BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat
BattleTech Game Systems => General BattleTech Discussion => Topic started by: PeripheryPirate on 22 March 2011, 13:58:39
-
Just saw this (http://www.classicbattletech.com/index.php?action=products&mode=full&id=347) on the main page.
Is this implying that the values given in this first installment are BV1 and not BV2? If so... WHY?!
EDIT: Woo! The title is fixed! :)
-
Just saw this (http://www.classicbattletech.com/index.php?action=products&mode=full&id=347) on the main page.
Is this implying that the values given in this first installment are BV1 and not BV2? If so... WHY?!
No. It means that this is version 1.0 of the MUL:BV list. All Battle Values will be using the current BV2 calculations.
-
What Ben said.
A blog will be going up shortly, that will explain things in a bit more detail.
Best,
Joel BC
-
SQUEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!! :D
-
THATS more like it. ;)
-
WHEW! saw the thread title and was bracing for the player request for battle value 1 to be added.......
heart attack averted.
nice cover. and landscape? can't wait to see what the layout people did with this mess :).
-
nice cover.
Every available unit can be found on it :D ;)
-
I'm kinda bummed that this is a PDF exclusive.
I would like a paper copy because I meet with other players at FLGS and we don't always have a computer handy to look BV up. At at least 100 pages long, it's a bit expensive to print off.
Anyhoo, I've still very happy it's coming.
-
If you are complaining about the price to print it, you would not be able to afford a print version.
-
I would like a paper copy because I meet with other players at FLGS and we don't always have a computer handy to look BV up. At at least 100 pages long, it's a bit expensive to print off.
That's probably a good reason why there isn't a paper copy available. ;)
Edit: Roosterboy'd by the Aero King.
-
No. It means that this is version 1.0 of the MUL:BV list. All Battle Values will be using the current BV2 calculations.
[/quote]
I thought that's what it meant, but I did scratch my head at first. You guys need to hire a title consultant! Master Unit List 1.0: Battle Value, or Master Unit List: Battle Value (ver. 1.0) would have been a bit clearer. That'll be $49.50 consulting fee for the titles. Each. [legal]
-
The real question, besides the obvious one of when is it coming out, is what is the file size of this jewel?
-
The real question, besides the obvious one of when is it coming out, is what is the file size of this jewel?
Only 2MB.
Ray, one of our layout gods, worked some of his magic on the project. 208 pages and only 2MB in size.
-
Oh no. They've made FASAfizzicks in reality. We're doomed.
-
He must have cut all the Tetatae units :)
-
Oh no. They've made FASAfizzicks in reality. We're doomed.
Be glad they set the price using FASAnomix ... :)
W.
-
Can we get a Master Unit List: Battle Value using BV1 as well?
I like the Rim Worlds Republic, Clan Smoke Jaguar, 12th Star Guard, Chesterton Commonality . . . what can I say, I like things that have been erased from history.
-
Man, I'm looking forward to this! Thanks for the hard work CGL!
-
He must have cut all the Tetatae units :)
I told you that Herb would notice those.
-
You guys keep on doting on those, and he'll probably nuke the Locusts, too.
-
Can we get a Master Unit List: Battle Value using BV1 as well?
I like the Rim Worlds Republic, Clan Smoke Jaguar, 12th Star Guard, Chesterton Commonality . . . what can I say, I like things that have been erased from history.
Given the nightmare that the MUL has been so far? I seriously doubt it. The closest you'll get is the Faction lists in the back of Combat Operations, but they've got a fair few errata.
-
I thought that's what it meant, but I did scratch my head at first. You guys need to hire a title consultant! Master Unit List 1.0: Battle Value, or Master Unit List: Battle Value (ver. 1.0) would have been a bit clearer.
My thoughts exactly. I was thinking "There's no way they'd be using BV1 values instead of BV2..." but that is one misleading title slapped on there.
I should say I'm looking forward to it nonetheless, and even more so now that I know it will, in fact, be BV2-based.
-
Be glad they set the price using FASAnomix ... :)
W.
This is like how the Dasher Mk.II with the 400XL is sold for a loss in order to make PROFIT, is it?
-
Really looking forward to this. As I look forward to pretty much everything Battletech from Catalyst. [notworthy]
-
Given the nightmare that the MUL has been so far? I seriously doubt it. The closest you'll get is the Faction lists in the back of Combat Operations, but they've got a fair few errata.
I think he was joking.
-
I'm kinda bummed that this is a PDF exclusive.
I would like a paper copy because I meet with other players at FLGS and we don't always have a computer handy to look BV up. At at least 100 pages long, it's a bit expensive to print off.
So happy this is digital. Print copy would be a nightmare to actually use, like those phone books I keep recycling every time I find one discarded on my doorstep (if you try to print it, you'll probably find that out yourself). Only wish a spreadsheet version were available too.
-
I think he was joking.
Just in case:
NO. NEVER.
Paul
-
Cool beans. Can't wait to see it.
-
Anybody else notice it says first installment? What else could they have planned for it to be the first installment?
Glad to see it is coming. Can't wait to get it.
-
You magnificent... well I can't really finish this sentence the way I wanted to but I'm still just as pleased this is coming soon!
-
I thought that's what it meant, but I did scratch my head at first. You guys need to hire a title consultant! Master Unit List 1.0: Battle Value, or Master Unit List: Battle Value (ver. 1.0) would have been a bit clearer. That'll be $49.50 consulting fee for the titles. Each. [legal]
Excellent. Send your check or money order to InMediaRes Productions, LLC, PMB 202, 303 91st Ave NE G701, Lake Stevens, WA 98258.
-
InMediaRes Productions, LLC
PMB 202, 303 91st Ave NE G701
Lake Stevens, WA 98258
Awesome! Now we can send money to Catalyst directly without having to do disgusting things like buying products!
-
Anybody else notice it says first installment? What else could they have planned for it to be the first installment?
There could be updates in the next installment. Either fixes or new units that were released in the meantime.
-
I'm kinda bummed that this is a PDF exclusive.
I would like a paper copy because I meet with other players at FLGS and we don't always have a computer handy to look BV up. At at least 100 pages long, it's a bit expensive to print off.
Anyhoo, I've still very happy it's coming.
They have these things called printers ..... ;)
EDIT: 208 pages?! Thank god I have work printers to use to save money on ink, I'll bring my own paper.
-
There could be updates in the next installment. Either fixes or new units that were released in the meantime.
There was also some mention of possible "expanded/upgraded" (not sure of the proper term here) releases in the future that may have differing costs, during Herb's last chat. Perhaps those would be part of later releases.
-
I just noticed something: It says it will give faction availability for the jihad and dark eras. Does that mean there won't be availability data for earlier eras?
-
And its free, which makes is a million times better!! [rockon]
-
I just noticed something: It says it will give faction availability for the jihad and dark eras. Does that mean there won't be availability data for earlier eras?
Not in this release, no.
-
I think he was joking.
My first response was going to be "you're kidding, right?" But that would have been rude ;)
-
Just in case:
NO. NEVER.
Paul
I was joking, however all together now . . .
WHAT, NEVER?
-
I was joking, however all together now . . .
WHAT, NEVER?
NEVER QUESTION THE POWER OF THE TETATAE?
-
Stop, please. Off-topic posts are really getting out of control.
-
Will this be a searchable pdf?
Is there any chance of it being released into an electronic spreadsheet format?
-
Herb said in the chat it'd be searchable.
-
I just noticed something: It says it will give faction availability for the jihad and dark eras. Does that mean there won't be availability data for earlier eras?
I imagine that's what they mean by this being the first installment. Future installments might give availability for the Age of War, the Succession Wars, etc.
-
Well everytime they released a new product with a new unit in it the MUL would be out of date. So depending on the rate the list is updated would determine the version number, we could concievably see version 99.3 before long or only 12.1 it just depends. Since quite a few of the older items are already included that cuts down on the updating, but I'm sure there are still holes in various eras for various types, especially support units.
-
And its free, which makes is a million times better!! [rockon]
The first hit always is....
-
Hey, it looks like (at least when I just looked at it on the front page under Coming Soon) that the potentially confusing 1.0 has been removed from the item's cover image... just looks to read Master Unit List: Battle Values.
O0
-
The first hit always is....
You're a drug? dealer now, Kit
-
I'm stoked this is on the horizon!
-
Its out. Got mine first ;)
-
Its out. Got mine first ;)
Where?
-
go to this thread
http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,2209.0.html
click the notify button.
then you will know all that is important to know.
(the new battletech for sale thread....)
-
This is great to have. the data nerd in me has been looking forward to it since I knew it existed. :D
-
Its out. Got mine first ;)
Found a typo, I'll need you to generate a new version. ;D
-
Found a typo, I'll need you to generate a new version. ;D
Ah heck, one of the MUL team found a whole goof in factions. Yours truly tagged the MH column instead of the MC column.
We'll have an errata thread going shortly.
-
Somehow i am unable to find any P(AL) suits like the nighthawk or the aerie.
Is there a reason they were omitted?
Oh, and can't find the teppo from tro3085supp either
-
I just D/Led a copy.........going to eyeball it real good
-
Wow, some of these are pretty surprising. Lokis are IS General now? :o
-
Same with the Black Hawk (Nova)
Nearly every configuration of Black Hawk KU is available for the FS, save the Prime?
Badger C / Bandit C: not available for Clans?
But, yay! The v1 is very impressive! 208 pages of information. Kudos.
[notworthy]
-
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ya'll took out the year's of availability since the beta of the list was put out!!
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!
[tickedoff]
The age of war was FIVE HUNDRED years, you can't give that just an era if you ever want people to be able to play campaigns, ARGH.
Almost everything HAD years, why on earth would you want to remove that?!?!?!?
And why just restrict the data to the dark age and jihad, WHY?!?!?! What about unit tech ratings/availability, those would have been better suited to the Jihad/Dark Age columns, as lets face it EVERYBODY uses EVERYTHING in BT, everybody knows that (its obvious the companies that make stuff aren't limited by the faction the factory is in) so the columns are essentially worthless.
I'm crushed :(
Very nicely put together except all the missing stuff though, though all the extra graphics and large font means its far more pages than it needs to be.
I hate to be ungrateful, as I love the rate of new products being released, but dumbing them down really hurts the love of the game by the detail oriented such as myself.
-
And yet the Sea Foxes get no love?
-
Ya'll took out the year's of availability since the beta of the list was put out!!
snip
Almost everything HAD years, why on earth would you want to remove that?!?!?!?
This is the BV portion of the effort - as described in the blog, only a small portion of the complete effort. And it obviously is aimed at units that possess current RS.
-
Does the designation 'Merc-General' mean the the unit in question was generally for sale to non-specific nations? If so, Merc outfits have slim pickings even in the Dark Age era as far as battlesuit options go.
-
Not too awful far in yet but is this listing current (3085ish) production units and extinct units, but not superseded variants? Units like the Akuma and Argus have only single entries but multiple variants with record sheets.
For example the Aku-2XC Akuma is listed where the Aku-1X and Aku-1XJ are not
or the Ags-8DX Argus is listed but the Ags-2D and -4D are not
I see from the blog that further iterations are planned with different eras as a possibility. Looks like a very nice piece of work!
-
On factions - if I'm going to list one thing that's a work in progress about the MUL, it's faction access. Please take it with a grain of salt.
-
Whut? The Hegemony builds cyber commandos in DA but the MoC not anymore? Must be a typo.
But I like the c3i King Crab....... :D
-
...The Sphinx Standard having 'CGS' as its only availability is making me eye twitch like crazy.
-
Well...we have all the variants of the 8 original Protos, but the newer ones from Combat Equipment/TRO 3075 are strangely missing. ???
-
Not too awful far in yet but is this listing current (3085ish) production units and extinct units, but not superseded variants? Units like the Akuma and Argus have only single entries but multiple variants with record sheets.
For example the Aku-2XC Akuma is listed where the Aku-1X and Aku-1XJ are not
or the Ags-8DX Argus is listed but the Ags-2D and -4D are not
I see from the blog that further iterations are planned with different eras as a possibility. Looks like a very nice piece of work!
The MUL - BV List only lists units that have a "current" published records sheet. 3067 does not have a currently published record sheet product, so those units are not listed. The variants in RS3085u are listed because they have a record sheet.
somebody above mentioned PA(L)s, RS3075 doesn't have Battle Armor in it yet, so there's no published record sheets for those and they are not listed in the BV List either.
