BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat
Catalyst Game Labs => BattleTech Game Errata => Topic started by: Xotl on 04 June 2011, 14:26:40
-
Locked at 50 pages. See the new thread at:
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=47774.0
This thread is for all error reports and suggestions for the MUL online database, as found at:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/
Some notes - read before posting:
- How do I log in? You can't. The login is only for site administrators.
- As this covers suggestions as well as errors, discussion is allowed in this thread.
- This database does NOT include any unit lacking a current Catalyst record sheet. Units currently missing from the MUL almost certainly fall in this category. Please do NOT report any such unit as missing.
- Also not currently included is availability info for the Homeworld Clans, or any Dark Age availability for units not in TR 3085.
- The entire Camospecs/Ironwind Metals feature is still being worked on (as in: the entire way it works could change). We're not going to be dealing with individual issues on this for a while.
- Corrections not touching on the above are welcome. However, please provide a page number and/or direct quote to support your case. "Faction X should have this because I said so" is less than helpful and will likely be ignored.
- If you have corrections for a unit entry, include a direct MUL link to the unit in question in your report.
- If it's a BV correction, please enclose or attach your entire BV calculation and how you made it (by hand, SSW, MML, Heavy Metal etc; include version number of any software used).
Please keep your posts concise and polite. Posts that do not follow these rules will be deleted. Thank you.
WHAT IS THE MUL?
- The Master Unit List is an official Catalyst product, one that Catalyst provides for free to its fans. It is every bit as official as any TRO or sourcebook, if not more in many cases.
- The MUL undergoes continuous amount of fact check and is constantly being updated. So unlike a static print TRO, the MUL is able to be updated should something change. If a unit appears on the MUL, then enough validation was done to determine that "Yes, this unit existed and is not pure rumour."
- This does not mean that said unit will ever see its stats published: that is not the purpose of the MUL. While the MUL does serve as a very useful resource for Battle Value, Alpha Strike stats, and image art, the MUL's primary purpose is to provide a list of all known units in the universe, and their faction availability.
- That something is not on the MUL does not mean it does not exist. The concept of "the needs of fiction" still apply to the BattleTech universe. Not every factory, vehicle and handgun in the universe has been documented, nor will they ever be. The MUL is what we know: what has been documented in canon.
- Sarna.net is not a canon source. If Sarna lists a Mech and the MUL doesn't, then the MUL is most likely correct (though we certainly do make mistakes). The MUL has access to internal information that Sarna does not.
Project Updates:
Inner Sphere BattleMechs of the Republic and Jihad Faction Lists are Gold Release
We are happy to announce that we have declared the Inner Sphere BattleMech lists on the Republic and Jihad era faction lists as "complete". This means we will not be making wholesale changes to these faction lists anymore. For all published units, the list is considered complete.
That is not to say there are not errors. We will continue to make error corrections based on reported errata. But because these are now considered complete, the bar for errata reporting is much higher.
-
I have found two units that seems a bit buggy:
Clan Space Marine Clan Snow Raven Warships Marines, ""
and
Clan Space Marine Clan Snow Raven Warships Marines, ??
- First, there is the garbage characters at the end ("" and ??).
- Second, neither units have any faction availability listed.
- Third, it is most like supposed to be only one unit as only one record sheet exists in RS3085 Cutting Edge.
- Fourth, "Warships Marines" does not sound right. Suggests a change to either "Warship Marines" or "Warship's Marines".
-
Fenris (Ice Ferret) U:
Tonnage incorrectly listed as 40t, Fenris is a 45t Omni.
-
One Feature Request and one Usability Issue:
(feature request) Having to adjust the Name, Piloting & Gunnery of the Mechwarrior and see the BV increase as per the TechManual errata (as per the pilot skill chart) woud be very nice.
(usability issue) I tried this on my iPhone and it was difficult to read and work with--a mobile version would be very helpful too (in time, I know you've got a flood of requests).
PS: Also having Clan Pilots & Gunners having their appropriate default skills (example: Mechwarriors being gunner/piloting 3/4 by default) would make it easier too--as suggested on another thread, having the base Mech Values and the adjusted mech values on the mech search might be a good idea.
-
Error: I am unable to remove a unit from a force list. Clicking the Remove Unit button reloads the page, but does not remove anything. Also, I am unable to save an existing force list. I saved it after adding the first unit, but have been unable to save it since.
-
The following mechs have a dropship picture:
- Behemoth (Stone Rhino) (Standard)
- Behemoth (Stone Rhino) 2
- Behemoth (Stone Rhino) 3
This is obviously incorrect, and the right one should be found in TRO3055U.
EDIT:
The Goliath availability is strange with Clans having access to Goliaths during the Jihad, but not during the Republic. This does stand out since in many clans this is the only modern Inner Sphere mech they have access to.
The following mech - Clan pairings have been spotted that needs to be checked for correctness:
GOL-6H - Clan Wolf
GOL-5D - Clan Snow Raven
GOL-5W - Clan Snow Raven
GOL-2H - Clan Hell's Horses
GOL-3M - Clan Jade Falcon
GOL-4S - Clan Nova Cat
GOL-5S - Clan Nova Cat
-
Stoat Scout Car has a Scout JumpShip picture.
-
The ability to select multiple criteria in the advanced search - already mentioned in the context of specifying two or more factions - would be wonderful if extended to all the advanced search criteria. Eg. it would be great if we could list equipment for both Introductory and Standard rules levels, or for 4th SW & Clan Invasion eras, at the same time.
But well done! A truly heroic challenge is being met.
W.
-
1) Commando mech has a wrong picture (capellan infantry).
2) Ostwar 2M is not listed as an era specific/primitive design. it's listed as a standard design. it's also listed as a star league design
while it should be an age of war design.
I guess the problem arises from the MUL PDF which has 2 Ostwar 2M in them.
-
The following mechs have a dropship picture:
- Behemoth (Stone Rhino) (Standard)
- Behemoth (Stone Rhino) 2
- Behemoth (Stone Rhino) 3
This is obviously incorrect, and the right one should be found in TRO3055U.
Fixed the images.
-
Prowler Multi-Terrain Vehicle (all variants) use the image of the Prowler Solaris 7 battlemech.
-
Stoat Scout Car has a Scout JumpShip picture.
Updated with the pic from XTR:Primitives I
-
The Following mechs have images of the Marauder IIC 2-
Marauder IIC (Standard)
Marauder IIC 8
Marauder IIC 4-7
and the Marauder IIC 3 has the Image of the Marauder IIC 7
-
Prowler Multi-Terrain Vehicle (all variants) use the image of the Prowler Solaris 7 battlemech.
Updated
-
The Following mechs have images of the Marauder IIC 2-
Marauder IIC (Standard)
Marauder IIC 8
Marauder IIC 4-7
and the Marauder IIC 3 has the Image of the Marauder IIC 7
7 updated, 3 updated, the rest have to take what I had which is the 2
-
George,
You're doing a great job! If you're overloaded or need any help, feel free to contact me--I volunteer well :)
Also, I'm honored than you visited my Blog and made mention of the new site being up and going--I'll be posting about that tonight.
Cheers!
Jeff (Gauthic)
-
The ability to select multiple criteria in the advanced search - already mentioned in the context of specifying two or more factions - would be wonderful if extended to all the advanced search criteria. Eg. it would be great if we could list equipment for both Introductory and Standard rules levels, or for 4th SW & Clan Invasion eras, at the same time.
But well done! A truly heroic challenge is being met.
W.
Done, once I figured out how to actually do it I just had to apply it to all of the various field choices. So now you can multi select on all the advanced fields! I also added the ability to up the number of records displayed to 10, 25, 50, 75, or 100 and the new default is now 25.
-
I thought the Starslayer 3D models were available to the Federated Suns, by preference over the -3C model.
-
This is so awesome. Thanks for all your hard work. [notworthy]
As a suggestion, it would be nice to be able to have more than 20 units in a force, and/or have the ability to save all search results to a file (for example: if I want to have a printed list of all mechs available to a faction ever).
Again, great work and major props.
-
The entry for the Ferret (all variants) has the Scout (Jumpship) for a picture, or at least did yesterday when I was looking at it (I noticed you fixed another vehicle with the same problem).
-
Hello,
perhaps you could check some 'Mechs:
buccaneer- wrong picture
bushwacker - x2 listed as unique
Ceremonial Guard Caesar's Royal Guard, Marian Hegemony - wrong picture
commando - wrong picture
defiance - wrong picture
eagle - wrong picture
eidolon - missing picture
excalibur - wrong picture
Galahad original GLH - wrong picture
Heavy Jump Infantry Royal Gurkha Battalion, 4th Regulan Hussars - wrong faction (available to everyone?)
hercules - wrong picture
sarissa - listed as unique
missing Shadow hawk SHD-7M
Titan TI-1A - wrong picture
-
Cauldron-Born (Ebon Jaguar):
Uses some ugly picture instead of the one in the TRO.
-
Night Gyr - TRO mentions, that Clan Goliath Scorpion and Star Adder field some. Maybe add them to faction list?
Black Lanner - TRO says it has spread to Ice Hellions and Steel Vipers.
Errata Coordinator: as noted in the first post, the Homeworld Clans are not properly included at this time. Please do not report issues regarding them. Thank you.
Cauldron-Born (Ebon Jaguar):
Uses some ugly picture instead of the one in the TRO.
That's the image from Field Manual - Invading Clans. Please, keep it as is, it's nice.
-
Suggestion: Add the old MUL back to the Download page as an alternative source. [EDIT: I'm referencing the XL spreadsheet database, not the beta MUL released a few months back.]
Since the old MUL is the only comprehensive source for dates of manufacture, it's appropriate that the old MUL still be available for download. While some will definitely find this new database compelling, it creates a lot more work for people like myself who run period-specific campaigns, forcing you to read through the TRO to fish out this data. That defeats the entire purpose of an MUL, IMO.
-
The Marian Hegemony has access to the Penthesilea while the Magistracy has not.
The Marian Hegemony has access to Assault Commando Ebon Magistrate Shocktroops.
Assassin Battlemech showing wrong picture
Merlin Battlemech showing wrong picture
Armored Personal Carrier (all versions): Showing wrong pictures and the base versions are not available to all factions.
Heavy APC ( tracked, hover, wheeled): Base versions not available to all factions.
Karnov UR Transport: Base version version is not available to all factions.
AC 2 Carrier, Laser Carrier, MRM Carrier and AC2 Carrier LBX: Showing wrong picture
-
Axel - missing picture, use Rommel/Patton image
Bandit - missing picture
Burke - image of Burke with two PPC barrels instead of 3 is wrong, try change it for better one, but could stay with HPPC variant (this uses 2 HPPCs)
Devastator Heavy tank - wrong picture of Devastator 'Mech
Fox Armored Car - wrong picture of warship
Thunder fox - wrong image of Thunder 'Mech
Gürteltier - check spelling of Gürteltier
marsden - missing picture
phalanx tank - missing picture
Striker tank - maybe use image of six-wheeled Striker for 3058+ variants ?
-
Done, once I figured out how to actually do it I just had to apply it to all of the various field choices. So now you can multi select on all the advanced fields! I also added the ability to up the number of records displayed to 10, 25, 50, 75, or 100 and the new default is now 25.
Now that's service! Thanks muchly.
W.
-
Blackjack battlemech & Blackjack Omnimech both using picture for Blackjack battlemech. Change picture for BJ2-O Omnimech & configurations to that used in TRO3058U.
-
I thought the Starslayer 3D models were available to the Federated Suns, by preference over the -3C model.
source? tr3058u just says the 3d is favored on the clan front, nothing about FS preference.
-
Hey there, this has already been posted, however as it's a big glitch thought I'd mention it again! Once a force list is saved, you can't then add to it and save again, also the remove unit function doesn't do anything.
Cheers
-
source? tr3058u just says the 3d is favored on the clan front, nothing about FS preference.
I could have sworn it was in 3058 Original Flavor, but I could be misremembering.
-
Trebaruna all versions (TR-XB, TR-XJ & TR-XL) seems to be available to all Inner Sphere and Clan faction in IS and also to all mercenaries.
This seems very odd, especially since TRO3085 states on page 106: "..., the Federated
Suns, Draconis Combine and Lyran Commonwealth have so
far chosen not to develop the Trebaruna. "
The deployment section of the same page does neither mention any foreign sales at all.
Suggestion:
change availability of
- Trebaruna TR-XB to Republic of the Sphere
- Trebaruna TR-XJ to Free Worlds League
- Trebaruna TR-XL to Capellan Confederation
-
Incorrect pictures:
Gladiator Exoskeleton "The Spider" - image Gladiator battlemech
Gray Death Scout Suit - image Scout JumpShip
-
Having the Merc General and Mercenary fields is a little confusing (same for IS and Inner Sphere Faction), especially since Merc General and IS General don't return any results if they are the only fields selected.
Cheers,
LCC
-
The TDR-10M (Salazar) RS is incorrectly linked to BattleTech Dossiers: Lamenkov's Liability
Change to BattleTech Dossiers: Salazar Tsakalotos (PDF) http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=27_35_213&products_id=2629
Cheers,
LCC
-
Having the Merc General and Mercenary fields is a little confusing (same for IS and Inner Sphere Faction), especially since Merc General and IS General don't return any results if they are the only fields selected.
Ah yes, forgot to clean out some of the early General groups that were no longer used in the 1.0.1 version. Will do.
-
Locust IIc 8 has the TRO:3055 art instead of the TRO: 3085 art.
-
Not sure if this is the right place to post, but since the word 'suggestions' is in the thread title:
Feature request: Ability to filter out 'unique' units when doing a faction search.
EDIT:
Also,
Starslayer STY-3Dr has incorrect tonnage. Should be 50 tons, not 55.
-
Almost all Warhammer variants show the Warhammer 8D art, with the exceptions of the 4L, 6S, 11T, 9S, 9D, and 10CT. Is it intentional to use the reseen art for the Unseen models, or should they be using the silouettes from TRO:3039/record sheets?
Interestingly, this means Warhammer WHM-X7 "The Lich" shows the Warhammer 8D, while the art is being used for the 10CT.
-
As I also reported in the RS3085unabridged thread, Shadow Hawk SHD-8L does not need experimental rules, it should be under advanced rules instead.
http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,5927.msg150851.html#msg150851 (http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,5927.msg150851.html#msg150851)
-
Crusader CRD-4L: No such record sheet exists in RS3085 PP
-
The CRD-4L is exactly the same as the CRD-4D. So the CRD-4L Record Sheet is in RS3085 PP, it's just called the CRD-4D. We haven't found a good way to note this yet. VTR-9D and VTR-9K is the same thing.
-
The CRD-4L is exactly the same as the CRD-4D. So the CRD-4L Record Sheet is in RS3085 PP, it's just called the CRD-4D. We haven't found a good way to note this yet. VTR-9D and VTR-9K is the same thing.
I see two possibilities:
- 1. Record sheets for both even if they are the same.
- 2. Show it in the name, like this: Crusader CRD-4L (CRD-4D)
-
Considering the policy of the MUL to not publish any unit for which there is no record sheet, it seems logical that the entry be removed entirely until a record sheet is published.
-
Considering the policy of the MUL to not publish any unit for which there is no record sheet, it seems logical that the entry be removed entirely until a record sheet is published.
There is a record sheet. It's just under a very slightly different designation.
-
Quick note: under the "Warfare Symbology" tab under "Getting Started", it displays the same symbol for Combat Vehicle and Naval Vessel, and the same symbol for Protomech & Support Vessel
Correction: replace with correct icons for Naval Vessel and Protomech.
W.
-
Correction: replace with correct icons for Naval Vessel and Protomech.
There isn't any other generic symbol in Strategic Operations for those unit types that I saw. Can you send me/point me to the icons that are more specific for those?
-
Helepolis HEP-1H:
According the Objectives: Capellan Confederation page 16, the primitive Helepolis was manufactured on Ward by Ceres Metal Industries during the Jihad.
Suggested fix: Add Capellan Confederation availability for the Jihad era to Helepolis HEP-1H.
EDIT:
Icarus ICR-1X:
According the Objectives: Capellan Confederation page 4, the primitive Icarus was manufactured on Betelgeuse by Hellespont Industrials during the Jihad.
Suggested fix: Add Capellan Confederation availability for the Jihad era to Icarus ICR-1X.
Wasp WSP-1:
According to RS3039unabridged page 443, the WSP-1 Wasp is a primitive battlemech.
According the Objectives: Capellan Confederation page 16, the primitive Wasp was manufactured on Betelgeuse by Hellespont Industrials during the Jihad.
Suggested fix: Change rules level of the WSP-1 Wasp from Standard to Era Specific, and technology from Inner Sphere to Primitive. Add Capellan Confederation availability for the Jihad era to Wasp-1.
-
Suggestion: Allow export to MegaMek's MUL format, which is pretty similiar to the BFB format.
Contact me by PM for more info on the format.
-
Huh, I was under the impression that Assassins were a FWL design...
Regardless I am certain that none of them have the correct image attached.
-
Rifleman IIC 5
Jihad era availability lists Capellan Confederation, Draconis Combine, Federated Suns, Free Worlds League, Lyran Alliance, Mercenary, and Word of Blake. No Clan availability. Dark Age era does list it as Inner Sphere Clan General.
Shadow Cat H
Has no information available for either Jihad or Dark Age eras. I'm not sure if this is an error on intentional. Previous PDF version had available to Clan Diamond Shark, Clan Jade Falcon, Clan Nova Cat, Clan Snow Raven, Clan Wolf for both eras.
-
The CDA-2A Cicada is listed as Star League. All the 3025 readouts disagree..
-
The CDA-2A Cicada is listed as Star League. All the 3025 readouts disagree..
You didn't say what you think it should be. Guessing you mean Sucession Wars.
While TR3025 (the original) says 2840 as the intro date, it also says it was ordered by the Star League by a small firm before the fall of the Star League. The Star League didnt' exist in 2840. Tr3039 changes this date to 2740 to match the intent of the text of 3025 that the Cicada was introduced just before the fall of the Star League. Therefore the Star League era for the Cicada.
-
Dunno if others would find it useful, but last night I found myself wishing there was a way to exclude factions. You know, something like "assault 'Mech in the Star League era that is used by the Capellans but not the Mariks".
-
I'd really like to see availability searches be more inclusive. Especially as more units go extinct it would be useful to have - for instance- A search for Jihad era Taurian and Periph Availability show all units available during the Jihad, not just the units introduced in that era. I realize that you can do a multi era search, but that doesn't take into account extinction.
-
I asked about that in the MUL thread in General Discussion, Welshamn said it was on the "to-do" list.
-
I can't imagine this would be at all quick to implement, but:
Level 2 technology was published in batches, each batch spanning one or more TROs (2750/3050/3055/3058 was the first batch, then 3060 was the second batch, 3067/PP was the third, and Total Warfare/TechManual was the fourth). It would help me greatly if I could search for units according to which "batch" of technology they belong to.
Easier:
When an image is unavailable and another has been substituted, it might be helpful to have a note or caption saying as much.
-
I can't imagine this would be at all quick to implement, but:
Level 2 technology was published in batches, each batch spanning one or more TROs (2750/3050/3055/3058 was the first batch, then 3060 was the second batch, 3067/PP was the third, and Total Warfare/TechManual was the fourth). It would help me greatly if I could search for units according to which "batch" of technology they belong to.
One of the advanced search fields is "Sourcebook", whcih lets you specify what TROs and other books you want to look for. Of course, it's going to include the later variants from the Upgrade TROs, but it'd be a fairly functional search.
-
Since "TRO" actually goes by record sheet book instead of TRO, each search gives you the whole range of tech. Not at all functional for me. :(
-
Era introduced does that though with slighty different breakdowns.
2750 would be Star League.
3050-3060 would be clan invasion.
3067 and PP are civil war.
-
Tried it. Those eras don't divide as cleanly as you'd think, and different techs are still mixed in anyhow.
Believe me, I did try to get this function by using the existing options. Wouldn't have made the suggestion if I hadn't. Still, thank you, I do appreciate the help.
EDIT: to be clear, I'm not talking about the release order of OOP books, that was just a handy illustration. I'm talking about the in-universe release of weapons technology. From ~3040-3058 the Inner Sphere only has regular lostech, and I'd like to find machines that are restricted to that technology. I can spot (or handwave) an anachronistic 'Mech in a pool of identical technology more easily than I can, say, Streak SRM-4s or MRMs in a pool of "Clan Invasion Era" 'Mechs. Even moreso with the Civil War and Jihad eras, where I'm less familiar with how the weaponry plays, it helps me if I can find all the machines that draw on the period's characteristic set of weapons.
So I guess that my request boils down to dividing the Clan Invasion era into "Early" and "Late" options, and then creating a way to use the "production era" field to search for tech instead of introductory dates. /EDIT
-
Error:
I seem to be unable to add multiples of the same unit. Is anybody else having this problem?
I just hope its not something on my end...
-
Possible Error:
Not sure if this is intentional (and if so, not sure I understand it), but here it is.
Did a search for all unit types (all tech levels) linked to the Taurians. I come up with them having access to all of the other factions' infantry types form TRO 3085 (Lyran Royal Guards Heavy, Davion Firefighters, Explorer Corps XCT, etc.) I'm also not sure if this an issue just limited to the Taurians.
Edit: Also, the Royal Warhammer (6Rb) is available to the Taurians. I thought the MUL was meant to show "significant" numbers, whether that be salvage, importing, or production. They had significant salvage of the Royals that nobody knew about until the New Dallas core, just sitting around? Or are they producing Royals? Maybe I'm misunderstanding the MUL, but I do have to admit some confusion on that one.
Edit 2: Similar to the Royal Warhammer, the Taurians show the Demolisher II (MML) as available, but not the Demolisher II itself. Tagged wrong perhaps? Again, maybe I'm mistaken, but Demolisher II seemed pretty exclusive to the Lyrans.
-
Re: Infantry
These were given as wide a distribution as possible. The specific unit name mentioned was basically ignored, and only the generic unti type used for determining availability. The specific unit is treated as merely a "notable pilot" of that unit type. There must be something in the stats of the unit that makes it unavailable. Also, faction specific armor can be replaced with same stat armor available to another faction. So as long as the faction has armor available with the same stats, the unit can be available to them (unless some other stat makes it impossible).
Examples.
Heavy Jump Infantry/DEST Heavy Response Team. Everyone has Heavy Jump Infantry. However, these use DEST Infiltration Suits. So that would limit availability.
Clan Assault Infantry/Ghost Bear Heavy Solahma Infantry. All the equipment is available to all clans, so this unit type is available to all clans, not just Clan Ghost Bear.
Any 100 person Marian Infantry is Marian only, as nobody else uses 100 person infantry units.
etc.
Unless there is a stat in the unit that is not reproducible by the faction, the unit can be available to that faction.
-
New face here, though I have been a Troll for some time. Anywho, hello! I'd like to say the MUL is an awesome acheivement, thanks to all the great folks who brought this into being for the BT community. Nice piece of work!
So, before I get too far here, can I ask if the MUL will eventually be a "complete" list of BT units, or are there always going to be some units omitted? It is a fantastic resource in any event, but I thought I'd ask. Apologies if this has already been answered.
Thanks!
-
On the Getting Started page, the BattleTech Eras tab, is the following misspelling in the 3rd paragraph:
"we’ve pided BattleTech into six major eras."
I believe that should be:
"we’ve divided BattleTech into six major eras."
-
I saw it mentioned earlier, but the remove unit button isn't working. Also, I'm clicking on the Thor Prime and Thor A and it wasn't adding to My force.
Feature Request: On the Advanced Search, selecting a faction would include the general inner sphere or general clan mechs. For example, I select Jade Falcon and look up the Thor, I only see 4 variants (B, M, G, U). The Prime version is not listed, but is included in clan in general. If I select Jade Falcon, all the Jade Falcon specific and clan in general would appear.
-
Error: JES I has a weight of 95t
It only has 50t in RS 3085 and 3075.
-
I saw it mentioned earlier, but the remove unit button isn't working. Also, I'm clicking on the Thor Prime and Thor A and it wasn't adding to My force.
Remove button now works.
I tried adding the Thor Prime and Thor A and both were added to my list, I can also add multiples of the same unit which I've seen mentioned off and on. Hmm, maybe the browser caches it and doesn't re-call...will have to check that out.
-
The Behemoth Heavy Tank (Kurita) is listed as available to Inner Sphere Faction General as well as obscure factions like the Kell Hounds.
I recommend restricting it to House Kurita. Also, it isn't a heavy tank AFAICT.
-
The Zugvogel Prime (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3660)'s faction listings are doubled for some reason.
Also, the units at Unit/3661 to Unit/3665 are all duplicates of existing units.
-
The ability to select multiple criteria in the advanced search - already mentioned in the context of specifying two or more factions - would be wonderful if extended to all the advanced search criteria. Eg. it would be great if we could list equipment for both Introductory and Standard rules levels, or for 4th SW & Clan Invasion eras, at the same time.
Hold down the Shift key when selecting will allow you to pick a range (so clicking on "Age of War", then Shift+clicking on "Civil War" will select all the in-between as well.
Holding CTRL will allow you to pick and choose, so clicking Age of War, then CTRL+clicking Civil War will only select those 2.
[REQUEST:]
I'd really like to see a Random Allocation Table for this, following all said modifiers already available, but adding weight class. Thanks!
-
Great work on this DB, really useful. For dopey people like me, any chance of a password reminder function on the MUL!?!
-
Great work on this DB, really useful. For dopey people like me, any chance of a password reminder function on the MUL!?!
Thanks, I can add a password reset that will send an e-mail to you...but no reminder as it is encrypted.
-
The Mercury II (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2173) is using the artwork for the original Mercury. It should be using the Brent Evans art (http://www.evansgraphiccreations.com/ClassicBattletech-MercuryII.html) from Blake Documents.
-
The Mercury II (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2173) is using the artwork for the original Mercury. It should be using the Brent Evans art (http://www.evansgraphiccreations.com/ClassicBattletech-MercuryII.html) from Blake Documents.
Done, thanks for the link to the image
-
Anhur (P-Stealth) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/33)
The image should match that of the standard Anhur (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/35).
-
RPT-2X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2657) and RPT-2X1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2658) Raptor II
Both should be using the artwork from The Blake Documents, reproduced here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/4/49/Raptor-2X.jpg). In addition, judging from TRO3085 page 70, the RPT-2X and RPT-2X1 are not extinct but rather in use by the Republic of the Sphere.
-
Password reset will do nicely, thanks!
-
Anhur (P-Stealth) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/33)
The image should match that of the standard Anhur (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/35).
Done
-
KGC-0000 King Crab (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1771)
Based on the record sheet, this should have the artwork from TRO3039 page 279, uploaded here (http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/5766/kgc0000kingcrab.png).
KGC-010 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1778) and KGC-000b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1772) King Crab
Based on the record sheet, these are supposed to have the TRO3050U artwork here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/f/fa/3050U_King_Crab.jpg).
-
KGC-0000 King Crab (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1771)
Based on the record sheet, this should have the artwork from TRO3039 page 279, uploaded here (http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/5766/kgc0000kingcrab.png).
KGC-010 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1778) and KGC-000b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1772) King Crab
Based on the record sheet, these are supposed to have the TRO3050U artwork here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/f/fa/3050U_King_Crab.jpg).
And Done
-
Regulator II Hovertanks (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2679)
All three models are currently lacking artwork, which should be the TRO3085 line art here (http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/7846/regulatorii.png).
-
3053 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3098), 3063 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3099), Narc (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3102) and Laser (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3100) Strikers
All four of these should use the TRO3058 artwork linked here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/2/2e/3058U_Striker.jpg).
Phalanx (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2480)
This tank is missing imagery; the artwork is from XTRO Marik (http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/34/phalanxdv.png).
-
Regulator II Hovertanks (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2679)
All three models are currently lacking artwork, which should be the TRO3085 line art here (http://img805.imageshack.us/img805/7846/regulatorii.png).
Done
3053 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3098), 3063 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3099), Narc (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3102) and Laser (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3100) Strikers
All four of these should use the TRO3058 artwork linked here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/2/2e/3058U_Striker.jpg).
Phalanx (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2480)
This tank is missing imagery; the artwork is from XTRO Marik (http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/34/phalanxdv.png).
And Done
-
PLG-4X Pillager "Anvil" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2526)
This one should have the artwork from XTRO: Liao (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Pillager_Anvil.jpg).
-
PLG-4X Pillager "Anvil" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2526)
This one should have the artwork from XTRO: Liao (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Pillager_Anvil.jpg).
Done
-
BE700 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1711) and BE701 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1712) Jousts
Both units should have the TRO3085 artwork here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/3/3d/BE700_Joust.jpg).
Standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3309) and Combat Support (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3308) Triremes
Both units should have the TRO3085 Supplemental artwork here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Trireme_VTOL.jpg).
-
BE700 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1711) and BE701 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1712) Jousts
Both units should have the TRO3085 artwork here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/3/3d/BE700_Joust.jpg).
Standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3309) and Combat Support (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3308) Triremes
Both units should have the TRO3085 Supplemental artwork here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Trireme_VTOL.jpg).
Got em.
-
Skyhigh, I just wanted to, again, thank you for the great work you're doing here. :)
-
Save error. I get an error "You must name your force before we can save" when trying to save, but there's no Force Name field to save it as ;)
PS: Great work on the Mechwarrior skill BV Modifiers :)
-
If you click on Unnamed Force, it should change to an edit box.
-
Skyhigh, I just wanted to, again, thank you for the great work you're doing here. :)
Thanks Gauthic!
Don't know if anyone noticed but I updated the Force List features so that you can now Remove a unit, Edit the Units Warrior, Gunnery, and Piloting. And you can save changes that are made after the initial save of the unit too.
I'll keep adding features as I get them done.
-
If you click on Unnamed Force, it should change to an edit box.
Wow fantastic... I didn't pick up on the visual clue on that. I see the title tag in it now, but there wasn't a reminder at the bottom of the list or anywhere. That might need a bit of massaging as far as documentation goes for new users (because if I missed it, I'm sure others will too).
Thanks, nckestrel :)
-
Yeah I like that feature but it is really hidden...it's on my list of things =)
-
I know how it is for "list of things" I'm in the process of rewriting my Tournament-Tracker (http://www.tournament-tracker.net) to handle Warmachine/Hordes style tournaments (and possibly BattleTech Open 2.0 Tournaments too, but with my lack of local players right now this is low priority) with more maintainable code, but family and work steals MUCH of my personal development time.
-
Under Unit Sub Type there is no listing for Omnivehicle.
-
Under Unit Sub Type there is no listing for Omnivehicle.
That one would be rather difficult to do, currently.
We track the movement type of the vehicle in the sub type. If we would also track the omni flag there, we would have to have double the amount of sub types (not only for combat vehicles and all of their movement types, but also for VTOLs, submarines etc). It would make things far more complicated and confusing if you try to search for something that is not an omni, because you would have to look for all tracked vehicles and all tracked omni vehicles, if you want to see all tracked vehicles.
-
That one would be rather difficult to do, currently.
We track the movement type of the vehicle in the sub type. If we would also track the omni flag there, we would have to have double the amount of sub types (not only for combat vehicles and all of their movement types, but also for VTOLs, submarines etc). It would make things far more complicated and confusing if you try to search for something that is not an omni, because you would have to look for all tracked vehicles and all tracked omni vehicles, if you want to see all tracked vehicles.
Would it be feasible to have a checkbox or something similar in a separate space?
-
That one would be rather difficult to do, currently.
We track the movement type of the vehicle in the sub type. If we would also track the omni flag there, we would have to have double the amount of sub types (not only for combat vehicles and all of their movement types, but also for VTOLs, submarines etc). It would make things far more complicated and confusing if you try to search for something that is not an omni, because you would have to look for all tracked vehicles and all tracked omni vehicles, if you want to see all tracked vehicles.
All the other fields allow you to select more than one option (using ctrl + click) so why not here? You could select omnivehicle | omnivehicle, tracked | omnivehicle, hover etc.
-
All the other fields allow you to select more than one option (using ctrl + click) so why not here? You could select omnivehicle | omnivehicle, tracked | omnivehicle, hover etc.
He's saying the data has to change, not how you select.
-
He's saying the data has to change, not how you select.
Sure, but I would guess it's something as straightforward as adding a column to a table. I see change controls for those daily here at work, it can't be that tough of a change to make.
-
Sure, but I would guess it's something as straightforward as adding a column to a table. I see change controls for those daily here at work, it can't be that tough of a change to make.
It isn't, but it would make it unnecessary complicated to use. We are discussing an easier way to handle the issue, though :)
-
*puts on his smarmy "told ya so" hat*
-
Suggestion: include the price in C-Bills in the information listed for each unit.
-
The Hermes II HER-5Sr is listed as a 35 ton mech. It should be 40.
Thanks for all of your efforts.
-
I know you're still working on this functionality, so treat this as a reminder for your to do list. :)
After a force has been saved, there should be a way to remove/rename/manage your saved forces.
Perhaps a whole "Manage Saved Forces" page instead of the area in the sidebar, so if I have a lot of forces the sidebar isn't so congested. Also, if I do have a lot of forces, you might want to put the Search on top of the forces list so that the search isn't all the way on the bottom.
Thanks again!
~G~
-
Remove I'll need to add. Manage you can already do by clicking on the Force which will re-load it into your session and then you can Add/Remove units + change the Warrior info and re-save.
-
Despite the sourcebook being a searchable choice, no units appear to be present from XTRO: Retrotech.
Suggestion: Add the following units to the list:
PTN-2 Patron MilitiaMech
PFF-2 Pathfinder
CN9-H Centurion
NH-1B Rook-X
HWK-3F HawkWolf
Humming Bird
HW1 Hwacha
Barouche
Nike
White Tip
SPR-DH Sparrowhawk
S-2 Star Dagger
BAM-1A1 Malaika
-
Don't know if anyone noticed but I updated the Force List features so that you can now Remove a unit, Edit the Units Warrior, Gunnery, and Piloting. And you can save changes that are made after the initial save of the unit too.
I seem to have a problem with the "remove" button. While it does remove a unit from the list, it doesn't remove the unit's tonnage or BV from the force totals.
I have to add, though: Terrific work on the MUL, Skyhigh and CGL! O0
-
I seem to have a problem with the "remove" button. While it does remove a unit from the list, it doesn't remove the unit's tonnage or BV from the force totals.
I have to add, though: Terrific work on the MUL, Skyhigh and CGL! O0
Doh! I'll take a look at that.
-
M1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2205) and M2 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2206) Moltke, A3 Augustus (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/154)
Per the record sheet images, all three vehicles should use the original JHS3076 artwork here (http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/6996/moltkejhs3076.png).
Unrelated Question
Is there any way to get the MUL database not to try for partial matches via input into the search field? I.e., to specify I only want a result on "Archer ARC-2R" and do not care that there's this nifty thing called the "Archer ARC-2Rb"?
-
M1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2205) and M2 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2206) Moltke, A3 Augustus (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/154)
Per the record sheet images, all three vehicles should use the original JHS3076 artwork here (http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/6996/moltkejhs3076.png).
Done
Unrelated Question
Is there any way to get the MUL database not to try for partial matches via input into the search field? I.e., to specify I only want a result on "Archer ARC-2R" and do not care that there's this nifty thing called the "Archer ARC-2Rb"?
No there's no way to tell it that.
-
I don't know if this has bee mentioned but you cant seem to add the same unit twice to the same force. Been having a problem with this on the mars and the Fenrir units.
Thanks for this program by the way its been very helpfull.
-
While attempting to duplicate that error (I wasn't able to), I got this lovely little compiler error:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Force/Clear (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Force/Clear)
Compiler Error Message: CS1061: 'MUL.Models.Force' does not contain a definition for 'TotalBV' and no extension method 'TotalBV' accepting a first argument of type 'MUL.Models.Force' could be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?)
Source Error:
Line 3: }
Line 4: <p>Your force list contains @MUL.Controllers.AppData.Force.Units.Count Units
Line 5: with a total BV of @MUL.Controllers.AppData.Force.TotalBV</p>
Line 6: <p>Do you really want to clear this list and lose all changes?</p>
Line 7: <br />
Source File: c:\VirtualHosts\MUL\Views\Force\Clear.cshtml Line: 5
-
While attempting to duplicate that error (I wasn't able to), I got this lovely little compiler error:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Force/Clear (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Force/Clear)
Compiler Error Message: CS1061: 'MUL.Models.Force' does not contain a definition for 'TotalBV' and no extension method 'TotalBV' accepting a first argument of type 'MUL.Models.Force' could be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?)
Source Error:
Line 3: }
Line 4: <p>Your force list contains @MUL.Controllers.AppData.Force.Units.Count Units
Line 5: with a total BV of @MUL.Controllers.AppData.Force.TotalBV</p>
Line 6: <p>Do you really want to clear this list and lose all changes?</p>
Line 7: <br />
Source File: c:\VirtualHosts\MUL\Views\Force\Clear.cshtml Line: 5
Gah, fixed. And fixed the issue where you actually saw the real error message :)
-
I don't know if this has bee mentioned but you cant seem to add the same unit twice to the same force. Been having a problem with this on the mars and the Fenrir units.
Thanks for this program by the way its been very helpfull.
Thanks peter, yeah I am aware of it but still working an update/fix.
Well, once I had a chance to dig into it I found the fix pretty fast!
I also fixed the issue with a removed unit not adjusting the total BV's. All posted.
-
Suggest making Steiner and Marik variants of 3025 mechs available to the Marian Hegemony. MH mech forces had a particularly high number of mechs stolen from these nations.
-
Just a question, but currently the Gallant 8-0 is listed as being available to WoB during the Jihad and to pretty much everybody in the Dark Ages.
Clan Diamond Shark/Sea Fox
Clan Nova Cat
Clan Wolf (in Exile)
Inner Sphere Faction General
Magistracy of Canopus
Marian Hegemony
Mercenary
Outworlds Alliance
Rasalhague Dominion
Taurian Concordat
TRO 3085 would seem to indicate that the 8-0 was developed in house by the Federated Suns after the specs for the 7-0 were transfered .
Suggestion- Remove the Jihad availability entirely and consider removing it from the General lists.
-
Heavy MML Carrier (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1441)
This should use the heavy LRM carrier (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1440)'s image per the sheets.
-
Some ProtoMechs lacks a faction availability for the Jihad era.
Siren (all variants)
Satyr 3
Centaur 2 and Centaur 4
Hydra 3 and 4
Gorgon 2 and 4
Minotaur 3 and Mintaur 4
-
Vindicator VND-3LD (Dao)
Should show the image of the Vindicator from XTR Liao. Currently it shows the standard one.
-
Suggestion: include the price in C-Bills in the information listed for each unit.
I would have to second this request. The MUL is great for tournament play, but for those of us running role playing campaigns the price of a unit is often of greater concern then it's battle value.
I realize it would be quite a large task. To share the work, maybe the code could be altered to allow us to enter the C-bill cost. (probably too big a security hole I'd imagine)
-
With Piloting and Gunnery Skills for the unit list included, it should be named which value is Piloting and which is Gunnery.
Currently only two drop-downs are included togehter with a field for the pilot's name - all marked as warrior.
-
With Piloting and Gunnery Skills for the unit list included, it should be named which value is Piloting and which is Gunnery.
Currently only two drop-downs are included togehter with a field for the pilot's name - all marked as warrior.
Is it really that unclear which is which? The default of 4 and 5 doesn't help that?
-
IMHO, yes.
While maybe some new players try to explore the MUL, not familiar with the standard Piloting / Gunnery Settings
and also after "playing" with different values there is no default setting anymore.
-
Is it really that unclear which is which? The default of 4 and 5 doesn't help that?
I have to agree with Demos on this one. It's probably clear enough to a veteran who thinks about it but a label, even something as simple as a G/P note, wouldn't be amiss.
-
Silent until now, but I'm gonna weigh in. I agree with the idea of including even a simple 'G/P'. The target audience for this isn't the veteran users, but the first timers. Doing so reduces the unfamiliarity with the 'process' of the online MUL and is one less reason they won't come back a second time. Veterans won't be irked by its inclusion and newcomers will have a proverbial lightbulb that glows that much brighter.
- Rev
-
OK, I have added an indicator to the column header so that it is clear that these are Name ( Gun / Pilot ) inputs.
-
The Hermes II is 35 tons when it should be 40.
-
None of the unit images is working.
Warhammer X7 image links to standard Warhammer image instead of the actual image, should link to the same image as the WHD-10CT
-
The CRD-4L is exactly the same as the CRD-4D. So the CRD-4L Record Sheet is in RS3085 PP, it's just called the CRD-4D. We haven't found a good way to note this yet. VTR-9D and VTR-9K is the same thing.
A similar problem exists with the THE-F & THE-S Thorn. RS3039u contains the sheet for the THE-S which is identical to the THE-F for which no sheet exists. I would suggest a note in the source column where the source TRO(RS) are listed stating the designation the mech is included in the RS under eg. for the THE-F TR3039 (RS3039u - sheet labelled THE-S).
Not sure if this is the right place but the PRC-1N Porcupine is noted in the MUL as having a BV of 870 but the sheet has a BV of 880 (RS3055Uu). Will also post this to the errata for RS3055Uu as I am unsure which is correct.
-
COM-1C Commando - is this functionally identical to the COM-1B Commando? They have the same BV and are listed as being from the same source books & both listed as TR3050 & RS3050U-I but other than here on the MUL I have been unable to find any mention of the COM-1C Commando.
-
Phoenix Hawk IIC 4 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2514)
Should use the TROPP (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Phoenixhawk_iic_4.jpg) artwork per the RS3085 Phoenix sheet.
Phoenix Hawk IICs 5 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2515), 6 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2516), 8 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2518)
All should use the Phoenix Hawk IIC 7 (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Phoenix_hawk_iic_7.png) artwork.
-
Phoenix Hawk IIC 4 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2514)
Should use the TROPP (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Phoenixhawk_iic_4.jpg) artwork per the RS3085 Phoenix sheet.
Phoenix Hawk IICs 5 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2515), 6 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2516), 8 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2518)
All should use the Phoenix Hawk IIC 7 (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Phoenix_hawk_iic_7.png) artwork.
Done
-
Gürteltier MBT (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1353) and C3M (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1352)
Both models are missing the TRO3085 artwork (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/1/1c/G%C3%BCrteltier.jpg).
-
Warhammer X7 image links to standard Warhammer image instead of the actual image, should link to the same image as the WHD-10CT
Seems you overlooked it ;)
-
Gürteltier MBT (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1353) and C3M (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1352)
Both models are missing the TRO3085 artwork (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/1/1c/G%C3%BCrteltier.jpg).
Updated
-
Gürteltier MBT (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1353) and C3M (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1352)
Both models are missing the TRO3085 artwork (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/1/1c/G%C3%BCrteltier.jpg).
Updated
Seems you overlooked it ;)
Updated
-
ASN-30 Assassin (Alice) & BNDR-01A Bandersnatch (Horus) from RSUM are missing from the MUL.
-
Rhino Fire Support Tank (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2686)
The tank should be marked as Introductory rules, not standard.
-
Marsden II (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2084), Marsden II (Primitive) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2085), Marsden II-A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2086), Marsden II-A LB-X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2087)
All tanks should have the Marsden II (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/8/89/Marsden_II.jpg) image.
-
The ability to alter the search display order would be nice. If I want to find the most expensive or cheapest variant of a unit it would make it easier.
-
Marsden II (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2084), Marsden II (Primitive) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2085), Marsden II-A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2086), Marsden II-A LB-X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2087)
All tanks should have the Marsden II (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/8/89/Marsden_II.jpg) image.
Done
-
The era and availability information for the standard and MG variants of the various APCs is missing. I'm just going to link to the unit families to save some typing. The variants that are off are missing an icon on the list.
Armored Personnel Carriers (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/112)
Heavy Hover APC (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1432)
Heavy Tracked APC (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1451)
Heavy Wheeled APC (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1456)
-
Baboon (Howler) 3 "Devil" uses the art for the Baboon (Howler) (Standard) from TRO3055
As it is a refit of the Baboon (Howler) 2 it should use the art from TRO3055U
-
Source TRO for the Cossack C-1FC is listed as TRO 3060. While the base model the C-SK1 Cossack is described in TRO 3060 no variants are mentioned. The C-1FC is described in a milispecs article from BattleCorps.
Solution: Change Source TRO to BattleCorps.
-
Padilla Tube Artillery Tank (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2406), (LTC) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2405), (Thumper) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2407)
All three are marked as only being available to the Republic of the Sphere. On page 32 of TRO3085, Aldis Industries is described as selling the Padilla Tube Artillery Tank "to all non-Clan factions in the Inner Sphere". At a minimum, that sounds like it should be on the Inner Sphere General list.
-
Suggestion: Include a cardstock image of the 'Mech on the unit page to allow players to use the 'Mech in combat until they get a mini.
Col. Hengist mentioned this idea in another thread (http://www.classicbattletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,6595.msg200585.html#msg200585), but I wanted to be sure you saw it.
-
Source TRO for the Enforcer III ENF-6NAIS & Enforcer III ENF-6Ma is listed as TRO 3060. While the base model the ENF-6M is described in TRO 3060 no variants are mentioned. The ENF-6NAIS is described in a milispecs article from BattleCorps. I am unaware of any TRO entry for the Enforcer III ENF-6Ma.
Solution: Change Source TRO for ENF-6NAIS Enforcer to BattleCorps. Unsure as regards ENF-6Ma Enforcer III.
-
For the BA listing it looks like the tonnage is listed for a per suit basis (e.g. 1 ton) while the BV is listed on a per squad basis. Shouldn't the entries use the same standard?
-
Source TRO for the Stalking Spider 3 is listed as TRO 3060. While the Stalking Spider 1 & 2 are described in TRO 3060 the 3 is not mentioned. The Stalking Spider 3 is described in a milispecs article from BattleCorps.
Solution: Change Source TRO to BattleCorps.
-
I'm not exactly sure it is an error or not. The Marauder MAD-1R and MAD-2R, The Exterminator EXT-4D, and the Atlas II AS7-D-H2 are all listed as Inner Sphere Clan General. I thought they were extinct.
-
I'm not exactly sure it is an error or not. The Marauder MAD-1R and MAD-2R, The Exterminator EXT-4D, and the Atlas II AS7-D-H2 are all listed as Inner Sphere Clan General. I thought they were extinct.
The Atlas II apparently didn't go extinct among the Clans, just the Inner Sphere. They were pulled out of the Brian Caches periodically and one was even used at Tukayyid according to TRO3075. TRO3050U notes that the Clans have but don't use the EXT-4D. Given the way that's worded, I'd imagine they lost access after the Jihad. As to the Marauders, we simply don't have information on them for the Clans.
-
Several of the 3085 units don't show which of the 3 3085 books they are in.
-
Is possible to setup MUL to be able to have two groups of units to be able to compare them for possible game?
-
For now, having two different browser tabs or windows open should do a decent job of that.
EDIT: To clarify, I'm not arguing with the suggestion, just offering a way to do it right now.
-
How about as a bonus feature adding a Perks list for units?
-
Locust LCT-5T is not showing up as available to the CapCon.
2nd paragraph under Variants (pg. 226, TRO 3085) seems to indicate that it should be available to the CapCon.
-
Is possible to setup MUL to be able to have two groups of units to be able to compare them for possible game?
Another FYI, Part of the Solaris Skunkwerks (SSW) download is a program I wrote called Battletech Force Balancer which allows you to create and manage two separate forces and balance them against each other (and print all sheets in whatever format you want).
I don't currently have plans to add multiple force balancing to the MUL website.
-
Does anyone know of a database where I can find the intro dates to the units? Or do I have to dig through the TROs and find the data?
-
Hermes II HER-5Sr and Vulcan VT-5Sr are the wrong weight. They are both listed as 35t, but the record sheets has them at 40t, like all other Vulcans and Hermes IIs.
-
Hello, I have a question regarding the Master Unit List tool on www.classicbattletech.com (which is awesome by the way!)
In the "My Force" window, for each unit is a drop-down menu for Gunnery and Piloting (ranges 0 - 7). After selecting the appropriate skills for a unit and clicking "save", it adjusts the BV.
When you add an infantry platoon or point, the drop-down under Piloting remains. I notice that changing the Piloting value for infantry units also changes their BV after clicking "save".
Is this actually the Anti-'Mech skill given that infantry do not have a piloting skill?
-
Yes, it is.
-
So I can add units and save the entire list that I named. I can call up a list that I previously saved and remove a unit. What I can't figure out how to do is to remove an entire list (delete it) once it has been saved. Need to unclutter and I can't figure out how.
-
Is there a time limit posted for unsaved forces? I was building a force, got distracted, and when I came back to add another unit, my force was gone.
-
The 'Vindicator VND-3LD (Dao)' does shows up when I specify 'Inner Sphere' tech level. This is wrong, since it is a mixed tech unit.
-
I have been having problems finding the record sheets for some Battle Armor units:
Elemental (fire armor) AP Gauss, Flamer, MicroPulse laser. All are listed as TRO3085u. They aren't in TRO 3085, and not listed in the table of contents for TRO3085 supplemental. Is there a 3085 Upgrade for sale? I haven't been able to find it.
-
I have been having problems finding the record sheets for some Battle Armor units:
Elemental (fire armor) AP Gauss, Flamer, MicroPulse laser. All are listed as TRO3085u. They aren't in TRO 3085, and not listed in the table of contents for TRO3085 supplemental. Is there a 3085 Upgrade for sale? I haven't been able to find it.
TR 3085 p190.
-
There are 3 seperate 3085 record sheets available. I missed one of them myself and had to get it the other day. Now if we could only get the new 39u i would be happy.
-
Stooping Hawk: Prime, A, B, C, D, E
There is no era listed for the Stooping Hawk configs listed above. Considering the history of this mech, and the fact that it is fluffed to be based on a design the Bears rejected in favor of the Mad Dog, it needs to have the era of configs Prime, A, B, and C set to Late Succession Wars (since Mad Dog has that era). The record sheets (RS3060u) lists D as Clan Invasion and E as Civil War.
-
TR 3085 p190.
Hi. I saw that, but it doesn't really help define what is the official configuration of a fire-armored Elemental. Removing the AP mount and SRM-2 reload nets 25kg, but converting to 10 pts of fire-proof armor requires 50kg...unless the unit drops to 9 pts fire-proof armor? I don't see how else it could be done, but unless I see something different in print, what am I to assume?
