Author Topic: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST  (Read 310597 times)

nckestrel

  • Scientia Bellator
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11030
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #360 on: 08 May 2016, 16:08:19 »
In Alpha Strike, the infantry do not use any alternative munitions, there's no exception given for Infernos and SRM infantry. 
Alpha Strike Introduction resources
Left of Center blog - Nashira Campaign for A Game of Armored Combat, TP 3039 Vega Supplemental Record Sheets

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13687
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #361 on: 08 May 2016, 22:51:26 »
The Galleon 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.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

nckestrel

  • Scientia Bellator
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11030
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #362 on: 09 May 2016, 10:43:40 »
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.
Alpha Strike Introduction resources
Left of Center blog - Nashira Campaign for A Game of Armored Combat, TP 3039 Vega Supplemental Record Sheets

Hussar2

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 295
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #363 on: 09 May 2016, 12:15:28 »
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

cavingjan

  • Spelunca Custos
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4470
    • warrenborn
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #364 on: 09 May 2016, 15:21:58 »
Hmm. I seemed to have missed those. Repub, merc, and three of the fwl states. I'll get them in tonight. Sorry about that.

Tai Dai Cultist

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7127
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #365 on: 09 May 2016, 21:29:52 »
The Wolverine-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?

Hussar2

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 295
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #366 on: 10 May 2016, 13:08:40 »
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)

cavingjan

  • Spelunca Custos
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4470
    • warrenborn
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #367 on: 10 May 2016, 19:30:16 »
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.
« Last Edit: 10 May 2016, 21:55:20 by cavingjan »

Hussar2

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 295
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #368 on: 11 May 2016, 00:44:58 »
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


cavingjan

  • Spelunca Custos
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4470
    • warrenborn
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #369 on: 11 May 2016, 07:10:46 »
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.

Wraithcannon

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 366
  • Oh boy, here I go killing again!
Whomever said violence isn't a solution obviously wasn't using enough.

Planning an operation against the Capellans? Hey, who wouldn't? - Sulla

nckestrel

  • Scientia Bellator
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11030
Alpha Strike Introduction resources
Left of Center blog - Nashira Campaign for A Game of Armored Combat, TP 3039 Vega Supplemental Record Sheets

cavingjan

  • Spelunca Custos
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4470
    • warrenborn
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #372 on: 11 May 2016, 21:23:22 »
Hussar2: fixed with some light tweaking.

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13687
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #373 on: 11 May 2016, 21:26:11 »
The Galleon 102, 103, and 104 do not have images.  They should use the image found in TRO3058U and RS3058Uu-I.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

cavingjan

  • Spelunca Custos
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4470
    • warrenborn
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #374 on: 11 May 2016, 21:38:09 »
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.

ColBosch

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8647
  • Legends Never Die
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #375 on: 12 May 2016, 21:00:09 »
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?
BattleTech is a huge house, it's not any one fan's or "type" of fans.  If you need to relieve yourself, use the bathroom not another BattleTech fan. - nckestrel
1st and 2nd Succession Wars are not happy times. - klarg1
Check my Ogre Flickr page! https://flic.kr/s/aHsmcLnb7v and https://flic.kr/s/aHsksV83ZP

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13687
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #376 on: 12 May 2016, 21:01:47 »
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*.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

ColBosch

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8647
  • Legends Never Die
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #377 on: 12 May 2016, 21:03:09 »
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!
BattleTech is a huge house, it's not any one fan's or "type" of fans.  If you need to relieve yourself, use the bathroom not another BattleTech fan. - nckestrel
1st and 2nd Succession Wars are not happy times. - klarg1
Check my Ogre Flickr page! https://flic.kr/s/aHsmcLnb7v and https://flic.kr/s/aHsksV83ZP

Scotty

  • Alpha Strike Guru by appointment to the FWLM
  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 13687
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #378 on: 12 May 2016, 21:18:42 »
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.
Catalyst Demo Agent #679

Kansas City players, or people who are just passing through the area, come join us at the Geekery just off Shawnee Mission Parkway for BattleTech!  Current days are Tuesdays in the afternoon and evening.  I can't make every single week, but odds are pretty good that somebody will be there.

Wraithcannon

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 366
  • Oh boy, here I go killing again!
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #379 on: 13 May 2016, 14:47:59 »
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
Whomever said violence isn't a solution obviously wasn't using enough.

Planning an operation against the Capellans? Hey, who wouldn't? - Sulla

Cache

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 3126
    • Lords of the Battlefield
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #380 on: 21 May 2016, 09:45:09 »
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.

pheonixstorm

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5548
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #381 on: 27 May 2016, 00:34:55 »
Kanga Medium Hovertank 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.
« Last Edit: 31 May 2016, 13:53:22 by Xotl »

Question

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 249
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #382 on: 27 May 2016, 03:38:09 »
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?

pheonixstorm

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5548
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #383 on: 27 May 2016, 04:25:33 »
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?

ColBosch

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8647
  • Legends Never Die
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #384 on: 27 May 2016, 04:31:46 »
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. :-[
« Last Edit: 27 May 2016, 04:36:56 by ColBosch »
BattleTech is a huge house, it's not any one fan's or "type" of fans.  If you need to relieve yourself, use the bathroom not another BattleTech fan. - nckestrel
1st and 2nd Succession Wars are not happy times. - klarg1
Check my Ogre Flickr page! https://flic.kr/s/aHsmcLnb7v and https://flic.kr/s/aHsksV83ZP


jymset

  • Infinita Navitas & RecGuide Developer
  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1528
  • the one and only
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #386 on: 30 May 2016, 00:48:00 »
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
On CGL writing: Caught between a writer's block and a Herb place. (cray)

Nicest writing compliment ever: I know [redacted] doesn't like continuity porn, but I do, and you sir, write some great continuity porn! (MadCapellan)

3055 rocks! Did so when I was a n00b, does so now.

RoundTop

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1372
  • In Takashi We Trust
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #387 on: 30 May 2016, 14:42:07 »
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>
No-Dachi has a counter-argument. Nothing further? Ok.
Demo team agent #772

Jim1701

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1916
  • "Don't Panic"
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #388 on: 31 May 2016, 02:06:02 »
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.

Jim1701

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1916
  • "Don't Panic"
Re: Master Unit List (MUL) Feedback Thread II - READ THE FIRST POST
« Reply #389 on: 31 May 2016, 02:15:13 »
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.