-
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think someone really needs to read the latest BattleBlog (http://www.classicbattletech.com/index.php?action=blog&blog=BattleBlog) to learn about the scope of this initial release and future plans.
-
Well sounds like another can of worms has been opened. Marketing people will be the death of a company yet.
-
And why just restrict the data to the dark age and jihad, WHY?!?!?! What about unit tech ratings/availability, those would have been better suited to the Jihad/Dark Age columns, as lets face it EVERYBODY uses EVERYTHING in BT, everybody knows that (its obvious the companies that make stuff aren't limited by the faction the factory is in) so the columns are essentially worthless.
If the faction isn't listed as having it available, then it has less than a half dozen or so max in the entire faction. Your personal games aside, that's the definition we used. If you want to have Akuma's in the Magistry of Canopus, that's your choice.
I'm really confused about tech ratings/availability, since in my experience, nobody uses those. You seem to be the opposite of my personal experiences with faction availability versus tech ratings/tech availability.
-
Gentlemen and Ladies,
You have done a outstanding job IMHO!
It may not have everything and the kitchen sink, but dang for a first offering it is impressive. All the data you had to pull together not to mention you probly drove more than a few people insane with all the crunching!
If I was rich I would buy you all a case of your favorite drink you've earned it forty times over with MUL.
-
Woha. In the errata the Hegemony lost a lot.
The COM-4H?! So TRO 3050u was another comstar error? ::)
The MAD-4H?! So TRO Phoenix lied as well?
Gosh.. wonder why I still buying those TROs.... should stay with record sheets as the fluff is off anyway... :D
But the pictures are pretty.... :P
-
Well sounds like another can of worms has been opened.
Nope, just a can of BV :)
-
It is out! It is finally out! Praise the founder! [notworthy] [notworthy] [notworthy] [notworthy] [notworthy] [notworthy] [notworthy]
[cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers] [cheers]
BTW, does Periphery General include Snow Ravens/Raven Alliance?
-
Pretty disappointing that designs that have been in the BT universe for a while (3067 designs) aren't included. Not to mention designs that are new to the universe, but don't have Record Sheets yet, for whatever reason. I find it pretty hard to believe that CGL doesn't have the information for these designs. They've been willing for this long to say "Make your own record sheets," what's really changed?
Its a good start, the info looks good (though I have to question why they have suberas as well), and I can't wait to see the final product.
-
This.
Is.
AWESOME.
-
If the faction isn't listed as having it available, then it has less than a half dozen or so max in the entire faction. Your personal games aside, that's the definition we used. If you want to have Akuma's in the Magistry of Canopus, that's your choice.
I'm really confused about tech ratings/availability, since in my experience, nobody uses those. You seem to be the opposite of my personal experiences with faction availability versus tech ratings/tech availability.
Count me among the anomalies.
-
Also, what does a blank mean in a era? That it never made it off the drawing board from the previous era? Little confusing to have a design with a Jihad era introduction date, but a Not Available for the Jihad era, and a Blank for the Republic era.
-
Count me among the anomalies.
May I ask how you use them?
-
Wow, it is fantastic to see this published. A serious thank you to all the people that worked on the project. After reading the blog the design weenie in me giddy with anticipation for a canon ongoing, evolving list of manufacturers and production facilities.
Cheers,
LCC
-
Thanks nckestrel for the clarification, much appreciated! I was confusing published record sheet with current record sheet. Spectacular job and keep it up!
-
I'm not sure if this is the place to help critique errors, but I noticed under availability there's a "CWX" but page 2 doesn't say what CWX means...
-
Likely Clan Wolf-in-Exile.
-
Likely Clan Wolf-in-Exile.
But that's supposed to be CWE. Not CWX.
-
But that's supposed to be CWE. Not CWX.
Aha. Right you are. I'm guessing it changed at some point, then.
-
May I ask how you use them?
Tech Rating and availability are tools for Game Masters to determine whether or not the players can do what they want to achieve, and how difficult it is. First, what is the tech rating of the player’s unit, their technicians, or those they can ‘appropriate’ from the local populace. If you’re on a world with a tech rating of A (primitive, 19th to early 20th centuries) you’re limited to whatever you brought with you. You’ll have some trouble finding tweezers and copper wiring, let alone diagnostic equipment.
If you’re in the Niops Association, you’d have a far easier task. Depending on what you want to do, there are modifiers, multipliers, and rolls. Found yourself a Clan ER Medium Laser and you want to retrofit your Phoenix Hawk to use it? It can be done in theory, and depending on the situation, we’ll determine whether or not they can accomplish it in their current situation. Found yourself a mountain of C-Bills and you want a Daishi, well, you do have the money to buy it, but can you find one for sale?
-
Ah, question. The only variant of the Templar in this list is the TLR1-OU. What happened to the rest?
Thumbing through it, I must say this is impressive. I haven't seen the likes of this since MechForce, which was obviously a much smaller list.
-
Ah, question. The only variant of the Templar in this list is the TLR1-OU. What happened to the rest?
Thumbing through it, I must say this is impressive. I haven't seen the likes of this since MechForce, which was obviously a much smaller list.
Templar is TR3067. There is no currently availabel RS3067. The U is from RS3085u ONN and therefore does have a currently available record sheet.
-
Very happy to see this. The Thor and Loki (in some though not all configurations) are Merc General eh? I know what my next mini order is gonna look like 8)
No doubt this pdf is going to ruffle some feathers but I'm very happy to see it.
A big thanks to all the folks who made this happen.
-
Tech Rating and availability are tools for Game Masters to determine whether or not the players can do what they want to achieve, and how difficult it is. First, what is the tech rating of the player’s unit, their technicians, or those they can ‘appropriate’ from the local populace. If you’re on a world with a tech rating of A (primitive, 19th to early 20th centuries) you’re limited to whatever you brought with you. You’ll have some trouble finding tweezers and copper wiring, let alone diagnostic equipment.
If you’re in the Niops Association, you’d have a far easier task. Depending on what you want to do, there are modifiers, multipliers, and rolls. Found yourself a Clan ER Medium Laser and you want to retrofit your Phoenix Hawk to use it? It can be done in theory, and depending on the situation, we’ll determine whether or not they can accomplish it in their current situation. Found yourself a mountain of C-Bills and you want a Daishi, well, you do have the money to buy it, but can you find one for sale?
If you're on a tech rating A world, then the list of tech ratings for BattleMechs is unnecessary. No BattleMechs are available.
All the individual equipment has listed tech ratings, you don't need another list for that.
So that just leaves full units. there's a few Cs, but almost entirely Ds and Es. While that may be useful, I personally don't find it worth the work to determine those for so little differentiation. Especially when who builds/purchases/salvages the unit is a FAR more differentiating factor. You're on a tech level E world, won't help you get an Akuma if you're not in the Draconis Combine.
-
The Gray Death Heavy has a entry in TRO 3085? I know it's in the RS3085 but I was not aware of it being in the TRO.
-
But that's supposed to be CWE.
Not since TechManual it's not.
-
Templar is TR3067. There is no currently availabel RS3067. The U is from RS3085u ONN and therefore does have a currently available record sheet.
Ah, gotcha. Thanks.
-
OK sorry if I missed this but I could not find a listing for the Nighthawk PA or the Legionnaire 2K were they left out for some reason or am I blind?
-
The MUL-BV only contains units that have an in-print available record sheet, so 3067 and some 3075 units are not included
-
If a Clan attacks some backwards little world, and a Mercenary Unit happens to be there, the Mercenary Unit does not have to have the same tech rating as the world. With their own JumpShip, DropShip, and technicians, they’ll be able to effect some repairs if need be. Also salvage. Whether or not they can buy a BattleMech doesn’t take into account the usefulness of a tech rating in that situation. In the case of an A tech rating, you are pretty much screwed no matter what you need, unless you need a meal, shower, or shave. You may have trouble with the shower however.
It entirely depends on the situation. There are times you need the tech rating on a piece of equipment, times you need the tech rating on the entire unit, and times you need the tech rating of the locals. Availability is another need.
In your example of a tech level E world, why wouldn’t you be able to acquire one in the Republic of the Sphere? In MUL 1.0, the AKU-2XC Akuma, the only Akuma listed, was not available in the Jihad, but in the Dark Age it is a Draconis and Republic design, since it was an experimental design in the Jihad. Now, if you were on an E level world, and were attacked by someone with an Akuma, you’ve had a decent chance of being able to salvage it, depending on the damage it had taken. If the Angel ECM Suite needed repair or replacement, as that is an F piece of equipment, which would be difficult.
Tech Rating and availability can be used or ignored at the player and game master discretion. I kind of like the feel of the old rules and old era, where there was emphasis placed on not being able to repair everything correctly, which these rules kind of bring back. I could easily see a situation where a house unit or some mercs salvaged the Akuma, but had to replace the Angel ECM with a Guardian ECM, they had the LB 10-X AC working, but were low on ammo, and may have the MRM 40, and ammo (wow!), but the Apollo FCS wasn’t working.
-
Thanks for the answers Guardsman. It doesn't work for me (single shot scenarios where I want to emphasize the flavor of the factions), but i think I understand your point now.
-
Not since TechManual it's not.
That's odd, because Page 2 of the MUL states that CWE = Clan Wolf (in Exile), and CWF = Clan Wolf.
Of course, the legend is the only place that CWE is used, so I guess that's a pretty big errata right there.
-
Woha. In the errata the Hegemony lost a lot.
The COM-4H?! So TRO 3050u was another comstar error? ::)
The MAD-4H?! So TRO Phoenix lied as well?
Gosh.. wonder why I still buying those TROs.... should stay with record sheets as the fluff is off anyway... :D
But the pictures are pretty.... :P
Caught that already. They are back on the MH list.
Also, what does a blank mean in a era? That it never made it off the drawing board from the previous era? Little confusing to have a design with a Jihad era introduction date, but a Not Available for the Jihad era, and a Blank for the Republic era.
Per the introduction on page 1:
This release of the product only list Dark Age availability for units that were introduced
or updated in Technical Readout 3085 and Technical Readout
3085 Supplemental.
To address the many comments about why something isn't on the list, even though they have been out a long time. As mentioned in the blog, verifying old units is a time consuming project and we want to make sure the BV is as accurate as possible. The faction list we expect to change as we get it "right". We don't want the BV changing if we can help it.
Best,
Joel BC
-
Thanks for the answers Guardsman. It doesn't work for me (single shot scenarios where I want to emphasize the flavor of the factions), but i think I understand your point now.
I like BattleTech for the augmented combat and for role-play. But I’ve had some of my favourite BattleTech experiences out of a ‘Mech, like when the group got it into their mind to try and infiltrate a ComStar base . . . it did not end well, but was really funny!
-
Good gravy this is amazing!
-
Caught that already. They are back on the MH list.
Thanks Welshman. Was close into losing faith into my books ;). It hurts to see the other units go- most were part of the Legions for a long time, as they were on the old MH's faction list. The ON-2M won me several MO scenarios :D.
Not sure if this is the place to discuss this- but the errata thread seems wrong as well.
So:
The Battlecorps Milspecs entry http://battlecorps.com/BC2/news.html?article=492 (http://battlecorps.com/BC2/news.html?article=492) concerning the Gladius II hints on the TC being a major user of this Vee. The MUL however lists it as MH only.
And one last thing:
Even if my favoured faction got it bad ( again, sadly) the MUL team deserves praise. Must have been a hell of a work. Good work, guys! Keep it up!
-
The faction availability is pretty worthless. It would be more worthwhile to know what factions actually produce those mechs.
I'd also like to second the request for introductory year. Listing the era is nice, but doesn't help at all. Remember, we are BATTLETECH players. Every campaign starts out like:
Starglass Beach, Emerald Ocean, New Avalon
Crucis March, Federated Suns
19 May 3049
Therefore... we want dates. C'mon battletech writers!
-
If you read the blog piece up on the main page, you would see this is the first in a line of products that will eventually cover that sort of thing.
Edit: Direct quote from the blog "Today we released the first product to use the MUL project data"
-
If you read the blog piece up on the main page, you would see this is the first in a line of products that will eventually cover that sort of thing.
