, the link will take you there with no problem.
This only works for units, not sources.
-
Was wondering if there was any update on this Error with the MUL?
-
No.
You'll learn about it immediately if there is. Promise. :)
-
Any update on fixing the MUL?
-
Yes, it has been fixed.
-
The second issue was just fixed this morning. If you are still having problems please let us know.
-
Regarding the MUL hiccup...
Glad to see it back up! For the most part, I'm able to run the search just fine. 2 problems have occurred, so just putting it out there to see if others are getting the same results I am
(1) Random Search Fail.
Sometimes, after operating a search (general, era, or faction), I can view the unit in question, click secondary links to look at other variants, go back to the previous, and close.
Sometimes... when I click on an alternate variant, it spews back the same Search Error we previously suffered.
I've been unable to duplicate the error successfully. It happens at random times for random units. Sometimes it doesn't happen at all, and sometimes it happens right off the bat. I am hoping its just my IP and lame-ass upload (while the kids are streaming NetFlix on 3 different devices) and not an actual problem for the MUL. Still, if anyone else is having an error like that, I felt I should post it...
(2) Add Function Fails to add units into AlphaStrike Force Builder.
Tested this multiple times, clicking the "Add Unit" function on the line with a unit found using the Search functions (generic Search, Era, or Faction)
The "added" units are only added to the Standard Force list, but when I select "AS Builder" from the submenu under "Force" nothing appears in the roster.
Units may still be searched and added under the AS Force Builder normally; Skill ups and Print function remains normal (or at least, pre-hiccup normal; still spits out BV table for AlphaStrike Cards)
-
The Dasher II 4 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6919/dasher-ii-4) has Hardened Armor and a nominal walk speed of 7. I think there might be an issue with the conversion here, since it probably shouldn't be able to maintain full ground speed.
-
The Koshi 3 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6549/koshi-3) has MASC, but this is not reflected in its MV. MV should be 18" (14" base x 1.25 = 17.5, rounds to nearest whole number). TMM does not change, DIR does not change, adjusted PV should remain 19 (increase of 0.5 points for movement, previous total was 18.75 thanks to the 3.5 from movement and 0.25 from LTAG. Total comes up to 19.25, rounds down to 19).
-
Koshi 3 and Dasher II 4 corrected. Thanks.
-
The Orion 1C from XTRO:Primitives vol V is missing
-
Several are missing. I'm still trying to finish uploading them but a sick toddler is interrupting me. I'm hoping to finish tonight and get the images in place. The Orion 1C is being trouble. I think that record is messed up somehow. That one may take a little extra time.
Edit:
Toddler with croup is asleep and the rest are entered. They should all be there except the Orion 1C. We need to see why that record is frozen.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7322/thug-thg-11ecx-jose
The Star League era Faction availability lists "Star League Regular," "Star League Royal," "Terran Hegemony," and "Unique."
However, according to the fluff in XTRO Gunslinger, this design was used by a mercenary in the employ of Amaris (p. 7).
The Star League factions should be removed, and replaced with whatever is appropriate. The Terran Hegemony listing should also probably be removed, since according to the MUL, the Hegemony stopped existing in 2767, and the date on the design is 2772.
Not really sure the "Amaris Empire' or whatever he was elected to is part of the MUL :)
-
I'll get the Thug fixed. Thanks.
There really wasn't a great way of dealing with an occupied Terran Hegemony. The only reason the TH got a faction eentry is to account for some of the militia units that the Star League didn't use like the Mackie and some other items that are planet specific and really not Star League like some of the civilian stuff.
-
There are eight introtech mechs that were formerly listed as TBD during the early republic and are now listed as Extinct AND TBD. Unsure if this was intentional or TBD the flag wasn't removed when the change was made. All nine are also flagged as Extinct in both the Late Republic and Dark Ages.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/910/dragon-drg-2y-yoriyoshi
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2052/marauder-mad-sd-douglass
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2349/ostroc-osr-2c-michi
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4787/panther-pnt-9r-tanaka
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3036/stalker-stk-3f-jagawen
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3242/thunderbolt-tdr-5s-t-tallman
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/141/atlas-as7-d-danielle
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/150/atlas-as7-wgs-samsonov
-
Jose fixed.
Sartis: those have been fixed. I was hoping they would get suppressed once regular data showed up. I'll have to get them deleted en-masse since there are about 1600 TBD entries still kicking around the system and I don't want to have to delete them all by hand.
-
The primitive Archer has no intro date.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3721/archer-arc-1a
-
The primitive Archer has no intro date.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3721/archer-arc-1a
Fixed. Thanks
-
Emperor 5A (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/963/emperor-emp-5a)
TRO is erroneously listed as 3025. I don't know if it is mentioned in a TRO (I see nothing in 3058U), but it isn't TRO3025.
-
I don't want to have to delete them all by hand.
yeah, that's fair
-
Emperor 5A (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/963/emperor-emp-5a)
TRO is erroneously listed as 3025. I don't know if it is mentioned in a TRO (I see nothing in 3058U), but it isn't TRO3025.
TR3025 p120 lists "EMP Emperor" as an early mech design of same era as BNC and MCK. That's what that MUL entry was created to reference. But yeah, now that XTRO Primitives vol 4 has more of the story, it will be the new TR reference.
-
The Cameron battlecruiser has an intro date of 2688 in the MUL and is named accordingly:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3890/cameron-battlecruiser-2688
Problem: TRO:3057 and TRO:2750 consistently give its intro date as 2668, twenty years earlier. TRO:3057r gives the date as 2688 in what seems to me may have been a typo.
-
The Cameron battlecruiser has an intro date of 2688 in the MUL and is named accordingly:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3890/cameron-battlecruiser-2688
Problem: TRO:3057 and TRO:2750 consistently give its intro date as 2668, twenty years earlier. TRO:3057r gives the date as 2688 in what seems to me may have been a typo.
Newer sources trump old. It may be a typo, but errata is not being accepted for any of those sources at this time, and this is the wrong place to report such an error anyway.
-
RFL-3N availability seems very limited in the star league era. It's not even available to the SLDF or TH. Is that righ:t?
-
How are these availability settings determined? Specific entries in a TRO or Source Book? RATs?
Also, does "availability" means it was available through whatever means? i.e.: manufacturing vs. legal sales from the SLDF or inter-House trade
-
Yes, and lots up filling in the blanks.
Available means we believe multiple regiments/clusters/etc have (or could have) multiple of that unit in its forces. We don't care how they would have gotten there (new production, old production, absorbing star league forced, refit of other models, sold by clan merchants, doesn't matter).
Though unless a source specifically mentions large numbers available through salvage, we don't include salvage.
-
This thread is for all error reports and suggestions for the MUL online database, as found at:
Homeworld Clan and Late Succession Wars data is now available.
Star League and Early Succession Wars data is now available.
In the Master Unit List, the introductory date for the CPLT-K2 variant is apparently retconned to 3033.
I find this a little disturbing, since it is a prominently noted variant, complete with record sheets in the original 1986 edition of the TRO 3025 and it's 1996 Revision. But at some point since CGL took over, it's intro has been retconned to 3033, throwing away 21 years of canon and gameplay. So I guess what I am asking, is 3033 the official introduction date for the production model of the k2, with it existing as House Kurita's standard refit before that, or is it CGLs stance now that the TRO was just plain wrong, and no PPC Cats before 3033? (I'd also note your own tables in House Kurita 3025 lists K2 as available) And if so, when were they first available as a unit?
Any official ruling on that would be greatly appreciated by this long time player.
-
We're going over the issue now, and we'll update here when it's been decided on. Thanks for bringing it up.
-
First of all thank you for your great work.
It seems to me that all of the BA from TRO3058U are missing dark age availability.
is this intentional?
-
Most of 3058 is missing many eras. This is an artifact of how long it takes to compile this stuff. Only about 1/3 of the units in the MUL have faction data for the later eras.
Side note: 3058 is the current TRO of units I'm working on. I've been working on it and 3055 for a while now.
-
We're going over the issue now, and we'll update here when it's been decided on. Thanks for bringing it up.
A number of us over at HBS's BATTLETECH forum are quite interested in the Introduction Date of the K2: https://community.battletechgame.com/forums/threads/3819/comments/67713
Some want a Retcon of a Retcon so as to put the Catapult K2 "in play" for HBS's 3025 BATTLETECH.
And some of support the original CGL 3033 Introduction Date of the K2, with HBS free to introduce the K2 in a future potential expansion to BATTLETECH.
We await your response, Good Sir! :)
-
Rim Worlds Republic
Field Report:2765 Periphery
Page 18: The Black Knight, Excalibur, Highlander, and King Crab are becoming "more common sights" in the Imperial Divisions.
Page 20: A full company of Atlas were purchased by Taborri Amaris for her Amaris Regulars.
Page 21: Land-Air 'Mechs are available in the Battalion size
- Atlas AS7-D
- Black Knight BL-6-KNT
- Excalibur EXC-B2
- Highlander HGN-732
- King Crab KGC-000
- Stinger LAM
- Wasp LAM
- Phoenix Hawk LAM
Liberation of Terra, Volumes I & II
Missing units from the RATs.
- Bombardier BMB-12D
- Cestus CTS-6Y
- Crab CRB-27
- Emperor EMP-6A
- Exterminator EXT-4D
- Firefly FFL-4A
- Flashman FLS-8K
- Galahad GLH-2D
- Griffin GRF-2N
- Hermes HER-1S
- Hussar HSR-200-D
- Kintaro KTO-19
- Kyudo KY2-D-02
- Lancelot LNC25-01
- Lynx LNX-9Q
- Mongoose MON-66
- Night Hawk NTK-2Q
- Panther PNT-9R
- Pillager PLG-3Z
- Rifleman RFL-2N
- Rifleman RFL-3N
- Sentinel STN-3L
- Shootist ST-8A
- Talon TLN-5V
- Whitworth WTH-1 (TRO:3039, p. 126) - A branch of the Whitworth company existed in the RWR.
- Whitworth WTH-1S (TRO:3039, p. 126) - A branch of the Whitworth company existed in the RWR.
- Wyvern WVE-5N
-
We typically don't use RATs as a basis for this unless other reliable information is completely lacking. We'll take a look at your list.
Only the Whitworth WTH-0 was produced in the RWR.
-
"The WTH-0 design was fielded exclusively by the Amaris Dragoons and used more as a terror weapon. Only twenty-four were ever made by Whitworth’s Republic branch on some forgotten world."
Seems odd that they'd set up an entire factory for 24 units, since they were made in 2754 and in peacetime. But you guys probably have more info on it than I do.
-
I'd hate to bring up more stuff to "add to the pile" ...but the MUL is not correctly displaying the BV for Clan Battle Armor.
I believe it has to do with the "generic" CAR4 profile which is likely using the "4" troop multiplier instead of "5" from the Tech Manual p.316
Gnome [Standard] http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1216/gnome-battle-armor-standard
. Individual Trooper BV = 83 [per TRO3058_Upgrade p.51 ]
. . with x5 Multiplier = 7.0 or 581 [matches RecordSheet_3058_Unabridged_Clan p.89]
. . with x4 Multiplier = 5.2, or 431.6 BV [close to MUL error]
Elemental [MicroPulse]: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/962/elemental-battle-armor-micropl
. Individual Trooper BV = 69 [per TRO3058_Upgrade p.45 ]
. . with x5 Multiplier = 7.0 or 483 [closely resembles RecordSheet_3058_Unabridged_Clan p.82]
. . with x4 Multiplier = 5.2, or 358.8~ BV [close to MUL error]
Only suggestion I have is to make "CAR5" the default card for these (and other) primarily Clan-fielded battle armor.
-
Just to note, the individual BVs shown in the TROs are rounded. If you're calculating the BV for a squad/point/level I you take the unrounded individual BV, apply the multiplier, then round.
As for the suggestion, it can certainly be taken under consideration but no saying if or when something can come of it.
-
Just to note, the individual BVs shown in the TROs are rounded. If you're calculating the BV for a squad/point/level I you take the unrounded individual BV, apply the multiplier, then round.
As for the suggestion, it can certainly be taken under consideration but no saying if or when something can come of it.
Agreed, which is why i checked my numbers against the multipliers in the Tech Manual (table on p.316). While I did not manually calculate each BA, I followed the TRO entries and then multiplied by the respective multipliers. Anything within 10 BV didn't concern me... but when the difference between the MUL and the Record Sheets is +100? I decided to test the "Wrong Multiplier" theory and felt inclined to share my conclusions.
I don't have any reason to believe the Record Sheets, TRO, or TechManual to be in error; the current values on the MUL for [respective] Clan-fielded BA are misleading (undervalued). Anyone with the Record Sheets will have the right of it; anyone using the Force Builder may have issues.
**Edit** italicized for clarity
-
It's a technical issue I believe. The MUL is supposed to show BV for all three (4, 5 and 6). It's currently showing PVs instead of BVs on the "5 trooper squad" and "6 trooper squad" lines, and those are supposed to be BV.
-
Methinks the card for the Leviathan JumpShip needs some work... :)
-
Vulture MkIII "D" variant:
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6275/vulture-mk-iii-d
Sources:
TRO3145_Clans p.41
RS3145_Unabridged p.454
AlphaStrike Companion (conversion process p.90-142)
Damage is currently listed as "5/5/3" for 39 PV. I believe this is in error and should instead be "6/6/4" and 43 PV
2x clan RAC5 damage = 4.0/4.0/4/.0 [ASC table values p.108]
...with 60 shots per weapon (120 shots, or 6 tons of ammo combined), the damage should not be reduced by the Insufficient Ammo multiplier [ASC p.101]
2x clan Medium Pulse damage = 1.54/1.54/-
Total Heat = 12(6)+8(4)+2(engine) = 22 total heat
Total Heat Dissipation = 24 (12 double heat sinks)
...since "24 > 22" there is no need to check for Overheat. The unit is efficient.
Final damage should be 5.54/5.54/4.0 ~ 6/6/4
I have calculated a +4 increase in OFV, which should directly affect the PV of the unit.
-
I think the Firestarter availability is backward. The FS9-A (2550) was the earlier design. Shouldn't it be available to IS/Periphery General as well? The FS9-H (2703) and FS9-K also seems like they'd be "general", or in the case of the -K, Lyran exclusive. It was built by Argile Technologies and there were no Capellan Firestarter lines at the time. At least none I've seen.
TRO:3039, 'Variants'
"A companion model, the FS9-K, mounted two flamers, a large laser, and two small lasers. However, the -H model proved to be so popular that it was Argile’s dominant product after 2703."
-
We're going over the issue now, and we'll update here when it's been decided on. Thanks for bringing it up.
guessing no decisions on the CPLT-K2's introductory date? I'll keep checking back about once a week, either way, but won't bug ya about it again.
-
Issue: MUL cards for ASFs describe Engine Hits as 1/4 thrust lost; Alpha Strike pg. 58 (second printing, PDF) describes an Engine Hit as 1/2 thrust lost (round down).
-
guessing no decisions on the CPLT-K2's introductory date? I'll keep checking back about once a week, either way, but won't bug ya about it again.
Most often when you file a report and don't get an immediate response, it's because there is a LOT of discussion going on behind the scenes. I will say that I support your error report; the CPLT-K2 is one of the units I definitely did the date on, and unless I made a mistake I am certain I submitted it as being from the 3020s or earlier.
-
The Eagle (ASF)'s role in the MUL is currently "None".
-
The Eagle (ASF)'s role in the MUL is currently "None".
He's on break.....
-
The Vandal LI-O is listed as a standard tech unit but it has a Large VSP Laser which AFAIK is still advanced tech even in its native era.
-
Most often when you file a report and don't get an immediate response, it's because there is a LOT of discussion going on behind the scenes. I will say that I support your error report; the CPLT-K2 is one of the units I definitely did the date on, and unless I made a mistake I am certain I submitted it as being from the 3020s or earlier.
Cool. Well, as said, not trying to be a pain. I always took 3033 as being when factory new versions of the K2 rolled off the first new CPLT line since Hollis stopped production way back when, and that the K2 in the TRO 3025 was a general refit, like the Shadow Hawk or Wolverine K. But getting an actual "canon" answer, and possibly even clarification on when it first arrived as a Mod, would definitely my day.
So again, I'll check in periodically. Just because of the way this Forum works, wasn't realyl sure if my question had been seen (as the post following could have been directed to several people) or lost in the glut, as it were.
cheers!
-
The Vandal LI-O is listed as a standard tech unit but it has a Large VSP Laser which AFAIK is still advanced tech even in its native era.
The VSPLs are listed as common (aka TL) in IntOps as of 3080.
-
The VSPLs are listed as common (aka TL) in IntOps as of 3080.
Christ, there is a THIRD source of tech translations!?! This is getting stupid. >:( Whenever TPTB are done screwing around it would be nice to see a compiled tech change list available for download.
-
You're right, all of the systems in non-core supplements and tech level transitions needed to be consolidated down into one spot. That's why Interstellar Operations has a whole chapter devoted to that subject! It's available for download from BattleCorps (http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=3485) and DriveThruRPG (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/153613).
-
I was searching for the answer for a while, but can't find one.
The issue is with the Combat Manual availability lists don't match MUL. For example CM: Mercenary lost Jagermech JM6-A as available for mercs, while MUL don't. Its just an example, as some more mechs availabilities don't match.
I presume its just silly me not being able to find a simple answer, but still looking for clarifying.
-
You're right, all of the systems in non-core supplements and tech level transitions needed to be consolidated down into one spot. That's why Interstellar Operations has a whole chapter devoted to that subject! It's available for download from BattleCorps (http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?products_id=3485) and DriveThruRPG (http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/153613).
If I had not already shelled out for two books already to get what I thought was the whole list then that would be ok but I did and so it's not. I don't think I should have to shell more money for something I thought I already had. There isn't anything else in IntOps that I would use.
-
I was searching for the answer for a while, but can't find one.
The issue is with the Combat Manual availability lists don't match MUL. For example CM: Mercenary lost Jagermech JM6-A as available for mercs, while MUL don't. Its just an example, as some more mechs availabilities don't match.
I presume its just silly me not being able to find a simple answer, but still looking for clarifying.
The MUL and CM tables are not meant to match exactly. They'll be really close, but they are nonetheless two completely separate availability systems, and players can use whichever one they like.
-
Introduction date for the Transgressor fighter is incorrect.
It is listed as 2890 in the MUL, but TRO:3025 (p. 150) indicates that the still living Harry S. Yoshita was one of the original designers of the Transgressor. House Liao: The Capellan Confederation (p. 50) indicates that "the first of the Confederation's new Transgressor fighters became available" in 2987. That date would be consistent with the TRO:3025 entry.
-
While looking up some BV/PV points earlier I noticed the Raven 4Lr is listed on its AS card as a Missile Boat. I call shenannigans on this as apart from loss of the Narc beacon it has exactly the same electronics as the 4L and its single solitary missile rack is an MML-7. this should really be a Scout like its 4L predecessor.
-
I have three suggestions for the MUL printouts for Alpha Strike.
1. Can we please have the option to print out colored cards similar to the Lance pack cards shown here (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=54970.0)? In this modern day and age, it's fairly easy to print out full-color items and doing so will make it easier to attract new/younger players to the game. After all, if we are really content with black-and-white, we wouldn't need to paint our mechs, would we? >:D
2. Another option I would like to suggest is the inclusion of numbers on the Armor and Structure. For example:
A: (10) 0000000000
S: (8 ) 00000000
The reason I'm asking for this is because I am planning to play WITHOUT having to mark the cards. Instead, I will use counters like coins/beads/tokens to track damage and having this option would make it easier to determine how much armor/structure a mech has and how much is remaining.
3. Third suggestion would be the option to automatically convert mech movement from inches to hexes. I don't have the space in my house to play on a 6x4 table so we're playing on the mapsheets instead.
Thank you!
-
When can I start posting corrections for cards again? I seem to recall the arbiters of the MUL estate being on vacation or something.
-
Post whenever you like. We will respond when we get to it.
-
Can't argue with that.
Units missing pictures: Boomerang Spotter Plane (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3854/boomerang-spotter-plane-standard), Vulcan VLC-3N (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3460/vulcan-vlc-3n)
Units missing roles (or have role: "None"): Boeing Jump Bomber (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/409/boeing-jump-bomber-standard), Saber SB-26 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4958/sabre-sb-26), Sabre SB-28 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4960/sabre-sb-28), Saber SB-29 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4961/sabre-sb-29), Centurion CNT-1A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3924/centurion-cnt-1a), Centurion CNT-2D (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3926/centurion-cnt-2d), Centurion CNT-3S (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3927/centurion-cnt-3s), Blackwasp Mk. 30 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/390/blackwasp-mk-30), Planetlifter Air Transport (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2544/planetlifter-air-transport-standard), Planetlifter Tactical Support Aircraft (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4840/planetlifter-tactical-support-aircraft-standard)
Hellcat HCT-313 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4299/hellcat-hct-313), Eagle EGL-R1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4106/eagle-egl-r1), Eagle EGL-R11 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4108/eagle-egl-r11), Eagle EGL-R4 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4109/eagle-egl-r4), Deathstalker F-77A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4056/deathstalker-f-77a)
Units with thrust printed in inches: Saber SB-27b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2762/sabre-sb-27b), Zero ZRO-116b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3637/zero-zro-116b), Corsair CSR-V12b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/694/corsair-csr-v12b), Hellcat II HCT-213c (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1470/hellcat-ii-hct-213c) (it was at this moment I realized most of these were in HS:OK) Lightning LTN-G15b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1878/lightning-ltn-g15b), Voidseeker Mk 39-004 Interceptor (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7144/voidseeker-mk-39-004-interceptor), Eagle EGL-R6b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/939/eagle-egl-r6b), Voidseeker Mk 39-007 Striker (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7145/voidseeker-mk-39-007-striker), Chippewa CHP-W5b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/585/chippewa-chp-w5b), Stuka STU-K5b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3111/stuka-stu-k5b), Thunderbird TRB-D36b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3227/thunderbird-trb-d36b)
Units missing entire cards: Cheetah II F-12A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5856/cheetah-ii-f-12a), Tabanid Light Drone Fighter (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3148/tabanid-light-drone-fighter-standard), Planetlifter Support Aircraft (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2545/planetlifter-support-aircraft-standard), Scarab Medium Drone Fighter (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2812/scarab-medium-drone-fighter-standard), Aeshna Heavy Drone Fighter (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/15/aeshna-heavy-drone-fighter-standard)
Units with incorrect RS sources: Lancer LX-1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4470/lancer-lx-1) (the record sheet does not exist; can't really be in RS3067U if it doesn't exist)
I think that's literally every fighter on the MUL with errors at present (obviously excepting the ones that don't have record sheets or anything else).
-
With the release of a few new products over the past few weeks, a few good and old classic `Mechs got a new facelift. The new faces are:
Griffin GRF-1N [Wireframe image + AS card] (Source: Spotlight On - Crescent Hawks)
Valkyrie VLK-QA [Wireframe image + AS card] (Source: Spotlight On - Crescent Hawks + Sourcebook - First Succession War)
Thunderbolt TDR-5S [Wireframe image + AS card] (Source: Spotlight On - Crescent Hawks)
Wolverine WVR-6R [Wireframe Image] (Source: Sourcebook - First Succession War)
Wasp WSP-1A [Wireframe Image] (Source: Sourcebook - First Succession War)
The entries in the relevant sources might refer to other variants, but the images themselves refer to the model and variant as described above.
Can the old "wireframes" on the MUL be replaced by these new appearances?
EDIT: Added reference for new WSP-1A image.
-
Can't argue with that.
Units missing pictures: Boomerang Spotter Plane (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3854/boomerang-spotter-plane-standard), Vulcan VLC-3N (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3460/vulcan-vlc-3n)
Fixed.
Units with incorrect RS sources: Lancer LX-1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4470/lancer-lx-1) (the record sheet does not exist; can't really be in RS3067U if it doesn't exist)
Fixed.
Units with thrust printed in inches: Saber SB-27b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2762/sabre-sb-27b), Zero ZRO-116b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3637/zero-zro-116b), Corsair CSR-V12b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/694/corsair-csr-v12b), Hellcat II HCT-213c (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1470/hellcat-ii-hct-213c) (it was at this moment I realized most of these were in HS:OK) Lightning LTN-G15b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1878/lightning-ltn-g15b), Voidseeker Mk 39-004 Interceptor (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7144/voidseeker-mk-39-004-interceptor), Eagle EGL-R6b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/939/eagle-egl-r6b), Voidseeker Mk 39-007 Striker (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7145/voidseeker-mk-39-007-striker), Chippewa CHP-W5b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/585/chippewa-chp-w5b), Stuka STU-K5b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3111/stuka-stu-k5b), Thunderbird TRB-D36b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3227/thunderbird-trb-d36b)
Fixed.
Units missing roles (or have role: "None"): Boeing Jump Bomber (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/409/boeing-jump-bomber-standard), Saber SB-26 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4958/sabre-sb-26), Sabre SB-28 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4960/sabre-sb-28), Saber SB-29 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4961/sabre-sb-29), Centurion CNT-1A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3924/centurion-cnt-1a), Centurion CNT-2D (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3926/centurion-cnt-2d), Centurion CNT-3S (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3927/centurion-cnt-3s), Blackwasp Mk. 30 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/390/blackwasp-mk-30), Planetlifter Air Transport (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2544/planetlifter-air-transport-standard), Planetlifter Tactical Support Aircraft (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4840/planetlifter-tactical-support-aircraft-standard)
Hellcat HCT-313 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4299/hellcat-hct-313), Eagle EGL-R1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4106/eagle-egl-r1), Eagle EGL-R11 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4108/eagle-egl-r11), Eagle EGL-R4 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4109/eagle-egl-r4), Deathstalker F-77A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4056/deathstalker-f-77a)
fixed. Boomerang and Planetlifter Tactical are still none.
Units missing entire cards: Cheetah II F-12A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5856/cheetah-ii-f-12a), Tabanid Light Drone Fighter (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3148/tabanid-light-drone-fighter-standard), Planetlifter Support Aircraft (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2545/planetlifter-support-aircraft-standard), Scarab Medium Drone Fighter (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2812/scarab-medium-drone-fighter-standard), Aeshna Heavy Drone Fighter (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/15/aeshna-heavy-drone-fighter-standard)
and fixed.
thanks.
-
Monitor Naval Vessel (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2219/monitor-naval-vessel-standard) has no role.
-
Fixed.
Fixed.
Fixed.
fixed. Boomerang and Planetlifter Tactical are still none.
and fixed.
thanks.
Thank you! The Corsair V12b and V18, Sabre 27 and 27b, and Eagle R6 have all appeared in games of mine in the last two months, so these fixes will see immediate table time. O0
-
4. I tried changing the MV values from inches to hexes but realized that doing so alters the TMM. For instance, the Jenner JR7-D with a move of 14"/10"j has a TMM of 3 but changing it to 7/5j brings the TMM to 1. Can we please have the option to enter the TMM manually instead of it being automatically calculated off the MV value?
Thanks!
-
TMM should not change.
-
He knows that, he's saying that the TMM is calculated automatically when you click "Customize" on a given unit's card and input a speed in hexes instead of inches. Since the speed in hexes is 7/5j, the TMM is calculated as if the speed were seven inches instead, and displaying incorrectly.
-
Thanks for moving my suggestions! 8)
-
One issue I just came across.... when adding mechs via the "+Force" button, they print out with Skill: 0 instead of "4"
-
A poster pointed out to me in a PM that the Clan Mechanized Infantry Mimir/Watch Counter Insurgency Point http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/622/clan-mechanized-infantry-mimirwatch-counter-insurgency-point is currently listed as Inner Sphere technology. Since the Bears have all but completely integrated with the FRR, I can see this go either way, but I wanted to pass it on just the same.
NCKestrel: Fixed, thanks for you and anon poster for pointing it out :).