The situation with either the flamer or micro-pulse laser is even more undefined as they are lighter than the AP Gauss (heaviest of the listed weapons options).
-
Hi. I saw that, but it doesn't really help define what is the official configuration of a fire-armored Elemental. Removing the AP mount and SRM-2 reload nets 25kg, but converting to 10 pts of fire-proof armor requires 50kg...unless the unit drops to 9 pts fire-proof armor? I don't see how else it could be done, but unless I see something different in print, what am I to assume?
The situation with either the flamer or micro-pulse laser is even more undefined as they are lighter than the AP Gauss (heaviest of the listed weapons options).
The Record Sheets show the final sheets for the units. That may help you figure out what you are looking for, but the MUL can't change what is or is not in the Technical Readout.
-
Thanks, I can add a password reset that will send an e-mail to you...but no reminder as it is encrypted.
Will we see a password reset function soon for the MUL?
-
Per TR3085 p. 62, the Nyx should not be available to the Capellan Confederation, as it was only supplied to Coalition members, and even then only in small numbers.
-
Add TDR-9M Thunderbolt to Marian Hegemony, per TRPP p. 42.
-
Bushwacker BSW-X2 has Faction Availability as Unique. Though this design has no fluff that I'm aware of, I'm guessing it should be a standard refit rather than a unique design. I would guess it should be available to the FedCom states, etc.
Ostroc OSR-2C (Michi) has Faction Availability as Unique / Draconis Combine. Should be Unique / Extinct to match other Unique 'Mechs from the current Historical range.
Zeus (Leonidas) has Faction Availability as Unique. Should probably be Unique / Extinct to match other Unique 'Mechs from the current Historical range.
Battlemaster BLR-1G (Red Corsair) has Faction Availability as Unique. Should probably be Unique / Extinct to match other Unique 'Mechs from the current Historical range.
Stalker STK-3F (Jagawen) has Faction Availability as Unique. Should probably be Unique / Extinct to match other Unique 'Mechs from the current Historical range.
Highlander HGN-732 (Colleen) has Faction Availability as Unique / Word of Blake. Should be Unique / Clan Blood Spirit.
Atlas AS-7D (Danielle) has Faction Availability as Unique. Should probably be Unique / Extinct to match other Unique 'Mechs from the current Historical range.
-
Per Field Manual Periphery records sheets, add CGR-2A2 Charger to Marian Hegemony.
-
Will we see a password reset function soon for the MUL?
My sentiments exactly. This would be very nice... very very nice.
-
Stormcrow H (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2756) should be Clan/Inner Sphere General in line with other H-series Omnis from 3050. In FM: U's RATs (p. 207 on) it is present in the lists for Clan Star Adder in addition to the Horses and Cats.
-
Longbow LGB-12C jihad availability is listed as Capellan Confederation, Federated Suns, Kell Hounds, Magistracy of Canopus, Marian Hegemony, Mercenary, Wolf's Dragoons.
As per TRO:PP LGB-12C Longbow deployment, availability should also include Free Worlds League (manufactured on Emris IV) & Lyran Alliance (manufactured on Loburg)
-
Will we see a password reset function soon for the MUL?
I've got one working, just let me know your username or email and I'll reset it for you.
-
Have a question and an error.
Is anything from starter book Wolf and Blake in the MUL? I ask because the Locust LCT-6M Griffin GRF-6S Francine is not under Wolf Dragoon in the MUL. Pages 31 and 22 of Wolf and Blake respectively.
the Art of the Thunderbolt TDR-11SE shows the UNseen T bolt.
-
Found that some "General Inner Sphere" Mechs, maybe more, do not show up if you search by faction. Example: the Avatar Omni did not show up when I searched Kurita units but is under General Inner Sphere units. If this how it should work, I would suggest to explain that in the getting started page. Also what in all Does General Inner Sphere included? Just Major Factions? Or do Mercs get those units too?
-
Inner Sphere General are units that everyone has access to. If you're looking for all the units a faction has access to, you should select Inner Sphere (or Clan) General, and also the faction.
-
Inner Sphere Faction General in the Jihad era is Liao, Marik, Steiner, Davion, Kurita, Comstar, Word of Blake and Free Rasalhague.
It does not mean periphery or Merc unless tagged as such. I'll see about making sure the definitions of each are up on the site.
-
If you drill down into the entries for the various configurations of the Achileus Light Battle Armor, it notes the unit as weighing 1 ton in the brief stat block next to the suit image. The mass is shown correctly as 0.75 in the Tons column of the search list results.
EDIT: The same is true for the other Light Battle Armor designs currently in the MUL: the Gray Death Scout, Infiltrator Mk I, Kage & Slyph.
-
Have a question and an error.
Is anything from starter book Wolf and Blake in the MUL? I ask because the Locust LCT-6M Griffin GRF-6S Francine is not under Wolf Dragoon in the MUL. Pages 31 and 22 of Wolf and Blake respectively.
The Griffin GRF-6S (Francine) should be listed as WD (and not extinct until the Dark Age).
The LCT-6M, the one in Wolf and Blake is a captured WoB unit. There is nothing (in that entry in Wolf and Blake) that suggests the LCT-6M exists in any numbers outside of salvage and the MUL, to maintain some sort of sanity, does not list salvage unless there is a source that specifically states the faction has the unit in numbers. The MUL does not list everything a faction might have, it lists what is expected in some number (multiple units in multiple forces - regiments/clusters/etc) with that faction. Otherwise CC would need Falconers and Rifleman and Jagermechs, FS would need Vindicators and Thunders and DC would need Banshees and Zeuses (ok, what is the plural of Zeus?) and the list would become meaningless pretty quick.
-
There's something wrong with the adjusted BV calculator. I'm not sure of the full details, but it always gives a higher BV for a mech with a 5 gunnery 4 piloting skill pilot than the base BV.
Also, the Penthesilea isn't listed as being available to the Magistracy of Canopus.
-
There's something wrong with the adjusted BV calculator. I'm not sure of the full details, but it always gives a higher BV for a mech with a 5 gunnery 4 piloting skill pilot than the base BV.
It's supposed to do that. In this PDF (http://bg.battletech.com/errata/CAT35002_TechManual_Errata_2.1.pdf), look at the chart on the bottom of page 37. Base BV is calculated using gunnery 4/piloting 5. I'm not sure I'd rate a gunnery 5/piloting 4 pilot as better, personally, but it's correct as far as the rules go.
Also, the Penthesilea isn't listed as being available to the Magistracy of Canopus.
I could've sworn that had been reported already but apparently it hasn't.
-
If you drill down into the entries for the various configurations of the Achileus Light Battle Armor, it notes the unit as weighing 1 ton in the brief stat block next to the suit image. The mass is shown correctly as 0.75 in the Tons column of the search list results.
EDIT: The same is true for the other Light Battle Armor designs currently in the MUL: the Gray Death Scout, Infiltrator Mk I, Kage & Slyph.
Found the issue, I was formatting the Tonnage and removing decimal places ...code change will be pushed later tonight.
-
I think there's some sort of connection problem with the database. No units, no ability to login.
-
i am having the same issue.
-
Same issue here, won't return any results.
SP13
-
Fixed that night, that's what I get for publishing changes late in the day before leaving the office.
-
Patron LoaderMech and Patron-I LoaderMech from RS3075unabridged are missing.
EDIT, some more:
Titan II TI-2P -- record sheet, TRO, and SSW 0.6.76 gives a BV of 2143, while the MUL has 2139. It looks to be that the MUL might have an error.
Von Rohrs VON 4RH-6 lacks era. Should be either Age of War or Star League.
Helepolis HEP-1H has BV according to the older record sheet in RS3075 unabridged. This design was changed in the newer product XTRO: Primitives 1, and hence is supposed to have a BV calculated according to the newer better armored record sheet. (The newer record sheet says 1055 BV, SSW 0.6.76 gives 1063 for it.)
-
Von Rohrs VON 4RH-6 lacks era. Should be either Age of War or Star League.
No VON 4RH-6's are known to have been built. So we can't say it was first built in X era, if it was never built.
-
No VON 4RH-6's are known to have been built. So we can't say it was first built in X era, if it was never built.
Well, how about introducing a "never built" era to be more explicit about designs that never progressed beyond the drawing board?
Also, speaking about units that lacks an era, the following Battlemechs without an era does also show up on a search:
- Clint CLNT-2-4T
- Hunchback HBK-5SG
- Stooping Hawk Prime, A, B, C, D, E
- Victor (Li)
- Annihilator ANH-1E
-
Well, how about introducing a "never built" era to be more explicit about designs that never progressed beyond the drawing board?
Also, speaking about units that lacks an era, the following Battlemechs without an era does also show up on a search:
- Clint CLNT-2-4T
- Hunchback HBK-5SG
- Stooping Hawk Prime, A, B, C, D, E
- Victor (Li)
- Annihilator ANH-1E
The Von Rohrs and Clint, we prefer not to answer definetely one way or another, until somebody writes something that says one way or another, it will remain a mystery. (Maybe somebody will submit a Battlecorps story? :) )
Most of the rest, we were/are still debating exact dates, then we'll tag the era.
-
The Undine (Standard) is shown as available to the Diamond Sharks and Wolves, but according to the PDF version of the MUL, the Wolves don't have access.
Given the current omission of the Homeworld Clans from the online MUL, again going by the PDF version no faction should have access to the Undine (Upgrade).
-
If you mean the ancient PDF that was released for community overview, that was a Beta version and contained errors. The online MUL should be considered an updated and more-accurate source.
-
I mean the one currently downloadable from both the MUL website and the BattleShop, product code CAT35ML01A.
-
The Undine (Standard) is shown as available to the Diamond Sharks and Wolves, but according to the PDF version of the MUL, the Wolves don't have access.
Given the current omission of the Homeworld Clans from the online MUL, again going by the PDF version no faction should have access to the Undine (Upgrade).
I'm glad to report that this is not an error. :)
-
The MUL is a very good tool (thanks CGL for that). The advance search engine is great to find which mech each faction have. Another thing in this game that need special mech grouping is the c3 system. It would be great to have a searchfor c3in the MUL. Just a little suggestion in case guys at CGL have some free time to fill. :-)
Keep up the good work !!! [rockon]
-
Harasser "Leaping Lisa" (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1386)
Rules Level should be Experimental, not Advanced. Per TRO3039 page 28, this unique vehicle was extinct long before the 3083 date when the vehicular jump jets became advanced rules per TRO Prototypes.
Mobile Long Tom Ammunition Carriage (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2203)
Tonnage should be 10 tons per TRO3039 page 79.
Mobile Long Tom Support Carriage (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2204)
Tonnage should be 5 tons per TRO3039 page 79.
-
I keep getting an application error trying to access the entry for the Gray Death Heavy Suit. Other Battle Armor and non-Battle Armor entries that I've tested are fine.
-
According to Handbook House Marik & TRO3058U, Irian Technologies built the Strider OmniMech on Shiro III, but the FWLM aren't listed as a user on the MUL.
Is this an accidental omission or was the Strider only built for export?
-
According to Handbook House Marik & TRO3058U, Irian Technologies built the Strider OmniMech on Shiro III, but the FWLM aren't listed as a user on the MUL.
Is this an accidental omission or was the Strider only built for export?
Accident.
-
Grasshopper 5N list "--" as rules level, instead of introductory.
-
Blackjack BJ-3 http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/388 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/388)
The record sheet is listed as being RS3039u/RS3050U-I, but it is not in RS3039u.
Suggested change:
Change record sheet to RS3050U-I.
-
The newest update (love the tabs for the unit type BTW O0 ) lists Dark Ages availability of all variants of Thunderbird Battle Armor as "To Be Announced". Per TRO:3085 Supplemental it should be Clan Nova Cat.
-
I was checking for the Thunder Fox (TFT-L8 and TFT-C3) but the image of the Thunder appear instead of the good one.
Keep up the good wotk guys ! O0
-
The Sabre SB-31 "Defense Special" is listed twice.
Once as Sabre SB-31 "Defense Special" and once as Sabre Defense Special SB-31.
The second listing lacks faction availability while the first is complete.
-
The GRH-5N is listed as having a RS in RS 3039u which it has not.
edit:
The Ravager is missing from the Marian List.
-
Fury command tank (standard)
intro date is 3068 but it's a SL era design from the original TRO:2750.
Page 178 from TRO3050U: "Jolassa’s sole Fury assembly plant was partially destroyed in a nuclear fireball by the Combine in the opening salvos of the First Succession Wars"
So it should have an earlier intro date.
-
Fury command tank (standard)
intro date is 3068 but it's a SL era design from the original TRO:2750.
Page 178 from TRO3050U: "Jolassa’s sole Fury assembly plant was partially destroyed in a nuclear fireball by the Combine in the opening salvos of the First Succession Wars"
So it should have an earlier intro date.
We put 3068 because we have listed an older version that has no record sheet as the original. Though I think we'll have to review that, it seems to be based on the idea of using the TR2750 stats as the original.
-
The GRH-5N is listed as having a RS in RS 3039u which it has not.
edit:
The Ravager is missing from the Marian List.
Ouch, the Ravager is actually part of a larger problem, where all TR3085 units got switched to TBA for Early Dark Age. Error on my part *sigh*. Working on that..
-
We put 3068 because we have listed an older version that has no record sheet as the original. Though I think we'll have to review that, it seems to be based on the idea of using the TR2750 stats as the original.
I don't have TRO:2750 with me right now but I am quite certain that the 2750 Fury and the Fury (standard) are supposed to be identical.
IIRC there are only slight differences due to changes in the construction rules (fractional accounting, etc).
-
I don't have TRO:2750 with me right now but I am quite certain that the 2750 Fury and the Fury (standard) are supposed to be identical.
IIRC there are only slight differences due to changes in the construction rules (fractional accounting, etc).
Yeah, that's why I said I think it will be reviewed. :)
-
Love the intro dates and tabs. This tool keeps getting better and better.
It would be cool if the intro dates got a column on the search results eventually.
-
Centurion CN9-Da
Source should be changed from TR:3050U to TR:3085 (ONN).
-
Orion ON1-MA appears to be a false entry. Error when you try to reach it. AFAIK, there is no such variant
-
Orion ON1-MA appears to be a false entry. Error when you try to reach it. AFAIK, there is no such variant
There is (it's referenced in TRO3050U's Orion entry, as I recall), but the details of some of the new designs loaded into the MUL aren't accessible yet.
We're seeing similar things with the stuff from TRO3067.
-
Centurion CN9-Da
Source should be changed from TR:3050U to TR:3085 (ONN).
There's no reference to the CN9-Da in TR:3085? The Old is the New New text about the Iron Guard's Centurion is about the CN9-Ar.
-
There's no reference to the CN9-Da in TR:3085? The Old is the New New text about the Iron Guard's Centurion is about the CN9-Ar.
There is no TRO entry about the Centurion 9Da but the RS is in RS:3085 ONN page 76. the Ar is on page 75.
-
There is no TRO entry about the Centurion 9Da but the RS is in RS:3085 ONN page 76. the Ar is on page 75.
And that's what the MUL says? RS is RS3085-ON, TR is TR3050U? yes, the specific variant 9Da is not referenced in TR3050U, but that's the most applicable technical readout information about the CN9-D that it is based on. Saying the TR is 3085 would send people on a wild goose chase?
-
yes, the specific variant 9Da is not referenced in TR3050U, but that's the most applicable technical readout information about the CN9-D that it is based on.
Might be helpful if the sourcebook entry had something to indicate this is the case.
I haven't been keeping up 100% with this thread, but I vaguely recall other instances of "best fit" data being substituted in other areas of the MUL listings as well. (Sadly, I do not have a specific suggestion. Small red box appears over bottom right corner of the "best fit" entry? I dunno.)
-
And that's what the MUL says? RS is RS3085-ON, TR is TR3050U? yes, the specific variant 9Da is not referenced in TR3050U, but that's the most applicable technical readout information about the CN9-D that it is based on. Saying the TR is 3085 would send people on a wild goose chase?
Sorry my mistake.
I was under the wrong impression that the MUL table is about the RS volume but it uses the TRO instead.
I didn't pay attention to the pictures at the right side of the screen.
I apologize for the inconvenience.
-
Nightstar NSR-9J:
It currently has an introduction date of 2764 on the MUL, but according to its fluff in TRO3058U (repeated below) it wasn't developed until after the Amaris Coup/Amaris Civil War had started, which didn't begin until December 2766.
"The Nightstar was born in the early years of the Amaris Civil War when it became clear that battlefield commanders, especially those piloting Marauders, were being specifically targeted by Amaris troops." (TRO3058U, p226)
-
WSP-1 Wasp
Rules level should be changed from "standard" to "era specific".
Technology should be changed from "Inner Sphere" to "primitive".
-
Shadow Cat H
Has an intro date of 6062
-
Well I came to talk about the Thunder/Thunderfox but it looks like someone already noticed.
Since I'm here I guess, a bunch of the Unseens have Project Phoenix pics instead of the silhouettes. Shadowhawk, Thunderbolt, Locust, Griffin, Crusader and the Battlemaster.
-
Question
The Phoenix BattleMech has two introduction dates in the Era Digest: Age of War book with the following page references:
2474 [11]
2520 [11]
The MUL has the PX-1R debuting in 2520 and the PX-3R and -4R debuting in 2580. Was there some form of errata published negating the Era Digest's information?
-
The 2520 entry is in error, though nothing has been published to that effect.
-
Lexan Surveillance Helo[/b]
Image is missing. (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1868)
-
Protomech piloting skill can be adjusted. As per Total Warfare, Protos have a fixed piloting skill of 5 for BV purposes.
-
The 2520 entry is in error, though nothing has been published to that effect.
In the Era Digest or the MUL?
-
If it's wrong, it's wrong, no matter where it shows up. Errata for Age of War will remove that reference unless I'm told otherwise; presumably the MUL will follow suit.
-
FS9-C and FS9-P swapped their designations in the last RS: 3050U IS unabridged volume.
FS-9C is once again the RL armed version while the P is the SRM armed one.
-
FS9-C and FS9-P swapped their designations in the last RS: 3050U IS unabridged volume.
FS-9C is once again the RL armed version while the P is the SRM armed one.
how does that change what is in the MUL now?
-
If it's wrong, it's wrong, no matter where it shows up. Errata for Age of War will remove that reference unless I'm told otherwise; presumably the MUL will follow suit.
It also states on page 11 that the Rim Worlds Republic "introduced modern technology" in BattleMechs in 2503. It does seem odd that they'd take 78 years to debut the PX-3R and -4R in 2581, especially since it's done in the middle of the Reunification War dates.
Does the removal of the 2520 date affect the 2503 date then?
-
That goes beyond straight errata or online MUL questions and into Ask The Developers territory. All I can add is the very real possiblity that "modern Battlemech technology" could be just that, the technology: your quote does not say it was homegrown mechs. As such, there's plenty of room for that reference to mean either imported tech grafted on to existing primitive mechs, or the importation of whole (non-primitive) mechs from the Inner Sphere. This follows a historical pattern where anyone other than the inventor of the technology often acquires examples (in whole or in part) before taking the much more labourious step of building their own from scratch (which requires a painstakingly-created infrastructure that must be created out of nothing).
-
how does that change what is in the MUL now?
Some factions have access to the RL armed version but not the SRM armed one and vice versa. Also the BV of both must be changed of course (right now the FS-9C still has the BV of the P and vice versa).
For example the Marians use only the RL Firestarter but if this swap is ignored have the Circinan one on their list- and it has the wrong BV as well.
-
Haven't seen this posted yet: the HCT-5D Hatchetman (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5445) is listed as a BattleMech and a battlesuit.
-
Haven't seen this posted yet: the HCT-5D Hatchetman (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5445) is listed as a BattleMech and a battlesuit.
Funny things can happen with typos :). Thanks, fixed now.
-
Some factions have access to the RL armed version but not the SRM armed one and vice versa. Also the BV of both must be changed of course (right now the FS-9C still has the BV of the P and vice versa).
For example the Marians use only the RL Firestarter but if this swap is ignored have the Circinan one on their list- and it has the wrong BV as well.
Thanks. I wanted to verify, because I had been told that they were switched long ago, and thought we had already switched them. Apparently I had not.
-
Haven't seen this posted yet: the HCT-5D Hatchetman (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5445) is listed as a BattleMech and a battlesuit.
If only that had happened to the Commando....
-
Request
For campaign purposes, it really helps to know what was introduced in a specific year range. i.e.: 2500 - 2600. How much work would it be to create such a search function or export the MUL to a searchable PDF?
-
Some minor issues:
Hunchback 6S is listed as an aerospace fighter and it's rules level is listed as introductory.
Several other designs are listed as introductory instead of standard or advanced: stalker 6M, Hunchback 6N, Shogun 2F Trisha, Zeus Leonidas, Panther 10KA, Zeus 9S-DC (advanced),Grand Dragon 5K-DC (Advanced), Orion 1M-DC (advanced), Cyclops 11A-DC (advanced).
Grasshopper 5N and Trebuchet 3C are missing.
There seems to be a mix up in the Orion department:
Orion 1-MB is listed as a Kurita design while the 1-MC is listed as a Marik design.
It seems mixed since the MB uses a light gauss rifle (a common FWL weapon of the period) while the MC uses MRMs and C3 ( common DC weapons of the period).
-
Thanks Hussar, those should be corrected now. Except ON1-M? faction availabilities, those are set to "to be announced" for now.
-
Request
For campaign purposes, it really helps to know what was introduced in a specific year range. i.e.: 2500 - 2600. How much work would it be to create such a search function or export the MUL to a searchable PDF?
We can't really answer that kind of question. New features will be added when they are added. But keep the suggestions coming.
-
I'd like to see search filters for pieces of equipment. For example, show all units with 2 C3 Masters.
-
Hey
Tech level for the Raven 3M and Jagermech 6DGr should be moved from intro to standard.
Quickdraw 5K2 is listed twice
Assassin Servitor is missing.
Jagermech 7F is missing.
Firestarter 9-B lists it's old BV (before it got IJJ).
Assassin 99 lists it's old BV (before it got a sword and stealth armor).
Trebuchet 8B lists it's old BV (before it's speed got boosted).
Cataphract 5D lists it's old BV (before the stealth armor).
Zeus 10WB lists it's old BV (before the light engine and extra heat sinks).
Centurion D4D BV is listed as 1399 - should be 1369 according to the RS and SSW.
-
Hey
Tech level for the Raven 3M and Jagermech 6DGr should be moved from intro to standard.
Quickdraw 5K2 is listed twice
Assassin Servitor is missing.
Jagermech 7F is missing.
Firestarter 9-B lists it's old BV (before it got IJJ).
Assassin 99 lists it's old BV (before it got a sword and stealth armor).
Trebuchet 8B lists it's old BV (before it's speed got boosted).
Cataphract 5D lists it's old BV (before the stealth armor).
Zeus 10WB lists it's old BV (before the light engine and extra heat sinks).
Centurion D4D BV is listed as 1399 - should be 1369 according to the RS and SSW.
Thanks, changes made.
-
Just because they're cool so I felt like mentioning them...
Skyhigh added a mobile version of the site. It defaults to the mobile view if it detects you are using a mobile device, but you can manually switch between the two "views" as well using the mobile option on the menu.
And he added logos to the faction names under availability. I think they're cool at least :).
-
Centurion CN9-D4D (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5449) seems to be lacking the Faction Availability section altogether.
-
Hatamoto-Chi HMT-28T (Shin) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5457), Stalker STK-3F (Jamison) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5119) and Banshee BNC-5S (Vandergriff) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3787) all lack introduction dates.
Since the Awesome AWS-9Ma (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3769) is listed as unique, it should probably be extinct as well.
Archer (Wolf) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/72) has availibility listed as Jihad - WiE / Kell Hounds / Wolf's Dragoons and Dark Age - Kell Hounds / Wofl's Dragoons. Unless that's intentional, I would think it should be Jihad - Unique / Wolf's Dragoons and Dark Age - Extinct.
-
Hey
Tech level for the Stalker 6M should be changed from intro to standard.
Whitworth 3 lists it's old BV (before the Endo-Steel was removed).
Whitworth K lists it's old BV (before the Endo-Steel was removed).
Centurion YLW2 is missing and that's odd since I can swear that I have seen it with it's old BV that should be changed.
-
Archer (Wolf) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/72) has availibility listed as Jihad - WiE / Kell Hounds / Wolf's Dragoons and Dark Age - Kell Hounds / Wofl's Dragoons. Unless that's intentional, I would think it should be Jihad - Unique / Wolf's Dragoons and Dark Age - Extinct.
That was the availability as stated by the writer of the unit..you could use Ask the Writers if you want more information, but the current availability is correct according to the information we have.
-
Hey
Tech level for the Stalker 6M should be changed from intro to standard.
Whitworth 3 lists it's old BV (before the Endo-Steel was removed).
Whitworth K lists it's old BV (before the Endo-Steel was removed).
Centurion YLW2 is missing and that's odd since I can swear that I have seen it with it's old BV that should be changed.
Thanks, fixed.
-
Hey
-Thunderbolt 9Nr. According to TRO:3085 page 254 it was developed by the WoB so it should be added to their Jihad era list.
Wight 2SC/3SC is listed as a FWL design but according to TRO:3075 page 70 it's produced by Starcorps on Son Hoa,
a Lyran world. Either the entry in the TRO is in error or it is should be a Lyran design (although I can think of other far fetched explanations).
-
Hey
-Thunderbolt 9Nr. According to TRO:3085 page 254 it was developed by the WoB so it should be added to their Jihad era list.
Wight 2SC/3SC is listed as a FWL design but according to TRO:3075 page 70 it's produced by Starcorps on Son Hoa,
a Lyran world. Either the entry in the TRO is in error or it is should be a Lyran design (although I can think of other far fetched explanations).
Thunder 9Nr: correct, changed.
Wight 2SC/3SC: "Strangely enough, though Starcorps is known to be manufacturing the Wight in significant numbers, it cannot be verified whether any have been sold to date. Whether Starcorps is selling to a hidden party, stockpiling the designs for mass sales at a later date, or building its own personal army is unknown at this time"
As of 3075, nobody has the 2SC or 3SC. There is nothing that says the Lyran Alliance has them, and implies that either the LA doesn't want them, or Starcorps doesn't want to sell them to the LA, or at the very least, had some reason to not sell them to the LA yet (as of 3075). As for why FWL after 3075? That's a suggestion that is open to further reveals from the Developers/Writers in future products. (And we may very well be wrong.) But it represents our best guess as of right now.
-
Oh, and Skyhigh has added BattleForce stats to the MUL!
-
Oh, and Skyhigh has added BattleForce stats to the MUL!
Hey! Many thanks to Skyhigh! :)
-
I added the display...the stats are all nckestrel =)
-
Thanks to both of you. O0
-
You both rock the hard rock of ultimate hard rocking! A question, though: I've seen many units with no stats yet, mostly infantry and experimental units. While I understand that you won't have everything done at once, what is your priority ranking? What kinds of units do you plan to do first, and so on?
-
You both rock the hard rock of ultimate hard rocking! A question, though: I've seen many units with no stats yet, mostly infantry and experimental units. While I understand that you won't have everything done at once, what is your priority ranking? What kinds of units do you plan to do first, and so on?
For BattleForce stats? There's two way priorities happen for those. 1) Somebody yells "Hey, we're doing Quick Strike cards for Technical Readout X next!" And then I make sure I'm cut up on all of those. So XTR's are likely to be very, very far away, while TR3085 and its infantry is likely closer. In very vague, general terms. IE. Subject to developers. 2) I really feel like X needs to be done. Because really nice people ask (Catalyst Agents need for convention, random forum poster asks nicely, etc) or because my pride is hurt that X is missing.
Most happen according to #2 so far, because we haven't done that many Quick Strike card products yet. Hopefully now that the work is actually useful for something other than sitting on my laptop, I'll start looking at filling in gaps again.
-
I saw that you have added some nice faction icons to the availability lists.
However, the fact that the general categories does not have any icons does disturb the look of the lists. So, I would recommend that you add some kind of icons to those too. If you do not have any better idea, how about a big I for Inner Sphere General, a big P for Periphery General, and a big C for IS Clan General?
-
The BNC-9S from RS 3050U IS is nowhere to be found.
-
The BNC-9S from RS 3050U IS is nowhere to be found.
Fixed. It was too awesome to release in a batch like the rest, it insisted on it's own entrance. Or maybe I missed the checkbox.
-
I saw that you have added some nice faction icons to the availability lists.
However, the fact that the general categories does not have any icons does disturb the look of the lists. So, I would recommend that you add some kind of icons to those too. If you do not have any better idea, how about a big I for Inner Sphere General, a big P for Periphery General, and a big C for IS Clan General?
Skyhigh was all over this one and it's in already :). Thanks for the suggestion.
-
Minor quibble. The Summoner F shows the original TRO:3050 under the products listing.
-
BForce stats for the Winston Combat Vehicle seem off. I think you forgot the turret.
-
BForce stats for the Winston Combat Vehicle seem off. I think you forgot the turret.
Yeah, the turret got lost somewhere. The turret's in there now.
-
Minor quibble. The Summoner F shows the original TRO:3050 under the products listing.
Couple more got tagged as TR3050 as well, those should be all fixed now.
-
TRO: 3039 says that the CPLT-C1b was an upgraded variant for the royal star league units, appearing in 2688. But the MUL claimes its Inner Sphere general during the Jihad? Is this correct?
-
Deimos B has an intro date of 3065, while the other configurations have an intro date of 3085-3086.
-
The MUL gives a BV of 616 for Commando COM-1C. This is the same of Commando COM-1B, also both RS3050Uunabridged and SSW (0.6.76) gives a BV of 458. So, it looks like the COM-1C has by mistake gotten the BV of the COM-1B.
Skyhigh was all over this one and it's in already :). Thanks for the suggestion.
And thanks for implementing it. Looks much better.
-
TRO: 3039 says that the CPLT-C1b was an upgraded variant for the royal star league units, appearing in 2688. But the MUL claimes its Inner Sphere general during the Jihad? Is this correct?
Correct. The plans were again available during the Jihad, and CPLT-C1s throughout the Inner Sphere were upgraded. (Not saying how many were upgraded, just that they were available through the Inner Sphere). The same is true of many other Royal designs, especially those in the New Dallas Memory Core (TR3075).
-
The MUL gives a BV of 616 for Commando COM-1C. This is the same of Commando COM-1B, also both RS3050Uunabridged and SSW (0.6.76) gives a BV of 458. So, it looks like the COM-1C has by mistake gotten the BV of the COM-1B.
Thanks, fixed.
-
Deimos B has an intro date of 3065, while the other configurations have an intro date of 3085-3086.
Yeah, that was wrong, typo. Deimos B and Deimos <base> fixed to 3085.
-
BForce stats for both Giggins are missing their cargo bays.
-
Hexpack Promotions PDF 1 units added, including BF stats.
-
BForce stats for both Giggins are missing their cargo bays.
IT8 and IT4 added. thanks.
-
Wait. What units from the hexpack?
-
Buildings. O0
-
*blinks repeatedly* I won't tie this thread up any more with this...but it seems I have a quest.
-
:o wow the buildings too, aren't you worried that MUL's page will explode from too much awesome?
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1728
The Kabuto, it was in TRO:3060. Near the image with the stack of stats starting with "tonnage" going down it shows that it is available during the "clan invasion" era. Intro date is given as 3059. Below it, it states that the clan invasion era lasts until 3061. The far right of the screen shows the mech as being available to the DC and GhostBears as of 3068 "Jihad era"
The link to the 7B variant shows the 7B's intro date as being 3068, which is also shown as the start of the jihad era. I am not sure what happened to the GhostBears in the jihad era, so if they were removed, or lost availability to the design, then it would be correct that only the DC has access to the 7B. But, that might need to be fact checked by someone.
-
[Ghost Bear has Kabuto A but not Kabuto B.
Having access to one variant does not necessarily have anything to do with access to another. Ghost Bear doesn't make Kabuto's, they don't automatically get access to new variants of it.
-
Hey
The Catapult K3 from RS:3050Uu IS is missing.
-
Hey
The Catapult K3 from RS:3050Uu IS is missing.
Now it's not! Hmm. And add that to the list I need to convert to BF..
-
In the current incarnation (Release 2.00) would it be possible to get the columns from the search results to be sortable, such that I could arrange results by BV low to high, or by intro data, rules level, etc.?
Thanks and Cheers for the hard work you guys put in,
LCC
-
Thanks again for all the fine work guys!
Clan Medium Battle Armor-
There is both a (Naval) "B„r" and a (Naval) "Bär" model with the same BV, intro date, etc. The "B„r" in the only one listing faction availablity.
-
I am not sure this qualifies; the Akuma AKU-1X has low res artwork when compared to the AKU-1XJ.
Also, when I looked up the No-Dachi, a very strange variant came up. The No-Dachi NDA-1KC (which has no BV, and no rules level). The No-Dachi NDA-1K is also missing its rules level.
-
Batu E is listed twice. One entry seems complete, the other is missing picture, availability and rules level.
-
I am not sure this qualifies; the Akuma AKU-1X has low res artwork when compared to the AKU-1XJ.
Also, when I looked up the No-Dachi, a very strange variant came up. The No-Dachi NDA-1KC (which has no BV, and no rules level). The No-Dachi NDA-1K is also missing its rules level.
AKU-1XJ and NDA-1K fixed.
NDA-1KC, is correct as is. It will get BV, rules leve, etc when it gets a record sheet.
Thanks again for all the fine work guys!
Clan Medium Battle Armor-
There is both a (Naval) "B„r" and a (Naval) "Bär" model with the same BV, intro date, etc. The "B„r" in the only one listing faction availablity.
Thanks! Fixed.
-
Batu E is listed twice. One entry seems complete, the other is missing picture, availability and rules level.
Thanks. Fixed.
-
The BattleForce stats for the Elemental (Fire) (AP Gauss) configuration gives the wrong damage values, it should be 2 for both Short and Medium, not 1.
The APGRs average 9 damage per attack (3 out of 5 APGRs hit, 3 damage each), and the SRM2(OS) averages 1.2 damage per attack (6 out 10 SRMs hit, 2 damage each, result multiplied by 0.10 due to being one-shot, result rounded to 2 decimal places as per SO p360).
The final Damage Value would thus be 10.2 divided by 10, rounded up as per SO p 360, so 1.02 rounded up to 2.
-
Noted the following TRO: Prototypes units have the following Jihad Era availability ... oddities.
Legionnaire LGN-2F has "F"
Ursus 3 has "R"
Lexan Surveillance VTOL has "L"
Myrmidon Medium Tank (Anti-Infantry) has both "Federated Suns" and "R"
Po Heavy Tank (HV) has "C"
Bullet Suicide Drone has "C"
Cheetah OF-17A-R has "F"
Sabre SB-31D has "D"
Transit TR-13G has "C"
Rapier RPR-300S has "L"
Outpost Defender has "CH"
Void Battle Armor (Minelayer) has "D"
Arbiter SecurityMech ARB-001 has "IS Genera"
Procyon ProtoMech (Quad) has "CH"
Minotaur P2 has "CH"
Satyr XP has "CN"
Phalanx Support Tank has "IS Genera"
Kalki Cruise Missile Launcher has "F"
Nishikigol Support Aircraft Koi has "D"
Sea Skimmer Hydrofoil (ELRM) has "R"
-
Kit Fox W has an intro year of 3054, even if it does show up in 3051 in Blood Legacy both in the Homeworlds and on Outreach. The relevant chapters are 10 and 16. From this we can conclude that it should be at least available in that year, but considering where it shows up, it is even more likely that it needs an intro-date that is before the Wolf's Dragoons' last supply run. This means that the Era should most likely be Late Succession War.
Suggested Solution:
Change Uller (Kit Fox) W Era to Late Succession War, and give it a year from the 2900s or very early 3000s.
-
- Tempest TMP-3MA, and 3G do not have any Battleforce Stats. (I also noted the Tempest TMP-2M has no BV and no rules level, but I only assume it is much like the earlier No-Dachi I noticed, so I am doubtful that this is a report item.)
- The Argus 4D has low res art when compared to the other Argus variants.
- The Fafnir FNR-5 has low res artwork.
- Barghest BGS-4T has the wrong artwork (it is showing the 1T artwork when it should have the same art as the 4X).
- The Lao Hu LHU-2B has low res artwork as well...
- The Legacy LGC-01 has low res artwork too...
Ok... I'm going to stop with the artwork stuff now. It seems a lot of the base variants of the mechs from 3067 have a low res (thick black lines, low detail) artwork when compared to their later variants. I was looking for more Battleforce stats that were missing, I thought I saw some, but could remember the mechs... instead I found artwork.
-
Raptor U config is listed as RTX-1Ox
All other Raptor configs are listed as RTX1-Ox
-
The Void Battle Armor (Minelayer) is incorrectly shown as weighing 2 tons, but as a Medium suit it should be 1 ton. The suit's picture is also missing when you select the design, as are the other Void variants in the list of Other Models.
All the other Void variants do not list the Void Battle Armor (Minelayer) among Other Models.
-
Stalker STK-4P from RS3039 unabridged is missing from the MUL.
-
Lets see if I can describe this well enough.
As I select a unit name from the drop down menu under the Name or Model field, my screen refreshes and the unit name never appears in the Name or Model field. I have to type the name of the unit and then click search. It hasn't always been that way has it?
-
Rhino Fire Support Tank (Standard) has two listings, one at Introductory and one at Standard.
-
The Void Caltrop is listed with an intro date of 3077, but according to XTRO: Kurita the Caltrop project didn't start until 3078.
-
Ok... I'm going to stop with the artwork stuff now. It seems a lot of the base variants of the mechs from 3067 have a low res (thick black lines, low detail) artwork when compared to their later variants. I was looking for more Battleforce stats that were missing, I thought I saw some, but could remember the mechs... instead I found artwork.
There is no need to report missing BattleForce stats. I can pull up a list of those missing BF stats. (Just trying to save people work in finding them and reporting them.)
-
The Void Caltrop is listed with an intro date of 3077, but according to XTRO: Kurita the Caltrop project didn't start until 3078.
Fixed (to 3078).Stalker STK-4P from RS3039 unabridged is missing from the MUL.
It hadn't been updated to being included in RS3039u, it's fixed now.
The Void Battle Armor (Minelayer) is incorrectly shown as weighing 2 tons, but as a Medium suit it should be 1 ton. The suit's picture is also missing when you select the design, as are the other Void variants in the list of Other Models.
All the other Void variants do not list the Void Battle Armor (Minelayer) among Other Models.
Corrected name to Void Medium Battle Armor, and fixed weight, picture.
Raptor U config is listed as RTX-1Ox
All other Raptor configs are listed as RTX1-Ox
Fixed.Kit Fox W has an intro year of 3054, even if it does show up in 3051 in Blood Legacy both in the Homeworlds and on Outreach. The relevant chapters are 10 and 16. From this we can conclude that it should be at least available in that year, but considering where it shows up, it is even more likely that it needs an intro-date that is before the Wolf's Dragoons' last supply run. This means that the Era should most likely be Late Succession War.
Suggested Solution:
Change Uller (Kit Fox) W Era to Late Succession War, and give it a year from the 2900s or very early 3000s.
Thanks. Novel references are the toughest for us to keep up with. Date changed to 3051.
-
The BattleForce stats for the Elemental (Fire) (AP Gauss) configuration gives the wrong damage values, it should be 2 for both Short and Medium, not 1.
The APGRs average 9 damage per attack (3 out of 5 APGRs hit, 3 damage each), and the SRM2(OS) averages 1.2 damage per attack (6 out 10 SRMs hit, 2 damage each, result multiplied by 0.10 due to being one-shot, result rounded to 2 decimal places as per SO p360).
The final Damage Value would thus be 10.2 divided by 10, rounded up as per SO p 360, so 1.02 rounded up to 2.
correct, thank you.
-
Mongoose MON-68 shows up twice in the MUL. The one with Intro-tech and BV 676 agree with the Record Sheet.
-
As noted in Hetzer Vehicle of the Week thread, Hetzer (Sealed) faction availability changed to WoB only in Jihad era and extinct in Republic era.
Mongoose MON-68 shows up twice in the MUL. The one with Intro-tech and BV 676 agree with the Record Sheet.
Fixed.
-
MAD-3D,WVR-6M,LGB-12C, Ravager Assault Battle Armor added (back) to Marian Hegemony.
Highlander HGN-733C/733P: the HGN-733 is only available to the CC,DC,LA. The 733C/733P were mistakenly given to a much wider faction availability, and were fixed to not be more available than the model they are based on.
Demolisher II (MML): similar to Highlander. It was limited to the same factions the Demolisher II (Standard).
Neither of these were aimed at the Marian Hegemony in particular, they were just changes made to make the MUL consistent with itself in what it was saying.
3085 Infantry: Units are defined by their record sheets. This limits the factions that can use specific infantry units based on their organizing of infantry. Marian Hegemony can only use infantry sheets built to its organization of infantry, and other factions can't use MH infantry. Comstar/Word of Blake can only use CS/WB infantry, and other factions can't use their infantry. This doesn't mean the Marian Hegemony doesn't have firefighting infantry or whatever other type, it means it doesn't have them as detailed on that specific record sheet. We did assume equipment swaps that wouldn't affect stats (faction specific armor for another faction, the faction could use it if they had an available equivalent that wouldn't change the record sheet). But MH can't use 28 trooper infantry units, etc.
Aeron Strike VTOL (BAP): is not available to Marian Hegemony in the Jihad era. It was introduced in 3084. We will be changing the Jihad era to end in 3085 (therefore adding the Ravager from 3084 to MH), but within the first year of its introduction MH does not have it yet. In the Republic era, the Aeron Strike VTOL will be widely available, but that whole era needs work.
-
The MUL is a very good tool (thanks CGL for that). The advance search engine is great to find which mech each faction have. Another thing in this game that need special mech grouping is the c3 system. It would be great to have a searchfor c3in the MUL.
Agreed - FANTASTIC tool! And also agreed - I would be very grateful if you could add another list to the Advanced Search allowing you to search on Specials.
I need to get lists of mechs that have TAGs and those that have ECMs, both with availability to Mercs and in the Clan era. Right now I can apply most of the filter I need, but then need to open each Mech that gets returned to see whether it has a TAG and/or ECM.
Adding this Specials list to Advanced Search would be very helpful!
-
Era Digest Age of War, Jihad Final Reckoning and OTP: Falcon Incursion units got BattleForce stats.
OTP: Falcon Incursion mechs were also added in general, they were not being shown at all before.
Duplicate Pariahs deleted.
Koshi A and Dasher C BVs corrected.
-
Running into an issue with the Leopard dropships - when I look for one specifically, and click on the standard model, it comes up tagged as Periphery General. However, when I do a faction search of Periphery General, it doesn't show.
-
Running into an issue with the Leopard dropships - when I look for one specifically, and click on the standard model, it comes up tagged as Periphery General. However, when I do a faction search of Periphery General, it doesn't show.
The search defaults to listing only those units with BV. There's only one Leopard with a BV currently and it's not Periphery General. If you uncheck the box that says "only units with BV" when you search for leopard and periphery general, it will show the standard leopard and leopard cv.
-
New features.
Search now has boxes to enter a range for intro dates. 3000 start to 3039 end for example.
Search results now place an asterisk next to results that are the featured unit in a sourcebook. WHM-6R for example is the Warhammer in TR3039 that gets a full Technical Readout entry.
The unit page will have a box that says "this unit is featured in Technical Readout 3039". So you can know before purchasing a source if it's a full TR entry or not.
Search for BattleForce abilities. The search now has a box where you can enter a BF ability to search for. ECM, C3S, C3M, AMS, etc. This search the specials string for the text. AM (for anti-mech) will return results that include AMS (anti-missile system) for example.
-
New features.
Search now has boxes to enter a range for intro dates. 3000 start to 3039 end for example.
Search results now place an asterisk next to results that are the featured unit in a sourcebook. WHM-6R for example is the Warhammer in TR3039 that gets a full Technical Readout entry.
The unit page will have a box that says "this unit is featured in Technical Readout 3039". So you can know before purchasing a source if it's a full TR entry or not.
Search for BattleForce abilities. The search now has a box where you can enter a BF ability to search for. ECM, C3S, C3M, AMS, etc. This search the specials string for the text. AM (for anti-mech) will return results that include AMS (anti-missile system) for example.
On behalf of the masses, we thank you very much for these additions!
W.
-
New features.
Search now has boxes to enter a range for intro dates. 3000 start to 3039 end for example.
Search results now place an asterisk next to results that are the featured unit in a sourcebook. WHM-6R for example is the Warhammer in TR3039 that gets a full Technical Readout entry.
The unit page will have a box that says "this unit is featured in Technical Readout 3039". So you can know before purchasing a source if it's a full TR entry or not.
Search for BattleForce abilities. The search now has a box where you can enter a BF ability to search for. ECM, C3S, C3M, AMS, etc. This search the specials string for the text. AM (for anti-mech) will return results that include AMS (anti-missile system) for example.
Awesome work, guys!
-
Per TRO3039 page 8, the Ferret was used by the Free Worlds League and certain Periphery worlds (which is as specific as it gets) in addition to the Lyrans and Davions listed in the MUL (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1060).
-
(Don't know if this has been reported yet or not)
Technical problem with MUL Search feature.
The autosuggestion feature on the MUL's search line does not work. When typing in a word in the search box, suggested possibilities are displayed. However, clicking on one of the suggestions deletes the text in the search box instead of shortcutting to the suggestion.
Example: in the search box, typing "Puma" produces suggestions of Puma (Adder) and Puma Assault Tank below the search box. Clicking on "Puma Assault Tank" deletes the text in the search box instead of taking me to the Puma Assault Tank entry.
-
(Don't know if this has been reported yet or not)
Technical problem with MUL Search feature.
The autosuggestion feature on the MUL's search line does not work. When typing in a word in the search box, suggested possibilities are displayed. However, clicking on one of the suggestions deletes the text in the search box instead of shortcutting to the suggestion.
Example: in the search box, typing "Puma" produces suggestions of Puma (Adder) and Puma Assault Tank below the search box. Clicking on "Puma Assault Tank" deletes the text in the search box instead of taking me to the Puma Assault Tank entry.
I get the same problem
-
So does a friend of mine, and he uses a different web browser than I do (heck, he uses a Mac while I use a Dell), which is why I concluded it was a problem with the MUL rather than my browser or computer.
-
Thanks for the heads up. My attempt to make it auto-submit the form when you picked from the list caused it to do that. I've pulled the code so you'll have to click the search button but it at least keeps the item you selected in the field.
-
Grizzly intro date corrected to 2947 from 2997.
JI-50 (HMG) changed to JI-50 (MG).
Ferret Light Scout VTOL (Standard), added FW availability.
-
The Clan Medium Battle Armor "Rache" variant lacks any availability for the Jihad era. Presumably only available to Clan Wolf judging by the entry in TRO3085 ONN section.
-
Mercury MCY-98:
This mech has according to MUL available to IS General, Merc General, Wolf's Dragoons and Kell Hounds. However, according to page 238 of TRO3039 it is supposed to be extinct.
Suggested solution:
Change availability to Extinct.
Commando COM-2D & Commando COM-2Dr:
The COM-2Dr has an Inner Sphere General availability, the COM-2D has not. The TRO entries for the Commando suggests that it has not spread to other Successor States, so the the lack of Inner Sphere General seems to be not correct.
Suggest solution:
Give the COM-2Dr same availability as the COM-2D.
Hitman HM-1r:
This mech has for some reason gained Capellan Confederation availability during the Jihad. This seems strange since there is no HM-1 availability for the Capellan Confederation.
Suggested solution:
Remove Capellan Confederation for HM-1r availability.
-
Hey
several issues:
Phalanx support tank from TRO:prototypes
1) Change from support vehicle to a combat vehicle (variant of the vehicle introduced in XTRO:Marik)
2) Add a star since it's got a TRO entry
Phalanx BA, Gnome BA, Sloth BA, Tengu BA, Rogue bear BA
Weight is 2 instead of 1.5
Grenadier BA
1) No picture
2) Hunte killer (base) lists BV as 0 and there is an error if you try to select it (at least for me)
-
Zeus ZEU-9S-DC from RS3050U unabridged Inner Sphere (page 232) is missing from the MUL.
-
Zeus ZEU-9S-DC from RS3050U unabridged Inner Sphere (page 232) is missing from the MUL.
It's there, I just hadn't entered the BV yet, so you would have had to uncheck the "only units with BV" checkbox.
-
2) Hunte killer (base) lists BV as 0 and there is an error if you try to select it (at least for me)
Any of the <Base> units will give an error at this time. The site is not handling the <> well.
-
TRO 3067 states that the new line of Marauders was introduced in 3067, placing them in the Civil War era.
MUL only places the MAD-5L in 3067, put the other Marauders are in 3068, including the 5R, 5T, 7D, and 9M. This places them in the Jihad era.
Considering the destruction of several factories during the Jihad not long after 3068, is this intended? It would give the latter four models very little to no production time, meaning almost none extant during the following years.
Is this intended?
-
TRO 3067 states that the new line of Marauders was introduced in 3067, placing them in the Civil War era.
MUL only places the MAD-5L in 3067, put the other Marauders are in 3068, including the 5R, 5T, 7D, and 9M. This places them in the Jihad era.
Considering the destruction of several factories during the Jihad not long after 3068, is this intended? It would give the latter four models very little to no production time, meaning almost none extant during the following years.
Is this intended?
Intended. TR Project Phoenix says the other Marauders were still just planned models and didn't exist yet as of its writing in late 3067.
-
Marian
Added HMR-3M, ICR-1X,ASN-23,WTH-2,HBK-4H,SHD-5M,BLR-3M,MR-V2
Canopus
Added MR-V2,GOL-3L,LGB-7V,WTH-2,OTT-7J
Taurian
Added WSP-7MAF, VL-5T,TDR-5Sb,CP-11-H,As7-Dr,STK-4N,WTH-2,VLK-QA
OSR-5C added to Periphery General.
-
Hey Thanks again for the great job!
Some issues:
PTN-2 Patron from XTRO:Retro should get an asterisk
It seems that all of the units that I have checked from TRO:PROTOTYPES miss the asterisk.
Examples: PTN-2M Patron, PDG-1R Pendragon, ON3-M Orion, Persepolis, Wildkatze, Heavy NLRM carrier, GHR-7P Grasshopper.
Most of these units also lack a picture.
-
Hey Thanks again for the great job!
