Register Register

Author Topic: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread III - READ THE FIRST POST  (Read 78641 times)

Hussar2

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 273
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread III - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #30 on: 30 April 2021, 19:20:57 »
Not sure if it's errata or conscious choice but should house Liao have the Caesar 3S? It's a Lyran design that has no connection to the Confederacy

http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/456/caesar-ces-3s

I also believe that there is a mix of King Crabs. House Davion should lose access to the 008B ( a Republic remake of the Wob 008) and gain access to the 007 (the RAC version mentioned to be a Davion and a Steiner variant).

It seems the FS has lost access to the MDG-1B Rakshasa and the JM-7D Jagermech. Is this intentional? They continue to use the MDG-1A and JM-7F, very close designs.

Hussar2

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 273
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread III - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #31 on: 30 April 2021, 19:24:37 »
DOL-1A2 Dola should have the picture of a Dola and not Ti T'sang (I know the yoh Ti Tasng is confusing :) )

http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4087/dola-dol-1a2-yoh-ti-tsang

Cache

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3110
    • Lords of the Battlefield
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread III - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #32 on: 30 April 2021, 19:26:19 »
All 'MechBuster entries don't have the "B" capitalized. It's written as 'MechBuster, 'Mechbuster, and Mechbuster in various sources, but TRO's 3026, 3026r, and 3039 have it as 'MechBuster.

Similarly, SeaBuster is written as Seabuster in XTRO: Periphery, and SeaBuster in TRO: Prototypes. I'm assuming SeaBuster is correct.

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 17499
  • I can and I will make you use a Garm
    • Master Unit List
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread III - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #33 on: 30 April 2021, 19:37:15 »
DOL-1A2 Dola should have the picture of a Dola and not Ti T'sang (I know the yoh Ti Tasng is confusing :) )

http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4087/dola-dol-1a2-yoh-ti-tsang

Guessing when I assigned the ti t’sang image I blasted through this one without even noticing. No thoughts, just vibes.

All 'MechBuster entries don't have the "B" capitalized. It's written as 'MechBuster, 'Mechbuster, and Mechbuster in various sources, but TRO's 3026, 3026r, and 3039 have it as 'MechBuster.

Similarly, SeaBuster is written as Seabuster in XTRO: Periphery, and SeaBuster in TRO: Prototypes. I'm assuming SeaBuster is correct.

Once an official clarification comes down we’ll adjust as necessary

GreekFire

  • Aeternus Ignis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3667
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread III - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #34 on: 30 April 2021, 19:38:38 »
Caesar 3S?

Not errata, supported by FM:3145 and the Capellan conquest of New Syrtis.

Quote
House Davion should lose access to the 008B and gain access to the 007.

Production of the 007 was extremely limited, hampered by Word of Blake raids on Son Hoa and the relocation of their line to Loburg (along with its replacement with the 009), which is why its numbers in the FedSuns fell off.

Quote
It seems the FS has lost access to the MDG-1B Rakshasa and the JM-7D Jagermech. Is this intentional? They continue to use the MDG-1A and JM-7F, very close designs.

JM7-D is intentional; its main line was destroyed in on Talon during the Jihad.
I can't speak for the Rakshasa.
Tu habites au Québec? Tu veux jouer au BattleTech? Envoie-moi un message!

Hussar2

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 273
Not errata, supported by FM:3145 and the Capellan conquest of New Syrtis.



I understand but the 3S was apparently never produced in new Syrtis (It's never available to the Suns in the MUL). I guess either add the 3S to the FS list or change the Capellan produced variant to the 3R/4R/4S

GreekFire

  • Aeternus Ignis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3667

I understand but the 3S was apparently never produced in new Syrtis (It's never available to the Suns in the MUL). I guess either add the 3S to the FS list or change the Capellan produced variant to the 3R/4R/4S

The 3S was an export model. Capellans would have ceased its exportation to field it themselves.
Tu habites au Québec? Tu veux jouer au BattleTech? Envoie-moi un message!

Hussar2

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 273
Should the Jagermech III D4/Jagermech JM7-F/Jagermech 7-C3BS/ Penetrator 4D be in the Liao list in the Dark Age? The have never produced it and have never conquered  The factory world.
The same argument could be made for the Rifleman 7X/8X

http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1673/jagermech-iii-jm6-d4
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4391/jagermech-jm7-f
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1671/jagermech-jm7-c3bs
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2704/rifleman-rfl-7x
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2706/rifleman-rfl-8x
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2465/penetrator-ptr-4d

BTW if you want me to post only clear cut errata and not this kind of speculation/analysis  just say so.
 I am a real fan of your work on the MUL and I don't want to waste your time  if it's unhelpful.