-
**Bump**
Vulture MkIII "D" variant.
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=47774.msg1259787#msg1259787
Also the Hata-moto Chi, HTM-28T (Shin) variant needs to have someone look it over. (I don't have the TRO, but, from the Record Sheet, there's a few things needing corrected).
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5457/hatamoto-chi-htm-28t-shin
Source: RS3050_Unabridged_ InnerSphere p.223
Movement: change 8" to 6"j
Damage
. Short: change from 3 to 5
. Medium: change from 3 to 5
Long Range Damage, Overheat, and listed Specials all appear fine as is.
PV will need to be recalculated accordingly (my numbers came back with 49.75, or 50 PV)
-
I noticed the Whitworth WTH-1 isn't listed as available to the Star League during the Star League era even though TRO3039 (pg 126) description implies the variant was made at the request of Star League Defense Forces:
"Originally armed with dual Harpoon-6 SRM launch-
ers, Star League designers convinced the manufacturer to
switch to the longer reach of the Longbow LRM 10 series
after noting that..."
Of course, the text doesn't actually state that the SDLF ever used WTH-1. It mentions that Whitworths were absorbed by Great House armies but it doesn't specify any variants. But logically the Star League wouldn't have made the request unless they wanted to use WTH-1, i think, so i'd suggest WTH-1 is made available for the Star League in MUL.
Unless i'm missing another source, quote or something that clearly implies otherwise?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3538/whitworth-wth-1
-
Most often when you file a report and don't get an immediate response, it's because there is a LOT of discussion going on behind the scenes. I will say that I support your error report; the CPLT-K2 is one of the units I definitely did the date on, and unless I made a mistake I am certain I submitted it as being from the 3020s or earlier.
So at this point, I'm going to guess the K2 question is either deemed "correct" in date, or got buried?
-
So at this point, I'm going to guess the K2 question is either deemed "correct" in date, or got buried?
Buried under a ton of other work at the moment, presumably.
-
So at this point, I'm going to guess the K2 question is either deemed "correct" in date, or got buried?
We haven't decided what date to change it to.
-
We haven't decided what date to change it to.
Ah, OK... didn't realize I was opening such a can of worms... (looks sheepish). Always figured it was a Field Refit like the SHD-2K, etc, and probably a product of the Second Succession War, when they still had tech levels high enough for such an extreme conversion, of real late 3rd Succession War, 3020s, just before the TRO 3025, era, when the resurgence brought on the Grand Dragon, the ZEU-6T, Hatchetman, etc... but TBH, in all my years of playing, the only two "solid" dates I have ever seen associated with the K2 was that it existed in some form when the TRO 3025 was released, and that in 3033 Kurita started the first Catapult line in over 200 years, and produced the K2. At this late date, I doubt I'll be able to plead and cajole Mitch into adding it to HBS's game, but as a long time fan of the chassis in TT, I would love to know, regardless. I feel like I'm being a bad person running K2s in my 3025 campaign right now......... :(
-
Need to first thank two mods -- ActionButler, and Bosefius --- I didn't find this thread in a search, and ActionButler happily passed on my request on the infantry without criticism, and Bosefius did the same with a question I had on the ML variant of the Scorpion Light Tank.
Which brings me back to this, again -----
The MUL entry for the Scorpion Light Tank, ML variant has been updated from 2/2/0 damage, to 2/1/0 --- but I am curious, as it is only armed with 2 medium lasers and a machine gun for a maximum of 12 damage, how it gets the 2 at short range? If I missed something in the calculations, I would appreciate having that information.
This also brings me to the Vedette Liao, which has the same 2 medium lasers and a machine gun in the turret, with 2 tons of ammo for the machine gun - has a 2/1/0 damage profile, but has a Turret of 1/1/0 listed, even though all the weapons are in that turret ... and it's exactly the same turret armament as the Scorpion Light Tank.
Thank You very much, in advance
Nahuris
-
Base damage is rounded up. So 1.2 becomes 2.
-
Base damage is rounded up. So 1.2 becomes 2.
Does it always round up, because i have seen it round down, in other applications with 1.3 and 1.4 damage -- and that is with vehicles, where heat is not a factor.
I do appreciate the response, though, as I have been doing a lot of work with conventional forces, recently
Nahuris
-
Yes, non-special ability damage values round up. Special abilities damages round normal.
-
Yes, non-special ability damage values round up. Special abilities damages round normal.
Again, thank you -- ok, this does then create a question for the Vedette (Liao), which has that same 2 medium lasers and machine gun in the turret, but is listed with turret 1/1/0.
Nahuris
-
RS 3039u is showing me the Vedette Liao's machine gun as front mounted and not in the turret?
-
RS 3039u is showing me the Vedette Liao's machine gun as front mounted and not in the turret?
I tend to use SAW, as it's faster, and they have it in the turret, with 2 tons of ammo in the body ......
That works, though, and thank you
Nahuris
-
RS 3039u is showing me the Vedette Liao's machine gun as front mounted and not in the turret?
TRO3039 p.66-67 **PDF version, "Corrected Second Printing"**
The weapons entry for the primary variant of the Vedette puts the MG in the turret; it doesn't mention where it should go for the others. (Intuitively, the MG is maintained throughout the other variants; only the primary weapon is weight-swapped).
Is it possible the [the Vedette's] Record Sheets were wrong?
**edit: source**
-
We haven't decided what date to change it to.
It's my belief the -K2 refit originated on Al'Nair, which TRO 3025 says explicitly manufactures the original AS7-D Atlas, as part of Takashi Kurita's program to create a series of more powerful BattleMechs. It likely uses the same Lord's Thunder PPC found on the DRG-1G "Grand Dragon." Furthermore, I think the core issue is the date of Yori 'Mech Works, which I believe was operational well before 3025. The "atlas" portion in the back of the House Kurita handbook says Yori Mech Works is a joint venture between Luthien Armor Works and Alshain Weaponry and that it was damaged in 3010 but is "recently back to production." Yori is also known to have later produced both the advanced -K and-K2 versions of the Atlas.
A conservative date for the -K2 is 3024 but I think there is sufficient indirect evidence to date it to 3004.
-
Thanks to the MUL team for all their work, the MUL is a great resource to have available. Is there any way that fans can help volunteer to contribute to the MUL effort?
Specifically I have a question about the status of the Dark Age unit availabilities. They are listed in "Draft" status - is there any way to help advance its status? There is a statement at the top of the this thread that "This database does not include Dark Age availabilities for units published prior to TR 3085". Should be interpreted as a canonical limitation ("The likelihood of encountering a 100 year old Daishi on the battlefield in 3150 is about the same as encountering a century-old WW1 Landship in a present-day conflict")? Or it is more to limit the scope of work involved providing availability for these eras?
My guess would be mostly the latter (though with a bit of the former) -- this question came up while putting together a Dark Age unit and noticing that Union dropships are on some RATs in 3145, but not tagged as available in the MUL.
Thanks!
-
Scope of work. I wish it was something simple like this TRO isn't done because some are partially done. We have been working on data for TRO 3055 and later. I have 3039 and 3050 (clans are already done) on the docket next but it is a matter of carving out the time to compile and review.
For a quick answer if there is data available for a unit, it should give something for faction data for all eras after introduction with the exception of homeworld clan mechs. Compare these two examples:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2495/phoenix-hawk-pxh-1k
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4488/legacy-lgc-01
The legacy has full data while the phoenix hawk only has data covering Star League through Early Republic.
As of right now, Dark Age and Late Republic eras only have about 57% coverage. Early Republic era has about 82%. Clan Invasion to Jihad eras have over 99% coverage.
The clan omnis from 3050 all have faction data.
-
If I may step in for a moment, as a former contributor to the MUL, I feel I should add that RATs should not be taken as "canon." They are a game aid meant to help players quickly create thematic forces; no more, no less.
-
Just curious as I have been unable to find any details on when Lycomb-Davion IntroTech started building Awesomes on New Avalon.
Am assuming it's one of the many retcons I missed over the years, as when I first played the game only Technicron produced the AWS series. If there is a better resource for finding out this info, please can somebody direct me to it?
-
Just curious as I have been unable to find any details on when Lycomb-Davion IntroTech started building Awesomes on New Avalon.
Am assuming it's one of the many retcons I missed over the years, as when I first played the game only Technicron produced the AWS series. If there is a better resource for finding out this info, please can somebody direct me to it?
Let's back up a sec, what makes you think Lycomb-Davion builds Awesomes on New Avalon? The MUL doesn't have production information, only availability (and not system specific).
-
possible lack of info, only world I found lycomb davion listed was for New Avalon. Excuse me if I missed something. That's kind of the point of posting and asking here, yes? If incorrect, cool, kindly source the correct info. But it's rather secondary to the main point, being when lycomb davion started producing AWS on whatever planet.
-
Field Report 2765: AFFS is the only source implying that Davion made any Awesomes. It is implied on Demeter. The factories were destroyed in the 1st SW. That is the last we hear about them making Awesomes.
-
If I may step in for a moment, as a former contributor to the MUL, I feel I should add that RATs should not be taken as "canon." They are a game aid meant to help players quickly create thematic forces; no more, no less.
Except that many units have no sources, outside of RATs, for their faction availability. Yet they are listed as available for those factions in the MUL.
CHEVALIER
Is there a published source stating that the Chevalier Light Tank was sold to every state during the Star League era? It's under "General" for all factions during the 2750 era on the MUL.
MERCURY MCY-99
Mercury MCY-99. TRO:2750, p. 16 states that "none of these 'Mechs were allowed outside of the direct control of the Regular Army." Yet it appears on the RATs for CCAF and LCAF and, of course, in their MUL availability.
WARHAMMER WHM-6Rb
This variant is found only on the RATs in the 2765 series (during the Star League) and is replaced by the WHM-6Rk on the DC table. This corresponds directly with what's in the MUL data. FR:2750 states that these "Royals" also represent field upgrades to existing units. So while the Combine and Periphery states are easily capable of upgrading their WHM-6R with double heat sinks and CASE, the MUL doesn't have them as available for these factions. The only place they appear (or do not appear) is in the 2765 RATs.
GALAHAD GLH-1D
As per Herb, this was a discontinued design produced by the Hegemony, just prior to the Star League's existence. (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=38360.msg887231#msg887231 (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=38360.msg887231#msg887231)) It appears in the MUL as available to CCAF, LCAF, AFFS and in their corresponding RATs.
It seems as if the RATs were the initial source for the MUL data and, probably, the reason why there are so many oddities. It's hard to not come to that conclusion.
-
I'm not sure what your points are here, because you show cases where the RATs and MUL don't agree, and cases where there may be errors with both. My point is that sometimes units appear on RATs just to fill them out, because despite the thousands of units published, there are still gaps. (For example, the Chevalier Light Tank: maybe nobody but the SLDF really used that exact model, but the other states used local designs with the same stats.) Beyond that, mistakes also happen. Sometimes they're corrected through errata, and sometimes they're allowed to stay because their actual impact is minor.
If you feel you have found a mistake, the proper procedure is to report it as errata for the appropriate product. Do note that certain products are considered obsolete and will neither have errata threads nor be corrected. If any newer source disagrees with them, then the older product is usually considered to have been retconned unless the newer book is outright incorrect. TR2750, as one of the earliest Technical Readouts, certainly falls under this guideline. If you are uncertain what fix should be made, then before posting in the errata thread, post a question in either Ask the Writers or Ask the Lead Developers, but understand that it will take some time to get an answer, and that the answer you receive might not be what you wanted.
If you feel that the Master Unit List has an error, then this is the proper thread to post in. A unit's appearance on a RAT can be a point of evidence, but it might not be enough for inclusion on the MUL. On the other hand, a unit not appearing on a RAT is not a point of evidence in either direction. On the gripping hand, there may be internal discussion that places or removes a unit from the MUL without corroborating evidence in print.
BattleTech is a hugely detailed and sprawling universe, covering about six centuries "on-screen" over a couple hundred sourcebooks and novels. No one person can remember it all. Mistakes happen, and it is very much appreciated when the fanbase brings them to the developers' attention, so they can be fixed. All that's asked in return is patience on answers, and a willingness to accept that reports might not be acted upon or result in changes that the reporter might not personally agree with. "Hoarding" mistakes - that is, not reporting them because they're in your favor - or rejecting direct developer input is generally considered poor form, and is just going to prolong arguments.
Whoof. Sorry for the long post, and my apologies if I stepped on any toes, but I worked hard to develop the current errata system at CGL, and I know how hard everyone works behind the scenes, especially the MUL guys.
-
Long story made short, if you feel there is an error in the MUL, report it and whatever sources you have for believing it's an error.
RAT, technical readout, scenario, novel, whatever.
There are few rules, many guidelines, and mostly headaches from the resulting conflicts.
-
Regarding the MUL introduction date for the Zeus BattleMech:
TRO: 3025 reports the Zeus was designed in 2407 with Defiance Industries beginning production in 2411.
TRO: 3039 does a massive about face on this and states the Zeus didn't began production until after the fall of the Star League, arriving just in time for the beginning of the First Succession War. The MUL also uses 2787 as the introduction date with the familiar -6S finally arriving 2898.
This would infer that Defiance Industries, the sole producer of the Zeus, maintained the ability to produce the advanced weapons of the Star League until almost 2900, including extended range energy weapons, Ultra autocannons, the Artemis IV FCS, Ferro-Fibrous armor and most importantly, Double Heat Sinks.
The Tech Manual reports extended range lasers were extinct as of 2950, Ultra autocannons in 2915, DHS in 2865, the ER PPC as of 2860, Artemis IV disappears in 2855, and Ferro-Fibrous armor in 2810.
How was Defiance Industries making the -5S and 5T Zeus using reportedly "extinct" technology up until 2898? Something seems very, very wrong here. Please review and clarify.
-
Or Defiance didn't make any Zeus for several decades. Or Defiance made an as of yet undescribed variant for that time. There's nothing on the MUL that says when production stopped, only when it first started. If Defiance couldn't produce the 5S and 5T for a time, then they weren't.
-
Field Report 2765: AFFS is the only source implying that Davion made any Awesomes. It is implied on Demeter. The factories were destroyed in the 1st SW. That is the last we hear about them making Awesomes.
great, that clears that up.
-
Regarding the MUL introduction date for the Zeus BattleMech:
TRO: 3025 reports the Zeus was designed in 2407 with Defiance Industries beginning production in 2411.
TRO: 3039 does a massive about face on this and states the Zeus didn't began production until after the fall of the Star League, arriving just in time for the beginning of the First Succession War. The MUL also uses 2787 as the introduction date with the familiar -6S finally arriving 2898.
This would infer that Defiance Industries, the sole producer of the Zeus, maintained the ability to produce the advanced weapons of the Star League until almost 2900, including extended range energy weapons, Ultra autocannons, the Artemis IV FCS, Ferro-Fibrous armor and most importantly, Double Heat Sinks.
The Tech Manual reports extended range lasers were extinct as of 2950, Ultra autocannons in 2915, DHS in 2865, the ER PPC as of 2860, Artemis IV disappears in 2855, and Ferro-Fibrous armor in 2810.
How was Defiance Industries making the -5S and 5T Zeus using reportedly "extinct" technology up until 2898? Something seems very, very wrong here. Please review and clarify.
Or they were using existing stockpiles set aside for their Flagship, until they ran out? What we see in modern military ggear (admittedly usually with advancements, not downgrades) is a steady stream of modifications that get little or no official "designations" and then at various times, usually with a major change, a new model. (M1A1 Abrams has had a ton of changes made that didn't really get noted by it's designation)
Out of Ferro Fibrous? Switch the Line to standard. Out of Artemis FCS (or more likely, the warheads)? Remove it, tuck another SHS in it's place. Can't make an ER LLaser? Use a std. Few of those changes, individually would call for a new designation. I would say the DHS to SHS downgrade would be the most likely "change" point, from where the official 6S would step in.
Of course, all of that is counter to the original lore, which went from PPC packing prototypes to production 6S, with no 5T or 5S in between. But hey...why bother keeping continuity when we can retcon, instead! (yes the sheer amount of unneeded retcons and variants added has me a bit salty)
-
"Hoarding" mistakes - that is, not reporting them because they're in your favor - or rejecting direct developer input is generally considered poor form, and is just going to prolong arguments.
As I've no idea from where this information is taken, I cannot say what is/is not a mistake. There is no canon publication for many of them, outside of RATs. Which means that the data is either taken directly from a RAT, or from the developers'/authors' notes, or some other source which remains unpublished. Which is why I have not posted anything further. I'm not "hoarding" anything. Without more information on the MUL's sources, or feedback on the things I have posted, I cannot fact-check or post (possible) errors.
My follow-up question would then be, "what are the sources being used to determine availability?" Or, just narrowing it down for illustrative purposes; "what was the source of the Warhammer WHM-6Rb availability?" The answer to that would go a long way in helping me/others fact-check things and submit potential errors. :) If we don't know what sources are valid, how can we check them?
-
Quit the arguing before I start deleting posts.
This is for posting feedback about the MUL to the MUL team. It's for a conversation between the MUL team and players, not players arguing with other players. There's an entire forum outside of MUL feedback thread for that.
ColBosch, you're not on the MUL team any more. I understand you had insight, but arguing with players is not something we want or need it.
TigerShark, 99% of the MUL information had to be made up. There's often not a source, other than the MUL itself. Feel free to point out if you think we missed a source that's contradictory, and ignore ColBosch. (And we'll get to your previous posts at some point, I'm just busy over the winter holidays so don't have the time to do the research yet that it deserves).
-
TigerShark, 99% of the MUL information had to be made up.
That helps a lot, actually. :) I've several I could post (Jihad-era) which make sense, based on that. Thanks.
-
TRO3039 p.66-67 **PDF version, "Corrected Second Printing"**
The weapons entry for the primary variant of the Vedette puts the MG in the turret; it doesn't mention where it should go for the others. (Intuitively, the MG is maintained throughout the other variants; only the primary weapon is weight-swapped).
Is it possible the [the Vedette's] Record Sheets were wrong?
**edit: source**
Yep, thanks. Vedette AS card corrected.
-
I noticed the Whitworth WTH-1 isn't listed as available to the Star League during the Star League era even though TRO3039 (pg 126) description implies the variant was made at the request of Star League Defense Forces:
Star League Regular faction availability added for Star League era.
Thanks.
-
Vulture MkIII "D" variant:
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6275/vulture-mk-iii-d
Sources:
TRO3145_Clans p.41
RS3145_Unabridged p.454
AlphaStrike Companion (conversion process p.90-142)
Damage is currently listed as "5/5/3" for 39 PV. I believe this is in error and should instead be "6/6/4" and 43 PV
2x clan RAC5 damage = 4.0/4.0/4/.0 [ASC table values p.108]
...with 60 shots per weapon (120 shots, or 6 tons of ammo combined), the damage should not be reduced by the Insufficient Ammo multiplier [ASC p.101]
2x clan Medium Pulse damage = 1.54/1.54/-
Total Heat = 12(6)+8(4)+2(engine) = 22 total heat
Total Heat Dissipation = 24 (12 double heat sinks)
...since "24 > 22" there is no need to check for Overheat. The unit is efficient.
Final damage should be 5.54/5.54/4.0 ~ 6/6/4
I have calculated a +4 increase in OFV, which should directly affect the PV of the unit.
Yep, I think they missed the ammo in the CT. AS Card corrected, thanks.
-
Also the Hata-moto Chi, HTM-28T (Shin) variant needs to have someone look it over. (I don't have the TRO, but, from the Record Sheet, there's a few things needing corrected).
Yeah, there's nothing in the TR saying what it has at all, so the RS is all there is. AS Card corrected. Thanks.
-
The CPLT-K2 and ZEU-6S intro dates are still being reviewed. If there's something else asked about that hasn't been responded to, feel free to bump, I may have lost it in the backlog.
Thanks.
-
I found a mention of the 'HH-1 compact mobile shipyard' in Wars of Reaving (page 35).
Could this unit please be added to the MUL, with more details if possible?
Bump
-
Lynx LNX-9Q
This unit has the availability of "Lyran Commonwealth" during the Star League era. Their manufacturer (Blue Shot Weapons of Solaris VII), was under the control of the Free Worlds League at the time. (2765:FWLM, page 25) TRO:3058U gives the impression that Solaris was the only site for the LNX-9Q and that the chassis was not made on Loxley.
Suggestion
Free Worlds League, Lyran Commonwealth, Star League Regular, Star League Royal, Terran Hegemony
TRO:3058U, page 212
When Solaris VII factories were leveled during a House Marik raid in 2928, the surviving Lynx soon found themselves cannibalized for parts, and the line became extinct.
-
Hellcat II HCT-212
Faction availability - the TRO states this ASF was available throughout the SW yet it does not have an entry for late SW (both). I would suggest it should have the same availability as for early SW.
I would also suggest an odd example here or there would be available to mercenary groups
-
The Dig King RCL-1M MiningMech MOD has in introduction date of 2573, the same year as the base model. The Era is listed as "Early Succession War."
The Carbine CON-7M ConstructionMech MOD is listed but there is no entry for the original CON-1 Carbine released in 2691. This information is clearly stated in the TRO Vehicle Annex.
-
Hellcat II hasn't been reviewed at all for LSW era faction data. I don't think any of that TRO has to be honest. We are currently trying to finished up the post jihad eras before finishing up the LSW. We also need clan data to go with ESW and LSW. I think that era is about 25% done.
I suspect the dig king mod has a wrong date. ESW seems to be when the MODs started appearing in general.
There is an entry for the Carbine -1. It appears to have been in the original set of data from when the MUL was set up. A search for Carbine brings it up for me.
-
I was digging around the Arctic Wolf II and noticed that it was only available to Wolves in Exile and Kell Hounds through three eras. It does appear in the Sea Foxes RAT table in FM3145 (pg 219.) I know RATs are the end-all-be-all on what a faction can field, but if it appears in a RAT, would a faction have enough of them to make the MUL as well?
I searched to see if this had come up with this unit but couldn't find anything. Thanks!
-
I was digging around the Arctic Wolf II and noticed that it was only available to Wolves in Exile and Kell Hounds through three eras. It does appear in the Sea Foxes RAT table in FM3145 (pg 219.) I know RATs are the end-all-be-all on what a faction can field, but if it appears in a RAT, would a faction have enough of them to make the MUL as well?
I searched to see if this had come up with this unit but couldn't find anything. Thanks!
Added Lyrans and Clan Sea Fox for Late Republic and Dark Ages availabilities.
-
STINGER STG-5G
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3062/stinger-stg-5g
should not have an OV 1
it has only one weapon, a light PPC with capacitor, and 10 DHS (according to RS3085 PP, and i checked the errata thread whether it are DHS or SHS).
even with single HS it could not overheat (11 heat build-up vs. 10 heat dissipation), so it should be corrected to OV 0 and PV 13 (it loses one point in the calculation for OV value).
(and btw, it would be impossible, even with AS conversion up-rounding all weapon damage, to deal 2 damage points with only a light PPC w/ capacitor. ;) )
-
I could easily be missing something here, but I was wondering about the Faction Availability of the Rifleman IIC 8 and 5;
Of the IIC 8 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2717/rifleman-iic-8 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2717/rifleman-iic-8)) TRO3085 says:
"This variant appeared in forces from all three Clans who soiled New Earth with their presence ... Though offered to all Inner Sphere factions, prior to 3080 the IIC 8 only appeared with the Sharks, Wolves, Falcons, Bears and AFFS. Since then, the DCMS and Duchy of Oriente have both aquired the design in small numbers."
This doesn't seem to agree with what's in the MUL for the Rifleman IIC 8.
Of the Rifleman IIC 5 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2714/rifleman-iic-5 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2714/rifleman-iic-5)), TRO3085 continues:
"In a futile attempt to confuse us, the putrid Falcons deployed a second variant of the Rifleman IIC ... The second variant identified by the Blakists is the IIC 5."
This is presumably the Rifleman IIC refit the Jade Falcons have coming out of Red Devil Industries on Pandora, but as per the MUL, it is not available to the Falcons but is available to a host of factions that the Falcons generally wouldn't trade with (trade of the merchant or warrior caste variety). I think the IIC 5 was mistakenly thought to have come from the Diamond Shark line on Twycross in the MUL.
-
Constable Pacification Suit (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=constable)
The MUL restricts availability to the Rasalhague Dominion. According to its source material:
Despite its preliminary stigma as being
of Dominion manufacture, the suit went on to
see service in the Draconis Combine with ISF
agents and the occasional Civilian Guidance
Corps emergency response team.
The source goes on to give an example of a notable ISF operation making use of the suits, and one of the two notable pilots is a Combine agent.
According to the fluff, even though there's no evidence of its use by the actual military, the paramilitaries of the Combine seem to make notable use of suit, even if it may or may not be widespread use by those paramilitaries. Should Draconis Combine availability be added?
-
The CPLT-K2 and ZEU-6S intro dates are still being reviewed. If there's something else asked about that hasn't been responded to, feel free to bump, I may have lost it in the backlog.
Thanks.
Any movement on this question?
-
Karhu C - http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1750/karhu-c
Per AlphaStrike Companion Conversion p.90-142
Per TRO3085 p.163, "Weapon Configuration C"
"HT2/2/2" should not be available to this variant, as Clan Plasma Cannons are not present on the equipment list in the TRO.
All other stats appear accurate (Armor, Movement, Damage, and applicable Specials).
The omission of the HT special should reduce the OFV by 2.5 (I calculated the total PV to be 42.25, which rounds normally [down] to 42).
Upon consorting with the Record Sheets (3085_Cutting Edge p.229-233) the "C" configuration has replaced the "Prime" configuration found in the TRO. Also, the allocation of some of the "fixed" Critical Slots do not conform to the TRO. Information was made known in the individual Errata thread (3085) but the info is dated, and does not read like any adjustments were made [to either the TRO or Record Sheets].
I have a proposed "fix" for the Record Sheets, but am holding to see what transpires in the other errata threads.
-
Karhu C fixed to match TRO as the RS 3085 errata says to use the TRO stats.
Thanks.
-
Not to be rude, but the previous version (with the HT2/2/2) was 45 PV (44.75, rounded up)
The corrected version should be 42 PV (44.75 - 2.5 = 42.25).
OFV = 17
. (4+4+4+3 damage + 1.5 size + 0 overheat + 0.5 MEL special)
DFV = 25.25
. DIR + MF
. . DIR = [(7*2) + 4] x [1+(3 tmm/10)] ~ 23.4, or 23.5 (round, nearest half)
. . MF = 10/8 + 0.5 jump = 1.25 + 0.5 = 1.75
GFB = +0
-
. . DIR = [(7*2) + 4] x [1+(3 tmm/10)] ~ 23.4, or 23.5 (round, nearest half)
TMM is 2, not 3? Only infantry include the +1 for jump now, as of v1.1 errata.
-
My apologies-- I missed the v1.1 errata to the DIR calculation (40 would be correct).
Odd. When (or rather, *why*) did that change? (link discussion, if available to public?)
-
It changed because when the PV system was first written jumping was a mandatory movement mode (i.e. it repalced ground movement completely) and only offered a +1 attack penalty. In the process of Alpha Strike's development, jumping became an option but also the attack penalty rose to +2. At that point I felt it was unfair for a guy to be charged as if they were jumping all the time when making attacks, because not only did they not have to, they probably weren't if they wanted to hit something.
Infantry still pay because they don't get the attack penalty when jumping.
-
It changed because when the PV system was first written jumping was a mandatory movement mode (i.e. it replaced ground movement completely) and only offered a +1 attack penalty.
Small correction, jumping in the 1st printing had no attacker penalty. They got a +1 target modifier for being jump capable (which led to errata clarifying that the unit had to actually use jump movement to get the +1 for jumping), but there was no penalty to attacks by a jumping unit. The ASC/2nd printing jumped (oops, sorry for the pun) directly to a +2 attacker modifier for jumping.