Edit: Direct quote from the blog "Today we released the first product to use the MUL project data"
Whew!!!!
I'm sure glad the writers are just as much players/fans as I am
-
It hurts to see the other units go- most were part of the Legions for a long time, as they were on the old MH's faction list. The ON-2M won me several MO scenarios :D.
So:
The Battlecorps Milspecs entry http://battlecorps.com/BC2/news.html?article=492 (http://battlecorps.com/BC2/news.html?article=492) concerning the Gladius II hints on the TC being a major user of this Vee. The MUL however lists it as MH only.
Unfortunately we have found a number of errors with the fan faction list. It was a great product, but lacking internal developer information it did make some assumptions along the way. Some of these even became canon thanks to Catalyst's own use of that faction list as a resource.
That said, we fully expect the faction list section will be seeing changes. We reached a point where we had Battle Value well and truly locked down and were faced with a decisions of "Do we make sure the faction list is perfect, or do we get it to around 90% and publish." While we prefer to not issue massive erratas, we also wanted to finally deliver a product to the fans.
The MUL team is continuing to go over the faction list and you will see changes. Most of the errors for the really modern stuff is just my own fat fingers when I filled out the 3085 faction data. With older units, we are trying to align them with the factory data and known history to clean them up.
If you truly think there is an error, and you have supporting data, please post it in the errata thread. It will be reviewed. The Gladius example above is an excellent example of an errata to post there for our review.
The MUL teams work is never done...
-
And I, for one,
would like to welcome our new spreadsheet overlords salute the blunt-force trama required to get something like this done. [notworthy]
Well done, gentlemen . . .
-
Unfortunately we have found a number of errors with the fan faction list. It was a great product, but lacking internal developer information it did make some assumptions along the way. Some of these even became canon thanks to Catalyst's own use of that faction list as a resource.
That said, we fully expect the faction list section will be seeing changes. We reached a point where we had Battle Value well and truly locked down and were faced with a decisions of "Do we make sure the faction list is perfect, or do we get it to around 90% and publish." While we prefer to not issue massive erratas, we also wanted to finally deliver a product to the fans.
The MUL team is continuing to go over the faction list and you will see changes. Most of the errors for the really modern stuff is just my own fat fingers when I filled out the 3085 faction data. With older units, we are trying to align them with the factory data and known history to clean them up.
If you truly think there is an error, and you have supporting data, please post it in the errata thread. It will be reviewed. The Gladius example above is an excellent example of an errata to post there for our review.
The MUL teams work is never done...
Never done indeed...
I see the reason behind the decisions now, thanks for giving that glimpse behind the curtain.
I will repost the (potential) Gladius II errata to the thread then.
-
And I, for one, would like to welcome our new spreadsheet overlords salute the blunt-force trama required to get something like this done. [notworthy]
Well done, gentlemen . . .
I call it my own personal brain aneurysm (at least twice per week) :D
Whew!!!!
I'm sure glad the writers are just as much players/fans as I am
We have to be. Otherwise it would be really strange and annoying to do this kind of work ;)
-
I still use Combat Values, what about me? :D
*runs*
-
I want to give props to the whole MUL team! This is a very nice product and Look forward to more releases.
-
I still use Combat Values, what about me? :D
*runs*
2nd Oriente Hussars fan, eh? ;)
-
I still use Combat Values, what about me? :D
*runs*
I still have my original notes from when I wrote Combat Efficiency Factor for BattleTechnology and the original "Master List" we published in the magazine. Were it was as easy as it was back then. :)
-
I still have my original notes from when I wrote Combat Efficiency Factor for BattleTechnology and the original "Master List" we published in the magazine. Were it was as easy as it was back then. :)
How many pages did it have? ;D
-
I still have my original notes from when I wrote Combat Efficiency Factor for BattleTechnology and the original "Master List" we published in the magazine. Were it was as easy as it was back then. :)
Wait, what?! :o That was you, too?
<tries very hard not to regress into very basic geek form>
You and I will have to have words, sir. WORDS! I say! [whipit]
-
Someone may have asked this but, will a future version have the price/unit (Infantry price/squad) I was really hoping for prices as part of it.
-
Probably. They can only list so much on each page. This is the "Battle Values" installment. I wouldn't be surprised to see a "Cost" installment.
-
This list is simply wonderfull !!! Congratulation to the team who write it down cause it's not an easy task! [notworthy]
-
I think someone really needs to read the latest BattleBlog (http://www.classicbattletech.com/index.php?action=blog&blog=BattleBlog) to learn about the scope of this initial release and future plans.
Well I didn't know about it, so I read it, and it didn't say anything about actual years. It does say it may respark the Objective Raids, which sounds awesome, and perhaps it appears TPTB will be going towards a more hard dataset instead of an intentially vague one.
The vague data we have now, has been completely responsible for the following applications not being created:
#1. Vehicle Designer
#2. Mobile Structure designer
#3. Building designer
#4. Base designer (collections of buildings on a map)
#5. Support Vehicle designer of all types
#6. Warship/Dropship/Jumpship/Space Station Designer
#7. Aerospace/Fighter Designers
#8. A strategic game that allows one to be a faction, and fight for control of the inner sphere
#9. Dynamic and animated maps of invasions, battles, civil wars, exodus exploration, etc
#10. A dynamic, navigatable, jump route plottable, map of the inner sphere (and clan homeworlds)
#11. Dynamic production maps of units, showing where all parts are made and the unit assembled
#12. Dynamic random unit tables, creating historical percentage of units for any year, from 2500 to 3100
#13. A dynamic TOE for units, showing the little boxes and chain of command lines for units
and others...
I know this, as each one of those projects I have tried very hard to do, but my inability to "fill in the blanks", as well as people who refuse to accept non-canon, have kept me from finishing any one of those, yet much of the design work has been done and I've spent hundreds, if not thousands of hours working on all of them together.
In fact, I'm even blowing thousands out of my own pocket (http://www.freelancer.com/projects/Visual-Basic-NET/Planetary-Mapping-System.html (http://www.freelancer.com/projects/Visual-Basic-NET/Planetary-Mapping-System.html)) to get the algorythms coded to randomly generate worlds with maps accurate to 10m (I won't go into details on how I keep the data managable). This would allow me to map every single system in the inner sphere, and fit on a blu-ray, with far more data on each planet than explorer corps gives. I'm thinking of just trying to create my own somewhat parallel universe as there is just so much missing from BT in regards to details that are *absolutely* required for any computer adaptation.
-
The vague data we have now, has been completely responsible for the following applications not being created:
#1. Vehicle Designer
#2. Mobile Structure designer
#3. Building designer
#4. Base designer (collections of buildings on a map)
#5. Support Vehicle designer of all types
#6. Warship/Dropship/Jumpship/Space Station Designer
#7. Aerospace/Fighter Designers
Worry not, you can find that data here (http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=27_35_73&products_id=1875) or here (http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=27_35_73&products_id=2122).
-
Worry not, you can find that data here (http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=27_35_73&products_id=1875) or here (http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=27_35_73&products_id=2122).
Sorry, a COMPUTER version of the Total Warfare, Tactical Operations, Strategic Operations, and hopefully someday Interstellar Operations rules.
I didn't mention A Time of War, as I was thinking of a character generator, but don't think any data would be missing for it :)
-
Sorry, a COMPUTER version of the Total Warfare, Tactical Operations, Strategic Operations, and hopefully someday Interstellar Operations rules.
The links I provided included a pdf as well.
-
Wow Berith's ride is Unique in Dark Age, a foreshadowing I think?
Also where's my other Akuma variants?! :( Disregard I didn't read fully. I sit ashamed :-[
-
Also where's my other Akuma variants?! :(
Psst...already covered back here. (http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,3435.msg79635.html#msg79635)
-
Yeah already updated the post before you replied.
I should have uninstalled Trillian right then and there. But no, silly me I said "We'd need to add some resources, but I think it can be done."
Wow you just reminded me of last week with my boss.
-
Sorry, a COMPUTER version of the Total Warfare, Tactical Operations, Strategic Operations, and hopefully someday Interstellar Operations rules.
Commercially licensed computer programs would have to go through the electronic rights holder (Microsoft) for approval. I just seems nobody has the combination of drive and time to write one ala SSW.
-
So RasDom and the Republic have access to some Protomechs, this will make my table more interesting. Thanks MUL team for the first steps to a grand legacy.
-
Is it greedy of me to wish that this was done in MS-Access so I could filter it to my heart's content?
Last thing though...
OUTSTANDING JOB FOLKS!!!!
[cheers]
-
Commercially licensed computer programs would have to go through the electronic rights holder (Microsoft) for approval. I just seems nobody has the combination of drive and time to write one ala SSW.
I have the time, the drive, and the expertise, but not the resources (like somebody to IM with questions for the designers especially, they didn't have computer designers in mind when they wrote it, and computers can't assume/guess very well). And I wasn't trying to commercially license them, just like SSW, I was going to make them, not asking for any money, to provide them for free, and if MS wants to sue me, well, I welcome the publicity and can easily make these programs "skinnable" so I release a 100% nothing like BT version, you toss on a new skin/mod/etc, and its 100% like BT, just to protect myself if that was a serious issue.
I did write an infantry platoon editor, though I'm not real happy with the interface and it probably has a bug or two, it does work is more than anything else I've ever seen.
The links I provided included a pdf as well.
I hope that was sarcasm :)
-
Awesome job! Glad it has finally arrived.
Now to the required complaint( ;) ;D ) :
No LAM's?(I wish they were there but understand why they are not)
Unique should be defined with"less than 5 in existence" as at least one of the listed unique units started with 5 and had 3 destroyed for various reasons leaving 2 which is not unique.
-
I hope that was sarcasm :)
No, a .pdf is the computer version of a book.
Unless you meant something else, then you should probably explain what you are talking about. The construction rules are all there, no 'hidden information' that has anything to do with the MUL that would help with a unit construction program.
-
Greetings,
I would like to clear up a little confusion on the definition of faction access. Honestly I am ashamed I didn't think to put this definition into the product and we will likely rectify that in a future update. A previous post referenced some guidelines, but this answer was a 'from the trenches' perspective. Each of the MUL team had to build their own set of "logic" to use as they plowed through the work.
Q- What does it mean for a faction to be listed as having access to a given design?
A- The faction has a measurable number of the design in relation to their total military size. Measurable is loosely defined as more than a "handful." A single Mackie, in the honor guard of the faction's premiere regiment, does not indicate that faction has access to the Mackie. Having one or more Hollanders in the majority of a factions front line units would be a qualification for faction access.
Faction access does not indicate any total numbers, the dirt common Valkyrie having the same check mark as the relatively uncommon Jenner JR7-C on the FedSuns faction access. It is ultimately up to the players, and if present, the gamemaster to decide how many of any one kind of unit is reasonable for game play.
Q- What defines a "Unique"?
A- We are still coming to a firm decision on this. The easy ones are the truly unique units. There is only one Prometheus (Victor's personal Daishi) and only one Eryines (The Word's "planet killer" Newgrange refit). The introduction of the XTRO series created a new category of units, where we showcased prototype units or limited run units. Again, there are no specific numbers, but a Unique unit will typically be only a "handful" of units. Few enough to keep track of and talk about by name (Yeah X-5 has a bad actuator right now, gonna need to bring it down for rebuild). If you see an XTRO unit listed as a Unique, then there are only a "handful", if you see it listed as faction access, then it fell in the "limited production run" category. Either way, XTRO units are not something you would ever see in "volume."
Thank you,
Joel BC
-
No, a .pdf is the computer version of a book.
Unless you meant something else, then you should probably explain what you are talking about. The construction rules are all there, no 'hidden information' that has anything to do with the MUL that would help with a unit construction program.
I meant a computer program to use the TW/TO/SO rules to build those units, much like heavymetalpro. There are many rules that simply haven't had every conceivable combination taken into account, which is completely understandable, but if I have to wait a week or month for each answer, it pretty much makes it impossible to write code before mechs are actually walking outside my window.
But as you said that doesn't really have a *lot* to do with the MUL, but the years for equipment was in all the TW books, we know when everything was put into production, when/if it went extinct, and when/if it was reintroduced. If I built a mech I can determine the earliest available dates for it, but the MUL no longer has those actual years, so if I'm playing a campaign I could end up introducing mechs hundreds of years before they were actually *possible* to build, so playing out any campaign along historical timeframes can be seriously problematic.
