Author Topic: Power is a goal. Pleasure is eternal. Welcome to Canopus. (Read 218020 times)

Maelwys · « **Reply #270 on:** 11 April 2011, 09:09:27 »

And the MUL has them around in the post Jihad-era, though they're erroneously tagged with the MH label instead of the MC.

Quote from: ArkRoyalRavager on 11 April 2011, 07:15:32

Well, that would be good, but considering the glut of powered armor in the market right now, wouldnt it be better to just license-build the Kobold/an Infiltrator MkI upgrade/Achileus?

Ebon Magistrate+BA=pwnage (EDIT:Is the Magistrate still around? These guys did some kind of heroic sacrifice against a Shadow Division, so i'm not sure if they're still a unit after the Jihad)

Sure, either is possible. Both are pretty good suits, and they could even license the GDL Scout I assume. I'm just one of those people that wouldn't mind a homemade design (though I suppose if they're producing the entire thing, that is almost as good). Of course there's also the problem of "What can you really do with a light suit to make it effective that you haven't done before :)

ArkRoyalRavager · « **Reply #271 on:** 11 April 2011, 10:50:57 »

Quote from: Kit deSummersville on 11 April 2011, 08:31:46

I live to serve.

Everyone serves together here to help this game!

Quote from: Maelwys on 11 April 2011, 09:09:27

And the MUL has them around in the post Jihad-era, though they're erroneously tagged with the MH label instead of the MC.

Considering the size of the MUL, its natural for things like that to appear.

Quote

Both are pretty good suits, and they could even license the GDL Scout I assume. I'm just one of those people that wouldn't mind a homemade design (though I suppose if they're producing the entire thing, that is almost as good). Of course there's also the problem of "What can you really do with a light suit to make it effective that you haven't done before :)

Well, its not as if the Canopians get much action out there too, post-Jihad. I think the Theseus can get a nice scout variant to streamline their logistics. That problem with "everything with a light suit has been tried in canon already" is also why i just thought it'd be better to just license-build stuff. For homebrews, it'd be really cool(i'm a fan of BA for everyone) but IC i just cant find any good reason the MoC can use to justify a BA program, especially when they're rolling out stuff like the Penthesilea and PP 'Mechs. The Marians are the ones who can really get away with new suits in the new era...

Maelwys · « **Reply #272 on:** 11 April 2011, 13:01:46 »

Well, the biggest IC reason I could see is the heavy losses the infantry took on Canopus.

ANS Kamas P81 · « **Reply #273 on:** 11 April 2011, 18:55:32 »

Theseus suits work just fine and they're homebrewed. Give them time to circulate and get some good infantry numbers, and they'll be fine. What I want to see is a heavy, slower BA (1500kg, 1-2 ground MP, 80-100% armor, max firepower) that can mechanize on an omnivehicle like the Merc-general Bandits or standards like Karnovs, or those Blizzards which are factionally-specified ours. Use it as an Infantry Tank - it stays with your squishies, and provides a high-protection target to draw fire, with a lot of firepower to be a real threat. That can free up your armor to do other things, at least some of them.

ArkRoyalRavager · « **Reply #274 on:** 11 April 2011, 23:09:22 »

Quote from: Maelwys on 11 April 2011, 13:01:46

Well, the biggest IC reason I could see is the heavy losses the infantry took on Canopus.

Arguably, they were up against MD. Everyone took heavy losses against those guys. There was also some fire-bombing that would naturally kill a large portion of infantry. The Canopians performed well in combat against the Blakists, though.

Maelwys · « **Reply #275 on:** 12 April 2011, 00:26:53 »

Nah, even before that. The 34th Division pretty much wiped out the Raventhir Iron Hand Infantry on Canopus (partially because 1/3rd of them were off protecting VIPs and whatnot). One of the big problems was probably the WoB's use of laser weapons, which the MoC infantry kit sucks against (actually, I'd almost be willing to say that the MoC infantry kit sucks completely, and not just against energy weapons).

That is one thing I hope to see. A new upgraded MoC infantry kit (even more so than any BA).