Some issues:
PTN-2 Patron from XTRO:Retro should get an asterisk
It seems that all of the units that I have checked from TRO:PROTOTYPES miss the asterisk.
Examples: PTN-2M Patron, PDG-1R Pendragon, ON3-M Orion, Persepolis, Wildkatze, Heavy NLRM carrier, GHR-7P Grasshopper.
Most of these units also lack a picture.
Prototypes units will get more information once the RS comes out. We get the images from the RS team to avoid (us having to do) duplication of work.
-
(Don't know if this has been reported yet or not)
Technical problem with MUL Search feature.
The autosuggestion feature on the MUL's search line does not work. When typing in a word in the search box, suggested possibilities are displayed. However, clicking on one of the suggestions deletes the text in the search box instead of shortcutting to the suggestion.
Example: in the search box, typing "Puma" produces suggestions of Puma (Adder) and Puma Assault Tank below the search box. Clicking on "Puma Assault Tank" deletes the text in the search box instead of taking me to the Puma Assault Tank entry.
Hey, I reported this first...but you explained it better than I did :P
-
One thing that would be great for the MekWars crew out there would be the ability to use the unit list to automatically create basic faction lists.
The feauture would only neeed to take the unit selection and put them in a big file done like this:
1 unit model.mtf (mechs)
1 unit model.blk (the rest)
So, for example, I set the search parameters to show only the light mechs of the Periphery General selection. Afterwards I click the "save as mekwars list" buttom and I would be asked to save a .txt which will look like this:
1 Locust LCT-1E.mtf
1 Stinger STG-3R.mtf
1 Stinger STG-3P.mtf
1 Stinger STG-5T.mtf
1 Thorn THE-S.mtf
1 Wasp WSP-1A.mtf
1 Commando COM-2D.mtf
1 Commando COM-2Dr.mtf
1 Javelin JVN-10N.mtf
1 Javelin JVN-10F.mtf
1 Spider SDR-5V.mtf
1 UrbanMech UM-R60.mtf
1 UrbanMech UM-R60L.mtf
1 UrbanMech UM-R69.mtf
1 UrbanMech UM-R80.mtf
1 UrbanMech UM-AIV.mtf
1 Firestarter FS9-H.mtf
1 Firestarter FS9-S.mtf
1 Firestarter FS9-S1.mtf
1 Firestarter FS9-C.mtf
1 Jenner JR7-D.mtf
1 Panther PNT-9R.mtf
That is completly MekWars-capable and thus the server admins could change the numbers (chances for pulling units) as they wish afterwards in the txt itself. A tip for the would be admins: that list there should be saved as "Periphery_light.txt" to be pulled on the light factories of a faction called Periphery, for example. (by the way that is the true list above)
...
And a second thing: there is no way to separate the lists by "availability JIHAD" and "availability DA"
-
There are two entries of the Annihilator ANH-1A in the MUL. One of them is missing rules level, image, record sheet info and availability info, the other has that info.
-
The Annihilator with no info is marked as being from a different, later revision and has different Battleforce stats, so I don't know which one to toss.
-
I noticed an Atlas AS7-S3 listed in the MUL. I'm not familiar with this unit and it's not described in the "variants" section of TRO: 3050 Upgrade. It also has the same BV as the AS7-S2. It looks like it was meant to be the AS7-S2 and something happened.
Also, I'd like to suggest listing the manufacurer and factory location of each 'mech variant, if known. It would also help to make these items searchable. I'd hope this would be generally helpful and useful info, but I can cite the specific reason it would be helpful to me as an example. In short, I'm trying to get a list of all of the 'mechs produced by Defiance Industries and Coventry Metal Works for a Time of War campaign that I'm looking to put together.
Thanks.
-
There is a new AS7-S3 in RS: 3050U-IS and yes, it indeed has identical BV to the AS7-S2 despite being noticeably different.
-
Just found an issue with the Shamash Reconnaissance Vehicle (Interdictor). The MUL says it's in RS3085uCE, but it's actually in RS3085uONN.
-
There is a new AS7-S3 in RS: 3050U-IS and yes, it indeed has identical BV to the AS7-S2 despite being noticeably different.
Gotcha. Thank you.
-
Satyr and Satyr 4 shows up in the Raven Alliance RAT in FM3085, but does not show up as Raven protos in the MUL.
Suggested solution:
Add Satyr and Satyr 4 for Ravens.
A Raven front-line unit has a 10/36 chance of getting a Deimos in the RAT in FM3085, which implies that the Deimos has been in production for quite some time. However, the MUL has intro dates of 3085-86 for the Deimos.
Suggested solution:
Subtract five years from the Deimos intro dates, giving 3080-81 dates, which will give it time to become common enough in the Raven touman, while still not conflicting with the TRO entry about early 3080 rumors.
-
A Raven front-line unit has a 10/36 chance of getting a Deimos in the RAT in FM3085, which implies that the Deimos has been in production for quite some time. However, the MUL has intro dates of 3085-86 for the Deimos.
Suggested solution:
Subtract five years from the Deimos intro dates, giving 3080-81 dates, which will give it time to become common enough in the Raven touman, while still not conflicting with the TRO entry about early 3080 rumors.
No, it just conflicts with TRO3085 Supplemental's direct statement on page 54 that it was introduced in early 3085. The same text indicates that the Deimos saw a large production run and that there's one in nearly every Cluster with expectations of it being the mainstay Raven assault OmniMech, so clearly there's going to be a lot of them floating around. Considering that RATs are not indicative of rarity, a point writers and the Line Developer have stated multiple times in the past, I'd call it factional flavor and move on.
-
Technical issue with MUL (wasn't present last time I checked):
When on a unit's entry, altering the pilot and gunnery values do not change the unit's Battle Value.
Also, clicking "Add to Force" has no effect. "My Force" will still be empty.
-
If passed me something similar when I try to create a fighting force
-
Based on various discussions, the following BA should be added to the Magistracy of Canopus factionlist (* Indicates an Omni/Modular BA)
Tornado G12
Fa Shih (Support)*
Fa Shih*
Longinus*
Achileus*
Ying Long*
-
Based on various discussions, the following BA should be added to the Magistracy of Canopus factionlist (* Indicates an Omni/Modular BA)
You need to be more specific than "based on various discussions". Page numbers and/or links to posts are required. Thank you.
-
Well, they all appear on the FM 3085 RAT for the Magistracy. Normally I wouldn't say this is enough to put them on the MUL, but all the designs on the Marian 3085 RAT are on the MUL. So what's good for the Roman is good for the Canopian.
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,598.msg346247.html#msg346247
Nckestrel's comment there indicates that the changes were based on the 3085 RATs, rather than anything in the fluff, so...
-
That's what is needed - thanks.
-
Falcon FLC-4N:
I doubt the validity of the IS General, Kell Hounds and Mercenary availability during the Jihad of this design.
This is due to the following sections from TRO3039, page 248:
"However, the loss of the Stormvanger
Assemblies production line on Hesperus II put an end to
new production, and numbers dwindled during the course
of the Succession Wars. Of course ComStar possessed a
number of Falcons amongst its secret cache of weapons
on Terra, but as far as the Inner Sphere was concerned the
design had all but vanished."
"The appearance of Wolf’s Dragoons in 3005 marked
the return of the Falcon to the battlefields of the Inner
Sphere."
"After the Fourth Succession War a number of Falcons
appeared in the Draconis Combine. Thought to have been
salvaged from the fighting between the Ryuken and Wolf’s
Dragoons on Misery, these ’Mechs had actually been se-
cretly supplied to House Kurita by ComStar."
"The Falcons that remain in the Inner Sphere are al-
most all extensively repaired, many of them becoming
hybrids with arms, legs, and weapons taken from other
BattleMechs. Only Wolf’s Dragoons have access to new,
undamaged ’Mechs of this type."
From this I would conclude that existing Falcons in the Inner Sphere when the Dragoons appeared where mostly of frankenmech types, and are rapidly heading for extinction, and that only Wolf's Dragoons, Draconis Combine, Comstar and Word of Blake should have access to them. Maybe also the Clans?
Suggested solution:
Change Jihad availability of FLC-4N Falcon to: Wolf's Dragoons, Draconis Combine, Comstar and Word of Blake.
-
Falcon -4N's Jihad Availability has been updated to "Extinct".
-
The miniatures links for the Thunder Stallion show Thunder minatures instead of Thunder Stallion (a Clan Mech) minis.
-
I do not appear to be able to edit in the correct images, but here they are:
http://www.camospecs.com/Miniature.asp?ID=1917
http://www.camospecs.com/Miniature.asp?ID=5689
http://www.camospecs.com/Miniature.asp?ID=5950
Thanks for the report.
-
The Marian Hegemony should have access to the Saracen Medium Hover Tank.
Per Field Manual: Periphery,"IV Legio Unit Profile", p. 80.
Also, the Ravager Assault BA as list has the BV for a 4 man squad. Per Record Sheets 3085 Unabridged: Cutting Edge, the Marians field 5. I don't know if you'd want to do a separate listing for the MH Organization style or not. Just wantedt o point it out. :)
-
The Tornado P12 "Hurricane" has an intro date of 2890, however according to Combat Equipment p50 it didn't even begin development until 2892, only going into production in 2905.
The Nighthawk Mk XXI has an intro date of 2718, as suggested in Technical Readout 3075, however as per Combat Equipment p44 this is actually the prototype date, with the Mk XXI not entering production until 2720.
-
Many humble thanks for all the awesome work you guys have done for Battletech <3
I have request considering the main unit list.
We have discovered that playing a longer campaing using C-Bills is awesome fun. It brings a totally new aspect to your game when your main goal is to achieve the best cost efficiency in your army, but currently it's a bit a nuissance that several desingers software seem to give you different costs and the costs vary depending on your sources. So it would be really really cool if you could add the prizes to the main unit list, and save a huge amounts of time from our gamemaster (guess who that is ;) )
Thanks
iimu
-
Vulcan 8N Aerospace fighter should be added to the FS in the Jihad and post-Jihad era.
It's constructed in the FS (TRO:3075) and appears on the FS RAT in FM:3085 page 222.
There is no indication if it's also available to mercenaries.
-
The Marian Hegemony should have access to the Saracen Medium Hover Tank.
Per Field Manual: Periphery,"IV Legio Unit Profile", p. 80.
Added. Thanks!
-
Warhammer 8K (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3495/Warhammer-WHM-8K#)
Image is the Reseen Warhammer shilouette as used for unseens.
RS: 3085 PP uses the Warhammer-4L art (http://img.masterunitlist.info/BattleMechs/Warhammer%20WHM-4L.jpg)
Warhammer 10T (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3481/Warhammer-WHM-10T)
Image is the Reseen Warhammer shilouette as used for unseens.
RS: 3085 PP uses the Warhammer-9D art (http://img.masterunitlist.info/BattleMechs/Warhammer%20WHM-9D.jpg)
Warhammer-5L (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3484/Warhammer-WHM-5L)
Image is the Reseen Warhammer shilouette as used for unseens.
RS: 3085 PP uses the Warhammer-4L art (http://img.masterunitlist.info/BattleMechs/Warhammer%20WHM-4L.jpg)
Warhammer-8M (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3496/Warhammer-WHM-8M)
Image is the Reseen Warhammer shilouette as used for unseens.
RS: 3085 PP uses the Warhammer-9D art (http://img.masterunitlist.info/BattleMechs/Warhammer%20WHM-9D.jpg)
-
The Tornado P12 "Hurricane" has an intro date of 2890, however according to Combat Equipment p50 it didn't even begin development until 2892, only going into production in 2905.
The Nighthawk Mk XXI has an intro date of 2718, as suggested in Technical Readout 3075, however as per Combat Equipment p44 this is actually the prototype date, with the Mk XXI not entering production until 2720.
Corrected: thanks!
Many humble thanks for all the awesome work you guys have done for Battletech <3
I have request considering the main unit list.
We have discovered that playing a longer campaing using C-Bills is awesome fun. It brings a totally new aspect to your game when your main goal is to achieve the best cost efficiency in your army, but currently it's a bit a nuissance that several desingers software seem to give you different costs and the costs vary depending on your sources. So it would be really really cool if you could add the prizes to the main unit list, and save a huge amounts of time from our gamemaster (guess who that is ;) )
Unfortunately the MUL can only implement information confirmed by Catalyst, and the costs vary because there is no confirmed list of prices. Until that is available, the MUL will not have costs. Thank you.
-
the costs vary because there is no confirmed list of prices.
My problem exactly 8)
Appreciate the answer! Thanks!
And while you guys are at it, please please please, pretty please! Oh, would you please make chart/formula to calculate prizes for older stuff in different ages :D ;D [drool]
-
Daedalus IndustrialMech (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/4036/Daedalus-GTX2) variants are showing the imagery for the Daedalus BattleMech in TRO3055U. The correct image is here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:DaedalusGTX2.jpg).
-
Thunderbird Battle Armor [All Variants] currently link to the Camospecs pics and Ironwind Metals product page for the Thunderbird Aerospace fighter. The correct product page is here http://ironwindmetals.com/store/product_info.php?products_id=6919 . There are no examples of Thunderbird Battle Armor currently available at Camospecs
-
Thunderbird Battle Armor [All Variants] currently link to the Camospecs pics and Ironwind Metals product page for the Thunderbird Aerospace fighter. The correct product page is here http://ironwindmetals.com/store/product_info.php?products_id=6919 . There are no examples of Thunderbird Battle Armor currently available at Camospecs
The entire Camospecs/ironwindmetals feature is still being worked on. As in the entire way it works could change. We're not going to be dealing with individual issues on this for a while.
-
Daedalus IndustrialMech (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/4036/Daedalus-GTX2) variants are showing the imagery for the Daedalus BattleMech in TRO3055U. The correct image is here (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:DaedalusGTX2.jpg).
Fixed
-
The Axel (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/180/Axel-Heavy-Tank-Mk-1) and Axel IIC (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/182/Axel-Heavy-Tank-IIC) should be using the same image as the Rommel and Patton according to the record sheets.
-
The Axel (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/180/Axel-Heavy-Tank-Mk-1) and Axel IIC (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/182/Axel-Heavy-Tank-IIC) should be using the same image as the Rommel and Patton according to the record sheets.
Done
-
The entry for the CN-10B says that there is no recordsheet available, but it can be found on RS 3050u inner Sphere pg.123 .
-
The entry for the CN-10B says that there is no recordsheet available, but it can be found on RS 3050u inner Sphere pg.123 .
Fixed. Thanks.
-
Warhammer 8K (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3495/Warhammer-WHM-8K#)
Image is the Reseen Warhammer shilouette as used for unseens.
RS: 3085 PP uses the Warhammer-4L art (http://img.masterunitlist.info/BattleMechs/Warhammer%20WHM-4L.jpg)
Warhammer 10T (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3481/Warhammer-WHM-10T)
Image is the Reseen Warhammer shilouette as used for unseens.
RS: 3085 PP uses the Warhammer-9D art (http://img.masterunitlist.info/BattleMechs/Warhammer%20WHM-9D.jpg)
Warhammer-5L (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3484/Warhammer-WHM-5L)
Image is the Reseen Warhammer shilouette as used for unseens.
RS: 3085 PP uses the Warhammer-4L art (http://img.masterunitlist.info/BattleMechs/Warhammer%20WHM-4L.jpg)
Warhammer-8M (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3496/Warhammer-WHM-8M)
Image is the Reseen Warhammer shilouette as used for unseens.
RS: 3085 PP uses the Warhammer-9D art (http://img.masterunitlist.info/BattleMechs/Warhammer%20WHM-9D.jpg)
Fixed. Thanks.
-
I don't know if its been mentioned but unable to search for Star League First or Royal but it could be just me
-
I don't know if its been mentioned but unable to search for Star League First or Royal but it could be just me
That data doesn't exist (yet?).
-
RCL-ZIM Deep Lord MilitiaMech should be the RCL-Z1M (that's a one, not an I. Atleast according to the Record Sheet, and the TR Table of Contents).
Also this one is kind of big, but doesn't affect too many units.
All units with a 3081 date have the Jihad Image, but the Jihad Era ends in 3080, so all of these need to be changed to the Republic/Dark Ages image.
This one is slightly bigger..
All units with a 3049 date have the Clan Invasion image, but the Clan Invasion Era doesn't start until 3050, so all of these need to be changed to the Succession Wars/Late Succession Wars Era image
-
RCL-ZIM Deep Lord MilitiaMech should be the RCL-Z1M (that's a one, not an I. Atleast according to the Record Sheet, and the TR Table of Contents).
Also this one is kind of big, but doesn't affect too many units.
All units with a 3081 date have the Jihad Image, but the Jihad Era ends in 3080, so all of these need to be changed to the Republic/Dark Ages image.
This one is slightly bigger..
All units with a 3049 date have the Clan Invasion image, but the Clan Invasion Era doesn't start until 3050, so all of these need to be changed to the Succession Wars/Late Succession Wars Era image
Jihad era is being changed to go through 3085. (due to the FM:3085 "wrapping" up the Jihad era). So the images/era are correct, there's still a lot of availabilities that need to be fixed. (unit intro'ing 3082-3085 need Jihad availabilities now). And the legends describing the Jihad/republic eras needs to be changed. This is all in process.
3049 is an exception. The decision was made to make 3049 as Clan Invasion even though event wise it's not Clan Invasion until 3050. This needs to be noted somewhere in the MUL as well.
-
3049 is an exception. The decision was made to make 3049 as Clan Invasion even though event wise it's not Clan Invasion until 3050. This needs to be noted somewhere in the MUL as well.
So you're going to redefine the Succession Wars as 2781-3048 and the Clan Invasion as 3049-3062?
-
The decision was made to make 3049 as Clan Invasion even though event wise it's not Clan Invasion until 3050.
Unless you were living on Oberon in 3049....
-
So you're going to redefine the Succession Wars as 2781-3048 and the Clan Invasion as 3049-3062?
No. The era is not being redefined. Only in the case of putting an era label on a unit, we will "nudge" 3049 units in to the Clan Invasion era.
If a short story, novel or sourcebook were to be written about events in 3049, it would still be Succession Wars.
-
Unless you were living on Oberon in 3049....
Nobody cares about Oberon :). And even that wasn't until very late in 3049 (August?).
We're not breaking the eras down in to months.
in the case of any intro year, if you're basing something in the year of it's introduction (or even a few years before or after), you'd still want to check the actual source material for when/where it was available.
-
RCL-ZIM Deep Lord MilitiaMech should be the RCL-Z1M (that's a one, not an I. Atleast according to the Record Sheet, and the TR Table of Contents).
Thanks, fixed.
-
No. The era is not being redefined. Only in the case of putting an era label on a unit, we will "nudge" 3049 units in to the Clan Invasion era.
If a short story, novel or sourcebook were to be written about events in 3049, it would still be Succession Wars.
So you can have a Succession War sourcebook with Clan Invasion `Mechs in 3049? This seems kind of silly, what's the point of doing it this way? You've defined the era, why not use the definition? If you're going to push it back to 3049, why not 3048? Or if you're pushing the Clan Invasion era back a year, why not all the other eras back? Civil War is 3062 to 3067, so why not label all units with a 3061 date as Civil War?
-
So you can have a Succession War sourcebook with Clan Invasion `Mechs in 3049? This seems kind of silly, what's the point of doing it this way? You've defined the era, why not use the definition? If you're going to push it back to 3049, why not 3048? Or if you're pushing the Clan Invasion era back a year, why not all the other eras back? Civil War is 3062 to 3067, so why not label all units with a 3061 date as Civil War?
3049 is a single exception in correlation to RS volumes. The majority of designs labelled 3049 - especially on the Clan side - are directly relevant to KLONDIKE and not the time before.
That is the bottom line reason for the 3049 special case.
I assume the other questions are rhetorical?
-
3049 is a single exception in correlation to RS volumes. The majority of designs labelled 3049 - especially on the Clan side - are directly relevant to KLONDIKE REVIVAL and not the time before.
-
Thanks! O:-)
-
So you can have a Succession War sourcebook with Clan Invasion `Mechs in 3049? This seems kind of silly, what's the point of doing it this way? You've defined the era, why not use the definition? If you're going to push it back to 3049, why not 3048? Or if you're pushing the Clan Invasion era back a year, why not all the other eras back? Civil War is 3062 to 3067, so why not label all units with a 3061 date as Civil War?
Why [snip quoted arguement]? Because that's what I was told to do. You reported a change, I pointed out why we wouldn't be making the change.
Longer answer? It's a compromise. And like most compromises, it's not perfectly logical because it's a compromise between two competing "logics."
-
Why [snip quoted arguement]? Because that's what I was told to do. You reported a change, I pointed out why we wouldn't be making the change.
Longer answer? It's a compromise. And like most compromises, it's not perfectly logical because it's a compromise between two competing "logics."
Its cool. I just asked for a clarification, since it seems rather silly. (After all, you can make the argument that 3061 designs have more in common with the Civil War than they do the Clan Invasion as well). Since it seems set in stone I'll quietly wander back to the main forums :)
-
Its cool. I just asked for a clarification, since it seems rather silly. (After all, you can make the argument that 3061 designs have more in common with the Civil War than they do the Clan Invasion as well). Since it seems set in stone I'll quietly wander back to the main forums :)
The primary reason is the Exodus road. A number of Clan designs were first available in late 3049, but were then loaded up onto ships and didn't see real combat until they arrived in the Inner Sphere.
These designs really did not belong in the Succession Wars era (Clan Golden Century), despite their construction dates being 3049. So Catalyst development chose to make this exception to deal with these anomalies. It was preferable to changing the construction years for the designs in question.
Or, as has been mentioned, we made a compromise to make things work for the many.
-
That data doesn't exist (yet?).
As in not put into the system or you don't know who had what?
-
As in not put into the system or you don't know who had what?
Both? If it's not in the system, we don't know.
-
The Patron MilitiaMech (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/4794/Patron-MilitiaMech-PTN-2) should be using this image (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/c/c5/Militamech-patronlaoder.png).
You might want to see if you can get a clean version of the correct image from TRO Prototypes for the PatrolMech (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/4795/Patron-PatrolMech-PTN-2M), too.
-
Frustration: Several years with the MUL now has lead me to the realization that while the MUL is great at a great many things, therapy for BattleTech fans it is not. My non-professional advice is take a break, do something non-BattleTech related for a short while, and let the stress meter empty out.
RS3039Uu BF stats: I have not redone them since RS3039 Unabridged was rereleased. Looking over the first two, those were both corrections made in the rereleased RS3039 Unabridged. (Though the missing EE's don't have that excuse). Glancing over the rest of the list, the only thing I think is not correct in your list is the IF1. LRM5s are 3 damage, which rounds normally (IF is a round normal as of the 2nd printing of SO), after dividing by 10, to 0, so they get no IF.
-
Rifleman RFL-8X: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2706/Rifleman-RFL-8X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2706/Rifleman-RFL-8X)
and
Rifleman C: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2693/Rifleman-C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2693/Rifleman-C)
has the wrong weight. They are 65 tons in MUL, but should be 60 tons according to RS3085u-PP.
-
These 2 units, the
Mówáng-class Courier at http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4680
and
MÓTUÖ CHË NO. 2 at http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4681
Have invalid names, due to either URL encoding or the database doesn't like them (or they were just put in all hokey).
Also, all 13 of the standard APC models from TRO3039/RS3039 are missing. The HEAVY versions are there, but their BV seems to be for their lighter counterparts.
The name of http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5066 is incorrect, should be Škoda with a tilde thing on it.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4827 and http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4828 should be "Protectorates" with an S, according to TRO:Vehicle Annex.
The Hesoid, http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4322, should have 4 variants not just the 1, as it has 4 listed configurations in TRO:VA page 36.
The Corx thing at http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4011/Corx-Mobile-Tunner-Miner should be "Tunnel" minor, not "Tunner".
The slipper hover car series is 1.5 tons, not 2.0 tons (though the "ZX is listed as larger and roomier)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5079
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5080
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5081
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5082
In fact, since we have zero data on the 3 variants, plus the other 3 listed (Feicui, Excelsior, and Windstreak), and without a record sheet to back them up, and since other units are often mentioned in TROs, it may be worth considering to simply remove all 6 extra entries until *something* more is printed at some point. If they aren't removed, the Windstreak has "Z70" twice in the name.
The Adelante is interesting. When I search everything in the TRO:Vehicle Annex, it doesn't come up, but it does have the annex listed on the page http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3669/Adelante-PassangerCargo-Train. On the same note, this is an omni-train, and has a primary and A-D configurations, but they are not in the MUL at all. And also, "Passanger" should be "Passenger".
The http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4422/Kallon-Industries-Nolan-RML-4-47 should have the designation of RML-447, according to multiple listings in TRO:VA.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3994 should be just "CPK-6", not "CPK-65".
It appears the "Thumper TAV-1" is mixed with the "Thumper", recommend reversing the names to match the record sheets. http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3212 and http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3210
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3661 and http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5463 are the same, the 2nd has no data so it should probably be removed.
Some omni units have the <BASE> unit in the MUL, while others don't (as an example Malak has <BASE>, Cougar doesn't). For consistency it should just be one or the other, and I'd recommend removing the <BASE> configs as they are unconfigured..... unless the desire is to have cargo transports with the BF2 stats.
The 3 SM1 tank destroyers, http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2971, http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2972, and http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2973, all have the designation (SM1, etc) in the name twice.
And that is how you make writers hate you :)
-
The Gladiator GLD-1R is on the RATs for the Marian Hegemony in FM 3085 page 205( pdf version) medium battle mechs,roll of 12. It is not listed in the MUL for battlemechs for the Marian Hegemony.
Suggestion, place the Gladiator GLD-1R in the battlemechs section for the Marian Hegemony.
Thank you.
-
Some more:
There are 2 Hiryo Armored Infantry Transport "Hound" entries. The stats are the same, but one is named ?HOUND" while the other "HOUND". Only one has BF2 stats. Recommend deleting entry 1529 and changing the ? to " for entry 3665.
Recommend remove the word "ProtoMech" from entry 4979 and 4870 for consistency.
Recommend changing name of 4541 to "Luficer III" to match TRO Prototypes.
Recommend changing name of 5344 to Vengeance DC, not PC.
3737 and 3739 are both the same unit, with the same BV, but different images and introduction dates. Not sure what is up with that.
Missing the Kobold BA variant with a Small Pulse Laser support weapon, and Small Laser standard weapon.
-
The GRM-01A Garm (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1189/Garm-GRM-01A)'s availability looks a little off. Per TRO3060 page 82, it was sold to unspecified Periphery and mercenary customers in addition to the AFFC. That suggests that, at a minimum, it should be available to mercenaries and possibly the Canopians or Outworlders. And given the manufacturer, it's a little odd that the Capellans wouldn't have captured enough to wind up with it, yet the Combine has.
-
The GRM-01A Garm (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1189/Garm-GRM-01A)'s availability looks a little off. Per TRO3060 page 82, it was sold to unspecified Periphery and mercenary customers in addition to the AFFC. That suggests that, at a minimum, it should be available to mercenaries and possibly the Canopians or Outworlders. And given the manufacturer, it's a little odd that the Capellans wouldn't have captured enough to wind up with it, yet the Combine has.
Dont Forget the Marians >:D
-
The Centurion CN10-B seems to have disapeared from MUL, is this on purpose ? as it's still a canon design I hope ?.
Dave.
-
The Centurion CN10-B seems to have disapeared from MUL, is this on purpose ? as it's still a canon design I hope ?.
Dave.
Help us out, please provide your citation for where the unit comes from. Unqualified errata goes to the bottom of the list for research.
-
The Centurion CN10-B seems to have disapeared from MUL, is this on purpose ? as it's still a canon design I hope ?.
Dave.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3921/Centurion-CN10-B
?
-
Is was my fault nckestrel. An update I did on the site forced a database rebuild and I hadn't reset the Current Version correctly. :-\
-
Help us out, please provide your citation for where the unit comes from. Unqualified errata goes to the bottom of the list for research.
Sorry Welshman, my mistake totally :-[ - I was away from my books when I posted yesterday - though that is no excuse, see : BC204 RS3050u Inner Sphere page 123 for it's Record Sheet.
Dave.
-
Crockett CRK-5003-0:
This mech is neither represented in TRO3039, nor in RS3039unabridged, so the product info for it is wrong.
-
Crockett CRK-5003-0:
This mech is neither represented in TRO3039, nor in RS3039unabridged, so the product info for it is wrong.
It was in the *original* RS3039, page 180 or so, and like many variants the TRO would be the one with the machine the variant based on. However, it was probably *forgotten* in RS3039 Unabridged.
When it comes to missing units I haven't been too sure what to provide. Anybody want to chime in on that?
I am pretty sure the Slyph, both Standard and Upgrade from TRO3058 Upgrade should be in there. Same with the groundhog exoskelton from TRO Vehicles (as 6 variants, 1 per glove type in the modular equipment adapters like standard). The Rescue Ailette from VA is also missing, and of course lots of units from more recent products (mostly XTRO's) I'd be happy to list if desired.
-
However, it was probably *forgotten* in RS3039 Unabridged.
The Crockett is not in TRO:3039, that's why it's not in RS:3039.
-
When it comes to missing units I haven't been too sure what to provide. Anybody want to chime in on that?
If you feel an entry is missing from a product, ask the Lead Developers.
If it is confirmed, you can enter it into the errata for that product.
-
If you feel an entry is missing from a product, ask the Lead Developers.
If it is confirmed, you can enter it into the errata for that product.
I'll mention it, as the Crockett is the ONLY TRO2750 mech to NOT be in TRO3039, but there was a record sheet for it in RS3039, so it seems it was missing the TRO. However the unit *IS* in RS3039 (not the unabridged version), so for MUL purposes it really should be listed as being in there, until a more recent product updates it.
I don't question things like this to TPTB, as when I have in the past the answers are far more like to be "we meant to do that" rather than an "oops" :)
-
If you feel a unit is missing. You can post it here, with all supporting documentation. If it's something clear, then the review process will cover it. If it is something that requires a ruling, then it goes up internal channels (which ultimately lead to the Lead Dev).
Important note, no documentation (Book, exact page #), no research. There is already a mountain of internal research going so the MUL reviewers need all the data you have.
Thanks,
Joel BC
-
And I'd note that the Mercury and Exterminator are also not present. The relevant page numbers are 62 (MCY-98 Mercury), 150 (EXT-4A Exterminator), and 180 (CRK-5003-0 Crockett); all references to the older HMP-generated RS3039, not the print or Unabridged version. I don't have TRO3025R to give you any page numbers from there.
Arguably, given their non-appearance in TRO3039, the units should instead fall into RS3050 Upgrade Unabridged, which does cover their respective types.
-
And I'd note that the Mercury and Exterminator are also not present. The relevant page numbers are 62 (MCY-98 Mercury), 150 (EXT-4A Exterminator), and 180 (CRK-5003-0 Crockett); all references to the older HMP-generated RS3039, not the print or Unabridged version. I don't have TRO3025R to give you any page numbers from there.
Arguably, given their non-appearance in TRO3039, the units should instead fall into RS3050 Upgrade Unabridged, which does cover their respective types.
This forum is only for changes/suggestions/errata to the Master Unit List. Not for what should or shouldn't be in a Record Sheet or other publication. The CRK-5003-0 has been corrected to TR3025r and no (current) Record Sheet. The MCY-98 was already listed that way, and the EXT-4A is in RS3050Uu-CSL.
Note: There does seem to be a bug where if there's no image for the book, the website doesn't show the Technical Readout on the unit's page. But if you search for TR3025 Revised, you find the MCY-98 and CRK-5003-0 listed.
-
A number of the generic APCs have introduction dates that are far too early. The LTV-4 is, per XTRO Primitives Volume II, the first modern combat vehicle and the first ground unit with standard armor to my understanding. The affected units are linked to below.
To summarize: Each standard and MG model is ES (Early Spaceflight). SRM models are 2370. LRM variants are 2400. All of these appear to be early.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/111/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-LRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/112/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-MG
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/114/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-SRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/115/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/116/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked-LRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/117/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked-MG
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/119/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked-SRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/120/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/121/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled-LRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/122/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled-MG
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/124/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled-SRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/125/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1431/Heavy-Hover-APC-LRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1432/Heavy-Hover-APC-MG
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1434/Heavy-Hover-APC-SRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1435/Heavy-Hover-APC
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1450/Heavy-Tracked-APC-LRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1451/Heavy-Tracked-APC-MG
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1452/Heavy-Tracked-APC-SRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1453/Heavy-Tracked-APC
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1455/Heavy-Wheeled-APC-LRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1457/Heavy-Wheeled-APC-SRM
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1456/Heavy-Wheeled-APC-MG
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1458/Heavy-Wheeled-APC
-
The Armored Personnel Carrier (Hover Sensors) (Pg 18 of RS3039u) is missing
-
Panther PNT-12K:
While this unit is represented in the MUL, it is not in RS3085 unabridged, AND neither in RS3050Uunabridged or RS3039unabridged.
The only reference to this unit that I have managed to find is the following sentence from TRO3085:
"The PNT-12K2 is actually a variant of the PNT-10K2 not the -12K, replacing the -10K2’s SRM racks with a single MRM
10 rack, using the same CASE-protected left torso space for ammo."
So to me it looks like a typo, and that it should be referring to the -12A, and that the -12K does not exist.
Suggested solution:
Remove the Panther PNT-12K from the MUL, or in case someone rules that it does exist after all, just remove its BV, record sheet and Battleforce stats.
-
Panther PNT-12K:
While this unit is represented in the MUL, it is not in RS3085 unabridged, AND neither in RS3050Uunabridged or RS3039unabridged.
The only reference to this unit that I have managed to find is the following sentence from TRO3085:
"The PNT-12K2 is actually a variant of the PNT-10K2 not the -12K, replacing the -10K2’s SRM racks with a single MRM
10 rack, using the same CASE-protected left torso space for ammo."
So to me it looks like a typo, and that it should be referring to the -12A, and that the -12K does not exist.
Suggested solution:
Remove the Panther PNT-12K from the MUL, or in case someone rules that it does exist after all, just remove its BV, record sheet and Battleforce stats.
The PNT-12K and PNT-12K2 are identical in stats. The PNT-12K2 is a refit of PNT-10K2's to the PNT-12K stats.
See http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,5927.msg151445.html#msg151445.
The PNT-12K was from RS MWDA. (The weapon placement is slightly different in Rs 3085, but that's intended to be a correction for the MWDA RS as well).
Eventually we'll have a note on the MUL entries were the RS is being listed because it's an exact match (and therefore the RS volumes don't print a duplicate). VTR-9K/9D is another one. but the PNT-12K does exist.
-
The Armored Personnel Carrier (Hover Sensors) (Pg 18 of RS3039u) is missing
Fixed, thanks.
-
The Sea Skimmer Sniper is listed twice: Here (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/5005/Sea-Skimmer-Hydrofoil-Sniper) and here (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2855/Sea-Skimmer-Sniper). I suggest eliminating the second one to keep it in the same list as the other Sea Skimmer variants.
-
I have set up a password and account and it forgets them all. It doesn't have a place to reset passwords if you forget what your pass is or if it's just being glitchy. help.
-
I have set up a password and account and it forgets them all. It doesn't have a place to reset passwords if you forget what your pass is or if it's just being glitchy. help.
MUL Admin has been notified.
-
The Sea Skimmer Sniper is listed twice: Here (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/5005/Sea-Skimmer-Hydrofoil-Sniper) and here (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2855/Sea-Skimmer-Sniper). I suggest eliminating the second one to keep it in the same list as the other Sea Skimmer variants.
Fixed, thanks.
-
I have set up a password and account and it forgets them all. It doesn't have a place to reset passwords if you forget what your pass is or if it's just being glitchy. help.
Hey FedCom4Ever, your account was locked (too many failed attempts) so I have unlocked it and reset your pass...I'll email you shortly.
-
RFL-7X Rifleman
RFL-8X Rifleman
Rifleman C
Rifleman C2
All erroneously listed as being 65 tons.
Karasu
-
Preta C-PRT-OE Eminus
Rules show as "Experimental"
In RS3075 Unabridged - "Advanced"
Replace on "Advanced"
-
Commando COM-1A:
MUL says that it is extinct, but Objectives: Federated Suns, page 4 claims that retrotech Commando was manufactured on Marlette during the Jihad, and Objectives: Lyran Alliance, page 4 claims it was manufactured on Arcturus, Hyde, Kaumberg and Rahne.
Suggested solution:
Add Lyran Alliance and Federated Suns availability for the COM-1A during the Jihad.
-
The HTM-27T Hatamoto-Chi is listed as being available from 3042.
The HTM-27T Hatamoto-Chi Daniel refit is listed as being available from 3039.
Perhaps the Hatamoto-Chi Daniel should be listed with the HTM-26T code.
-
The HTM-27T Hatamoto-Chi is listed as being available from 3042.
The HTM-27T Hatamoto-Chi Daniel refit is listed as being available from 3039.
Perhaps the Hatamoto-Chi Daniel should be listed with the HTM-26T code.
That is what Starterbook: Sword and Dragon calls it, so that's what the MUL calls it.
I'm not sure there's anything that says the HTM-27T Daniel is a refit. Perhaps it was the prototype for the eventual production model HTM-27T. The MUL's intro dates are generally their service dates, not prototype dates.
-
Annihilator ANH-1E:
The design has an introduction year (3028), but no era.
Suggested solution:
Set Era to Late Succession War.
Xotl: fixed, thanks.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1175/Galleon-Light-Tank-GAL-100
All of the Galleon family is using the Unseen artwork. The TRO3058U (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Galleon-Maxwell.png) art would be more appropriate in this instance.
At a minimum, it needs to be used on the GAL-102 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1176/Galleon-Light-Tank-GAL-102), GAL-103 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1177/Galleon-Light-Tank-GAL-103), GAL-104 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1178/Galleon-Light-Tank-GAL-104), GAL-200 (RL) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1180/Galleon-Light-Tank-GAL-200-RL), and Galleon Maxwell (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1181/Galleon-Light-Tank-Maxwell) based on the record sheet artwork.
-
These omni units from all sorts of products are missing the base version, I listed the products the items are in (TRO anyway), and I think the approximate page number
Bolla --- TRO:3085 (34)
Zugvogel --- TRO:3085 (56)
Arctic Wolf II --- TRO:3085 SUPP (50)
Hephaestus --- TRO:3067 (30)
Ajax --- TRO:3067 (26)
Heimdall --- TRO:3067 (40)
Avar --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (180), TRO:3055 (148),
Bashkir --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (176), TRO:3055 (146),
Batu --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (182), TRO:3055 (150),
Jagatai --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (190), TRO:3055 (158)
Jengiz --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (194), TRO:3055 (162)
Kirghiz --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (198), TRO:3055 (166),
Sabutai --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (192), TRO:3055 (160)
Scytha --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (196), TRO:3055 (164),
Sulla --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (184), TRO:3055 (152)
Turk --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (186), TRO:3055 (154)
Vandal --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (178), TRO:3055 (144)
Visigoth --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (188), TRO:3055 (156)
Ostrogoth --- TRO:3085 (182)
Wusun --- TRO:3085 (180)
Balius --- TRO:3075 (142)
Dasher (Fire Moth) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (114), TRO:3050:Revised (10), TRO:3050 (12)
Koshi (Mist Lynx) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (116), TRO:3050:Revised (12), TRO:3050 (14)
Uller (Kit Fox) --- TRO:3050 (16), TRO:3050:Revised (14), TRO:3050 Upgrade (118)
Puma (Adder) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (120), TRO:3050:Revised (16), TRO:3050 (18)
Dragonfly (Viper) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (122), TRO:3050:Revised (18), TRO:3050 (20)
Fenris (Ice Ferret) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (124), TRO:3050:Revised (20), TRO:3050 (22)
Black Hawk (Nova) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (126), TRO:3050:Revised (22), TRO:3050 (24)
Ryoken (Stormcrow) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (128), TRO:3050:Revised (24), TRO:3050 (26)
Vulture (Mad Dog) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (130), TRO:3050:Revised (26), TRO:3050 (28)
Loki (Hellbringer) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (132), TRO:3050:Revised (28), TRO:3050 (30)
Thor (Summoner) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (134), TRO:3050:Revised (30), TRO:3050 (32)
Mad Cat (Timber Wolf) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (136), TRO:3050:Revised (32), TRO:3050 (34)
Man O' War (Gargoyle) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (138), TRO:3050:Revised (34), TRO:3050 (36)
Masakari (Warhawk) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (140), TRO:3050:Revised (36), TRO:3050 (38)
Gladiator (Executioner) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (142)
Daishi (Dire Wolf) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (144), TRO:3050:Revised (38), TRO:3050 (40)
Cougar --- TRO:3060 (146), TRO:3060R (146), Battle of Coventry (63)
Pariah --- TRO:3075 (138)
Grendel (Mongrel) --- TRO:3058 Upgrade (168), TRO:3058 (184), Black Thorns (54)
Kingfisher --- TRO:3058 Upgrade (188), TRO:3058 (184), Black Thorns (56)
Shadow Cat --- TRO:3058 Upgrade (170), TRO:3058 (166), Black Thorns (58)
Linebacker --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (90), TRO:3055 (138), Clan Wolf (116)
Naga --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (92), TRO:3055 (140), Clan Wolf (118)
Phantom --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (86), TRO:3055 (134), Clan Wolf (120)
Pouncer --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (88), TRO:3055 (136), Clan Wolf (122)
Manteuffel --- TRO:3067 (20)
Coyotl --- ED:Golden Century (22)
Lupus --- ED:Golden Century (23)
Woodsman --- ED:Golden Century (25)
Karhu --- TRO:3085 (164)
Flamberg --- TRO:3085 (168)
Deimos -- TRO:3085 SUPP (54)
Wusun -- TRO:3085 (180)
Ostrogoth --TRO:3085 (182)
All the Omnis from TRO3058
Wusun should be just Clan, not Clan Mixed.
-
These omni units from all sorts of products are missing the base version, I listed the products the items are in (TRO anyway), and I think the approximate page number
Bolla --- TRO:3085 (34)
Zugvogel --- TRO:3085 (56)
Arctic Wolf II --- TRO:3085 SUPP (50)
Hephaestus --- TRO:3067 (30)
Ajax --- TRO:3067 (26)
Heimdall --- TRO:3067 (40)
Avar --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (180), TRO:3055 (148),
Bashkir --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (176), TRO:3055 (146),
Batu --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (182), TRO:3055 (150),
Jagatai --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (190), TRO:3055 (158)
Jengiz --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (194), TRO:3055 (162)
Kirghiz --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (198), TRO:3055 (166),
Sabutai --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (192), TRO:3055 (160)
Scytha --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (196), TRO:3055 (164),
Sulla --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (184), TRO:3055 (152)
Turk --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (186), TRO:3055 (154)
Vandal --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (178), TRO:3055 (144)
Visigoth --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (188), TRO:3055 (156)
Ostrogoth --- TRO:3085 (182)
Wusun --- TRO:3085 (180)
Balius --- TRO:3075 (142)
Dasher (Fire Moth) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (114), TRO:3050:Revised (10), TRO:3050 (12)
Koshi (Mist Lynx) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (116), TRO:3050:Revised (12), TRO:3050 (14)
Uller (Kit Fox) --- TRO:3050 (16), TRO:3050:Revised (14), TRO:3050 Upgrade (118)
Puma (Adder) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (120), TRO:3050:Revised (16), TRO:3050 (18)
Dragonfly (Viper) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (122), TRO:3050:Revised (18), TRO:3050 (20)
Fenris (Ice Ferret) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (124), TRO:3050:Revised (20), TRO:3050 (22)
Black Hawk (Nova) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (126), TRO:3050:Revised (22), TRO:3050 (24)
Ryoken (Stormcrow) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (128), TRO:3050:Revised (24), TRO:3050 (26)
Vulture (Mad Dog) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (130), TRO:3050:Revised (26), TRO:3050 (28)
Loki (Hellbringer) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (132), TRO:3050:Revised (28), TRO:3050 (30)
Thor (Summoner) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (134), TRO:3050:Revised (30), TRO:3050 (32)
Mad Cat (Timber Wolf) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (136), TRO:3050:Revised (32), TRO:3050 (34)
Man O' War (Gargoyle) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (138), TRO:3050:Revised (34), TRO:3050 (36)
Masakari (Warhawk) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (140), TRO:3050:Revised (36), TRO:3050 (38)
Gladiator (Executioner) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (142)
Daishi (Dire Wolf) --- TRO:3050 Upgrade (144), TRO:3050:Revised (38), TRO:3050 (40)
Cougar --- TRO:3060 (146), TRO:3060R (146), Battle of Coventry (63)
Pariah --- TRO:3075 (138)
Grendel (Mongrel) --- TRO:3058 Upgrade (168), TRO:3058 (184), Black Thorns (54)
Kingfisher --- TRO:3058 Upgrade (188), TRO:3058 (184), Black Thorns (56)
Shadow Cat --- TRO:3058 Upgrade (170), TRO:3058 (166), Black Thorns (58)
Linebacker --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (90), TRO:3055 (138), Clan Wolf (116)
Naga --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (92), TRO:3055 (140), Clan Wolf (118)
Phantom --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (86), TRO:3055 (134), Clan Wolf (120)
Pouncer --- TRO:3055 Upgrade (88), TRO:3055 (136), Clan Wolf (122)
Manteuffel --- TRO:3067 (20)
Coyotl --- ED:Golden Century (22)
Lupus --- ED:Golden Century (23)
Woodsman --- ED:Golden Century (25)
Karhu --- TRO:3085 (164)
Flamberg --- TRO:3085 (168)
Deimos -- TRO:3085 SUPP (54)
Wusun -- TRO:3085 (180)
Ostrogoth --TRO:3085 (182)
All the Omnis from TRO3058
Wusun should be just Clan, not Clan Mixed.
Ack! When you said some were missing, I knew of a few. Most of these exist, you just can't see them. Technical problems. Time to page our website admin!
Skyhigh, email incoming!
Thanks for the heads up Bad Syntax.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2000/Malak-C-MK-OS-Caelestis - listed as mixed tech, but should only be IS as it has no clan tech.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/284/Battlemaster-BLR-1G-Red-Corsair should be Inner Sphere Mixed tech, not clan. Its an IS mech with clan weapons.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2000/Malak-C-MK-OS-Caelestis - listed as mixed tech, but should only be IS as it has no clan tech.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/284/Battlemaster-BLR-1G-Red-Corsair should be Inner Sphere Mixed tech, not clan. Its an IS mech with clan weapons.
On the Battlemaster, is there any equipment on it that is not available to the clan tech base?
-
On the Battlemaster, is there any equipment on it that is not available to the clan tech base?
If this is what determines the Mixed Tech Status some designs from RS: 3085 Phoenix need to be revieved and corrected. The Shadow Hawk C, Rifleman C, Thunderbolt C and Archer C all use components that are all available to the Clan Tech Base.
-
Yes, but those were originally introduced as refits, and for the Red Corsair BLR, that's less clear.
-
If this is what determines the Mixed Tech Status some designs from RS: 3085 Phoenix need to be revieved and corrected. The Shadow Hawk C, Rifleman C, Thunderbolt C and Archer C all use components that are all available to the Clan Tech Base.
It was a question, not an answer. I'm preparing for the review. The original did not list what piece of equipment made it not Clan tech, nor what the official record sheet for the unit said it was. These are things I need to know/find out before giving an answer (or determining who needs to give an answer).
If there's a piece of equipment on it that is clearly not clan tech, or the MUL doesn't match the official record sheet, then I can give a pretty quick answer. If there is no equipment on the unit that is not available to Clan tech base, and the official record sheet says it is clan tech, then I pass along a note to the MUL team and Record sheet team and verify that's what the RS and MUL should have for the tech base.
-
Understood.
The BLG-1G Battlemaster Red Corsair as given on pg. 29 OTP: mounts only Clan equipment, despite the IS-like designation.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/3746/Athena
"Date Introduced" should be 2569 instead of 2369 (SO pg 16 "Naval Factor")
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/3746/Athena
"Date Introduced" should be 2569 instead of 2369 (SO pg 16 "Naval Factor")
Fixed, thanks.
-
The Legionnaire 2K, Export, and Ortega are all missing from the MUL.
-
Alo, no base BV listed for the Dokkalfar variant of the Alfar.
-
The Legionnaire 2K, Export, and Ortega are all missing from the MUL.
Sources for those?
-
2K - Record Sheets: MechWarrior Dark Age I, p. 58
Ortega - Record Sheets: MechWarrior Dark Age I, p. 59
-
Material from XTRO: The Periphery is missing. At a minimum, the book itself from the search criteria and the Danai's Arrow variant are not present.
-
2K - Record Sheets: MechWarrior Dark Age I, p. 58
Ortega - Record Sheets: MechWarrior Dark Age I, p. 59
Record Sheets: MechWarrior Dark Age is not considered a canon source at this time. There are known issues with many designs as well as the continuity of others.
TRO:3085 has redone some of these Dark Age era designs and Catalyst hopes to publish future products that include more DA designs (which is in no way a promise of a future product).
-
I was kind of surprised to see the Barghest BGS-7S as belonging to the Lyran Alliance. Is that correct? It's equipped like a Word of Blake refit.
-
Sylph Battle Armor (Enhanced) entry:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5171/Sylph-Battle-Armor-Enhanced
Shows Jihad-era availability as Comstar
As it's the production version of the Sylph XR, exclusive to Clan Snow Raven, should this be Clan Snow Raven?
Further note: the other two Sylph entries in the MUL:
Standard http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3146/Sylph-Battle-Armor
Upgrade: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3147/Sylph-Battle-Armor-Upgrade
show Jihad-era faction availability as Clan Diamond Shark/Sea Fox, and Clan Snow Raven. Given the Sylpo originated with Clan Clound Cobra (FM: Warden Clans, p188), this should be Clan Clound Cobra, Clan Diamond Shark/Sea Fox, and Clan Snow Raven
Thanks,
W.
-
I was kind of surprised to see the Barghest BGS-7S as belonging to the Lyran Alliance. Is that correct? It's equipped like a Word of Blake refit.
the MUL says it's in 3060U, I don't have a 3060U. I thought i was missing a PDF but i don't see it in battlecorps. I'm not seeing it in the fluff for the 3060 reprint,which is the latest one i have. It does look like a wob refit with the VSP's btu it has an "S" after it.