So the MUL can potentially, since those years are no longer in there, lead to campaign issues or just occasional confusion. It would have been just as easy to just have a year of availability, since there is a year to era table in the front, and the beta list had many of the years already.
I'm sure I'm the only disgruntled fan about that though, so it isn't like what I say is widely accepted by the BT community.
-
I'm sure I'm the only disgruntled fan about that though, so it isn't like what I say is widely accepted by the BT community.
Everyone's entitled to their opinion, as long as they understand so is everyone else entitled to their opinions. Being BT fans, one can usually find seven (mutually contradictory) opinions in any group of 3 or 4 players ...
W.
-
I just want to say thank you to all the people that worked on this and thank you to Catylst for giving away free one of the most useful battletech products I can think of.
-
Hello,
The years of introduction were put into the beta to test them out. For various reasons, we chose not to put them into this product release. We apologize for any confusion any fan may have had. Catalyst thought it was clear that the beta in no way promised any specific features or functions in a final shipping product.
Again, our apologies for any inconvenience this confusion may have caused.
Joel BC
-
Perhaps a full refund for all those unhappy with the MUL?
;)
-
Hello,
[snip]
Again, our apologies for any inconvenience this confusion may have caused.
Joel BC
Read: It the free Beta, dude. Chill.
-
Perhaps a full refund for all those unhappy with the MUL?
That seems fair, for everyone who feels they didn't get their money's worth. ;)
-
Im sure its one of the best products for the price.
I cant wait for the download to finish!
-
Have the Ghost Bears started a Pilot breeding operation to use their Rocs or are they recruiting tiny Rasalhaguians for the job?
-
Have the Ghost Bears started a Pilot breeding operation to use their Rocs or are they recruiting tiny Rasalhaguians for the job?
I'm betting it was supposed to say "RS" instead of "RD"
"D" being next to "S" these things can happen.
-
I would like to say Thanks to all the people who worked on this. I like the layout and will be using it. AND it is free. Great Job guys!!!
-
Have the Ghost Bears started a Pilot breeding operation to use their Rocs or are they recruiting tiny Rasalhaguians for the job?
I figure they tell little Rasalhaguian kids its one big video game and let them go.
-
That is the second best use for small children I have ever heard of!
The best is the Light Leperpult.
-
I still have my original notes from when I wrote Combat Efficiency Factor for BattleTechnology and the original "Master List" we published in the magazine. Were it was as easy as it was back then. :)
I've always loved the CEF system, and found it vastly superior to the ridiculous Mechforce Combat Value, and much more accurate and less seizure-inducing to calculate than Battle Value. Perhaps you should update it, and chuck BV!
-
I'm betting it was supposed to say "RS" instead of "RD"
"D" being next to "S" these things can happen.
Ah, I see. That might explain the Capellan exclusive Raiden too.
-
I'm impressed with the amount of data in the MUL. Much Kudos to the team that put it together. Heck you're probably still working on it now.
-
This. Is. Great.
I have only one point I'd like to make, though I'm sure it's already been addressed...
Why were none of the vehicles from TRO Vehicle Annex included, save for the industrialmechs?
Say what you want, I think those Buffalo transports would be fun to have in an objective-based game.
-
I tried to copy/paste the data with adobe reader to excel, so I could look for particular units (say a unit closest to 1500 BV, without going over, available in Age of War, etc) but it just copies it as text and its unusable.
It would be very helpful to have something more than just searching for a particular string.
Any way we could get an excel version to help do some sorting and comparisons? Surely ya'll just ported it from excel to PDF anyway :)
Thanks
-
I have to say, it is really weird seeing Clan mechs listed as IS general...
-
This. Is. Great.
I have only one point I'd like to make, though I'm sure it's already been addressed...
Why were none of the vehicles from TRO Vehicle Annex included, save for the industrialmechs?
Say what you want, I think those Buffalo transports would be fun to have in an objective-based game.
We have not updated TRO:VA or release record sheets for it. Once Total Warfare era record sheets are released, they will be added to the BV list.
-
I have to say, it is really weird seeing Clan mechs listed as IS general...
Except, oddly enough, the Mad Cat. Since it shows up in nearly ever single fan made merc unit, almost every merc unit featured in the novels, and every computer games has the most House units filled with them, it's kinda odd seeing it not on the IS General list. Even the Daishi and Masakari made the IS general lists.
-
Obviously with that kind of distribution, the damn things get blown to pieces every time someone sees one. (Even worse I seem to have a Mad Cat in my own merc unit, but it's more of a "Hrm... how can we get it to some very nice, very rich factory?")
I like the MUL so far, but I'll reserved judgment until I can see years. For I require more useless trivia, and introduction dates fill that void quite cleanly!
-
Yo you guys missed the Morrigu Fire Support Tank and its Laser Variant!!
-
Yo you guys missed the Morrigu Fire Support Tank and its Laser Variant!!
Hello,
Master Unit List: Battle Values only list units that have a published Total Warfare Record Sheet. The Morrigu is in TRO:3067 and this TRO has not been updated and had an unabridged RS released.
Once that happens, it will be queued up for inclusion in the Battle Values list.
Thank you,
Joel BC
-
Hello,
Master Unit List: Battle Values only list units that have a published Total Warfare Record Sheet. The Morrigu is in TRO:3067 and this TRO has not been updated and had an unabridged RS released.
Once that happens, it will be queued up for inclusion in the Battle Values list.
Ah, I see. I thought it included all published units to date (didn't read the preface). My mistake.
Cheers
-
Anyone else find it odd that the (Wolf) variant of the Archer isn't a Unique `Mech, but one that's apparently present in "More than a handful" quantity in the Dragoons, Kell Hounds and WiE?
-
Anyone else find it odd that the (Wolf) variant of the Archer isn't a Unique `Mech, but one that's apparently present in "More than a handful" quantity in the Dragoons, Kell Hounds and WiE?
Well...it works? And the Dragoons, Kell Hounds, and Exiles are not ones to sit on something if it works..Heck,
the fact that it has faction availability means that it is in production...I am sure Dragoons and Kell Hounds would
love the thing, and the Exiles would make good use of it for their Second Line troops..
-
I like this book, its not everything that has a BV but probaly has 90% of it.
-
am I the only one who wishes they'd included CBILL COST?!
Problem with Battletech is the Devs seem to forget that there is an RPG attached.
-
Sweet zombified deity of your choice. IT'S THE FIRST RELEASE. A beta more or less, mainly to get the material out so fans can see the end result. That it doesn't have costs is nitpicking when the product focuses on what faction has certain machines. No one is holding a gun to your head and making you download the MUL as it is now.
-
Sweet zombified deity of your choice. IT'S THE FIRST RELEASE. A beta more or less, mainly to get the material out so fans can see the end result. That it doesn't have costs is nitpicking when the product focuses on what faction has certain machines. No one is holding a gun to your head and making you download the MUL as it is now.
I thought it was focusing on: Battle Values, and the factional stuff was just a little extra they threw in..
-
I thought it was focusing on: Battle Values, and the factional stuff was just a little extra they threw in..
Fine fine it has BV too. But no Irish! :P
-
Oh..and I LOVE Sulla's post on the availability of the MUL: BV (v1.00)
He summed up one of the things that makes Battletech unique anymore: we like our tables!
-
Nice work. And a lot cheaper than I expected. thank you to all those who worked on this.
I thought I saw some missing stuff (All CMBAs except Rache for example) but that appears covered.
First installment. I'm guessing later volumes will include other eras, and missing units, possibly the intro dates and costs, or the like. Any other possible stuff MUL might be used for that TPTB would like to tantalize us with?
-
A few random musings:
1. I find it INCREDIBLY OMINOUS that most of the WoB and Homeworld Clan stuff isn't EXTINCT in the Republic era, but it's also not available to any of the main factions.
2. At first I was a little mystified as to why only the Turkina B was Clan General. Then I thought about it and realized that if your Clan only has a limited supply of Turkinas, you're definitely gonna want the scariest version possible.
3. The Republic of the Sphere gets everything.
4. EVERYTHING. Ironholds, even.
5. What is a Flamberge (standard), and why does it have the same BV as the Flamberge 2? It seems like two names for one 'mech, but it only needs one name.
6. Coral Intent should be all caps. Incidentally, I nominate CORAL INTENT for coolest variant name ever, just ahead of Temax Cat NinjaBolt,
-
And what's the difference between "Merc General" and "ME" which means "Mercenary, non-specific?" And why not some fancy acronym for "IS General" (Such as ISG), instead of taking up all that space? Same for Periphery General and Clan General I'd assume.
-
A few random musings:
1. I find it INCREDIBLY OMINOUS that most of the WoB and Homeworld Clan stuff isn't EXTINCT in the Republic era, but it's also not available to any of the main factions.
3. The Republic of the Sphere gets everything.
Yeah 1 I noticed as well no Extinct sign at all
3 well it was made up of all the factions so makes sense to have a bit of everything
-
Thank you for an awesome FREE product. It's unbelievable how much information is in this FREE list. I can't believe you guys did so much work and gave it away for FREE!
Thank you again!!!
-
Sweet zombified deity of your choice. IT'S THE FIRST RELEASE. A beta more or less, mainly to get the material out so fans can see the end result. That it doesn't have costs is nitpicking when the product focuses on what faction has certain machines. No one is holding a gun to your head and making you download the MUL as it is now.
AND I might add it's free, you get what you pay for.
-
Seeing the complete MUL brought a tear to my eye. Thanks.
-
You know guys, there IS an errata thread out there already. Rather then mention possible errors here, it'd probably be more productive to mention it there (http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,3479.0.html).
Hello,
Master Unit List: Battle Values only list units that have a published Total Warfare Record Sheet. The Morrigu is in TRO:3067 and this TRO has not been updated and had an unabridged RS released.
Once that happens, it will be queued up for inclusion in the Battle Values list.
I wonder if they're tired of repeating this, in slight variations, yet.
-
I still use Combat Values, what about me? :D
*runs*
<Dispatches the Fanny-Spank Cat-Girl Unit to Lootbag's coordinates>
-
1. I find it INCREDIBLY OMINOUS that most of the WoB and Homeworld Clan stuff isn't EXTINCT in the Republic era, but it's also not available to any of the main factions.
Hello,
This was addressed in the product introduction, on page 1:
This release of the product only list Dark Age availability for units that were introduced
or updated in Technical Readout 3085 and Technical Readout 3085 Supplemental.
A future release will include full DA availability. For now, if you see a blank in the DA, mentally insert a "?".
Apologies for any confusion this may have caused.
Best,
Joel BC
-
<Dispatches the Fanny-Spank Cat-Girl Unit to Lootbag's coordinates>
So do I get one of those too? Not that I'm much of a fan of neko, but hey, a bunch of women sauntering into my house looking to do things with/to me is not a bad thing :D
-
So, anyone figure out which 'Mech has the most variants yet?
-
So, anyone figure out which 'Mech has the most variants yet?
The Rifleman did manage to mix a lot of variants with a lucky layout and get a whole page to itself.
-
The Marauder's got two pages I think, or close to it, once you factor in all the various things named Marauder.
-
The Rifleman did manage to mix a lot of variants with a lucky layout and get a whole page to itself.
if you count IICs, and it still falls short of the warhammers 21 variants, 30 counting the Warhammer IIC
the Marauder has 23 configurations, 35 if you count the Marauder II, and a whopping 43 if you count IIC
I did notice an error, TRO 3085 Supplimental mentionmed that Ymir's were being built for the DCMS during the jihad (along with Ostwars) by Osaka, a minor Military contractor. during the jihad should not some Ymir variant read DC under users
-
I love the way that every question I had about this release has been asked in this thread, and in a much more hostile or confrontational way than even I could have done. Bravo, gents! [applause]
And a big well done to all those who put the effort into making this product. As an obsessive list maker myself, I understand how difficult such a thing must have been. Looking forward to the future shards of the MUL. O0
-
How come if there's a Marauder II for the Marauder, that there isn't a Warhammer II for the Warhammer?? ???
-
I didn't mention this earlier because I hadn't really had time to think about it, but I feel like I should.