ArkRoyalRavager · « **Reply #276 on:** 12 April 2011, 02:30:56 »

Although the MoC's infantry suck, their medical corps is the best, allowing them to somewhat mitigate losses. Other factions might have strong kits with 2 divisors and Mausers/FB M42B/whatever, but they dont have good medics.

Maelwys · « **Reply #277 on:** 12 April 2011, 08:24:06 »

Sure, but the MoC Armor kit under the RPG could use some work. Atleast bump it up so it covers and arms and the legs, so you give the medics a bit of a break :)

Maelwys · « **Reply #278 on:** 14 April 2011, 02:56:26 »

May have asked this before, may have just meant to, but does anyone know what's going on with the planet(s?) Adhara/Trip (Almost due south of Fanardir, almost due west of Palm).

They look to be in the same place, with Adhara showing up sometime during the Star League era, and staying there throughout the 3025 map. Then suddenly the 3067 map no longer shows Adhara, and instead there's a planet named "Trip" that looks to be in the exact same spot.

Anyone have any ideas? (well, I guess the first question is, does anyone know what's going on that can answer, and then if that's a no, we can toss around ideas on what happened :) )

Moonsword · « **Reply #279 on:** 14 April 2011, 06:17:02 »

It looks like there's been some waffling or confusion on the name before that point - Oystein's older maps show Trip in 3025, Adhara in 3030, 3050, 3052, and 3063. The official Dark Age poster has it as Trip. If I had to guess, the name was changed for some reason.

jimdigris · « **Reply #280 on:** 14 April 2011, 15:51:32 »

I could've sworn that there is another Adhara somewhere. Maybe TPTB had to rename it for that reason.

Maelwys · « **Reply #281 on:** 14 April 2011, 16:59:47 »

I'm not seeing a second on any of the online maps (such as at the Star League mapping agency). And even if there was another with the same name, there are several planets (such as Atreus) that share names as well.

Mapping error in the 2nd Periphery book maybe?

Medron Pryde · « **Reply #282 on:** 15 April 2011, 01:46:15 »

I believe there is another Adhara in either the FWL or the Marian Hegemony. I could be wrong but I seem to remember that.

And yes, it was known as Adhara until after 3052ish. And IIRC, either Periphery Second or FM Periphery also showed units stationed on Adhara. Sometime between then and 3067 it was renamed to Trip. I do not know the IC reason for the change. I also don't actually know the OOC reason for the change, though I would GUESS a typo while doing the 3067 map.

Oystein's fan maps always had some issues with spellings (New Vandenberg according to FASA and New Vandenburg according to Oystein as an example) and the 3067 wall map was the first one done with his files, with some of his misspellings. All previous maps, such as the 3025 and the 3052 and the 3057 maps were done with FASA's files. I've always just assumed that any differences are because of typos.

In Adhara/Trip, it seems it was decided to embrace the change in a Carver V/Liberty way. :)
There still seems to be some disagreements on the New Vandenberg/New Vandenburg system, with some sources saying one thing and some sources saying something else. I wish they'd just fix it back to the original. It is getting annoying that I have to do two different searches every time I want to look for the system. :(

Ian Sharpe · « **Reply #283 on:** 15 April 2011, 09:49:51 »

I chalk it up to people in the real world using both -berg and -burg. The correct way is whatever it was where one grew up.

Guardsman · « **Reply #284 on:** 15 April 2011, 12:14:04 »

Quote from: jimdigris on 14 April 2011, 15:51:32

I could've sworn that there is another Adhara somewhere. Maybe TPTB had to rename it for that reason.

According to Handbook: Major Periphery States, Adhara (Magistracy of Canopus) was founded sometime between 2571 and 2750, and was renamed Trip sometime between 3025 and 3067. There is also and Addhara (Marian Hegemony), which was founded sometime between 2920 and 2930.

ShadowRaven · « **Reply #285 on:** 16 April 2011, 19:59:21 »

It's the MoC. it was renamed Trip after the planetary governer had one of the 'mind expanding' kind

Reaver · « **Reply #286 on:** 20 April 2011, 13:19:00 »

Quick question for the MoC'ers of the board. Who was Magistrix in 2976? I've got a Magistracy character and it's an important date in their backstory.