-
The CGL-branded TRO: 3060 reprint maintains the same text as the FASA era TRO:3060(with errata of course), but the accompanying Unabridiged Record Sheet book (http://www.battlecorps.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=27_35_208&products_id=2417) contians jihad-era variants. The BattleCorps Milspec article for that Barghest (http://www.battlecorps.com/BC2/news.html?article=515) (subscribers only) model marks it as being spotted in an Arcturan gurard unit on Ginestra.
-
the MUL says it's in 3060U, I don't have a 3060U. I thought i was missing a PDF but i don't see it in battlecorps. I'm not seeing it in the fluff for the 3060 reprint,which is the latest one i have. It does look like a wob refit with the VSP's btu it has an "S" after it.
TR3060 and RS3060u. No U on the TR. Little u on the RS (for Unabridged). As Locan Nagle says, it got a Milspec article on Battlecorps and its faction availability is based on that article.
-
Sylph Battle Armor (Enhanced) entry:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5171/Sylph-Battle-Armor-Enhanced
Shows Jihad-era availability as Comstar
As it's the production version of the Sylph XR, exclusive to Clan Snow Raven, should this be Clan Snow Raven?
Typo. Should be Snow Raven, not Comstar.
Further note: the other two Sylph entries in the MUL:
Standard http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3146/Sylph-Battle-Armor
Upgrade: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3147/Sylph-Battle-Armor-Upgrade
show Jihad-era faction availability as Clan Diamond Shark/Sea Fox, and Clan Snow Raven. Given the Sylpo originated with Clan Clound Cobra (FM: Warden Clans, p188), this should be Clan Clound Cobra, Clan Diamond Shark/Sea Fox, and Clan Snow Raven
Thanks,
W.
Homeworld Clan Availability is not listed at all, not just for the Sylph. No idea when Homeworld Clan availability will be listed.
-
The first Trinity Battle Armor variants have an introduction date of 3065 on the MUL, however according to Combat Equipment p52 production began in 3066.
The Asterion (PPC) variant should have a later introduction date than the original Asterion (MRR), due to the Taurians only beginning to field it after production moved to the Concordat, as per Technical Readout 3075 p26. The Readout says this happened after a "few years", however Handbook: Major Periphery States, which is dated 3067, shows the Asterion in production in the Concordat, which suggests that 3067 is the earliest introduction date for the Asterion (PPC).
-
The first Trinity Battle Armor variants have an introduction date of 3065 on the MUL, however according to Combat Equipment p52 production began in 3066.
The MUL supercedes dates in Combat Equipment. MUL development did extensive research on all units that had dual origins.
The Asterion (PPC) variant should have a later introduction date than the original Asterion (MRR), due to the Taurians only beginning to field it after production moved to the Concordat, as per Technical Readout 3075 p26. The Readout says this happened after a "few years", however Handbook: Major Periphery States, which is dated 3067, shows the Asterion in production in the Concordat, which suggests that 3067 is the earliest introduction date for the Asterion (PPC).
Going to defer to the CC/MoC expert in the MUL team. If you see a change in the next week or so, then you know you were right. :)
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2719/Ripper-Infantry-Transport-ERML
Has a date of 3054, but the ERML didn't come into existence until 3058, so date should be upped to atleast 3058.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2278/Nightshade-ECM-VTOL
This is starred, with the note that it features in TR3050U. However, the Nightshade entry in TR3050U (pp. 156-157) is infact the modern, Light PPC model.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2276/Nightshade-ECM-VTOL-Light-PPC is the design that should be tagged as featured.
-
TR3060 and RS3060u. No U on the TR. Little u on the RS (for Unabridged). As Locan Nagle says, it got a Milspec article on Battlecorps and its faction availability is based on that article.
Hurray! I helped!
-
Per Welshman,
Cephalus does not have a unit image here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3930/Cephalus-Prime) and here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3929/Cephalus-A).
Osteon does not have a unit image here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4767/Osteon-Prime) and here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4766/Osteon-A).
Hobgoblin does not have a unit image here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4326/Hobgoblin).
Boggart does not have a unit image here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3843/Boggart).
Sprite does not have a unit image here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5109/Sprite).
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2719/Ripper-Infantry-Transport-ERML
Has a date of 3054, but the ERML didn't come into existence until 3058, so date should be upped to atleast 3058.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2278/Nightshade-ECM-VTOL
This is starred, with the note that it features in TR3050U. However, the Nightshade entry in TR3050U (pp. 156-157) is infact the modern, Light PPC model.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2276/Nightshade-ECM-VTOL-Light-PPC is the design that should be tagged as featured.
Thanks! Changes made as listed.
-
Per Welshman,
Cephalus does not have a unit image.
Osteon does not have a unit image.
Hobgoblin does not have a unit image.
Boggart does not have a unit image.
Sprite does not have a unit image.
Please provide links to the MUL entry. This allows us to know exactly which unit you are talking about.
Best,
Joel BC
-
Riga: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4921/Riga-DestroyerCarrier
Date Introduced: 2747
This date is in error, as TRO3057r (p. 216, PDF) indicates the last one was mothballed in 2740. The article indicates it was commissioned 300 years earlier, in 2440.
Hope this helps,
Rev
-
Riga: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4921/Riga-DestroyerCarrier
Date Introduced: 2747
This date is in error, as TRO3057r (p. 216, PDF) indicates the last one was mothballed in 2740. The article indicates it was commissioned 300 years earlier, in 2440.
Hope this helps,
Rev
No error. The entry in 3057r refers to the Riga-class Frigate, not the Destroyer/Carrier. The DD/CV currently does not exist in any form aside from a mention in the York's fluff and a few mentions to Riga IIs in Liberation of Terra Vol 1.
-
Not sure if this has been mentioned recently but if you go to the page for the Eagle aerospace fighter, it first shows the Eagle battlemech mini, with the aerospace minis displayed further down the page (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4106/Eagle-EGL-R1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4106/Eagle-EGL-R1)). The same is true for the Eagle battlemech pages (shows both sets of minis).
Cheers,
LCC
-
Goliath GOL-1H http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1229/Goliath-GOL-1H (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1229/Goliath-GOL-1H):
This mech has an introduction year of 2652. However, two other mechs by the same designer, Dr. Harrison, the Xanthos and the Scorpion has intro years of 2564 and 2570. While people did live for a long time during the Star League, a gap of 80 years between the Scorpion and the Goliath does not really sound plausible.
Suggested solution:
Change to intro year of the Goliath to sometime in the 2580-2910 range of years.
EDIT:
Zeus ZEU-6S1 http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5436/Zeus-ZEU-6S1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5436/Zeus-ZEU-6S1):
The Zeus ZEU-6S1 is listed as being in Record Sheets: 3039 Unabridged in the MUL.
However, this is not true, no such record sheet can be found in said product.
Suggested solution:
Remove Record Sheets: 3039 Unabridged product association from the Zeus ZEU-6S1.
-
XTRO Periphery's units are now all live to the public, although the Ailette doesn't have art right now. It's on the list of things to do.
-
Annihilator ANH-3A http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/41/Annihilator-ANH-3A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/41/Annihilator-ANH-3A) and
Annihilator ANH-4A http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/42/Annihilator-ANH-4A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/42/Annihilator-ANH-4A):
Both these units have intro years during the Jihad (3068 & 3069), however their era is listed as Civil War.
Suggested solution:
Change the Eras for both mechs to Jihad.
EDIT:
Atlas C http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3750/Atlas-C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3750/Atlas-C):
This unit has no associated products in the MUL, however its record sheet can be found in RS3050Uunabridged Inner Sphere.
Suggested solution:
Add RS3050U unabridged Inner Sphere to products for Atlas C.
-
I'm not certain this is a concern, but I found a simple error - the Falcon Hawk entries contain links to camospecs/IWM miniatures for Falcon BattleMechs. Just thought I would point this out; I know you love your webpartners.
links:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1032/Falcon-Hawk-FNHK-9K1B
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1030/Falcon-Hawk-FNHK-9K
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1031/Falcon-Hawk-FNHK-9K1A
Cheers!
-
don' know if its supposed to be in here, but the BFB export does not include abilities although they are on the units page...
Thanks in advance
Flashhawk
-
don' know if its supposed to be in here, but the BFB export does not include abilities although they are on the units page...
By Abilities you mean the BattleForce Stats right? Thanks for pointing that out, I hadn't remembered to update the export with those when we added them. I'll work on that.
-
Wasp WSP-1, http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3519/Wasp-WSP-1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3519/Wasp-WSP-1), has has been assigned to TRO3039, even if it has a detailed writeup in XTRO:Primitives II.
Suggested solution:
Change assigned TRO for Wasp WSP-1 to XTRO:Primitives II.
BattleAxe BKX-1X, http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5584/BattleAxe-BKX-1X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5584/BattleAxe-BKX-1X), has no record sheet product in the MUL, even if it has a record sheet in XTRO:Primitives II.
Suggested solution:
Add XTRO:Primitives II as the record sheet product for BattleAxe BKX-1X.
Wolverine II WVR-7H, http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3585/Wolverine-II-WVR-7H (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3585/Wolverine-II-WVR-7H), has been assigned TRO3075 as its main TRO, even if it has a detailed writeup in Historical:Operation Klondike, while it is only covered by a few lines in TRO3075.
Suggested solution:
Change TRO for Wolverine II WVR-7H to Historical: Operation Klondike.
-
Fixed.
-
Per Welshman,
Cephalus does not have a unit image here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3930/Cephalus-Prime) and here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3929/Cephalus-A).
Osteon does not have a unit image here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4767/Osteon-Prime) and here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4766/Osteon-A).
Hobgoblin does not have a unit image here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/4326/Hobgoblin).
Boggart does not have a unit image here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3843/Boggart).
Sprite does not have a unit image here (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5109/Sprite).
FYI, this one is still waiting to be addressed
-
Thank you for your dedication.
I can assure you that all MUL reports are tracked and put into a backlog of work to be done. There is no need to repost a report. All items will be addressed when we can get to them.
-
Thank you for your dedication.
I can assure you that all MUL reports are tracked and put into a backlog of work to be done. There is no need to repost a report. All items will be addressed when we can get to them.
Understood, I was worried that it had been skipped when I edited the post, and since it's been a month I was afraid it had slipped through the cracks.
-
The 'Mechs are fixed. I need to contact Sky about the Protos.
EDIT: Sky took care of that when I asked him to just upload the images for me.
-
Rifleman C http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2693/Rifleman-C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2693/Rifleman-C)
Rifleman RFL-7X http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2704/Rifleman-RFL-7X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2704/Rifleman-RFL-7X)
Rifleman RFL-8X http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2706/Rifleman-RFL-8X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2706/Rifleman-RFL-8X)
Rifleman C 2 http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2694/Rifleman-C-2 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2694/Rifleman-C-2)
have all wrong tonnage. According to RS3085PP, they are all 60 ton mechs, but the MUL has them incorrectly as 65 tonners.
Suggested solution:
Correct weights to 60 ton.
Xotl: Corrected, thanks!
-
All these Combat Vehicle APC units:
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Wheeled) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/125/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/125/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Wheeled MG) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/122/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled-MG (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/122/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled-MG)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Tracked) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/120/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/120/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Tracked MG) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/117/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked-MG (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/117/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked-MG)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Hover) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/115/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/115/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Hover MG) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/112/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-MG (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/112/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-MG)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Hover Sensors) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3731/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-Sensors (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3731/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-Sensors)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Wheeled SRM) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/124/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled-SRM (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/124/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled-SRM)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Wheeled LRM) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/121/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled-LRM (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/121/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Wheeled-LRM)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Tracked SRM) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/119/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked-SRM (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/119/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked-SRM)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Tracked LRM) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/116/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked-LRM (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/116/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Tracked-LRM)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Hover SRM) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/114/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-SRM (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/114/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-SRM)
- Armored Personnel Carrier (Hover LRM) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/111/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-LRM (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/111/Armored-Personnel-Carrier-Hover-LRM)
has introduction dates of either ES, 2370 or 2400. According to XTRO: Primitives II, page 16 this is not possible, since the earliest year modern technology, and thus Combat Vehicles becomes available is 2470.
Suggested solution:
Change introduction year of all these APC units to 2470.
-
BattleAxe BKX-1X, http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5584/BattleAxe-BKX-1X (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5584/BattleAxe-BKX-1X)
has in introduction year of 2468 in the MUL.
However, both XTRO:Primitives Vol II, page 7 and Era Digest: Age of War, page 11 gives a year of 2459.
Suggested solution:
Change introduction year to 2459.
-
The BattleTech Eras page at: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Home/GettingStarted#Eras (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Home/GettingStarted#Eras), needs to be updated, as mentioned in this post.
Jihad era is being changed to go through 3085. (due to the FM:3085 "wrapping" up the Jihad era). So the images/era are correct, there's still a lot of availabilities that need to be fixed. (unit intro'ing 3082-3085 need Jihad availabilities now). And the legends describing the Jihad/republic eras needs to be changed. This is all in process.
3049 is an exception. The decision was made to make 3049 as Clan Invasion even though event wise it's not Clan Invasion until 3050. This needs to be noted somewhere in the MUL as well.
Suggested solutions:
- Change Succession Wars to 2781-3048
- Change Clan Invasion to 3049-3061
- Change Jihad to 3068-3085
- Change Dark Age to 3086+
-
Fury Command Tank (Standard) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1161/Fury-Command-Tank (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1161/Fury-Command-Tank):
This vehicle has an introduction year of 3064 and an era of Star League. This is clearly not correct.
The year should be sometimes 3068-3069, as the design was recovered in 3068 (see TRO3050U) and this is the first version that JKAW put into production:
With some work, JKAW modified the original design, which
had some unutilized growth room, to fit an infantry bay
before putting it to market.
-- TRO3050U
and implying that it was the first variant with an infantry bay, which this version has.
Suggested solution:
- Change Era to Jihad, and change Year to 3068.
-
TRO 3060 mentioned that Toyama BattleMechs were to be shipped to Atrean Dragoons.
Suggestion: Add Free Worlds League/Marik-Stewart Commonwealth to Faction Availability
-
TRO 3060 mentioned that Toyama BattleMechs were to be shipped to Atrean Dragoons.
Suggestion: Add Free Worlds League/Marik-Stewart Commonwealth to Faction Availability
The general rule of thumb for availability is multiple units in multiple forces. Otherwise it's just a quirk of that one specific force, not the faction.
-
The general rule of thumb for availability is multiple units in multiple forces. Otherwise it's just a quirk of that one specific force, not the faction.
Okay. I only got the idea when I saw that a few Grand Crusaders served in 15th Marik Militia.
-
Tarantula ZPH-3A http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/3162/Tarantula-ZPH-3A
Availability for the Republic era of all variants (including the 3A) is populated, but only the 3A still has an unknown designation in addition. Perhaps it was accidentally not removed?
-
Striker Light Tank (Ammo) - http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5154/Striker-Light-Tank-Ammo (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5154/Striker-Light-Tank-Ammo):
This unit has no record sheet assigned in the MUL. However, its record sheet is found in RS3058U unabridged - Inner Sphere.
Suggested Solution:
Add RS3058Uu-I as record sheet source to it.
-
I suggest to add a new faction option: "Free Worlds League (Duchy of Tamarind-Abbey)"
-
I suggest to add a new faction option: "Free Worlds League (Duchy of Tamarind-Abbey)"
Thank you. This does not fall under errata, as we have defined it. Instead this is more a fan request.
Factions will be added as appropriate, by decision of the MUL team and Line Development.
-
I formally apologize.
Since all other FWL splinter states are available at the MUL, I deemed this was merely omitted in error.
-
On the direction of someone wiser than me, I'll repost my question here
What does extinct mean in relation to MUL units?
-
Ti Ts'ang TSG-9DDC, has two entries: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3253/Ti-Tsang-TSG-9DDC (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3253/Ti-Tsang-TSG-9DDC) andhttp://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5242/Ti-Tsang-TSG-9DDC (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5242/Ti-Tsang-TSG-9DDC):
While it figures in both the XTRO and TRO:Prototypes, both the stats and the name are the same in both occasions.
Suggested solution:
Merge both entries, using the date from the XTRO one, and the picture from the TRO:Prototype one.
EDIT:
Another two entries, one mech issue:
Gladiator GLD-1R has two entries http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1198/Gladiator-GLD-1R (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1198/Gladiator-GLD-1R) and http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5582/Gladiator-GLD-1R (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5582/Gladiator-GLD-1R).
Suggested solution:
Merge them.
-
On the direction of someone wiser than me, I'll repost my question here
What does extinct mean in relation to MUL units?
No longer available in any noticeable numbers to any faction in that era.
-
Ti Ts'ang TSG-9DDC, has two entries: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3253/Ti-Tsang-TSG-9DDC (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3253/Ti-Tsang-TSG-9DDC) andhttp://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5242/Ti-Tsang-TSG-9DDC (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5242/Ti-Tsang-TSG-9DDC):
While it figures in both the XTRO and TRO:Prototypes, both the stats and the name are the same in both occasions.
Suggested solution:
Merge both entries, using the date from the XTRO one, and the picture from the TRO:Prototype one.
Merged and deleted extra. Note that date is for in service date/full production once there is such a thing. So the 3083 date was kept even though a prototype was available in 3076.
EDIT:
Another two entries, one mech issue:
Gladiator GLD-1R has two entries http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1198/Gladiator-GLD-1R (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1198/Gladiator-GLD-1R) and http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5582/Gladiator-GLD-1R (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5582/Gladiator-GLD-1R).
Suggested solution:
Merge them.
Merged and deleted extra.
Thanks!
-
Striker Light Tank (Ammo) - http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5154/Striker-Light-Tank-Ammo (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/5154/Striker-Light-Tank-Ammo):
This unit has no record sheet assigned in the MUL. However, its record sheet is found in RS3058U unabridged - Inner Sphere.
Suggested Solution:
Add RS3058Uu-I as record sheet source to it.
Thanks, fixed.
-
Tarantula ZPH-3A http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/3162/Tarantula-ZPH-3A
Availability for the Republic era of all variants (including the 3A) is populated, but only the 3A still has an unknown designation in addition. Perhaps it was accidentally not removed?
Thanks for the report, fixed.
-
I formally apologize.
Since all other FWL splinter states are available at the MUL, I deemed this was merely omitted in error.
We didn't have any use for it yet, as it wasn't yet assigned anything that wasn't in Free Worlds League availability. That should be changing shortly (because MadCapellan is awesome....)
-
I found three more entries that might need the To Be Determined tag removed
Archer ARC-9K http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/87/Archer-ARC-9K
Goliath GOL-5D http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1235/Goliath-GOL-5D
Stealth STH-2D2 http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/3056/Stealth-STH-2D2
-
- Cataphract 5D BV is listed as 1510 but the correct value is 1742.
I guess this is from the old standard heat sink version that was changed in RS3050Uu.
- Assassin 99 suffers from the same problem. Change BV from 928 to 1116.
- Trebuchet 3C BV is listed as 1414 but in RS3050Uu and SSW it's listed as 1342. I have no explanation for this.
A pair of mech variants from RS3050Uu are missing faction availability: Hunchback 6S, Zeus 9S2
Highlander 694 misses intro date.
-
- Cataphract 5D BV is listed as 1510 but the correct value is 1742.
I guess this is from the old standard heat sink version that was changed in RS3050Uu.
- Assassin 99 suffers from the same problem. Change BV from 928 to 1116.
- Trebuchet 3C BV is listed as 1414 but in RS3050Uu and SSW it's listed as 1342. I have no explanation for this.
A pair of mech variants from RS3050Uu are missing faction availability: Hunchback 6S, Zeus 9S2
Hello,
If you are going to list BV errors, we need you to provide more data. Battle Value in the MUL is considered correct unless proven by math to not be. MUL BV supersedes all other BT publications.
Thank you.
Joel BC
-
Both the Assassin 99 and Cataphract 5D are designs that were completely changed between
RS3050U and RS3050Uu and were given stealth armor (in order to conform with the fluff from TRO3050U in the case of the Cataphract).
The stealth armor is a massive BV changer.
The values in the MUL are exactly the same as the old values (928 for the Assassin and 1510 for the Cataphract)
I can post the BV calculations done automatically by Solaris Skunk Werks.
Cataphract 5D
Item DefBV OffBV
Internal Structure - Standard 120 0
Engine - Light Fusion Engine 0 0
Gyro - Gyro 35 0
Cockpit - Small 0 0
Heat Sinks - Double Heat Sink 0 0
Musculature - Standard 0 70
Actuators 0 0
Jump Jets - Improved Jump Jet 0 0
Armor - Stealth Armor 480 0
ER Medium Laser 0 62
ER Medium Laser 0 62
Light AC/5 0 62
Plasma Rifle 0 210
@ Light AC/5 0 8
@ Plasma Rifle 0 26
@ Plasma Rifle 0 26
Guardian ECM Suite 61 0
CASE 0 0
Cost Multiplier
Dry Cost
Total Cost
Defensive BV Calculation Breakdown
________________________________________________________________________________
Total Armor Factor (192) * Armor Type Modifier (1.0) * 2.5 480.00
Total Structure Points (107) * Structure Type Modifier (1.0)
* Engine Type Modifier (0.75) * 1.5 120.38
Mech Tonnage (70) * Gyro Type Modifer (0.5) 35.00
Total Defensive BV of all Equipment 61.00
Excessive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Explosive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Explosive Item Penalty 0.00
Subtotal 696.38
Defensive Speed Factor Breakdown:
Maximum Ground Movement Modifier: 1.20
Maximum Jump Movement Modifier: 1.30
Defensive Speed Factor Bonus from Equipment: 0.20
Minimum Defensive Speed Factor: 0.00
(Max of Run or Jump) + DSF Bonus = 1.50
Total DBV (Subtotal * Defensive Speed Factor (1.50)) 1,044.56
Offensive BV Calculation Breakdown
________________________________________________________________________________
Heat Efficiency (6 + 28 - 3) = 31
Adjusted Weapon BV Total WBV 396.00
-> ER Medium Laser 62.00
-> ER Medium Laser 62.00
-> Light AC/5 62.00
-> Plasma Rifle 210.00
Non-Heat Equipment Total NHBV 60.00
-> @ Light AC/5 8.00
-> @ Plasma Rifle 26.00
-> @ Plasma Rifle 26.00
-> Guardian ECM Suite 0.00
Excessive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Mech Tonnage Bonus 70.00
Subtotal (WBV + NHBV - Excessive Ammo + Tonnage Bonus) 526.00
Offensive Speed Factor Breakdown:
Adjusted Running MP (6) + ( Adjusted Jumping MP (6) / 2 ) - 5 = 4.00
4.00 / 10 + 1 = 1.400
1.40 ^ 1.2 = 1.5 (rounded off to two digits)
Total OBV (Subtotal * Offensive Speed Factor (1.5)) 789.00
Small Cockpit modifier 0.95
Total Battle Value ((DBV + OBV) * cockpit modifier, round off) 1,742
Assassin 99
Item DefBV OffBV
Internal Structure - Standard 50 0
Engine - XL Fusion Engine 0 0
Gyro - Gyro 20 0
Cockpit - Standard 0 0
Heat Sinks - Double Heat Sin 0 0
Musculature - Standard 0 40
Actuators 0 0
Jump Jets - Standard Jump Jet 0 0
Armor - Stealth Armor 320 0
Light PPC 0 88
SRM-2 0 21
SRM-2 0 21
TAG 0 0
Guardian ECM Suite 61 0
Sword 0 9
@ SRM-2 0 3
Cost Multiplier
Defensive BV Calculation Breakdown
________________________________________________________________________________
Total Armor Factor (128) * Armor Type Modifier (1.0) * 2.5 320.00
Total Structure Points (67) * Structure Type Modifier (1.0)
* Engine Type Modifier (0.5) * 1.5 50.25
Mech Tonnage (40) * Gyro Type Modifer (0.5) 20.00
Total Defensive BV of all Equipment 61.00
Excessive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Explosive Ammunition Penalty -15.00
Explosive Item Penalty 0.00
Subtotal 436.25
Defensive Speed Factor Breakdown:
Maximum Ground Movement Modifier: 1.40
Maximum Jump Movement Modifier: 1.40
Defensive Speed Factor Bonus from Equipment: 0.20
Minimum Defensive Speed Factor: 0.00
(Max of Run or Jump) + DSF Bonus = 1.60
Total DBV (Subtotal * Defensive Speed Factor (1.60)) 698.00
Offensive BV Calculation Breakdown
________________________________________________________________________________
Heat Efficiency (6 + 20 - 7) = 19
Adjusted Weapon BV Total WBV 138.63
-> Light PPC 88.00
-> SRM-2 21.00
-> SRM-2 21.00
-> Sword 8.63
Non-Heat Equipment Total NHBV 3.00
-> TAG 0.00
-> Guardian ECM Suite 0.00
-> @ SRM-2 3.00
Excessive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Mech Tonnage Bonus 40.00
Subtotal (WBV + NHBV - Excessive Ammo + Tonnage Bonus) 181.63
Offensive Speed Factor Breakdown:
Adjusted Running MP (11) + ( Adjusted Jumping MP (7) / 2 ) - 5 = 10.00
10.00 / 10 + 1 = 2.000
2.00 ^ 1.2 = 2.3 (rounded off to two digits)
Total OBV (Subtotal * Offensive Speed Factor (2.3)) 417.74
Total Battle Value (DBV + OBV, round off) 1,116
-
Thank you, that is the kind of information we needed.
-
The MUL is an amazing resource and I am happy to contribute in any way I can.
-
Not sure if anyone has mentioned it or not, but there does not appear to be a Linebacker F anywhere in the stated sources (both TRO: 3055 Upgrade or Record Sheets: 3055 Upgrade Unabridged). Does this model exist?
Thanks
-
It's in my RS: 3055Uu - x4 SRM-6, ERPPC, and an iOS Narc
-
Strange, its not in mine.
-
Cicada CDA-3F http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/594/Cicada-CDA-3F
Hermes HER-4S http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1494/Hermes-HER-4S
Both have intro dates and their availabilities for the Jihad and Dark Age established, but are listed as unavailable for the Unknown era (4000-4000). Seems like a tag that was kept by accident (my apologies if it's supposed to be there)
-
Thunderbird Battle Armor
Base http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/5235/Thunderbird-Battle-Armor-Base
AP Gauss http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/3228/Thunderbird-Battle-Armor-%5bAP-Gauss%5d
ER Laser http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/3229/Thunderbird-Battle-Armor-%5bER-Laser%5d
Pulse Laser http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/3230/Thunderbird-Battle-Armor-%5bPulse-Laser%5d
All are listed with a tonnage of 2. Per TRO 3085 Supplement it's a heavy suit with a weight of 1.5 tons.
-
The Ferret Light Scout VTOL (Sensor) variant has a BV of "NA", which displays as a "0" in the list of "other models". The cargo variant has a BV of 17.
-
The Ferret Light Scout VTOL (Sensor) variant has a BV of "NA", which displays as a "0" in the list of "other models". The cargo variant has a BV of 17.
I'm not certain what you are saying here. What does the BV of the cargo variant have to do with the BV of the sensor variant? 0 and NA are the same thing. Nothing has an actual BV of 0.
-
The cargo variant is unarmed, as is the sensor variant, seeming to set a minimum value. Is the sensor variant BV NA because it hasn't been officially calculated yet?
-
The Blackjack Omni (all configs) uses the graphic for the venerable Blackjack instead of the image from RS: 3058Uu IS
Current Image: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/378/Blackjack-BJ2-O
It should use this one: http://www.sarna.net/wiki/images/thumb/3/3e/BlackjackOmni.jpg/498px-BlackjackOmni.jpg
Xotl: corrected, thanks!
-
Oops. I should have linked all configs of the BJ2 (they were all using the wrong graphic)
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/3830/Blackjack-BJ2-O-Base
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/379/Blackjack-BJ2-OA
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/380/Blackjack-BJ2-OB
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/381/Blackjack-BJ2-OC
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/382/Blackjack-BJ2-OD
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/383/Blackjack-BJ2-OE
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/384/Blackjack-BJ2-OF
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/385/Blackjack-BJ2-OR
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/386/Blackjack-BJ2-OU
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/387/Blackjack-BJ2-OX
Xotl: corrected, thanks!
-
Duplicate entries for the Icarus ICR-1X
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1599/Icarus-ICR-1X
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/5581/Icarus-ICR-1X
I double-checked and the RS in 3075u and XTRO: Primitives Vol.2 are identical (save the mech picture)
suggest merging the entries
-
Incubus II from TRO: Prototypes is listed on the MUL as the Incubus 2
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/4363/Incubus-2
-
Incubus II from TRO: Prototypes is listed on the MUL as the Incubus 2
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/4363/Incubus-2
Fixed. thanks!
Duplicate entries for the Icarus ICR-1X
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1599/Icarus-ICR-1X
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/5581/Icarus-ICR-1X
I double-checked and the RS in 3075u and XTRO: Primitives Vol.2 are identical (save the mech picture)
suggest merging the entries
And merged. Thanks.
-
The Warhammer (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3479/Warhammer-C), Thunderbolt (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3231/Thunderbolt-C), Archer (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/90/Archer-C), Rifleman (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2693/Rifleman-C), and Shadow Hawk C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2895/Shadow-Hawk-C) all list the FS, DC, and LA as users in the Jihad era. Only the Archer C has any Clan availability.
Two issues.
1. All but the Archer C show up on the FM:85 Jade Falcon RATs, so either the MUL is right and those are new conversions (which would be weird since they're crappy), or they had them all along and the MUL should have Jade Falcon availability listed. The Archer C is on the '85 Wolf RAT and that Jihad availability is listed.
2. Furthermore, every one of those designs is listed as extinct in the Republic era, but between the '85 Wolf and Falcon RATs every one of them shows up, so they should probably have something there besides extinct.
I know that RATs are not intended to be a perfectly faithful representation of a faction's military but the units they list should probably exist in that era. If it's an oversight, it's an understandable one, since those designs are so awful and I can't imagine many people have had occasion to pay attention to them.
EDIT: Three other possible problem 'Mechs, the Marauder (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2032/Marauder-C), Atlas (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3750/Atlas-C), and Victor C (http://).
The Marauder C does have Falcon, Ghost Bear, Wolf, and Nova Cat Jihad availability, but is also extinct in the Republic Era. It doesn't show up on any RATs, though, so that's not a direct contradiction of anything. It'd be odd if those other "extinct" availabilities changed, though.
The Atlas C has IS Clan General availability in the Jihad, so that makes sense, but only IS General availability in the Republic Era, and it's on the Falcon '85 RAT. Maybe change the Republic availability to IS Clan General as well?
The Victor C is extinct in both the Jihad and Republic Eras. That doesn't conflict with anything I'm aware of, but it seems quite odd given the widespread usage of its crappy, underweight, single-heat-sinked brethren. Perhaps that's the difference, since it's the only reasonably cooled one of the lot.
-
I know that RATs are not intended to be a perfectly faithful representation of a faction's military but the units they list should probably exist in that era. If it's an oversight, it's an understandable one, since those designs are so awful and I can't imagine many people have had occasion to pay attention to them.
Greetings,
Thank you for your input and detailed report.
- RATs published in 2012 and moving forward are intended to match up with the MUL under most circumstances. There are fringe cases, mostly with small factions where they won't. This is not the norm.
- RATs prior to 2012 are heavily considered during MUL faction list work. Because Faction Lists and RATs were not previously justified, there will be cases where something appears in a RAT and does not appear on the MUL. When this happens, consider the RAT to either represent a very small slice of that overall era or that this unit, while not large enough in number to rate faction access, played a significant part in the history of that faction in that era.
For example: While Daniel Allard piloted a Wolfhound in the Succession Wars, that single unit doesn't really justify the Kell Hounds having the WLF in that era.
- Clan Units are still in "Beta" so are not yet perfect. Your detailed feedback is greatly appreciated.
-
Shadow Hawk SHD-1R http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2898/Shadow-Hawk-SHD-1R (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2898/Shadow-Hawk-SHD-1R),
has an introduction year of 2457, and mounts jump-jets, even if:
A) The Wasp-1 in XTRO:Primitives, Vol 2, page 3 is fluffed as the first mech with jump-jets, and has an introduction year of 2464.
B) The Era Digest: Age of War, page 11 gives an introduction year of 2467 for the Shadow Hawk.
Suggested solution:
Change introduction year of the Shadow Hawk to 2467.
-
Nuefeld, that's the kind of errata we love. Thank you
-
Fixed.
-
Suggestion:
Have the individual unit pages list the loadouts. Not looking for record sheets, but looking for a single, unified location to be able to look at and decide which model I want to include based on weaponry.
-
The Firestarter Omni is using the oldschool Firestarter image:
http://img.masterunitlist.info/BattleMechs/firestarter.jpg
Instead of:
http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:FirestarterOmni.jpg
Pages using the incorrect image
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1099/Firestarter-FS9-O
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/4173/Firestarter-FS9-O-Base
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1100/Firestarter-FS9-OA
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1101/Firestarter-FS9-OB
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1102/Firestarter-FS9-OC
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1103/Firestarter-FS9-OD
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1104/Firestarter-FS9-OE
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1105/Firestarter-FS9-OF
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1106/Firestarter-FS9-OG
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1107/Firestarter-FS9-OH
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1108/Firestarter-FS9-OR
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1109/Firestarter-FS9-OU
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/1110/Firestarter-FS9-OX
The following Blackjack omni still uses the incorrect image
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/3830/Blackjack-BJ2-O-Base
-
I cannot edit the images of the base Firestarter and Blackjack Omnis due to some sort of security setting, but the rest have been fixed. Thanks!
-
Thunderbolt TDR-5Sb http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3239/Thunderbolt-TDR-5Sb (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/3239/Thunderbolt-TDR-5Sb),
has an introduction year of 2680, even if:
A) It mounts an ERPPC, see Historical: Operation Klondike, page 160, and RS:Operation Klondike, page 45
B) The ERPPC was not invented until 2760, see Tech Manual, page 233, and Era Report: 2750, page 144
Suggested solution:
Either A) Change the introduction date of TDR-5Sb to 2760+,
or
B) create two different royal Thunderbolts, one with a PPC, and the other with an ERPPC.
------------------------------------
Griffin GRF-2N http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1299/Griffin-GRF-2N (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1299/Griffin-GRF-2N),
has an introduction year of 2703, even if:
A) It mounts an ERPPC, see Historical: Operation Klondike, page 159, and RS:Operation Klondike, page 36
B) The ERPPC was not invented until 2760, see Tech Manual, page 233, and Era Report: 2750, page 144
Suggested solution:
Either A) Change the introduction date of GRF-2N to 2760+,
or
B) create two different Griffins, one with a PPC, and the other with an ERPPC.
------------------------------------
Champion CHP-1Nb http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/550/Champion-CHP-1Nb (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/550/Champion-CHP-1Nb),
has an introduction year of 2737, even if:
A) It mounts an ERPPC, see Historical: Operation Klondike, page 160, and RS:Operation Klondike, page 43
B) The ERPPC was not invented until 2760, see Tech Manual, page 233, and Era Report: 2750, page 144
Suggested solution:
Either A) Change the introduction date of CHP-1Nb to 2760+,
or
B) create two different Champions, one with a PPC, and the other with an ERPPC.
-
Thank you- We are aware of the issue with all Royal units that mount ERPPCs. We are working to address that.
For now, assume all Royals with ERPPCs have an introduction date after 2750.
Please note we are also changing the ERPPC introduction date to 2751, from 2760.
-
Problem with the Hunter Light Support Tank: The earliest introduction date in the MUL is 2937; all other models have later introduction dates.
However, the BattleCorps story "Broken Blade", set in 2787 (First Battle of Hesperus II) features a Hunter vehicle factory on Hesperus and a number of Hunter tanks fighting.
Suggestion: Put the introduction date(s) for the standard Hunter Light Support Tank and possibly its variants back to before 2787.
-
The story, Broken Blade, is in error. It would have to have been another vehicle. The Hunter has always been a Succession Wars era introduced engine. Hence the stress on how odd it was to put a fusion engine on it.
Thank you,
Joel BC
-
Some additions to the Canopian MUL based on TRO 3085 and 3090.
GRF-5L Griffin: TRO 3085, p238: "These GRF-5L variants were shared with the Magistracy of Canopus, but not with the Taurian Concordat."
CRD-8L Crusader: TRO 3085, p252: "...and two others in the hands of allied Magistracy units."
WHM-5L: TRO 3085, p258: "A joint venture between the Magistracy and the Capellan Confederation, the WHM-5L trades in..."
DOL-1A1 Dola: TRO Prototypes, p96: "The Dola is also being exported to the Magistracy of Canopus, ..."
RCL-Z1M Deep Lord: TRO Prototypes, p124: "Primary Factory: Canopus"
I admit that the CRD-8L is iffy, but it's only an in-universe intelligence report and isn't 100% inclusive of all CRD-8Ls that may be in the Magistracy. Also, the WHM-11T is given to the MoC despite the text saying only that Canopus has expressed a desire to buy them versus actually using the things directly.
EDIT: A few more additions; these are from the 3085 RAT for the Canopians. OTT-7J Ostscout, WTH-2 Whitworth, and CP-10-Q Cyclops. They don't show on Periphery General either.
-
Helepolis HEP-2H http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1461/Helepolis-HEP-2H,
has an introduction year of 2488, even if:
A) It uses double heat-sinks, see Record Sheets 3075 unabridged, page 174, and TRO:3075, page 182-183
B) Double Heat-sinks was not invented until 2567 (prototype 2559), 80 years later, see Tech Manual, page 221, and Historical: Reunification War, page 178
Suggested solution:
Either A) Change the introduction date of HEP-2H to 2567+,
or
B) remove the double heat-sinks from HEP-2H.
-
Was there ever any kind of password recovery or reset system put into the MUL?
-
Was there ever any kind of password recovery or reset system put into the MUL?
Not yet. I believe it is planned for the next update.
-
There is no listing for Teppo Artillery Vehicle from the TRO 3085 supplimental. It comes up as Tepp? Artillery vehicle.
Suggestion - Have record sheets made for it and added to the MUL.
-
I have corrected the unit's name in the MUL.
-
The Thunderbird Battle Armor entries are showing links to the image of a painted Thunderbird ASF miniature and the sales page to purchase the ASF miniature from IWM.
Suggestion: Correct the links to point to the correct Tbird BA pages on IWM's site.
-
Hello,
I found a couple of errors.
-The Falcon Hawk entries link to the page to purchase the Falcon BattleMech.
-The date of introduction for the Blackjack is listed as 2771. Is this correct? This is not published in any of the TRO I have (3025, 3039), and it is different that the lasted publication of RS: 3039. Additionally, TRO3039 states, "The Blackjack's original role was to help suppress insurgent forces (mainly in the Periphery) that challenged Star League authority in the decades before its fall".
Thanks!
Steve
-
I can't do anything with the Falcon Hawk issue for now.
As for the Blackjack fluff, the TR3039 reference does work - it's saying that the Blackjack was designed to combat the sort of trouble that had been plaguing the League for its final decades, not that the Blackjack was built prior to those decades. The trouble pre-existed the design.
-
As for the Blackjack fluff, the TR3039 reference does work - it's saying that the Blackjack was designed to combat the sort of trouble that had been plaguing the League for its final decades, not that the Blackjack was built prior to those decades. The trouble pre-existed the design.
OK, I was just worried because the date on RS: 3039 (Catalyst) of 2757 also seems reasonable with that description. Thank you for your quick reply!
Steve
-
Hmmm, I thought you were talking about the Unabridged set of Record Sheets, which have no date. Checking the abridged version now I see the 2757 date. I'll raise the issue with the Scooby Gang.
-
Okay, we're going with 2757. Thanks for your help in spotting this issue!
-
No problem. I got another question. MUL states the DV-6M Dervish appeared in 2610, but it is listed extensively in the RUDs of Historical: Reunification War (I love those historical settings ;D). Thank you!
Steve
-
The Ryoken (Stormcrow) I (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/5487/Ryoken-Stormcrow-I) and Uller (Kit Fox) G (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/5486/Uller-Kit-Fox-G) are both listed as Unit Type: BattleMech. Both should be Unit Type: BattleMech OmniMech.
-
Fixed - thanks!
-
Shadow Cat A (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2887/Shadow-Cat-A) has a listed availability of:
Jihad: Clan Diamond Shark/Sea Fox, Clan Jade Falcon, Clan Nova Cat, Clan Snow Raven, Clan Wolf
Republic: To Be Announced
Shadow Cat B (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2888/Shadow-Cat-B) has a listed availability of:
Jihad: IS Clan General
Republic: To Be Announced
The Shadow Cat Prime (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2892/Shadow-Cat-Prime), C (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2889/Shadow-Cat-C), H (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2890/Shadow-Cat-H), and J (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/2891/Shadow-Cat-J) variants have:
Jihad: IS Clan General
Republic: Clan Diamond Shark/Sea Fox, Clan Jade Falcon, Clan Nova Cat, Mercenary, Raven Alliance, Republic of the Sphere
Are the A and B listings an error?
-
Hello,
I noticed the introduction date of the DV-6M Dervish on the MUL is 2610, but the DV-6M appears in the in the Random Unit Assignment Tables for Historical: Reunification War. Since the Reunification War is 2577-2596, I was wondering if this was correct.
The DV-6M appears 5 times between the Federated Suns (1), Capellan Confederation (1), Terran Hegemony (1) and Draconis Combine (2) on p. 171 of the book. Thanks!
Steve
-
The Ha Otoko-1C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1357/Ha-Otoko-HKO-1C) and/or Clan-tech Ha Otoko (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1355/Ha-Otoko) entries may need to be altered:
FM: U, p. 59.
"Unlike the Ha Otoko, the Mad Cat Mk II is not a stripped-down version, but incorporates fully functional Clan technology..."
The MUL has the HKO-1C listed as available to the Draconis Combine and Lyran Alliance from '68 on, but since the text indicates it was being sold prior to the Jihad, the Combine probably has it during the Clan Invasion era. The Diamond Sharks should definitely have access pre-Jihad.
Similarly, the standard Ha Otoko is a Clan Invasion-era machine and should be available for the Diamond Sharks in that window. I believe based on the text in FM: U and the general spread of Clan technology that Jihad and beyond availability to various Sphere factions is correct.
-
The Ha Otoko-1C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1357/Ha-Otoko-HKO-1C) and/or Clan-tech Ha Otoko (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1355/Ha-Otoko) entries may need to be altered:
FM: U, p. 59.
"Unlike the Ha Otoko, the Mad Cat Mk II is not a stripped-down version, but incorporates fully functional Clan technology..."
The MUL has the HKO-1C listed as available to the Draconis Combine and Lyran Alliance from '68 on, but since the text indicates it was being sold prior to the Jihad, the Combine probably has it during the Clan Invasion era. The Diamond Sharks should definitely have access pre-Jihad.
Similarly, the standard Ha Otoko is a Clan Invasion-era machine and should be available for the Diamond Sharks in that window. I believe based on the text in FM: U and the general spread of Clan technology that Jihad and beyond availability to various Sphere factions is correct.
The MUL lists Jihad era availability and is adding Republic era availability. It does not say anything about Clan Invasion era availability (nor Civil War era availability or Star League availability, etc).
-
Hello,
I noticed the introduction date of the DV-6M Dervish on the MUL is 2610, but the DV-6M appears in the in the Random Unit Assignment Tables for Historical: Reunification War. Since the Reunification War is 2577-2596, I was wondering if this was correct.
The DV-6M appears 5 times between the Federated Suns (1), Capellan Confederation (1), Terran Hegemony (1) and Draconis Combine (2) on p. 171 of the book. Thanks!
Steve
There were Dervishes functionally identical to the DV-6M in the Reunification War, but had different model numbers. Those models have not been named/published yet, so the RATs just say to use the DV-6M.
-
Thanks for going through these!
Some additions to the Canopian MUL based on TRO 3085 and 3090.
GRF-5L Griffin: TRO 3085, p238: "These GRF-5L variants were shared with the Magistracy of Canopus, but not with the Taurian Concordat."
GRF-5L added to MC in both Jihad and Republic.
CRD-8L Crusader: TRO 3085, p252: "...and two others in the hands of allied Magistracy units."
Added to both MC and CC. (CC was missing due to Jihad era end date change).
WHM-5L: TRO 3085, p258: "A joint venture between the Magistracy and the Capellan Confederation, the WHM-5L trades in..."
Added to both MC and CC. (CC was missing due to Jihad era end date change).
DOL-1A1 Dola: TRO Prototypes, p96: "The Dola is also being exported to the Magistracy of Canopus, ..."
Added to both MC and CC. (CC was missing due to Jihad era end date change).
(OK, sounding like a broken record now I know..)
RCL-Z1M Deep Lord: TRO Prototypes, p124: "Primary Factory: Canopus"
Added to MC for Jihad, and MC plus Mercenary for Republic era.
EDIT: A few more additions; these are from the 3085 RAT for the Canopians. OTT-7J Ostscout, WTH-2 Whitworth, and CP-10-Q Cyclops. They don't show on Periphery General either.
OTT-7J: added MC to Jihad era. sending Republic era to review.
WTH-2: added MC to Jihad and Republic.
CP-10-Q: added MC to Jihad. sending Republic era to review.
-
Is the CamoSpecs thing still under construction?
I ask because the Scorpion Light Tank has images of the Scorpion Medium Quad 'Mech on its page.
-
Everyone should check out the new MUL interface that was just implemented. If you find any bugs or have any further suggestions, post them.
-
First- looks very good. I also had no troubles using the new interface and getting the answers I was looking for.
Still there are csome questions:
Inner Sphere General can be chosen under Units but not under Factions.
Are the units from the general list an IS faction gets included in their Faction specific list already?
In the Periphery the Periphery General 'faction' can be found both under Units and Factions. So if I want to check what units are available for the MoC or MH I have to check both lists (Faction specific and General) or do a unit search (like I usually do).
How about a small line about what Periphery Factions also may use the General List or integrating the PG units into the Faction selection to make it easier for new players to find their stuff?
BTW- Rasalhague Dominion is found under Periphery factions and not among the Clans?
-
The overall page look is very clean, and IMO a great advancement over the previous version. I like the similarities to the main bg.battetech site.
You should put a notice up top of the 'Era' page stating that it is still a work in progress. While those of us who follow the MUL development know that the non-Jihad and Republic eras are still works in progress, some users may not know that. And while it is stated on the home page, it really should still be repeated on the 'Era' page. People will always click without reading.
The 'Units' page layout seems too vertical. The 'Your Terms' is placed close to center, while the actual selection areas are aligned left. Additionally, there is an awful lot of white space to the right, even viewing at 1024x768. Moving some or all of the selection boxes to the right would allow for less white space and also allow clicking 'Filter' without having to page scroll.
The "Under license from Topps" section / image in the lower right links to the Battletech Facebook page, rather than to Topps website. The Catalyst logo in the upper right hand corner should probably link to Catalyst's website, and I would suggest having the large Battletech logo link to bg.battletech.com rather than linking back to home. Even if you decide not to do that, I would add a link to the main Battletech website somewhere on the MUL site, other than the only current link(which leads directly to this thread, bypassing the main page altogether).
Additionally, the favicon is currently missing.
-
The answer to this needs to be shown:
Inner Sphere General can be chosen under Units but not under Factions.
Are the units from the general list an IS faction gets included in their Faction specific list already?
In the Periphery the Periphery General 'faction' can be found both under Units and Factions. So if I want to check what units are available for the MoC or MH I have to check both lists (Faction specific and General) or do a unit search (like I usually do).
Also, not related to update, but I am also confused if the Republic era Ravens has access to Periphery General and/or IS Clan General lists?
Going on about factions, the following are missing from the faction list:
- Clan Stone Lion
- The six FWL-substates
- Fronc Reaches
- Filtvelt Coalition
(The last two should probably be separated from Periphery General, due to the latest FR:Periphery and FM:3085 treating them as major Periphery states.)
Other than that, I do like the update and thinks it is a clear improvement.
EDIT:
No, I found another issue. The screen that displays an individual unit is too wide. I have a wide-screen monitor, and has to scroll sideways, that is not good. The culprit is the BattleForce box, those pages that lacks it are fine.
-
In any of the dropdown lists that include any number of check boxes, the any beyond the first are indented
-
The "Under license from Topps" section / image in the lower right links to the Battletech Facebook page, rather than to Topps website.
Fixed
The Catalyst logo in the upper right hand corner should probably link to Catalyst's website,
Fixed
Additionally, the favicon is currently missing.
Fixed
-
EDIT:
No, I found another issue. The screen that displays an individual unit is too wide. I have a wide-screen monitor, and has to scroll sideways, that is not good. The culprit is the BattleForce box, those pages that lacks it are fine.
Fixed, was on a wide screen when I made that change =) Saw the problem this morning and went back to BF on the bottom.
-
- Fronc Reaches
- Filtvelt Coalition
(The last two should probably be separated from Periphery General, due to the latest FR:Periphery and FM:3085 treating them as major Periphery states.)
Periphery General means all the tracked Periphery states have it. (TC,OA,MC,MH,CF in Jihad). It's shorthand for all the listed Periphery factions.
-
So is the force creator gone for good then (or am I just not seeing it)? In general I suck at math, so that was extremely helpful in coming up with a lance or two for a game.
-
So is the force creator gone for good then (or am I just not seeing it)? In general I suck at math, so that was extremely helpful in coming up with a lance or two for a game.
Not gone for good, but I will need to re-design it. In the meantime you could always use the Battletech Force Balancer that is part of SSW for Mechs and Vehicles (prints too!).
-
In any of the dropdown lists that include any number of check boxes, the any beyond the first are indented
Got rid of that finally.
-
Not gone for good, but I will need to re-design it. In the meantime you could always use the Battletech Force Balancer that is part of SSW for Mechs and Vehicles (prints too!).
That works sorta. I can select & modify the P/G of mechs, but only mechs. I can see Vees & Inf. in the faction specific units selection, but it won't let me select anything to add to the force. will play with it some more I guess while waiting for the MUL force creator's return.
:-\
I rarely if ever alter the P/G of Vees & never Inf., so will manage I guess. Aside from the lack of the force creator, it looks pretty good!
-
That works sorta. I can select & modify the P/G of mechs, but only mechs. I can see Vees & Inf. in the faction specific units selection, but it won't let me select anything to add to the force. will play with it some more I guess while waiting for the MUL force creator's return.
:-\
I rarely if ever alter the P/G of Vees & never Inf., so will manage I guess. Aside from the lack of the force creator, it looks pretty good!
you can add/edit Vehicles too (download the most current version...I added SAW (Solaris Armor Werks) about 6mo ago now) and the updated Master List too. No inf yet though.