The attention to detail from the developers and the depth of the universe that allowed this product to exist is pretty much the single biggest reason I love this game. I know I will probably never have a specific use for the vast majority of this data, but some day I'm going to be sitting around thinking "Hrmm.... I wonder whether <faction> could be expected to field any <unit> in <era>," and now I'll be able to find that information quickly and easily.
Bravo Catalyst and the entire MUL team. Well done.
-
How come if there's a Marauder II for the Marauder, that there isn't a Warhammer II for the Warhammer?? ???
Because the Dragoons didn't like Warhammers as much? Same reason there isn't a Swift Wind II, I guess.
-
Because the Dragoons didn't like Warhammers as much? Same reason there isn't a Swift Wind II, I guess.
Hmmm, Swift Wind II....
-
It needs to be done, I tell you. Unarmed scout cars can also benefit from growing to 100 tons and gaining jump jets!
-
It needs to be done, I tell you. Unarmed scout cars can also benefit from growing to 100 tons and gaining jump jets!
Yes, but then someone will complain it has single heat sinks.
-
That can easily be fixed by using a heavy 'mech with IJJs and a XXL engine to pack as many fluid guns as possible, to keep it cool.
-
Yes, but then someone will complain it has single heat sinks.
Until the Bounty Hunter decides he needs one.
-
Until the Bounty Hunter decides he needs one.
Where does he get those wonderful toys?
-
Where does he get those wonderful toys?
Nice homage to Jack.
-
Awesome product! [notworthy]
But I have one little question.
What sources in the source list does MWC and SBW&B stand for?
-
SBW&B= Starter Book: Wolf & Blake
MWC= Mechwarrior Companion?
-
Real good news!
-
I've been looking over this 1st release from the whole MUL project, and I'm really loving it! Thanks for the data, it's a big help to have and obviously was a tough nut to crack. I'm also amazed at the wizardry to keep the file size so small when there's so many pages included. Well done!
I would like to add another vote to the "released as an Excel file" camp, be it this release or even some later version culled from the MUL, so that it would be possible to adjust the list per tonnage, BV, faction, etc, as needed. Not that I like Excel or anything... ::)
-
OK, dumb faction availability questions: Some units are listed as "IS General" and "Merc General" others are only "IS General" also some are "ME" for merc, nonspecific. OK, so if a unit is IS General then it may not be available to mercs? In particular is the Hellstar (IS General) versus the Thor (standard) (IS General and Merc General). So would such an entry imply that while the successor states may have access to the Hellstar mercs do not? That's my take anyway. Also what's the difference between "ME" and Merc General?
This is probably just me proving my own stupidity but I'm honestly confused here :-[
-
Good job guys!
-
Greetings,
Merc General vs ME:
This is the same thing. ME is the heading used for General Merc availability. We also have a column for the Dragoons and the Hounds. I believe the the way our system worked, if all three were checked for faction access, it generated the Merc General heading instead of the ME heading.
We will work to correct that in the future.
Thank you,
Joel
-
I didn't think this book would be almost 200 pages, for free. It would be nice to see something like that in a print form.
-
I didn't think this book would be almost 200 pages, for free. It would be nice to see something like that in a print form.
Are you willing to buy it each and every time it is updated every couple of months? This is a product that makes absolutely 0 sense to print due to it being a living breathing (and expectedly updated often) document.
-
[notworthy] to the MUL team!
I have a question though: Can the MoC take units from the Inner Sphere general and Merc general listing?
-
Thanks Welshman that clears up some confusion.
Would IS General include mercs? I ask because it shows up alongside Merc General in some cases, leading me to believe that the two do not overlap.
Many apologies for the questions and thank you for being so patient with us.
-
Hello,
We are sorting out some confusion on Mercs, I may have an update.
Periphery Factions do not have access to IS General or Merc General.
IS Factions cannot access Periphery General or Merc General
IS Clan is a new "general faction" that represents all the Clans in the Inner Sphere. It cannot access IS General, Merc General or Periphery General (CSR and OA are still in their own lists, so CSR does not have Periphery General access yet.).
Best,
Joel BC
-
I have a question. I know this was a massive project that took years to accomplish. Please do not don't take this as comment of being ungrateful.
Why were some of the FedCom Civil War era 'Mechs dropped from it? Early Jihad used those 'Mechs, since Dawn of the Jihad/JHS:3070/Blake Ascending books uses many those 'Mechs using the rolling tables. Those books use BV1, having MUL least be able pick BV2 would be highly useful.
My group finally finishing up DotJ, the tracks/warchest system usually draws from 'Mechs from FM:U. I know some of them are listed, but not all of them.
-
I have a question. I know this was a massive project that took years to accomplish. Please do not don't take this as comment of being ungrateful.
Why were some of the FedCom Civil War era 'Mechs dropped from it? Early Jihad used those 'Mechs, since Dawn of the Jihad/JHS:3070/Blake Ascending books uses many those 'Mechs using the rolling tables. Those books use BV1, having MUL least be able pick BV2 would be highly useful.
My group finally finishing up DotJ, the tracks/warchest system usually draws from 'Mechs from FM:U. I know some of them are listed, but not all of them.
Probably for the same reason as the Morrigu not being listed:
Hello,
Master Unit List: Battle Values only list units that have a published Total Warfare Record Sheet. The Morrigu is in TRO:3067 and this TRO has not been updated and had an unabridged RS released.
Once that happens, it will be queued up for inclusion in the Battle Values list.
Thank you,
Joel BC
-
Okay, thank you.
-
[rockon] [notworthy]
-
I have to say, this is going to become an invaluable tool in helping new players pick mechs if they decide they want to collect and paint up a faction based army.
-
Indeed. Once most of the initial errata has been incorporated, I plan to copy this to Excel, with a separate page for each faction(and maybe era as future sheets come out), allowing me to quickly see what is the complete faction list for any given faction.
-
A few random musings:
2. At first I was a little mystified as to why only the Turkina B was Clan General. Then I thought about it and realized that if your Clan only has a limited supply of Turkinas, you're definitely gonna want the scariest version possible.
I sort of think listing who gets what version of an Omni mech sort of forgets the whole point of what an Omni mech is. Unless the version has faction specific tech. After all anyone with a Dashi and the amni pods can make Victors omni mech. Plug and kill is the whole point of omni's
-
Question: The primitive & Age of War designs that were listed in the MUL. Weren't they available during the Jihad, since some aspects of the Inner Sphere were using the New Dallas Hegmony Memory Core and started producing them? I was little surprised many of them were Exinct in the Jihad and Dark Age.
-
OmniMechs are easy to configure, but some factions don’t necessarily make the pods for certain configurations. It’ not as though you can plug a right arm with a gauss rifle into the left socket of an OmniMech. So some being faction specific, whether or not it includes special equipment, would make sense. Most OmniMechs should be Clan General, but a few would make sense. Also, regular BattleMechs are relatively easy to modify if you have the right equipment and technicians. The advantage of OmniMechs is that you can reconfigure them, assuming you had the pods, easier than you could a regular ‘Mech. It’s not much more involved than re-loading ammunition. You can also repair them easier, since they’re modular.
-
OmniMechs are easy to configure, but some factions don’t necessarily make the pods for certain configurations. It’ not as though you can plug a right arm with a gauss rifle into the left socket of an OmniMech. So some being faction specific, whether or not it includes special equipment, would make sense. Most OmniMechs should be Clan General, but a few would make sense. Also, regular BattleMechs are relatively easy to modify if you have the right equipment and technicians. The advantage of OmniMechs is that you can reconfigure them, assuming you had the pods, easier than you could a regular ‘Mech. It’s not much more involved than re-loading ammunition. You can also repair them easier, since they’re modular.
Well no dont' plug a right arm with a gauss rifle into the left socket of an omni mech. But you can take that gauss rifle out and plug it straight in to the left arm or left torso. Of into another mech that normally doesn't carry a gauss rifle,
In reality the only way a faction would not have access to a omni variant is if the don't have the mech or there is faction specific equipment. Now that is not to say that a faction may not ever use a varient but other than the reason listed above there is no reason they can't.
I also agree that a regular mech is easy to modify....But not as plug and kill as an omni mech.
-
Indeed. Once most of the initial errata has been incorporated, I plan to copy this to Excel, with a separate page for each faction(and maybe era as future sheets come out), allowing me to quickly see what is the complete faction list for any given faction.
Good luck with that, the way its formatted adobe reader at least copied it as lines of text, unformatted, so you'd basically have to re-enter everything and go through 8000 lines one at a time....
Seems much nicer to just release the excel file it was created from as well :)
Honestly though, this would have made a great wikipedia sorta thing, all online (but downloadable). That would have allowed it to be kept 100% updated all the time, allow easier queries and such, hyperlinks, and all sorts of neato features a pdf can't provide.
-
Hello,
We are sorting out some confusion on Mercs, I may have an update.
Periphery Factions do not have access to IS General or Merc General.
IS Factions cannot access Periphery General or Merc General
IS Clan is a new "general faction" that represents all the Clans in the Inner Sphere. It cannot access IS General, Merc General or Periphery General (CSR and OA are still in their own lists, so CSR does not have Periphery General access yet.).
Best,
Joel BC
I don't get why the others wouldn't be able to access merc general as that's pretty much "Show me the money!"
I'd also like to voice a complaint about the lack of prices for the units in Btech products once more...
-
Honestly though, this would have made a great wikipedia sorta thing, all online (but downloadable). That would have allowed it to be kept 100% updated all the time, allow easier queries and such, hyperlinks, and all sorts of neato features a pdf can't provide.
I'm not sure why there is continued past tense usage in regards to this. This was stated several times as not being the only product out of the overall MUL. It was also stated that future plans for the MUL were going to be looked at. There's nothing stopping what you're suggesting from happening...it's just not happening with this specific release of a portion of the full MUL. It certainly could be done that way in the future (though that doesn't guarantee that it is).
-
Seems much nicer to just release the excel file it was created from as well :)
Honestly though, this would have made a great wikipedia sorta thing, all online (but downloadable). That would have allowed it to be kept 100% updated all the time, allow easier queries and such, hyperlinks, and all sorts of neato features a pdf can't provide.
It makes me shiver that this was done in Excel at all. I can understand starting it there, but this is exactly the kind of thing databases were designed for... It would have been then been able to tie it into a web based front end for queries too.
That being said, it's awesome that it was done at all :)
-
It makes me shiver that this was done in Excel at all. I can understand starting it there, but this is exactly the kind of thing databases were designed for... It would have been then been able to tie it into a web based front end for queries too.
Obviously you are far more technical than the average American, by even knowing what a database is, while I agree with you completely, I know that most people don't have very much technical abilities. While *I*, and maybe you, could design and create a database like that in meer minutes in MSSQL/MySQL or whatever, the management of that is far beyond I'm betting most of the writers at CGL, not to mention the hardware/softare costs. I'm happy they don't spend the money hiring overpriced engineers such as myself who's technical expertise adds little to their creative content.
Just about everybody can figure out excel tho, and lets face it, this is only a couple thousand rows with only a few columns, its not too excessive, plus you can have formulas for each cell far easier than with sql queries ;)
-
I'd also like to voice a complaint about the lack of prices for the units in Btech products once more...
Hello,
Your complaint has been heard. Unfortunately at this time, costs are not possible to be easily generated for most of the combat units. Catalyst chose to focus first on Battle Value and BattleForce statistics.
We hope to release cost in a future release, once we have the ability to easily and reliably generate those costs for the majority of the 5000+ units/variants that exist.
Thank you,
Joel BC
-
I was just looking for a couple of mechs in the list and there were a few missing - any version of the Mad Cat after the original ie MK2 mad cat 3 etc. I also noticed that the Ninja DC mechs aren't listed either.
-
A great product.
Why is the errata thread locked?
-
Probaly got tired of people post missing units that don't have current record sheets
-
We hope to release cost in a future release, once we have the ability to easily and reliably generate those costs for the majority of the 5000+ units/variants that exist.
I had excel spreadsheets a while back that did costs/BVs for everything in an instant, 1 unit per row, though I had a lot of various questions on equipment and stuff... I sent it to somebody up ther... I didn't have the warship/fighter/sv parts done, but those were pretty easy. Oh well... someday :)
-
A great product.
Why is the errata thread locked?
We were making a new one, with errata posting rules.