So the original PV was based on a "free" +1 target movement modifier with no penalty. It was clearly beneficial. A +2 to attacks penalty to get a +1 when targeted is much less clearly beneficial.
-
I suppose I can see both your points...
Without meaning to discuss the matter, I'm concerned that the ability to jump was always held a distinctive tactical value over units incapable of jumping, (which is why I assumed it was in the Defense Factor calculations to begin with).
Is there some other way to pay for jump capability?
Jumping while suffering Overheat, for instance. Those with heat levels 1-3 can still jump their full [jump] movement, while units that lack jump capability must hobble/standstill until they cool off [in this case, purely a defensive tactic]
And what about units equipped with Partial Wings and Improved Jump Jets whose [jump] movement often expands into the next bracket? (6"/10"j goes from +1 to +3 total TMM when jumping). The movement modifiers usually offset the attack penalty (+2 TMM,+2 TN) while controlling/threatening more ground area [both offensive and defensive tactical].
-
Jumping does add a movement factor.
-
TRO 3039 page 58 states the Machine Gun variant of the Goblin is a "rare Kurita variant". The MUL lists no Draconis Combine availability for this variant after the Early Succession War era (where it's IS General, Mercenary, and Periphery General): http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1224/goblin-medium-tank-mg
Curiously, the SRM variant of the Goblin is listed with exclusive Draconis Combine (and Rasalhague, during its existence) availability after the Early Succession War era: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1225/goblin-medium-tank-srm
It appears the two variants were confused at some point with regard to their availability. Recommend adding Draconis Combine/Rasalhague availability to the MG variant, and wider availability to the SRM variant (which isn't characterized as a "Kurita" variant). The Combine already has access to the base and LRM variants.
-
are the Trooper TP-1R from Primitives Vol 5 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7407/trooper-tp-1r) and the Trooper TRP-1 metioned in the Flea writeup in TRO 3039 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5301/trooper-trp-1) discrete designs, or does the new TP-1R make the TRP-1 a redudant entry?
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/748/crusader-crd-2r
Something I just noticed (& brought up in my post http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=56239.0 (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=56239.0)). I'm not 100% sure about the Alpha Strike calculations for the CRD-2R.
It's possible that it's just because of a carryover from the BattleForce calculations (at least from what Solaris Skunk Werks says should be the BattleForce figures), or perhaps I'm just reading Alpha Strike Companion wrong, but I think the Attack Values and Overheat value might be off.
From what I can tell from the tables, Base damage (before adjusting for heat) should be:
- Short: 0.6x2 (LRMs) + 0.4x4 (Streaks) + 0.5x2 (MLs) + 0.2x2 (MGs) = 1.2 + 1.6 + 1.0 + 0.4 = 4.2
- Medium: 1.2x2 (LRMs) + 0.4x4 (Streaks) + 0.5x2 (MLs) = 2.4 + 1.6 + 1.0 + 5.0
- Long: 1.2x2 (LRMs) = 2.4
Maximum heat should be 26 (5x2=10 for LRMs, 2x4=8 for Streaks, 3x2=6 for MLs, & 2 for Movement; 10 + 8 + 6 + 2 = 26). Heat dissipation is 20 (10 double heat sinks). The formula in ASC (p. 115) says Heat Modified Damage is Base Damage x Heat Dissipation / (Max Heat -4); or, in this case, Heat Modified Damage = Base Damage x 20 / 22. When I plug that into the calculator, I get:
- Short: 4.2 x 20 / 22 = 3.818181, which rounds up to 4 (this matches the Alpha Strike card)
- Medium: 5.0 x 20 / 22 = 4.545454, which rounds up to 5 (this does not match the Alpha Strike Card, which lists a "4" instead)
- Long: Since only the LRMs have an Attack Value at this range, & the maximum heat (10 + 2 = 12) is less than the heat dissipation, there's no adjustment for heat at this range. "Modified" damage = Base Damage = 2.4, which rounds up to 3 (again, this does not match the Alpha Strike card, which lists "2").
- Since the "Modified" and "Base" damage for Medium Range are now the same (5), OV is now 0 (also does not match the "1" listed on the Alpha Strike card).
For the CRD-2R, the Defensive Points are 18.7 (6x2 = 12 for Armor, 5x1 = 5 for Structure, 12 + 5 = 17; TMM = 1; DIR = 1 + (1/10) = 1.1; 17 x 1.1 = 18.7). The Offensive Points, however, are now 20.5: 4 (S) + 5x2 (M) + 3 (L) + 2 (IF2) + 1.5 (SZ 3, 3/2) = 4 + 10 + 3 + 2 + 1.5 = 20.5. Added together, I get 20.5 + 18.7 = 39.2, rounded down to 39 (1 point higher than the 38 listed on the Alpha Strike card).
Did I miscalculate somewhere, or is this a real error on the card?
-
The Crusader is penalized for only having 8 rounds of ammo per LDM launcherz
-
The Crusader is penalized for only having 8 rounds of ammo per LDM launcherz
(Smacks self in head)
Right... I'd forgotten about that. And that's why they don't have the LRM special as well?
-
(Smacks self in head)
Right... I'd forgotten about that. And that's why they don't have the LRM special as well?
That's due to the Artemis. Artemis equipped units, in AS/BF, can only use Artemis rounds, so they don't get the LRM to use alternative munitions.
-
Perhaps this has been addressed, but the MUL lists the BJ3 with a 3042 introductory date, but the mech itself was first debuted in the Fourth Succession War Battlepack? I have not been able to obtain a copy of this Battlepack to confirm, though.
-
Perhaps this has been addressed, but the MUL lists the BJ3 with a 3042 introductory date, but the mech itself was first debuted in the Fourth Succession War Battlepack? I have not been able to obtain a copy of this Battlepack to confirm, though.
it was in the 4thSW Battlepack, yes (writeup on pg 38)
(http://puu.sh/tPGmM/b1a85db363.png)
-
That variant is also mentioned in TRO 3039 (page 128) as being from the "3030's".
-
it was in the 4thSW Battlepack, yes (writeup on pg 38)
That variant is also mentioned in TRO 3039 (page 128) as being from the "3030's".
Those are prototypes, not production models. Double heat sink production was not re-started until 3040 according to TechManual. This appears to be the limiting factor of the design.
-
So the 3042 version has 10(20) heat sinks vice 10(13)?
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3831/blackjack-bj-3x
-
Perhaps this has been addressed, but the MUL lists the BJ3 with a 3042 introductory date, but the mech itself was first debuted in the Fourth Succession War Battlepack? I have not been able to obtain a copy of this Battlepack to confirm, though.
Actually, it first debuted in Objective Raids (page 149) as an evolution of the BJ-2.
-
Actually, it first debuted in Objective Raids (page 149) as an evolution of the BJ-2.
Which makes sense from a nomenclature standpoint.. but since the BJ2 was produced in 3052, and the BJ3 was in various guises produced during the 4th Succession War and full production apparently in 3042... the designation doesn't really make sense... but what can you do?
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3831/blackjack-bj-3x
thank you! Are there record sheets anywhere? This is literally the only reference I have ever seen to a 3X.. the rest just list the BJ3 as being the first mech to enter production with DHS, apparently the corrosive ones, originally.
-
i presume the BJ-3X is referenced obliquely in this paragraph from TRO:3039... though the intro date of 3029 on the MUL muddles things.
In the 3030s, the St. Ives Compact experimented with
recovered technology on some of their Blackjacks. One prototype
that showed great promise replace the autocannon
and one heat sink with a pair of Ceres Arms Smasher PPCs.
Three of the remaining heat sinks were replaced with experimental
“freezer” double efficiency units.
-
thank you! Are there record sheets anywhere?
He originally posted in the wrong thread. There's only a quote left.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3831/blackjack-bj-3x
The BJ-3 with all double heat sinks could not have existed that early. So we created a BJ-3X that was a step toward the 3. It has not received a record sheet yet.
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=55482.msg1293852#msg1293852
-
He originally posted in the wrong thread. There's only a quote left.http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=55482.msg1293852#msg1293852
Ah, OK, so this is a "new canon" stopgap fix, basically?
-
Yes, the "old" canon was contradictory.
-
I apologize if I'm late or missed a comment. If I did I couldn't find it.
Should Davion have access to the 3050 Clan omnis in the Jihad era?
-
Not all of them but most of them. Davion is part of the IS General list.
-
The availability trajectory makes sense if you imagine the 3050 omnis as battle salvage. By the Jihad everyone has accumulated a good bit of Clan salvage thanks to Revival, Bulldog, and Serpent. But chronic borderjumping raids don't maintain that windall, and availability peters back out for the IS as time advances.
-
BEAR CUB (Standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/314/bear-cub-standard
should not have long range damage value of 1
its only long range weapon is a lrm5, converts with 0.3 points of damage, which qualify for a long range damage of 0*
(sources: TRO3075 and SSW)
-
and again the KARHU.
the discussion and correction of the KARHU C (now PV 40) on the previous page made me wonder why the KARHU A costs 44 points.
compared to the C it lacks the melee weapon but adds 1 damage point at long range and an IF1. this should not be a 4 point difference.
KARHU A
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1748/karhu-a
offensive value
4+4+4+4 damage +1.5 size +1 IF1 = 18.5
defensive value
MF = 10/8 + 0.5 jump = 1.25 + 0.5 = 1.75
DIR = [(7*2) + 4] x [1+(2 tmm/10)] = 21.6, rounded to nearest half = 21.5
Defensive Value: 21.5 + 1.75 = 23.25
Final Point Value = 18.5 + 23.25 = 41.75
so the PV of the KARHU A should be 42.
-
The Karhu A is jump-capable. Using the current rules, that gives it a further +1 defence mod, for a 1.3 multiplier, not a 1.2.
The PV revision would remove that, but it's not finalized as of yet and so hasn't been implemented in the MUL.
-
The Karhu A is jump-capable. Using the current rules, that gives it a further +1 defence mod, for a 1.3 multiplier, not a 1.2.
The PV revision would remove that, but it's not finalized as of yet and so hasn't been implemented in the MUL.
i dont think so.
according to errata v1.1 for ASC the additional +1 is for jump-capable infantry, so the multiplier of 1.2 should be correct.
see also GoldBishops math and Nckestrels answer/correction to it:
. . DIR = [(7*2) + 4] x [1+(3 tmm/10)] ~ 23.4, or 23.5 (round, nearest half)
TMM is 2, not 3? Only infantry include the +1 for jump now, as of v1.1 errata.
-
@Starbuck - the ASC v1.1 Errata is found here:
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=40232.msg928691#msg928691
The change for calculating the Defensive Interaction Rating (DIR) is located on p.12 of the Errata, and reads as thus:
Defense Factor Modifiers Table (Ground Units) (p. 140)
1) Under “Unit’s Best Move Rate”
Unit is Jump-Capable
Change to:
Unit is Jump-Capable Infantry
...Since the Karhu is *not* Infantry, only its best movement is used to determine the multiplier (10", or +2). I did not go back and correct my calculations; if I mislead you, please forgive me - mine are not official calculations.
Do note that it's my understanding that Jump-capable units still pay for Jump movement in the Movement Factor (MF)... but that's it. (I sympathize if you feel this value is under-costed to jump-capable 'mechs, but this is not the thread to voice such a complaint).
Another note: the whole of the MUL is still in need of this (v1.1) update; many of the values, while unchecked, will be calculated slightly off (as of 9-Feb-2017, units are more expensive by about 1-2 PV depending on the unit). One could assume that once the Heat Modification section is finalized, we'll see the "update" ripple through the MUL. (I'm not privy to their time tables, so we can only guess).
**EDIT** I can confirm the reduced cost to the Karhu "A" (44 to 42) "B" (47 to 45) and G (48 to 46)... but again, these should come after the v.1.1 screens units off the MUL en masse. (Mine are still unofficial calculations; I'm just a friendly calculating spectator)
-
@GoldBishop
you did not mislead me at all.
i have the errata, but haven't looked thoroughly into conversion and calculating PV changes.
if you hadn't brought up the Karhu issue i would not have noticed the change in calculating the DIR.
and as you stated, it seems that a lot - if not all - jump-capable mechs are still calculated using the old (and now obsolete) formula.
-
All MUL entries for Infantry (as well as all TRO)'s are now drastically different due to Tech Manual Errata 3.0 changing and replacing nearly all BV and Damage Calculations for infantry weapons.
See an example of change impact to Heavy Jump Infantry (TRO 3085)
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=5884.msg1296048#msg1296048
I did check the standard weapons as well. Rifle, LRM, SRM, and Flamer have all been changed, meaning any units (nearly all of them) that use those weapons are now incorrect in both damage output and BV in the entire MUL.
-
TI-1A Titan has a MUL date of 2787.
TRO: 3075 pg. 94 gives a prototype date of 2765 and references General Aleksandr Kerensky.
FFL-4A Firefly has a MUL date of 2801 and even the oldest Firefly mode, the FFL-2SLE, has a date of 2790
Operation Klondike pg. 164 clearly states the Firefly was a mainstay of the SLDF and introduced in the "27th century."
-
The CPLT-K2 and ZEU-6S intro dates are still being reviewed. If there's something else asked about that hasn't been responded to, feel free to bump, I may have lost it in the backlog.
Thanks.
Ping!
-
This one seems tied into the introduction of the snub-nosed PPC, which may require errata in its own right. However, given the data we have:
Falcon FLC-4Nb
The current fluff states that the Falcon was put into production with the remaining factories of the Rim Worlds Republic, namely Roe Weapon Systems of Apollo. This would have to have been done during the SLDF occupation. This puts the date of the FLC-4Nb no earlier than 2770 (conquest of Apollo) and no later than 2772, when Kerensky's troops departed the Republic. (LoT, pp 109-110) My suggested date would be 2770, since it states these were "rushed into production." But in reality, it could have been any time up to the launch of ALMARIC.
This would mean that an FLC-4N production facility existed on Apollo prior to this date. Unless the unlikely scenario exists where General Kerensky has a Falcon factory built from scratch out of a Roe Weapons Systems aerospace plant. So the FLC-4N should probably be added to the RWR Home Guard availability. Also, seems like there was some kind of upgrade done to the plant, if it existed. Seems a little strange that an Endo Steel frame would be readily available for a rushed unit. Feels like there should be another unit here preceding the -4Nb, like the FLC-4Nb-PP2 config. (I know that's not canon--just my impression from the timeline and the logical chain of events).
Phoenix Hawk PXH-1c
Going off of the FLC-4Nb fluff, the PXH-1c is said to come first: "Equipped with the prototype Snub-Nosed PPC first deployed in
the PHX-1c Phoenix Hawk.." (Op:Klondike, p. 163) This suggests that the Phoenix Hawk's upgrade came first. Given that Kerensky's Orion custom came in at 2754, this should be much earlier than 2784, possibly just inserting the Kerensky date of 2754.
-
Firestarter FS9-K
THE MUL has this mech extinct since the 1st SW (and then available to only Liao) yet the description seems to indicate it was in production by the Lyrans but not as prolific as the base model and would certainly be more numerous than the 'Mirage'.
Can this be reviewed for canonicity?
-
The only data we were able to find on the FS9-K was that it was not produced for long in the LC; it was overshadowed by the FS9-H; and the only reference to it at all was in the Liao Field Report. We assumed that some were sold to all of the great houses but that they all turned them down with the run being dumped off on Liao for one reason or another.
Not exactly the best information to work with on that one.
-
thanks cavingjan; it certainly sounds as though there is limited information. Could I suggest that its not unlike the Whitworth and therefore a lot of these machines went into the open market and given it had more than the one year of production versus the 'Mirage' it would be more common and you could have quite a few in private hands. Given the availability of parts it would be safe to assume these survived. I would also like to think that it's not unlike the Blackjack in that mech warriors figured out over time that the bad reputation was unjustified???
-
Sprite [Standard]
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5109/sprite-ultraheavy-protomech-standard
Conversion information and tables per AlphaStrike Companion p.90-141 {errata noted}
Stats from Wars of Reaving - Supplemental p.50
OFV = 9.5
DFV = 8.25 {8.75 pre-Jump errata}
GFB = 0
Total PV = 17.75 {18.25} or 18; currently listed as 20
Sprite [2]
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5636/sprite-ultraheavy-protomech-2
per Wars of Reaving - Supplemental p.51...
Units are missing "LTAG" among listed specials
{No apparent increase in cost when compiled with latest Jump-capable errata}
**disregard; I found the errata**
-
Exterminator EXT-4D
Current: SLDF, Royal Divisions, RWA/AEAF Terran Corps
Suggested: IS General, SLDF, Royal Divisions, RWA/AEAF Terran Corps
Why? The EXT-4D came out in 2620. 10 years later, the stealth version (EXT-4C) came out. The -4D has no restricted technologies whatsoever. The XLE and AMS were pieces of equipment on units which were sold as SLDF surplus to Member States (and the Periphery). It doesn't even have a Guardian ECM Suite or Active Probe.
Seems to me like the EXT-4D was the "consumer-grade" model, sold off to prospective buyers, while the EXT-4C and SPR-4F were kept as Royal-exclusive, fulfilling the mission of "seek-and-destroy". That would explain its appearance in Great House RATs and the sheer numbers surviving into the early Succession Wars. Had it been SLDF / HAF exclusive, most (if not all) of the advanced units (i.e: Devastator, Nightstar, Spector, etc.) would have been destroyed during the drive for Terra or evacuated on the Exodus. The standard models (EXT-4D) would probably be left behind; and they were.
-
Trooper TRP-1 and Trooper TP-1R
Trooper (no exact designation) is mentioned in TRO 3039 (on p. 242) as an original name for a 'Mech, that later become known as Flea. The MUL lists Trooper TRP-1 as a 'Mech from TRO 3039, but lists no official record sheet for it. There is also Trooper TRP-1R in the MUL from XTRO Primitives V. Both TRP-1 and TRP-1R have the same introduction date (2475).
I don't own XTRO Primitives V, so I can't be 100% certain, but I suspect, that TRP-1 and TRP-1R are supposed to be the same 'Mech variant (XTRO Primitives V provides official stats for the 'Mech mentioned in TRO 3039) in which case one of the MUL entries needs to be removed.
Recommendation - remove the Trooper with designation not matching the XTRO (Trooper TRP-1 most likely) from the MUL, unless Trooper TRP-1 and Trooper TP-1R are indeed meant to be two different models.
EDIT: Strange thing... When I look for the Trooper in MUL by name, the TRP-1 variant is not listed, but when I list all TRO 3039 units by source - it is there. A leftover after removal somehow done incorrectly, perhaps?
-
Per the TRO:3075 errata doc, the Von Rohrs (Hebis) should be changed to Von Rohrs (Hebi)
-
The Trooper TRP-1 and Trooper TP-1R situation (described two posts above) seems to be mostly resolved, but they still link to each other as "Other Models". Other than that I must say I'm pleasantly surprised, that MUL maintainers react so quickly to errata reports. Good job guys.
Edit: Huh? I could swear, that when I wrote this post the TRP-1 was removed from the list of units in TRO 3039, but it appears to be back there again.
-
I reported the same issue a month or so ago. They generally fix errors in fairly short order. If something isn't attended to, I suspect there is some internal conversation that takes place.
If you search for units and uncheck the 'Only units w/Battle Value' box, the mysterious TRP-1 reappears
-
Source: TRO 3050
Issue: Wrong Era icon
Affects:
Ripper Infantry Transport (Infantry) - shows Civil War, intro is Jihad
Puma Assault Tank PAT-007 - shows Civil War, intro is Jihad
Assassin ASN-30 - shows Clan Invasion, intro is Civil War
Ahab AHB-643 - shows Clan Invasion, intro is Civil War
-
Unit: the Dragon-5nr (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/912/dragon-drg-5nr).
Issue: It has a C3 slave but lacks the C3S and MQ1 specials. I did not compute PV to see if it already reflects the C3. I suspect it does not, though.
-
Unit: the Dragon-5nr (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/912/dragon-drg-5nr).
Issue: It has a C3 slave but lacks the C3S and MQ1 specials. I did not compute PV to see if it already reflects the C3. I suspect it does not, though.
I did some fiddling with a builder program, and adding the C3Slave would put the Dragon -5Nr overweight by 1 ton.
However, it looks like the Record Sheet (RS3085_ONN p.88) is in error, as the TRO entry upgrade for the Dragon (3085, p.190) does not mention an Artemis upgrade to the LRMs.
Dropping Artemis for the C3 Slave would make up for that that 1-ton difference. (record sheet needs the errata).
As far as "PV" calcs? No real change in damage, so once the Record Sheet Errata goes through, I suppose the following...
OFV = ~12.5
DFV = 19.25
GFB = 1.0
Total = 32.75 ~ 33 PV
Specials: CASE, C3S, MHQ1, IF1
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2033/marauder-mad-1r
Page 10 of the Field Report 2765 Periphery states that "Beginning in 2753, MMM also began production of the MAD-1R Marauder under a contract with the Free Worlds League that allows the MAF to receive twenty-five percent of each production runs. This has added hundreds of Marauders to the otherwise underweight MAF BattleMech forces."
So under the Star League era, the Magistracy of Canopus should be added to the list of users, and I'd suggest that since "hundreds" existed in the MAF, that even with the loses of the Periphery Uprising, it should still be around in noticeable numbers for part of the First Succession War. Thus it should be listed as available to the MoC during the First Succession War as well (the 1st Succession War RAT backs this up, though that's not the greatest source, I know).
-
According to TRO 3145, the Vulture MKIII should have the VRT (Variable Range Targeting) special ability.
-
Just checking in to rattle the cage around the CPLT-K2 Catapult intro date question/debate, figuring it has been some time, and hoping it was not lost in the shuffle. It shan't be appearing in HBS's upcoming Battletech game, regardless, but for personal sanity, am hoping to see it restored to it's proper pre 3025 introduction date.
-
It will be pre-3025: that's guaranteed. It's just a matter of nailing down the exact date.
-
It will be pre-3025: that's guaranteed. It's just a matter of nailing down the exact date.
heck, just having that confirmed is a huge weight off. Lurf mah K2s!
-
Any update on the Firefly?
FFL-4A Firefly has a MUL date of 2801 and even the oldest Firefly model, the FFL-2SLE, has a date of 2790
Operation Klondike pg. 164 clearly states the Firefly was a mainstay of the SLDF and introduced in the "27th century."
-
Any update on the Firefly?
FFL-4A Firefly has a MUL date of 2801 and even the oldest Firefly model, the FFL-2SLE, has a date of 2790
Operation Klondike pg. 164 clearly states the Firefly was a mainstay of the SLDF and introduced in the "27th century."
Look up the FFL-3A. It doesn't have a Battle Value listed in the MUL, but it's the first one introduced [2679]. The BV would be 797.
-
Where's the record sheet on that one?
-
Where's the record sheet on that one?
There isn't one. It was described but no record sheet.
-
What is the status of things like the Roughneck from MWO? We keep hearing Randall Bills has declared them canon, was curious if that considered so, or only after/if they are actually added to a "paper" CGL supplement? Also how this affects the unique "hero" versions of mechs?
-
DRG-5Nr fixed.
-
According to TRO 3145, the Vulture MKIII should have the VRT (Variable Range Targeting) special ability.
The MUL isn't showing quirks for any units, we're not going to just do one.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2033/marauder-mad-1r
Page 10 of the Field Report 2765 Periphery states that "Beginning in 2753, MMM also began production of the MAD-1R Marauder under a contract with the Free Worlds League that allows the MAF to receive twenty-five percent of each production runs. This has added hundreds of Marauders to the otherwise underweight MAF BattleMech forces."
So under the Star League era, the Magistracy of Canopus should be added to the list of users, and I'd suggest that since "hundreds" existed in the MAF, that even with the loses of the Periphery Uprising, it should still be around in noticeable numbers for part of the First Succession War. Thus it should be listed as available to the MoC during the First Succession War as well (the 1st Succession War RAT backs this up, though that's not the greatest source, I know).
MAD-1R adjusted, thanks.
-
CPLT-K2 updated.
-
Source: TRO 3050
Issue: Wrong Era icon
Affects:
Ripper Infantry Transport (Infantry) - shows Civil War, intro is Jihad
Puma Assault Tank PAT-007 - shows Civil War, intro is Jihad
Assassin ASN-30 - shows Clan Invasion, intro is Civil War
Ahab AHB-643 - shows Clan Invasion, intro is Civil War
Updated, thanks.
-
Duplicate Trooper deleted.
The older entry didn't have a BV, so it didn't show up in some searches that automatically have "only units w/Battle Value" selected.
-
TI-1A Titan has a MUL date of 2787.
TRO: 3075 pg. 94 gives a prototype date of 2765 and references General Aleksandr Kerensky.
Updated, thanks.
FFL-4A Firefly has a MUL date of 2801 and even the oldest Firefly mode, the FFL-2SLE, has a date of 2790
Operation Klondike pg. 164 clearly states the Firefly was a mainstay of the SLDF and introduced in the "27th century."
FFL-3A was the SLDF model.
-
BEAR CUB (Standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/314/bear-cub-standard
should not have long range damage value of 1
its only long range weapon is a lrm5, converts with 0.3 points of damage, which qualify for a long range damage of 0*
(sources: TRO3075 and SSW)
Bear Cub updated, thanks.
-
TRO 3039 page 58 states the Machine Gun variant of the Goblin is a "rare Kurita variant". The MUL lists no Draconis Combine availability for this variant after the Early Succession War era (where it's IS General, Mercenary, and Periphery General): http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1224/goblin-medium-tank-mg
Curiously, the SRM variant of the Goblin is listed with exclusive Draconis Combine (and Rasalhague, during its existence) availability after the Early Succession War era: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1225/goblin-medium-tank-srm
It appears the two variants were confused at some point with regard to their availability. Recommend adding Draconis Combine/Rasalhague availability to the MG variant, and wider availability to the SRM variant (which isn't characterized as a "Kurita" variant). The Combine already has access to the base and LRM variants.
Goblin MG updated to being DC (and FRR), Goblin SRM updated to match Goblin LRM.
Thanks.
-
Constable Pacification Suit (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=constable)
The MUL restricts availability to the Rasalhague Dominion. According to its source material:
The source goes on to give an example of a notable ISF operation making use of the suits, and one of the two notable pilots is a Combine agent.
According to the fluff, even though there's no evidence of its use by the actual military, the paramilitaries of the Combine seem to make notable use of suit, even if it may or may not be widespread use by those paramilitaries. Should Draconis Combine availability be added?
Yep, DC added for Constable suits. Thanks.
-
I could easily be missing something here, but I was wondering about the Faction Availability of the Rifleman IIC 8 and 5;
Of the IIC 8 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2717/rifleman-iic-8 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2717/rifleman-iic-8)) TRO3085 says:
"This variant appeared in forces from all three Clans who soiled New Earth with their presence ... Though offered to all Inner Sphere factions, prior to 3080 the IIC 8 only appeared with the Sharks, Wolves, Falcons, Bears and AFFS. Since then, the DCMS and Duchy of Oriente have both aquired the design in small numbers."
This doesn't seem to agree with what's in the MUL for the Rifleman IIC 8.
correct, adjusted.
Of the Rifleman IIC 5 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2714/rifleman-iic-5 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2714/rifleman-iic-5)), TRO3085 continues:
"In a futile attempt to confuse us, the putrid Falcons deployed a second variant of the Rifleman IIC ... The second variant identified by the Blakists is the IIC 5."
This is presumably the Rifleman IIC refit the Jade Falcons have coming out of Red Devil Industries on Pandora, but as per the MUL, it is not available to the Falcons but is available to a host of factions that the Falcons generally wouldn't trade with (trade of the merchant or warrior caste variety). I think the IIC 5 was mistakenly thought to have come from the Diamond Shark line on Twycross in the MUL.
http://www.battlecorps.com/BC2/news.html?article=258 specifically states the IIC 5 is Diamond Shark. But you are correct that TR3085 makes it clear the Falcons used it as well, and our production notes have both CJF and CDS making it. Adding CJF.