-
For some reason, the Free Worlds League list in the Jihad gets a double Wasp WSP-1 listing. One has a TRO-featured star, the other doesn't. The one with the star has no BV
-
For some reason, the Free Worlds League list in the Jihad gets a double Wasp WSP-1 listing. One has a TRO-featured star, the other doesn't. The one with the star has no BV
Woops, that's my fault..one of those shouldn't be visible. ::) Changing now.
-
Going on about factions, the following are missing from the faction list:
- Clan Stone Lion
- The six FWL-substates
- Fronc Reaches
- Filtvelt Coalition
(The last two should probably be separated from Periphery General, due to the latest FR:Periphery and FM:3085 treating them as major Periphery states.)
We are not currently providing faction list data for Home World Clans from the Jihad onwards. When we choose to support them, then we will add any Clan factions that are needed.
The six FWL substates will only appear in the Republic and are in process.
Fronc and Filtvelt are being considered.
-
Please, please, please revert to the old form that allows chosing more than one faction under Units.
Having to do two independent searches just to get all units available to the MH is a big pain in the bottom.
edit: Found I can do it by use Shift/CTRL and click. Still i licked the old system with boxes to check better. It was a lot easier to use and less prone to missclicks.
-
Will "Inner Sphere General" and "IS Clan General" be listed on the Factions page like "Periphery General"? Also, shouldn't the Rasalhague Dominion be listed under Inner Sphere or Clan? I can see the Raven Alliance being listed Periphery but the Dominion is quite firmly in the Inner Sphere.
-
When I try to access the Fulcrum (hybrid) page I get this message:
"Woops, an error happened!
Something went horribly wrong...we are passing the information on to our crack team."
the other Fulcrum variants are fine.
-
When I try to access the Fulcrum (hybrid) page I get this message:
"Woops, an error happened!
Something went horribly wrong...we are passing the information on to our crack team."
the other Fulcrum variants are fine.
Fixed
-
Please, please, please revert to the old form that allows chosing more than one faction under Units.
Having to do two independent searches just to get all units available to the MH is a big pain in the bottom.
edit: Found I can do it by use Shift/CTRL and click. Still i licked the old system with boxes to check better. It was a lot easier to use and less prone to missclicks.
I switched to the multi-select boxes because I can better control the length of the section. With the checkboxes the Faction and Sources areas became so long vertically that you were having to scroll for days to get to the filter button.
CTRL-Click and SHIFT-Click are how you work with multi-select boxes...and you will have the same click errors as you would with checkboxes so in my mind that is a wash.
-
How does one retrieve a login password for the MUL site? I can not remember mine.
-
There isn't an automated way, I've generated and sent a new pass to you M-Rex.
BTW, I've re-added Mobile to the site, so if you access from your phone you get a more phone friendly interface...still working on the unit search part of it though :)
-
Thank you for adding the mobile. I do have a question tho. I guess i'm just not understanding how to look up availability on this new interface. I'm trying to look up "Sl regular, infantry" by using the filters. It's not coming up with anything.It just keep telling me that if i add more filters it makes my list smaller...
All i want to know is what infantry are available in the SL era. How do i do that? I appologise if this isn't the right place to ask this but i'm not very savvy when it comes to this kind of thing.
-
We've only done Jihad and Early Republic. There's no Star League data to find.
-
CTRL-Click and SHIFT-Click are how you work with multi-select boxes...and you will have the same click errors as you would with checkboxes so in my mind that is a wash.
I disagree.
It is a major PITA when you try to select more than one or three options from a list. One missclick in a column and you can start out again. When I check the wrong box I can simply uncheck it again without having to go through the whole process again.
-
I disagree.
It is a major PITA when you try to select more than one or three options from a list. One missclick in a column and you can start out again. When I check the wrong box I can simply uncheck it again without having to go through the whole process again.
Thank you for your feedback.
Joel BC
BattleTech
-
We've only done Jihad and Early Republic. There's no Star League data to find.
ah, no wonder i haven't found any SL era stuff.
Suggestion : take out all the eras that are not done and add them when they are.Less confusion that way.
-
Hey guys,
I like the new format to your MUL, but I have a couple of questions:
This may be completely legitimate, but I am surprised the "Inner Sphere General - Jihad" category has so many Clan OmniMechs available (14 if I did not miss any - Dasher, Koshi, Hankyu, Puma, Dragonfly, Fenris, Black Hawk, Loki, Thor, Man O'War, Masakari, Kingfisher, Gladiator and Daishi). I took a look in "Combat Operations", and this is not the case 1 year before this list takes over. In spite of all the battlefield salvage (and trade?), I guess I am just surprised these OmniMechs are so ubiquitous in the Inner Sphere.
Also, there is a very small selection of combat units available to "Lyran Commonwealth - Jihad" and "Lyran Alliance - Republic". Not realizing you separated the Lyran state into 2 separate entries, I was confused at first. Can this be changed to be a little less confusing?
Thanks!
Steve
-
An omission rathen than an error:
Entry for the Tomahawk (OmniMech) from "The Price of Conviction" lists tonnage as N/A.
In the story (second page of the story's print edition, on p. 91 of in First Strike - BattleCorps Anthology 2), the Tomahawk is explicitly said to be a 100-tonner with 19 tons of armor and "over half [its] total weight" is devoted to pod space for weaponry".
-
Hey guys,
I like the new format to your MUL, but I have a couple of questions:
This may be completely legitimate, but I am surprised the "Inner Sphere General - Jihad" category has so many Clan OmniMechs available (14 if I did not miss any - Dasher, Koshi, Hankyu, Puma, Dragonfly, Fenris, Black Hawk, Loki, Thor, Man O'War, Masakari, Kingfisher, Gladiator and Daishi). I took a look in "Combat Operations", and this is not the case 1 year before this list takes over. In spite of all the battlefield salvage (and trade?), I guess I am just surprised these OmniMechs are so ubiquitous in the Inner Sphere.
Also, there is a very small selection of combat units available to "Lyran Commonwealth - Jihad" and "Lyran Alliance - Republic". Not realizing you separated the Lyran state into 2 separate entries, I was confused at first. Can this be changed to be a little less confusing?
Thanks!
Steve
Yes, the older Clan Omnis have gotten around a lot.
As for the Lyran issue- This looks like a bug that we'll need to work on. Darned factions changing names and all.
-
Yes, the older Clan Omnis have gotten around a lot.
As for the Lyran issue- This looks like a bug that we'll need to work on. Darned factions changing names and all.
Won't be worse once we get into the later Dark Age & beyond when everyone splitting apart into sub-factions like FWL?
-
Hey guys,
I like the new format to your MUL, but I have a couple of questions:
This may be completely legitimate, but I am surprised the "Inner Sphere General - Jihad" category has so many Clan OmniMechs available (14 if I did not miss any - Dasher, Koshi, Hankyu, Puma, Dragonfly, Fenris, Black Hawk, Loki, Thor, Man O'War, Masakari, Kingfisher, Gladiator and Daishi). I took a look in "Combat Operations", and this is not the case 1 year before this list takes over. In spite of all the battlefield salvage (and trade?), I guess I am just surprised these OmniMechs are so ubiquitous in the Inner Sphere.
Also, there is a very small selection of combat units available to "Lyran Commonwealth - Jihad" and "Lyran Alliance - Republic". Not realizing you separated the Lyran state into 2 separate entries, I was confused at first. Can this be changed to be a little less confusing?
Thanks!
Steve
Note: Combat Operations faction list is being "obsoleted" by the MUL. IE. We're not tracking errata to those lists. Combat Operations not having the IS with any Clan omnis and the MUL having them available in the Jihad does not mean the IS suddenly gained them post 3067. But as the Field Manuals (Updates and earlier) show, the IS had a significiant number of Clan tech units. There needs to be Clan tech on their faction availability lists in order for there to be units for players to select to "match" the Field Manual listings.
-
Why is it that if I apply more than one filter I get no results? For example, I click on 'mercenary' and get a list of what's available. If I additionally click one of the availability eras, i get nothing after I click on filter.
-
Why is it that if I apply more than one filter I get no results? For example, I click on 'mercenary' and get a list of what's available. If I additionally click one of the availability eras, i get nothing after I click on filter.
Which era did you choose? We only have data for Jihad and Republic. If you choose a different era, there will be no data to show.
-
I updated the Unit search to only list the Availability Eras that are actually ready for searching (ie, have data).
-
Hello,
This is a small find: The RUD tables from Era Report: Reunification War say the the Rifleman RFL-1N is 50 tons. Currently, this unit is listed as "NA". Thanks!
Steve
-
I'm trying since yesterday to pull up a list for the Goliath Scorpions but i get nothing. I've tried various combinations of filters but it just doesn't work. Am I missing something?
-
I'm trying since yesterday to pull up a list for the Goliath Scorpions but i get nothing. I've tried various combinations of filters but it just doesn't work. Am I missing something?
Yes. Read the first post.
-
When using the "has BF ability" filter you have to enter the string exactly as it appears on the BF card. That means you have to know what is on the BF card and in what order the abilities are in in order to find a given unit.
For example:
If I want to find all units with ECM and a C3M and I enter ECM,C3M I will get zero (0) results. To find all units with ECM and C3M I have to enter ECM,TAG,C3M. If I enter the same terms in a different order such as TAG, ECM, C3M then I get zero (0) results.
The search function should be able to parse that line and search for each term individually. Also, if spaces are used between search terms or if any delimiter other than a comma is used it will break the search and no results will be found.
-
When using the "has BF ability" filter you have to enter the string exactly as it appears on the BF card. That means you have to know what is on the BF card and in what order the abilities are in in order to find a given unit.
Correct, the field is set too look for a single BF Ability at the moment. It is doing a simple Contains check (ie. "ENE, MEL, AC1/1/1" Has ENE in the string) and will not work if you do not match the string exactly. At the moment I do not have plans to make that field more intelligent. But I'll put it on my list of things to consider adding.
-
Axeman mech is not coming up in a general search. There are sheets for it in the 3050 record sheets .pdf.
*background for comment* Building a data base for mini collection and using the MUL as a unit weight and tech base clearing house.
-
Axeman mech is not coming up in a general search. There are sheets for it in the 3050 record sheets .pdf.
Try searching under "Axman".
-
Firebee WAM-B http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1078/firebee-frb-1e-wam-b (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1078/firebee-frb-1e-wam-b):
Experimental Technical Readout: Primitives, Vol III, page 3 gives an introduction year of 2472.
MUL has given it an intro year of 2483.
Suggested fix:
Change intro year to 2472.
Also, the MUL is still missing the Wars of Reaving: Supplemental designs.
-
Firebee WAM-B http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1078/firebee-frb-1e-wam-b (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1078/firebee-frb-1e-wam-b):
Experimental Technical Readout: Primitives, Vol III, page 3 gives an introduction year of 2472.
For the WAM-A; the text notes which variant that date refers to in the middle of the second paragraph. The MUL also lists 2472 for the WAM-A.
MUL has given it an intro year of 2483.
That's not an error.
-
Try searching under "Axman".
Thanks!
-
Hello,
I was just looking at the date for the Mad Cat Mk II in the MUL. The current date of introduction is 3066, but Technical Readout: 3067, p. 132 states "While the Mad Cat Mk II has now been in production for more than half a decade..." (beginning of "Deployment" section). The book is dated "1 December 3067" on p. 4. Thank you!
Steve
-
Hello,
I was just looking at the date for the Mad Cat Mk II in the MUL. The current date of introduction is 3066, but Technical Readout: 3067, p. 132 states "While the Mad Cat Mk II has now been in production for more than half a decade..." (beginning of "Deployment" section). The book is dated "1 December 3067" on p. 4. Thank you!
Steve
The MUL's introduction date is it's first date in service. FM: Updates says "In 3066, they unveiled the Mad Cat Mk II."
I don't know why they waited so long. We don't even know where it was manufactured (perhaps the reasons are linked). Perhaps the Diamond Sharks wanted to wait for the FS/DC to be at their most desperate before selling it.
But since neither one (production since 3061 and unveiled in 3066) are necessarily impossible, we've kept them as is.
-
The MUL's introduction date is it's first date in service. FM: Updates says "In 3066, they unveiled the Mad Cat Mk II."
I don't know why they waited so long. We don't even know where it was manufactured (perhaps the reasons are linked). Perhaps the Diamond Sharks wanted to wait for the FS/DC to be at their most desperate before selling it.
But since neither one (production since 3061 and unveiled in 3066) are necessarily impossible, we've kept them as is.
Thanks!
-
A MUL search with the settings of Raven Alliance (Faction), Clan & Mixed (tech) & Jihad, Republic & Dark Age (Production) is failing to find the Corax C (built on Ramora) and the Hydaspes 3 (Diamond Shark sold to all IS Clans) as detailed in TRPrototypes.
-
The exact availability of those units has yet to be announced as the units' availability listings note. As such, the factions for them aren't set at the moment. When they are, that search will work.
I should note that neither unit you're inquiring about is mixed tech, by the way.
-
Thanks for the reply, i was doing a general search for Raven Alliance units made with clan or mixed tech, i was surprised when the MUL only gave me the option for 2 clan tech fighters.
I'm guessing Proto's haven't been worked out yet as none came up on the search?
-
Thanks for the reply, i was doing a general search for Raven Alliance units made with clan or mixed tech, i was surprised when the MUL only gave me the option for 2 clan tech fighters.
I'm guessing Proto's haven't been worked out yet as none came up on the search?
The Raven Alliance doesn't exist until the Early Republic. For the Early Republic era, we've only done Mechs and Vehicles.
The Snow Raven availability in the Jihad should give you a good idea of what they have, except for new units.
-
Actually, just tracked combat vehicles, not all vehicles.
-
Hi there, I think that the http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2414/pandion-combat-wige-infantry is missing the Infatry Transport value, as it can transport a full squad of BA troops.
-
According to the MUL (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5255/tomahawk-thk-63b)
The THK-63b is available in Battlecorps, but I've looked through all the MilSpecs articles I can think of and cannot find the information for this fighter.
So where is it?
-
Looks like one of the others got to the online portion of that before I could but check the SLDF Royal refits section in TRO3075.
-
The MUL was mistakenly reporting the RS at Battlecorps. There is no RS for it yet.
-
The Quickdraw QKD-8P is using the default Quickdraw image, if it has no image of it's own from TRO:Prototypes it should probably be using the QKD-8X's image as it is a production model of the later
All the units produced by this search: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit?Name=&HasBFAbility=&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=0&MaxBV=0&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&Types=21&SubTypes=30&SubTypes=31&SubTypes=32&SubTypes=33&SubTypes=34&SubTypes=35&SubTypes=36&SubTypes=37&SubTypes=38&SubTypes=39&BookAuto=
Notably lack Record Sheets and I believe they are repeat entries of either other units in the MUL or erroneously generated/added, all units on that list come from the Housebooks and later appeared in TRO:3085 under different names and updated for the new construction rules
Finally it would be nice, if possible, to have some indication of when a unit might be found
-
The "Cost" field appears to be text vice numerical. This makes sorting by cost problematic, as 11,000,000 is filed before 1,400,000. Commas would also be helpful.
-
Hi Daryk,
Are you clicking on the Cost column header to sort it? I am not seeing the issue with the two values you mentioned in my tests. The comma was intentionally left off specifically so that the sort WOULD work. =)
-
Skyhigh,
Yes, when I click on the cost column to sort, it appears to be sorting purely by alphabetical order, such that 10152706 (SHD-5M) and 11807510 (AXM-1M) are before 1248700 (HNT-152), which is then followed by 13015625 (Marauder Bounty Hunter). The filters I'm using are: Production Eras Late Succession War; Types BattleMech; Techs Inner Sphere. The whole list is 149 units. The last unit with an actual cost (i.e. before it gets into the NA's) is the BLR-2C (9894294). My previous examples were arbitrary round figures for convenience. Hopefully that didn't cause too much confusion.
-Daryk
-
Now I see what you are talking about, funny that my original search worked without doing that. I'll see if there is some way to tell the Javascript sorter I am using that the field is numeric...I took away the commas specifically because it considered the field as text then.
-
Thanks for looking into it! O0
-
So it turns out that the issue was the "NA" that I was filling in for records without a Cost. This NA I think was forcing the sorter into seeing the column as a string and not a number. I've removed the NA and now all the tests that I can think of seem to be sorting correctly.
-
Thanks again! I should have time to try it out after work tonight.
-
I'm having trouble using the MUL on my Nitro LG phone. This issue is a very recent one (two months?) and started around the last major update when the /mobile part of the site was removed. So chalking these up to teething errors of a new format though they are inconvenient as I mostly access the MUL through my phone when at a game.
The biggest issue is that when I go to a specific unit to look up its Battleforce stats I do not get all of the information. For some reason I see two large blank boxes which apparently should contain the image card one sees when viewing the entry on a normal computer, and a string of information about the units points cost, weight, damage, and special abilities. However the part listing the armor and structure "bubbles". and the unit image itself are simply not there. I assume that's because those two items are part of one of those two blank image boxes I'm seeing.
For some reason the pages aren't loading like they were a few months ago, and for some reason when I go to the units page I have to scroll down through all the various filter options before I'm presented with the units that were found in my search. When a specific unit entry is loaded the image for it takes up the majority of the screen and I can't seem to zoom out at all.
It also seems that when there are multiple camospec images for a unit it loads them in a vertical lne that can make scrolling down to the bottom of a page kind of a chore for units such as the Warhammer.
When I go to a normal computer everything looks fine but as my friend commented on having similar issues using his Iphone I'm not sure if my graphical issues are a end user error or something with the list itself.
-
Heya George_Labour,
It looks like it wasn't correctly grabbing the mobile view for the details page. I just updated the site code and tested on my android and I am seeing the correct view now which includes the BF data as you would expect.
Try it out and let me know!
-
Looks to be back to the way it was and working like a charm on my phone once again. Thanks for the quick turn around.
-
Skyhigh,
Sorry for the delay... work was a little more than I expected yesterday. The cost sort seems to be working now. Thank you!
-Daryk
-
I seem to be having trouble viewing it on my android phone again. :-[
I didn't do anything to the phone's configurations so I'm pretty sure it's not something I did. Unless I'm supposed to be going to a different page to get the mobile friendly content instead of the regular front page for the MUL site.
-
I just ran a quick check. Things are working for me.
Nexus 7
Android 4.2.1
Mobile Chrome 18
-
So, the Hellion goes from Clan General in the Jihad to a more restricted list in the Republic? I guess that could happen but it still seems odd.
Also, no availability data shows up at all for the Burrock 2, and the Blood Kite 3, which didn't show up in the product, appears to have a page and is listed as 3067u. So, that's also weird.
Perhaps you are already aware of these things. Hopefully this comment isn't completely useless.
-
I'm assuming with the Hellion they're becoming less available due to no production replacing losses.
-
So, the Hellion goes from Clan General in the Jihad to a more restricted list in the Republic? I guess that could happen but it still seems odd.
Loss of production facilities or simple abandonment of a design can lead to reduced availabilities.
Also, no availability data shows up at all for the Burrock 2, and the Blood Kite 3, which didn't show up in the product, appears to have a page and is listed as 3067u. So, that's also weird.
Yes, Burrock 2 is known and is no error. It is not available to any Inner Sphere power at the moment.
Blood Kite was entered in error.
I'm assuming with the Hellion they're becoming less available due to no production replacing losses.
Please keep all discussion in the Errata Discussion Thread (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,5884.0.html). Every post here sends an email to people who will think something could be up with the website, please don't make us panic for no reason. Thank you.
-
Some aerospace units from RS3067U Don't have faction availability for the Republic era.
Strangely the newer variants of these units do have availability both for the Jihad and the Republic era.
Chaeronea , 2, 3
Issus ,2, 3
Tyre ,2
Ammon
Xerxes, 2
Merlin 3063
Arcadia
Outpost 3063, 3070
Assault Triumph 3062
Overlord A3
Nekohono'o (standard)
Conquistador
-
The older fighters haven't necessarily been resolved by the MUL Team yet, while the new units had their availability determined when they were put into the MUL.
-
I just ran a quick check. Things are working for me.
Nexus 7
Android 4.2.1
Mobile Chrome 18
Odd I wonder why It's loading the wrong way for me then.
There's no special adress for the mobile function anymore correct? It's just www.masterunitlist.info with no special extensions for mobile or anything else?
-
As far as I can tell, the site does it by sniffing the user agent string. Putting in a Chrome for Android string as an override in my laptop's browser gets me the mobile site. So no, you shouldn't need to do anything like that.
-
Ailette Rescue PA(L) is given an introduction date of 3080 in the MUL, but according to XTRO Periphery it entered production in 3074.
EDIT: Scrub that. I think. There appears to be a un-statted production Ailette Rescue as well as the experimental Ailette Rescue judging by the fluff. I'm going to pester jymset.
-
A small request for our resident MUL users:
I'm currently working on getting missing images into the MUL. So, if you notice anything missing, wrong or even bad image quality: Please tell me. I will then try to get a new/improved image up ASAP. There are far too many units in the MUL to see them all, so a few more eyes help :)
You do not need to go out of your way to find anything, but if you are using the MUL anyway, and notice anything, anything at all, please ping us.
You do not need to report any TRO VA images, though. I'm currently on those, a few are already up, others are in the works.
TRO Prototypes doesn't need reporting, either, we are aware of the holes there (though a few have been stuffed).
Anything else is game :)
-
So, I'm bored, and decided to go out of my way. O:-)
Units missing pictures (NOTE I do not know if these units even have official art, but I'm listing them anyway):
Pathfinder PFF-2
Pathfinder PPF-2T
Hector HOR-1B
Hector HOR-1C
HawkWolf HWK-3F
Star Dagger S-2
Firebird FR-1
Malaika BAM-1A1
Dragonfire DG-05
Aquilla Transport Jumpship (Standard)
Just did a quick search for Primitives, and all came up with low-pixel transparent squares for their pictures. I'm not 100% sure whether that falls under the "TRO Prototypes" heading or not, so putting it here anyway.
-
Okay, have all images around, with a few additional units (all XTRO: Retro, Primitives I, DATP:Liao and ED: AoW should be up later).
No XTRO Units fall under the TRO Prototypes rule :)
Thanks for your input.
-
Are there any plans to expand the list of currently available factions into the coreward Deep Periphery, by adding in the Hanseatic League and Escorpión Imperio?
The latter faction has been given a RAT in ISP3, and would have use for the Reptar (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5797) and Araña (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5798/arana-ara-s-1-militiamech) recently added to the list of MilitiaMechs in the MUL.
I should apologise in advance if the Hansa would be covered already under Periphery General. However, O:P notes that certain units which the MUL lists as being extinct in the Jihad era, such as the Tiger medium tank (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5244/tiger-medium-tank-t-12), are still in production on Antwerp as of 3079.
-
Lobo 3 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5669/lobo-3) have incorrect BV and Era.
Should be 1824 and "Jihad".
Xotl: fixed, thanks.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1885/lightray-lgh-6w
The LGH-6W Lightray's Record Sheet information should be switched to RS3067, since its the latest version of it.
The source and product data is harder to tell what it should be, since Wolf and Blake DOES detail the 6W in a TR-like fashion, while TR3067 details the 4W and doesn't mention the 6W in the variants fluff.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1885/lightray-lgh-6w
The LGH-6W Lightray's Record Sheet information should be switched to RS3067, since its the latest version of it.
Corrected, thanks.
The source and product data is harder to tell what it should be, since Wolf and Blake DOES detail the 6W in a TR-like fashion, while TR3067 details the 4W and doesn't mention the 6W in the variants fluff.
Generally, trying to go with where is the most current, detailed information. Since TR3067 has no detail (or even a mention), and Wolf and Blake has some, I'm going to leave it as is.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5700/thanatos-tns-4t
Date listed is 3062, which puts it into the Civil War era. The Era icon is for the Clan Invasion however.
Fix: Either change the date, or change the icon :)
-
Fixed. Thank you
-
All variants of Clan Medium Battle Armor missing images.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3957/clan-medium-battle-armor-standard-rabid
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3955/clan-medium-battle-armor-laser-volk
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3956/clan-medium-battle-armor-naval-bar
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/635/clan-medium-battle-armor-rache
And as an aside, all but the "Rache" are still listed at TBA for the Republic Era. The Rache has no Jihad era availability though its introduction date is 3077. Just being a brat. ::)
-
Images will be up later, no ETA on the availability.
-
The Templar needs some house keeping
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5191/templar-tlr1-o
Variants "Prime" A, B, C, (Grayson), and (Tancred) are all listed as "Templar TLR1-O"
However, variants D, E, F, G, H, and I are all listed as just "Templar"
Fix is to change the name of the D, E, F, G, H, and I variants to match the other Templars, ie, "Templar TLR-0"
-
I have no idea, what you are talking about O:-)
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5677/crimson-langur-e
This has a Jihad Date (3068) but a Civil War Era Icon. Change the Era/Icon to Jihad.
Xotl: fixed, thanks.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5716/mad-cat-mk-ii-3
Date is 3082, but the symbol/era is Civil War. Fix is to change the symbol/era to Jihad.
-
Fixed. Thank you.
-
Wolverine II uses a blacked out image instead of the OK image.
I love that mech, so I have to mention it O0
-
FWL sub-factions (e.g., http://www.masterunitlist.info/Era/FactionEraDetails?FactionId=72&EraId=15&Faction=free-worlds-league-regulan-fiefs&Era=republic) are not available on the Factions page (www.masterunitlist.info/Faction).
-
Hello,
Because there has been a lot of confusion lately.
WHAT IS THE MUL?
- The Master Unit List is an official Catalyst product. One that Catalyst provides for free to its fans, though every bit as official as any TRO or sourcebook, if not more in many cases.
- The MUL undergoes continuous amount of fact check and is constantly being updated. So unlike a static print TRO, the MUL is able to be updated should something change. If a unit appears on the MUL, then enough validation was done to determine that "Yes, this unit existed and is not pure rumor."
- This does not mean said unit will ever see its stats published. That is not the purpose of the MUL. While the MUL does serve as a very useful resource for Battle Value, Battle Force stats and image art, the primary purpose of the MUL is to provide faction availability for units and as a list of all known units in the universe.
- Just because something is not on the MUL does not mean it does not exist. The concept of "the needs of fiction" still apply to the BattleTech universe. Not every factory, vehicle and hand gun in the universe has been documented, nor will they ever be. The MUL is what we know, what has been documented in canon.
- Sarna is not the MUL. Sarna is not canon. If Sarna lists a Mech and the MUL doesn't then the MUL is most likely correct (Catalyst is not perfect, we do make the occasional errors). The MUL has access to information that Sarna does not have access to, as it is internal information.
-
Hi, I'm not sure I'm doing this right. But for some reason, each and every MenShen variant on the MUL has a different BV than what is my HMPro.
I've listed out the BV calculations for the F model but its all variants so I think it might be a base chassis issue. I'm really not sure.
CALCULATE DEFENSIVE BATTLE RATING:
----------------------------------
Total Armor Factor x 2.5 176 x 2.5 = 440
Total Internal Structure Points x 1.5 x 0.5 91 x 0.75 = 68.25
Gyro BV = 'Mech Tons x 0.5 55 x 0.5 = 27.5
Defensive Weapons: Heat:
1 Beagle Active Probe 0 10
Total BV of all Defensive Equipment 10
--------
545.75
----------
At a full Run of 12, Movement Modifier is + 4 545.75
Multiply by Defensive Movement Factor of 1.4 x 1.4
----------
DEFENSIVE BATTLE RATING = 764.05
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CALCULATE OFFENSIVE BATTLE RATING:
----------------------------------
'Mech Heat Efficiency = 6 + Heat Sink Capy - Movement Heat
= 6 + 22 - 2 = 26
Total Corrected Offensive weapon heat = 20
20 Offensive weapon heat <= 26 'Mech heat efficiency,
so use full Battle Value of all weapons:
Offensive Weapons: Heat:
Weapons at Full BV:
1 Snub-Nose PPC 10 165
1 Snub-Nose PPC 10 165
1 TAG 0 0
Targeting Computer BV = .25 x Weapon BV 330 x .25 = 82.5
--------
Base Weapon Battle Rating 20 Offensive Weapon Heat 412.5
Add Total 'Mech Tonnage + 55
--------
Adjusted Offensive Battle Rating 467.5
Calculate Speed Factor
Add Running MP + Jumping MP / 2 9 + 0 / 2 = 9
+ 1 for MASC + 1
----
10
Speed Factor (based on table or calculation) = 1.63
Final Offensive Battle Rating = Adjusted Battle Rating x Speed Factor
467.5 x 1.63 = 762.025
FINAL OFFENSIVE BATTLE RATING = 762.025
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total BV = Defensive BV + Offensive BV: 764.05 + 762.025 = 1526.075
TOTAL BATTLE VALUE FOR 'MECH = 1,526
*********************************************
Also, Per FM:3085 the Fast Recon infantry (pg210) is 114 BV while the MUL has Fast Recon as 99 BV.
Not sure which one is correct here.
Hope this helps.
-
In this case, HMP is incorrectly calculating the BV for the mech's speed factor because it's using the old BV formula for adding MASC. The -OF's Speed Factor is 1.89, not 1.63. Make sure you're using the latest patch for HMP - if you are, you'll have to wait for a new version to be released.
-
In this case, HMP is incorrectly calculating the BV for the mech's speed factor because it's using the old BV formula for adding MASC. The -OF's Speed Factor is 1.89, not 1.63. Make sure you're using the latest patch for HMP - if you are, you'll have to wait for a new version to be released.
Ah ha, okay, I kinda figured it might be a HM issue, but I thought I was using most updated & never realized there was an issue since I thought it was fully TM compatable (besides new weapons of course).
Any word on the problem w/ the infantry ?
-
The Battlemaster (Red Corsair) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3804/battlemaster-red-corsair) entry can be deleted, as it is a pre-existing duplicate of the Battlemaster BLR-1G (Red Corsair) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/284/battlemaster-blr-1g-red-corsair) from before this unit had a record sheet.
-
Done.
Thanks for pointing it out :)
-
Can STK-3Fk Stalker came from Era Report: 2750 be added, source Page 129, Fourth Sword of Light.
-
Following units were included in Era Report: 2750, but they do not have MUL entry:
page 128
- HWH-3D Hammerhands upgraded with LBX autocannons, Federated Suns; it may be typo from HMH-3D, but there is nothing about it in the Era Report: 2750 Errata thread
- VTR-9B Victor with AC-10 instead of AC-20, Federated Suns
page 129
- BLR-1Gd BattleMaster, Federated Suns
- TDR-5Sd Thunderbolt, Federated Suns
- DV-6Md Dervish, Federated Suns
- STK-3Fk Stalker, Draconis Combine
- WHM-6Rk Warhammer, Draconis Combine
- PHX-1Kk Phoenix Hawk, Draconis Combine
page 135
- CRB-27sl Crab
page 136
- LNC25-01sl Lancelot
page 137
- WVE-5Nsl Wyvern
page 138
- MSH-9HKR Mackie “Kill-Roy’s Little Buddy”
page 139
- BLR-1GHE BattleMaster “HellSlinger”
page 145
- HWH-4D Hammerhands - probably typo from HMH-4D; it may be typo from HMH-4D, but there is nothing about it in the Era Report: 2750 Errata thread
-
The MUL lists the Rifleman "Legend Killer" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4914/rifleman-legend-killer), but lacks the Rifleman "Legend Killer 2" and Rifleman II "Legend Killer". Record sheets for all three are in Record Sheets: 3055 Print.
Additionally, the above entry lacks a source attribution on the MUL.
-
The Assassin (Roberta) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5464/assassin-roberta) can be deleted from the database, as it is a pre-existing duplicate of the Assassin "Servitor" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3737/assassin-servitor) from before this unit had a record sheet.
-
I tried entering a search string of "<base>" in order to generate a listing of all Omni base entries and the MUL through an error, that's me entering a bad search, right? (Note: it worked afterwards)
Suggestions:
More meta groups (IE: FWL:all and IS All Geat Houses)
Add standard Omni config identifiers to WoB/MD unit names (Invictus/Prime)
Error:
All Bolla Stealth Tank MUL Entries lack Stealth (STL) BF Ability: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/417/bolla-stealth-tank-invictus
Other then double checking that Omni base entries are not supposed to have BF stat blocks that's all I can think off but I reserve the right to change my mind later, it feels like I missed something
-
Error:
All Bolla Stealth Tank MUL Entries lack Stealth (STL) BF Ability: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/417/bolla-stealth-tank-invictus
thanks. fixed.
Other then double checking that Omni base entries are not supposed to have BF stat blocks that's all I can think off but I reserve the right to change my mind later, it feels like I missed something
Only units with official record sheets get BF stats.
-
I tried entering a search string of "<base>" in order to generate a listing of all Omni base entries and the MUL through an error, that's me entering a bad search, right? (Note: it worked afterwards)
Try searching for "base" without the lesser then and greater then signs. Those are special characters for HTML which are blocked by the server automatically.
-
Try searching for "base" without the lesser then and greater then signs. Those are special characters for HTML which are blocked by the server automatically.
Thought so, and I did that afterwards
-
Linebacker D (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1889/linebacker-d) in Republic era should be available to the same factions that have access to other Linebacker configurations (Clan Wolf, Clan Wolf in Exile, Kell Hounds, Raven Alliance). It's "To be announced" at the moment.
-
*The Atlas C's page (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3750/atlas-c) states that it is not in any Catalyst record sheet pdf. It can be found on pg 282 of Record Sheets: 3050 Upgrades Unabridged - Inner Sphere (The one that has a black Cataphract with the Death Commando logo on the cover)
*The Daedalus "Grimjet" (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4035/daedalus-grimjet) lists its source as RS:3055Uu. It is not present in that RS PDF. It is mentioned on pg 144 of TRO: 3055U, however.
He made a name for himself on the local circuit piloting his new ’Mech, the “Grimjet,” in hit-and-run attacks at close range, often finishing off his opponents with a flashy and dangerous “Death from Above” attack.
*The Arctic Fox AF1U's (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/98/arctic-fox-af1u) record sheet source is listed as RS: 3085u - The Cutting Edge. It should be RS:3085u - Old is the New New
*The Longbow LGB-8V's (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1938/longbow-lgb-8v) record sheet source is listed as RS: 3085 - Project Phoenix. It can actually be found in RS: 3085u - Old is New New pg 111 (which is weird because the rest of the Longbows are in PP)
*The Shadow Hawk C's (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2895/shadow-hawk-c) record sheet source is listed as RS: 3085u - The Cutting Edge. It should be RS:3085u - Project Phoenix
*The Warhammer WHD-10CT's (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3480/warhammer-whd-10ct) record sheet source is listed as RS: 3085u - Project Phoenix. It is found on pg 144 of RS: 3085 - The Cutting Edge.
-
The introduction dates of the three PX-3R Phoenix may need to be changed:
PX-1R: 2474 (Correct)
PX-3R: 2520 (Change)
PX-4R: 2581 (Correct)
Reasoning can be found here:
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,26906.msg611507.html#msg611507
Paul
-
*BattleTech Dossier: Youling Zhanshi and BattleTech Dossier: Jason Zaklan are not with the other dossiers on sources page (the mechs included in those products are also missing)
*The Clan Battle Cobra has a <base> model, but the Inner Sphere version does not.
*When I attempt to use the mobile version of the MUL on a variety of my iPad's browsers (I tested Safari, Mercury, and Puffin), tapping on on 'Units' sends me to an otherwise blank screen that says 'Undefined' and I am unable to conduct a search.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2533/pinto-attack-vtol-wob (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2533/pinto-attack-vtol-wob)
Issue: Pinto (Wob) does not show an IT6 special
Suggested Solution: Add IT6 to the special section of the QS card.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1802/kiso-k-3n-kr4-constructionmech (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/1802/kiso-k-3n-kr4-constructionmech)
Issue: Possible problem, duplicate battle values. Kiso K-3N-KR5 ConstructionMech & Kiso K-3N-KRHQ CommandMech share same Battle Value (2.0)...959
Experimental Technical Readout: Succession Wars v1 shows the CommandMech variant having bv of 940 on its record sheet (PDF p. 24). (Note: this is the only unit in that pdf which does have a BV.)
Suggestion: Reevaluate if these BVs are the same.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2533/pinto-attack-vtol-wob (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/2533/pinto-attack-vtol-wob)
Issue: Pinto (Wob) does not show an IT6 special
Suggested Solution: Add IT6 to the special section of the QS card.
Fixed, thanks.
-
Legend Killer (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4914/rifleman-legend-killer)
Listed as having no record sheet. Record sheets for RFL-3N Rifleman "Legend Killer", RFL-3N Rifleman "Legend Killer 2" and RFL-3N-2 Rifleman II "Legend Killer" are found at the back of the PRINT Record Sheets 3055 Upgrade (CAT 35162)
Scorpion Light Tank (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2842/scorpion-light-tank-lrm)
The "Miniatures" link for all versions of the Scorpion Tank link to the Scorpion BattleMech. Correct link is http://www.camospecs.com/MiniList.asp?Action=Detail&ID=682 for CSO gallery and http://ironwindmetals.com/store/product_info.php?products_id=3335 for IWM catalog.
-
I've been toying with the idea of putting together a Kell Hounds battalion, with 1 company of clan mechs. I almost posted on these forums elsewhere asking for help on a few mechs as I wasn't sure if they would technically be used by the Kell Hounds or not. Somehow I came across the feature on the Master Unit List database to sort by faction (sorry I have barely ever used it). Low & behold it does sort out for Kell Hounds. So I scrolled through the list & I think I found some errors...and by all means please correct me if I'm wrong...
#1 - There are no mechs such as Grendel, Shadow Cat, Nobori-Nin, Cauldron-Born, Nova Cat, & Behemoth etc...that are listed. Per cannon, the Kell Hounds captured a lot of clan tech on Luthien...so aren't these kind of a given?
#2 - The Uller is not listed, but per TRO3060, they used captured Ullers to create the Arctic Fox Omni mech. Shouldn't that be listed in there?
#3 - The Hoplite HOP-4X is not listed, and per XTRO Mercs it's manufactured at Arc Royal MechWorks...but I take it due to the main tech involved & that it is mostly clan tech, the Kell Hounds would not be using this mech?
#4 - The Wolfhound WLF-2X, Annihilator ANH-2AX & Schwerer Gustav from XTRO Mercs are not listed for the Kell Hounds either.
Also, I'm not sure if this is an oversight or simply wrong choices on my part as per mechs for the Kell Hounds, but what about the Mjolnir, Hauptman, Fafnir & Imp? Could these technically be used by the Kell Hounds? Supposedly the Imp is a rumor since Wolf's Dragoons are now on Arc-Royal (and the Imp IMP-4E is listed in the Dark Age listing for Kell Hound mechs)...but the other 3 should be available to them right?
Thanks
-
Hello, Dragon.
1- The very first rule and guideline to understand is this one: "It if works for your and your fellow player's game, then do what makes sense to you."
2- The second rule is that the MUL Faction List represents the "norm." There are always exceptions to this norm. For example, the Mackie is considered extinct during the Late Succession War. At the same time, the Free Worlds League has a LSW unit that has a couple of Mackies it uses just for parades. The Mackie is "extinct" there are almost always exceptions to any of the "norms" as they represent the broad brushstrokes of the universe.
As to your specific questions.
#1- Many of the units you call out were not common during the early Clan Invasion or not even in production. The Grendel was first used in 3053 (check out the MUL lists introduction dates).
#2- Generally, when units are used to help design something else, they get taken apart in the process. This happened with the Nighthawk BA the GDL found, the Undines sold to the FedSuns (to make the Hauberks) and so on.
#3- Arc Royal MechWorks built it, that does not automatically mean the Kell Hounds get access. I believe this one was made exclusively for the WiE.
#4- I don't have the XTRO handy right now, so can't comment officially. However, remember that most units in the XTRO are either one of a kind or part of very small production run. Unless the Hounds were the ones making any of these units, it is very likely they don't have one of the few or THE unique unit.
Thank you, we hope this answers your questions.
Joel BC
Catalyst Staff Volunteer
I've been toying with the idea of putting together a Kell Hounds battalion, with 1 company of clan mechs. I almost posted on these forums elsewhere asking for help on a few mechs as I wasn't sure if they would technically be used by the Kell Hounds or not. Somehow I came across the feature on the Master Unit List database to sort by faction (sorry I have barely ever used it). Low & behold it does sort out for Kell Hounds. So I scrolled through the list & I think I found some errors...and by all means please correct me if I'm wrong...
#1 - There are no mechs such as Grendel, Shadow Cat, Nobori-Nin, Cauldron-Born, Nova Cat, & Behemoth etc...that are listed. Per cannon, the Kell Hounds captured a lot of clan tech on Luthien...so aren't these kind of a given?
#2 - The Uller is not listed, but per TRO3060, they used captured Ullers to create the Arctic Fox Omni mech. Shouldn't that be listed in there?
#3 - The Hoplite HOP-4X is not listed, and per XTRO Mercs it's manufactured at Arc Royal MechWorks...but I take it due to the main tech involved & that it is mostly clan tech, the Kell Hounds would not be using this mech?
#4 - The Wolfhound WLF-2X, Annihilator ANH-2AX & Schwerer Gustav from XTRO Mercs are not listed for the Kell Hounds either.
Also, I'm not sure if this is an oversight or simply wrong choices on my part as per mechs for the Kell Hounds, but what about the Mjolnir, Hauptman, Fafnir & Imp? Could these technically be used by the Kell Hounds? Supposedly the Imp is a rumor since Wolf's Dragoons are now on Arc-Royal (and the Imp IMP-4E is listed in the Dark Age listing for Kell Hound mechs)...but the other 3 should be available to them right?
Thanks
-
Hello, Dragon.
1- The very first rule and guideline to understand is this one: "It if works for your and your fellow player's game, then do what makes sense to you."
2- The second rule is that the MUL Faction List represents the "norm." There are always exceptions to this norm. For example, the Mackie is considered extinct during the Late Succession War. At the same time, the Free Worlds League has a LSW unit that has a couple of Mackies it uses just for parades. The Mackie is "extinct" there are almost always exceptions to any of the "norms" as they represent the broad brushstrokes of the universe.
As to your specific questions.
#1- Many of the units you call out were not common during the early Clan Invasion or not even in production. The Grendel was first used in 3053 (check out the MUL lists introduction dates).
#2- Generally, when units are used to help design something else, they get taken apart in the process. This happened with the Nighthawk BA the GDL found, the Undines sold to the FedSuns (to make the Hauberks) and so on.
#3- Arc Royal MechWorks built it, that does not automatically mean the Kell Hounds get access. I believe this one was made exclusively for the WiE.
#4- I don't have the XTRO handy right now, so can't comment officially. However, remember that most units in the XTRO are either one of a kind or part of very small production run. Unless the Hounds were the ones making any of these units, it is very likely they don't have one of the few or THE unique unit.
Thank you, we hope this answers your questions.
Joel BC
Catalyst Staff Volunteer
Welshman,
Thank you very much, you bring up a good few points I completely forgot about such as timelines against when the Kell Hounds faced the Nova Cats & Smoke Jaguars...I'll double check what those were!
I know there aren't "specifics" when dealing with the making of mechs at Arc-Royal MechWorks when it comes to who gets what, just wasn't sure if there is some sort of guideline people use, but the whole "if it works for you and your fellow players game..." statement makes sense.
Thanks again!
-
XTR units: since they are often a single unit, we initially just marked them as unique (ie. check the book because its so rare it's not generally available to anyone).
Later we started combining unique and a faction, I think we just need to update XTR mercs to show KH for some of those units that don't have it now.
-
MUL Online shows DRG-3F Dragon Fire (Searcy) and DRG-3F Dragon Fire (Searcy II).
However, the correct designation for Dragon Fire is DGR-3F. (Because DRG- is the designation for Dragon).
-
Hi folks,
I have a question about the BL-10-KNT Black Knight Ross from Starterbook: Sword and Dragon.
I already added some similar problems in the appropriate errata thread, but I am not sure how to treat this one.
The record sheet on page 111 and the MUL gives an introduction date for the Mech of 3055, but it uses ER Lasers (introduced 3058) and a Targeting Computer (introduced 3062). Do you think this is an error, or are the components supposed to be some kind of prototypes?
-
Thanks for reporting that. We're looking into it.
-
When was the BJ-3 Blackjack introduced? The MUL has a BJ-3X introduced in 3035 and BJ-3 in 3042. Battlepack Fourth Succession War 1705, page 34, has the BJ-3 being used on on Sian on 24 October 3029. Two are listed as defenders. The fluff on page 38 says they're creation was ordered by Duchess Candace Liao and that she gave them to House Davion as part of a peace proposal after the Fourth Succession War.
What is the BJ-3X? Is it the one mentioned in TRO:3039? If it is, is it still a retcon of the BJ-3 from the Battlepack? If yes, shouldn't the BJ-3X have an introduction date in the late 3020s? If they're not the same mech, what kind of double heat sinks did the Battlepack BJ-3 use?
-
With the re-release of the 3075 Record Sheets, I'm sure y'all are going to go through and check all the 3075 designs (and change the sources most likely).
However, I figure this one might slip by so I thought I'd mention it.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1826/koschei-ksc-5x
This should be "Advanced" and not "Experimental" as per the latest Record Sheet.
-
When was the BJ-3 Blackjack introduced? The MUL has a BJ-3X introduced in 3035 and BJ-3 in 3042. Battlepack Fourth Succession War 1705, page 34, has the BJ-3 being used on on Sian on 24 October 3029. Two are listed as defenders. The fluff on page 38 says they're creation was ordered by Duchess Candace Liao and that she gave them to House Davion as part of a peace proposal after the Fourth Succession War.
What is the BJ-3X? Is it the one mentioned in TRO:3039? If it is, is it still a retcon of the BJ-3 from the Battlepack? If yes, shouldn't the BJ-3X have an introduction date in the late 3020s? If they're not the same mech, what kind of double heat sinks did the Battlepack BJ-3 use?
The BJ-3 replaces all the heat sinks with doubles. The BJ-3X replaces 3 external (to the engine) heat sinks with experimental double heat sinks.
Tech Manual says "Their [experimental double heat sinks] deployment in the late 3030s, however, gave Davion and Steiner forces a brief advantage in the early days of the FedCom alliance."
Standard double heat sinks were recovered in 3040, again according to Tech Manual.
The BJ-3X intro date was changed to match Tech Manual.
Note that intro dates listed on MUL are, in general, for in standard service dates (not testing, prototype). So whether or not there were 2 prototype BJ-3Xs earlier is beyond the scope of the MUL.
-
The BJ-3 replaces all the heat sinks with doubles. The BJ-3X replaces 3 external (to the engine) heat sinks with experimental double heat sinks.
Tech Manual says "Their [experimental double heat sinks] deployment in the late 3030s, however, gave Davion and Steiner forces a brief advantage in the early days of the FedCom alliance."
Standard double heat sinks were recovered in 3040, again according to Tech Manual.
The BJ-3X intro date was changed to match Tech Manual.
Note that intro dates listed on MUL are, in general, for in standard service dates (not testing, prototype). So whether or not there were 2 prototype BJ-3Xs earlier is beyond the scope of the MUL.
Thank you but does that mean there were two different BJ-3s? Battlepack Fourth Succession War has the BJ-3 being used in 3029 during the Fourth Succession War. If that's still canon, does that mean the Fourth Succession War version used Chemical Double Heat sinks, since the experimental DHS-Ps werent introduced until later?
-
Thank you but does that mean there were two different BJ-3s? Battlepack Fourth Succession War has the BJ-3 being used in 3029 during the Fourth Succession War. If that's still canon, does that mean the Fourth Succession War version used Chemical Double Heat sinks, since the experimental DHS-Ps werent introduced until later?
I think you're moving beyond MUL questions in to Ask the Writers when we're talking about the status of the Battlepack 4th SW.
-
According to the BattleCorps story Proprietary (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Proprietary), the Steiners built prototype DHS (of the Hoff type, or possibly more advanced) for the Davions on Hesperus II around 3027. The FedSuns lacked the industrial base to build them themselves.
A significant share of the production was siphoned off into the Capellan Confederation by a traitor.
In the Twelfth Battle of Hesperus II (a raid by McCarron's Armored Cavalry mentioned in the MAC sourcebook), which was actually an extraction raid for the traitor, the facility was smashed.
I wrote the story with the odd BJ-3 and its DHS in mind, though that's not spelled out anywhere.
-
Sending the whole Blackjack 3 issue to be hashed out.
-
The Puma E, Man O' War E, Gladiator E, and Daishi X all show as having intro dates of 3054 on the MUL, but all of them mount weapons that weren't developed until later.
Puma E - Micro Pulse Lasers (3060)
Man O' War E - Heavy Medium Laser (3059), ER Micro Laser (3060)
Gladiator E - Heavy Medium Laser (3059), Heavy Small Laser (3059)
Daishi X - Heavy Medium Laser (3059), ER Micro Laser (3060)
-
I think I've mentioned this before, but...
Quite a few designs with c3i have introduction dates before the introduction of c3i in 3062. The LNC25-04 Lancelot at 3057 for instance. Last time I think I mentioned this, I was told that the introduction date for c3i was looking to be pushed back. The 3.0 Errata for TM doesn't say anything about this. Should I be posting the designs with the incorrect dates again, or is this a TM issue?
-
Sending the whole Blackjack 3 issue to be hashed out.
Cool. Thanks. :)
According to the BattleCorps story Proprietary (http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Proprietary), the Steiners built prototype DHS (of the Hoff type, or possibly more advanced) for the Davions on Hesperus II around 3027. The FedSuns lacked the industrial base to build them themselves.
A significant share of the production was siphoned off into the Capellan Confederation by a traitor.
In the Twelfth Battle of Hesperus II (a raid by McCarron's Armored Cavalry mentioned in the MAC sourcebook), which was actually an extraction raid for the traitor, the facility was smashed.
I wrote the story with the odd BJ-3 and its DHS in mind, though that's not spelled out anywhere.
Very cool! Thanks :)
-
Shadow Hawk SHD-5D (Sandy):
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5806/shadow-hawk-shd-5d-sandy
Should be named Shadow Hawk SHD-5H (Sandy) instead. (See Dossiers: Bounty Hunter, page 24)
Blackjack BJ-1X & Blackjack BJ-1:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/376/blackjack-bj-1x
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/373/blackjack-bj-1
The BJ-1X has an intro date of 2769, while the BJ-1 has an intro date of 2757. However, TRO 3039, page 128 makes it clear that the BJ-1X is an early prototype, and hence should have an intro date that is earlier than that of the BJ-1.