Thank you,
Joel BC
-
I don't get why the others wouldn't be able to access merc general as that's pretty much "Show me the money!"
I figure that's more a case of what a faction actually has\buys than what it can have\buy (I think the list is based on units fielded rather than access). That two bit ruler may not be willing to shell out the c-bills for certain mechs even though they're available. Also it gives mercs some degree of character as they will have combinations of equipment that others won't. Just my two cents.
-
I figure that's more a case of what a faction actually has\buys than what it can have\buy (I think the list is based on units fielded rather than access). That two bit ruler may not be willing to shell out the c-bills for certain mechs even though they're available. Also it gives mercs some degree of character as they will have combinations of equipment that others won't. Just my two cents.
That's also how I figure it.
It also makes sense for omnis. Sure several clans might have the same omnimehcs and thus are able to field all of the variants of it, but maybe some of those clans never bother to field variant A; maybe they prefer variant E in the same situations.
-
Probaly got tired of people post missing units that don't have current record sheets
Seriously. how hard is it to read the thread and see that the TRO:3067 mechs aren't included becuase CGL haven't released Record Sheets for them before asking again?
-
Seriously. how hard is it to read the thread and see that the TRO:3067 mechs aren't included becuase CGL haven't released Record Sheets for them before asking again?
Isn’t that the Steiner principle? Some view a Wasp as a light ‘Mech, but Steiner’s view it as an XXXL ‘Mech. I could have said that some view a Zeus as an assault ‘Mech, but Steiner’s view it as a light ‘Mech, but that wouldn’t have been as much fun.
-
I'd also like to voice a complaint about the lack of prices for the units in Btech products once more...
Are you even reading the responses in this thread?
-
Are you even reading the responses in this thread?
Has that ever stopped anyone on these forums? ;)
-
Has that ever stopped anyone on these forums? ;)
Nope, and it's often the reason why I don't bother to post on most threads on these forums anymore.
A few nice surprises in this list. The Capellan Confederation gets a King Crab refit! At least for a few years.
-
Wow, for a FREE product that took more than a year's work from a group of VOLUNTEERS there sure is a lot of complaining. A FREE 200 page product is a reason to celebrate, not whine about what was not included, especially when it has been explained multiple times that this FREE product is the first in a line of them. Though, if people aren't happy with the quality of this FREE product I am sure that the people involved can find something else to do than provide an incredible data book for FREE.
-
[applause]
-
I say kudos to all the volunteers for all their hard work and also double kudos to Catalyst for realizing what an untapped resource they had with the MM crowd and other rabid fans of CBT.
I was about to post in the errata thread about the lack of WOB Demon BA but then I noticed the rule about "if it doesn't have a record sheet yet, it's not in the MUL". That struck me as terribly odd. We already have stats for these units, we have their BV, so why weren't they included?
Not having a record sheet seems like an odd criteria for exclusion, eventually everything is going to have a record sheet, so why hold it back until it does?
We fans have Heavy Metal Pro, so we can make our own record sheets (even if we have to jimmy in custom weapons or equipment), or we can just do them up by hand, so it's not like these units are in a sealed vaccum playwise until released in an RS book, in home games or on Mega Mek.
I understand the desire to get this product out to us, but we've been waiting for it for literally years (as was stated in the blog) so if it was pushed out minus these units so that we could get our hands on it faster then I just have to chuckle and scratch my head.
I'm sure that everyone here loves it now that they have it and wouldn't want to give it up, but I'm also sure that since we haven't had it for so long, taking a few extra months to furbish it with every unit and making a true Master list would have gone without complaint as well.
Please share your thoughts on this decision.
-
[rockon] [applause]
Awesome. I love it.
But about the BV value for the battle armor... is that per man or per squad? I seems to change from unit to unit.
Thanks!
-
What does it mean when an availability entry both has factions and EXTINCT in it?
Like this: EXTINCT, DC, FS, LA, CCC, CFM, CGS, CSA, CSV, CWF, CWX
?
-
Remember that Extinct, in Battletech terms, just means no one's producing them anymore.
So if it's Extinct but still has factions listed, it likely means it's a recent occurence, and combat losses/mothballing hasnt made them rare enough to 'delist' yet.
-
Wow, for a FREE product that took more than a year's work from a group of VOLUNTEERS there sure is a lot of complaining. A FREE 200 page product is a reason to celebrate, not whine about what was not included, especially when it has been explained multiple times that this FREE product is the first in a line of them. Though, if people aren't happy with the quality of this FREE product I am sure that the people involved can find something else to do than provide an incredible data book for FREE.
Hear Hear!!!
-
Hello-
A few answers:
"Not on the list but we have stats and BV, just no Record Sheet." - The act of creating a record sheet is something of the final fact check. Over the course of the MUL process, errors were found with construction in TROs predating 3085, including 3075. Until we generate a Record Sheet, we do not feel we can commit to the quality levels we are aiming for with the Battle Value / BattleForce stats. As BV/BF is critical to balanced game play, quality wins over schedule.
"Is BA Battle Value per trooper or squad?"- It is intended to be per squad, with the squad size based on the most common user of that design. A Clan Elemental will have a BV based on a squad of 5, a WoB Purifer on a squad of 6.
We hope to update BA BV in the future to show the value for an individual suit and the most common squad size. Players can then calculate the BV of any squad size using the rules on pg 316 of TechManual (Battle Armor Unit Size Modifier Table).
Extinct- Extinct is intended to mean the design is not in any "measurable" use during that Era. LAMs are considered extinct in the Dark Age. There may be some in museums or the like, but not enough to warrant them being measured in the faction access.
This is an error in the database output. We had originally planned to release this version of the MUL last year, with only a Jihad faction availability. TRO3085 and its Supplemental cross the Jihad, Dark Age boundary so we chose to update the database and start supporting multiple eras of availability in this release (something planned for much later). Unfortunately the "Extinct" heading was first intended for a single era system and we missed how it didn't translate properly when we added the Dark Age faction access. This will be corrected in future releases.
Thank you,
Joel BC
-
Extinct- Extinct is intended to mean the design is not in any "measurable" use during that Era. LAMs are considered extinct in the Dark Age. There may be some in museums or the like, but not enough to warrant them being measured in the faction access.
This is an error in the database output. We had originally planned to release this version of the MUL last year, with only a Jihad faction availability. TRO3085 and its Supplemental cross the Jihad, Dark Age boundary so we chose to update the database and start supporting multiple eras of availability in this release (something planned for much later). Unfortunately the "Extinct" heading was first intended for a single era system and we missed how it didn't translate properly when we added the Dark Age faction access. This will be corrected in future releases.
Thank you,
Joel BC
So, if the faction list reads:
Jihad: EXTINCT, X, Y, Z Republic: EXTINCT
It is supposed to be:
Jihad: X, Y, Z Republic: EXTINCT
quiaff?
-
So, if the faction list reads:
Jihad: EXTINCT, X, Y, Z Republic: EXTINCT
It is supposed to be:
Jihad: X, Y, Z Republic: EXTINCT
quiaff?
Hello,
Most likely. Obviously until we review them all, we don't want to give a hard and fast answer. We are working to correct this with the next update.
-
The MUL is so good, I would have paid
double...triple for it!
-
The MUL is so good, I would have paid double...triple for it!
Triple?!?! Hhhhrrrrmmmphhhh! I would pay, dear fellow, FIVES TIMES what I did!
-
Hello-
A few answers:
"Is BA Battle Value per trooper or squad?"- It is intended to be per squad, with the squad size based on the most common user of that design. A Clan Elemental will have a BV based on a squad of 5, a WoB Purifer on a squad of 6.
We hope to update BA BV in the future to show the value for an individual suit and the most common squad size. Players can then calculate the BV of any squad size using the rules on pg 316 of TechManual (Battle Armor Unit Size Modifier Table).
Thank you,
Joel BC
No, Thank you! [rockon]
-
All,
While I'm sure that CGL appreciates all those fans who have expressed their appreciation of this product in this thread and others on these message boards (or in any other ways they may have expressed this), I would also ask that those dissatisfied with the product for whatever reason be allowed to express any constructive criticism they may be able to offer. This type of response is actually useful, as it helps CGL improve future products to better meet all of our demands.
However, just remember, when I said the above, I asked for "CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM" from those dissatisfied with the product. Snide comments about it and/or disparaging ones against the volunteers that put it together are still not allowed in our rules. Helpful comments and examples concerning how it could be made better will be accepted, and, I'm sure, given due consideration by those working on future products.
Thank you,
Ruger
-
Unfortunately most of that criticism seems to take the form of complaining that x isn't in this, the first (of many) release, and most of them have resons for not being there on the first or second pages.
I'm personally happy with it at the moment, the holes are a bit annoying, true, but I accept the desire for fact checking. I only hope they hurry up with those record sheets (insert ravenous fan who needs more product here). It wasn't said explicetly, but it is looking like we might get faction availability for all the eras eventually once more fact checking is done. If that is indeed the case, since we now have sourcebooks for playing the clans pre-invasion, I would hope the availability would cover that (just what mechs DID Clan Ghost Bear field during Operation Klondike and during the Golden Century?)
-
"Not on the list but we have stats and BV, just no Record Sheet." - The act of creating a record sheet is something of the final fact check. Over the course of the MUL process, errors were found with construction in TROs predating 3085, including 3075. Until we generate a Record Sheet, we do not feel we can commit to the quality levels we are aiming for with the Battle Value / BattleForce stats. As BV/BF is critical to balanced game play, quality wins over schedule.
Thanks for the response, I guess it just seemed to me that providing these units could have helped speed up the errata process for them, not only for BV but manufacting and timeline stats as well. This is a HUGE project and we know there will be errata, just because it will be one type of errata (BV) vs another (availablity) seemed an odd reason to exclude them.
Not saying that we as fans have come to expect errata, because we have (I had the PDF within an hour of it's realease but I think I'll wait until a year or so of updates before I print it). It's that we love the errata, and are happy to get it in such a timely manner and prolific amounts. ;D
I was also frustrated by their lack of inclusion because it now inhibits my use of this document to educate new players on the existance and availablity of these "Phantom Units" as they begin to explore the CBT universe, I'd rather have them in and wrong then not have them at all.
-
One thing I am curious about: the Celestials are not listed a Extinct in the MUL. I can understand them
not having which factions are willing to field the salvaged ones from the Jihad, since that would
likely be a spoiler, but I would think that the Celestial 'Mechs would be Extinct in the Early Dark Age.
Also, I found it interesting that the Jade Falcons were listed as having availability of Protomechs in
the Early Dark age period. Given that the Falcon's killed their Protomech program by 3067, by the Jihad
era, there would be dwindling numbers of left-over warriors who went through the program. A large number
would have been thinned out, in fact, by 3070(given that the average life expectancy of a Protomech Warrior
is 3 years). Even if the significant numbers are the result of Bondsmen from Ice Hellions, you would still be
seeing a drop off from 3074 to 3081. In theory, by 3085, 10 years in, there would be no Protomech Warriors
for the Jade Falcons...unless something changed.
Another thing I found interesting is that TRO:3085 mentioned that many of the original Clan OmniMechs were
no longer in production in the Inner Sphere Clan Facilities. Does the not listing them as "Extinct" in the Dark
Age Era, the time period where it was already stated many were no longer in production, mean that TRO:3085
was already out of date/in error, that the Home World Clans are somehow still going to factor into the Early
Dark Age, that they have Inner Sphere(i.e., Republic) based factories, or that, at this time, which ones are no
longer in production has yet to be finalized?
-
One thing I am curious about: the Celestials are not listed a Extinct in the MUL. I can understand them
not having which factions are willing to field the salvaged ones from the Jihad, since that would
likely be a spoiler, but I would think that the Celestial 'Mechs would be Extinct in the Early Dark Age.
Well, the Shadow Divisions did leave and disappear.
-
Greetings,
Wraithcannon- Thank you for the feedback. It is a tough decision between quality and inclusiveness. Because BV is used to balance battles, we decided to go with quality. Thank you for the feedback though, it helps us to make future decisions.
Celestials in the Dark Age (Republic)- I believe this is an error. We will be checking that and please look to the next update for final confirmation.