-
STINGER STG-5G
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3062/stinger-stg-5g
should not have an OV 1
it has only one weapon, a light PPC with capacitor, and 10 DHS (according to RS3085 PP, and i checked the errata thread whether it are DHS or SHS).
even with single HS it could not overheat (11 heat build-up vs. 10 heat dissipation), so it should be corrected to OV 0 and PV 13 (it loses one point in the calculation for OV value).
(and btw, it would be impossible, even with AS conversion up-rounding all weapon damage, to deal 2 damage points with only a light PPC w/ capacitor. ;) )
Fixed, thanks.
-
The MUL isn't showing quirks for any units, we're not going to just do one.
The problem with VRT is that it actually affects PV as a Special mentioned in the conversion rules. This makes it unique among quirks, and probably warrants inclusion as an exception.
-
Do you add the cost to the base unit with a note to reduce the cost if you aren't playing with the optional quirks rules or do you just add a note with the additional costs if you are playing with those additional quirk rules. There is no place other than notes to show quirks so it wouldn't be on the card as the MUL is currently designed.
-
Cost the unit appropriately. The Special is defined in the usual place; I suggest the exception to be treat VRT as always in play. That, or remove it from being a Special and the conversion rules entirely. Given how much easier it is to edit the MUL than it is to issue errata for a book that most people might realize had changed, my preference is for the former.
-
That, or remove it from being a Special and the conversion rules entirely.
Bingo. Same as all the other quirks.
-
CPLT-K2 updated.
Thank you for that. Am curious about the extinct from 3020 to 3033 part, if that was based on some errata, or a bit of a salve to make conflicting info work a little more harmoniously?
-
Thank you for that. Am curious about the extinct from 3020 to 3033 part, if that was based on some errata, or a bit of a salve to make conflicting info work a little more harmoniously?
Opposite direction, it's ancient.
TR3025 Catapult entry says "One of House Kurita’s few Catapults was lost to Davion forces during the battle for the planet Hoff; the Draconis Combine has at least one other Catapult assigned to Brion’s Legion, but no others have been deployed with any regular Kurita unit.” And that's for all Catapult's for Kurita. Since Kurita has no Catapults from 3020 (Hoff was 3019) until some undefined later date that's at least post 3025, and only Kurita has K2s, there's no K2s after Hoff until Kurita starts new production of K2s in 3033.
-
Opposite direction, it's ancient.
TR3025 Catapult entry says "One of House Kurita’s few Catapults was lost to Davion forces during the battle for the planet Hoff; the Draconis Combine has at least one other Catapult assigned to Brion’s Legion, but no others have been deployed with any regular Kurita unit.” And that's for all Catapult's for Kurita. Since Kurita has no Catapults from 3020 (Hoff was 3019) until some undefined later date that's at least post 3025, and only Kurita has K2s, there's no K2s after Hoff until Kurita starts new production of K2s in 3033.
Ah, that works well. Good to know and makes sense. Plus as the entire TRO 2750 knows... extinct is seldom as extinct as one thinks. So I reckon it's not too far of a stretch for there to be another stray or three like the one in Brion's Legion, but none in any Kurita House Unit, etc......and yeah, rare enough to be for all intents and purposes, extinct. And let's be honest, even before Hoff... it was essentially extinct with that info. Very interesting stuff.
-
Opposite direction, it's ancient.
TR3025 Catapult entry says "One of House Kurita’s few Catapults was lost to Davion forces during the battle for the planet Hoff; the Draconis Combine has at least one other Catapult assigned to Brion’s Legion, but no others have been deployed with any regular Kurita unit.” And that's for all Catapult's for Kurita. Since Kurita has no Catapults from 3020 (Hoff was 3019) until some undefined later date that's at least post 3025, and only Kurita has K2s, there's no K2s after Hoff until Kurita starts new production of K2s in 3033.
Are there any other BattleMechs that have a similar "period of extinction" in the MUL? I was under the impression the MUL only dealt with introduction dates specifically and steered clear of "extinction" dates. Is this a change in policy?
-
Are there any other BattleMechs that have a similar "period of extinction" in the MUL? I was under the impression the MUL only dealt with introduction dates specifically and steered clear of "extinction" dates. Is this a change in policy?
It's an interesting tidbit that I thought to include. We put them in public notes every now and then. There is no policy on the public notes.
-
Zeus ZEU-9S2 seems to have REAR 1/1/- ability in its AS card even though the 'Mech does not have any rear-facing weapons.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5459/zeus-zeu-9s2
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/5459?skill=4
On the other hand, Zeus ZEU-9S seems to be missing REAR 1/1/- ability. I believe single rear-mounted Medium Pulse Laser is enough for that.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3644/zeus-zeu-9s
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/3644?skill=4
Posted this note long-ish time ago, seems these got missed. Not sure if point values and other stats are correct. Other Zeuses don't seem to have issues at cursory glance.
-
Posted this note long-ish time ago, seems these got missed. Not sure if point values and other stats are correct. Other Zeuses don't seem to have issues at cursory glance.
Yep, thanks for the reminder, ZEU-9S and ZEU-9S2 updated.
-
A few more Blackjack Issues:
Had someone point out the Blackjack Prototype, the BJ-1X, is listed as being produced in 2769.... 12 years after the later production model, the BJ-1 entered production (2757). Not sure if this implies that the original Prototype BJ-1X was later released as a full production model, or just a fact check/typo issue?
Also noted that the BJ-3X http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3831/blackjack-bj-3x does not show on the base BJ entry? http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=blackjack
-
BJ-3X http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3831/blackjack-bj-3x does not show on the base BJ entry? http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=blackjack
it doesn't have a BV assigned so it will not appear by default. you have to click the "Only units w/Battle Value" checkbox off.
-
BJ-1X intro date fixed.
-
Vedette Medium Tank (Standard) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3395/vedette-medium-tank-standard)
Vedette Medium Tank (AC2) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3388/vedette-medium-tank-ac2)
Vedette Medium Tank (Liao) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3391/vedette-medium-tank-liao)
Image for these three should be the older TRO:3039 version, not the updated TRO:3058 version.
-
BJ-1X intro date fixed.
thx!
-
is there a way to add RS: 3145u as a searchable source? it would be easier than having to add all eight 3145 faction TROs when looking at 3145/50 units.
thanks
-
Very minor thing but... The Celerity CLR-02-X-D has wrong intro date (3052). Kinda, maybe.
The issue is the XL Gyro the Celerity uses. The XL Gyro is prototyped in about 3055 according to Interstellar Operations pg 48.
On the other hand, XTRO ComStar describes the Celerity project starting in 3052. Now, perhaps the project was indeed started then but assuming IO is correct, then the first functional Celerities can't have been produced before 3055 (indeed, perhaps XL gyro is basically a side-effect of the project). Seems to me that adjusting the 'Mech's intro date makes more sense than issuing errata for IO and XTRO ComStar so i figured i'd drop this here rather than somewhere else.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5553/celerity-clr-02-x-d
-
The update section on the front page of the MUL hasn't been updated in over a year.
I would like to know what new sources or units have been added in that time so that I can update my cards.
I follow this thread so I have all the errata listed here to try to keep my printed cards correct.
Thanks
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/43/annihilator-c
This Annihilator lists its TRO as 3050U, but I can't find any mention of the C variant in the writeup in 3050U, and so its source should probably be set as Operation Klondike, where it is mentioned in the writeup Also, the Record Sheet Source says "RS3050Uu-C" but the C and C2 are in RS3050Uu-I. They're also in RSOK, but I'm not sure which one is newer at this point, but I would recommend RS3050Uu-I since its more mainstream.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/45/annihilator-c-2
The TRO for this is listed as "RS3050Uu-C" but obviously that's not a TRO, and should probably be set as Operation KLONDIKE, since that's where its mentioned. The Record Sheet source is technically correct, but it might be better to use RS3050Uu-I, since that's the more mainstream product.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1011/eyleuka-eyl-4a
Ths date is 3068, which is the Jihad Era, but the Era Symbol is the Civil War symbol. Since the design has Machine Gun Arrays, which debuted in 3068, the symbol should be changed to the Jihad Symbol. I suppose you could try to argue prototypes or something, but either way, the date and the Era Symbol should match.
-
Thanks, Annihilators and Eyleuka fixed.
-
The update section on the front page of the MUL hasn't been updated in over a year.
I would like to know what new sources or units have been added in that time so that I can update my cards.
I follow this thread so I have all the errata listed here to try to keep my printed cards correct.
Thanks
I don't have such a list.
-
Galahad GLH-1D
Current availability has this at several factions, along with the SLDF, HAF, and AEAF. As per an old post from Herb, it was a one-off production line and wasn't continuously produced. Suggesting a rating of "Extinct".
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=38360.msg898036#msg898036
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6522/gorgon-carrier-standard
Gorgon Carrier missing image
edit: also
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6520/caerleon-standard
Caerleon small craft missing image
-
I don't have such a list.
So, there's no information on what new sources or units have been added in the last year? No way to know what's new?
I have hundreds of different units, and there's no way to find out if new variants have been posted without going through each individual entry?
How hard would it be to post an update on the front page whenever a new source is added? "Hey guys, all the mechs from TRO: 3155 have finished being added."
-
If it's not listed in this thread, I haven't added or changed any units in years. So it would be impossible for me to list anything else, I haven't done anything else to list. I can't prove anybody else hasn't, I do t have such a list.
-
Primitive V was the last set of units I've entered. Corrections have been done. Judging by the volume of the change log, adding a step of logging it manually here wouldn't be realistic. I know at one point in time I was averaging 10 changes a day if the log was any indication of work and I was only one person.
Sorry.
I'm in the habit of getting a fresh AS image each time just to make sure I'm up to date.
-
Based on personal observations, the main coverage holes right now are:
*3039 and 3050 (IS/SL) units don't extend past the Early Republic
*Zero Clan tables exist for anything pre-Clan Invasion.
*There is no public data for the Age of War
*The status of TRO:3057 units remains in limbo
There is still some work to be done on non-TRO sources, but I suspect a good portion of that is marking dozens of units as extinct an era or two past when they debuted.
-
Very good observations. I burned out before getting the 39/50 IS units. Warships aren't my strength. PreInvasion clan may appear when Golden Century comes out.
I doubt we will see Age of War unless we get better source materials. There were just too many holes to fill to make it worth the time. Star League was difficult enough and there are more books in that era to work with.
-
Does Morgan Kell's personal Archer really have an intro date of 2474? Seems like it got the ARC-2R's by mistake. I would imagine the custom would have originated in the 3010s?
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5809/archer-arc-2r-morgan
I doubt we will see Age of War unless we get better source materials. There were just too many holes to fill to make it worth the time. Star League was difficult enough and there are more books in that era to work with.
That's the impression I got from poking at the Age of War stuff for some personal use projects. About two-thirds of the mechs are pretty cut and dry. There are very few indications that many of the primitives or a number of the house designs (e.g. Hammerhands, Koschei, Crossbow) found their way out of the initial designers' hands with a few exceptions. The first wave of introtech designs largely pops up between the late 2400s and early 2500s that are already widely dispersed. You get hints of mass-proliferation of Hegemony designs from both the Talos' and Hector's writeups, but to where and how quickly is, at best, inference and guesswork.
-
Morgan drove a stock 2R archer so yes it does share the same dates. I think it has the same faction data too if I remember correctly.
-
a stock 2R archer
well i'll be damned.
-
According to TRO 3145, the Vulture MKIII should have the VRT (Variable Range Targeting) special ability.
The MUL isn't showing quirks for any units, we're not going to just do one.
I don't mean offense in questioning your decision, but VRT isn't solely a quirk. It's a special Ability, defined on page 109 of the Alpha Strike Core Rule Book, it's usage is further explained on page 103 of the core rule book, where it is explicitly called out as a special ability, and it's conversion rules are listed in the Alpha Strike Companion on page 133 in the 'Battletech Conversions" rules, right after UMU and right before VTX#. Additionally, while VRT may be listed in the quirks section, it is listed there right after Trailer Hitch and searchlight (Page 64 ASC). Trailer hitch and searchlight are both a design quirk AND special ability (HTC or SRCH) and have been added to cards (link to units with HTC special ability (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=&HasBV=true&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasRole=&HasBFAbility=HTC&MinPV=&MaxPV=&Role=None+Selected&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=))(link to units with SRCH special ability (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=&HasBV=true&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasRole=&HasBFAbility=SRCH&MinPV=&MaxPV=&Role=None+Selected&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=)), so to say that VRT can't be done because it's a "quirk" is insufficient in my opinion, with how well documented it is, and with the core book explicitly calling it a special ability, and providing rules for it as part of the core rules (which do not even include quirks).
In short, I ask you to reconsider, and having VRT added to the aforementioned unit's card, as well as any other unit that can be pointed at as meeting the criteria as per the conversion rules (I don't know of any other unit that has this, personally, but if I find one, I'll let you know).
-
Cost the unit appropriately. The Special is defined in the usual place; I suggest the exception to be treat VRT as always in play. That, or remove it from being a Special and the conversion rules entirely. Given how much easier it is to edit the MUL than it is to issue errata for a book that most people might realize had changed, my preference is for the former.
Bingo. Same as all the other quirks.
-
Faction Availability on the Bandit Hovercraft base and variants:
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3782/bandit-hovercraft-base
- List Wolf's Dragoons as the only one with access.
- Most if not all variants list Mercenaries, and later Kell Hounds from Fed Com Civil War as having access.
It stands to reason, that the same faction availability that applies to the variants should apply to the <Base> model.
Fix: Change FCCW and Jihad Faction Availability on the Base to match availability on variants.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2186/minotaur-standard
Errata had already been issued for the Record Sheet, but the Unit Card doesn't match the TRO entry (TRO3060 p.203)
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=4021.msg272449#msg272449
Per the ASC p.90-141
Weapon Values should be 2/2/0 [0.7x2 or 1.4/1.4/0 for 2 ERML]
PV should increase to 12 PV (a +3 increase from the change in damage)
...everything else looks good.
-
Rim Worlds Republic
Missing the Aegis Cruiser from both lists. We know that at least one existed from Historical Turning Points: New Dallas. How do I remember this? The ship was named the RWS Tigershark. ;D
-
Asshur Fast Reconnaissance Vehicle has TAG as an AS ability but does not have TAG
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/135/asshur-fast-reconnaissance-vehicle-standard
Asshur Artillery Spotter does not have TAG as an AS ability but does have TAG
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/133/asshur-artillery-spotter-standard
Solution: remove TAG from the former, add TAG to the latter
Xotl: Corrected, thanks.
-
Colt Medium Fighter (From Experimental Technical Readout: Primitives V)
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7415/colt-medium-fighter (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7415/colt-medium-fighter)
ISSUE: MUL entry for the Colt Medium Fighter (SRM) Variant is missing. The SRM variant is noted in the original entry in XTRO: P5, with no record sheet published.
SOLUTION: Add missing page for fluff variant, only difference from the original Colt Medium Fighter is straight swap of LRM5s for SRM4 on either wing and LRM ammo is also straight switch for 1 ton of SRM ammo.
-
ISSUE: Bear Cub and Bear Cub 3 PV Incorrect. The Bear Cub 2 is fine though.
Currently, the PV for the standard is showing as 22PV:
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/314/bear-cub-standard
while the 3 is showing at 20PV:
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/316/bear-cub-3
This makes no sense on its face because the 3 does MORE damage than the standard, and is identical in all other respects, but it costs LESS PV.
SOLUTION:
According to the Alpha Strike PV spreadsheet that Xotl provided for evaluating the upcoming PV revision, the current PV's for those units are 19PV for the Bear Cub Standard, and 20PV for the Bear Cub 3. I double-checked and those numbers seem correct.
Standard:
Offensive = Dmg 9 [3+3+0] + size 0.5 + Specials[IF0*] 0.5 = 10
Defensive = MV 2 + DIR 6.5 [(Armor 4 + Structure 1) * Defense 1.3] = 8.5
Total = 10 + 8.5 = 18.5 round normally to 19PV.
Standard:
Offensive = Dmg 10 [3+3+1] + size 0.5 + Specials[IF1] 1 = 11.5
Defensive = MV 2 + DIR 6.5 [(Armor 4 + Structure 1) * Defense 1.3] = 8.5
Total = 11.5 + 8.5 = 20PV
-
As best as I can tell, under the current (non-revised) PVs, both should have the same value (20). However, the spreadsheet that uses the old formulas and which we derived all the current MUL PVs from has a rounding error compared to how the Companion lays things out, so that may explain why you're getting a 1-point difference.
I'll change the Standard to 20 PV, placing them closer together. If/when the revision goes through, the rounding error will be fixed; I don't want to adjust it now, because that would be a bunch of work only to be thrown out when the revised values are implemented.
-
WFT-2X "Bear Trap" (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3557/wolf-trap-tora-wft-2x-bear-trap)
Issue: The unit is armed with a Silver Bullet Gauss which according to the ASC conversion rules on pg 104 qualifies for the FLK special. The Card lacks this special.
Solution: Add FLK 1/1/1 to the specials field. PV should not be affected as this special is not invoked as an offensive special factor.
NCKestrel: updated, thanks!
-
Hi, the MUL is missing the Stalker STK-3Fk. It's from Era Report:2750 (Page 129). I am not sure if there is a record sheet for it, I can't find one.
The only reason it's come up is that it's one of only two mechs specifically mentioned for Inner Sphere forces in the new World Wide Event.
-
This was added during the Blackout! http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5870/stalker-stk-3fk
W.
-
A question came up and was posted here (lost with last hiccup), the question is about the LCT-1M according to the MUL is is listed as extinct (as of 2901) but several of us can find no sources other than the MUL that says it is/or should be extinct, on the other hand we can find sources that imply it is still active as late as 3039 at least.
According to TRO 3025 "The Model 1M Locust reduces its armor and carries two LRM 5-packs, 24 rounds of ammunition, and the popular Martell medium laser . This version is used mainly by House Davion's Ceti Hussars." It also goes on to say "Model 1E is the Locust variant least produced and least resembling the others . Reducing its armor in favor of more weaponry, the 1E carries two arm-mounted medium lasers as well as two small lasers." and then in TRO 3039 "The 1M variant, popular in Davion space, further reduces the Locust’s armor in order to mount two LRM-5 launchers." So if it is produced more than the 1E but the 1E is not extinct, and in 3039 it is popular in Davion space, also both TRO's talk about it in the present tense not past. So I guess the question is there a super special secret source that only the MUL folks have that says it is extinct as several of us have looked and can not find anything, or are we just missing the snake in front of our faces?
NCKestrel: LCT-1M's have been found not yet dead in the AFFS in later eras. They were just hiding to protect their thin armor. MUL updated. Thanks.
-
Question: Phoenix Hawk LAM PHX - in the MUL, all the records show it as size 1. At 50 tons, should be size 2.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4822/phoenix-hawk-lam-phx-hk2
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4822/phoenix-hawk-lam-phx-hk2m
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4821/phoenix-hawk-lam-phx-hk1rb
(no AS card for the C version).
For correction in the next pass, thanks.
Xotl: Corrected, thanks.
-
Here are some more 50-55 ton LAMs in the MUL with size 1 instead of 2:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4824/phoenix-hawk-lam-mk-i-phx-hk1
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4825/phoenix-hawk-lam-mk-i-phx-hk1r
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4823/phoenix-hawk-lam-phx-hk2m
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5039/shadow-hawk-lam-shd-x1
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5040/shadow-hawk-lam-shd-x2
Xotl: corrected, thanks.
-
Xotl: Corrected, thanks.
Thank you!
-
I'm not sure if this is an issue or not, but Clan Wolf appears to have somehow lost the Loki and all its alt. configs for the Dark Ages. If I recall correctly, it was available to them quite a few months back, as I made a purchase off the info.
Any ideas?
-
I'm not sure if this is an issue or not, but Clan Wolf appears to have somehow lost the Loki and all its alt. configs for the Dark Ages. If I recall correctly, it was available to them quite a few months back, as I made a purchase off the info.
Any ideas?
I just dug out the original file used to import the Late Republic and Dark Age eras. The data that is there now appears to be the same as what was entered early last year. The Loki II has been available to them.
-
I just dug out the original file used to import the Late Republic and Dark Age eras. The data that is there now appears to be the same as what was entered early last year. The Loki II has been available to them.
Objectives: The Clans (ca. 3079) has the Falcons as the only producers of the original Loki in the Inner Sphere. With all of the fighting, I could see the Wolves' stock running out by 3100 when they lose access on the MUL.
-
Objectives: The Clans (ca. 3079) has the Falcons as the only producers of the original Loki in the Inner Sphere. With all of the fighting, I could see the Wolves' stock running out by 3100 when they lose access on the MUL.
I just dug out the original file used to import the Late Republic and Dark Age eras. The data that is there now appears to be the same as what was entered early last year. The Loki II has been available to them.
Alright, sounds like I may just have a poor memory then, haha.
It is pretty safe to assume the Wolf Empire could potentially maintain some that they already possessed (via salvage) or claim some as isorla from the Falcons, no?
-
That's outside the purview of the MUL, but in general any major faction in BattleTech can field at least a few examples of most 'Mechs. The faction availability notes in the MUL (and other sources) should be treated as guidelines, not straitjackets.
-
Hi, I have a function request. Is there any way to add a function so that we can just click on an era and see everything available to every faction (essentially, am average lost of all units available in a specific era)? If this already exists I'm missing how to do it.
Thank you!
-
You can do it with the regular filters. Just use the available era filter. Don't specify a faction in that filter.
-
The following units are listed as 'Standard' tech. Looking at the record sheets, they should be classified as 'Introductory'
Darter Scout Car
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/836/darter-scout-car-standard
Korvin Tank KRV-3
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1817/korvin-tank-krv-3
Marsden MBT II
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2084/marsden-mbt-ii
Marsden MBT II-A
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2086/marsden-mbt-ii-a
Merkava Heavy Tank Mk VIII
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2176/merkava-heavy-tank-mk-viii
Sabaku Kaze Heavy Scout Hover Tank (Standard)
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2761/sabaku-kaze-heavy-scout-hover-tank-standard
The Cobra Transport VTOL (Original) has no rules level, but the record sheet classifies it as introtech
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3971/cobra-transport-vtol-original
The Darter Scout Car (SRM 2) lacks a BV (167) and a Rules Level (record sheet tags it as introtech)
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4050/darter-scout-car-srm2
NCKestrel: corrected, thanks. random trivia... The MUL started with 3075 units, back when it was first a spreadsheet and handed to me when I joined the MUL team. And at the time, Introductory was limited to 'Mechs only (as only 'Mechs were in the Intro Box Set). Eventually Intro tech was broadened to include vehicles, but it looks like these 3075 vehicles never got caught up....
-
After setting up a complete set of factories for our online campaign, I did notice that there was a notable lack of advanced tech in the RWA, despite the language of FR:2765:
Intelligence Command reports also show that, since the Twentieth Army left Republic space [2755], each of these divisions has been slowly cycling older BattleMechs out of its ranks, replacing them with models normally seen only from Hegemony sources.
This seems to indicate that, for 12 years, the Imperial Divisions were modernizing with SLDF equipment. Feels like some of the TRO:2750 designs would be listed in the "Rim Worlds Republic: Home Guard", such as those listed in 2765 on page 18 (Black Knight, Excalibur, Highlander, King Crab) and on page 19 (Atlas).
Surely, these advanced designs went with the Liberation Army to Terra, but for those 12 years, they were in the Republic proper. I'm sure it's come up before, but just asking if you guys can take a look. The list feels a bit "anemic" for a force capable of defeating the SLDF on its home ground. :)
-
The Titan TI-1Aj and Titan TI-1Ar have intro dates of 3023, but Late Republic Era badges. The -1Aj contains a number of advanced technologies that do not exist at the time. The -1Ar. while using strictly Star League tech, is quite out of place in the 3020s as well.
Solution: Was the intro date for these supposed to be 3123?
---------------
The Victor VTR-9B (Li) from OTP: Death to Mercenaries is listed as Standard tech. I can't see any advanced tech on the sheet.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3402/victor-vtr-9b-li
edit: Same with the Annihilator ANH-1E
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/36/annihilator-anh-1e
NCKestrel: Yep, both Titan's are supposed to be 3123. That and the two intro tech units corrected. Thanks
-
Hachiwara HCA-6P had incorrect Armor value (208 points of Hardened Armor is 14 AV, not 10). Was missing CR from specials list (Hardened Armor), OV should have been 1, not 2. (5 Medium Lasers + ER PPC w/Capacitor = 3.25 damage, adjusted by heat to 2.32), PV should have been 48.
Card adjusted.
-
Cauldron-Born X lacking long range damage value (The RAC is a Clan model, not Inner Sphere) and has CASE instead of CASEII special. Both errors corrected.
-
Sunder SD1-OR had an incorrect LR damage value of 1. Changed it to a 3 (The Large Pulse Lasers are Clantech)
-
Panther PNT-9ALAG (from CM: Kurita, Pg. 54) does not come in up in searches. There is an entry in the clan invasion section for House Kurita for a PNT-10LAG (which seems to be the unit described in FM: Kurita, pg. 94), but this does not appear in searches either.
Also, no card is provided for the extant PNT-10LAG (I'm assuming that this and the PNT-9ALAG are the same machine?)
Also, I wonder about the 3054 entry date on the PNT-10LAG's MUL entry. The description on Pg. 54 (last paragraph of main body text) of CM: Kurita suggests that the modifications for the PNT-9ALAG are such that it would be possible to field the design during the Late Succession Wars (Renaissance).
NCKestrel: Adding PNT-9ALAG. PNT-10ALAG is a different unit, but there has never been a record sheet or any other details for it. It's not showing in searches because it has no BV (due to no details to calculate BV from).
-
To my knowledge, none of the combat manual only entries have been added to the mul. Without a record sheet, it is unknown if the 10ALAG is based upon the 9R or the 10K.
-
I was wondering: Would it be possible to add an option to download Alpha Strike cards as "one card per page", with the the circles able to be filled in while being read in the pdf? I would like to not have to print out all these cards every time I want to play, and adding a few simple things to a pdf will make it easy to use on a small screen like a phone or tablet.
Here is an example of what I mean: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8kqPO6A6VFgR0FtclY0Mm5qdGs (https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B8kqPO6A6VFgR0FtclY0Mm5qdGs)
The dots and heat scale can be manipulated in adobe reader for Linux, Windows, iOS, or Android but not the pdf viewer in the Google drive app.
It would also not be hard to program a pdf to recalculate the inches of movement based on the number of MP hits, the damage based on Weapons hits, or to alter the cost based on the base to hit target (skill level). It might be better to put that on a legal size page instead of letter, since most screens are 16:9 instead of 4:3
NCKestrel: Thanks for the suggestion, but we do not have the resources at this time to make any new development on the MUL.
-
Screamer LAM has availability of Star League Regular, Royal, Terran Hegemony, and Unique. Should also have "Rim Worlds Republic - Terran Corps", since no other faction actually fielded one.
-
It also appears that several factions need to be updated for availability of Land-Air 'Mechs in the SL era.
Draconis Combine
Field Report: 2765 (DCMS), page 15
The First Rasalhague Regulars are the showpiece of the Rasalhague District. Based on the SLDF striker regiments, the First has light- to medium-weight BattleMechs, a dedicated aerospace fighter wing, and a company of Land-Air ’Mechs. It also contains a significant number of Star League-designed BattleMechs, produced both within the Combine or purchased from SLDF surplus. The First Rasalhague’s LAMs are thus one of the most advanced tools in the Combine’s arsenal, produced by LexaTech Industries on Irece.
Outworlds Alliance
Field Report: 2765 (Periphery), page 9
Positions in the WarShip training programs are the most highly sought after in the RSSCO, but the largest classes focus on aerospace fighter and small craft programs, which also includes training for the Alliance’s few Land-Air ’Mech pilots.
