Welcome to the near-infinitely fractal world of BT resources ...
I admire what you've done, but I do feel there's a fundamental flaw based on just working with the one source, TRO 3039. Let's take a single example: the Marauder.
From your list, youv'e got the 3D in Davion service, 3L in Liao, and 3M in Marik. But where's the 3R serving? Historically, the Marauder is common across all Successor States, having been in production continually for close to three centuries at this point. According to this version of your table, Duke Hassid Ricol couldn't be using his trademark red & black Marauder, because the CC doesn't have a named version, and you're not allowing access to the 3R.
(Similarly, the FWLM has captured so many Banshee 3Es it's a common occurrence, including in Xotl's tables.)
Now other folk have taken different approaches, myself being one of them. But let's look at one other first - the MUL approach.
Within the MUL, it tags 'Mechs (and vees, ASF, etc) as being available either to specific factions, or to the category "inner sphere general". Now it's worth pointing out that the MUL is largely founded on Xotl's RAT tables to begin with. However, they decided to do away with the frequence/commonality of origin. So the MAD-3R is tagged as "Inner Sphere General" for late Succession Wars (covering 3039), while the MAD-3M is tagged as Free Worlds only at that time. So it's pretty easy to say from this that any faction can have a MAD-3R appropriately, but if you want to make your MAD fit even more into a Marik company, consider it a 3M.
(Side issue, I'm doing what you're doing, but with combined-arms battalions in mini form. I'd be happy to talk about how I approach building period- and faction-appropriate units; PM me if you'd like to discuss).
Now for a different approach, I also started with Xotl's RATs when I did my
Army Report 3025 series - 6 years ago now. My intention was to provide the sort of information players from games with army lists & the like might find providing some structure, rather than having to drink from the firehose of background canon.
Now Keith's tables at that time didn't differentiate between "general" and "faction" - each faction's RAT had what was available to that faction, with his excellent research into availability reflected in the d1000 breakdowns. I took an approach based on the MTG system:
* The most frequent designs were massaged into a 2d6 RAT format, and considered Common. The assumption was that it would be totally unsuprising to see these designs fielded by that faction.
* Any other designs listed in Xotl's table for that faction were fitted in the category Uncommon. Ie not expected, but not totally bizarre.
* And anything not listed in that faction's table was Rare.
So for example, looking at the AR:3025 for FWLM, the Marauder isn't a "common" heavy design (see 2d6 RAT in p19). That's based on Xotl's tables - he has the MAD-3M with a frequency of .6%, and the 3R with .7%, compared to the ARC-2R's 13.2%, or CRD-3R's 11.3%, etc, etc. So the ARC-2R & Crusader 3R are "common" for the FWLM in that period, while the MAD-3R and -3M are "uncommon".
Likewise, the BNC-3E is "common" - we sure capture a lot of them! The BNC-3M conversion is "uncommon", and at this time the BNC-3S is simply not available in any numbers to the League.
I then went a step further, and came up with a simple balancing:
* A unit can contain any number of Common designs.
* One unit in each Lance can be an Uncommon, freely.
* One unit in each Company can be a Rare.
I was more worried about playability, and not making people "forbidden" to put minis they had down on the table in some form.
Okay, a bit of an epic skald. Hopefully it comes across as a discussion on alternate viewpoints. At the end of the day, no-one's right or wrong - CGL get to dictate canon, but we can do what we want on our tables.
W.