Rainbow 6

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2571
Should the Jagermech III D4/Jagermech JM7-F/Jagermech 7-C3BS/ Penetrator 4D be in the Liao list in the Dark Age? The have never produced it and have never conquered  The factory world.
The same argument could be made for the Rifleman 7X/8X

http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1673/jagermech-iii-jm6-d4
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4391/jagermech-jm7-f
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1671/jagermech-jm7-c3bs
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2704/rifleman-rfl-7x
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2706/rifleman-rfl-8x
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2465/penetrator-ptr-4d

BTW if you want me to post only clear cut errata and not this kind of speculation/analysis  just say so.
 I am a real fan of your work on the MUL and I don't want to waste your time  if it's unhelpful.

I'm going to guess this is due to Kallon taking over the factories on Victoria and changing the lines to build the Shadow Hawk/JagerMech/Penetrator as per FM:3145 which the CCAF has since recaptured.

Hussar2

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 273
I'm going to guess this is due to Kallon taking over the factories on Victoria and changing the lines to build the Shadow Hawk/JagerMech/Penetrator as per FM:3145 which the CCAF has since recaptured.


Interesting missed that. Thank you. does it mean The Republic  had began producing the Rifleman 7X/8X on Nanking before it was captured by the CCAF?

Rainbow 6

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2571
Interesting missed that. Thank you. does it mean The Republic  had began producing the Rifleman 7X/8X on Nanking before it was captured by the CCAF?

Not sure, the FM only says the CCAF is getting Wolverines and Riflemen from the Nanking factory.

GreekFire

  • Aeternus Ignis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3667
I'm going to guess this is due to Kallon taking over the factories on Victoria and changing the lines to build the Shadow Hawk/JagerMech/Penetrator as per FM:3145 which the CCAF has since recaptured.

This is correct.

Interesting missed that. Thank you. does it mean The Republic  had began producing the Rifleman 7X/8X on Nanking before it was captured by the CCAF?

This is also correct.

BTW if you want me to post only clear cut errata and not this kind of speculation/analysis  just say so.
 I am a real fan of your work on the MUL and I don't want to waste your time  if it's unhelpful.

Don't worry about it! This type of stuff can help us pin down small mistakes or omissions.
I definitely prefer people posting speculative comments than holding back because they think they might be wrong.
Tu habites au Québec? Tu veux jouer au BattleTech? Envoie-moi un message!

CVB

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1625
Field Gun Infantry Motorized Batteries, 75th Light Guard, First Taurian Lancers should weigh 42.5t according to the current errata version 2.0.

Additionally, intro date 2500 doesn't match with employing LAC5s as field guns (introduced in 3068).
"Wars result when one side either misjudges its chances or wishes to commit suicide; and not even Masada began as a suicide attempt. In general, both warring parties expect to win. In the event, they are wrong more than half the time."
- David Drake

I'm willing to suspend my disbelief, but I'm not willing to hang it by the neck until it's dead, dead, dead!

GreekFire

  • Aeternus Ignis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3667
Field Gun Infantry Motorized Batteries, 75th Light Guard, First Taurian Lancers should weigh 42.5t according to the current errata version 2.0.

Additionally, intro date 2500 doesn't match with employing LAC5s as field guns (introduced in 3068).

Those are indeed issues. Fixed.
Tu habites au Québec? Tu veux jouer au BattleTech? Envoie-moi un message!

CVB

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1625
Thanks. And since no good deed shall go unpunished...

From the same current errata version 2.0 for TRO3085:

The Bolla Stealth Tank's Technology Base should be "Inner Sphere (Experimental)".

Aerial Beast Infantry should have a BV of 43.

Minesweeper Infantry should have a Transport Weight of 6.5 tons

Ceremonial Guard should have a Transport Weight of 12 tons (4 groups of 3 tons).
Comment: Should you prefer to display 25-men subplatoons instead of 100-men centuries, the BV would have to be adapted.

General Clan Infantry: Motorized Infantry should have a BV of 65.

Outside of the errata document:
Intro date for Frogmen should be changed. Federated-Barrett M42B Assault Rifles (intro 3064 FS) as primary weapons preclude a 2500 intro date.

Edit: removed unsourced Common Intro date for M42B
« Last Edit: 01 May 2021, 18:51:05 by CVB »
"Wars result when one side either misjudges its chances or wishes to commit suicide; and not even Masada began as a suicide attempt. In general, both warring parties expect to win. In the event, they are wrong more than half the time."
- David Drake

I'm willing to suspend my disbelief, but I'm not willing to hang it by the neck until it's dead, dead, dead!