Suggested solution:
Give the BJ-1X an intro year that is earlier than that of the BJ-1, for example 2755.
-
Shadow Hawk SHD-5D (Sandy):
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5806/shadow-hawk-shd-5d-sandy
Should be named Shadow Hawk SHD-5H (Sandy) instead. (See Dossiers: Bounty Hunter, page 24)
I've looked over your message a half dozen times now. I'm not seeing how what you just typed is different from what's on the MUL. Can you explain?
Blackjack BJ-1X & Blackjack BJ-1:
The Blackjack is already under review. Thank you.
-
SHD-5H instead of SHD-5D. The last letter of the base version.
-
SHD-5H instead of SHD-5D. The last letter of the base version.
Just goes to show even developers need glasses. Thanks, I read that several times and didn't notice the difference.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2013/mangonel-mnl-3w (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2013/mangonel-mnl-3w)
Issue: Technology show as Inner Sphere
Suggested Solution: Replace to Clan
-
Fixed, thanks.
-
Is it acceptable to report problems with the Cameo Specs and IWM integration?
-
You could, but honestly there is no manual way of changing (known "missing" feature), so we couldn't fix any reported issues.
-
I don't think that's what's happening nckestrel. The Scorpion Light Tank (Standard) page ( http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2847/scorpion-light-tank-standard ) has CameoSpecs images for the 'Mech of the same name and the IWM link/ad is for the SCP-12S
-
I don't think that's what's happening nckestrel. The Scorpion Light Tank (Standard) page ( http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2847/scorpion-light-tank-standard ) has CameoSpecs images for the 'Mech of the same name and the IWM link/ad is for the SCP-12S
I kind of said this on the last page. Search is your friend.
-
The matching is done by an algorithm. If its wrong, like with the Scorpion tank, there's no manual override. So you can list a problem, I'm saying it can't be fixed at this time.
-
I've been having an issue when trying to access the MUL website using the web browser on my PS Vita.
When I go to the site, it defaults to what seems to be a mobile edition. (If there was a way to skip that and have it go to the desktop edition, that would be welcome; but that's not what I'm getting at for the moment.)
The MUL main page shows up like this:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v108/Nerroth/Misc/2013-04-29-164435_zps1ef5f228.jpg)
Some of the links on the second row work well enough; here is what happens when you click on "Sources":
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v108/Nerroth/Misc/2013-04-29-164454_zps4f1416a8.jpg)
However, if you try and click on "Units", it does this instead:
(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v108/Nerroth/Misc/2013-04-29-164503_zps815a68af.jpg)
I don't know if that is happening for anyone else trying to access to the site on a mobile device, but I thought it might be worth mentioning just in case.
-
Yes, same on my Nexus 7. Units is undefined.
Also on mobile "search" seems to be missing or hidden by the CSS.
-
Don't know if anyone has mentioned this yet, but the MSK-7A has a record sheet in the latest Record Sheet: 3075 Unabridged update.
-
The introducition date for the CGR-SB Challenger (Charger variant) is given as 3025 in the MUL. This is correct if going by the BattleTechnology writeup in issue 0202. However, BattleTechnology is not canon anymore and Record Sheets Volume Four: Assault Mechs (which established the CGR-SB as canonical irrespective of the canon status of BattleTechnology) gives 2665 as introduction year for this variant, same as the standard CGR-1A1 Charger.
Also, the MUL wrongly names TRO:3039 as a source for the CGR-SB. The CGR-SB isn't mentioned there at all (at least in my PDF edition) although it arguably should be. In fact TRO:3039 explicitly states that only two variants made an appearance in the early 31st century (the -1L and -1A5), and later on the 1A9.
-
The introducition date for the CGR-SB Challenger (Charger variant) is given as 3025 in the MUL. This is correct if going by the BattleTechnology writeup in issue 0202. However, BattleTechnology is not canon anymore and Record Sheets Volume Four: Assault Mechs (which established the CGR-SB as canonical irrespective of the canon status of BattleTechnology) gives 2665 as introduction year for this variant, same as the standard CGR-1A1 Charger.
Also, the MUL wrongly names TRO:3039 as a source for the CGR-SB. The CGR-SB isn't mentioned there at all (at least in my PDF edition) although it arguably should be. In fact TRO:3039 explicitly states that only two variants made an appearance in the early 31st century (the -1L and -1A5), and later on the 1A9.
I believe the original RS:3039u gives entry date for 2950 for it entering service. RS:3039U lists just Succession Wars era. So it kinda bandaids the problem. Unfortunately entry years are tough now, i think SB was added as sort of bonus mech variant when Unabridged RS came out.
-
While we did/do look at dates that were printed on published record sheets, story often overrides dates with no story attached. In this case, the story of what the SB variant is overturned a record sheet date.
-
Following units were included in Era Report: 2750, but they do not have MUL entry:
page 128
- HWH-3D Hammerhands upgraded with LBX autocannons, Federated Suns; it may be typo from HMH-3D, but there is nothing about it in the Era Report: 2750 Errata thread
- VTR-9B Victor with AC-10 instead of AC-20, Federated Suns
page 129
- BLR-1Gd BattleMaster, Federated Suns
- TDR-5Sd Thunderbolt, Federated Suns
- DV-6Md Dervish, Federated Suns
- STK-3Fk Stalker, Draconis Combine
- WHM-6Rk Warhammer, Draconis Combine
- PHX-1Kk Phoenix Hawk, Draconis Combine
page 135
- CRB-27sl Crab
page 136
- LNC25-01sl Lancelot
page 137
- WVE-5Nsl Wyvern
page 138
- MSH-9HKR Mackie “Kill-Roy’s Little Buddy”
page 139
- BLR-1GHE BattleMaster “HellSlinger”
page 145
- HWH-4D Hammerhands - probably typo from HMH-4D; it may be typo from HMH-4D, but there is nothing about it in the Era Report: 2750 Errata thread
These have entries now.
Both Hammerhands should be HMH not HWH.
-
From what I can determine all Boosted C3 units do not have that special ability in their BattleForce ability listings
-
The art used to illustrate the SDR-7K Spider (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3011/spider-sdr-7k) on the MUL seems to be the same as that used for the SDR-8X model. From what I gather, the -7K model
should look more like the sample shown on the cover art for ISP3 (http://bg.battletech.com/?wpsc-product=interstellar-expeditions-interstellar-players-3) (which, according to the note on the back cover, is supposed to be a -7K model). may be correct, after all (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,8039.msg693532.html#msg693532); which would make the ISP3 back cover note in error, rather than the respective MUL entry.
My apologies.
-
Hello,
I haven't used the MUL much. A while ago I remember signing in and being able to select units and add them to unit lists. I even remember being able to modify battle values by adjusting gunnery and piloting skills. I've signed in a few times recently and can't seem to find this functionality any longer. Am I missing something or did I just imagine the entire thing?
Thanks in advance.
Mike
-
Phalanx B (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4814/phalanx-battle-armor-b) is listed with an Intro Date of 3065. However, the BA taser it mounts has an introdate of 3067, or 3066 for the Prototype design and production (TO page 345).
-
Hello,
I haven't used the MUL much. A while ago I remember signing in and being able to select units and add them to unit lists. I even remember being able to modify battle values by adjusting gunnery and piloting skills. I've signed in a few times recently and can't seem to find this functionality any longer. Am I missing something or did I just imagine the entire thing?
Thanks in advance.
Mike
The site was redone and the creating your own list was not a part of it. There's no timeline on its return.
-
Ahab AHB-643 http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/18/ahab-ahb-643 lists an intro date of 3061, but rocket launchers have an intro date of 3064 (TM page 229).
-
Ronin SA-RN7 http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2739/ronin-sa-rn7 is listed with introdate 3063, but the M-Pod has an introdate of 3064 (TO, page 330)
-
Ahab AHB-643 http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/18/ahab-ahb-643 lists an intro date of 3061, but rocket launchers have an intro date of 3064 (TM page 229).
Per Technical Readout: 3050 Upgrade, p. 246, "In 3061, BBA began manufacturing two new variants of the venerable fighter." Please check the original sources before posting in this thread, as you may be reporting the wrong issue; or, rather, the right issue in the wrong place.
-
Longbow LGB-13NAIS http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1934/longbow-lgb-13nais lists an introdate of 3068, but IS B-Pods are not available until 3069.
-
Thanatos TNS-4S (Felix) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3173/thanatos-tns-4s-felix lists an intro date of 3063, but rocket launchers have an intro date of 3064 (TM page 229).
-
Puma Assault Tank PAT-007 http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2601/puma-assault-tank-pat-007 lists an introdate of 3066, but B-Pods are not available until 3069
-
Puma Assault Tank PAT-008 http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2602/puma-assault-tank-pat-008 lists an introdate of 3068, but B-Pods are not available until 3069
-
Commando COM-4H http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/673/commando-com-4h lists an introduction year of 3058, but its RLs are not available until 3064.
-
Could you please combine those into one post next time?
-
The Ballista variant of the Manticore Heavy Tank is not associated with the other Manticore tanks: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2014/manticore-the-ballista
-
As per the conversation with Paul...
Intro Date
PX-3R Phoenix 2581 --> 2520
-
As per the conversation with Paul...
Intro Date
PX-3R Phoenix 2581 --> 2520
We still a link to something, even if it is a rules ruling.
-
We still a link to something, even if it is a rules ruling.
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,26906.msg611507.html#msg611507
-
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,26906.msg611507.html#msg611507
Thank you. As mentioned in the post, the MUL will review this and make a final decision.
-
We still a link to something, even if it is a rules ruling.
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,6620.msg611512.html#msg611512
:p
;)
-
Longer named cards, while looking fine on screen, print the title at a larger font. Blocking sight of point values and looking odd.
Thanks for effort.
-
Longer named cards, while looking fine on screen, print the title at a larger font. Blocking sight of point values and looking odd.
Thanks for effort.
Can you post an example of what you mean?
-
What's the MUL's source for all the people having access to the Royal Crab in the Jihad and Republic and DA? Sure the clans and C* and WoB makes sense in small numbers (they were only a fraction of the original 1k Crab run), but the others really don't to me.
The 27b is not mentioned in 3050U (3071) with the updates and refits being from 20's to 27's and 27's to C's and all the factories at the time being stuff like 30's and 45's and no confirmed factories making the Crab in 3080. The New Dallas Core with the specs didn't become widely available until after 3075 so it's not a lot of time to pull together 27b packages. Northwind was under blockade, Mars was only making stuff for the Blakists, Orestes had it's line converted over to something else under the Dominion. Where is this stuff coming from?
The MUL source makes it look like anyone who made or could have got their hands on a 20 or 27 or a 30 also has access to the 27b. Just wondering where is the official source that has people making that refit? It's a good mod, and refit kit level for a 20 or 27, but that doesn't automatically make it available. Kind of like the Grasshopper 5N isn't a 3rd War mech. Just looking for a canon source here or the reasoning used.
-
The MUL is the source.
The availability is there in the MUL. Any reasoning behind it would not be canon however, just my opinion. (And would be based on the idea that the refit can be done in dropship bays.)
-
The MUL is the source.
The availability is there in the MUL. Any reasoning behind it would not be canon however, just my opinion. (And would be based on the idea that the refit can be done in dropship bays.)
As he has said, the MUL is now the primary source for faction data. During product development, faction access is determined and entered into the MUL.
Thank you,
Joel BC
-
It just seems that for nearly extinct designs, they get around a lot, with no indication as to why.
Take the old Pixie Special 2. Barely out of prototype when the exodus hit. So the Clans and WoB/C* have a few. By the DA, the Capellans and the Mariks all have access to it for some reason.
It just seems that if a design has less than 10 chassis in existence, it should be declared extinct for all intents and purposes. Take the Shogun C. There are literally 6 Shoguns and a small fraction of that is the C left in known space 10 years prior to the Jihad. The only two operational models by 3071 are a Shogun 2F and the custom Trisha. But there she is on the Dragoons availability chart like you could grab a lance of C's and crank up the party tunes in 3084.
And the royals aren't even getting rarer, they're expanding. All I'm looking for is any non-mul published product that says these refits are being done or kit upgrades are being made.
At the least, you guys must have an internal log for an entry beyond "Because"?
-
It just seems that for nearly extinct designs, they get around a lot, with no indication as to why.
Take the old Pixie Special 2. Barely out of prototype when the exodus hit. So the Clans and WoB/C* have a few. By the DA, the Capellans and the Mariks all have access to it for some reason.
It just seems that if a design has less than 10 chassis in existence, it should be declared extinct for all intents and purposes. Take the Shogun C. There are literally 6 Shoguns and a small fraction of that is the C left in known space 10 years prior to the Jihad. The only two operational models by 3071 are a Shogun 2F and the custom Trisha. But there she is on the Dragoons availability chart like you could grab a lance of C's and crank up the party tunes in 3084.
And the royals aren't even getting rarer, they're expanding. All I'm looking for is any non-mul published product that says these refits are being done or kit upgrades are being made.
At the least, you guys must have an internal log for an entry beyond "Because"?
New Dallas Memory Core dissemination would be my guess.
-
Remember that for every word written into a book, there are probably at least a thousand unwritten words that are never seen. The MUL has become one of the tools to communicate at least he end product of some of those unwritten words.
And in this case, gooseman, pretty much hit he nail on the head. People know a good design when they see one and the Dallas memory core gave them the ability to rebuild these lost designs. You'll notice in most cases, the revived Royals are ones where the base chassis still existed, so it was just a refit or factory variant.
Best,
Joel BC
-
Much appreciated guys. Keep up the hard work! O0
-
How the heck do i register or see if I've registered? I keep trying to register and when I hit register it just empties out the password fields and says nothing.
I've tried changing passwords. Logging in with what I think is my password. Many different ways but getting nothing.
Help me obi wan.
-
The BV for Stealth Armored Units is still not adjusted. Please adjust asap.
-
The BV for Stealth Armored Units is still not adjusted. Please adjust asap.
It is being adjusted as soon as possible. You'll just have to be patient, it'll get updated eventually, just like everything else.
-
Hello,
I can't get into my account on the Master Unit List ... I seem to have forgotten my password. There's no option to request password recovery or a reset on the MUL page, can I request help through here, please? Moonsword redirected me here from the website support page.
-
I've notified George, the guy who created the MUL and helps the MUL team maintain it. He's taking a look.
I suppose in here or in Website & Forum support is equally good.
-
How the heck do i register or see if I've registered? I keep trying to register and when I hit register it just empties out the password fields and says nothing.
I've tried changing passwords. Logging in with what I think is my password. Many different ways but getting nothing.
Help me obi wan.
Hi Itinerant Hobbyist, I have unlocked your account and reset your password. You should have an email with the new random password.
-
My password is now fixed also. Thank you very much for the help.
-
My password is now fixed also. Thank you very much for the help.
yeah, George makes slackers like myself look bad... ;)
-
I am not exactly sure this is an errata but most of the battlearmor from TRO3058U, 3075, 3085 Supplemental and Prototypes don't have
their Republic era availability listed (BTW the BA from TRO 3085 do have it).
Examples: Warg, Infiltrator, Phalanx, Void, Thunderbird, Gladiator, Elemental II, Longinus, Corona and so on.
Is this omission on purpose or are you planning to fill this gap?
-
...or I could be wrong.
-
They do have a RS:
Warg, Thunderbird RS3085 The Cutting Edge
Infiltrator, Longinus RS3058 Clan (The battlearmor is in this volume)
Phalanx, Void, Corona RS 3075 Unabridged
Gladiator S, Elemental II, Void Minelayer RS Prototypes print version (There is no RS Prototypes Unabridged yet).
I will gladly make a full list if it will help somehow.
I now see in the first page that only mechs have had their Republic era availability finished so I guess the MUL team is on it.
-
Yes, we are working on it.
No ETA yet, sorry.
-
Thanks DarkISI it's good to know it was not forgotten by mistake.
Keep on the good work.
-
Searched the thread and didn't find it, so..
The Hunchback IIC pages ( http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1569/hunchback-iic-2 as an example) are displaying images of painted IS Hunchbacks, rather than the IIC. Likewise, the purchase links are for the HBK-4G and -7R. The Quick Strike cards are showing up correctly, however.
-
That's a sort of known problem, it also effects the Scorpion 'Mech and Light Tank, it looks like anytime a name is re-used this problem crops up, likely the MUL is graping the wrong images from cameospecs (I'd reckon it's just using the first word of the name "Hunchback" in your case) when it goes looking for images
-
That's a sort of known problem, it also effects the Scorpion 'Mech and Light Tank, it looks like anytime a name is re-used this problem crops up, likely the MUL is graping the wrong images from cameospecs (I'd reckon it's just using the first word of the name "Hunchback" in your case) when it goes looking for images
It may be "sort of known," but it can only be fixed when reported.
-
The MUL lists a HCT-3G Hatchetman, with the Recognition cards as it's reference.
Looking through my set of the cards (#FASA1675) there is no HCT-3G. Only the HCT-3F (from TRO: 3025) and the HCT-5S (from TRO: 3050). Is there another set of Recognition cards? Or is the reference to something else?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4267 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4267)
-
The MUL lists a HCT-3G Hatchetman, with the Recognition cards as it's reference.
Looking through my set of the cards (#FASA1675) there is no HCT-3G. Only the HCT-3F (from TRO: 3025) and the HCT-5S (from TRO: 3050). Is there another set of Recognition cards? Or is the reference to something else?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4267 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4267)
The Hatchetman from the Recognition Cards moves at 3/5/3. It's a strange variant that appears only there. It was an attempt to give the Hatchetman a hatchet, which didn't exist under the rules when TRO3025 was published. The final variant dropped three heat sinks instead of the speed.
-
Thanks. I knew there was a difference, but not what it was. We gave it the G instead of F, but its the variant described on the card.
-
Spectre BA, found in TRO 3145 Mercenaries.
Can be found twice on the Periphery General RAT in Era Report 3145 (pg. 178) and was described in the TRO as have being spread all over the IS and Periphery.
Yet only a few factions have access to it in the MUL. Suggestion: Add it to Periphery General List.
-
The Loki Mk II (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6277/loki-mk-ii-prime) seems to be available to almost every Clan and Great House except the Jade Falcons.
-
Gorgon Carrier (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6522/gorgon-carrier-standard)
Problem: Conflicting Introduction Dates.
The MUL Profile shows the Dropship being introduced in 3104.
However the TRO: 3145 FWL p. 53 shows the introduction date being 3096.
Not sure which entry is the correct one, but I'd say its the TRO unless this was retro-conned.
-
Gorgon Carrier (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6522/gorgon-carrier-standard)
Problem: Conflicting Introduction Dates.
The MUL Profile shows the Dropship being introduced in 3104.
However the TRO: 3145 FWL p. 53 shows the introduction date being 3096.
Not sure which entry is the correct one, but I'd say its the TRO unless this was retro-conned.
We'll take a look at this one. However, as has been stated before when in doubt, the MUL is the accurate document. In this case the MUL data was all created during the writing of the TRO.
As for all the faction data in the MUL for 3145, we uploaded the wrong set of data and are correcting it right now. Please stand by.
-
Per p.39 of TRO: 3145 (Federated Sun) the Ant Lion (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6338) should be "Antlion", one word.
-
Seleucus Infantry Transport (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6521)
It looks like that both dropships are having same bad luck with into dates. Transport is having similar problem.
Problem: Conflicting Introduction Dates
The MUL Profile shows the Dropship being introduced in 3100.
However the TRO:3145 FW P. 51 shows the introduction date being 3113.
-
I have a couple recommendations & a question for the Master Unit List site and whom ever is in charge of it...
#1...Easy addition...Can you have your programmers allow the download of a .CSV or .XLSX file of the displayed units. For example, I go to the site and click units, apply filters for Inner Sphere & Mixed Tech, and then select a Faction and hit apply filters. This brings back a list of all units for that faction in those given techs. Either at the bottom or top of the list, there could be a download button that allows a file of those said units to be downloaded and viewed offline (yeah I know almost everyone is always online)...but it could be helpful and should be a really easy addition to the site.
#2...BIG addition...At some point, if/when things slow down for you guys, could you add in the description of each unit, what planets and/or factories the mechs (vehicles, aerospace, etc.) are manufactured on/at? It might be easier to have the factory show for the mech, especially when it comes to variants, and that factory link would take you to the factory description, which would then show you what planet it was on...and what house/clan had possession of the planet at any given time. Currently, without this, we as Battletech players have to dig through Sarna.net to find these types of answers, and we all know it's not 100% reliable, and it's only updated to around 3067. At least with the described option on the MUL...we would have official cannon answers.
#3...Question...The listings for Wolf's Dragoons in the Eras of Late Republic and Dark Age seem too light. I realize they are coming back after being nuked on Outreach...but being that they were on Arch Royal, would they not have access to the Clan Wolf in Exile mechs, Arch Royal Mech Works mechs, and the Lyran Commonwealth mechs that were manufactured during that time?
-
#3...Question...The listings for Wolf's Dragoons in the Eras of Late Republic and Dark Age seem too light. I realize they are coming back after being nuked on Outreach...but being that they were on Arch Royal, would they not have access to the Clan Wolf in Exile mechs, Arch Royal Mech Works mechs, and the Lyran Commonwealth mechs that were manufactured during that time?
Full availability information for the Late Republic and Dark Age eras isn't available yet. What's listed are just the 'Mechs from the TRO3145 series.
-
Ah ok...makes sense. I was also thinking last night that I read somewhere (cannot remember where now) that the Wolf's Dragoons were using a lot of Davion Salvage as well.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5104/specter-surveillane-plane-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5104/specter-surveillane-plane-standard)
Error: Specter Surveillane Plane (Standard)
Corr: Specter Surveillance Plane (Standard)
Xotl: corrected, thanks.
-
The Swallow Attack WIGE (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6597/swallow-support-wige-standard)
Problem: Vehicle is missed named.
MUL Lists the vehicle and its variant as the Swallow Support WIGE.
The vehicle is listed in the TRO as a Swallow Attack WIGE pp. 14-15.
Please correct the name on MUL. Thank You
-
The Swallow Attack WIGE (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6597/swallow-support-wige-standard)
Problem: Vehicle is missed named.
MUL Lists the vehicle and its variant as the Swallow Support WIGE.
The vehicle is listed in the TRO as a Swallow Attack WIGE pp. 14-15.
Please correct the name on MUL. Thank You
Fixed, thanks.
-
The Atlas III (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6358/atlas-iii-as8-d3)
Problem: MUL says AS8-D3, TRO says AS7-D3
Solution: Either change the MUL entry or errata the TRO. Changing the MUL might be easier.
-
thanks, Atlas III fixed to AS7.
-
Amusingly, the URL with the 8 in it still works.
I wonder how many other ghost URLs there are.
EDIT: Wait a minute, it also works if I put a 9 there!
What is going on?
-
The /####/ is the important part, not the name. you could leave the name out of the URL entirely.
-
CASEII seems to show up as CASE. I noticed this first with the HBK-7R.
EDIT after getting some sleep: CASEII seems to be showing up as CASE on the Alpha Strike cards. Also some units don't have CR on their cards where I believe they should. An example of the CASEII=CASE scenario can be seen with the HBK-7R Hunchback while the CR issue appears with the Mad Cat MK.II Enhanced. I don't know what qualifies a unit for CR besides Hardened Armor or Ferro-Lamellor but I believe Reinforced Structure gives a Critical Hit modifier in TW; I don't know if that translates into CR in AS.
Also the KSC-5I and KSC-5MAF Koschei still have their pre-errata BV.
-
DI Schmitt Tank (Standard) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6602/di-schmitt-tank-standard)
Problem: Introduction Year conflicting with fluff of Profile.
Schmitt introduction date for the standard model & Targeting computer version are dated for 3093 on the MUL.
However, the DI Schmitt's background info mentions vehicle in service for 30 years. That would make the intro year for the DI Schmitt as 3115.
Recent action on Hesperus II demonstrates it is still a relevant and capable unit thirty years after its introduction.
Suggestive Fix: Change Intro years to 3115 on MUL.
P.S. I'm not sure, but there something off about the MUL. Its been distorting the icons on the webpage. I'm using a older browser, but i'm not sure if me or the website. Era icons don't fit in the boxes for instance.
-
CASEII seems to show up as CASE. I noticed this first with the HBK-7R.
EDIT after getting some sleep: CASEII seems to be showing up as CASE on the Alpha Strike cards. Also some units don't have CR on their cards where I believe they should. An example of the CASEII=CASE scenario can be seen with the HBK-7R Hunchback while the CR issue appears with the Mad Cat MK.II Enhanced. I don't know what qualifies a unit for CR besides Hardened Armor or Ferro-Lamellor but I believe Reinforced Structure gives a Critical Hit modifier in TW; I don't know if that translates into CR in AS.
Also the KSC-5I and KSC-5MAF Koschei still have their pre-errata BV.
We've been fixing the CASEII as we find them.
CR is used for armor that resists through armor crits. Reinforced Structure gives more structure points, not CR.
-
STM-O Sternensturm (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6637/sternensturm-stm-o)
Problem: Rules Level is Wrong for Base, Primary Configuration, and B Configuration
The Sternensturm's tech level according to the TRO and its record sheet indicates this fighter is a "for this era" regular Inner Sphere technology and not Advanced Rules as is listed with MUL entry. Only Advanced Rules level is A due to the PPC Capacitor. Unless I missed something, because i was referring to TRO: Prototype's P.206-207 tech changes and found nothing else that would be listed Advanced or better as of 3145.
Suggested Fix: Changed Base, Primary Configuration, and B Configuration's Rules set to Standard.
-
Ymir Bipedal Weapons Platform (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3623/ymir-bwp-x1-bipedal-weapons-platform)
Problem: Alpha Strike Card lists a point value of 0 (I want all the Ymir!)
Suggested Fix: Change the point value to 12
-
Currently...on the MUL, when you type a name of anything in the search box & hit enter, nothing pulls up.
-
Bandit Hovercraft A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/230/bandit-hovercraft-a)
Bandit Hovercraft F (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/235/bandit-hovercraft-f)
Bandit Hovercraft G (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/236/bandit-hovercraft-g)
Problem: Alpha Strike Card does not list OMNI as one of the special abilities on all three of these vehicles.
The other Bandit variants have OMNI as an ability.
Suggested Fix: Add OMNI to the special abilities list.
-
Ymir Bipedal Weapons Platform (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3623/ymir-bwp-x1-bipedal-weapons-platform)
Problem: Alpha Strike Card lists a point value of 0 (I want all the Ymir!)
Suggested Fix: Change the point value to 12
Yeah, 12 is much better :). Fixed.
EDIT: Rather, the data was fixed, card isn't updating. so still ongoing..
-
STM-O Sternensturm (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6637/sternensturm-stm-o)
Problem: Rules Level is Wrong for Base, Primary Configuration, and B Configuration
The Sternensturm's tech level according to the TRO and its record sheet indicates this fighter is a "for this era" regular Inner Sphere technology and not Advanced Rules as is listed with MUL entry. Only Advanced Rules level is A due to the PPC Capacitor. Unless I missed something, because i was referring to TRO: Prototype's P.206-207 tech changes and found nothing else that would be listed Advanced or better as of 3145.
Suggested Fix: Changed Base, Primary Configuration, and B Configuration's Rules set to Standard.
Changed them all (including A) to standard to match the TR.
-
Bandit Hovercraft A (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/230/bandit-hovercraft-a)
Bandit Hovercraft F (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/235/bandit-hovercraft-f)
Bandit Hovercraft G (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/236/bandit-hovercraft-g)
Problem: Alpha Strike Card does not list OMNI as one of the special abilities on all three of these vehicles.
The other Bandit variants have OMNI as an ability.
Suggested Fix: Add OMNI to the special abilities list.
It's actually a display problem, it's in the data but not showing on the card. Working on it still...
-
DI Schmitt Tank (Standard) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6602/di-schmitt-tank-standard)
Suggestive Fix: Change Intro years to 3115 on MUL.
You are correct. Fixed. Thanks!
-
I've complied a list of units that link to the CASE II page on Sarna, this should help in tracking down those that use CASE II
Exterminator
Highlander
Whitworth
Hunchback
Wolverine
Warhammer
Stalker
Atlas
Hollander
Apollo
Grim Reaper
Thunder
Grand Titan
Barghest
Deathstalker
Ursus
Tiburon
Bane (Kraken)
Warwolf
Havoc
Cadaver
Exhumer
Atlas II
Hachiwara
Pendragon
Pandarus
Slagmaiden
Osteon
Yurei
Omega
Thunderbolt IIC
Dragon II
Tenshi
Centurion (OmniMech)
Scarecrow
Atlas III
Stalker II
Anzu
Carronade
Juliano
Gauntlet (OmniMech)
Viking IIC
Zeus X
Sorry about the poor formating
-
Thanks, I had missed the Wolverine, Stalker and Hachiwara...
-
Hoplite C listed as an Early Succession Wars design, has intro date of 3052
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1540/hoplite-c
Shadow Hawk SHD-3H listed as an Age of War design, has intro date of 2752
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5037/shadow-hawk-shd-3h
No-Dachi NDA-3S listed as Clan Invasion design, has intro date of 3081
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5692/no-dachi-nda-3s
-
Thanks, I had missed the Wolverine, Stalker and Hachiwara...
If Sarna had a better data model I could probably have given you model numbers easier
-
Mad Cat Mk IV Prime AS card appears to have the PV at 28 when BV is 2681. Suggest the card be amended to PV 27.
BV is 2781, the card was correct. I think I need to get my eyes checked :-[
-
Purifier Terra (all versions)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5617/purifier-battle-armor-terra-ap-gauss
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5615/purifier-battle-armor-terra-mrr
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5616/purifier-battle-armor-terra-spl
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5614/purifier-battle-armor-terra-ersl
AS stats give them the MAS ability, but according to their source in XTRO:Phantoms this version doen's use Mimetic Armor like the standard Purifier. So MAS ability should be deleted
-
Search box on main page is still not functioning...but the one on the "Units" page does.
Also...Republic of the Sphere icon on the "Faction" page is broken
-
Mad Cat Mk IV Prime AS card appears to have the PV at 28 when BV is 2681. Suggest the card be amended to PV 27.
The BV was wrong, amended to 2762. Thanks for pointing out the error!
-
Purifier Terra (all versions)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5617/purifier-battle-armor-terra-ap-gauss
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5615/purifier-battle-armor-terra-mrr
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5616/purifier-battle-armor-terra-spl
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5614/purifier-battle-armor-terra-ersl
AS stats give them the MAS ability, but according to their source in XTRO:Phantoms this version doen's use Mimetic Armor like the standard Purifier. So MAS ability should be deleted
It's a top secret armor....ok, it's been fixed. No MAS for the Purifier Terra!
-
Search box on main page is still not functioning...but the one on the "Units" page does.
Fixing now.
-
I did a lot of re-work on the mobile views for the MUL site. It is at least usable now. =) Get out your smartphones and tablets and give it a try.
-
I did a lot of re-work on the mobile views for the MUL site. It is at least usable now. =) Get out your smartphones and tablets and give it a try.
That's much better. Thanks Skyhigh!!!
-
More era/date mismatches (I think this is all of them)
The following three mechs have intro dates of 3068, but are listed as Clan Invasion
Suggestion: Change era to Jihad
- Perseus W P1W (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5699/perseus-p1w)
- Phantom F (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4818/phantom-f)
- Pouncer F (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4850/pouncer-f)
The Annihilator ANH-3A (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/41/annihilator-anh-3a) has an intro date of 3068, but is listed as Civil War
Suggestion: Change era to Jihad
The Annihilator ANH-4A (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/42/annihilator-anh-4a) has an intro date of 3068, but is listed as Civil War
Suggestion: Change era to Jihad
A number of units are listed as Early Republic designs, but have intro dates before that era
- Zeus-X ZEU-X (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6631/zeus-x-zeu-x)
- Zeus-X ZEU-X2 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6632/zeus-x-zeu-x2)
- Tomahawk <base> (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6297/tomahawk-base)
- Tomahawk Prime (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6298/tomahawk-prime)
- Tomahawk A (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6299/tomahawk-a)
- Tomahawk B (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6300/tomahawk-b)
- Tomahawk C (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6301/tomahawk-c)
- Black Hawk (Standard) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6554/black-hawk-standard)
The following units have an intro year of 0, but are in TRO 3145 The Clans. I do not have this book, so disregard this if no intro year is provided in that publication
Arion (Standard) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6252/arion-standard)
Cyllaros (Standard) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6253/cyllaros-standard)
Harpagos (Standard) (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6254/harpagos-standard)
Kodiak II 2 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6296/kodiak-ii-2)
The Celerity CLR-02-X-D (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5553/celerity-clr-02-x-d) has an intro date of 3052, but is listed as Jihad
Suggestion: Not sure what to make of this one, as the XXL engine is listed as a 3055 rediscovery in TacOps (pg 309), and the equipment description suggests that the original Hegemony designs were mere prototypes and never made it to production. Did ComStar have some sort of secret stash of XXL engines to work on?
-
Search box is working again...thanks...
One more thing, the ability to search up to a certain introduction year is now gone (year to year). Could you please bring that back...it is very helpful
-
It's still there, just under "Basic Filters".
-
Ahhh ok...thanks. I see it now that I'm home, but for some reason my work computer was not showing those selections as I checked each box before posting.
-
The Mosquito Light Fighter's Date Introduced field somehow is listing the Era instead, whie the Era field is empty.
-
How can I select two or more factions at once, when searching for something?
-
Put in a search term. Pick the faction that matches it. Then put in another search term. Keep going until you've got all the factions you want.
-
Put in a search term. Pick the faction that matches it. Then put in another search term. Keep going until you've got all the factions you want.
So this is the way. Thank you.
I hate those searching suggestions.
Not to talk that there is nothing what could tell me what factions I can choose from. The old user interface was much better and much more lucid (to see what I can choose from and what fields I have checked).
-
The Grigori Caelestis lists CASE, but should have CASE II.
-
Have I missed it, or is the ability to search by BF/AS special abilities gone?
-
OO-Suzumebachi (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6426/oo-suzumebachi-standard)
Problem: Conflicting Introduction Dates
Summary: Oo-Suzumebachi's introduction date in the TRO:3145 Draconis Combine is clearly marked as 3117 on p. 53.
MUL profile for the small craft lists its intro date being 3118.
Correction Suggestion: Change Oo-Suzumebachi's entry to 3117. Unless this was changed on MUL on purpose.
-
OO-Suzumebachi (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6426/oo-suzumebachi-standard)
Problem: Conflicting Introduction Dates
Summary: Oo-Suzumebachi's introduction date in the TRO:3145 Draconis Combine is clearly marked as 3117 on p. 53.
MUL profile for the small craft lists its intro date being 3118.
Correction Suggestion: Change Oo-Suzumebachi's entry to 3117. Unless this was changed on MUL on purpose.
3117 was when it was prototyped. I am under the impression that the MUL focuses on service dates, in which case 3118 seems to fit perfectly with the text, which has been reproduced below.
Purpose-built after the Second Combine-Dominion War, the first prototype cleared trials at Dover in 3117, and production models quickly became the preferred choice of small unit battlesuit commanders and their planners.
-
"The Celerity CLR-02-X-D (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5553/celerity-clr-02-x-d) has an intro date of 3052, but is listed as Jihad
Suggestion: Not sure what to make of this one, as the XXL engine is listed as a 3055 rediscovery in TacOps (pg 309), and the equipment description suggests that the original Hegemony designs were mere prototypes and never made it to production. Did ComStar have some sort of secret stash of XXL engines to work on?"
The MUL is designed to represent field units. As such, it is bent by unique, prototype units. The Celerity CLR-02-X-D was never anything but a prototype unit. We put the project start date, because there was never anything but testing on this project. So putting a "field date" would be making up something that didn't exist.
When did it's engine actually work? 3055 presumably. Before that it was probably running around, but overheated in seconds/minutes/whatever was wrong with it prior to 3055. But it didn't do anything signficantly different after 3055. It was still just testing.
-
the Waneta LAM's Movement rate on the card overlaps the word "skill", making it difficult to read.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5380/waneta-s-wn-2lam
this seems to be a common problem on mechs using IJJ's or non-standard jump distances, almost all of them overlap like that.
-
The MUL is designed to represent field units. As such, it is bent by unique, prototype units. The Celerity CLR-02-X-D was never anything but a prototype unit. We put the project start date, because there was never anything but testing on this project. So putting a "field date" would be making up something that didn't exist.
When did it's engine actually work? 3055 presumably. Before that it was probably running around, but overheated in seconds/minutes/whatever was wrong with it prior to 3055. But it didn't do anything signficantly different after 3055. It was still just testing.
Yeah, the project to make ComStar drones started in 3052, but the 02-X-D is far from the first one Celerity. It came in to being well past the development of XXL.
Paul
-
Yeah, the project to make ComStar drones started in 3052, but the 02-X-D is far from the first one Celerity. It came in to being well past the development of XXL.
Paul
More importantly the SL/TH never actually finished/completed it's XXL research so C* would not have had anything to work with in 3052
And would it be possible the set things up to produce Venn diagrams of factional availability? (I'm guessing not)
-
And would it be possible the set things up to produce Venn diagrams of factional availability? (I'm guessing not)
No.
-
No.
Well, not in two-dimensional space.
"Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn"
-
I think the Mad Cat MKII3 is missing some special abilities. I looked at the record sheet PDF and found that it has a light probe. I believe this equates to RCN and LPRB which is missing from the card. At least according to stratops it does. I don't have AS yet.
Thanks
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5716/mad-cat-mk-ii-3
-
the Waneta LAM's Movement rate on the card overlaps the word "skill", making it difficult to read.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5380/waneta-s-wn-2lam
this seems to be a common problem on mechs using IJJ's or non-standard jump distances, almost all of them overlap like that.
Yup, it's a ton of text to fit in. Added a check for longer movement move text and have it reducing the font size.
-
The card for the Wolverine 9W is discombobulated.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3583/wolverine-wvr-9w
Thanks for the work on the MUL. Looks great.
-
The card for the Wolverine 9W is discombobulated.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3583/wolverine-wvr-9w
Thanks for the work on the MUL. Looks great.
the Raptor II RPT-2X has the same issue.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2657/raptor-ii-rpt-2x
-
Those look like the MUL thinks their space ships or something
-
Actually, it's a combo of bad data (not type was entered for the two mentioned) and bad default (anything not matching would go to large card). I updated the code to default to the standard card rather then the large and will work with the MUL team to update the data.
-
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,6620.msg611512.html#msg611512 (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,6620.msg611512.html#msg611512)
:p
;)
Bump.
-
The Götterdämmerung cannot be searched due to the umlauts over the o & a in it's name.
Edit for proper terminology - Thanks Kit deSummersville
-
Those are umlauts.
-
Think there is an issue with the Templar III TLR2-OC from TRO 3145 Fed Suns.
The MUL shows an introdate of 3100 but the Re-Engineered Large laser didn't prototype until approx. 3120 according to TRO 3145 Print Edition.
Suggestion to move the OC date to 3120 and make it Tech Base Experimental.
-
We'll look into it. The details are a little more complicated than that since RE lasers are advanced per FM3145.
For the time being, I've set the B, C, and D configurations as Advanced per their listings in TRO3145 Federated Suns and updated the tech base on the D.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4564/mad-cat-mk-ii-enhanced
Armor should be 13, add CR to specials.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6502/havoc-hvc-p6
Structure should be 2
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6363/kishi-ceremonial-armor-standard
THe MUL states the name as "Kishi Ceremonial Armor", But the TRO3145Kurita states it as "Kishi Battle Armor".
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6544/testudo-siege-tank-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6544/testudo-siege-tank-standard)
The mass of the Testudo Siege Tank is listed as 45t.
Should be 75 according to TRO 3145 Mercs, pg 20.
-
Looks like bad data on the Guillotine GLT-3N
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1338/guillotine-glt-3n
-
Can the QuadVees be listed in the vehicle list as well as the mech list for Hell's Horses?
-
Mad cat mk iv. Only lists variant c as having case ii.
-
Mad cat mk iv. Only lists variant c as having case ii.
That's because the Bravo configuration has explosive weapons protected only by CASE.
-
Not sure if this is a MUL error or needs clarification somewhere else.
I noticed in the TRO 3145 Clans the Shrike is listed as Advanced but the MUL has it as Standard.
Was there a tech change affecting; I assume the Laser HS and/or Partial wing that isn't listed in TRO 3145 Print Edition, or is the MUL in error?
-
That's because the Bravo configuration has explosive weapons protected only by CASE.
On one side, other side has ATM ammo.
-
The zibler prime Alpha strike stats shows that its Standard damage is 4/4/0, but the TUR ability is 5/5/0. Im not sure about the damage convertion of this unit
-
The zibler prime Alpha strike stats shows that its Standard damage is 4/4/0, but the TUR ability is 5/5/0. Im not sure about the damage convertion of this unit
That should be TUR(4/4/-). The Streak SRM-4s have insufficient ammunition to get their full damage potential.
-
Consultation should not be added to the tank that has the Marian Hegemony the Bulwark Assault Vehicle in the fluff of it says that in a raid of the Second Legion stole Kendall in 3140 and took a good number of them and spare parts for a long time
-
Consultation should not be added to the tank that has the Marian Hegemony the Bulwark Assault Vehicle in the fluff of it says that in a raid of the Second Legion stole Kendall in 3140 and took a good number of them and spare parts for a long time
Source for this? The TR 3145 FWL Bulwark entry only mentions mercs, and I don't see anyting about Kendall at all.
-
On one side, other side has ATM ammo.
Protected part of the ammo isn't sufficient. If there's one ton of ammo without any protection, it doesn't get any CASE, no matter if other ammo is protected. If there's one ton of ammo with CASE and one ton with CASE II, it only gets CASE.
-
Not sure if this is a MUL error or needs clarification somewhere else.
I noticed in the TRO 3145 Clans the Shrike is listed as Advanced but the MUL has it as Standard.
Was there a tech change affecting; I assume the Laser HS and/or Partial wing that isn't listed in TRO 3145 Print Edition, or is the MUL in error?
All the Shrikes have been changed to Advanced in the MUL. Thanks.
-
Looks like bad data on the Guillotine GLT-3N
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1338/guillotine-glt-3n
Thanks. Data edited, card will be correct when the cards get regenerated. (Not quite sure when that happens..)
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6544/testudo-siege-tank-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6544/testudo-siege-tank-standard)
The mass of the Testudo Siege Tank is listed as 45t.
Should be 75 according to TRO 3145 Mercs, pg 20.
Fixed. thanks.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6363/kishi-ceremonial-armor-standard
THe MUL states the name as "Kishi Ceremonial Armor", But the TRO3145Kurita states it as "Kishi Battle Armor".
Fixed. Thanks. (But Ceremonial Armor would have been cool..) :)
-
This said in the fluff of Bulwark in 3145 TRO
NDTABLE UNITS
Miles Gregarius Felix Antonelli: Miless Antonelli
Legio II participated in raid on Kendall in 3140,
and his maniple walked away with enough
Bulwarks and spare parts to last them a long
time. The Bulwarks Transformed Antonelli's maniple
from a light support unit into heavy raiding
That force has Kendall's immediate neighbors
and the outer worlds Tamarind-Abbey
running scared.
page 75
-
The Phoenix PX-3R is listed as a Star League Era design, but it's intro date puts it in the Age of War
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2489/phoenix-px-3r
Suggested fix: change the mech's production era From Star League to Age of War
-----
The Templar III TLR2-OC is listed as an Early Republic design but has an intro date (3120) that makes it a Late Republic mech
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6356/templar-iii-tlr2-oc
Suggested fix: Either change the production era from Early to Late Republic or change the intro date to 3100 to match with the other Templar III variants
-----
The Arion, Cyllaros, and Harpagos all have intro dates of 3136, but are listed as Late Republic designs.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6252/arion-standard
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6253/cyllaros-standard
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6254/harpagos-standard
Suggested Fix: Change the Production era of these designs from Late Republic to Dark Age.
-----
The Fury Command Tank (Standard) has an intro date of 3064, but is listed as a Star League design
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1161/fury-command-tank-standard
Suggested Fix: Change the production era to Civil War
-----
The Tyr Infantry Support Tank (Kurita) has a production date of 3070 but is listed as a Civil War design
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5730/tyr-infantry-support-tank-kurita
Suggested Fix: Change the production era from Civil War to Jihad
-----
The following units are listed at Early Republic Designs, but have intro dates well outside of that era
Shillelagh Missile Tank (Original) - 0 (apologies if this unit currently has no intro date)
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6379/shillelagh-missile-tank-original
Kruger Combat Car (Original) - 2620
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6312/kruger-combat-car-original
Predator Tank Destroyer (Original) - 2942
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6442/predator-tank-destroyer-original
Marten Scout VTOL (Standard) - 3021
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6313/marten-scout-vtol-standard
Marten Scout VTOL (Infantry) - 3024
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6314/marten-scout-vtol-infantry
Savior Repair Vehicle (Standard) - 3059
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6546/savior-repair-vehicle-standard
Suggested fix: change the production era to the appropriate categories.
-
Think there is an issue with the Templar III TLR2-OC from TRO 3145 Fed Suns.
The MUL shows an introdate of 3100 but the Re-Engineered Large laser didn't prototype until approx. 3120 according to TRO 3145 Print Edition.
Suggestion to move the OC date to 3120 and make it Tech Base Experimental.
The Tech Base should be Advanced. Just because the current Prime config of an Omni has gear that's newer than its intro date doesn't mean it started with that config. It was just considered 'prime' at the time the TRO was made. In this case, the C and D configurations came in to being subsequent to the widespread introduction of the R-Lasers, even though the Templar OmniMech itself had existed prior to 3120.
-
Hope this wasn't mentioned somewhere else already, looked but couldn't find it...
Crimson Langur Prime & D configurations
Movement says 14"/6"j.... believe it should be 14"/10"j
Thanks again for all the work you guys do on the MUL, such a great resource for us all!
-
The Crimson Langur's jump movement is correct. It's not a direct conversion if the jump movement is less than walking movement.
-
oh... i stand corrected then, will read up on the why. Thanks again
-
The EPT-C-1 Reptar MilitiaMech (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5797/reptar-ept-c-1-militiamech) and Araña ARA-S-1 MilitiaMech (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5798/arana-ara-s-1-militiamech)
Problem: Both Mech's Introduction Year is listed as 0.
-
Vulcan VLC-6N
Intro Date
"2777"
Change to...
"2767"
Notes: As per the TRO entry, the VLC-5Ns were upgraded with Hegemony tech by RWA troops during the Amaris Coup, putting this in the mid-2760s. 2777 was the final year of the entire conflict and does not seem relevant to the fluff description.
-
The Thor II (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6281/thor-mk-ii-prime) and its associated Configuration.
Problem: Conflicting Names.
Summary: The name of the 'Mech is listed in the TRO:3145 The Clans as simply the Thor II (alternately called the Grand Summoner). MUL entry with its associated alternate configurations names the 'Mech as the Thor Mk II Prime and Thor Mk II A and etc. The PDF Suppliment product which is the source of the 'Mech's name lists it clearly as Thor II and does not mention it as being Mk II. No Errant has been reported for Thor II in PDF's errant forums.
Suggested Action: Change MUL entries to Thor II Prime or so forth or clearify which name is the correct one.
-
The Thor II (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6281/thor-mk-ii-prime) and its associated Configurations.
Problem: Conflicting Introduction Dates
Summary: The 'Mech is listed in the TRO:3145 The Clans as being introduced in 3093. The MUL entry with its associated alternate configurations names the 'Mech lists the design being introduced in 3118.
Suggested Action: We need clearification on which year is the correct one.
-
Subject: Kodiak II (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6295/kodiak-ii-standard)
Problem: Conflicting Date Introduced
Summary: The Kodiak II's introduction dated listed in the MUL's profile is incorrect for the Standard Model. The fluff presented in TRO:3145 The Clans (PDF) clearly identifies the year of introduction being 3095. Additionally in the Capacities section of the fluff, it is mentions a defect was detected needed to be corrected in 3105.
Suggested Action: Change MUL Entry for the Standard Model of the Kodiak II to 3095.
-
Hello,
There is no MUL entry for the MN2-A Sarissa SecurityMech from TRO:Prototypes.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Sarissa
The MUL's introduction date for the Cadaver is 3099. The date should be 3094, according to this quote from both TRO: 3145 Mercenaries, p. 28 and TRO: 3145 (print), p. 90: "Despite its first appearance on the battlefield in 3094..."
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=cadaver
Additionally, I noticed there is no introduction date for the Reptar or Araña MilitiaMechs. Is this intentional or an omission?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Reptar
(forgive me, I cannot provide a working link for the Araña because the tilde breaks the link)
Thank you!
Steve
-
The MUL's introduction date for the Cadaver is 3099. The date should be 3094, according to this quote from both TRO: 3145 Mercenaries, p. 28 and TRO: 3145 (print), p. 90: "Despite its first appearance on the battlefield in 3094..."
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=cadaver
This is a great time for a general reminder. When it comes to unit introduction dates, faction access and rules level, the Master Unit List is the top of the list for canon accuracy. That is not to say the MUL doesn't have mistakes, nor to ask you all to stop reporting errors.
What it is to say is, until corrected, always assume the MUL is correct and the published source is incorrect.
Thank you,
Joel BC
MUL Coordinator
-
Hello,
Thanks for the reminder Welshman, I will word my posts a little more softly. Here are a few more instances where I believe the MUL may be incorrect:
The introduction dates for GDR-1C and GDR-1D on the MUL - are the two dates mixed up?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Gravedigger
TRO 3145 Clans, Gravedigger Entry, P. 36, Variants:
"The older GDR-1C can be found throughout the Inner Sphere in much greater numbers than the GDR-1D that replaced it."
The introduction date on the MUL for the Thor II is 3118
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Thor+Mk+II
TRO 3145 Clans, Thor II Entry, P.44:
"Lauded for its versatility and prized for its communication suite, the Thor II began replacing the Thor in 3093."
Additionally, the anecdote given in the "Deployment" section describes a Trial of Possession in 3097.
The introduction date on the MUL for the Kodiak II is 3115.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Kodiak+II
TRO 3145 Clans, Kodiak II Entry, P. 50:
"Based upon the Kodiak 4, the Kodiak II entered production in 3095..."
Additionally, the "Capabilties" section describes a service bulletin in 3105.