Rim Worlds Republic
Field Report: 2765 (Periphery), page 21
In addition to these assets, each division’s lighter weight ’Mech assets includes of a full battalion of Land-Air ’Mechs, spread out unevenly between each of the division’s nine regiments. These LAMs are used as highly effective scouts, to help direct larger Lancers formations towards their targets. Due to this tactical maneuverability, the Amaris Lancer brigades are often the first to be deployed against bandit forces on offensive missions.
...
The most common under-strength elements in the Lancers are their LAM formations. Intelligence Command shows evidence that the Republic is developing its own Land-Air ’Mech production lines somewhere within its territory, as the realm cannot presently secure enough of these flexible machines to keep up with the Lancers’ demand through Hegemony-source imports alone.
There are more in the other reports, but I don't have them in front of me ATM. :)
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2186/minotaur-standard
Errata had already been issued for the Record Sheet, but the Unit Card doesn't match the TRO entry (TRO3060 p.203)
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=4021.msg272449#msg272449
Per the ASC p.90-141
Weapon Values should be 2/2/0 [0.7x2 or 1.4/1.4/0 for 2 ERML]
PV should increase to 12 PV (a +3 increase from the change in damage)
...everything else looks good.
Is this a correct change that needs to be made?
-
Is this a correct change that needs to be made?
Research into the Record Sheet confirmed the omission of the 2nd ERML on the Minotaur [Standard] that exists in TRO3060.
My calculation is unofficial, but it is based on the current methods. Someone else with the proper authority is welcome to check against it and make the appropriate correction
**EDIT** I revisited my calculations...
Minotaur [Standard] with 2 ERML (per the TRO entry)
OFV = 6.5 (2+2+0+2 Damage + 0.5 Size)
DFV = 4.75
DIR = 3.5 [(1 armor x 2 + 1 structure) x 1(1+ 1 TMM/10); Round to nearest half]
MF = 1.25 (6 / 8 + 0.5 jump)
GFB = +0
Total PV = 11.25 ~ 11 (rounded down)
Proposed changes on the MUL:
Change PV to 11
Change Damage to 2/2/0
-
The following entries are not in the MUL as of this posting.
- Hosiryokou (DropShip) from Handbook: House Kurita (pages 191-192, 202) is still not included in the mul.
- Gaajian System Patrol Boat (DropShip) - Handbook: House Kurita, PDF pp.192-193, 204 - it and it's Gaajian System Patrol Boat (3060) variant Still not in the MUL
- Dragonstar Passenger Transport (PT) from Handbook: House Kurita (pages 190-191, 201)- and it's Dragonstar Assault Transport (3060) variant are not listed as well. Both have BV2! (
-
Goblin Medium Tank (Standard) in Civil War Era is available only for St. Ives Compact. Isn't it an error?
NCKestrel: yes, corrected, thanks.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6631/zeus-x-zeu-x (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6631/zeus-x-zeu-x)
The Zeus-X ZEU-X is given an introduction date of 3054, though it has reactive armor which has a prototype date of 3063(DC), production ~3083(DC) (IO, p. 35; this date is unchanged from TO, 282).
NCKestrel: short answer, it's a mess but correct. longer answer: The ZEU-X is a very complicated case, since it was introduced to the universe in MaxTech Which had an in-universe date of 3059, so it couldn't have been 3063 or later. And it was the cover of MaxTech (ie. not exactly easy to ignore). And until RS 3085? (and/or MWDA) or so, it had no other existence in canon. So making it not exist in 3055 would mean removing it from it's only existence in canon to that point. Officially, the ZEU-X existed in 3054. There are many Solaris designs that have equipment prior to the TO/IO prototype date. The general directive has been that Solaris prototypes doesn't always count toward IO/TO prototype dates, as those dates are when the major militaries, ie, not Solaris only, use them. Above my pay grade to do anything about. But there was a ZEU-X in 3054.
-
GRF-2N Griffin (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1299/griffin-grf-2n)
MUL indicates this variant is in Record Sheets: Operation Klondike; there is actually no mention of the GRF-2N.
-
GRF-2N Griffin (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1299/griffin-grf-2n)
MUL indicates this variant is in Record Sheets: Operation Klondike; there is actually no mention of the GRF-2N.
The -2N appears in my PDF copies:
Operation: Klondike page 159 (pdf page 161) right hand column between Sentinel and Shadow Hawk.
Record Sheets: Klondike page 37
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4643/minotaur-p2 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4643/minotaur-p2)
Alpha Strike damage is incorrect.
Short should be 2, Medium should be *
2 x iHeavy Small. 6 damage each.
SRM-4 with 8 ammo. 4.5 damage (6 for SRM-4. X .75 for less then 10 ammo)
Total is 16.5 at short and 4.5 at medium.
This will also reduce the PV by 2 making it 10.
NCKestrel: updated, thanks
-
The -2N appears in my PDF copies:
Operation: Klondike page 159 (pdf page 161) right hand column between Sentinel and Shadow Hawk.
Record Sheets: Klondike page 37
I've got the mention in the sourcebook, but, oddly, not the record sheet. Thanks for the exact page number: mine show's the HOP-4Bb. Fortunately, I bought that thru DriveThru, so I can check to see if there's an update available.
I appreciate the double-check, GoldBishop.
Edit: DriveThru shows it was last updated March 2010, so either CGL didn't decide to update DriveThru or they removed it the -2N. GoldBishop: would you please check p. 3 of the RS, under "Credits"? See if there is a version number I can report to DriveThru?
-
I've got the mention in the sourcebook, but, oddly, not the record sheet. Thanks for the exact page number: mine show's the HOP-4Bb. Fortunately, I bought that thru DriveThru, so I can check to see if there's an update available.
...GoldBishop: would you please check p. 3 of the RS, under "Credits"? See if there is a version number I can report to DriveThru?
My copy of RS:OK appears to be the unmodified version (no update/revision number).
Under credits, I also have 2010, but no month.
Looking directly at the file, my copy was installed/downloaded in August 2016, but last modified in March [2016].
91 total pages, with the Griffin -2N in between the Sentinel STN-3Lb on page 36 and the Hoplite HOP-4Bb p.38
-
My RS OK is showing the GRF-4N, not 2N. However I have in my MUL email "The KLONDIKE GRF RS should be labelled GRF-2N, not -4N, it was a typo in that RS volume." Historical Operation Klondike calls it the 2N.
-
Looking directly at the file, my copy was installed/downloaded in August 2016, but last modified in March [2016].
91 total pages, with the Griffin -2N in between the Sentinel STN-3Lb on page 36 and the Hoplite HOP-4Bb p.38
My RS OK is showing the GRF-4N, not 2N. However I have in my MUL email "The KLONDIKE GRF RS should be labelled GRF-2N, not -4N, it was a typo in that RS volume." Historical Operation Klondike calls it the 2N.
Thank you, gentlemen. It looks like it was modified (GoldBishop) but possibly not submitted to DriveThru. I'll have to figure out how to make the note that nckestrel provided (so I don't lose it). I submitted the error to DriveThru, and their publisher relations team will be attempting to reach CGL.
-
XTRO RetroTech tells us that the Star Dagger was an obsolete fighter from the Terran Hegemony brought back into production in the Jihad. Clearly the intro date of 3077 in the MUL needs to be updated, though to exactly when I'm not totally sure.
-
I’m not where I can check, but the 3077 is for the S-2, and the presumed S-1 was the origanal Terran model that we have listed as unknown intro date (and no model number).
-
The MUL lists both the FS9-K and FS9-A as extinct from the early SW yet TRO3039 states that -H was the main production model not the only production model and it further clarifies it by stating the -M version was done just before the factory was destroyed.
Given the -A and -K were produced and are simple weapon swaps I think the MUL should reflect that it would be available.
The -K model looks like the inspiration for the omni model that came out later on.
-
*bump*
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=47774.msg1325687#msg1325687
NCKestrel: minotaur has been updated, thanks
-
The MUL lists both the FS9-K and FS9-A as extinct from the early SW yet TRO3039 states that -H was the main production model not the only production model and it further clarifies it by stating the -M version was done just before the factory was destroyed.
Given the -A and -K were produced and are simple weapon swaps I think the MUL should reflect that it would be available.
The -K model looks like the inspiration for the omni model that came out later on.
I just read TRO Succession Wars and it stated the only model that ceased production was the -A variant. So the -K model should still have limited availability as the -H model was the dominant production model not sole.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2065/marauder-iic-standard
The Marauder IIC is listed in the MUL as being worth 29,469,333 C-Bills.
As the MAD-IIC does not carry an XL engine, the cost should not be so overly inflated.
According to Record Sheets 3055-3058, the cost of the MAD-IIC Standard is supposed to be 9,913,534 C-Bills.
NCKestrel: cost updated, thanks
-
I'd like to request that the Goblin Infantry Support Vehicle (Standard) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1222/goblin-infantry-support-vehicle-standard) be made available to the Free Worlds League beginning in the Clan Invasion period. This is based entirely on the following lines from Field Manual: Free Worlds League:
Page 64. 20th Marik Militia's infantry component, 23rd Andurien Heavy Infantry, states:
The mechanized battalions use modern infantry vehicles like the Goblin, providing the unit with mobility and firepower.
Page 82. Protectorate Steel Guard's infantry component, 67th Independent Infantry Brigade, states:
The 381st [regiment of the brigade] makes extensive use of Maxim and Goblin infantry fighting vehicles.
NCKestrel: Added FWL to Civil War and Jihad availabilities for Goblin IFV
-
The tank that you linked to does not make sense to be sold from the FC to the FLW at that time when the arms were flowing in the other direction. The case could be made for the older Goblin Medium Tank to still have FWL availability. Those still carried infantry too.
-
Two points: first, the old Goblin's nomenclature is as a medium tank, meaning it would appear in armor formations rather than as an infantry fighting vehicle (being the nomenclature for the upgraded version that appeared in 3053). Second, the first quote from the 20th Marik Militia specifies modern IFVs. The original Goblin is of First Star League vintage which certainly doesn't make it modern.
Edit: Also note that the flow of arms wasn't one-way out of the Free Worlds. FedSuns-produced vehicles like the Yellow Jacket, as an example, are available to the FWL; the League also shipped arms to the Combine, yet the FWLM includes Combine-produced tanks like the Pegasus and Maxim as well as the the full range of first-generation OmniMechs (the Firestarter and Blackjack actually being licensed to FWL manufacturers).
-
Demolisher ii heavy tank (standard) should be 1619 bv, not 1397.
NCKestrel: Corrected, thanks
-
Demolisher ii heavy tank (standard) should be 1619 bv, not 1397.
It appears the Demolisher II (MML)'s BV is 1397. Copy/Paste error?
-
MARSDEN I MAIN BATTLE TANK
Issue: Missing
Details: This was published in Era Digest : Age of War. It has not been published on the MUL as of yet.
-
This one? http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4602/marsden-mbt-i
Its a primitive so it's classified as a support vee
-
This one? http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4602/marsden-mbt-i
Its a primitive so it's classified as a support vee
Shouldn't it populate anyways?
For some reason when you go to enter name, only the Marsden II MBT and Marsden III MBT only populate. That's not good...unless it suppose do that.
I've noticed that in the past.
-
Ah, I see what you're saying. It gives a generic "Marsden MBT" for all versions, but the marsden I doesn't get its own. Strange.
-
Names in the MUL are actually split by name and model. Warhammer is name, WHM-6R is model. The search field autopopulates on name only, not model.
The Marsden MBT I has a name of Marsden MBT, and a Model of I. The Marsden MBT (Standard) has a name of Marsden MBT, and a model of (Standard).
The Other Models list on a unit also goes by name. Thus all the Marsden MBT's show as Other Models to one another, because they all have the same name (Marsden MBT), just different models.
The reason Marsden MBT II is showing up, is because there is a a date entry...inconsistency. The primitive Marsden II is listed as Marsden II MBT II (Primitive), while the other Marsden IIs are listed as Marsden MBT II. So that needs to be cleaned up. And the same with the III.
-
Triton-class Missile Submarine (Standard)
Issue: Missing Variant
Comment: The variant is from TRO:VA (Revised), p. 231 - The Piranha variant of the Triton Class Missile Submarine. There nothing posted on MUL regarding it.
-
Lee (2756) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6785/lee-2756)
Issues: Missing Variants, availability is incorrect, and Role missing
Comment: The variant is from Liberation of Terra V2 (Revised), p. 148-149 - Fluff explains there are 3 variants, CV (aerospace carrier version), Combat Vehicle Transport, and Cargo Transport. None have entries on the MUL. I know it's lacking of record sheets, but they should have entries. The Ship is suppose to be extinct beyond the Succession War era. No notes have ever said the ship is back in production beyond that era. There no role in the article, which is a Mech Carrier (main variant)
-
Trident-3U
Issue: Incorrect Speed - Listed as 8
Comment: Shouldn't the speed of this version be 12? The fluff mentions switching from FAA to Standard but no reduction of 4MP.
-
Trident-3U
Issue: Incorrect Speed - Listed as 8
Comment: Shouldn't the speed of this version be 12? The fluff mentions switching from FAA to Standard but no reduction of 4MP.
RS3050U - Clan/Star League has a record sheet for the Trident 3U showing it with 8 safe thrust, but it looks like that was an error. checking...Yep, errata was posted. Thrust and Role updated.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6396/avalanche-avl-1o
Avalanche and it's configurations should only have 4 structure. (50 ton mech, standard engine)
-
I just read TRO Succession Wars and it stated the only model that ceased production was the -A variant. So the -K model should still have limited availability as the -H model was the dominant production model not sole.
bump - any opinion on modified availability for the -K?
-
Grigori C-GRG-OS Caelestis has CASEII according to the 3075 RS. Updated.
-
LRM Carrier (3055)
Issue: IDF value includes Artemis?
Comment: Shouldn't the IDF value only be 4? (12 x 3 = 36) The Artemis Bonus would only be included in the Direct Fire value, not IDF.
-
LRM Carrier (Standard)
Issue: Damage Value too low.
Comment: Shouldn't the base Damage value be 4 at Medium/Long? (12 x 3 = 36 /10 = 3.6 rounded to 4)
-
Did you check the ammo? Needs 10 rounds+ per launcher.
-
Did you check the ammo? Needs 10 rounds+ per launcher.
Doh!
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7145/voidseeker-mk-39-007-striker
The Voidseeker striker is listed as 14 points. I calculate that it should be 31 points
If I take the VoidSeeker Striker ship from the MUL; 3+4+4 for weapons=11, 8*1.5 for armor=12, 4 for structure =4; speed 6*0.25=1.5; ECM=2; Threshold 1*0.25=0.25 11+12+4+1.5+2=31
ASC pp. 142
[NCKestrel] Voidseeker Striker updated. Threshold should be 3 instead of 1, and the medium damage value counts twice, so the PV was higher.
Also
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7144/voidseeker-mk-39-004-interceptor
If I take the VoidSeeker Interceptor ship from the MUL; 4+4+1 for weapons=9, 7*1.5 for armor=10.5, 4 for structure =4; speed 7*0.25=1.75; PRB & RCN=4; Threshold 1*0.25=0.25 9+11+4+2+4=30
[NCKestrel] Voidseeker Interceptor updated. Threshold should be 3 instead of 1, and the medium damage value counts twice, so the PV was higher.
Thanks for pointing these out, definitely missed updating those PVs!
-
Timber Wolf Pryde alpha strike Short and Medium damage values are incorrect. Correct values are 4/4/4 not 6/6/4.
calc:
ER LL x 2 = 2/2/2 & 24 heat
ER ML x 2 = 1.4/1.4/- & 10 heat
ER SL x 1 = .5/.5/- & 2 heat
LRM 20 x2 = 1.8/1.8/1.8 & 12 heat
Total damage 5.7/5.7/3.8
Total Heat Short = 52 (48 weapon + 4 move)
Total heat Medium = 52 (48 weapon + 4 move)
Total heat Long = 28 (24 weapon + 4 move)
Heat Dissipation = 32
Heat Modified Damage
Short: (5.7 × 32) ÷ (52 – 4) = 3.8 (round up to 4)
Medium: (5.7 × 32) ÷ (52 – 4) = 3.8 (round up to 4)
Long = 4 as total heat is less than dissipation at long range
[NCKestrel] Fixed. Thanks.
-
The FS & IS General in the Jihad timeframe does not have the IS Standard BA, GDL Scout, Clan Medium 'Rabid' available to them according to the MUL while FM3085 lists the BA in the RAT respectively at the #3, #5 and #18 positions per p218 of the PDF.
-
Why does the Strider B get LRM1/1/1 when it has damage values 1/2/2? It’s entire armament is 2 LRM10s. Shouldn’t the damage and special values match?
-
Damage values round but where values for specials do not round.
-
Standard damage values round up. Special abilities round normal. So a 1.2 (two LRM-10s) would be 2 for standard M/L but a 1 for LRM.
-
The FS & IS General in the Jihad timeframe does not have the IS Standard BA, GDL Scout, Clan Medium 'Rabid' available to them according to the MUL while FM3085 lists the BA in the RAT respectively at the #3, #5 and #18 positions per p218 of the PDF.
We would have to look at them but I suspect the field manual is incorrect. With that said, 3085 is the tail end of the Jihad era.
-
For comparison . . .
IS Std BA is 3/5 on DC, 3/5/7 on CC, 7 on FWL, 4 on LC, 5/12 on merc and 7 on Republic
GDL Scout is 5 on LC, 7 on Merc, not on DC, CC, FWL or Republic
Rabid is 17 on DC, 21 on Republic and not on others
Since there is not a IS General RAT its hard IMO to say what that component would be for the MUL. I am not saying they are widely available, but the MUL has the Fire Moth available to the FS or IS General for that period as well.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/590/chippewa-iic-standard
Correct Chippewa IIC image is available in Era Digest: Golden Century, p. 36.
-
Revisiting an old question, so by this part " the Draconis Combine has at least one other Catapult assigned to Brion’s Legion, but no others have been deployed with any regular Kurita unit." is the assumption then that the Catapult in Brion's Legion is not a K2 series? Also one other Catapult is listed in use by House Kurita, in the Shaw District, Barlow's End on 29 September 3026, piloted by Chu-i Isabella Armstrong of the Ryuken, (first line of pg 171 of chp 19 of Wolves on the Border)
So I guess I am question the totality of the extinction between 3020 and 3033 of the CPLT-K2.. or if it's just for all intents and purposes that the Catapult as a whole i extinct in House Kurita (or in such low numbers ass to be functionally extinct). Mostly due to the various comments about how CGL and HBS are trying to work in lockstep with Canon, but HBS did recently announce the addition of the K2 to the game, (though admittedly in the forgotten reaches of the periphery, and so as such maybe has no bearing on it's "official" status in the Inner Sphere?)
I think I confused myself. Sorry about that.
Opposite direction, it's ancient.
TR3025 Catapult entry says "One of House Kurita’s few Catapults was lost to Davion forces during the battle for the planet Hoff; the Draconis Combine has at least one other Catapult assigned to Brion’s Legion, but no others have been deployed with any regular Kurita unit.” And that's for all Catapult's for Kurita. Since Kurita has no Catapults from 3020 (Hoff was 3019) until some undefined later date that's at least post 3025, and only Kurita has K2s, there's no K2s after Hoff until Kurita starts new production of K2s in 3033.
-
TR3025 also says the Zeus predates the Mackie.
It'd take anything and everything it says with a giant grain of salt.
-
I think the Lyran and maybe IS General armor column for the Jihad needs work- for instance FM3085 RAT has the Heimdall, Fensalir (HAG), Gurti, Fensalir, Demo II (Tbolt), DI Morgan, DI Morgan (LRM), Demo II, Demo II (MML), Alacorn Mk VII, Sturmfuer (HG), Behemoth, Fortune, Alacorn Mk VI and others are missing from the MUL. I was just skimming the assault column in that and then comparing. I would assume tanks were also left out in the other weight groups.
-
I started checking on those, and several are already listed for Lyran Alliance. The Demolisher IIs, DI Morgans, Alacorn Mk VII..
Perhaps you missed the Lyran Alliance being listed as a separate faction versus Lyran Commonwealth?
There's also a couple that looks like got missed when the Jihad era got extended later (intro year 3081-3085).
-
You are right, I did not check off Alliance since they had returned to being Commonwealth during the Jihad.
-
citation?
TR3025 also says the Zeus predates the Mackie.
It'd take anything and everything it says with a giant grain of salt.
-
citation?
TRO 3025 cites the Zeus's debut as either 2407 or 2410 depending on how you read the context of the date given (page 112). The Mackie's introductory date is 2439.
What I'm getting at here is that TRO 3025 is not particularly well known for its accuracy. I'd definitely try to find more supporting information and sources for anything it says.
-
Other way around, Scotty. In this case TR3025 is being used as the authoritative source by NCKestrel. Bishop Steiner is under the impression that if the mentioned Catapults are K2s, then the design shouldn't be listed as extinct. This is incorrect. If a faction does not have a unit listed on the MUL for a given time period, it does not mean that literally none of them exist, only that they are vanishingly rare. The Shadow Hawk LAM, for example, was basically Extinct from its creation, but one was in a Steiner museum.
-
Other way around, Scotty. In this case TR3025 is being used as the authoritative source by NCKestrel. Bishop Steiner is under the impression that if the mentioned Catapults are K2s, then the design shouldn't be listed as extinct. This is incorrect. If a faction does not have a unit listed on the MUL for a given time period, it does not mean that literally none of them exist, only that they are vanishingly rare. The Shadow Hawk LAM, for example, was basically Extinct from its creation, but one was in a Steiner museum.
I am under no such impression. I am looking for what the "official" take is on said matters specifically for dealing with the fact that there seems to be no consensus as to what extinct means. If there is, and I have missed it, that citation itself would work wonders.
That said, since the citation in TRO 3025 (part A) was used in part to determine it's "extinction" then the same citation (pt b) should be just as "authoritative.
But I also admit, as someone who has used K2s in his 3025 era canon unit, for decades, only to get told at a con... "bruh those aren't legal" one year.... (because apparently someone had decided that suddenly they didn't exist AT ALL until 3033... wtf?), and being the guy who instigated the last MUL related update to them...
Yeah I probably have an agenda.
-
Other way around, Scotty. In this case TR3025 is being used as the authoritative source by NCKestrel.
TR3025 Revised says the same.
TR3039 doesn't say anything specific about Catapults in Kurita until 3033, but states the Catapult was "completely ignored and it's numbers were dwindling" overall until Kurita started production in 3033. It also implies all of Kurita's Catapults came from taking Dieron. IE. Kurita had one source from one time in the 1st SW. It definitely does not sound like it's attempting to retcon 3025's statements on Kurita's extremely limited numbers of Catapults in 3025.
(On the other hand, Battlepack: 4SW has three Kuritan forces each with a CPLT-C1 in 3028-3029.)
No CPLT-K2s post 3025 is perhaps a little strong. Maybe one or two Kuritan's acquired Catapults and converted them to K2s on their own. It's always possible. "Practically extinct" as you described should always be assumed.
-
But I also admit, as someone who has used K2s in his 3025 era canon unit, for decades, only to get told at a con... "bruh those aren't legal" one year.... (because apparently someone had decided that suddenly they didn't exist AT ALL until 3033... wtf?)
I understand that. I am deeply annoyed that someone would declare that you can't use a CPLT-K2 in a game simply because it doesn't appear as available to Kuritans in that time period. That is a misuse of the Master Unit List. It was never meant to be the be-all, end-all of what a player can and cannot use in games. Even if the K2 is rare enough to not warrant MUL availability in those 13 years, it is certainly a thematically-appropriate unit for 3025ish Kuritan forces. Telling you that you couldn't use it was petty, and I am very sorry that it happened.
While I am no longer a BattleTech or MUL contributor, I can say that the use of the Master Unit List to dictate unit availability by faction is strictly optional. There are few - if any - formal, printed rules for using the MUL, and players, GMs, and event organizers should be certain that everyone involved in a game or tournament is in agreement as to any restrictions they feel it imposes. I strongly urge that people running tournaments retain the utmost flexibility in interpreting the Master Unit List. The Alpha Strike Combat Manuals give rules specifically tailored to allow factions to use rare or captured units; I would highly recommend using a variant of those.
-
And as for HBS using the K2, we know why they’ve added it. Sometimes there are forces beyond canon, and you do the best you can with what you have. Harassing them over canon when they’re just trying to give you a fun option when legally they can’t put in the preferred option doesn’t help.
-
Notice the Katya is missing off the CapCon list for the Jihad- produced in '67 and IIRC exclusive to the Confederation.
-
All four Katya are already on the CapCon list for the Jihad.
-
Maybe for production, but I was looking for just availability and the only 30t airframe on that list is Sparrowhawk H5. When I looked up on Sarna and MM, I only found 3 Katyas, -904, -905, -906.
-
Maybe for production, but I was looking for just availability and the only 30t airframe on that list is Sparrowhawk H5. When I looked up on Sarna and MM, I only found 3 Katyas, -904, -905, -906.
We don't have production on the MUL, so I'm not sure what you are refering to.
Katya C-904 is Capellan Confederation for Civil War and Jihad, and CC, FW, Merc, Periphery and Republic for Early Republic
RL15, RL10 and Fuel variants are exactly the same.
When I go the faction tab, select Capellan Confederation, Civil War (or Jihad) and then Aerospace, all four Katyas show up.
Are you using the unit search and select Capellan Confederation as faction? If so, make sure to uncheck the box that only shows units with BV. The Katyas don't have BVs entered, so won't show up in the default unit search that has BV required checked.
-
Then that sounds likely, what I was referring two was the 2 buttons at the bottom of the selection 'Production Era' and 'Availability Era'
-
production era refers only to the initial era that it was produced and not all eras that it was produced.
-
A note about some changes to AS unit cards in the MUL. Dak created some new templates, including some additional unit types. Skyhigh has finished implementing them on the site, so we now have separate templates for BattleMechs, Aerospace, Vehicles, ProtoMechs and Infantry.
-
I feel like the Ahab AHB-443's availability during the Star League should be flip-flopped with the AHB-X. The AHB-443, with its NARC technology, is NOT available to the SLDF. The AHB-X is a more primitive version, mounting no special tech, and is not available to the Great Houses?
It seems far more likely that the Star League would have allowed the AHB-X to be sold to the Member States and the AHB-443 reserved for its own military.
-
The entry for the Assassin Skaret Assassins, Jarnfolk is listed as one squad, and one ton on the list, but the card has a CAR2 in the specials ... just a quick heads up.
Thanks in Advance
Nahuris
-
The entry for the Assassin Skaret Assassins, Jarnfolk is listed as one squad, and one ton on the list, but the card has a CAR2 in the specials ... just a quick heads up.
Thanks in Advance
Nahuris
Weight should be 1.5 tons for one squad, they're Paratroopers. AS card is correct.
-
Correction.. looks like all vehicles are missing skills
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/860/demolisher-heavy-tank-defensive
The Mobile Long Tom Artillery Cards are missing skills on their cards.
Mobile Long Tom Artillery Ammunition Carriage LT-MOB-25
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2203/mobile-long-tom-artillery-ammunition-carriage-lt-mob-25
Mobile Long Tom Artillery LT-MOB-25
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2202/mobile-long-tom-artillery-lt-mob-25
Mobile Long Tom Artillery Support Carriage LT-MOB-25
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2204/mobile-long-tom-artillery-support-carriage-lt-mob-25
-
When will the FLE-16 be added from TRO succession Wars?
-
I just read TRO Succession Wars and it stated the only Firestarter model that ceased production was the -A variant. So the -K model should still have limited availability as the -H model was the dominant production model not sole.
Bump - any thoughts on this mods?
-
When will the FLE-16 be added from TRO succession Wars?
When we do it. We're overworked, unpaid volunteers (ok, probably redundant), we get to it when we get to it.