-
Another thing I found interesting is that TRO:3085 mentioned that many of the original Clan OmniMechs were
no longer in production in the Inner Sphere Clan Facilities. Does the not listing them as "Extinct" in the Dark
Age Era, the time period where it was already stated many were no longer in production, mean that TRO:3085
was already out of date/in error, that the Home World Clans are somehow still going to factor into the Early
Dark Age, that they have Inner Sphere(i.e., Republic) based factories, or that, at this time, which ones are no
longer in production has yet to be finalized?
I think it's just that it's not quite that dire for the IS Clans. TRO:3085 states that "several archetypal designs are now beyond their ability to manufacture." when discussing the IS Clans in general. It then goes on to only state that no new Warhawks have been seen in over a decade. The Timber Wolf and Summoner are mentioned, but just note that the Wolves nearly lost the ability to manufacture the T-Wolf and that just the Jade Falcons can still produce the Summoner. Outside of the Warhawk example, the Dragonfly and maybe the Myst Lynx are the only of the 3050 omnis not manufactured by at least one of the IS Clans, with the Nova Cats being the only IS Clan not manufacturing any such designs. The continued existence of the Warhawk could be chalked up to the IS Clans taking great pains to maintain them, as noted in TRO:3050U. The same could be true for the remaining 'mechs that aren't necessarily produced by a particular Clan. Heck, the Nova hasn't been produced since 2921 and was reasonably common at the time of Operation Revival.
But as always, I could be horribly wrong. :D
-
Also: there is no reason why production could not have been resumed on the Mist Lynx, Viper, and Warhawk in the years after 3085. Reverse engineering the production lines would take time, but it is possible.
-
Am I getting this wrong of has the RotS gained access to literally EVERYTHING? Oo
I'm surpised they didn't get access to the Blood Asp and Pariah as well...
-
Hopefully they will manage to get TRO3067 in their soon. The most current version is Fanpro so that would be why its no in their, but its still a lot of mechs missing from the list.
-
Great product. Thanks for all of the hard work.
Two recommendations:
1. For the Bookmarks, could we get some further breakdown rather than simply unit types? I don't think putting each mech name would be wise but maybe the first letter of the name. You can probably even skip some letters and do every third letter. Just to allow one to get to a specific section a little quicker without resorting to a search. AKA bookmark A, D, G... Enough to get you down to a 10ish page group. Infantry probably wouldn't need much at all. Mechs and vehicles could use some help.
2. This is the slightly more difficult one. Is it possible to get the units in true alpha numeric order. The variant numbers are a little jumping due to the computer putting things like -7S after -14S. It should probably be treated like -07S but we don't have the leading 0. I'm not sure how easy that would be.
-
1. For the Bookmarks, could we get some further breakdown rather than simply unit types? I don't think putting each mech name would be wise but maybe the first letter of the name. You can probably even skip some letters and do every third letter. Just to allow one to get to a specific section a little quicker without resorting to a search. AKA bookmark A, D, G... Enough to get you down to a 10ish page group. Infantry probably wouldn't need much at all. Mechs and vehicles could use some help.
^ This would be tremendously useful.
-
First off, a rather humble thank you goes out to the folks who put effort into this beast.
A few things are kind of bugging me at the moment now.
First, I can't understand the decision to go ahead with the two timelines listed for availability. It's known that many players have a problem with the Jihad and Dark Ages. It's why there's been so much effort put into products that service earlier eras. So why have the only two eras listed as the two least popular? Surely a Jihad and 67 listing would have served far more players.
Second, the decision to change the era listing from 50 to 49 seems conspicuous. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. (It's not broke.)
Third, The decision to exclude `67 designs seems downright obnoxious, and the reasoning behind it poorly portrayed. (We can't make a buck off it right now, so let's alienate longtime fans by rolling our eyes and whistling when someone mentions it's absence.)
-
Likely it's because the Jihad and Dark age products are easier to fact check and integrate directly into the MUL being more recent.
-
And Jihad products have been some of the best selling products in years, suggesting that the vocal anti-Jihad/Dark Age crowd are a minority.
-
It's known that many players have a problem with the Jihad and Dark Ages. It's why there's been so much effort put into products that service earlier eras. So why have the only two eras listed as the two least popular? Surely a Jihad and 67 listing would have served far more players.
There's a number of incorrect assumptions there, which have been refuted by continued sale presence, actually looking at the product catalog, and comments directly from TPTB.
-
On the other hand, alot of data is missing. We see giant gaps in the post Jihad era because they either don't know, haven't gotten there yet, or want it to remain a secret.
-
Hi Andrew,
It's known that many players have a problem with the Jihad and Dark Ages.
And many players have a problem with pretty much any era. Meanwhile, it's where we're at, and where we're moving forward from, whether some like it or not. Taking those eras is 100% logical.
It's why there's been so much effort put into products that service earlier eras.
No, that's not why.
So why have the only two eras listed as the two least popular? Surely a Jihad and 67 listing would have served far more players.
Sales say otherwise.
Third, The decision to exclude `67 designs seems downright obnoxious, and the reasoning behind it poorly portrayed. (We can't make a buck off it right now, so let's alienate longtime fans by rolling our eyes and whistling when someone mentions it's absence.)
I'd like to see you link to a post that says exactly that.
You can't. I'm not sure why you have such a strong urge to fill in non-existent blanks, nor why you choose to come up with malicious nonsense material such as above to do the filling with.
The issue is that no current recordsheets exist for the units in question. That's not a trivial issue.
But it is a temporary one. As has been stated countless times, this is WIP. And it always will be.
Paul
-
Hi Andrew,
And many players have a problem with pretty much any era. Meanwhile, it's where we're at, and where we're moving forward from, whether some like it or not. Taking those eras is 100% logical.
True enough, as far as being logical. Practical, however, Not as much. The somewhat recent addition of iconography on most major releases detailing which era the product covers was pure genius. Battletech has so many great timeframes to choose from, that it just seemed downright odd to have the only two listed in the project as the two furthest in the timeline, as opposed to splitting them up a bit.
Take Martial Olympiads, (Please) Was a great worldwide event. My most memorable Battletech experience. Works perfectly in the Star League reformation. The MUL is arguably the thing that the MO has been waiting on (And it's BV2 implications, obviously). However, an era listing for the 2nd Star League isn't about, and that's quite disappointing.
No, that's not why.
Please elaborate. The recent push towards "Play however you want, whenever you want." doesn't seem to jive with "Battletech is moving forward, deal with it."
Sales say otherwise.
You're unlikely (and legally barred) to release hard information on that, but I trust you at your word. Still, I find it hard to believe that when BT was putting out two dozen unit patches, faction dice, vinyl model kits, and every gaming store you walked into had 2 4th edition box sets and a wall of BT minis, it wasn't making as much money (or more) then Catalyst did during the Jihad, with core books being pushed back months at a time.
I'd like to see you link to a post that says exactly that.
You can't. I'm not sure why you have such a strong urge to fill in non-existent blanks, nor why you choose to come up with malicious nonsense material such as above to do the filling with.
The issue is that no current recordsheets exist for the units in question. That's not a trivial issue.
But it is a temporary one. As has been stated countless times, this is WIP. And it always will be.
Paul
Quote? I said it "seems downright obnoxious, and the reasoning behind it poorly portrayed." I still stand behind that. The MUL has been worked on for years. It seems odd that in that time, no one could have recreated every entry in 3067 within a weeks time. Hell, I'm still under NDA, I'll do it if asked.
-
Battletech has so many great timeframes to choose from, that it just seemed downright odd to have the only two listed in the project as the two furthest in the timeline, as opposed to splitting them up a bit.
Again, this is just step 1.
And as far as a first step, the only logical option era wise is to take the one where the story's at. Not where the story was. Or might be. Such other eras are best included at a later time.
Please elaborate. The recent push towards "Play however you want, whenever you want." doesn't seem to jive with "Battletech is moving forward, deal with it."
You've got an unfortunate habit of re-interpreting what other people say. Taking my words literally would serve us both better.
CGL isn't stopping support in to other eras. The first emission of the MUL not including other era's should not be taken as an indication that no other era's will ever be supported. That presumption is highly illogical.
Still, I find it hard to believe that when BT was putting out two dozen unit patches, faction dice, vinyl model kits, and every gaming store you walked into had 2 4th edition box sets and a wall of BT minis, it wasn't making as much money (or more) then Catalyst did during the Jihad, with core books being pushed back months at a time.
You're attempting to draw far-reaching conclusions based on an incomplete set of information. That's unwise.
It seems odd that in that time, no one could have recreated every entry in 3067 within a weeks time.
Everything in due time. If it was easy, it would've been completed already. So, either CGL is incompetent, or it's not easy. It's unfortunate your assumptions lead you to presume the former.
Hell, I'm still under NDA, I'll do it if asked.
Don't call us, we'll call you.
Paul
-
I think this thread has jumped the shark. The amount of chronic complaining is staggering considering the work put into the MUL. Embarrassing.
-
It shows to go that people as a general rule are never staisfied, especially when something is free. They always seem to want more. I'm blame the so-called 'Entitlement Generation' and all the instant gratification junkies that it spawned.
-
It shows to go that people as a general rule are never staisfied, especially when something is free. They always seem to want more. I'm blame the so-called 'Entitlement Generation' and all the instant gratification junkies that it spawned.
That is exactly it. [applause]
-
Hello,
At this time, the BattleTech Line Developer would like to request that all writers, developers, staff, and volunteers related to to the MUL process cease any and all activities in this thread. This is a discussion forum for fans, not staff.
Thank you,
- Herbert Beas
BattleTech
Catalyst Game Labs
-
I think this thread has jumped the shark. The amount of chronic complaining is staggering considering the work put into the MUL. Embarrassing.
In the restaurant business, there's a percentage of people referred to locally as "Dogfood customers". The term means that no matter how poor of a product you plate, no matter how terrible the atmosphere is, and no matter how hostile the front of the house is, there's a group of people who will clamor that the establishment is the best around, and continue to give their custom.
Then there's the "Money Talks" argument. I'm somewhere around 5k mark when it comes to money blown on my favorite giant robots game, between box sets, novels, books, minis, conventions, etc.
If you feel that you're in absolute love with the MUL, go nuts man.
I'm more in the "It's nice to see progress, but it's no lacasse list."
-
First, I can't understand the decision to go ahead with the two timelines listed for availability. It's known that many players have a problem with the Jihad and Dark Ages. It's why there's been so much effort put into products that service earlier eras. So why have the only two eras listed as the two least popular? Surely a Jihad and 67 listing would have served far more players.
Actually from what I've seen, what's known is that players who dislike the Jihad and Dark Age eras are the most willing to sit down at their keyboards and complain. ;)
Second, the decision to change the era listing from 50 to 49 seems conspicuous. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. (It's not broke.)
I'm not sure what you're referring to here, but I assume it's the Clan Invasion era. Operation Revival actually did begin in 3049, so this change is correct. (TRO:3050 came out after the Clans had been in the Inner Sphere for a year, after all.)
Third, The decision to exclude `67 designs seems downright obnoxious, and the reasoning behind it poorly portrayed. (We can't make a buck off it right now, so let's alienate longtime fans by rolling our eyes and whistling when someone mentions it's absence.)
The preview version of the Master Units List had over 4,000 entries in it.
Let me say it again: The preview version of the Master Units List had over 4,000 entries in it.
Do you have any idea how much work is it to generate 4,000+ entries? Then verify them? Then put them through the layout process? Let's just say it's a Metric Shipload.*
The BattleBlog already said that the MUL will be broken into a series of products.** So it seems to me that the decision to limit the scope of the first product is a rational compromise: CGL puts out a document that is filled with units that are relevant to the current timeframe (Jihad, beginning Dark Age) so players get an idea of what's going on. At the same time, as TRO:3067 undergoes the Update process of incorporating errata changes and the record sheets are updated, the newly computed BVs (which CGL has more confidence in since they were just generated) are included in the next installment of the "MUL line". This allows CGL to update the 4,000+ entries in bite sized chunks that are easier to produce, (hopefully) reducing the number of revisions, errata entries, and other mistakes that can creep into a massive product.
At any rate those are just some speculative reasons for the MUL release. I for one am hoping that the lessons learned from releasing the MUL (vol. 1) will result in process improvements and lessons learned that make production of future volumes easier.***
Mbear
*15-20% more than the more common Imperial Shipload, currently in use in the U.S.