The introduction date of the MUL for the URA-2A Ursa is 3112
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Ursa
TRO 3145 Lyran Commonwealth, Ursa Entry, P. 38, does not agree:
"The Ursa is a formidable quad ’Mech that premiered in the third decade of this century."
Steve
-
All pre-TRO: 3145 battle armor have BVs listed based on a full squad/point/level I from the record sheets. All battle armor from the TRO: 3145 series have BV listed for a single suit.
-
there's no AS card for the Emperor EMP-6M2.
Thanks for all the work.
Never mind....I just noticed that there wasn't an RS for it.
-
Is it intentional, that some 'Mechs in Alpha Strike are cheaper than others even if their stats are better? I just compared the
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/878/dervish-dv-6m
to the
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3297/trebuchet-tbt-5n
Dervish got jump capability and one extra point of structure but costs 1pt less.
If it is intentional, I stop looking for such inconsistencies.
-
AS point values are based on the standard Battle Values.
-
Even if that means that some units are more expensive even if they are less effective due to the quite inaccurate recalculation of their stats? And why is it that some units' PV is still based on their BV but their A or S just isn't? Just realized, that the http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/329/berserker-brz-a3 only got four pts of structure (so it's less robust by far) but it's PV is still calculated on it's BV.
-
Even if that means that some units are more expensive even if they are less effective due to the quite inaccurate recalculation of their stats? And why is it that some units' PV is still based on their BV but their A or S just isn't? Just realized, that the http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/329/berserker-brz-a3 only got four pts of structure (so it's less robust by far) but it's PV is still calculated on it's BV.
It has 4 Structure because it is a 100-ton 'Mech with an IS-tech XL engine. Armor is based on armor factor, Structure is based on tonnage and engine type.
-
This really isn't the place to debate whether or not the Alpha Strike point values make sense. The point's been raised and rebutted by staff. Any further discussion needs to go to the Alpha Strike board, please.
-
The Zeus-X ZEU-X has a Intro Date of 3054. It is listed as having Reactive Armor which wasn't introduced until 3063, a LB 20-X which wasn't introduced until 3058, a MRM-30 which also wasn't introduced until 3058, a composite chassis which wasn't introduced until 3061, and medium x-pulse lasers which weren't introduced until 3057.
At best this should mean that it was introduced in 3063, but the Zeus is a Lyran design and the reactive armor was originally developed by the Draconis Combine. So really it should have an even later intro date than just 3063.
-
The Xanthos XNS-01-A is completely missing from the list.
-
The Xanthos XNS-01-A is completely missing from the list.
Because there isn't one yet. We list units that have been published for BattleTech. As far as I know, that only exists as a MWDA piece so far?
-
Because there isn't one yet. We list units that have been published for BattleTech. As far as I know, that only exists as a MWDA piece so far?
pfarland, the variant you're looking for is the Xanthos XNS-01. The -A part at the end was just an add-on by WizKids to note the weight class of the 'Mech for purposes of gear cards, pilot cards, and Solaris VII matches. Currently there is not a XNS-01 variant, although the one that most closely matches the MWDA miniature is the XNS-07 variant found in the "Record Sheets 3145: New Tech New Upgrades" pdf-only file.
-
Well, the only ones listed in the MUL are the XNT-20, XNT-30, XNT-40, and XNT-50. None of those others are listed. I noticed this because I'm running a campaign that takes place pre jihad and post Succession Wars. I'm trying to make a Xotl style RAT just for the fact that I don't like having the same 11 (or less) mechs show up with a standard RAT. My project blossomed into a Mega MUL - RAT one and I'm adding in the manufacturers and factories as well as the factions that use them and when (and if) units became extinct. I'm using the Online MUL as a base and adding in info from other sources. I'm just noticing various different issues as I go through and posting them up here to help out the developers.
-
Note: those are the 2O, 3O, 4O and 5O, no zeros involved.
-
Copy that, thanks Kit!
-
And another possible error, though it may not be depending on your viewpoint. The Wulfen has an intro date on the MUL as 3137. That is it's design date, it didn't enter into production until 5 years later because of Clan Wolf's shift to the IS Occupation zone.
-
Is there a way no, or are there any plans to have a search function by tech type ?
For instance, if I wanted all models of Battle Mech with Light Engines & CASE.
Or Aero Fighters with XL Engines
Or Mechs that use Endo Steel & Compact Gyros
Etc etc etc.
-
Is there a way no, or are there any plans to have a search function by tech type ?
For instance, if I wanted all models of Battle Mech with Light Engines & CASE.
Or Aero Fighters with XL Engines
Or Mechs that use Endo Steel & Compact Gyros
Etc etc etc.
Things like this are on the future roadmap. We just can't say when that will be. The MUL is a free supplement to the BattleTech product line so it's development comes after the development that pays the bills so we can keep hosting the MUL (and things like that).
-
Things like this are on the future roadmap. We just can't say when that will be. The MUL is a free supplement to the BattleTech product line so it's development comes after the development that pays the bills so we can keep hosting the MUL (and things like that).
Thanks Welshman, I know its free & isn't a priority, I was just curious if its something being considered. Someone told me you can seach a few items like typing in TAG into the search field because it comes up in the QS/AS stats page but that only works for a couple item types. So I just wondered if a more in depth function was a possibility in the future. Thanks again.
-
The Rokurokubi models -4K (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6393/rokurokubi-rk-4k) and -4T (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6392/rokurokubi-rk-4t) as listed with a speed of 12" when their TW walking speed is 7.
Shouldn't that be an Alpha Strike speed of 14"?
-
The Rokurokubi models -4K (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6393/rokurokubi-rk-4k) and -4T (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6392/rokurokubi-rk-4t) as listed with a speed of 12" when their TW walking speed is 7.
Shouldn't that be an Alpha Strike speed of 14"?
Hardened Armor reduces their AS speed.
-
Entry for Longbow LGB-0C versus LGB-0W...
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Longbow
The LGB-0C at 2480 seems correct per XTRO: Primitives V.3, but the LGB-0W has the same intro date, yet wasn't this model introduced later on? I compared a few other primitives (Wasp, Thunderbolt, & Banshee) against their first "production" release...and they were all a few years later.
Given that fact...should the LGB-0W be updated to a few years after the LGB-0C?
Thanks
-
Going off of the conversion process for Armored Components on p. 345 of StratOps, shouldn't the Juliano's Alpha Strike stats feature the ARM special, since it has an armored cockpit?
The No-Dachi -3X is missing its too, so maybe there's an error with armored cockpit checking.
-
Going off of the conversion process for Armored Components on p. 345 of StratOps, shouldn't the Juliano's Alpha Strike stats feature the ARM special, since it has an armored cockpit?
The No-Dachi -3X is missing its too, so maybe there's an error with armored cockpit checking.
Yes. My Mk II eyeballs missed the little circles..
-
And another possible error, though it may not be depending on your viewpoint. The Wulfen has an intro date on the MUL as 3137. That is it's design date, it didn't enter into production until 5 years later because of Clan Wolf's shift to the IS Occupation zone.
It was in (highly limited) production on Weingarten in 3137. 3142 was when it went into (less limited) production on Thermopolis.
-
Hello,
Thanks for the reminder Welshman, I will word my posts a little more softly. Here are a few more instances where I believe the MUL may be incorrect:
The introduction dates for GDR-1C and GDR-1D on the MUL - are the two dates mixed up?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Gravedigger
TRO 3145 Clans, Gravedigger Entry, P. 36, Variants:
"The older GDR-1C can be found throughout the Inner Sphere in much greater numbers than the GDR-1D that replaced it."
The introduction date on the MUL for the Thor II is 3118
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Thor+Mk+II
TRO 3145 Clans, Thor II Entry, P.44:
"Lauded for its versatility and prized for its communication suite, the Thor II began replacing the Thor in 3093."
Additionally, the anecdote given in the "Deployment" section describes a Trial of Possession in 3097.
The introduction date on the MUL for the Kodiak II is 3115.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Kodiak+II
TRO 3145 Clans, Kodiak II Entry, P. 50:
"Based upon the Kodiak 4, the Kodiak II entered production in 3095..."
Additionally, the "Capabilties" section describes a service bulletin in 3105.
The introduction date of the MUL for the URA-2A Ursa is 3112
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Ursa
TRO 3145 Lyran Commonwealth, Ursa Entry, P. 38, does not agree:
"The Ursa is a formidable quad ’Mech that premiered in the third decade of this century."
Steve
Thanks.
All of these (and the Cadaver from the earlier post) have been edited to match the TR. (the MUL was based on an earlier work in progress and...work progressed..)
-
Phoenix PX-3R
Templar III TLR2-OC
Arion, Cyllaros, and Harpagos
Fury Command Tank (Standard)
Tyr Infantry Support Tank (Kurita)
Shillelagh Missile Tank (Original)
Kruger Combat Car (Original)
Predator Tank Destroyer (Original)
Marten Scout VTOL (Standard)
Marten Scout VTOL (Infantry)
Savior Repair Vehicle (Standard)
Eras fixed. Thanks.
-
Vulcan VLC-6N
Intro Date
"2777"
Change to...
"2767"
Notes: As per the TRO entry, the VLC-5Ns were upgraded with Hegemony tech by RWA troops during the Amaris Coup, putting this in the mid-2760s. 2777 was the final year of the entire conflict and does not seem relevant to the fluff description.
Thanks. Yeah, we misread that entry.
-
Hello,
There is no MUL entry for the MN2-A Sarissa SecurityMech from TRO:Prototypes.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Sarissa
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4974/sarissa-securitymech-mn2-a
Note on your page above, you have to switch to the IndustrialMech tab to see it. The MN1 series were primitive BattleMechs, the MN2 are modern industrialmechs.
Additionally, I noticed there is no introduction date for the Reptar or Araña MilitiaMechs. Is this intentional or an omission?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Reptar
(forgive me, I cannot provide a working link for the Araña because the tilde breaks the link)
Thank you!
Steve
Thanks. Added intro dates for those.
-
The ability to search for BattleForce and Alpha Strike special abilities is back! You'll find it under the Basic Filter in the Unit Search. Enter separate special abilities with a space between, and the search will find units that have all special abilities you listed.
For example, ENE C3S will show you all units that have both ENE and C3S.
-
Error Vehicles List:
Karnov UR Transport - There is a (Stealth) model that is listed as being in TRO: 3039, I think it's supposed to be the standard model because the only thing listed as (Standard) is the Karnov UR Gunship.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1759/karnov-ur-transport-standard
That's the standard 3039 model?
-
Hello,
Not sure if this is errata or not but thought it might be something for someone to check out.
I just came across the GrassHopper-Reynolds from HTP:Luzern
The MUL has it as 2244 BV & a 22 pt AS value.
Sarna has it as 2344 BV.
When I was creating the unit in HMPro it also matched the Sarna 2344 value.
Maybe Sarna is wrong & HMPro isn't using the right stats, or maybe someone just keyed in a 2 instead of 3.
Not sure but figured you might want to know.
Xotl: 2,344 is the right value. Thanks!
-
I came a cross a couple units where the intro dates conflict with equipment they carry. I couldn't find dates for these units in the published TR they came from, so I'm not sure where the dates in the MUL came from and if they are an error in the MUL or an Errata in neded is some other published book or pdf. I've only found a couple so far (not shabby) so here they are:
- Great Turtle GTR-1 : The MUL shows an introduction date of 3067, however the Compact Gyro was not introduced until 3068 per TechManual
- Kintaro KTO-21 : The MUL shows an introduction date of 3059, however the Improved C3 was not introduced until 3062 per TechManual
-
TechManual lists the production date for the compact gyro. The Great Turtle was introduced in 3067 as an experimental unit with a then-expiermental gyro, so that particular date doesn't apply in this case.
The KTO-21 Kintaro is in a messy position. We know it was used against the Smoke Jaguars from TRO3050U but that predates the introduction of C3i. I'll have to raise that one internally.
-
TechManual lists the production date for the compact gyro. The Great Turtle was introduced in 3067 as an experimental unit with a then-expiermental gyro, so that particular date doesn't apply in this case.
I actually thought it was classified as Experimental because of the X-Pulse Lasers. I guess this does make sense in this case since 3068 would be the introduction date of mass production for the compact gyro (which happens to be a TL level at this time). The prototype design for TL equipment definitely would predate this intro date. Is there a hard and fast rule for this published anywhere or is it more of a grey area type of thing, such as "several years prior to the date", which is really open-ended?
-
really open-ended?
Really open-ended, especially when dealing with already published work.
-
Just a note, which should probably be added to the opening post.
Solaris units do not adhere to the tech introduction dates. These are complete one off units that are often dealing with technology that goes beyond Experimental to bleeding edge. When looking at technology introduction dates, don't list any Solaris units as examples of incorrect intro dates for either the technology or the Solaris unit.
Thank you,
Joel BC
-
Thanks for your responses. I think TO makes things much more clear as it lists the prototype production dates, which technically removes any vagueness. TM, because it only publishes intro dates makes it so confusing, or at least leaves the dates very open, as you've noted.
Solaris units do not adhere to the tech introduction dates. These are complete one off units that are often dealing with technology that goes beyond Experimental to bleeding edge. When looking at technology introduction dates, don't list any Solaris units as examples of incorrect intro dates for either the technology or the Solaris unit.
I'm not sure it's always easy for someone to identify is something is a Solaris unit. Unless that is it is published in something like TR: Solaris or RS: Solaris. Things that I see in 3067 or any other "normal" TR I wouldn't assume is a Solaris unit.
-
I actually thought it was classified as Experimental because of the X-Pulse Lasers. I guess this does make sense in this case since 3068 would be the introduction date of mass production for the compact gyro (which happens to be a TL level at this time). The prototype design for TL equipment definitely would predate this intro date. Is there a hard and fast rule for this published anywhere or is it more of a grey area type of thing, such as "several years prior to the date", which is really open-ended?
It's more of a gray area overall, although with TO equipment there's prototype dates, not just production grade dates. Even there, there's some dates that could come under close scrutiny as we examine unit introduction dates that come to our attention as not quite lining up.
The Great Turtle rules level is a particularly messy situation, though. We know when the unit was introduced - it has to have gone into the arenas before 20 December 3067, when TRO3055U is set. But the rules levels that are applied in the book aren't the technological rules as they stood in 3067, but the standard ones from TW, TM, and TO. So the X-pulse lasers, hardened armor, and torso-mounted cockpit are all still experimental, just as they were in 3067, but under TW/TM, the compact gyro had since gone into standard production.
By the way, by 3081, all of those systems are down to the advanced rules level, so if the GTR-1 had been introduced in 3082, it would be an Advanced design, not an Experimental one.
I'm not sure it's always easy for someone to identify is something is a Solaris unit. Unless that is it is published in something like TR: Solaris or RS: Solaris. Things that I see in 3067 or any other "normal" TR I wouldn't assume is a Solaris unit.
TRO3055U has a section in it specifically about Solaris designs. You can also look at the faction - something we call out as the Solaris faction is a Solaris design.
-
I'm not sure it's always easy for someone to identify is something is a Solaris unit. Unless that is it is published in something like TR: Solaris or RS: Solaris. Things that I see in 3067 or any other "normal" TR I wouldn't assume is a Solaris unit.
A valid concern, but right now, they only exist in TRO3055U, and are all under a "SOLARIS VII BATTLEMECHS" subsection. I don't believe we have them anywhere else presently.
Not ideal, but still adequate?
-
By the way, by 3081, all of those systems are down to the advanced rules level, so if the GTR-1 had been introduced in 3082, it would be an Advanced design, not an Experimental one.
My design availability breakdown agrees with you, which is refreshing (Great Turtle GTR-1 (http://www.mordel.net/tro.php?a=vt&id=2796), click on the Availability link; this is how I have found this and other conflicts).
A valid concern, but right now, they only exist in TRO3055U, and are all under a "SOLARIS VII BATTLEMECHS" subsection. I don't believe we have them anywhere else presently.
Not ideal, but still adequate?
I think so. When I looked I didn't expand to see if it was a special section. Having that would definitely take any ambiguity out of the equation (as it does here).
-
A valid concern, but right now, they only exist in TRO3055U, and are all under a "SOLARIS VII BATTLEMECHS" subsection. I don't believe we have them anywhere else presently.
Not ideal, but still adequate?
There might be one or two Solaris-specific 'Mechs in XTRO Gladiators (as opposed to the other game worlds), but seeing it in that XTRO alone is a dead giveaway that the same general rules apply.
-
Another one up for discussion.
The Argus AGS-4D is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3061. The issue is the Rotary AC/5 was introduced in 3062. Based on other discussions, having a Rotary AC/5 on a design before it was introduced to the masses is OK, but wouldn't this make the design Experimental since it would mean the Rotary AC/5 was still in the Prototype phase? I didn't see 3061 listed in TR3067, so I'm not sure where it came from for purposes of the MUL.
Or am I just being way to rigid with these dates and rules levels?
-
Another one up for discussion.
The Argus AGS-4D is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3061. The issue is the Rotary AC/5 was introduced in 3062. Based on other discussions, having a Rotary AC/5 on a design before it was introduced to the masses is OK, but wouldn't this make the design Experimental since it would mean the Rotary AC/5 was still in the Prototype phase? I didn't see 3061 listed in TR3067, so I'm not sure where it came from for purposes of the MUL.
Or am I just being way to rigid with these dates and rules levels?
Mordel,
Great questions. Don't worry, we'll let you know if you're going off the deep end.
Creating a comprehensive, and fully canon listing of everything is a daunting task. So there are bound to be errors. We appreciate the helpful feedback.
Best,
Joel BC
-
The Warhammer -10CT is listed in MUL as in 3085-Project Phoenix. It's actually in 3085-The Cutting Edge.
-
The Warhammer -10CT is listed in MUL as in 3085-Project Phoenix. It's actually in 3085-The Cutting Edge.
The TRO would be 3085 Supplemental.
You are correct, the RS it appears in is Cutting Edge
-
The Barghest BGS-2T (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/253/barghest-bgs-2t) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3059. However, the Ultra AC/20 wasn't introduced until 3060. So I believe one of the following three options is possible:
- Change the introduction date for the unit to 3060
- Change the rules level to Experimental
- Create an Errata to change the introduction date of the Ultra AC/20 to 3059
-
The Axman AXM-3S (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/186/axman-axm-3s) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3057. However, there are a few problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment as follows:
- LB-20X was not introduced until 3058
- ER Medium Laser was not introduced until 3058
- Light Fusion Engine was not introduced until 3062
-
The Crab CRB-30 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/718/crab-crb-30) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3061. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- Improved C3 Computer was not introduced until 3062
-
The Champion CHP-3P (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/553/champion-chp-3p) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3056. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- ER Medium Laser was not introduced until 3058
- Improved C3 Computer was not introduced until 3062
- Improved Narc Launcher was not introduced until 3062
- Ultra AC/10 was not introduced until 3057
-
The Barghest BGS-2T (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/253/barghest-bgs-2t)
Change the introduction date for the unit to 3060[/li][/list]
CRB-30: no change, expecting errata to C3i date (3060).
CHP-3P: change to 3061, expecting errata to inarc date (3061) and c3i date.
AXM-3S: change to 3060, expecting errata to light fusion engine date (3060).
AGS-4D: change to 3062, should have been that already :).
if the expected errata doesn't happen, then we get to revisit some of those (and more)..
-
Thank you! I'll post more as I find them. And not that you need it, but I'm keeping my own list of "invalid" units and decisions so I can check up on them later. Who watches the watchers, after all?
-
The Exterminator EXT-5E (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1006/exterminator-ext-5e) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3060. Now, the two pieces of equipment which cause an issue is the Improved C3 (which was already indicated that an errate will change that intro year to 3060) and the iNarc. Now the iNarc was indicated that an errata will change its year to 3061. However, this is still one year off. TR3050 Upgrade specifically states the year for this as 3060, so I'm guessing the errata for iNarc should be to bring it into 3060 (and not 3061)?
-
I've noticed all three QuadVees have Early Republic Era on them. I don't think this is correct since the profile for all of them says they were introduced in 3136 which is Late Republic Era.
-
The Black Hawk E (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/339/black-hawk-nova-e) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3054. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- ATM 12 was not introduced until 3055
-
The Hellfire (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4300/hellfire-standard) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3058. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- Heavy Small Laser was not introduced until 3059
- Heavy Medium Laser was not introduced until 3059
- Heavy Large Laser was not introduced until 3059
-
The Hellfire specifically is IDed as the unit on which the weapons debuted. So no errata needed.
-
The Hellfire specifically is IDed as the unit on which the weapons debuted. So no errata needed.
Your response would indicate that the MUL would need to be updated to 3059 then?
-
Not in my view, no.
-
Not in my view, no.
OK, I think that's fine and would fall into the gray area of the "standard" equipment dates and rules levels. So, because units could be equipped with weapons prior to the intro dates, they'd be classified as experimental since they weren't officially introduced yet. And because the rules level for a design is based on the level for it's equipment for that era, this fits as Standard since the heavy lasers were standard for the Clan Invasion era (not caring what year they were introduced).
However, if using this design in a specific year campaign, and that year was 3058, I would think this would have to be classified as Experimental since the heavy lasers have not yet been "introduced". Does that reasoning sound logical?
-
The Firestarter FS9-C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1111/firestarter-fs9-c) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3063. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- Rocket Launcher 10 was not introduced until 3064
-
OK, I think that's fine and would fall into the gray area of the "standard" equipment dates and rules levels. So, because units could be equipped with weapons prior to the intro dates, they'd be classified as experimental since they weren't officially introduced yet. And because the rules level for a design is based on the level for it's equipment for that era, this fits as Standard since the heavy lasers were standard for the Clan Invasion era (not caring what year they were introduced).
However, if using this design in a specific year campaign, and that year was 3058, I would think this would have to be classified as Experimental since the heavy lasers have not yet been "introduced". Does that reasoning sound logical?
This is a great area. The Hellfire would be experimental only in the year 3059, when the Heavy Laser was still not in mass production. Because that is only a single year, out of it's total history, we list it as standard rules level instead of making an experimental version of the Hellfire just to exist for that single year.
The game has enough flexibility in it that plus or minus a year is the general fudge factor for these things.
-
This is a great area. The Hellfire would be experimental only in the year 3059, when the Heavy Laser was still not in mass production. Because that is only a single year, out of it's total history, we list it as standard rules level instead of making an experimental version of the Hellfire just to exist for that single year.
The game has enough flexibility in it that plus or minus a year is the general fudge factor for these things.
Works for me. I'm not hellbent on making everything line up all beautifully (though my OCD really REALLY wants me too). I'll just keep pointing out the things which fall outside the defined windows and you guys can decide if there really is something worth changing or if they are OK as is.
-
The Black Hawk E (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/339/black-hawk-nova-e) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3054. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- ATM 12 was not introduced until 3055
TechManual says 3054 for ATMs. Is there a source that gives a separate, 3055, date for ATM 12?
-
The Exterminator EXT-5E (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1006/exterminator-ext-5e) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3060. Now, the two pieces of equipment which cause an issue is the Improved C3 (which was already indicated that an errate will change that intro year to 3060) and the iNarc. Now the iNarc was indicated that an errata will change its year to 3061. However, this is still one year off. TR3050 Upgrade specifically states the year for this as 3060, so I'm guessing the errata for iNarc should be to bring it into 3060 (and not 3061)?
TR3050 gives a specific 3060 date for its debut, so adding a note for EXT-5E being experimental in 3060.
-
The Firestarter FS9-C (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1111/firestarter-fs9-c) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3063. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- Rocket Launcher 10 was not introduced until 3064
FS9-C moved to 3064.
-
I've noticed all three QuadVees have Early Republic Era on them. I don't think this is correct since the profile for all of them says they were introduced in 3136 which is Late Republic Era.
3136 is Dark Ages era.
These all say Dark Ages for era now. (I don't remember changing them, but I've been sick the past week, I may have forgotten fixing them...)
-
bunch of intro date changes.
All the APCs that were pre-2470 got pushed back to 2500. We have primitive APCs now. Also pushed forward some other generic vehicles (recovery, engineering).
Several units (Royal) got an pre-ER PPC version and a post-ER PPC version.
Many unique units that are using equipment pre-full production date got a note saying they were experimental for a while.
And then a bunch of c3i, light fusion, inarc, heavy ferro armor, er micro laser, heavy laser, improved jump jet units got pushed forward to appropriate dates (pending c3i, light fusion, inarc errata). Usually this was just a year or two change.
Mauna Kea
Korvin KRV-3
T-12 Tiger
Zhukov WoB
Puma PAT-005b
Puma PMA-007
Puma PMA-008
Demolisher II
Ripper Infantry
Light Thunderbolt Carrier
Schiltron F
Tomahawk C
Tomahawk THK-63b
Samurai SL-25
Gotha GTHA-600
Rusalka Infernus
Ahab AHB-643
Stuka STU-K5b
Planetlifter
Stinger STG-6S
Thorn THE-Nb
Commando COM-4H
Commando COM-7S
Eagle EGL-1M
Eagle EGL-2M
Icestorm
Hermes HER-4M
Hermes HER-1Sb
Hussar HSR-900-D
Malak C-MK-O (Mi)
Owens OW-1B
Puma E
Wight WGT-1LAW/SC
Dragonfly F
Pouncer F
Whitworth WTH-3
Blackjack BJ-4
Hatchetman HCT-5S (Austin)
Preta C-PRT-O (Kendali)
Shadow Hawk IIC
Black Hawk E
Hunchback HBK-5S
Eyleuka EYL-35A
Eyleuka EYL-4A
Griffin GRF-2N
Pariah A-Z
Champion CHP-1Nb
Grigori C-GRG-O (Rufus)
Lancelot LNC25-04
Ostsol OTL-8D
Axman AXM-3S
Cestus CTS-6X
Jinggau JN-G7L
Ostwar OWR-2Mb
Rifleman IIC 5
Thunderbolt TDR-5Sb
Thunderbolt TDR-9Nr
Barghest BGS-2T
Cataphract CTF-5MOC (Naomi)
Deva C-DVA-O (Achilleus)
Thunder THR-2L
Black Knight BL-10-KNT "Ross"
Black Knight BL-6-RR
Defiance DFN-3C
Dragon Fire DGR-6FC2 "Gregory"
Orion ON1-MC
Awesome AWS-10KM
Man O` War E
Phoenix Hawk IIC
Longbow LGB-13NAIS
Thunder Stallion 3
Cyclops CP-11-C
Highlander HGN-736
Buster XXI
Gladiator E
Turkina Z
Daishi D
Daishi X
-
TechManual says 3054 for ATMs. Is there a source that gives a separate, 3055, date for ATM 12?
You are correct. For some reason I had 3055 and so did SSW. I guess I should've checked TechManual to make sure.
-
The Kintaro KTO-20 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1793/kintaro-kto-20) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3035. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- Double Heat Sink was not re-introduced until 3040
What is interesting here is that the TR says "Though stripped of its advanced technology...", which indicates perhaps the issue is that this design should not have double heat sinks? Either that or the MUL needs to change to 3040 (I didn't see a specific date of 3035 here other then to say "3030s", and even that didn't specifically call out the KTO-20). Or perhaps a note gets added to indicate it is experimental from 3035-3039?
-
The Kintaro KTO-21 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1794/kintaro-kto-21) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3059. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- Improved C3 Computer was not introduced until 3060 (per upcoming Errata)
- Improved Narc Launcher was not introduced until 3061 (per upcoming Errata)
TR3050 does not specifically indicate 3059 for this unit. It does state "..., proving their success during the assault on the Clans and the FedCom Civil War."
-
The Kintaro KTO-21 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1794/kintaro-kto-21) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3059. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- Improved C3 Computer was not introduced until 3060 (per upcoming Errata)
- Improved Narc Launcher was not introduced until 3061 (per upcoming Errata)
TR3050 does not specifically indicate 3059 for this unit. It does state "..., proving their success during the assault on the Clans and the FedCom Civil War."
I'm waiting on the inarc errata, we're still debating the year.
-
Hello,
I noticed you added introduction dates for many of the 'Mechs from TRO:3145 Republic of the Sphere, but one is conspicuously missing a date, the Night Stalker.: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Night+Stalker
I waited a little bit thinking the update may not have been complete, but decided to ask now. Is there an introduction date for this BattleMech? Thank you!
Steve
-
Hello,
I noticed you added introduction dates for many of the 'Mechs from TRO:3145 Republic of the Sphere, but one is conspicuously missing a date, the Night Stalker.: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Night+Stalker
I waited a little bit thinking the update may not have been complete, but decided to ask now. Is there an introduction date for this BattleMech? Thank you!
Steve
I would have typed one in if I had one. Still working on TR3145 RotS.
-
For the Blood Asp PRIME, it has a year of 3059. However, the <BASE> config as well as configs A through D all show 3060. How can the PRIME config exist before it's <BASE>?
-
For the Blood Asp PRIME, it has a year of 3059. However, the <BASE> config as well as configs A through D all show 3060. How can the PRIME config exist before it's <BASE>?
It was changed and I missed one.
-
The Marauder (Bounty Hunter-3015) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2030/marauder-bounty-hunter-3015) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3015. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- Double Heat Sink was not re-introduced until 3040
I'm guessing a note should be added to indicate that from 3015 through 3039 the design should be considered Experimental?
-
Extinction dates don't change rules levels.
A Star League tech mech found in a cache doesn't change rules level. Nor does a mech built from a star league cache of components (like the Bounty Hunter).
-
Extinction dates don't change rules levels.
A Star League tech mech found in a cache doesn't change rules level. Nor does a mech built from a star league cache of components (like the Bounty Hunter).
Duh! Makes perfect sense that I'm ashamed I even brought it up.
-
MUL lists the Crockett CRK-5003-0 as not having a record sheet. It is in RS3039 (not unabridged)/
-
MUL lists the Crockett CRK-5003-0 as not having a record sheet. It is in RS3039 (not unabridged)/
The one with the grasshopper on the cover? It's not available any more, so we're not going to point people toward it. Too confusing with the newer 3039 releases.
-
Hi, firstly doing a great job, really getting the use out of the MUL.
Now the question (Which may have been asked already but I'm stuck for time to go through 30+ pages of posts.)
I'm trying to put together the Alpha Strike cards for my Comstar unit but when I look up the appropriate Infantry and BA sections they only seem to come in standard I.S sized squads, any chance you can add the Comstar/WoB/Marian Hegemony sized options?
-
I noticed the Chameleon CLN-4V is missing from the MUL, but I do see a Chameleon TRC-4B (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/546/chameleon-trc-4b). Is this suppose to be the CLN-4V and was just incorrectly typed?
-
The Raven RVN-4L (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2666/raven-rvn-4l) is listed in the MUL as Standard with a date of 3062. However, the following lists the problems with this date and rules level based on its equipment:
- Stealth Armor was not introduced until 3063
If the date is OK I think we'd need a note indicating it is considered experimental in 3062.
-
I noticed the Chameleon CLN-4V is missing from the MUL, but I do see a Chameleon TRC-4B (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/546/chameleon-trc-4b). Is this suppose to be the CLN-4V and was just incorrectly typed?
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,5933.msg173715.html#msg173715
Chameleon CLN-4V, p. 241
designation - replace "CLN-4V" with "TRC-4B"
It was an intentional change. If I remember correctly, the person that gave it the CLN-4V forgot the model had been given a designation way back and assigned a new designation. It was changed back when we found the old reference (TR3025 original and the construction example in the 2nd edition Box Set).
-
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,5933.msg173715.html#msg173715
Chameleon CLN-4V, p. 241
designation - replace "CLN-4V" with "TRC-4B"
It was an intentional change. If I remember correctly, the person that gave it the CLN-4V forgot the model had been given a designation way back and assigned a new designation. It was changed back when we found the old reference (TR3025 original and the construction example in the 2nd edition Box Set).
I wonder what the person was thinking when they tagged it TRC originally. Thanks...
-
I wonder what the person was thinking when they tagged it TRC originally. Thanks...
Most likely something to do with Training, as that was the Chameleon's in-universe purpose.
-
The one with the grasshopper on the cover? It's not available any more, so we're not going to point people toward it. Too confusing with the newer 3039 releases.
Correct, the original was fully replaced by the newer one.
-
I noticed the Falcon FLC-4Nb (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1023/falcon-flc-4nb) has a date of 2776. However the Snub-Nose PPC was not introduced until 2784. Since the date is prior to the introduction date, it likely needs a note about how the unit is considered experimental from 2776-2783. Which also begs the question that, given the Era specified, the unit should probably be classified as Experimental because it was never "Standard" at any point during the Star League era.
-
Noticed there is a GRF-2N2 variant Griffin listed in the MUL, which points to the Klondike Record Sheets. Cannot find said model. If this a typo or foreshadowing?
-
Noticed there is a GRF-2N2 variant Griffin listed in the MUL, which points to the Klondike Record Sheets. Cannot find said model. If this a typo or foreshadowing?
It should not say its in RS Klondike, I forgot to delete that when I copied the GRF-2N. The notes in the GRF-2N2 MUL page describe what the 2N2 is.
-
I noticed the Falcon FLC-4Nb (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1023/falcon-flc-4nb) has a date of 2776. However the Snub-Nose PPC was not introduced until 2784. Since the date is prior to the introduction date, it likely needs a note about how the unit is considered experimental from 2776-2783. Which also begs the question that, given the Era specified, the unit should probably be classified as Experimental because it was never "Standard" at any point during the Star League era.
Considering the FLC-4Nb was being manufactured in significant numbers on Apollo, I think it moved from Experimental to Production, IMO.
-
The Firefly FFL-3SL found in Record Sheets: Operation Klondike is not listed in the MUL.
-
There's no FFL-3SL in my RS Operation Klondike. I've got -3SLE, the 3PP series, the 4A and the C. All of which are listed in the MUL.
-
There's no FFL-3SL in my RS Operation Klondike. I've got -3SLE, the 3PP series, the 4A and the C. All of which are listed in the MUL.
Interesting. Wonder if there was an updated version of the PDF. My record sheets all say "©2010 The Topps Company, Inc." Does yours have the same copyright year?
-
Interesting. Wonder if there was an updated version of the PDF. My record sheets all say "©2010 The Topps Company, Inc." Does yours have the same copyright year?
Hmm. same year, but mine is still showing Wizkids, I must be missing an updated copy.... *goes rummaging around in the back for a bit*
-
I literally just bought a copy from the Battleshop minutes ago to check on commercial availability and it still says 2010 Wizkids in the credits and on every sheet, and there's no Firefly FFL-3SL.
-
Per FM: FWL p. 79, the League had two Goliath -3M combat-ready prototypes available in 3047. Perhaps move the -3M's introduction date back to 3047 or 3048.
-
Something seems to be wrong with the STY-3C Starslayer introduction date. It's 3056 according to the MUL, but the -3C appears much earlier in canon already:
- The -3C was available to MacCarron's Armored Cavalry during the Marlette campaign in 3044 according to the MacCarron's Armored Cavalry sourcebook (writeup on p. 20; features in a scenario on p. 35, MW Drake Shandy). Context suggests it was a lostech SL cache find on Menke.
- the -3C appears on Historical: Operation Klondike RATs on pp. 146, 147, indicating the -3C existed by 2784. This was raised here (Ask the Writers) (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,17624.msg400073.html#msg400073) and here (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,4967.msg110578.html#msg110578) but wasn't answered so far.
Suggestion: Date STY-3C introduction back to between 2772 (STY-2C) and 2784 (Exodus).
-
The 3C didnt exist until 3056 as per TRO 3058. The other 2 sources are in error, and should refer to the 2C.
-
Note that there is already an errata report filed for this error in the Klondike thread, so no need to report it again.
-
The Thumper TAV-2 is missing from the MUL, though it's in RS 3075 Unabridged
-
The Thumper TAV-2 is missing from the MUL, though it's in RS 3075 Unabridged
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3213/thumper-artillery-vehicle-tav-2
-
Per FM: FWL p. 79, the League had two Goliath -3M combat-ready prototypes available in 3047. Perhaps move the -3M's introduction date back to 3047 or 3048.
Moved to 3047. We don't normally list prototype dates, but FM: FWL has them in combat, so that overrides their prototype status :).
-
I noticed the Deimos <Base> is listed as 3065. I believe this should be 3085 as all the other configurations are 3085 or later.
-
I noticed the Deimos <Base> is listed as 3065. I believe this should be 3085 as all the other configurations are 3085 or later.
Would you believe that, due to a technical glich, the Deimos was produced for 20 years without being able to mount any omnipods?
No?
Ok, it was a typo. 3085 it is (now), and the era corrected as well.
Thanks for catching that. (And proving that somebody is looking at the <Base> entrees, for whatever reason.)
-
The three variants of the Winston Combat Vehicle (Support, TSEMP, and XXL) are all missing.
-
The three variants of the Winston Combat Vehicle (Support, TSEMP, and XXL) are all missing.
Correct.
Most of the 3145 NTNU is still being entered. (All the BattleMechs are missing for example).
-
Would you believe that, due to a technical glich, the Deimos was produced for 20 years without being able to mount any omnipods?
No?
Ok, it was a typo. 3085 it is (now), and the era corrected as well.
Thanks for catching that. (And proving that somebody is looking at the <Base> entrees, for whatever reason.)
Oddly enough, I would've believed it. This is BattleTech after all, and in our universe, just about anything is possible.
I look at the <Base> because you can't have a pod configuration with a date earlier then the base was available. So they just jump out at me.
-
Oddly enough, I would've believed it. This is BattleTech after all, and in our universe, just about anything is possible.
I look at the <Base> because you can't have a pod configuration with a date earlier then the base was available. So they just jump out at me.
I meant looking at them for a reason other than to point out we messed up something :).
-
I meant looking at them for a reason other than to point out we messed up something :).
What better reason to do something then to find someone else's flaws? That gets me in trouble with the wife, we'll see how it works out for me here.
-
Purifier Adaptive Battle Armor [PPC]
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2605/purifier-adaptive-battle-armor-ppc (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2605/purifier-adaptive-battle-armor-ppc)
AS strike point value shows 1 point. I believe it should be 4 points.
(http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/2605?skill=4)
-
Purifier Adaptive Battle Armor [PPC]
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2605/purifier-adaptive-battle-armor-ppc (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2605/purifier-adaptive-battle-armor-ppc)
AS strike point value shows 1 point. I believe it should be 4 points.
You are correct. Point Value has been changed to 4. (Cards take up to 24 hours to be redrawn).
Thanks.
-
What better reason to do something then to find someone else's flaws? That gets me in trouble with the wife, we'll see how it works out for me here.
Yes, but I was looking for a reason to do the work of creating the missing <base> models. Doing so just so somebody can point out flaws isn't motivating me very much :).
-
The Sylph-XR battle armor is listed in the MUL as 294 and in the RS in XTRO Clans as being 221.
Edit: Another one Elemental II X, MUL value: 322, XTRO Clans value: 296
-
Gray Death Heavy Suit, listed as being in RS3085 CE should be RS3085 ONN
-
The Sylph-XR battle armor is listed in the MUL as 294 and in the RS in XTRO Clans as being 221.
Edit: Another one Elemental II X, MUL value: 322, XTRO Clans value: 296
The MUL is intended as the offical BV list. It's supposed to list corrected BVs. Now, if you've done the math and gotten a different answer (if using software to calculate, there's usually an option to show it's work and copy/paste that), then we've got a problem to discuss... but there's no need to list where we've corrected a BV. That's the MUL's job.
-
Gray Death Heavy Suit, listed as being in RS3085 CE should be RS3085 ONN
Fixed.
-
Mackie 5S- listed as available to the lyrans in jihad era & early republic.
Macki 6S- listed as available to the FWL in jihad era & early republic.
According to the TRO the Mackie, and all his variants, have been extinct by the end of the liberation of terra, with the 5s only available as a museum piece even before the Amaris rebellion.
-
The Mackie was put back into production after 3075 - see the Objectives PDFs for the Lyran Alliance and Free Worlds League.
-
The Hatamoto-Suna-Z (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/6419?skill=4) probably should have its C3BM trait changed to C3BSM to make it in line with the notation used for other Boosted C3 masters in the MUL.
-
Are the two Historical: Liberation of Terra volumes set to have their respective units added to the Master Unit List at some point?
And, if so, would the AEM-01 Dragoon likely get separate entries (and Unit Cards) for its noted variants; or would each of those need to be given official Record Sheets in "classic" BattleTech first, before they could be written up in Alpha Strike terms?
-
Are the two Historical: Liberation of Terra volumes set to have their respective units added to the Master Unit List at some point?
Haven't look at them specifically, but if it's got a record sheet, then we'll add it.
And, if so, would the AEM-01 Dragoon likely get separate entries (and Unit Cards) for its noted variants; or would each of those need to be given official Record Sheets in "classic" BattleTech first, before they could be written up in Alpha Strike terms?
Depends. Generally we need the record sheet. Sometimes if it's obvious what the record sheet would be, we'll go ahead and add it anyway.
-
Haven't look at them specifically, but if it's got a record sheet, then we'll add it.
I see, thanks.
Depends. Generally we need the record sheet. Sometimes if it's obvious what the record sheet would be, we'll go ahead and add it anyway.
In this case, the "standard" AEM-01 has a Record Sheet on page 157 of H:LoT2. The Dragoon-02, -03, and -04 variant chasses do not, though there is some detail for each on page 144. (I'm not in a position to say if the descriptions there are enough to allow for any of them to be approximated right off the bat, or if one or moe of them would need to be formally published in Record Sheet form instead.)
-
Tiamat Pocket Warship (Standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5243/tiamat-pocket-warship-standard
No intro date. JHS:terra p.181, lists the first manned tiamat first seeing service in 3075.
-
LRM/SRM carriers (primitive)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5589/lrm-carrier-primitive
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5590/srm-carrier-primitive
"Age of war" is listed as intro date instead of era. Intro date is 2440, according to XTRO:primitives II p.12
Randolph support vehicle (standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5586/randolph-support-vehicle-standard
same as above. Intro is 2300 according to XTRO:primitives II p.10
-
The Alpha Strike stats for the HGN-641-X-2 Highlander from XTRO Comstar (pg. 7) is missing AECM in the abilities.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5552/highlander-hgn-641-x-2 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5552/highlander-hgn-641-x-2)
Xotl: corrected, thanks!
-
The Concordat-class frigate appears to have been misnamed as the Concordant on the MUL - I spotted it when I was looking for the Riga, and realised that was why I hadn't been able to find the Concordat when I was looking for it before.
Link: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3981/concordant-frigate-2506
-
The Concordat-class frigate appears to have been misnamed as the Concordant on the MUL - I spotted it when I was looking for the Riga, and realised that was why I hadn't been able to find the Concordat when I was looking for it before.
Thanks. fixed.
-
Tiamat Pocket Warship (Standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5243/tiamat-pocket-warship-standard
No intro date. JHS:terra p.181, lists the first manned tiamat first seeing service in 3075.
Indeed, thanks for pointing that out. Fixed.
-
Bug-Eye Surveillance Ship (Standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5801/bug-eye-surveillance-ship-standard
The Bug-Eye doesn't have an intro date listed; according to TR0: 2750 (p. 124 of the first printing) and ISP3: IE (p.114 of the pdf version), the intro date is 2620.
Xotl: fixed, thanks!
-
@nckestrel - about the Dragoon
I see, thanks.
In this case, the "standard" AEM-01 has a Record Sheet on page 157 of H:LoT2. The Dragoon-02, -03, and -04 variant chasses do not, though there is some detail for each on page 144. (I'm not in a position to say if the descriptions there are enough to allow for any of them to be approximated right off the bat, or if one or moe of them would need to be formally published in Record Sheet form instead.)
The AEM-02 and 03 work fine based on the variant description though the 02 leaves .5 ton leftover. Perhaps it should also have case but was not mentioned??
As for the 04 it will need a RS as I could only make it work by removing the jump jets. It also leaves which weapon gets the higher ammo tonnage, the SRM-4 or the Gauss.
The 02 may need an armor crit moved but only if you leave he ER PPC in its orginal right arm location and push the AC/20 in the left arm which is where you have 1 armor crit (Ferro-Fibrous). Beyond that I don't think see any reason you could not add it to the MUL.
The 03 requires a little more as far as crit placement for the Ferro-Fibrous as the ammo and case push 3 crits of FF armor to other locations. This based on the variant description:
each provided with two tons of ammunition (most, but not all, of which was contained within the CASE protected left torso magazine);
This is assuming that 4 tons of ammo and the case are placed in the left torso (having two lrm-15s in the LA and the third plus ammo in the RA/RT locations).
BV from MML
02 - 1712
03 - 1700
For the 04 I have two BVs
04 with 2 tons Gauss ammo 1752
04 with 2 tons STM-4 ammo 1695
Thats the best I could come up with based on variant specs (or the lack thereof for the 04). Hope its useful.
-
The Mackie was put back into production after 3075 - see the Objectives PDFs for the Lyran Alliance and Free Worlds League.
And production stopped by 3079, making them [obsolete]. The 5S uses primitive armor and tech, I can't see even the most backward lyran militia using it. With no spare parts wouldn't any and all government forces replace with just about anything? The certainly aren't in the RATs fro 3085 and 3145.
-
AC/2 Carrier (LB-X) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4/ac2-carrier-lb-x (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4/ac2-carrier-lb-x)
Missing the C3S and MHQ1 specials
-
And production stopped by 3079, making them [obsolete]. The 5S uses primitive armor and tech, I can't see even the most backward lyran militia using it. With no spare parts wouldn't any and all government forces replace with just about anything? The certainly aren't in the RATs fro 3085 and 3145.
They are certainly few, but we don't track few/many. They have several, and that's enough to be listed. The lists would certainly be much different if we removed everything no longer in production and/or not on RATs, that's not criteria we've excluded anything else on.
-
AC/2 Carrier (LB-X) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4/ac2-carrier-lb-x (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4/ac2-carrier-lb-x)
Missing the C3S and MHQ1 specials
Yep, fixed. Thanks.
-
It's a little thing:
Filtvelt coalition is listed as IS faction. Aren't they considered Periphery, like canopous and taurian?
-
It's a little thing:
Filtvelt coalition is listed as IS faction. Aren't they considered Periphery, like canopous and taurian?
They had Federated Suns units when they broke away..
I beleive we'd like to list them as IS General in Jihad, and move them to Periphery General post-Jihad, but there's not really a way to show it that way in the website right now.
-
Been looking for primitive combat vehicles, couldn't find any. So I looked them up by name, and the were all listed as support vehicles with IS tech, even those that have "(primitive)" in their names.
-
Been looking for primitive combat vehicles, couldn't find any. So I looked them up by name, and the were all listed as support vehicles with IS tech, even those that have "(primitive)" in their names.
Rules wise there is no such thing as a primitive combat vehicle.
Primitive BattleMechs have different rules from BattleMechs. "Primitive combat vehicles" are support vehicles in all ways as far as the rules of the game are concerned.
-
Been looking for primitive combat vehicles, couldn't find any. So I looked them up by name, and the were all listed as support vehicles with IS tech, even those that have "(primitive)" in their names.
There were some introduced in the XTRO: Primitive series, which have no modern version of them. Also the Record Sheets: 3075 Unabridged has some as well as Era Digest: Age of War has couple, they're listed on saran, if you type in search window Category:Primitive Combat Vehicles. Any unit that assoiciate or IS a primitive unit, will pop up. Its not perfect, but it has some things you can look over.
Bare in mind, some the primitive combat vehicles have been converted into succession war era tech as time went on.
-
looked up the barouche
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3793/barouche-military-transport-standard
The XTRO:retrotech says they're produced and sold mainly in fedsuns and terran protectorate as well as exported to the lyrans. In faction availability neither FS, LC or ROTS are listed, instead you have FWL, CC and MoC. Why is that?
-
looked up the barouche
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3793/barouche-military-transport-standard
The XTRO:retrotech says they're produced and sold mainly in fedsuns and terran protectorate as well as exported to the lyrans. In faction availability neither FS, LC or ROTS are listed, instead you have FWL, CC and MoC. Why is that?
A mistake. Somebody must have confused it with another unit. Fixed now.
-
A mistake. Somebody must have confused it with another unit. Fixed now.
That was quick O0 I assume the availability to DC is from salvage?
-
That was quick O0 I assume the availability to DC is from salvage?
sold not only in its native Federated Suns and the nearby Terran Protectorate, but also in the Lyran Alliance and Draconis Combine.
Seems the Federated Suns doesn't care to limit who they are selling the Barouche to.
-
The availability of the Hellstar (standard) seems wrong
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1481/hellstar-standard
The other variant are listed as available only to CHH and CWX (who manufacture it); I can understand how the lyrans and the dragoons&kell hounds, and even the republic got it, but where did the combine, capellan and fedsuns got it?
-
The Hellstar is being sold to them.
-
Nagasawa-class DropShip (Standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6580/nagasawa-class-dropship-standard
List availability as only clan sea fox. Should be IS clan general in DA, maybe even in late republic
TRO3145ME p.52: "The Nagasawa can be found in all Clans, either by purchase or Trial."
NCKestrel: yep, fixed. thanks.
-
The original Vengeance - now labeled Vengeance (2682) - has had its introduction date changed from the original 2782 to 2682, but the era has been left as Early Succession War (2781 - 2900).
Either the introduction date is a typo and should still be 2782 or the era needs to be changed to Star League (2571-2780).
If the introduction date was deliberately changed as a way of addressing the earliest reference to a Vengeance class, it's still not early enough - see SLSB p57 - so perhaps both need to be changed.
-
Rokurokubi RK-4X
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6394/rokurokubi-rk-4x
Tech base should be mixed. TRO3145DC, p.32, mention the 4X variant using clan-made ER PPC
Wendigo (and his variants)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6402/wendigo-prime
Should add availability to clan sea fox. TRO3145DC, p.36, mentions the DC trading them to the foxes, aswell as the foxes inning them in ToP.
NCKestrel: Thanks. RK-4X changed to mixed, Clan Sea Fox added to DA availability for Wendigos.
-
The original Vengeance - now labeled Vengeance (2682) - has had its introduction date changed from the original 2782 to 2682, but the era has been left as Early Succession War (2781 - 2900).
Either the introduction date is a typo and should still be 2782 or the era needs to be changed to Star League (2571-2780).
If the introduction date was deliberately changed as a way of addressing the earliest reference to a Vengeance class, it's still not early enough - see SLSB p57 - so perhaps both need to be changed.
Era needs to change to Star League
NCKestrel: aye, aye captain!