-
Weight should be 1.5 tons for one squad, they're Paratroopers. AS card is correct.
I have now corrected the MUL's tonnage listing for them to 1.5. It displays as 2 though because the site rounds up tonnage...
-
I feel like the Ahab AHB-443's availability during the Star League should be flip-flopped with the AHB-X. The AHB-443, with its NARC technology, is NOT available to the SLDF. The AHB-X is a more primitive version, mounting no special tech, and is not available to the Great Houses?
It seems far more likely that the Star League would have allowed the AHB-X to be sold to the Member States and the AHB-443 reserved for its own military.
The AHB-X was a prototype, regardless of technology, it was never widespread. Thus it never got a non-X designation. The spread it does have likely has more to do with us being unsure where the prototype served, if anything it should be more restricted.
-
When we do it. We're overworked, unpaid volunteers (ok, probably redundant), we get to it when we get to it.
@nckestrel - understood mate and no offence intended. all the volunteers do a great job!
-
The AHB-X was a prototype, regardless of technology, it was never widespread. Thus it never got a non-X designation. The spread it does have likely has more to do with us being unsure where the prototype served, if anything it should be more restricted.
Would this then mean that NARC missile beacon ammo was sold to every House? As well as NARC-compatible munitions?
-
The MUL lists the Tokugawa Heavy Tank (Standard) with a introduction date of 3053 and gives the downgraded -150 version with a date of 2792.
TRO: 3058 Upgrade pg. 102, says the first Tokugawa's were released during the First Succession War. The downgraded -150 came *after* the release of the original design. There was a period of time between its introduction and the later downgrade in which the standard version was available.
-
The MUL lists the Tokugawa Heavy Tank (Standard) with a introduction date of 3053 and gives the downgraded -150 version with a date of 2792.
TRO: 3058 Upgrade pg. 102, says the first Tokugawa's were released during the First Succession War. The downgraded -150 came *after* the release of the original design. There was a period of time between its introduction and the later downgrade in which the standard version was available.
"in the wake of that (Luthien) action..produced an improved Tokugawa that entered service in 3053."
"in the decade and a half since the upgraded version entered service"
The -150 was the original 2792 and the 3046 returned model, the upgrade (standard) didn't exist until 3053.
The text about the Tokugawa being released during the First Succession War is not specific to the medium pulse laser/lbx model, it's referring to the initial service date for the overall Tokugawa chassis.
-
Weight should be 1.5 tons for one squad, they're Paratroopers. AS card is correct.
Cool, so paratroopers are 1.5 tons, then... does that include Tau Wraiths, as they have PARA... in addition, in the list part, where it shows all of the infantry, both are listed at 1 ton, there.
Nahuris
-
I don't own a copy of TRO 3085, so I'm not able to verify with an official source, but Sarna states that the armament of an LGB-8V Longbow (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1938/longbow-lgb-8v) is two Arrow IV's with 8 tons of ammo and a single pulse laser, while the MUL Entry (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1938/longbow-lgb-8v) gives it the ARTAIS-2 special and far more firepower (and an OV value) than could be gained by a single pulse laser of any type could grant.
-
Sarna is incorrect.
-
Sarna entry has been corrected now stating that the Longbow 8V has 2 Medium Pulse Lasers, 1 ER Large, 10 rounds of missiles per launcher for the two Arrow IVs. Battle value is from Record Sheet, which matches MUL entry.
-
These IndustrialMechs exist in the Reunification War book, but the MUL dates have them as being made after the war's conclusion. They are anachronisms.
BC Buster XV (Standard)
BC Buster XV (AC)
BC Buster XV (PPC)
Crosscut ED-X2 (Standard)
Crosscut ED-X2 (Rocket)
Crosscut ED-X2 (Flamer)
Daedalus GTX-2
Daedalus GTX-2 (Militarized)
Harvester Ant
Harvester Ant (LRM)
Harvester Ant (MG)
Powerman LoaderMech (Standard)
Powerman LoaderMech (Laser)
Powerman LoaderMech (SRM)
-
Genadier II D battle armor lists the Tube Artillery special as ART-BA
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7393/grenadier-ii-battle-armor-d
while the Centaur Battle Armor lists the ability as ARTBA-1
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6651/centaur-battle-armor-standard
Also, I don't believe Battle Armor Tube artillery is experimental tech any longer, so both units should be advanced and not experimental tech base if I'm correct? (Ref, Tac Ops pg. 284 lists them as Advanced, not experimental).
Xotl: Corrected.
-
All Revenant variants have wrong identifier. The core model is correctly listed as UBM-2R. All the other variants are listed as UM-2R*. According to TRO:3145 and RS:3145 Unabridged, this is incorrect. Variants should be listed as UBM-2R*.
Xotl: Corrected.
-
page 102 of '3039 unabridged record sheets' has the BV for the Condor (Davion) at 577 but the MUL has 592, which one is correct?
-
BV rules have had errata since 3039 Unabridged was released. The MUL is much easier to update than the record sheet PDFs.
-
bump - any opinion on modified availability for the -K?
Any thoughts on the availability of the -K model fire starter for SW era?
Given the 'Mirage' had only one year of production and is available to Steiner in Late SW plus the TRO has the only model not in production is the -A variant. The -H variant was described as the dominant production model.
-
Any thoughts on the availability of the -K model fire starter for SW era?
Given the 'Mirage' had only one year of production and is available to Steiner in Late SW plus the TRO has the only model not in production is the -A variant. The -H variant was described as the dominant production model.
The statement that "one variant that has ceased production" is not meant to imply it is the only variant that has ceased production. It also says "a number of variants..were built during the period Argile still operated on Skye.." Argile was destroyed on Skye during the 3rd Succession War, so all the Firestarters from Argile ceased production. The later statement that one variant ceased production "during hte period Argile still operated on Skye" can't possibly mean Argile was still producing any Firestarter variant after the factory was destroyed. So it also can't mean the -K was still in production.
The -K was never made by Coventry, and Argile only produced a very few post-2703. Perhaps there's still a handful somewhere, but it's questionable. Extinct is a better answer than saying any specific faction has any. IE. It would be less misleading to continue saying extinct than to change the answer.
-
Question on the availability of the DRG-1G Grand Dragon - listed in the MUL as introduced in 3024. Were those just field refits, or did LAW start making the design at that point? I ask because, in "Warrior: Riposte," Yorinaga Kurita's son recounts using a freshly manufactured Grand Dragon he was taking out for a shakedown run at an Alshain 'Mech factory to drive off bandits who had come to the factory to steal Panthers.
Did Alshain Weapons manufacture the Grand Dragon in the 3020s, then close the line before 3054 (when Objective Raids was published)? (Per Objective Raids, their ER PPC line on Tok Do supplies that component to LAW on Luthien for construction.)
-
The statement that "one variant that has ceased production" is not meant to imply it is the only variant that has ceased production. It also says "a number of variants..were built during the period Argile still operated on Skye.." Argile was destroyed on Skye during the 3rd Succession War, so all the Firestarters from Argile ceased production. The later statement that one variant ceased production "during hte period Argile still operated on Skye" can't possibly mean Argile was still producing any Firestarter variant after the factory was destroyed. So it also can't mean the -K was still in production.
The -K was never made by Coventry, and Argile only produced a very few post-2703. Perhaps there's still a handful somewhere, but it's questionable. Extinct is a better answer than saying any specific faction has any. IE. It would be less misleading to continue saying extinct than to change the answer.
Hello, I appreciate your response and all the volunteers on here are awesome.
The only thing I would add is that based on your thoughts above, then the 'Mirage' variant would also be considered extinct. From 2703 to 2893 approximately 7790 -H Firestarters (190 years multiplied by 41 mechs* per year) were built at Argyle prior to factory destruction then the 41 Mirage models produced account for 0.5%.....by definition extinct.
If it is not considered extinct then the -K model would have had 190 years of potentially sporadic production and also maintains the same armour profile as the -H model.
Anyway....just thoughts.
*You can work out mechs per year as TRO3025 states 3000 Firestarters were produced between 2703 and 2776
-
The Warhammer IIC 10 and 11 and the Marauder IIC 8 have clearly too early intro dates.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6859/warhammer-iic-10 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6859/warhammer-iic-10) 2938
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6858/warhammer-iic-11 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6858/warhammer-iic-11) 2938
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2072/marauder-iic-8 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2072/marauder-iic-8) 3025
-
The Warhammer IIC 10 and 11 and the Marauder IIC 8 have clearly too early intro dates.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6859/warhammer-iic-10 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6859/warhammer-iic-10) 2938
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6858/warhammer-iic-11 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6858/warhammer-iic-11) 2938
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2072/marauder-iic-8 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2072/marauder-iic-8) 3025
They are old models that the IS didn’t learn of till much later.
-
They are old models that the IS didn’t learn of till much later.
The Warhammer IIC 11 uses heavy lasers though.
-
The Centurion CNT-1A fighter from Record Sheets: 3075 Unabridged - Age of War pg. 131 is overweight by 2 tons and Megamek is rejecting it as an illegal design. Hammer may have brought this unit up already?
23:04:21,882 ERROR [megamek.server.Server] {Packet Pump}
Chassis: Centurion CNT-1A (BLOODWOLF) - IS_Experimental (2430)
Movement: 8/12
Weight: 32.0 is greater than 30.0
Engine: 220 Fusion 10.00
Primitive Cockpit: 5.00
Fuel: 5.00
Heat Sinks: 10 0.00
Armor: 96 (Primitive Fighter) 9.00
Equipment:
Medium Laser NOS 1.00
Medium Laser RWG 1.00
Medium Laser LWG 1.00
-
That should go to the Record Sheets 3075 errata thread.
-
The Warhammer IIC 11 uses heavy lasers though.
Excellent point, and RS 3145 lists both as Dark Age. Kicking this to the team to see what needs to be fixed. Thanks.
-
The Ursa URA-2A (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6627/ursa-ura-2a) and Ursa URA-2C (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6628/ursa-ura-2c) have faction availabilities listed for the Early Republic era. However, the 'Mechs were introduced in the Late Republic era (3122 and 3125 respectively) and did not exist during the Early Republic era.
-
The Ursa URA-2A (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6627/ursa-ura-2a) and Ursa URA-2C (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6628/ursa-ura-2c) have faction availabilities listed for the Early Republic era. However, the 'Mechs were introduced in the Late Republic era (3122 and 3125 respectively) and did not exist during the Early Republic era.
Thanks, fixed.
-
The Puma Assault Tank PAT-007 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2601/puma-assault-tank-pat-007) has faction availabilities listed for the Civil War era. However, the tank was not introduced until 3069 and did not exist during the Civil War era.
-
The Puma Assault Tank PAT-007 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2601/puma-assault-tank-pat-007) has faction availabilities listed for the Civil War era. However, the tank was not introduced until 3069 and did not exist during the Civil War era.
Fixed, thanks.
-
MUL has the introduction date for the Blackjack BJ-3 as 3042 yet the description in the TRO says it was produced during the 4th SW by the St Ives Compact which would put the latest production date as 3030.
-
MUL has the introduction date for the Blackjack BJ-3 as 3042 yet the description in the TRO says it was produced during the 4th SW by the St Ives Compact which would put the latest production date as 3030.
The blackjack history was a mess of conflicting information. We put a different blackjack as the experiment during the 4th sw, it is intentionally not the -3.
-
Corsair CSR-V12b (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/694/corsair-csr-v12b)
Is listed with the BOMB1 special, it should have the BOMB2 special (as per conversion rules on page 121 of the Alpha Strike Companion).
-
i think both AS cards for the Anzu are incorrect.
ZU-G60 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6510/anzu-zu-g60)
should not have OV2.
heat dissipation is 20, maximum heat is 26*
running the math for OV calculation gives OV0 for short range and OV1 for medium range
unmodified damage is 2.675 / 3.1 / 2.6
OV1 would make this 2 / 3 / 3 final damage
*
8 (2x4 [Ultra10]
4 (LRM10)
5 (Er Med)
5 (LightPPC w/capacitor)
4 (jump)
--------------------------------------
ZU-J70 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6511/anzu-zu-j70)
is statted with damage 4 / 3 / 1 with OV1
only long range weapon is a MML7, which deals 0.4 damage at long range, which should translate to 0* long range damage.
heat dissipation is 20, max heat is 31*
running the math for OV calculation gives OV1 for short range and OV2 for medium range
unmodified damage is 4.6 / 4.05 / 0.4
OV2 would make this 3 / 3 / 0* final damage
*
6 (RAC/5)
4 (MML7)
2 (ER Small)
5 (ER Med)
10 (Snubnose PPC)
4 (jump)
--------------------------------------
note: i do not have the record sheets, so maybe i missed something. it would be great if someone could check my calculations.
-
I'm almost certain that the capacitor on the LPPC is to blame for the first variant (whether there's an error or not that's where it's going to be) because there's a fair chance it's going to contribute 10 heat instead of 5.
I'll check the J70 in a bit.
-
Alright, had a chance to review the conversions. You're entirely correct on the G60. It should have OV1 instead of OV2.
On the J70 there is a problem, but not exactly the way you describe. The unmodified damage is correct, but OV2 doesn't mean "reduce short range damage by 2", it still uses the heat-modified damage and rounds normally. A short range value or 4.6 with that heat level will be reduced to 3.407, which rounds up to 4. The long range damage will definitely end up as 0* though, for the reasons you cited.
Final damage value should be 4 / 3 / 0* with OV2.
-
Basilisk 3 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3799/basilisk-3) is listed as having a MV of 8"j/10"j. This should probably be 8"/10"j.
Waneta S-WN-2LAM (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5380/waneta-s-wn-2lam) is listed as having an MV of 8"12"j. This should probably be 8"/12"j.
Pollux II ADA Heavy Tank (Standard) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7401/pollux-ii-ada-heavy-tank-standard) has a special listed as ART-AIS1 (also listed in the turret). This should probably be changed to ARTAIS-1 to match other units.
Apostle Self-Propelled Artillery (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7414/apostle-self-propelled-artillery) has a special listed as ART-S1. This should probably be changed to ARTS-1 to match other units.
Reaper Self-Propelled Artillery (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7413/reaper-self-propelled-artillery) has a special listed as ART-T1. This should probably be changed to ARTT-1 to match other units.
Xotl: Updated, thanks!
-
hey Scotty,
thanks for checking.
. . . The unmodified damage is correct, but OV2 doesn't mean "reduce short range damage by 2", it still uses the heat-modified damage and rounds normally. A short range value or 4.6 with that heat level will be reduced to 3.407, which rounds up to 4. . . .
Final damage value should be 4 / 3 / 0* with OV2.
ah, okay, got it.
so in this case the Anzu - and i suppose there are more mechs out there -, with a (unmodified) maximum short range damage of 5, gains one potential extra damage point by OV calculation. nice cheat :D ;D
-
The Warhammer IIC 10 and 11 and the Marauder IIC 8 have clearly too early intro dates.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6859/warhammer-iic-10 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6859/warhammer-iic-10) 2938
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6858/warhammer-iic-11 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6858/warhammer-iic-11) 2938
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2072/marauder-iic-8 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2072/marauder-iic-8) 3025
Warhammer IIC 10 and 11 have intro dates moved to Late Republic. Thanks for pointing those out.
I misplaced/lost some of the conversation, so this is being reviewed again.
-
In case people didn't see the relevant thread in the Alpha Strike forums, the AS PV update has been rolled out onto the MUL. Please ensure that you're using the updated PV calculation formula as found in the ASC errata if you're reporting any PV errors. Thanks.
-
Ballista Self Propelled Artillery Tank (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6775/ballista-self-propelled-artillery-tank-standard)
TRO entry and record sheet in Historical - Liberation of Terra Vol. 2
Ballista has three MGs - two in the front, one in the rear - so it should have a damage output of 0*/0/0 not 1/0/0.
and a question:
several units, who have their artillery weapons in a turret (Ballista, Regulator Hover, ...), do not have the TUR(ARTxx) special. is there a reason for this? i could not find an explanation . . .
-
Mad Cat Mk. IV C Alpha Strike Calculations Error
Unit: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6573/mad-cat-mk-iv-savage-wolf-c
Error: The Alpha Strike damage values for this unit appear to be incorrect. My math below (Scotty ran identical calculations in another thread) reveals what seems to be a case of 'left out the XXL Engine heat'.
Long Range Damage Calculation (2x LRM-15 with Artemis V, 2x Clan ER Large Laser, 30 heat dissipation, XXL Engine): 1.26 + 1.26 + 1 + 1 = 4.52. Then (4.52 * 30) / (38 - 4) = 3.988 = Round to 4.
The stat card says 5.
Similar behavior exists in the Short and Mid range calculations, where I wind up with 4.3 damage after rounding. It appears like the XXL engine heat was instead calculated as standard engine heat (2 heat instead of the proper 4), resulting in damage values a bit higher than they should be. I think the correct damage for the Mad Cat Mk. IV C is 4 across all ranges.
(I also suspect, but have not checked in detail, that the other Mad Cat Mk IVs have the same issue. Eyeballing the damage on them makes me think 'aren't most of those 1 point higher than they should be?')
-
The Long range on the Mad Cat Mk IV C should be 4 (and reducing PV to 57).
The Medium and Short range 4.3 rounds up to 5 (non special damage always rounds up). So no change there.
Thanks. I'll go through the other Mad Cat Mk IV's as I have time.
Prime dropped at S and M and added OV (PV adjusted as well). A and B were fine.
-
Ballista Self Propelled Artillery Tank (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6775/ballista-self-propelled-artillery-tank-standard)
Thanks, corrected.
and a question:
several units, who have their artillery weapons in a turret (Ballista, Regulator Hover, ...), do not have the TUR(ARTxx) special. is there a reason for this? i could not find an explanation . . .
The artillery rules in the first/second printing don't have firing arcs, so there was no need to specify they are in a turret.
With the new standard rules artillery in the errata, they do have firing arcs, so yeah we will need to go through and update those. Thanks.
-
Thanks! Just to confirm before I go reporting any other units for Alpha Strike math... any unit with a decimal damage value (other than the 0 to 0.5 'minimum damage rule' situation) always rounds up to the next integer? Even if the decimal is #.01 to #.49?
For example, I'm checking out the Mad Cat Mk. II ( http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4565/mad-cat-mk-ii-standard ) and I wind up with...
Close Calculation: 1.245 (Gauss) + 1.245 (Gauss) + 0.6 (LRM-10) + 0.6 (LRM-10) + 0.7 (ERML) + 0.7 (ERML) + 0.7 (ERML) + 0.7 (ERML) = 6.49 base damage before heat modifiers.
Close modified by heat: (6.49 * 28 HeatDissipation) / (32 MaxHeat - 4 ) = 6.49
Close Rounded to Final: 7
Mid Calculation: 1.5 (Gauss) + 1.5 (Gauss) + 2.8 (4x ERML) + 1.2 (2x LRM-10) = 7.0
Modified by heat: Works out to 7.0, skipping further calculations on Mid
Long Calculation: 3.0 (2x Gauss) + 1.2 (2x LRM-10) = 4.2
No long modification for heat required in this case, so 4.2 rounds up to 5.
Resulting in the 7/7/5 we see on the MUL. Is this right? If so, I'll take a look at a few others to make sure my calculations are right before making any further reports.
-
Yes, round up. Unless it’s a special ability (lrm, srm, flk, if, etc), special abilities are round normal.
-
That's correct, and why the Bombast Laser (1.02 damage) is hilarious in Alpha Strike conversions.
-
I think the PV of this unit is wrong:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3457/vtol-infantry-hachiman-taro-enterprise-extraction-force (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3457/vtol-infantry-hachiman-taro-enterprise-extraction-force)
calculated by hand:
offensive = 1
movement = 1.25
DIR = ((2*1 + 2*2) * 1.2) = 7.2 => 7
total defensive = 1.25 + 7 = 8.25
total PV = 1 + 8.25 = 9.25 => 9
-
None of the Units listed Handbook House Kurita are in the MUL.
I did double checked the MUL, they are still not there.
Are they still going be still added? Do you guys need me give you page numbers etc?
• Heavy Riot Infantry
• Dragonstar Passenger Transport
• Hoshiryokou
• Gaajian System Patrol Boat
• Obuzaabaa Tactical Vehicle & Sasayaku Control Transport
• Gossamer Surveillance Drone
• Wakamiya Salvage Destroyer
-
I was looking at the Marksman Artillery Vehicle (Standard) and it is listed as general IS availability in the late SW yet it comes with ferro armor?
I thought Ferro would make it not available in this era?
-
I think that one should be extinct in renaissance.
-
Suggestion: Add the "Royal" variants to the Member States and Associate Member States from Era Report: 2750, which were available as per page 143:
To reflect Star League designs and technology creeping into the rest of the Inner Sphere, any unit on the Random Assignment Table that is noted with an asterisk (*) also has a “Royal” model available for play that is normally only found in Star League divisions, but may appear outside of SLDF ranks due to field modifications or other sources. To determine which model may be used, the controlling player must make a special 2D6 roll after the unit is selected. If this “Royal Check” equals or exceeds 10, the “Royal” model may be used. Otherwise, the player must choose the standard model. These Royal designs may be found in Record Sheets: Operation Klondike (RSOK) unless otherwise noted.
Below is a list of all those with Royal variants available, some of which have already been added to the MUL as-described, while some have not.
Inner Sphere General
CRD-3R Crusader
HER-1Sb Hermes
LCT-1Vb Locust
OTT-7Jb Ostscout
STK-3Fb Stalker
STG-3Gb Stinger
THE-N Thorn
WHM-6Rb Warhammer
Periphery General
CRD-3R Crusader
LCT-1Vb Locust
OTT-7Jb Ostscout
STK-3Fb Stalker
STG-3Gb Stinger
THE-N Thorn
TDR-5Sb2 Thunderbolt
Capellan Confederation
CHP-2N Champion
OSR-2Cb Ostroc
Draconis Combine
ARC-2Rb Archer
STN-3Lb Sentinel
TDR-5Sb2 Thunderbolt
WHM-6Rb Warhammer
Federated Suns
ARC-2Rb Archer
TDR-5Sb2 Thunderbolt
Free Worlds League
OSR-2Cb Ostroc
TDR-5Sb2 Thunderbolt
Lyran Commonwealth
OSR-2Cb Ostroc
FLC-4Nb Falcon
Rim Worlds Republic
HER-1Sb Hermes
-
After setting up a complete set of factories for our online campaign, I did notice that there was a notable lack of advanced tech in the RWA, despite the language of FR:2765:
This seems to indicate that, for 12 years, the Imperial Divisions were modernizing with SLDF equipment. Feels like some of the TRO:2750 designs would be listed in the "Rim Worlds Republic: Home Guard", such as those listed in 2765 on page 18 (Black Knight, Excalibur, Highlander, King Crab) and on page 19 (Atlas).
Surely, these advanced designs went with the Liberation Army to Terra, but for those 12 years, they were in the Republic proper. I'm sure it's come up before, but just asking if you guys can take a look. The list feels a bit "anemic" for a force capable of defeating the SLDF on its home ground. :)
Bump on this one. Any word on it? And if "no," what would the reasoning be? I ask because factories are a part of an ongoing campaign, so it'd be helpful :)
-
Add card for Thrush TR-5 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5227/thrush-tr-5): Identical to TR-7 but with Ferro Aluminum armor
Add Transit TR-9 (entry and card): Identical to TR-10 but with Ferro Aluminum armor--2 additional armor points aft and 15 rounds of AC ammo
(Both fighter's variants described in Second Succession War, p. 110, and Field Report 2765: CCAF, p. 18.)
Replace Star Dagger (Unknown) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5122/star-dagger-unknown) with Star Dagger S-2B: Same as S-2 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5123/star-dagger-s-2) but with standard components. Replace engine with 240 rating. Replace small laser with medium laser. Armor layout is 34/22/18
Described in Second Succession War, p. 110, and I found an old post about it from nckestrel (https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=10373.msg842345#msg842345).
-
Mad Cat III Standard might be Missing a Faction
Unit: Mad Cat III Standard
Link: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4561/mad-cat-iii-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4561/mad-cat-iii-standard)
Overview: I believe the Mad Cat III Standard should be added to the Mercenary unit list for Early Republic, Late Republic, and Dark Ages.
Reasoning and Evidence: The other models of Mad Cat III are listed as Mercenary units, and no special lore exists to establish why they wouldn't buy the Standard model as well. Additionally, page 148 of TRO: Experimental states "the Diamond Sharks are readily selling the Mad Cat III to every interested buyer." It lists several Houses in particular, but I imagine mercenaries would want this machine too.
Additionally, Mercenaries are listed as buyers for most other 'for Inner Sphere purchasers' Mad Cats, such as Mad Cat Mk. II and Mad Cat Mk. IV.
Edit: Further, the Kell Hounds and Wolf's Dragoons are also listed as users for the Standard model.
Suggested Change: Add Mad Cat III (Standard) to Mercenary listings for those three eras (Early Republic, Late Republic, Dark Ages).
Thank you for your time!
-
Thor II E is missing from the MUL
The variant appeared only in the 3150 book and not in the original 3145 rendition. It has a full stat line, not just a description, and should be easy to include with a proper BV and AS card.
-
Fast Recon Cavalry Point, 67th BattleMech Cluster, Iota Galaxy
Unit Type Infantry - Conventional Infantry - Wheeled
Hi, this should be listed as Hover infantry, not wheeled.
-
The Eagle EGL-R6 aerospace fighter does not have a star to indicate it was featured in a TRO - it is found in TRO:3075 (pg 264)
edit: Add the Lightning LTN-G15 (pg 251). I suspect there are more 3075 units lurking as well
edit2: by more I mean every fighter except the Hellcat
The List:
Shade S-HA-O (98)
Rusalka S-RSL-O (100)
Striga S-STR-O (102)
Sabre SB-27 (212)
Centurion CNT-1D (230)
Lightning LTN-G15 (250)
Eagle EGL-R6 (264)
Deathstalker F-77 (266)
Typhoon TFN-2A (284)
Thunderbird TRB-D36 (286)
Vulcan VLC-5N (302)
-
* VERSION: MUL Online
* LOCATION: GOL-6M Goliath (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1238/goliath-gol-6m)
* THE ERROR: MUL Online shows BV of 2006, but Record Sheets: 3085 - Project Phoenix lists the BV of the 'Mech as 1742.
Perhaps when the BV of GOL-5W Goliath was changed from 2030 to 2006 points in October 2015, somebody has changed the BV of GOL-6M by mistake too?
* THE CORRECTION: Return the BV of GOL-6M Goliath back to 1742.
-
Any chance that there could be a quick start record sheet generator on the MUL as well? I ask because while it would help me with con/demo games but I think it would also help draw in more players yet not compete with the existing record sheet line.
-
Would it be possible to get some sort of FAQ-style answer for the definition of "Extinct"? I feel like I've gotten different answers from different people on the team over the years (this may be because the official answer actually changed over time)
Is it:
A) All Dead: Definitely totally 100% gone excepting potentially unknown examples forgotten by the sands of time (e.g. a Star League Vault uncovered by a plucky mercenary outfit)
B) Mostly Dead: Gone from essentially every military (and possibly public memory), but a few working examples continue to be put into service in secret/out of sight (e.g. the ComGuards or a home clan dezgra garrison)
C) Not quite dead: some, but not enough to make it on any faction's availability lists
D) Some combination or variation of the above
E) none of the above
F) The rules are made up and the points don't matter
thanks
-
If it actually says Extinct, then there are no known (in universe) examples of that unit in a military force and it is believed by everyone to no longer be in service anywhere.
The MUL is about combat deployment, and informing players what is in use. It could be in a museum, or hidden in a star league cache, or maybe somebody has one and the rest of the Inner Sphere doesn't know about. None of those count.
The MUL isn't interested in being a straight-jacket. We're a tool to assist, not to beat people with. If a player wants an extinct mech, it's their (local) game. If a writer wants one in a story, it's an exception. We move on. We informed and people did what they wanted and good for them.