Maelwys · « **Reply #287 on:** 20 April 2011, 14:19:25 »

There's an old MoC family tree in the forum archives which suggests that the Magestrix you're looking for is Tamara Centrella.

Unfortunately the data on the Centrellas of the Succession Wars is...hazy from what I can tell. Something I really wish HB:MPS had cleared up.

Reaver · « **Reply #288 on:** 20 April 2011, 14:41:22 »

Thanks Maelwys. I've been poring through my records from the various sourcebooks, Sarna, and CBT resources, and I couldn't find the name anywhere. I appreciate it.

Maelwys · « **Reply #289 on:** 20 April 2011, 15:01:31 »

No problem.

Page 48 of Historical Brush Wars states that in 3012, Kyalla Centrella succeeded her mother Tamara. So that atleast gives the Magestrix just before Tamara. 36 years isn't too long of a reign, and certainly fits within the realm of possible, so its probably your best bet.

jimdigris · « **Reply #290 on:** 24 April 2011, 06:33:13 »

I checked my books yesterday, and the succession is really hazy at the begining and during the Succession Wars:
Kossandra (2530- ?)
Floral ( ? -2550) Grandaughter of Kossandra and third Centrella to run for the post.
Coranna (2550-2569)
Crystalla (2569-2596) Her tenure ended with the conquest by the SLDF.
Rinalla (2604-2612)
Carla (2612-2654)
Celine (2654-2656)
Gorraine (2656-2680)
Kim (2680-2712)
Jehan (2712-2738)
Vanura (2738-2760)
Janina (2760- ?)
Rawannah (known to be Majestrix in 2813)
Michaela (known to be Majestrix in 2840)
Tamara (?-3012)
Kyalla (3012-3039) She is noted as being the 16th Majestrix.
Emma (3039-3071)
Naomi (3071-present)

There is a problem with the Succession war lists. There are a total of 4 Majestrix for 252 years. That's an average of 75 years a piece. The original writers goofed by calling Kyalla the 16th holder of office. They could have slipped a Centrella or two in there to make it a little more reasonable.

Top Sergeant · « **Reply #291 on:** 24 April 2011, 08:16:33 »

Interesting that there are no repeats in the names.

Maelwys · « **Reply #292 on:** 24 April 2011, 16:59:17 »

Quote from: jimdigris on 24 April 2011, 06:33:13

I checked my books yesterday, and the succession is really hazy at the begining and during the Succession

There is a problem with the Succession war lists. There are a total of 4 Majestrix for 252 years. That's an average of 75 years a piece. The original writers goofed by calling Kyalla the 16th holder of office. They could have slipped a Centrella or two in there to make it a little more reasonable.

Which is why I really wanted to see a list of Magestrixes in HB:MPS :)

Stormcrow · « **Reply #293 on:** 25 April 2011, 01:53:54 »

Ditto, plus having OA and TC rulers filled out as well. This is the makor failing of the book IMO

jimdigris · « **Reply #294 on:** 27 April 2011, 15:43:59 »

Some minis for the Majistracy: http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,5083.msg114358.html

Maelwys · « **Reply #295 on:** 27 April 2011, 17:05:53 »

Looking pretty good. The Magistracy has had some good mini displays recently, making me feel much better about the various paint schemes of the Magistracy units :)

jimdigris · « **Reply #296 on:** 06 May 2011, 15:57:51 »

Another lance for the Majistracy: http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,5457.0.html

Top Sergeant · « **Reply #297 on:** 06 May 2011, 16:48:29 »

Really cool Jimdigris!

jimdigris · « **Reply #298 on:** 07 May 2011, 06:50:21 »

Thanks. O0

jimdigris · « **Reply #299 on:** 08 May 2011, 11:40:39 »

Let us suppose that Danai Liao-Centrella lands atop the Capellan throne. If you were her and wanted to reform the Capellan state to be more like the Majistracy, how would you do it? Having read through the Liao housebook, it turns out that there is a council or two of nobles that is supposed to "balance" the office of Chancellor, although they haven't done that for some time. Would you give them more power, or even create a democratically elected legislature?