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 17499
  • I can and I will make you use a Garm
    • Master Unit List
Don't worry about it! This type of stuff can help us pin down small mistakes or omissions.
I definitely prefer people posting speculative comments than holding back because they think they might be wrong.

Challenges based on textual evidence will always be considered

weaponsgrade

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 5
pack hunter 2 standard version lacks ene special ability

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 17499
  • I can and I will make you use a Garm
    • Master Unit List
now ammo exposition free

weaponsgrade

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 5
this pack hunter seems to be missing ene special to be specific

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 17499
  • I can and I will make you use a Garm
    • Master Unit List
ah. the Pack Hunter II (as opposed to the Pack Hunter 2 or Pack hunter II 2).

That one does not receive ENE because of the B-Pods, which are explosive. See also: the Malak C, Scarecrow F4r, and Hellbringer (Loki) D

weaponsgrade

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 5
copy.......  but then as a clan mech no case either?

 also seems excessive that the mech would be destroyed by an explosion that in regular battle tech would only cause 2 dam as per bpod crit rules
« Last Edit: 02 May 2021, 14:15:33 by weaponsgrade »

weaponsgrade

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 5
i'll just use another variant it was just activating my o.c.d.ness

GreekFire

  • Aeternus Ignis
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3667
Thanks. And since no good deed shall go unpunished...
*snip*

Thank you, mostly fixed. From what I can tell the Bolla Stealth (RotS) has the correct tech level with Advanced due to its introductory year, and the Frogmen carry the M61A, not the M42B (though it still requires an introductory date adjustment.)

copy.......  but then as a clan mech no case either?

It should have CASE, yes. Fixed.

Tu habites au Québec? Tu veux jouer au BattleTech? Envoie-moi un message!

weaponsgrade

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 5
thank you!!!!!!!!!!!!! :)

CVB

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1625
Thank you, mostly fixed. From what I can tell the Bolla Stealth (RotS) has the correct tech level with Advanced due to its introductory year, and the Frogmen carry the M61A, not the M42B (though it still requires an introductory date adjustment.)
Bolla: admittedly I had trusted the Errata pdf unchecked. Wouldn't  this mean instead that the RotS's primary configuration should be "Advanced" as well?  (RAC/5, MML-3, MG, TAG)
Should I enter a report for the TRO3085 errata thread, or does this happen "internally"?

Frogmen: mea culpa, in my spreadsheet I had used the wrong autocompleted Federated Barrett weapon. Correct intro date is 3062.
« Last Edit: 02 May 2021, 16:16:22 by CVB »
"Wars result when one side either misjudges its chances or wishes to commit suicide; and not even Masada began as a suicide attempt. In general, both warring parties expect to win. In the event, they are wrong more than half the time."
- David Drake

I'm willing to suspend my disbelief, but I'm not willing to hang it by the neck until it's dead, dead, dead!

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 17499
  • I can and I will make you use a Garm
    • Master Unit List
It might not be errata due to how we have to deal with tech levels - the unit takes on the lowest tech level of that era since there’s only one slot. Manual notes would be a mess both to enter and track

Empyrus

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8814
Vehicle Stealth Armor, which is what Bolla uses, becomes Advanced in 3084 per TRO Prototypes. All other tech in the unit are tournament legal.
EDIT The Bolla Prime doesn't seem to have anything that would make it Experimental. It certainly should be Advanced, i think.
« Last Edit: 02 May 2021, 16:29:56 by Empyrus »
Sun Tzu Liao: Scheming, opportunistic weasel of a ruler, or brilliant political tactician?
-What's the difference?

CVB

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1625
Exactly. Just the TRO3085 Errata 2.0 pdf seems to be wrong, stating
Quote
Bolla Stealth Tank (p. 34)
Technology Base should be "Inner Sphere (Experimental)".
(Right now, TRO3085 simply states "Technology Base: Inner Sphere" without qualifier).
"Wars result when one side either misjudges its chances or wishes to commit suicide; and not even Masada began as a suicide attempt. In general, both warring parties expect to win. In the event, they are wrong more than half the time."
- David Drake

I'm willing to suspend my disbelief, but I'm not willing to hang it by the neck until it's dead, dead, dead!

nckestrel

  • Scientia Bellator
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10436
  • All your tulips belong to us.
The Bolla has an intro date of 3074, before Vehicular Stealth became standad rules. Thus it has (Experimental).
Bolla Stealth Tank (ROTS) has an intro date of 3084, which Vehicular Stealth became standard, therefore it does not have (Experimental).
Left of Center blog - Nashira Campaign for A Game of Armored Combat, TP 3039 Vega Supplemental Record Sheets]

Empyrus

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8814
Sun Tzu Liao: Scheming, opportunistic weasel of a ruler, or brilliant political tactician?
-What's the difference?