-
Hello there,
I am not fully sure this should go here, but I will shot anyway to see what I get from you :)
I am sure I am a moron, but I do not know how to
1. Search the MUL from my phone. I can search for specific units normally (type "Karnov" in the search field) but I do not know how to use filters.
2. I do not know how to search for features or characteristics like mechs with 10"+ inch move, or transports with IT3 in their characteristics.
Are those 2 things possible? I m sure they are but I do not know how to do it, so any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks a lot!
Xavi
-
Filters are not available on the mobile site.
There is no move search on either site unfortunately.
The desktop site has a search for AS abilities under the Alpha Strike section. You'd just type IT3 into the text box for AS Abilities.
-
The Gladiator(Executioner) I should have a movement of 12”/8”j since it has a supercharger and MASC system, not 10”/8”j.
-
Swift Wind Scout Car should be available to the St. Ives faction for the duration of that faction's existence per TRO 3039, Pg. 12:
"Only a few dozen Swift Winds can be found outside the Capellan Confederation (or the short-lived St. Ives Compact), with most of those “foreign” Swift Winds operated by mercenary units that served House Liao well. With the secession of St. Ives, Swift Winds actually competed against one another as the Confederation mounts raids against its former state."
***
Apollo APL-1M should not be available to the Fed Com/Fed Suns/Lyrans/St. Ives/Rasalhauge in the Clan Invasion or Civil War era per TRO 3055, Pg. 57
"Earthwerks has been instructed to refuse any Federated Commonwealth, St. Ives Compact, or Rasalhague Orders for the new Mech."
However, it seems that sales to the LAAF, AFFS in the Jihad era per TRO 3055U, Pg. 42:
"The recent* removal of the LAAF and AFFS from the “banned sales list” has led to speculation about new exports; sales to ComStar, the Free Rasalhague Republic and the CCAF remain embargoed." (*The forward of the book states that TRO 3055U is written in 3067, which suggests that these would have been for sale in the Jihad era.)
TRO 3055U also states that the design is embargoed in the CCAF (unclear if this applied in the original TRO 3055). 3050U states the Apollo is also sold to the WOB Militia, but no timeline is given for when it was made available to them.
-
Of all the mechs listed in the new TRO: Succession Wars, the FLE-16 is the only mech not represented for Alpha Strike.
Would someone be so kind to add it?
On a very minor sidenote: CN9-A lists REAR1/1/0 while most other units would list it as REAR1/1/-
-
Cannot find the Battlemaster C 2 on the MUL, wondering if this is an oversight or it just hasn't been added yet.
Thanks!
-
hasn't been added yet.
-
hasn't been added yet.
Alright, thanks! Do you by chance know if it has a different PV or the same as the Battlemaster (Red Corsair)? Sarna states the C 2 is a production version, dunno if that means carbon copy or not..
Sorry for slightly OT chatter.
-
These two seem to be missing availability with the listed factions during the Star League era.
Von Rohrs VON 4RH-6
Draconis Combine
Hermes HER-1Sb
Rim Worlds Republic - Terran Corps
The Dual-Cockpit description in the MechWarrior Companion (FASA 1671) states that the BattleMaster was the earliest design to see use of the DC system (Cockpit Command Console). But the MUL has the Warhammer WHM-6R-DC as over 100 years earlier than the BattleMaster. Since the Cockpit Command Console is in production in 2631, it seems logical the BLR- would come about the same year.
BattleMaster BLR-1G-DC
Inner Sphere General
Star League Era
2631
-
Panther PNT-9R
Star League Royal
Star League Regular
This is in reference to TRO:3039 page 114, which states that the Star League solved the problems with the Large Laser and began production of the -9R. The MUL has the -9R as being introduced as 2759, so it should have been in Star League Regular and Star League Royal hands.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1319/grigori-c-grg-o-tamiel
this Grigori config is showing up when I search by source for Record Sheets: 3075 Unabridged - Age of War
-
I'd like to expand:
Of all the mechs listed in the new TRO: Succession Wars, the FLE-16 is the only mech not represented for Alpha Strike. While I understand the MUL is an eternal work-in-progress, it might be worth prioritizing addings mechs that have been featured in recently released products over adding others, where time allows...
And here's small list of odd cases I found:
This mech has typo, where a dot was used instead of a comma to seperate abilities:
(Lucian Finn) Wolfhound .Multi-Tasker -> ,Multi-Tasker
These mechs used a zero where a dash should have been used:
STM-R1 Storm Raider AC1/1/0 -> AC1/1/-
AVL-1OC Avalanche AC1/1/0 -> AC/1/1/-
CN9-A Centurion REAR1/1/0 -> REAR/1/1/-
I did find a bunch a cases where it seems parentheses were unnecessarily and inconsistently used, "wasting" the tiny amount of space we have on the unit cards :)
AS7-D (Danielle) Atlas AC(2/2/-) -> AC2/2/-
WVE-5UX Wyvern City SRM(2/2) -> SRM2/2
THG-11ECX (Jose) Thug SRM(2/2) -> SRM2/2
ARC-1A Archer LRM(1/2/2) -> LRM1/2/2
HCT-3F (Austin) Hatchetman FLK(1/1/1) -> FLK1/1/1
ENF-7D Enforcer III FLK(1/1/1) -> FLK1/1/1
A Boreas FLK(1/1/1) -> FLK1/1/1
HMH-3D (Kessem) Hammerhands FLK(1/1/1) -> FLK1/1/1
AS7-D-H (Kerensky) Atlas II FLK(1/1/1) -> FLK1/1/1
MSH-9HKR "Kill-Roy's Little Buddy" Mackie FLK(1/1/1) -> FLK1/1/1
HRC-LS-9000 (Julius) Hercules FLK(1/1/-) -> FLK1/1/-
-
Availability for EXT-4D Exterminator is listed as ComStar only in Late Succession War - Renaissance. It should be ComStar and Draconis Combine as per pg. 112 of Combat Manual: Kurita.
MON-67 Mongoose should also be available to Kurita in Late Succession War - Renaissance as per pg. 111 of Combat Manual: Kurita.
KTO-18 Kintaro is also not listed as available for Kurita in Late Succession War - Renaissance, but should be as per pg. 111 of Combat Manual: Kurita.
-
I just noticed the cost of the Heavy Battlemech Recovery Vehicle (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1429/heavy-battlemech-recovery-vehicle-standard) (618,750) appears to assume use of Ferro Fibrous armor. Using Solaris Armor Werks, the price for a Standard armor version would only be 585,000 (618,750 appears when I switch the armor to Ferro). As the entry lists "Age of War" for introduction, availability in all eras, and "Introductory" rules level, I recommend changing the listed price to 585,000.
-
No need to assume, it has a TR and RS. They say what it has.
We put an earlier era because it has so little armor that it’s nearly insignificant to remove it, and unlikely to get an earlier version, so we went ahead and suggested using it earlier. But the RS and cost are based on it ha jog ferro.
-
Is there any particular reason why the Merkava Mark II is listed as 2325 in the MUL when TRO 3075 and XTRO Primitives Vol I say it was introduced in 2294?
-
Ferret Light Scout VTOL (Cargo) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1059/ferret-light-scout-vtol-cargo)
Record Sheets 3039 has this unit equipped with 2.5 tons of cargo, while the Alpha Strike card on the MUL lists CT4. Recommend changing the AS card to read CT2.5.
-
"Dates Introduced" for Epona Pursuit Tank <Base> and configurations, 5/7 total listings
Links:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4130/epona-pursuit-tank-base
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/996/epona-pursuit-tank-prime
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/991/epona-pursuit-tank-a
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/992/epona-pursuit-tank-b
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/993/epona-pursuit-tank-c
Technical Readout: 3060, p. 54 (FASA and CGL printings) have this line in "Overview":
"Other Clans consider the pod technology wasted on conventional vehicles, but the Horses, who regularly use vehicles in front-line roles, have enjoyed the benefits of the flexibility of this design for more than seventy years."
The current MUL date listed in all the links above is 2884. While this is technically more than 70 years before the in-universe publication date (2884 is 176 years before 1 November, 3060), the dates would correspond better with either 1 of 2 changes, but not both:
A. Change the "Overview" in TRO:3060, p. 54 to say "...for more than one hundred seventy years." (I prefer this option!!!).
or
B. Change the "Dates Introduced" on all 5 linked pages to 2984, and remove Epona from the RATs in "Turning Points: Tokasha"
If TRO:3060 should be changed, please let us know so we can report the errata. Thank you!
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/182/axel-heavy-tank-iic-standard
Problem: The Axel IIC is listed as "Technology: Inner Sphere"
Solution: Chnage "Technology: Inner Sphere" to "Technology: Clan"
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6487/thang-ta-apc-standard
Problem: Date Introduced for the Thang-Ta is 3093. TRO:3145 FWL "Thang-Ta" p. 10 says, "Earthwerks quietly premiered the Thang-Ta before the Jihad."
Solution A: Change the Date Introduced for the Thang-Ta on the MUL.
or
Solution B: Change the description from the Thang-Ta entry in TRO:3145 FWL to say, "Earthwerks quietly premiered the Thang-Ta after the Jihad." (This is likely the more difficult change - the way the article is written, more changes will be required to avoid any implicit earlier introduction dates in the writing.)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6313/marten-scout-vtol-standard
Problem: Date Introduced for the Marten Scout VTOL is 3021. TRO:3145 FS "Marten Scout VTOL" p. 12, "Deployment" begins, "In active service for more than a century,..." This places the introduction before the Clan Invasion.
Solution A: Change the Date Introduced for the Marten on the MUL.
or
Solution B: Change "Deployment: In active service for more than twenty years,..."
Please respond and let us know which changes should be made. If TRO:3145 FWL and FS should be changed, I can post the errata on the pages. Thank you!
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6487/thang-ta-apc-standard
Problem: Date Introduced for the Thang-Ta is 3093. TRO:3145 FWL "Thang-Ta" p. 10 says, "Earthwerks quietly premiered the Thang-Ta before the Jihad."
Solution A: Change the Date Introduced for the Thang-Ta on the MUL.
or
Solution B: Change the description from the Thang-Ta entry in TRO:3145 FWL to say, "Earthwerks quietly premiered the Thang-Ta after the Jihad." (This is likely the more difficult change - the way the article is written, more changes will be required to avoid any implicit earlier introduction dates in the writing.)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6313/marten-scout-vtol-standard
Problem: Date Introduced for the Marten Scout VTOL is 3021. TRO:3145 FS "Marten Scout VTOL" p. 12, "Deployment" begins, "In active service for more than a century,..." This places the introduction before the Clan Invasion.
Solution A: Change the Date Introduced for the Marten on the MUL.
or
Solution B: Change "Deployment: In active service for more than twenty years,..."
Please respond and let us know which changes should be made. If TRO:3145 FWL and FS should be changed, I can post the errata on the pages. Thank you!
S.gage
Thang-Ta changed to 3079. Marten Scout VTOL, 3021 is 124 years before 3145. So that is "more than a century".
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/182/axel-heavy-tank-iic-standard
Problem: The Axel IIC is listed as "Technology: Inner Sphere"
Solution: Chnage "Technology: Inner Sphere" to "Technology: Clan"
Yep, thanks.
-
"Dates Introduced" for Epona Pursuit Tank <Base> and configurations, 5/7 total listings
Links:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4130/epona-pursuit-tank-base
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/996/epona-pursuit-tank-prime
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/991/epona-pursuit-tank-a
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/992/epona-pursuit-tank-b
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/993/epona-pursuit-tank-c
Technical Readout: 3060, p. 54 (FASA and CGL printings) have this line in "Overview":
"Other Clans consider the pod technology wasted on conventional vehicles, but the Horses, who regularly use vehicles in front-line roles, have enjoyed the benefits of the flexibility of this design for more than seventy years."
The current MUL date listed in all the links above is 2884. While this is technically more than 70 years before the in-universe publication date (2884 is 176 years before 1 November, 3060), the dates would correspond better with either 1 of 2 changes, but not both:
A. Change the "Overview" in TRO:3060, p. 54 to say "...for more than one hundred seventy years." (I prefer this option!!!).
or
B. Change the "Dates Introduced" on all 5 linked pages to 2984, and remove Epona from the RATs in "Turning Points: Tokasha"
If TRO:3060 should be changed, please let us know so we can report the errata. Thank you!
S.gage
Yeah, Comstar goofed there. It also says the Bandit is likely an offshot of the Epona. Meanwhile the Bandit is stated to be from the Golden Century (which ended more than 70 years before 3060). So I'm going to leave the Epona as earlier.
-
Ferret Light Scout VTOL (Cargo) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1059/ferret-light-scout-vtol-cargo)
Record Sheets 3039 has this unit equipped with 2.5 tons of cargo, while the Alpha Strike card on the MUL lists CT4. Recommend changing the AS card to read CT2.5.
Thanks, fixed.
-
Is there any particular reason why the Merkava Mark II is listed as 2325 in the MUL when TRO 3075 and XTRO Primitives Vol I say it was introduced in 2294?
When we created the entry in the MUL based on 3075, we had the Merkava Heavy Tank as 2294 and the Merkava Heavy Tank Mk. II coming later (2325). (The real world Merkava already has a Mk II, Mk III, Mk IV). We didn't notice the later Primitives Vol I went with the "mk I" being the real world tank and the BT Mk II being the 2294.
Updated the Mk II to 2294.
-
Alright, thanks! Do you by chance know if it has a different PV or the same as the Battlemaster (Red Corsair)? Sarna states the C 2 is a production version, dunno if that means carbon copy or not..
Sorry for slightly OT chatter.
There's no Record Sheet yet, so I don't know what AS stats it will have and therefore what PV it will have.
-
Availability for EXT-4D Exterminator is listed as ComStar only in Late Succession War - Renaissance. It should be ComStar and Draconis Combine as per pg. 112 of Combat Manual: Kurita.
MON-67 Mongoose should also be available to Kurita in Late Succession War - Renaissance as per pg. 111 of Combat Manual: Kurita.
KTO-18 Kintaro is also not listed as available for Kurita in Late Succession War - Renaissance, but should be as per pg. 111 of Combat Manual: Kurita.
MON-67 and KTO-18 have been updated. The Kurita Special list that the EXT-4D is on in CM:K is not going to be necessarily added to the MUL for DC. They are not generally available to the DC.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1319/grigori-c-grg-o-tamiel
this Grigori config is showing up when I search by source for Record Sheets: 3075 Unabridged - Age of War
It actually took me a while to figure out what you meant the problem was. I was about to reply "it is in RS:3075u, p160!" before I noticed it was labeled as the age of war instead of cutting edge....
thanks, fixed.
-
Panther PNT-9R
Star League Royal
Star League Regular
This is in reference to TRO:3039 page 114, which states that the Star League solved the problems with the Large Laser and began production of the -9R. The MUL has the -9R as being introduced as 2759, so it should have been in Star League Regular and Star League Royal hands.
Fixed, thanks.
-
These two seem to be missing availability with the listed factions during the Star League era.
Von Rohrs VON 4RH-6
Draconis Combine
The 6 was never made. "It is unknown if any made it past the planning stages before Kankoku was permanently shut down."
Hermes HER-1Sb[/b]
Rim Worlds Republic - Terran Corps
Sure.
The Dual-Cockpit description in the MechWarrior Companion (FASA 1671) states that the BattleMaster was the earliest design to see use of the DC system (Cockpit Command Console). But the MUL has the Warhammer WHM-6R-DC as over 100 years earlier than the BattleMaster. Since the Cockpit Command Console is in production in 2631, it seems logical the BLR- would come about the same year.
BattleMaster BLR-1G-DC
Inner Sphere General
Star League Era
2631
Used 2633 as that's the date we have for the BLR-1G, non-DC.
-
Swift Wind Scout Car should be available to the St. Ives faction for the duration of that faction's existence per TRO 3039, Pg. 12:
"Only a few dozen Swift Winds can be found outside the Capellan Confederation (or the short-lived St. Ives Compact), with most of those “foreign” Swift Winds operated by mercenary units that served House Liao well. With the secession of St. Ives, Swift Winds actually competed against one another as the Confederation mounts raids against its former state."
Added, thanks.
***
Apollo APL-1M should not be available to the Fed Com/Fed Suns/Lyrans/St. Ives/Rasalhauge in the Clan Invasion or Civil War era per TRO 3055, Pg. 57
"Earthwerks has been instructed to refuse any Federated Commonwealth, St. Ives Compact, or Rasalhague Orders for the new Mech."
However, it seems that sales to the LAAF, AFFS in the Jihad era per TRO 3055U, Pg. 42:
"The recent* removal of the LAAF and AFFS from the “banned sales list” has led to speculation about new exports; sales to ComStar, the Free Rasalhague Republic and the CCAF remain embargoed." (*The forward of the book states that TRO 3055U is written in 3067, which suggests that these would have been for sale in the Jihad era.)
TRO 3055U also states that the design is embargoed in the CCAF (unclear if this applied in the original TRO 3055). 3050U states the Apollo is also sold to the WOB Militia, but no timeline is given for when it was made available to them.
The AFFC purchased some ("small quantities") before the embargo went in to effect. I did remove St. Ives, Kell Hounds and WD. I left CC, I have to assume that embargo went in to effect later, I'm fairly certain we have Apollos in CCAF hands in other canon products. Added WoB for Jihad era.
-
The Gladiator(Executioner) I should have a movement of 12”/8”j since it has a supercharger and MASC system, not 10”/8”j.
Fixed, thanks.
-
The Eagle EGL-R6 aerospace fighter does not have a star to indicate it was featured in a TRO - it is found in TRO:3075 (pg 264)
edit: Add the Lightning LTN-G15 (pg 251). I suspect there are more 3075 units lurking as well
edit2: by more I mean every fighter except the Hellcat
The List:
Shade S-HA-O (98)
Rusalka S-RSL-O (100)
Striga S-STR-O (102)
Sabre SB-27 (212)
Centurion CNT-1D (230)
Lightning LTN-G15 (250)
Eagle EGL-R6 (264)
Deathstalker F-77 (266)
Typhoon TFN-2A (284)
Thunderbird TRB-D36 (286)
Vulcan VLC-5N (302)
Yep, thanks, fixed all those.
-
Any chance that there could be a quick start record sheet generator on the MUL as well? I ask because while it would help me with con/demo games but I think it would also help draw in more players yet not compete with the existing record sheet line.
It would be awesome, but it's been beyond our ability to implement.
-
Fast Recon Cavalry Point, 67th BattleMech Cluster, Iota Galaxy
Unit Type Infantry - Conventional Infantry - Wheeled
Hi, this should be listed as Hover infantry, not wheeled.
Fixed, thanks.
-
Mad Cat III Standard might be Missing a Faction
Unit: Mad Cat III Standard
Link: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4561/mad-cat-iii-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4561/mad-cat-iii-standard)
Overview: I believe the Mad Cat III Standard should be added to the Mercenary unit list for Early Republic, Late Republic, and Dark Ages.
Reasoning and Evidence: The other models of Mad Cat III are listed as Mercenary units, and no special lore exists to establish why they wouldn't buy the Standard model as well. Additionally, page 148 of TRO: Experimental states "the Diamond Sharks are readily selling the Mad Cat III to every interested buyer." It lists several Houses in particular, but I imagine mercenaries would want this machine too.
Additionally, Mercenaries are listed as buyers for most other 'for Inner Sphere purchasers' Mad Cats, such as Mad Cat Mk. II and Mad Cat Mk. IV.
Edit: Further, the Kell Hounds and Wolf's Dragoons are also listed as users for the Standard model.
Suggested Change: Add Mad Cat III (Standard) to Mercenary listings for those three eras (Early Republic, Late Republic, Dark Ages).
Thank you for your time!
done.
-
I was looking at the Marksman Artillery Vehicle (Standard) and it is listed as general IS availability in the late SW yet it comes with ferro armor?
I thought Ferro would make it not available in this era?
Removed from Late Succession Wars.
-
Thor II E is missing from the MUL
The variant appeared only in the 3150 book and not in the original 3145 rendition. It has a full stat line, not just a description, and should be easy to include with a proper BV and AS card.
Done.
-
Thang-Ta changed to 3079. Marten Scout VTOL, 3021 is 124 years before 3145. So that is "more than a century".
Oops, sorry for wasting your time, I was tired and I read that as 3121.
A couple more small catches:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6595/di-multipurpose-light-vtol-standard
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6596/di-multipurpose-light-vtol-gunship
Problem: Both entries use "DI Multipurpose Light VTOL ..." in the unit name. TRO:3145 LC pp. 12-13, the unit is only referred to as "DI Multipurpose VTOL ...". Personally I think it is clear, but I just thought I would mention it.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6488/red-kite-attack-vtol-standard
Problem: Date Introduced is 3121. From TRO:3145 FWL, the first line of the description states, "Imstar introduced the Red Kite in 3093,..."
If errata should be reported for TRO:3145 FWL, let me know. Thank you!
S.gage
-
Oops, sorry for wasting your time, I was tired and I read that as 3121.
A couple more small catches:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6595/di-multipurpose-light-vtol-standard
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6596/di-multipurpose-light-vtol-gunship
Problem: Both entries use "DI Multipurpose Light VTOL ..." in the unit name. TRO:3145 LC pp. 12-13, the unit is only referred to as "DI Multipurpose VTOL ...". Personally I think it is clear, but I just thought I would mention it.
There never was a standard for naming vehicles like there has been for 'mechs, so the MUL created one. In particular, giving the "type" of vehicle in the name. This is throughout vehicles. It doesn't mean it's more correct (or less), just that we have a standard we use that is often more than what the TRs have had.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6488/red-kite-attack-vtol-standard
Problem: Date Introduced is 3121. From TRO:3145 FWL, the first line of the description states, "Imstar introduced the Red Kite in 3093,..."
If errata should be reported for TRO:3145 FWL, let me know. Thank you!
S.gage
Fixed, thanks.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3782/bandit-hovercraft-base (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3782/bandit-hovercraft-base)
Problem: Base variant of the Bandit Hovercraft is listed as only available to Wolf's Dragoons until its extinction after the Jihad. All other variants list the Bandit with Mercenary and Wolf's Dragoons availability until their extinction.
Considering that the Base variant is any variant sans pod-mounted equipment -
Solution: Add Mercenary to the Civil War and Jihad availability for the Bandit Hovercraft Base. (Would also check the Badger availability too.)
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6374/saracen-mk-ii-hcv-bc3
Problem: The "Date Introduced" for the Saracen Mk II (BC3) is currently 3138. TRO: 3145 DC, p. 12, Saracen Mk II, Variants, first sentence, states "Scarborough began producing a C3 variant in 3140 at the DCMS’ request"
Solution: Either adjust the date on the MUL, or in TRO: 3145 DC. If errata is for the TRO is preferable, let me know and I can take care of reporting it. Thanks!
S.gage
-
I randomly browsed the MUL for aerospace units with "None" as TRO or RS sourcing. I'm not sure if I agree with all those entries:
- The "Manassas Heavy Cruiser" is a misnomer, imho. It's a one-off modified Aegis. There is no "Manassas" class, not even in spirit.
- The Dragoons' "Hephaestus Station" is a unique, one-off FrankenStation based off or at least including parts of the Olympus and Alliance class stations.
- The "Peregrine class JumpShip" - are you sure you're not referring to the ustatted Peregrine WarShip here?
- What's the difference between a "Newgrange" and a "Newgrange III"?
-
If it’s modified, then it has different stats and is a doffferent unit.
We note them as a reminder they exist Incase somebody wants to use time again.
-
It appears the Flea FLE-16, listed in the new Succession Wars record sheets, is missing from the MUL.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6387/sm2-heavy-artillery-vehicle-ltc
Note: This might not be errata, since the original article is a little ambiguous.
Problem: The SM2 (Long Tom Cannon) shares the same Date Introduced with the standard SM2, 3093. There are a few lines in TRO:3145 DC that seem to imply it was introduced 20+ years later:
P. 26:
"After the Second Combine-Dominion War, the Combine removed the LAW-Barcella factory from the Clan."
"...few within the Clan wept at the loss of the SM2. The military bureaucrats within the Dragon felt differently, as the production facility was meticulously rebuilt within twenty years of its dismantling."
"The Combine experimented with a Long Tom cannon version of the SM2, and produces a limited quantity of the tank."
Since LAW was involved in the design of CNC's original SM2, did they also prod the Cats to make the Long Tom version in 3093, or did LAW introduce this new variant after rebuilding the factory on Hyner?
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1060/ferret-light-scout-vtol-standard
Problem: Ferret Light Scout VTOL lists 2901 as its "Date Introduced". Both TRO:3026 (original FASA) and TRO:3039 (print) say the Ferret was introduced in 2904.
From TRO:3026, p. 4, last sentence of the first paragraph:
"First issued to Davion troops in 2904, the Ferret is now also in service with Steiner, Marik, and some worlds of the Periphery."
From TRO: 3039, p. 8, first sentence:
"The Ferret Light Scout VTOL is a Federated Suns reconnaissance rotor craft introduced in 2904."
Solution: either change the MUL listing to 2904, or I can write errata for both technical readouts. Thanks!
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1060/ferret-light-scout-vtol-standard
Problem: Ferret Light Scout VTOL lists 2901 as its "Date Introduced". Both TRO:3026 (original FASA) and TRO:3039 (print) say the Ferret was introduced in 2904.
From TRO:3026, p. 4, last sentence of the first paragraph:
"First issued to Davion troops in 2904, the Ferret is now also in service with Steiner, Marik, and some worlds of the Periphery."
From TRO: 3039, p. 8, first sentence:
"The Ferret Light Scout VTOL is a Federated Suns reconnaissance rotor craft introduced in 2904."
Solution: either change the MUL listing to 2904, or I can write errata for both technical readouts. Thanks!
S.gage
Changed MUL date to 2904.
-
It appears the Flea FLE-16, listed in the new Succession Wars record sheets, is missing from the MUL.
Yes, haven’t gotten to it.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6387/sm2-heavy-artillery-vehicle-ltc
Note: This might not be errata, since the original article is a little ambiguous.
Problem: The SM2 (Long Tom Cannon) shares the same Date Introduced with the standard SM2, 3093. There are a few lines in TRO:3145 DC that seem to imply it was introduced 20+ years later:
P. 26:
"After the Second Combine-Dominion War, the Combine removed the LAW-Barcella factory from the Clan."
"...few within the Clan wept at the loss of the SM2. The military bureaucrats within the Dragon felt differently, as the production facility was meticulously rebuilt within twenty years of its dismantling."
"The Combine experimented with a Long Tom cannon version of the SM2, and produces a limited quantity of the tank."
Since LAW was involved in the design of CNC's original SM2, did they also prod the Cats to make the Long Tom version in 3093, or did LAW introduce this new variant after rebuilding the factory on Hyner?
The Combine had some LTC SM2s before they took over the factory.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6374/saracen-mk-ii-hcv-bc3
Problem: The "Date Introduced" for the Saracen Mk II (BC3) is currently 3138. TRO: 3145 DC, p. 12, Saracen Mk II, Variants, first sentence, states "Scarborough began producing a C3 variant in 3140 at the DCMS’ request"
Solution: Either adjust the date on the MUL, or in TRO: 3145 DC. If errata is for the TRO is preferable, let me know and I can take care of reporting it. Thanks!
S.gage
Changed to 3140, thanks.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1390/harasser-missile-platform-standard
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1386/harasser-missile-platform-leaping-lisa
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1389/harasser-missile-platform-lrm
Problem: Dates Introduced. According to the text of TRO:3026 (original FASA), p. 18, the Harasser was introduced in 2829 (2nd sentence):
"In 2829, House Marik commissioned the Harasser as a companion vehicle to the Galleon."
The three entries above list "Date Introduced" as 2811, 2815, and 2821.