**Not their name for it, but Welshman indicated that the MUL data would be used in several products. No, I don't know which ones or what kind, but I can see additional "volumes" of the MUL Battle List being released in the future.
***Now be good, or else I'll start talking about "running ideas up the flagpole so we can harvest the low-hanging fruit so we can leverage institutional knowledge to create optimized synergistic win-win solution packages going forward to reduce negative growth." ;)
-
Actually from what I've seen, what's known is that players who dislike the Jihad and Dark Age eras are the most willing to sit down at their keyboards and complain. ;)
I dig the Jihad, for the most part. It's a means to a wanted end. For me, Battletech was most fun when it was a few family mechs passed down through generations, fighting for Coordinator and Country. The Jihad is like how fun kids smash the sand castle they built, and Herb and Co did a wonderful job smashing it in one of the more fun ways possible.
Dark Age... I'm much more iffy on. There's something inherently unfun about sporadic information provided by the click-tech folks, which must be accepted as canon.
For instance, There's a singular paragraph in the DA fiction that basically says the DC never takes back important worlds from the Ghost Bears. Gee, thanks. Might as well tell me Keyzer Soze is Kevin Spacey and DeCaprio is a mental patient in Shutter Island. Sure, there's still a lot of fun to be had in between those revelations, but it's just not the same.
I'm not sure what you're referring to here, but I assume it's the Clan Invasion era. Operation Revival actually did begin in 3049, so this change is correct. (TRO:3050 came out after the Clans had been in the Inner Sphere for a year, after all.)
The preview version of the Master Units List had over 4,000 entries in it.
The Clan Invasion has always had its year listed as 3050. Yes, it started in 49, but 50 was about units shown in 50 as well as 49, 48, 47, etc.
***Now be good, or else I'll start talking about "running ideas up the flagpole so we can harvest the low-hanging fruit so we can leverage institutional knowledge to create optimized synergistic win-win solution packages going forward to reduce negative growth." ;)
I'd hate to upset that paradigm.
-
All,
There have been several posts that are coming extremely close to violating the posting rules in this thread. Remember that everyone is entitled to their opinions, but we only allow discussions and debates on opinions and the like. We do not allow the same against other posters themselves. If the trends seen continue, this thread will be locked.
Thank you,
Ruger
-
In the restaurant business, there's a percentage of people referred to locally as "Dogfood customers". The term means that no matter how poor of a product you plate, no matter how terrible the atmosphere is, and no matter how hostile the front of the house is, there's a group of people who will clamor that the establishment is the best around, and continue to give their custom.
Then there's the "Money Talks" argument. I'm somewhere around 5k mark when it comes to money blown on my favorite giant robots game, between box sets, novels, books, minis, conventions, etc.
If you feel that you're in absolute love with the MUL, go nuts man.
I'm more in the "It's nice to see progress, but it's no lacasse list."
Well, since I own a retail game business, I'd say I pretty much have you beat in spades. In the retail business, there's a percentage of people referred locally as 'constant complainers'. The term means that no matter how much you give them, no matter how much you listen to them, no matter how much you try to appease them, there's a group of people who, if you handed out gold bricks, they'd complain about how heavy they are.
And...how does 'money talk' with a free product?
I'm more in the 'be gracious' crowd.
-
If you feel that you're in absolute love with the MUL, go nuts man.
I'm more in the "It's nice to see progress, but it's no lacasse list."
Nobody outside CGL and the MUL team has seen the MUL yet. We've only seen a small facet concerning BV 2.0 for a certain group of units so far, and the 1.66 beta version of the unit list.
Thus, it's hardly fair or accurate to judge the entire MUL project by the single product released so far; and it's plainly wrong to insinuate there would be nothing else coming.
I don't have any quarrels with a completed section being released early, given that the only alternative would have been to wait until the entire project is finished. It strikes me at somewhat odd to complain about that.
As to the Lacasse list, it's not official and badly outdated by now. The ultimate RATs and availability lists, as far as I'm concerned, are Xotl's RATs. (At least for the eras I'm typically active in - 3025 and early Clan invasion). It bodes well that Xotl was recruited into the MUL team.
-
The list is useless on it's own. It's value is associated with products previously purchased (Post-haste!).
Actually...it isn't useless. I've found that simply having a FREE (partially complete) list with much of the availability listings for the Jihad help me to explore possible ideas for faction force composition, especially when cross-referenced with certain other FREE fan websites (i.e. Sarna.net) that expound further on the individual units in the Jihad and Dark Ages. It may look like a jumble of numbers and letters to you, but it's information to me, and information is always usable, you just need to know how to use it (FOR FREE).
Also, I find it strange that you would attempt to educate other posters about "dogfood customers" on the official forum where official BattleTech staff interact with fans. That sounds to me like an assumption about peoples' levels of rationality that you are trying to pass off as fact.
EDIT: "New Canon is More True than Old Canon." Obviously this is the tendency for some fictional universes. However, this doesn't mean that people like...oh say, the Line Developer, has forgotten any interest in telling a good overall story. Why would people even buy a new product if there isn't any good flavor associated with it? Given how there happen to be a number of fans who are beginning to warm up to the happenings after the Jihad...somebody's doing something right, and nobody's FEAR OF THE NEW (insert gasps and screams here) is going to stop them.
Where are those fans, you say? Perhaps many of them post on these forums. Sure, you may discredit them by just calling them "dogfood customers", but what if they happen to -know- more about some of the up-and-coming happenings of the Dark Age better than posters on other forums? (I say up-and-coming here, because sometimes things writers put out about BattleTech happen to be very nice filling-in-the-details. The Dark Age is not set in Stone.) Take your time and ask around about some of the happenings after the liberation of Terra. Sneak a peek at some of the new units in TRO 3085. You may not want to sell that daisho set just yet.
-
The list is useless on it's own. It's value is associated with products previously purchased (Post-haste!).
Of course it's useless on its' own. Unless you want CGL to also give you a free copy of the rules, the maps and the record sheets.
-
Of course it's useless on its' own. Unless you want CGL to also give you a free copy of the rules, the maps and the record sheets.
That actually sounds like an awesome idea. Like, you could totally run a demo of BattleTech, with all the rules, maps, and record sheets out there for people, and everyone can come and play, and--ohhhhhhhhh right. :P
You could even ask Demo Team guys for where other people play BattleTech near you. USUALLY THOSE OTHER FANS ARE NICE ENOUGH TO LET YOU PLAY WITHOUT HAVING BOUGHT ANYTHING. Out of our party of seven, I currently play with three different people in a campaign who haven't paid a single cent for BattleTech. You know why I'm okay with that? Because I get to see their smiling faces. Because I enjoy them having fun. Fun isn't bad for people, is it?
It's a game, -and- a business. Not one more than the other.
-
Then there's the "Money Talks" argument. I'm somewhere around 5k mark when it comes to money blown on my favorite giant robots game, between box sets, novels, books, minis, conventions, etc.
Money only talks if there's a threat that it will be removed . . . are you seriously considering not puchasing any further products for a game that you've already spend $5,000 on just because a free supplement that is in no way required for playing/enjoying the game (and is still at Beta levels of completion) is not exactly what you want?
-
My first thought on reading that was more "Only 5k?!!" ;)
-
Oh yeah! I just realized something. Don't we have Quick-Start Rules (http://www.classicbattletech.com/index.php?action=downloads#Rules) that come with Introductory Record Sheets (http://www.classicbattletech.com/index.php?action=downloads#Record%20Sheets) for free download on the Catalyst site? That could be used with the MUL list. They're both official FREE products too!
-
My first thought on reading that was more "Only 5k?!!" ;)
Oh, hell yeah. I know a few people with double and triple that. Hell, a trip to GenCon takes about a grand, if you're doing it right. Wierdo's probably got more invested into the game then I've ever invested in automobiles.
Of course it's useless on its' own. Unless you want CGL to also give you a free copy of the rules, the maps and the record sheets.
For Charity's sake I'll assume you're not being obvious troll, though your view of how people should act might be better appreciated elsewhere. I hope that you don't earnestly believe that either you're 100% happy with the MUL, or you're some sort of greedy person.
I've already gone off and applauded the efforts of those who worked on it. Great folks, all with other real lives to attend to (Except maybe Paul <3). A labour of love, to be sure. If I mention the fact that at it's current state, it's basically unusable, a veritable hive of WHITE KNIGHTS come to defend the honor of CGL. Despite members of CGL repeatedly stating that in fact, it's a first run. It -isn't- finished.
THERE'S MORE WORK TO BE DONE.
-
I think that so far we have a great *free* product. There is more work to be done, cool, we will get more information sometime in the future. [rockon]
-
For Charity's sake I'll assume you're not being obvious troll, though your view of how people should act might be better appreciated elsewhere. I hope that you don't earnestly believe that either you're 100% happy with the MUL, or you're some sort of greedy person.
I've already gone off and applauded the efforts of those who worked on it. Great folks, all with other real lives to attend to (Except maybe Paul <3). A labour of love, to be sure. If I mention the fact that at it's current state, it's basically unusable, a veritable hive of WHITE KNIGHTS come to defend the honor of CGL. Despite members of CGL repeatedly stating that in fact, it's a first run. It -isn't- finished.
THERE'S MORE WORK TO BE DONE.
Unusuable. Let's see, we get the name, model, type of unit, tonnage, tech base, rules base, TRO, RS book, Era introduced, Jihad availability, and DA availability. That seems to be much much more useful than unusable. And this is only the first incomplete product. Just knowing where i can get the recordsheet for the damn unit is easily my favorite part of the List. If that makes me a white knight, fine. It just seems to me that for a free product, bitching about it is the least productive thing we can do.
-
Which part is 'unusable'? ???
-
Which part is 'unusable'? ???
I dunno, i can't find one. #P
-
For Charity's sake I'll assume you're not being obvious troll, though your view of how people should act might be better appreciated elsewhere. I hope that you don't earnestly believe that either you're 100% happy with the MUL, or you're some sort of greedy person.
you may have misinterpreted my post somewhat. I'm not demanding that CGL give me free rules and such. It's just I find it funny that you complain about the MUL being useless unless you buy other products when BattleTech is a commercial product to begin with.
And for the record, I am 100% happy with the MUL. I think it's a fantastic resource. I know it's currently missing a whole chunk of info but I understand and respect CGL's reasons for not including it at this date. Given that it's 1) free and a 2) living document, I'd rather the product be good and incomplete than error-laden and complete.
Also, I've submitted errata for the MUL - I recognise that errors creep into even the best products, and again respect CGL for recognising this too and engaging with the fanbase to fix them.
I've already gone off and applauded the efforts of those who worked on it. Great folks, all with other real lives to attend to (Except maybe Paul <3). A labour of love, to be sure. If I mention the fact that at it's current state, it's basically unusable, a veritable hive of WHITE KNIGHTS come to defend the honor of CGL. Despite members of CGL repeatedly stating that in fact, it's a first run. It -isn't- finished.
THERE'S MORE WORK TO BE DONE.
You decided it's unusable - I disagree.
And you complained bitterly about the chosen era, that it's missing info from products that CGL have stated they're in the process of revising and reprinting and have also stated will be included after they've finished their revisions, and threw out a bunch of misinformed tirades about relative popularity of eras, sales and so on.
But for Charity's sake I'll assume you're not being an obvious troll, though your view of how people should act might be better appreciated elsewhere.
-
Hate to resurrect a thread to ask a question I think I know the answer to but:
The MUL does not list the MAD-5R (or MAD-9S) as being available to mercs. Going through some of my old pdfs I noticed that RS PPU Mercs contains both the MAD-5R and MAD-9S. Since the PPU faction record sheets are (AFAIK) no longer available I assume the new MUL will supercede it but is there any chance that the MUL is in error on the availability of those two designs?
EDIT: forgot to spell check :-[
-
Hate to resurrect a thread to ask a question I think I know the answer to but:
The MUL does not list the MAD-5R (or MAD-9S) as being available to mercs. Going through some of my old pdfs I noticed that RS PPU Mercs contains both the MAD-5R and MAD-9S. Since the PPU faction record sheets are (AFAIK) no longer available I assume the new MUL will supercede it but is there any chance that the MUL is in error on the availability of those two designs?
EDIT: forgot to spell check :-[
Please report this in the MUL errata thread.
Thank you,
Joel BC