TRO:3039, p. 28, makes no direct mention of the introduction date, but it does reference the same story re: the Harasser's role accompanying Galleons, and losses incurred during the Second Succession War forcing Harasser deployment as a replacement for 2nd line and garrison formations being pressed into front-line service. The later date also fits better with this story - if the Harasser was introduced in 2811 (vs. 2829), it would have 19 years to be deployed with Galleons (vs. just months to deploy in its intended role).
Solution: change these "Date Introduced" entries to dates starting with 2829.
S.gage
-
The data for the Scavenger (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4987/scavenger-sc-v-salvagemech), the Scavenger MilitiaMech (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7174/scavenger-sc-v-m-militiamech) and the Vampyr (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5334/vampyr-sc-v-1-salvagemech) are all missing data. I'd suggest just expanding and cut and pasting what's already there for the most part, though I would probably make the MilitiaMech Canopian only, since the fluff states that its rare.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2154/mechbuster-standard
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2153/mechbuster-srm
Problem:
Without any explicit dates in TRO:3039, TRO:3026, p. 46, 'MechBuster, states that the "Date Introduced" is 3023. Quote from 2nd sentence-
"Designed in 3023, the 'MechBuster is assigned to replace AeroSpace Fighters in providing air support for garrison forces."
Both links for the 'MechBuster from the MUL list "Date Introduced" before, in 3002 and 3022, respectively.
Solution: Adjust the dates in MUL, or write errata for TRO:3026. If errata for TRO:3026 is preferred, I can post if there is a thread for it. Thank you!
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2935/sholagar-sl-21
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5227/thrush-tr-5
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3201/thrush-tr-7
Problem: From TRO:3039, p. 198, Sholagar, Overview-
"Later used as the base for the Capellan Thrush, the airframe was small and fit well into transports, but its circular wings were unstable in atmospheric flight, resulting in many crashes."
Both the TR-5 and TR-7 Thrush predate the Sholagar on the MUL.
Solutions:
Revise the passage in TRO:3039 to read, "Based on the earlier Capellan Thrush, the airframe was small and fit well into transports, but its circular wings were unstable in atmospheric flight, resulting in many crashes." (best option)
or
Change the "Date Introduced" for the Sholagar to between the TR-5 and TR-7, or to before both the TR-5 and TR-7. This is a much worse option because errata for several publications would be required (for TRO:3025, 3039, etc.)
If errata is required for TRO:3039, I can post it in the thread.
S.gage
-
That following 3 report unpublished variants missing from the MUL. Since other unpublished variants are at least listed in the MUL, I thought I would bring them to your attention. Additionally, unpublished earlier variants (of the Corsair, especially) may warrant adjusting some of the "Date Introduced" for published variants:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Sparrowhawk
Problem: There are no entries for unpublished versions of the Sparrowhawk, SPR-H1, SPR-H2, SPR-H3, SPR-H4, mentioned in the first paragraph of TRO:3025 (FASA, July 1994 printing), p. 134, SPR-H5 Sparrowhawk.
==========
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Corsair
Problem: There are no entries for unpublished versions of the Corsair, CSR-V1, CSR-V2, CSR-V3, CSR-V4, CSR-V5, CSR-V6, CSR-V7, CSR-V8, mentioned in the third paragraph of TRO:3025 (FASA, July 1994 printing), p. 136, CSR-V12 Corsair.
==========
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Stuka
Problem: There are no entries for unpublished versions of the Stuka, STU-K1 and STU-K2, mentioned in the 2nd-3rd paragraph of TRO:3025 (FASA, July 1994 printing), p. 138, STU-K5 Stuka. STU-K1 is described as having "difficulties with heat dissipation" and "structural instability". The first Stukas were introduced in 2530, according to TRO:3039, p. 220. This matches the first sentence from the second paragraph from TRO:3025, p. 138-
"The K1 prototype of this fighter rolled off the assembly line in the Lycomb plant on the planet Demeter in 2530."
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Transgressor
Potential Problem: The oldest "Date Introduced" for the Transgressor is 2890. From TRO:3025, p. 150 "Transgressor", "Notable Fighters and Pilots", the bio of Colonel Harry S. Yoshita explains Col. Yoshita helped design the original Transgressor. While the bio may have been published years after his design work, it is improbable Yoshita could have helped design the Transgressor in 2890, piloted it, recorded 22 kills, and still be attempting to return to front-line duty in 3025.
Solution: 1. Ignore the discrepancy, the bio could have been written in the 30th century.
2. Adjust the MUL "Date Introduced" closer to 3025.
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2959/slayer-sl-15
Problem: the "Date Introduced" for the SL-15 Slayer (the original production model) is 2657. TRO: 3039, p. 214, "Slayer", "Capabilities", 1st sentence starts with-
"With the Amaris Crisis raging, the Slayer’s designers had little time to craft a fi ghter’s typically complicated air frame." TRO:3025, p. 144, "SL-15 Slayer", does not heavily suggest an introduction date, simply "...before the collapse of the Star League."
Solution: Adjust the "Date Introduced" to some time during the Amaris Crisis, for instance, 2770.
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5147/striga-s-str-o-base
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5148/striga-s-str-o-invictus
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5149/striga-s-str-oa-dominus
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5150/striga-s-str-ob-infernus
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5151/striga-s-str-oc-comminus
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5152/striga-s-str-od-luminos
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5153/striga-s-str-oe-eminus
Problem: "Date Introduced" from all of the above Striga pages is 3072. From TRO:3075, p. 102, "S-STR-O Striga", Overview, 3rd sentence-
"The Rusalka and Shade fighters that followed [the Striga's] late-3071 debut would further refine the unique silhouette-changing features that have become the Spectrals’ hallmark,..."
=========
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4170/firebird-fr-1
Problem: MUL lists the "Date Introduced" for the FR-1 Firebird as 2400. Strategic Operations, p. 15, says "Firebird (2390)".
Additionally, ED:AoW, p. 28, "Firebird", says-
"The Firebird did not survive long once aerospace technologies matured. Obsolescent from its birth, after a mere twenty years this fighter was hopelessly obsolete. The Capellan Confederation scrapped the last of its Firebirds by 2420.
While this could imply 2400, it does not preclude the CC using the "hopelessly obsolete" Firebird for an additional decade (honestly, it seems like something the old CC might do ;) ).
Solution: Write errata for Strategic Operations
or
Adjust the "Date Introduced" for the FR-1 Firebird to 2390.
If you need errata written for Strategic Operations, I can post it, it is currently on the first Errata page.
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7193/hammerhead-hmr-ha
Problem: The "Date Introduced" for the HMR-HA Hammerhead is 2402. XTRO:Primitives Vol IV, p. 13, HMR-HA Hammerhead says-
"Prototype Introduction Date: 2402"
and
"While the fighter lacked the ability to engage enemies at range, the Hegemony Armed Forces were duly impressed with the Hammerhead and ordered it into production, with the first fighters reaching HAF squadrons in 2407."
Additionally, TRO:2750 (FASA), p. 76, HMR-HD Hammerhead, "Capabilities", 2nd paragraph starts, "Engineers added the Ferro-Aluminum armor more than a century after the Hammerhead entered service in 2407."
Solution: Change "Date Introduced" to 2407.
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Colt
Problem: There is a variant of the Colt Medium Fighter described in the text, mounting SRMs. Searching the MUL for Colt, only 1 entry is found. Here is the quote from XTRO:Primitives, Vol V, p. 13, "Colt Medium Fighter", 3rd paragraph, 2nd sentence-
"(A short-range variant, which swapped the LRMs for quad-SRM launchers also fed by a single one-ton magazine, was introduced by EAC in 2375.)"
Thank you!
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2682/rhino-fire-support-tank-mg
Problem: "Date Introduced" for the Rhino (MG) variant is 2653.
According to TRO:2750, p. 116, "Rhino", "Capabilities, 1st sentence- "When it appeared in 2669 to anchor defensive lines,..."
According to TRO:3050U, p. 180, "Rhino", "Overview", 1st sentence- "Introduced in 2669,..." Additionally, "Variants", 1st sentence- "There are no factory-produced variants of the Rhino.", therefore MG variant of the Rhino is a later modification of the original.
Solution: Change the "Date Introduced" for the Rhino (MG) variant to some time after 2669.
or
Write errata for the other variants of the Rhino, as well as TROs 3050U and 2750.
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4879/puma-assault-tank-pat-001
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4880/puma-assault-tank-pat-002
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2599/puma-assault-tank-pat-005
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2600/puma-assault-tank-pat-005b
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2601/puma-assault-tank-pat-007
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2602/puma-assault-tank-pat-008
Problem: Each of these 6 Puma Assault Tank entries includes the unit type, "PAT-n". Upon reading the initial entry from TRO:2750, p. 118, "Puma", the Pumas described in this TRO have a different type-
"Overview", 1st paragraph, 4th sentence- "The modifications in the latest model of the Puma, the PMA 005 BP..."
2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence- "The first model, produced in 2650, was the PMA 001,..."
"Capabilities", 2nd paragraph- "The Puma PMA-005 BP has long-range striking power..."
4th paragraph, 2nd sentence- "This is true of the Puma, but the PMA 005 BP protects itself with a Skylight Model 5 flamer..."
Solution: replace "PAT-n" in the names on the 6 entries with "PMA-n"
or
Write errata for TRO:2750
S.gage
-
The Pumas were changed in RS3050. The current TR with the Puma (3059 Upgrsde) doesn’t give the designation. We don’t errata 2750 as errata is only collected for CGL created products.
-
Solution: Change the "Date Introduced" for the Rhino (MG) variant to some time after 2669.
Rhino (MG) changed to 2725. Thanks.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Colt
Problem: There is a variant of the Colt Medium Fighter described in the text, mounting SRMs. Searching the MUL for Colt, only 1 entry is found. Here is the quote from XTRO:Primitives, Vol V, p. 13, "Colt Medium Fighter", 3rd paragraph, 2nd sentence-
"(A short-range variant, which swapped the LRMs for quad-SRM launchers also fed by a single one-ton magazine, was introduced by EAC in 2375.)"
Thank you!
S.gage
Thanks, entry added.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7193/hammerhead-hmr-ha
Problem: The "Date Introduced" for the HMR-HA Hammerhead is 2402. XTRO:Primitives Vol IV, p. 13, HMR-HA Hammerhead says-
Solution: Change "Date Introduced" to 2407.
S.gage
Done, thanks.
-
Problem: "Date Introduced" from all of the above Striga pages is 3072. From TRO:3075, p. 102, "S-STR-O Striga", Overview, 3rd sentence-
"The Rusalka and Shade fighters that followed [the Striga's] late-3071 debut would further refine the unique silhouette-changing features that have become the Spectrals’ hallmark,..."
TR3075 Shade entry (p98) makes it clear the Striga "rolled off the refurbished assembly lines" in late 3071. So we ruled they didn't actually see deployment till 3072.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4170/firebird-fr-1
Problem: MUL lists the "Date Introduced" for the FR-1 Firebird as 2400. Strategic Operations, p. 15, says "Firebird (2390)".
Additionally, ED:AoW, p. 28, "Firebird", says-
"The Firebird did not survive long once aerospace technologies matured. Obsolescent from its birth, after a mere twenty years this fighter was hopelessly obsolete. The Capellan Confederation scrapped the last of its Firebirds by 2420.
While this could imply 2400, it does not preclude the CC using the "hopelessly obsolete" Firebird for an additional decade (honestly, it seems like something the old CC might do ;) ).
Solution: Write errata for Strategic Operations
or
Adjust the "Date Introduced" for the FR-1 Firebird to 2390.
If you need errata written for Strategic Operations, I can post it, it is currently on the first Errata page.
S.gage
Agree with your reasoning here, changed to 2390.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2959/slayer-sl-15
Problem: the "Date Introduced" for the SL-15 Slayer (the original production model) is 2657. TRO: 3039, p. 214, "Slayer", "Capabilities", 1st sentence starts with-
"With the Amaris Crisis raging, the Slayer’s designers had little time to craft a fi ghter’s typically complicated air frame." TRO:3025, p. 144, "SL-15 Slayer", does not heavily suggest an introduction date, simply "...before the collapse of the Star League."
Solution: Adjust the "Date Introduced" to some time during the Amaris Crisis, for instance, 2770.
S.gage
Though it pains me to do so, changed. (TR3057 gave exact date, but 3039 generally overrules.)
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Transgressor
Potential Problem: The oldest "Date Introduced" for the Transgressor is 2890. From TRO:3025, p. 150 "Transgressor", "Notable Fighters and Pilots", the bio of Colonel Harry S. Yoshita explains Col. Yoshita helped design the original Transgressor. While the bio may have been published years after his design work, it is improbable Yoshita could have helped design the Transgressor in 2890, piloted it, recorded 22 kills, and still be attempting to return to front-line duty in 3025.
Solution: 1. Ignore the discrepancy, the bio could have been written in the 30th century.
2. Adjust the MUL "Date Introduced" closer to 3025.
S.gage
Ignoring. It's also the standard heavy aerospace fighter of the CC, and moving it that late causes issues as well.
-
That following 3 report unpublished variants missing from the MUL. Since other unpublished variants are at least listed in the MUL, I thought I would bring them to your attention.
To preserve my sanity, I'm no longer worrying about variant that have no information but a name. Maybe at a later time. Gotta prioritize..
Additionally, unpublished earlier variants (of the Corsair, especially) may warrant adjusting some of the "Date Introduced" for published variants:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Sparrowhawk
Problem: There are no entries for unpublished versions of the Sparrowhawk, SPR-H1, SPR-H2, SPR-H3, SPR-H4, mentioned in the first paragraph of TRO:3025 (FASA, July 1994 printing), p. 134, SPR-H5 Sparrowhawk.
==========
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Corsair
Problem: There are no entries for unpublished versions of the Corsair, CSR-V1, CSR-V2, CSR-V3, CSR-V4, CSR-V5, CSR-V6, CSR-V7, CSR-V8, mentioned in the third paragraph of TRO:3025 (FASA, July 1994 printing), p. 136, CSR-V12 Corsair.
==========
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Stuka
Problem: There are no entries for unpublished versions of the Stuka, STU-K1 and STU-K2, mentioned in the 2nd-3rd paragraph of TRO:3025 (FASA, July 1994 printing), p. 138, STU-K5 Stuka. STU-K1 is described as having "difficulties with heat dissipation" and "structural instability". The first Stukas were introduced in 2530, according to TRO:3039, p. 220. This matches the first sentence from the second paragraph from TRO:3025, p. 138-
"The K1 prototype of this fighter rolled off the assembly line in the Lycomb plant on the planet Demeter in 2530."
S.gage
The K1 and K2 are listed. K1 didn't have an intro date, so I'll add that.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5155/stuka-stu-k1
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2935/sholagar-sl-21
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5227/thrush-tr-5
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3201/thrush-tr-7
Problem: From TRO:3039, p. 198, Sholagar, Overview-
"Later used as the base for the Capellan Thrush, the airframe was small and fit well into transports, but its circular wings were unstable in atmospheric flight, resulting in many crashes."
Both the TR-5 and TR-7 Thrush predate the Sholagar on the MUL.
Solutions:
Revise the passage in TRO:3039 to read, "Based on the earlier Capellan Thrush, the airframe was small and fit well into transports, but its circular wings were unstable in atmospheric flight, resulting in many crashes." (best option)
or
Change the "Date Introduced" for the Sholagar to between the TR-5 and TR-7, or to before both the TR-5 and TR-7. This is a much worse option because errata for several publications would be required (for TRO:3025, 3039, etc.)
If errata is required for TRO:3039, I can post it in the thread.
S.gage
House Liao p42 has Normann Aris designing the Thrush. Yeah, go with errata to TR3039.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2154/mechbuster-standard
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2153/mechbuster-srm
Problem:
Without any explicit dates in TRO:3039, TRO:3026, p. 46, 'MechBuster, states that the "Date Introduced" is 3023. Quote from 2nd sentence-
"Designed in 3023, the 'MechBuster is assigned to replace AeroSpace Fighters in providing air support for garrison forces."
Both links for the 'MechBuster from the MUL list "Date Introduced" before, in 3002 and 3022, respectively.
Solution: Adjust the dates in MUL, or write errata for TRO:3026. If errata for TRO:3026 is preferred, I can post if there is a thread for it. Thank you!
S.gage
Mechbuster changed to 3023, SRM to 3024. Thanks.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1390/harasser-missile-platform-standard
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1386/harasser-missile-platform-leaping-lisa
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1389/harasser-missile-platform-lrm
Problem: Dates Introduced. According to the text of TRO:3026 (original FASA), p. 18, the Harasser was introduced in 2829 (2nd sentence):
"In 2829, House Marik commissioned the Harasser as a companion vehicle to the Galleon."
The three entries above list "Date Introduced" as 2811, 2815, and 2821.
TRO:3039, p. 28, makes no direct mention of the introduction date, but it does reference the same story re: the Harasser's role accompanying Galleons, and losses incurred during the Second Succession War forcing Harasser deployment as a replacement for 2nd line and garrison formations being pressed into front-line service. The later date also fits better with this story - if the Harasser was introduced in 2811 (vs. 2829), it would have 19 years to be deployed with Galleons (vs. just months to deploy in its intended role).
Solution: change these "Date Introduced" entries to dates starting with 2829.
S.gage
3039 says Marik acquired a bunch of Galleons at the fall of the Star League and this prompted the commissioning of the Harasser. It was viewed that 2829 was way too later to be commissioning something they acquired in the 2780s-2790s. This was an intentional change from the 2829 data in 3026.
-
House Liao p42 has Normann Aris designing the Thrush. Yeah, go with errata to TR3039.
Thank you! I saw "HLSB" as the source for the TR-5 Thrush, and could not determine what source this was. Should these FASA sourcebooks be added to the "Sources" page? Also, I noticed there was no Handbook: House Kurita in the source list.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Source/Index
Thanks!
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=heavy+wheeled+apc
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1432/heavy-hover-apc-mg
Problem: The "Date Introduced" results for Heavy APCs are a bit messy.
All of the Heavy Wheeled APCs in this chart mount standard armor, as well as the Heavy Hover APC (MG). With an introductory date 2460-2470 for standard armor (IO, p. 35), many of these entries probably should have their "Date Introduced" adjusted.
Heavy Tracked APC appears to have been fixed. All entries start at 2470, but there are no "primitive" models listed, either.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Heavy+Tracked+APC
The "primitive" models of the Heavy Hover APC (without cited record sheets) are listed with "Date Introduced" with dates "0", "2370", and "2400".
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Heavy+Hover+APC
Solutions: Adjust all "introductory" technology Heavy Hover and Heavy Wheeled APCs to become available no earlier than 2470.
(Please note: primitive versions of these vehicles would definitely be available beforehand. I look at these vehicles as the "latest iteration".)
S.gage
-
The APCs have so little armor that we were willing to fudge using the same RS earlier.
-
The APCs have so little armor that we were willing to fudge using the same RS earlier.
I understand.
=====
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6378/shillelagh-missile-tank-standard
Problem: The Shillelagh (original) is listed as tech Standard. The record sheet in TRO:3145DC says Intro.
Solution: Change the tech to Introductory.
======
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6655/crane-heavy-transport-standard
Problem: Technology Level of the Crane Heavy Transport on MUL is Standard. Unless I am missing something, the Crane should be Introductory (it has 4 MGs and infantry capacity). The record sheet in TR:3145RS was not helpful here, as it has errata, too.
Solution: Change tech level to Introductory.
======
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2811/saxon-apc-standard
Problem: The Saxon APC gives a tech base as Standard. From reading TR:3075, pp. 48-49, "Saxon APC", there appears to be no advanced equipment or construction materials used in the Saxon
Solution: Change the MUL tech rating for the Saxon APC (standard) to Introductory.
=======
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4602/marsden-mbt-i
Problem: The Marsden I MBT is listed under "Unit Type" as Support Vehicle - Tracked. It should be a combat vehicle.
Solution: Change "Unit Type" to Combat Vehicle - Tracked.
Never mind, support here is unit type, my fault
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1817/korvin-tank-krv-3
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=5936.0
Problem: Errata thread from TR:3075, p. 238, says the "Date Introduced" for the Korvis KRV-3 (Intro tech) should be 2530. MUL "Date Introduced" is 2544. Additionally, XTR:Primitives Vol III, p. 10 (no errata yet) still has the pre-errata date, 2430.
I prefer 2544 (simply because I read MUL before the errata thread), which one should be used?
Of course, whatever the decision, I can write the errata thread posts. Thanks!
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6766/thunderbolt-tdr-5sb2
Problem: I can find no reference to TDR-5Sb2 Thunderbolt in Historical: Operation Klondike. Also, with a "Date Introduced" of 2680, appears to have been introduced before the TDR-5Sb Thunderbolt (2753).
Solution: Fix the source if one exists. If not, remove from the MUL.
S.gage
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6766/thunderbolt-tdr-5sb2 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6766/thunderbolt-tdr-5sb2)
Problem: I can find no reference to TDR-5Sb2 Thunderbolt in Historical: Operation Klondike. Also, with a "Date Introduced" of 2680, appears to have been introduced before the TDR-5Sb Thunderbolt (2753).
Solution: Fix the source if one exists. If not, remove from the MUL.
S.gage
The TDR-5Sb2 is the exact same unit as the -5Sb, except with a standard PPC since the ER- version had yet to be invented. It's a bit backward, as you expect the second version to be the -2, but the ER-PPC variant becomes the -Sb and the PPC version becomes the -Sb2 when the later one comes in.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6766/thunderbolt-tdr-5sb2
Problem: I can find no reference to TDR-5Sb2 Thunderbolt in Historical: Operation Klondike. Also, with a "Date Introduced" of 2680, appears to have been introduced before the TDR-5Sb Thunderbolt (2753).
Solution: Fix the source if one exists. If not, remove from the MUL.
S.gage
Check the notes on this entry. The TDR-5Sb2 is the original model to the 5Sb that replaced the standard PPC with an ER PPC when available. The intro date supports that. The change on the record sheets is a simple enough one that an Alpha Strike card was made for it without an actual record sheet being published.
It might be one of maybe two or three other designs in the entire game to have that distinction.
-
Check the notes on this entry. The TDR-5Sb2 is the original model to the 5Sb that replaced the standard PPC with an ER PPC when available. The intro date supports that. The change on the record sheets is a simple enough one that an Alpha Strike card was made for it without an actual record sheet being published.
It might be one of maybe two or three other designs in the entire game to have that distinction.
Thank you, I did not know there was a canon Thud published as an alpha strike card. It still might make sense adjusting the introductory date for the -5Sb2 to after the -5Sb, a lower-heat Royal version of the Thud. My reasoning: At the (almost) ideal range for combining short- and long-range brackets, 180 m, a stationary TDR-5Sb overheats by 3 (ERPPC, LRM, 3 ML, 1 successful Streak). The -5Sb2 can have the same weapons strike can run an remain cool, which is advantageous for a 4/6/0 BattleMech.
S.gage
-
Thank you, I did not know there was a canon Thud published as an alpha strike card. It still might make sense adjusting the introductory date for the -5Sb2 to after the -5Sb, a lower-heat Royal version of the Thud. My reasoning: At the (almost) ideal range for combining short- and long-range brackets, 180 m, a stationary TDR-5Sb overheats by 3 (ERPPC, LRM, 3 ML, 1 successful Streak). The -5Sb2 can have the same weapons strike can run an remain cool, which is advantageous for a 4/6/0 BattleMech.
S.gage
Beyond the MUL's purpose. We had to do something about the 'Mechs that existed despite having ER PPCs that didn't exist yet. TPTB were firm that we couldn't change the intro date of the ER PPC. That left either errata all those 'Mechs to introduce very late in the Star League (with several causing other issues), or there was a short-term version without the ER PPC. We went with the last option there. The 2 'mechs are versions that got their ER PPCs after their introduction. We can't make further changes.
Moving the 2s after the "true" versions would defeat the point. We needed a version that exists at the intro date they were stated to have, before the existence of their ER PPCs. That was the limit of our purpose.
-
House Liao p42 has Normann Aris designing the Thrush. Yeah, go with errata to TR3039.
Ok, so reading this reference, I realized there are a few entries that may need adjusting to remove temporal conflicts for the TDR-5S, the WHM-6L, and the TR-5. I'm putting all 3 in the same post because they reference many of the same sources:
Timeframe
1. House Liao, the Capellan Confederation, pp. 41-42: Normann Aris, Chancellor 2599-2611. Before, he is a weapons designer, worked on modern Thunderbolt, Capellan variant of the Warhammer, and later improved Thrush. (written in this order)
2. IO, p. 35: Ferro Aluminum Armor standard production in Terran Hegemony after 2571
3. ED:AoW, p. 11, Capellan Confederation introduces "modern" battlefield technology in 2524.
For frame of reference, I will refer to the points above with the same numbers below
========
TDR-5S Thunderbolt http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3238/thunderbolt-tdr-5s
Problem: The "Date Introduced" for the TDR-5S is 2505. If designed by CC and Norman Aris, it is 1) 106 years before the death of its designer, 3) 19 years before CC introduces modern battlefield technology.
Solution: Adjust the "Date Introduced" for the TDR-5S Thunderbolt to ~2530. means 1) a very young Normann Aris (say, 20 years old) works on the Thud, dies ~100 years old. 3) CC has introduced "modern" technology. This also gives it more than 40 years to become a standard 'Mech for the FWL, TH, SL in time for the Reunification War.
========
WHM-6L Warhammer http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3487/warhammer-whm-6l
Problem: The "Date Introduced" for the WHM-6L Warhammer is 2825. 1) If this is the variant designed by Normann Aris, this is ~214 years after his death. (While the design could have sat un-produced for centuries, the reference from House Liao: The Capellan Confederation also says the improvement to the Thrush came afterwards.)
Making things more complicated,TR:3025, p. 96, "Variants" says, 1st paragraph- "Several variants on the Warhammer have appeared since the fall of the Star League, and usually involve additional heat sinks and altered weaponry."
3rd paragraph- "Also known as the ‘Hot Hammer’, the WHM-6L is a House Liao variant that replaces the machine guns with two flamers."
There may be more references to the WHM-6L I have not found.
Solution: It looks like FASA did the retcon here in 1988. House Liao may have already modified their Warhammer to be more terrifying to infantry during the Age of War. Adjust this variant's "Date Introduced" to between the TDR-5S Thunderbolt and the TR-5 Thrush.
=========
TR-5 Thrush http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5227/thrush-tr-5
Problem: The "Date Introduced" for the TR-5 Thrush is 2510. First Succession War, p. 150, says the TR-5 has Ferro-Aluminum armor. The TR-5 Thrush also appears in time for the Reunification War, according to RAT, p. 173, even though Ursula Liao stayed out of this war directly.
1) Normann Aris would therefore die 101 years after working on the Thrush. 2) IO, p. 35, says Ferro-Aluminum was standard production in 61 years later in Terran Hegemony. Maybe Ursula Liao got this technology for her war vote (Reunification War, p. 50). 3) This is also 14 years before "modern" battlefield tech.
Solution: Adjust the TR-5 Thrush "Date Introduced" to ~2575, early enough to be available for the CC for the RW.
Sorry for this crazy long post, I hope it helps!
S.gage
-
Beyond the MUL's purpose. We had to do something about the 'Mechs that existed despite having ER PPCs that didn't exist yet. TPTB were firm that we couldn't change the intro date of the ER PPC. That left either errata all those 'Mechs to introduce very late in the Star League (with several causing other issues), or there was a short-term version without the ER PPC. We went with the last option there. The 2 'mechs are versions that got their ER PPCs after their introduction. We can't make further changes.
Moving the 2s after the "true" versions would defeat the point. We needed a version that exists at the intro date they were stated to have, before the existence of their ER PPCs. That was the limit of our purpose.
Ok. I just provided a rationale, but it does not need to be used. Thank you for the clarification!
S.gage