-
I think the entry for the Ballista Artillery Trailer ( http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6330/ballista-artillery-trailer-standard ) is actually displaying some old data for the Ballista Self-Propelled Artillery Tank (Standard) ( http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6775/ballista-self-propelled-artillery-tank-standard )
To start with for some reason it has a move of 6"t when it should be 0"t as it generates no MP, but the BSPAT does move that fast
The BAT mounts two Arrow-4 Launchers and 2 ER Medium Lasers in a turret so it should have TUR( 1/1/0, ARTAIS-2) not ARTS-1 which does match the BSPAT.
The BAT used a Fusion engine but is listed with EE, again appropriate for the BSPAT
The BAT also mounts several AMS systems, including one in the turret, this should give it the AMS
And this is just what I noticed with a quick glance
NCKestrel: Correct, it was listed just as Ballista, and I matched it up to the wrong unit. Corrected now.
-
Phoenix Hawk PXH-4L.
MUL lists BV as 1282. RSU 3085: Project Phoenix (p. 52) shows the BV as 1399.
-
Phoenix Hawk PXH-4L.
MUL lists BV as 1282. RSU 3085: Project Phoenix (p. 52) shows the BV as 1399.
The BV listed on printed record sheets is wrong in some cases, as it is here. What is listed in the MUL is indeed the correct value.
-
The BV listed on printed record sheets is wrong in some cases, as it is here. What is listed in the MUL is indeed the correct value.
Mordel is correct.
If you find a print product and the MUL disagree on something, assume the MUL is correct for the purpose of the immediate need (you're playing a game or something).
We still appreciate the notices because the MUL is not fool proof and sometimes it is in error. This is becoming less and less common as the MUL can be updated easily, print products cannot.
-
I noticed the Mercury MCY-98 isn't associated with a record sheet. Now it did come out in Record Sheets: 3025 & 3026. Is that not listed because it isn't one of the new Unabridged versions?
-
I noticed the Mercury MCY-98 isn't associated with a record sheet. Now it did come out in Record Sheets: 3025 & 3026. Is that not listed because it isn't one of the new Unabridged versions?
Correct, only RS generated under Total Warfare rules are considered valid for the MUL. When in doubt, if the RS doesn't same Catalyst Game Labs, it is probably not a current RS. There are a couple of exceptions, but for the most part all "current" RS have been made under the CGL flag.
-
Mortis MS-1P
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6467/mortis-ms-1p
availability seem to be wrong
3145CC says the 1P variant is cappie exclusive.
NCKestrel: thanks. no 1P's for anyone but Capellans now!
-
BattleAxe BKX-1X
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5584/battleaxe-bkx-1x
According to XTRO primitives II p.7 intro date should be 2459 not 2468.
NCKestrel: you are correct. Looks it got the Crossbow-X intro date mixed up. Fixed to 2459.
-
I notice the Dervish DV-6M (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/878/dervish-dv-6m) is listed in Starterbook: Sword and Dragon with a date of 2520, but the MUL lists a date of 2610. Curious which one is correct.
NCKestrel: MUL
-
The Owens OW-1B (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2386/owens-ow-1b) is listed with an intro of 3058 while all other configurations are 3056. Should this be 3056 as well?
NCKestrel: yes. 3056 it is (now).
-
Some possible errors I found while doing the latest updates for AB:
Spatha SP1-X - special REF should be RFA
Partisan Heavy Tank (Standard) - not used by Outworlds Alliance (TRO 3039 pp 88 "Deployment")
Crockett CRK-5003-0 should date be 2735 &era be Star League? (TRO 3025 Revised pp 108 "Overview")
Challenger MBT XII missing MHQ1 special
Nobori-nin (Huntsman) E has both TAG and LTAG?
SRM Carrier (WoB) should it have SRM6/6 instead of tur(6/6/0)?
Spartan SPT-NF should have case and not tag
Cougar G missing OMNI
Oro Heavy Tank (Standard) Missing FLK1/1/0
Schiltron Mobile Fire-Support Platform B (and F) supposed to have both IF5 and IF2?
-
The Partisan wasn't used by the OWA in 3039. That might not be the case by the Jihad.
-
Spatha SP1-X - special REF should be RFA
Corrected
Challenger MBT XII missing MHQ1 special
Corrected
Nobori-nin (Huntsman) E has both TAG and LTAG?
Corrected
SRM Carrier (WoB) should it have SRM6/6 instead of tur(6/6/0)?
Actually, the SRM Carrier (WoB) mounts Streak SRM-4s in a turret so it is correct as listed.
Spartan SPT-NF should have case and not tag
Corrected
Cougar G missing OMNI
Corrected
Oro Heavy Tank (Standard) Missing FLK1/1/0
Corrected
Schiltron Mobile Fire-Support Platform B (and F) supposed to have both IF5 and IF2?
Not an error. The Schiltron B and Schiltron F both have IF-capable weapons that are mounted in both the turret and the front firing arc. This gives them a larger IF ability when not splitting fire.
-
Jaguar and Jaguar 2 from TRO:3145 Lyran do not have Mercenary listed in their Faction Availability. The write up talks about three different mercenary units using them (Kell Hounds, Queen's Gambit, and the Dioscuri) while the intro paragraph has the design being a WiE shell company selling to the general market to compete with the Sea Foxes and another line about selling to mercenary units that ply their trade in the Lyran Commonwealth.
-
I've been working away at ranking how available various mechs are for my own amusement, and I have been using RAT tables as a sort of low ranked data point while I go through the factions. One thing I have noticed is that a lot of them list mechs that are not available according to the MUL - I have a pretty good list of mechs in Field Manual 3145 and Field Manual 3085 RAT's that the tables and MUL disagree on, including some of the most common rolls.
Is that something the MUL team would be interested in, or is that just written off as RAT's being wonky?
- Devin
-
Jaguar and Jaguar 2 from TRO:3145 Lyran do not have Mercenary listed in their Faction Availability. The write up talks about three different mercenary units using them (Kell Hounds, Queen's Gambit, and the Dioscuri) while the intro paragraph has the design being a WiE shell company selling to the general market to compete with the Sea Foxes and another line about selling to mercenary units that ply their trade in the Lyran Commonwealth.
Technically, they should have Mercenary and Kell Hounds. The KH and Wolf's Dragoons factions don't have access to the standard merc list.
-
More possible errata:
Heimdall Ground Monitor Tank B & C missing tracked move mode and SRCH
Eisensturm EST-O,EST-OA,EST-OB,EST-OC,EST-OD missing OMNI
Huscarl HSCL-O- (all) missing OMNI
Savage Coyote W has both LTAG and TAG (should be LTAG only)
Savage Coyote Z ability IATM1 mispelled.
Stygian Strike Tank (WoB) missing SRCH.
Tatsu MIK-O through MIK-OE missing OMNI.
-
Aerospace do not get OMNI, try can't carry battle armor on the outside handholds..
-
Heimdall Ground Monitor Tank B & C missing tracked move mode and SRCH
Savage Coyote W has both LTAG and TAG (should be LTAG only)
Savage Coyote Z ability IATM1 mispelled.
Stygian Strike Tank (WoB) missing SRCH.
fixed
Eisensturm EST-O,EST-OA,EST-OB,EST-OC,EST-OD missing OMNI
Huscarl HSCL-O- (all) missing OMNI
Tatsu MIK-O through MIK-OE missing OMNI.
noted by others
-
The card for the pollux lists the PV as 0. According to LoTII it should be around 8 pts.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6779/pollux-ada-heavy-tank-standard
Thanks and have a good one.
NCKestrel: BV and PV fixed. Card should update within 24 hours.
-
Mad Cat III 4 AS card should have the AMS special.
-
The Atlas III
D2 variant: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6359/atlas-iii-as7-d2
D3 variant: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6358/atlas-iii-as7-d3
Both are listed as standard IS. Should be advanced IS mixed (they both use clan weapons)
TRO3145FS: P.48-49
NCKestrel: Fixed. Thanks (and extra thanks for page numbers/links in all these!)
-
Mad Cat III 4 AS card should have the AMS special.
Fixed. It can take 24 hours for the card to refresh.
The Atlas III
D2 variant: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6359/atlas-iii-as7-d2
D3 variant: http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6358/atlas-iii-as7-d3
Both are listed as standard IS. Should be advanced IS mixed (they both use clan weapons)
TRO3145FS: P.48-49
Fixed.
-
I'm sorry to bring up the Mad Cat III 4 again but I'm also not entirely sure the damage block is correct; it has a long range value of two but the 'Mech has two LRM 20s. There very well could be a reason for this but as it stands this 'Mech has the same long range damage as an AS7-D which puts out half as many missiles.
-
I'm sorry to bring up the Mad Cat III 4 again but I'm also not entirely sure the damage block is correct; it has a long range value of two but the 'Mech has two LRM 20s. There very well could be a reason for this but as it stands this 'Mech has the same long range damage as an AS7-D which puts out half as many missiles.
LRM 20 = 12 damage. *2 = 24.
It only has 6 shots per launcher so it will get the low ammo penalty. 24 * .75 = 18.
18/10 = 1.8, rounds up to 2.
Note the AS7-D takes advantage of a lucky break to get it's 2 at long range. One LRM-20 is 12 damage. 12/10 = 1.2, rounds up to 2.
So they are two extremes of the 2 range (1.2 and 1.8), but they are both 2.
-
LRM 20 = 12 damage. *2 = 24.
It only has 6 shots per launcher so it will get the low ammo penalty. 24 * .75 = 18.
18/10 = 1.8, rounds up to 2.
Note the AS7-D takes advantage of a lucky break to get it's 2 at long range. One LRM-20 is 12 damage. 12/10 = 1.2, rounds up to 2.
So they are two extremes of the 2 range (1.2 and 1.8), but they are both 2.
Oops, okay I was way off then. Thanks for your help/time.
-
Arrow IV Assault Vehicle per TRO: CC 3145 has 1 Arrow IV launcher in turret 2, the Alpha Strike card has ARTAIS-2. Should this be ARTAIS-1? Looks like a typo to me.
NCKestrel: Forgot to note this had been corrected earlier.
-
More possible issues:
Corona Heavy Battle Armor missing movement mode "f"
Cobra Transport VTOL (Standard) missing SRCH
Merkava Heavy Tank Mk VII missing SRCH
Nephilim Assault Battle Armor missing movement mode "f"
Nighthawk PA(L) Mk. XXX (Bounty Hunter) missing movement mode "f"
O-65 "Oppie" Hazardous Materials Recovery Vehicle missing MASH rating of 11
O-66 "Oppie" Hazardous Materials Recovery Vehicle missing MASH rating of 11
Phalanx Battle Armor B & C missing movement mode "f"
Trinity Medium Battle Armor (Asterion) (all) missing movement mode "f"
Additionally, it might be a good idea to split each model "Oppie" into two units, one (Salvage Bed) and one (DeConAid), as they would have different special abilities. Just a thought.
NCKestrel: yes, on salvage bed and deconaid as separate units, no stats for them yet. the missing battle armor move codes and CV SRCH are added (cards will refresh within 24 hours).
-
Cavalry Attack Helicopter (Infiltrator)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3909/cavalry-attack-helicopter-infiltrator
Shouldn't be listed as "Unique".
According to TRO:Prototypes p.30 - "Full production started in the fall of 3085."
NCKestrel:It's listed as Unique for the Jihad era, and is not listed as unique for the Early Republic era.
While technically fall of 3085 is within the last year of the Jihad era, by the time it then got shipped to combat units we'd be talking maybe a month of service before the end of the era? I'd rather ignore that month then mark the entire Jihad era as non-unique.
-
Garuda Heavy VTOL (Standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4202/garuda-heavy-vtol-standard
According to TRO:PRO p.70 - is also produced by the exiled wolves (who cooperated with CHH in the development)
NCKestrel: Yep, thanks for pointing that out. Clan Wolf-in-Exile added.
-
Corona, Rogue Bear, and Golem standard Battle Armors are not listed with a record sheet compilation in the MUL. Tjhe same is true of teh Clan Medium Armor Bar and Rabid.
They are in RSU 3075: The Cutting Edge, however.
NCKestrel: Ok, that took longer than I expected. The entire rerelease of RS3075u was missed, splitting in to two books and all the new units that got added (battle armor, protomech, aerospace, dropships.). Should be fixed now. Thanks.
-
Swallow Attack WiGE (Standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6597/swallow-attack-wige-standard
Swallow Attack WiGE (Original)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6598/swallow-attack-wige-original
According to TRO3145:LC p.14-15, this two rules level should be Advanced instead of standard.
Bardiche Heavy Strike Tank (Standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6496/bardiche-heavy-strike-tank-standard
Bardiche Heavy Strike Tank (Minesweeper)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6497/bardiche-heavy-strike-tank-minesweeper
According to TRO3145:FWL p.18-19, this two rules level should be Advanced instead of standard.
Shun Transport VTOL (Standard)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6440/shun-transport-vtol-standard
Should have the STL AS trait, since it uses stealth armor. TRO3145:CC p.12-13
NCKestrel: All fixed now to the corrections noted above. Thanks.
-
Noticed something strange... While looking for AS trait, apparently order is important. Writing "ECM, STL" and "STL, ECM" would yield different results...
ECM, STL:
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasBFAbility=ecm%2C+stl&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=
And
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasBFAbility=stl%2C+ecm&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=
Edit: Also some of them are on both lists.
Looks like you need to put the traits alphabetically to get the full results.
NCKestrel: The Alpha Strike special abilities search doesn't really support multiple special abilities. It's a simple text search that will find exactly what you type in there. Searching for ECM,STL won't find one that has an entry of ECM,CASE,STL since the text doesn't exactly match. Limitation of how it works.
-
From an email:
4416/Kalki Cruise Missile Launcher: ARTCM-5 instead of ARTCM5 - it actually looks like the SturmFuer was the one that is wrong and not following the format of the other artillery specials
5831/Savage Coyote Z: ITAM1 instead of IATM1 - fixed back in April
6662/Scapha Hovertank D: I-NARC instead of INARC - fixed
6709/Celerity/CLR-04-R: Has TSEMP-O1 instead of TSEMP - unless I'm missing an updated recordsheet, it is a OS TSEMP and not a regular TSEMP.
6775/Ballista Self-Propelled Artillery Tank (Standard): Has ART-S1 instead of ARTS-1 - fixed
22/Akuma/AKU-2XC: Has C3BS instead of C3BSS - fixed
PAR and PARA are the same thing, but use different codes. One should be picked, PARA probably - PAR is correct per Alpha Strike Rulebook
The following units have PAR:
1364/HALO Paratrooper
3001/SpecOps Paratrooper/MI6 Extraction Team
5466/Assassin/Skåret Assassins, JàrnFòlk
And the following units have PARA:
3166/Tau Wraith Manei Domini/"Tau Wraith" Recon Squad - fixed
6581/GD Infiltrator Suit/<Base> - not needed.
6582/GD Infiltrator Suit/[Firedrake] - fixed
6583/GD Infiltrator Suit/[TAG] - fixed
6584/GD Infiltrator Suit/[Sensors] - fixed
6585/GD Infiltrator Suit/[Remote Sensors] - fixed
6586/GD Infiltrator Suit/[Mines] - fixed
-
Infiltrator Battle Armour Mk I- http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Infiltrator+Mk.+I+Battle+Armor (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Infiltrator+Mk.+I+Battle+Armor)
Full name for the Infiltrator is listed as "Infiltrator Mk .I Battle Armor Mk I." - Name is redundant, one of the Mk .I should be removed
NCKestrel: Fixed, thanks.
-
The Tyre 3
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5315/tyre-3
TRO:Prototypes, P.194
Early republic Era faction availability should be Ghost Bears and Hell Horses.
Persepolis (Standard)
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4806/persepolis-standard
TRO:Prototypes, P.196
Early republic Era faction availability should be Jade falcons.
Hydaspes 3
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4351/hydaspes-3
TRO:Prototypes, P.198
Early republic Era faction availability should be IS Clan general.
NCKestrel: We haven't done any post-Jihad faction availability for anything except TR3145 units. TR Prototypes has an in universe date of 3090, at the very beginning of the Early Republic era. We need to figure out/make up, what happened after 3090 before we can say what the "final" faction availability for the era will be. Ie. Just giving reasons why this isn't being just added as is. The answer would (possibly) be incomplete.
-
Just noting that the units in Historical Turning Point: New Dallas are not yet on. Not sure if this warrants much else.
-
Partisan Air Defense Tank (LRM) should it have an LRMx/x/x special ability?
-
Partisan Air Defense Tank (LRM) should it have an LRMx/x/x special ability?
No. BattleForce and Alpha Strike do not allow LRM launcher with artemis to use special munitions (they're always using artemis missiles), so they don't get the LRM special ability.
-
Just noting that the units in Historical Turning Point: New Dallas are not yet on. Not sure if this warrants much else.
The units from XTRO: Gunslingers are also absent (apologies if this is known and they simply haven't been entered yet)
-
I've been working away at ranking how available various mechs are for my own amusement, and I have been using RAT tables as a sort of low ranked data point while I go through the factions. One thing I have noticed is that a lot of them list mechs that are not available according to the MUL - I have a pretty good list of mechs in Field Manual 3145 and Field Manual 3085 RAT's that the tables and MUL disagree on, including some of the most common rolls.
Is that something the MUL team would be interested in, or is that just written off as RAT's being wonky?
- Devin
Yes, please list them/send them. Thanks.
-
WarWolf Prime and C both list TMM as 3 and the best I can see it getting is a 2. It can only move 10" and jump for 4". Moving 10" is just a +2, Jumping 4" is +0 for the distance and +1 for jumping for a total of +1. As I understand the Rules on moving.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6287/warwolf-prime
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6290/warwolf-c
-
More possible errors:
Fensalir Combat WiGE (Infantry) missing g movement mode
Gray Death Heavy Suit (Standard) missing f movement mode
Kopis Assault Battle Armor (Anti-Infantry) missing f movement mode
Trinity Medium Battle Armor (Asterion Upgrade) [MRR] missing f movement mode
Trinity Medium Battle Armor (Asterion Upgrade) [PPC] missing f movement mode
Padilla Tube Artillery has Jihad availability as Republic o/t Sphere
Ranger Armored Fighting Vehicle VV2 has Jihad availability as Republic o/t Sphere
Angerona Scout Suit has Jihad availability as Republic o/t Sphere
Angerona Scout Suit missing f movement mode
Barouche Military Transport has Jihad availability as Republic o/t Sphere
Carnivore Assault Tank (Second Line) missing FLK1/1/1 seperate from TUR()
Challenger MBT XIVs missing FLK1/1/1 seperate from TUR()
Gürteltier MBT (C3M) missing FLK1/1/1 seperate from TUR()
Kinnol MBT (Standard) missing FLK1/1/1 seperate from TUR()
Tau Wraith Manei Domini "Tau Wraith" Recon Squad missing MHQ2 and PARA should be PAR
Trinity Medium Battle Armor (Asterion Upgrade) [MRR] missing f movement mode
Trinity Medium Battle Armor (Asterion Upgrade) [PPC] missing f movement mode
Vedette Medium Tank (Cell) missing FLK1/1/1 seperate from TUR()
Foot Ballistic Rifle Hastati V, 513th Infantry Regiment ability CAR3 spelled Car3
Tempest TMP-3M record sheet and TRO data transposed
NCKestrel: Thanks. The Alpha Strike corrections above are correct except the Tau Wraith MHQ. As will be stated in the Alpha Strike Companion. These corrections won't be showing up on the MUL for a bit though. We've got a series of corrections/additions being done because of ASC (or just AS errata) that are in progress, and I made the corrections there..
-
Unless I'm mistaken the Carronade AS card should have the FLK special.
NCKestrel: Yep. FLK1/1/1. Added to the Work in progress AS stats... Thanks.
-
The MUL reports the following WarShips as not having Record Sheets.
The following have RS in JPT:Luthien
Baron Destroyer (Standard) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3792/baron-destroyer-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3792/baron-destroyer-standard)
Carson Destroyer (Standard) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3902/carson-destroyer-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3902/carson-destroyer-standard)
The following have RS in JTP:Sian
Feng Huang (Standard) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4160/feng-huang-cruiser-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4160/feng-huang-cruiser-standard)
Feng Huang (Upgrade) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4161/feng-huang-cruiser-upgrade (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4161/feng-huang-cruiser-upgrade)
Vincent Mk 39 http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5351/vincent-corvette-mk-39 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5351/vincent-corvette-mk-39)
The following have RS in JTP:Tharkad
Fox (Standard) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4183/fox-corvette-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4183/fox-corvette-standard)
McKenna (2652) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4609/mckenna-battleship-2652 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4609/mckenna-battleship-2652)
Mjolnir (Standard) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4647/mjolnir-battlecruiser-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4647/mjolnir-battlecruiser-standard)
Sovetskii Soyuz (2742) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5099/sovetskii-soyuz-heavy-cruiser-2742 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5099/sovetskii-soyuz-heavy-cruiser-2742)
Tharkad (WoB) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5220/tharkad-battlecruiser-wob (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5220/tharkad-battlecruiser-wob)
The following have RS in JTP:New Avalon
Riga Frigate (Standard) http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4922/riga-frigate-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4922/riga-frigate-standard)
Also, the Caspar M5 and M5C drones appear not to be in the MUL at all, although they have RS in Historical: Liberation of Terra I
-
Possible date issue:
SRM Foot Infantry Taurian Citizens Militia.
Shows it was established in 2500 according to the MUL, but with the Taurian Concordat coming into being in 2335 and the SRM invented in 2370, wouldn't it make sense to have Militia as the same time as SRM is introduced or shortly after it?
-
Possible date issue:
SRM Foot Infantry Taurian Citizens Militia.
Shows it was established in 2500 according to the MUL, but with the Taurian Concordat coming into being in 2335 and the SRM invented in 2370, wouldn't it make sense to have Militia as the same time as SRM is introduced or shortly after it?
No. Just because the technology existed does not mean the Tuarians started using it then.
-
I don't know if this is errata or not...
Currently when doing a search (Faction - Capellan Confederation, Sub Type - Battlemech, Production Era - Age of War, Star League, & Early Succession War)...anything listed as Inner Sphere General does not show up.
I think if they are Inner Sphere General, shouldn't they just show up, or do I always have to select Inner Sphere General in the "Faction" listing?
Feel free to delete this if I'm just a bit slow today, just thought they would always show if they are general and we would not have to select the specific listing each time.
Thanks
EDIT DUE TO MESSAGE BELOW - Thanks Weirdo!
-
...or do I always have to select Inner Sphere General in the "Faction" listing?
This is correct. Selecting CapCon gets you everything that's specifically CapCon. To get everything a faction has access to, you have to select that faction and any general lists that apply.
-
I noticed that you have changed the MUL's user interface.
1) Please list all units (even those without BV) as default option. There are many units without BV,
2) Basic Filters
I don't know what to enter where, as all I can see is this:
(https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/a1e1/43i5b8z2a3ycup96g.jpg)
3) Please change the font back, as it use to be.
4) Divide units into "tabs" (or how to call it) according main unit types (such as BattleMech, VTOL, Battle Armor, etc, as it used to be, please.
5) Please delete those barely recognizable black icons.
-
The screen for me shows all listings in that box fully. It could be that your resolution is too low, mine was that way at work as we have smaller monitors there (17"), or your using it on a Phone/Tablet...I have the same issue there. Once I pushed up the res a bit, it was fine. At home, I've never had a problem as I have a 28" monitor, but I don't even run the browser full screen, roughly about 3/5 of the screen is used.
As far as your other complaints, I agree with you on the BV listings. Font looks ok to me, just different. Tab/Links were nice, but this is fine too, just have to get used to it. As far as the icons, I can see them fully.
-
Yep, shows full for me....unless I change the size of the reading pane (browser window), then it tries to fit things in and the boxes eventually become compressed to where you cannot fully read them.
-
The only thing I have to ask on the new redesign is reinstating the sort buttons on the list headings (the little arrows next to the name, tonnage, BV, intro date, etc.). Those were useful in finding particular units quicker.
-
The only thing I have to ask on the new redesign is reinstating the sort buttons on the list headings (the little arrows next to the name, tonnage, BV, intro date, etc.). Those were useful in finding particular units quicker.
yes, please
-
It seems that the UI has been modified overnight. It's much better now. Thank you.
But there are still two things:
1) Listing all units, even without BV as default behavior.
Every time I am looking for something, I still have to go to "Basic Filters" and then uncheck that option to make sure that I see all units (and that unneedful clicking gets old really fast).
2) Show complete list of factions to choose from.
I remember that the first original version of MUL had such functionality. I used to click on "Factions" and then I just clicked on factions I was interested in. It was very simple and convenient.
But now the searching is much more complicated. It will be best if I show you it on example: When I am searching for available units for my faction, firstly I must click on "Factions". Then I must write "Free" and wait until the autocomplete offers me "Free Worlds League". I click on it. Then I must write "Free" and wait again until the autocomplete offers me "Free Worlds League (Marik-Stewart Commonwealth)". I click on it again. Then I repeat it again for Free Worlds League (Tamarind) and I click again. Then I repeat it again for the Free Worlds League (Rim Commonality) and click again. Then again for Oriente. etc.
It means a lot of clicking, writing and waiting ..., especially if in the original MUL UI it was a matter of two seconds, as I said.
-
If I list units by tonnage the variants of the same unit are often spread out which makes it quite annoying to find stuff. For example I get 4 Stingers then 8 other mechs (Locusts Wasps ect) until I get the next two Stingers,
-
If I list units by tonnage the variants of the same unit are often spread out which makes it quite annoying to find stuff. For example I get 4 Stingers then 8 other mechs (Locusts Wasps ect) until I get the next two Stingers,
Use SHIFT-Click and you can sort by more then one column at a time.
-
Did not know, works well, thank you. O0
However I think the main problem I have is that units with a Star (those shown in the TRO) are kept seperately from those units without a Star- which leads to the chaos I mentioned. I have all 'stared' units first, then the variants.
-
Ah yes, for that I need to put the stars into their own table cell, THAT'S why I had it that way before (I wondered). Will update today.
-
When sorting units by column, clicking on era has no effect (it seems everything else is functions as-intended)
-
Spectre BA, found in TRO 3145 Mercenaries.
Can be found twice on the Periphery General RAT in Era Report 3145 (pg. 178) and was described in the TRO as have being spread all over the IS and Periphery.
Yet only a few factions have access to it in the MUL. Suggestion: Add it to Periphery General List.
-
When I try to use the MUL by going to faction then click on an era I am getting this message for most eras on most factions:
"Server Error in '/' Application.
The cast to value type 'Single' failed because the materialized value is null. Either the result type's generic parameter or the query must use a nullable type."
The late republic era tends to work properly, but anything before that and that message appears. I have tried using 2 or 3 browsers and get the same error.
-
I've been getting the same error. Jihad and Early Republic return the same error. Units still show available based on era but only from the unit page. Clicking on the faction icon from a unit page returns the same error.
-
Force Builder seems to no longer allow multiples of the same 'Mech to be added into a force. It allows the first one, and then afterwards does not allow further of the same, even if I go to another 'Mech and return to the one I wanted to add.
-
When I try to use the MUL by going to faction then click on an era I am getting this message for most eras on most factions:
"Server Error in '/' Application.
The cast to value type 'Single' failed because the materialized value is null. Either the result type's generic parameter or the query must use a nullable type."
The late republic era tends to work properly, but anything before that and that message appears. I have tried using 2 or 3 browsers and get the same error.
I've been getting the same error. Jihad and Early Republic return the same error. Units still show available based on era but only from the unit page. Clicking on the faction icon from a unit page returns the same error.
That's some sort of internal error on the server side. We'll have to have Sky look into it. I've moved the error reports here since this tends to be somewhere a lot of the MUL Team keeps an eye on.
-
Searching for Periphery General yields results that should not be available.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Era/FactionEraDetails?FactionId=57&EraId=16
-
@Klat: looks to me like there is also the IS general list included in this query.
-
When I try to use the MUL by going to faction then click on an era I am getting this message for most eras on most factions:
"Server Error in '/' Application.
The cast to value type 'Single' failed because the materialized value is null. Either the result type's generic parameter or the query must use a nullable type."
The late republic era tends to work properly, but anything before that and that message appears. I have tried using 2 or 3 browsers and get the same error.
Working on this one...
-
Force Builder seems to no longer allow multiples of the same 'Mech to be added into a force. It allows the first one, and then afterwards does not allow further of the same, even if I go to another 'Mech and return to the one I wanted to add.
Do you Internet Explorer? I'm in Chrome and able to add multiples. I'm wondering if it's a browser cache issue. I'll see about adding a random variable to the url so that the browser sees it as new each time.
-
Skyhigh, that may be the issue. When I posted that, I was using IE. The next day, using Firefox, I had no problem with multiples.
-
League (WarShip) - Standard (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4486/league-warship-standard)
Source - Field Report 2765: FWLM - Pages 23-27
The entry for the League Warship needs to be updated.
The Battle Value for the Standard unit is now available via FR2765: FWLM. Also, the entry may need to be updated since the standard version is now list also as the Block I. A second variant listed by the same Field Report with its own battle value and introduction date. This new variant is missing from the MUL.
-
How do I login to the master unit list? there is no option to make a account or lost password.
-
Logins are currently only for MUL team members to make edits, so there's no way for anyone else to make a login or change a password.
-
I was wondering if it was possible to add an option to the basic filters of the MUL?
I would like to see the checkbox: Units w/Miniature
-
Entry on MUL: Ymir BWP-X1 is listed as being in the Record Sheets: 3075 Unabridged The Age Of War. This is incorrect, it is listed in the older Record Sheets: 3075 Unabridged.
-
Entry on MUL: Historical: Liberation of Terra Volume 2. The following are marked as having a record sheet in this book, but there is no record sheet for the vehicle...
LB-X Carrier (Ambush)
LB-X Carrier (Ultra)
-
Currently, the Inner Sphere General list includes all 3050 invasion era Clan Omnimechs.
Is this correct? It seems wrong to me.
Best Regards,
Mad
-
The Master Unit List was updated today with new Alpha Strike cards using the new Point Values (PV), Minimal Damage rule (0*), special abilities (REAR, FUEL, etc) from the Alpha Strike Companion. If the unit has a card, as of today, it has been updated.
Battle Armor is currently showing 4-man squads for Alpha Strike cards. We've got a new system in place to allow each Battle Armor to have a separate card for 4, 5 and 6 man squads, but we're still working on how to get the data in the database. For now, it's showing 4-man squads only.
-
Currently, the Inner Sphere General list includes all 3050 invasion era Clan Omnimechs.
Is this correct? It seems wrong to me.
Best Regards,
Mad
By the Jihad era, the Great Houses each have multiple regiments with 10-15% Clan tech. They need something to fill those spots with.
-
Maybe I'm doing something wrong but I'm getting different damage values for the MAL-XT Malice.
Currently it shows 2/3/2 I'm getting 4/4/2. I will check my numbers again.
-
MAL-XT. At medium range.
4 * LB5-X = 4 * .315 = 1.26.
4 * ERML = 4 * .5 = 2
3.26 total medium damage.
24 heat sink dissipation and (26 heat generated -4) means we don't have to worry about heat.
Plenty of ammo.
3.26 rounds up to 4.
I'm seeing a 4 at medium as well. And a 3 at short (LB5-Xs drop to .236, for total 2.944 damage, rounds up to 3).
EDIT: and that should change the PV to 43. data changed, card should update within 24 hours.
-
Oops, I used the wrong short range value for the LB-X ACs. Somewhere I convinced myself it was .260 ???
Glad I'm not completely wrong though :)
-
Alpha Strike TMM modifiers for the Mist Lynx (all versions) and the Shadow Cat (all versions).
Currently reading "4" for the TMM but I worked it out (for both mechs) as "3".
-
Alpha Strike TMM modifiers for the Mist Lynx (all versions) and the Shadow Cat (all versions).
Currently reading "4" for the TMM but I worked it out (for both mechs) as "3".
for all units, the TMM shouldn't include the jumping movement (at all). So both of those are wrong, as you say they should be 3. But also the VND-1R should be a 1, not a 2, etc.
The TMM is generated automatically by the site, so pinging our site wizard for this. May be a while to correct.
-
for all units, the TMM shouldn't include the jumping movement (at all). So both of those are wrong, as you say they should be 3. But also the VND-1R should be a 1, not a 2, etc.
The TMM is generated automatically by the site, so pinging our site wizard for this. May be a while to correct.
Thanks for the reply. Useful knowing that the Jump modifier doesn't automatically go on the card, I can always adjust some of the cards in the meantime.
-
Skyhigh fixed it already actually :).
-
I'm trying to search for special abilities using the filter function on the MUL, but it no longer seems to be working since the update.
-
I'm trying to search for special abilities using the filter function on the MUL, but it no longer seems to be working since the update.
Fixed. And the ability to search by AS Role has been added as well. The role options are None, Scout, Striker, Skirmisher, Juggernaut, Brawler, Missile Boat, Sniper, Ambusher, Interceptor, Fast Dogfighter, Dogfighter, Fire-Support, , Attack, Transport
-
Fixed. And the ability to search by AS Role has been added as well. The role options are None, Scout, Striker, Skirmisher, Juggernaut, Brawler, Missile Boat, Sniper, Ambusher, Interceptor, Fast Dogfighter, Dogfighter, Fire-Support, , Attack, Transport
Could you please make a list of roles and abilities and maybe place it in the help section?
-
Hi are the mechs of Record Sheets: Operation Klondike still in the works. I cannot seem to find the cards on MUL.
Also
The card for the Celerity CLR-03-OA and CLR-03-Oc seems off. According to their cards they have no damage capacity. They have zero at all ranges. CLR-03-OA is armed with 2 one shot Clan SRM 6 and CLR-03-OC is armed with 2 ER Flamers. Can you look into this. Thanks
-
All the *'s from the 0*'s got lost in the import. The S, M and L fields were not created to allow non-numbers. There some significant database changes that need to be made to allow them, so it's taking a while to correct.
-
"Unit Role" probably shouldn't be listed with the data at the top. It's not necessarily applicable since the only game use is Alpha Strike force building (and it's already listed on the corresponding Alpha Strike card).
-
Possible Error with the:
Ares Assault Craft Mark VII - http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3727/ares-assault-craft-mark-vii the MUL shows 200 tons but TRO3057r has them at 150 tons.
Not sure which is correct.
-
The Nekohono'o (SCL) is listed as being in the 3085 ONN Record Sheet pdf. This is incorrect.
-
The Hippogriff protomech Alpha Strike card seems to be a bit wonky, with armor and the point cost seeming to be way too high.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6577/hippogriff-protomech-standard
-
Corrected. Thank you much. The card should update in the next day.
-
Corrected. Thank you much. The card should update in the next day.
Groovy, thanks a lot!
-
BV of Orc 3 is listed at 167 when it should be 168. Pedantic, I know, but since I've been calculating BV today...might as well put it to use.
EDIT:
-BV of Procyon 5 listed at 179, should be 196
-BV of Procyon 4 listed at 191, should be 182
-BV of Procyon 3 listed at 169, should be at 163
-BV of Orc 4 listed at 137, should be at 138
-BV of Orc 5 listed at 170, should be at 174
I calculated these by hand, the math matches up with the Record Sheets. The rest of the protos should be OK.
-
Hello,
I posted this in the AS board, but maybe this is the right place.
A double check on the iconic Hunchback IIC.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1568/hunchback-iic-standard (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1568/hunchback-iic-standard)
My calculations get me a AS stat of 4/4/0 and a OV 2 for this brawler.
(3*.75)+(3*.75)+.7+.7 = 5.9 FRU to 6 for max damage. 75% on the UAC/20s for lack of ammo.
24 (HS) / (14+14+7+7+4-4) = .63 * 5.9 = 3.7 FRU to 4 for Standard damage.
Please let me know the above calculation is correct.
Thanks
-
The heat for the ER medium lasers should be 5 instead of 7 but yes, your final results are correct. With that change the PV is adjusted to 27. The correction should be available within the next day. Thank you much!
-
Thanks for the confirmation.
Do you guys, those that maintain the MUL, want these kind of messages?
Just wondering. Don't want to be annoying.
-
Yes, definitely. Either we are fixing something we got wrong, or helping somebody figure out the conversion rules. Either way is a good thing.
-
Hello All,
Another crosscheck and the subject is the Black Knight 12.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/356/black-knight-bl-12-knt (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/356/black-knight-bl-12-knt)
I am looking at the Long Range Damage value.
For Long Range the Mech has one ER PPC tied to a Targeting computer.
Damage is 1 * 1.1 (TC) = 1.1 and FRU = 2. There is no reduction of damage for heat at long range. 17 Heat and 32 HS.
Yep it's a 1 point wonder.
Thanks
-
I believe the availability for the Vulpes may require review. Reading the TRO (pdf) entry the deployment section states that the Vulpes is in use by both the DCMS and CCAF and may appear in at least one mercenary command. While I understand that it may exist in such limited numbers among mercenaries that MUL availability is not necessary my reading of the entry leads me to believe that the Vulpes should be listed as available to the DCMS and CCAF.
-
The availability of the Vulpes is correct. There's simply not enough in DCMS or CCAF hands to be any more notable for them than for mercs.
-
The availability of the Vulpes is correct. There's simply not enough in DCMS or CCAF hands to be any more notable for them than for mercs.
Good enough for me. Thanks for checking it out.
I'm really not surprised as from what I understand units must be available in significant quantity to qualify for MUL availability.
I can't imagine what a chore availability must be for the MUL team.
If it's already been addressed I apologize but are there any guidelines for determining availability? I realize that the MUL team is forced to make a lot of judgment calls but if community members can help I'm sure many of us would.
-
There are no rules, but some general guidelines we use are
1) what the source says :). though as with the Vulpes, that often still leaves a lot of arguing. i meant debate, right?
2) there must be multiple of the unit in multiple regiments/clusters.
a) one "common" exception to this is if otherwise the unit would not be available to anyone at all. Uniques for example. The jihad era Assassin that only had one production run. etc.
3) unless a source specifically mentions it as available in numbers (see #2 above), we don't add for salvage. The list would explode into meaninglessness pretty quickly.
4) lately, for the last couple TRs, we get a document before the TR entry is even written that says which factions it should be available to.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3052/stealth-sth-1d (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3052/stealth-sth-1d)
One of my favorite recon mechs...
Should the Stealth -1D have SRM Special ability of SRM 1/1/0?
It has a standard SRM 6, enough ammo, and no heat issues.
SRM 6 is .8 damage in AS and Fractions Round normal for special abilities thus round to 1 point.
Please let me know if I am missing something
Thanks
-
You need a minimum of 10 damage to qualify for SRM, LRM, or AC specials
-
Thanks for the clarification.
I read the paragraph in the Alpha Strike companion as 1 point after rounding normally gets you the ability. The best way I will remember this, and this may help others in their conversion, is that for those three abilities, SRM, LRM, and AC, less than 1 damage rounds to zero and all other cases round normal.
Unfortunately, I have to go back a fix some custom AS cards. :(
-
Giving a pump to my Black Knight question.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/356/black-knight-bl-12-knt (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/356/black-knight-bl-12-knt)
Long Range Damage value for the Black Knight -12. At long range the Mech has one ER PPC tied to a Targeting computer.
Calc is...
Damage is 1 * 1.1 (TC) = 1.1 and FRU = 2. There is no reduction of damage for heat at long range. 17 Heat and 32 HS.
Is this correct?
Thanks
-
There are no rules, but some general guidelines we use are
1) what the source says :). though as with the Vulpes, that often still leaves a lot of arguing. i meant debate, right?
2) there must be multiple of the unit in multiple regiments/clusters.
a) one "common" exception to this is if otherwise the unit would not be available to anyone at all. Uniques for example. The jihad era Assassin that only had one production run. etc.
3) unless a source specifically mentions it as available in numbers (see #2 above), we don't add for salvage. The list would explode into meaninglessness pretty quickly.
4) lately, for the last couple TRs, we get a document before the TR entry is even written that says which factions it should be available to.
While we are at this- any news about the Spectre Ba's availability for the periphery ( Qurey I had posted here the last time:
Spectre BA, found in TRO 3145 Mercenaries.
Can be found twice on the Periphery General RAT in Era Report 3145 (pg. 178) and was described in the TRO as have being spread all over the IS and Periphery.
Yet only a few factions have access to it in the MUL. Suggestion: Add it to Periphery General List.
?
Or is this one of the cases where- while the RAT and TRO indicates it widely spread- the unit's numbers in most periphery states is too low to get them mentioned in the MUL?
-
While we are at this- any news about the Spectre Ba's availability for the periphery ( Qurey I had posted here the last time:
?
Or is this one of the cases where- while the RAT and TRO indicates it widely spread- the unit's numbers in most periphery states is too low to get them mentioned in the MUL?
The TRO3145 development notes for the Spectre list mercs, Filtvelt, Ravens and Calderon Protectorate as the factions that field the unit, as reflected by the MUL. The TRO fluff is meant to convey that the suit spread from the Prot to the Ravens and Filtvelt, plus to mercs. Those seen across the Per/IS are meant to be in merc service. RATs are always an imperfect guide, providing a quick and dirty way of building a force, with the Spectre results on the Per (Gen) table in ER3145 meant to recognize the large numbers of Spectres in Prot, Ravens and Filtvelt hands, plus (secondary) the possibilities of mercs serving a Per employer. Other Per states might pick up a few Spectres, probably for evaluation if nothing else, but numbers will be way low and thus not enough for a MUL entry.
-
Giving a pump to my Black Knight question.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/356/black-knight-bl-12-knt (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/356/black-knight-bl-12-knt)
Long Range Damage value for the Black Knight -12. At long range the Mech has one ER PPC tied to a Targeting computer.
Calc is...
Damage is 1 * 1.1 (TC) = 1.1 and FRU = 2. There is no reduction of damage for heat at long range. 17 Heat and 32 HS.
Is this correct?
Thanks
correct, the value has been changed, the card should update within 24 hours.
thanks.
-
Warhammer IIC 8 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3507/warhammer-iic-8) appears to be missing a role. If this has been addressed already I apologize.
This appears to be corrected. Thank you.
-
It appears that other units that previously had role assignments no longer do. I can't seem to find a pattern to it.
-
It appears that other units that previously had role assignments no longer do. I can't seem to find a pattern to it.
Like which ones?
-
Like which ones?
Wolverine II (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3585/wolverine-ii-wvr-7h) was a recent one I spotted.
I'll try to list more as I find them. Unfortunately, I'm at work so I may not be able to do this quickly.
EDIT: It appears much of 3075 is not displaying roles.
EDIT 2 edit harder: Wight (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3546/wight-wgt-1lawsc) and Koschei (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1820/koschei-ksc-3i) were the ones that clued me in to the 3075 issue. I'm going to go through some other sources during my break.
-
It appears that 3075 and XTRO sourced units are often not displaying roles.
-
Yeah, I got a list of missing roles. Just figuring out how best to fix them.
-
So...is anyone looking into the BV fixes I posted for Protos?
I checked a *ton* of protos as part of a fix for megamek, and I'm nearly 100% certain that the values I posted are right. If I'm calculating them wrong, could someone let me know?
-
So...is anyone looking into the BV fixes I posted for Protos?
I checked a *ton* of protos as part of a fix for megamek, and I'm nearly 100% certain that the values I posted are right. If I'm calculating them wrong, could someone let me know?
From the first post: "- If it's a BV correction, please enclose or attach your entire BV calculation and how you made it (by hand, SSW, MML, Heavy Metal etc; include version number of any software used)."
Thanks.
-
From the first post: "- If it's a BV correction, please enclose or attach your entire BV calculation and how you made it (by hand, SSW, MML, Heavy Metal etc; include version number of any software used)."
Thanks.
What if the record sheets have those different BV values as well? I really don't want to write up the math again.
-
4) lately, for the last couple TRs, we get a document before the TR entry is even written that says which factions it should be available to.
I'm kind of a fanatic about the availability issue, is there any chance for documents regarding the faction availabilities will become available to the public?
Also, when exactly did the practice start (year or TR)?
-
I'm kind of a fanatic about the availability issue, is there any chance for documents regarding the faction availabilities will become available to the public?
Also, when exactly did the practice start (year or TR)?
You'll know the information has been generated by it appearing on the MUL. The pre-production planning documents are wholly unsuitable for public consumption. All information from them is included in the Technical Readouts, Record Sheets, and MUL, in one form or another, unless changed during production for any number of reasons.
Trust me, you might think they'd be interesting, but they're really not. There's not even a special format or letterhead. It's basically just a table of contents with some notes. All that seeing the pre-production documents would do is start arguments ("Clan Wobbly Weasel was SUPPOSED to get the new UltraMech, but this was omitted during writing because Brock Writerman HATES THE CLANS!").
-
Scout DropShip entry (under 'Aerospace' units, cited source: Mercenary's Handbook 3055; I'm not talking about the Scout JumpShips found under 'Advanced Aerospace')
Error:
1. The image shown is that of a (Scout-class) JumpShip. The craft in question is a DropShip so this is definitely the wrong image. (Unit type correctly says "Aerospace - DropShip")
2. Not sure why the name is given as "Scout (Standard)"; this seems to be a carryover from the JumpShip of the same name which also has a Clan version and a subvariant in the Quetzalcoatl-class.
Suggested fix:
1. Remove image.
2. Rename DropShip entry to simply "Scout".
-
Standard is standard MUL naming nomenclature. It indicates which version of the unit it is. We tend to do this even when there is only one version as there may be another one in the future.
-
Copied from the site news
"Skyhigh added a new feature a while ago, I just wanted to point it out to everyone. Next to Units (in search, or on the Unit's page) is a +Force button. Clicking this button will give you a note about the unit being added to your force. You can do this multiple times, with the same unit or other units.
Then when you go to the Force page (from the top menu), you will see a list of all the units you have added to this Force. You can remove units if you'd like, or clear the entire Force.
Finally there's a Print icon in the upper right. From here you can choose to print a unit list (basically like you see on the page) or Alpha Strike cards (or both). This actually creates a PDF that you can then either save or print."
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2938/sholagar-sl-27x
Specials should add AECM.
PV should be 27 if I count correct:
Offensive: (2+2+2)+2 = 8
Defensive: (11 * 0.25) + 1 + (4 * 1.5) + 5 + (2 * 0.5) = 15.75
Total: 15.75 + 8 + 3 = 26.75 round to 27
Xotl: corrected, thanks.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4564/mad-cat-mk-ii-enhanced
The Mad Cat Mk II enhances should add CR to Special list because it uses hardened armor
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6892/thunder-fox-tdf-f11
The Thunder Fox F11 should add CR to Special list because it uses hardened armor
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6559/vulture-mk-iv-a
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6562/vulture-mk-iv-d
The The Vulture Mk IV should add CR to the Special list because it uses ferro-lamellor armor
-
Corrections made. No point changes that I'm aware of, though I'm not sure in the case of the TDF-F11. Thanks!
-
The TRO 3145 LryComm Zeus X4 Alpha Strike Card http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6630/zeus-x-zeu-x4 , the special ability MHQ1 is no longer there.
Previously, the 1 ton command console on the mech should qualify for the MHQ1 ability, and was part of the card prior to the current update.
-
I am checking, or learning, conventional infantry conversions. I have a cross check on the Clan foot infantry.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/601/clan-foot-infantry-ad-hoc-point-42nd-battlemech-cluster-theta-galaxy
Platoon Size 25, Armor divisor is 2
I calculate Armor points as 25 / 7.5 (15 / 2 Armor divisor) = 3.33 FRN = 3
The Card sheet shows 4 damage boxes.
Is this an accurate calculation. Please let me know.
Thanks
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5109/sprite-ultraheavy-protomech-standard
(http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5109/sprite-ultraheavy-protomech-standard)
Based on stats found in the "Wars of Reaving" book the Sprite proto mech should only have a 10" jump move.
Thanks
-
Here is a blanket aerospace fighter question.
All Bomb special ability stats for aero and conventional fighters are currently size +1 in the MUL. AS Companion describes the special ability as equal to size value.
This may break some jump bomber pilot's heart.
Thanks
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5109/sprite-ultraheavy-protomech-standard
(http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5109/sprite-ultraheavy-protomech-standard)
Based on stats found in the "Wars of Reaving" book the Sprite proto mech should only have a 10" jump move.
Thanks
Thanks. Card should update by tomorrow.
-
I am checking, or learning, conventional infantry conversions. I have a cross check on the Clan foot infantry.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/601/clan-foot-infantry-ad-hoc-point-42nd-battlemech-cluster-theta-galaxy
Platoon Size 25, Armor divisor is 2
I calculate Armor points as 25 / 7.5 (15 / 2 Armor divisor) = 3.33 FRN = 3
The Card sheet shows 4 damage boxes.
Is this an accurate calculation. Please let me know.
Thanks
Yeah, it should be 3. Card should be updated within 24 hours.
-
The TRO 3145 LryComm Zeus X4 Alpha Strike Card http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6630/zeus-x-zeu-x4 , the special ability MHQ1 is no longer there.
Previously, the 1 ton command console on the mech should qualify for the MHQ1 ability, and was part of the card prior to the current update.
Checking. The Command Console was (in SO) explictily stated as being MHQ1. That line was removed from Alpha Strike Companion. Checking if that was intented to make it no MHQ for Command Console, or assumed to fall under the 1 ton of communication equipment...
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/622/clan-mechanized-infantry-mimirwatch-counter-insurgency-point (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/622/clan-mechanized-infantry-mimirwatch-counter-insurgency-point)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3/aa-mechanized-infantry-mechanized-aa-infantry-point-67th-battlemech-cluster-iota-galaxy (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3/aa-mechanized-infantry-mechanized-aa-infantry-point-67th-battlemech-cluster-iota-galaxy)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1035/fast-recon-cavalry-point-67th-battlemech-cluster-iota-galaxy (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1035/fast-recon-cavalry-point-67th-battlemech-cluster-iota-galaxy)
I have a crosscheck for three Mechanized infantry platoons. They are all have damage divisor of 2, and they all have platoon sizes of 20 troopers.
So the armor conversion I have is
1> 2 [Damage Divisor] ÷ 2 [Mechanized] = 1
2> 15 ÷ 1 [Modified Divisor] = 15
3> 20 [Troops] ÷ 15 = 1.3; round normally to 1
Please let me know if there is anything I am missing.
Thanks for the replies and checks.
-
In the ER3145 a lot of the equipment gets downgraded from experimental and advanced to standard. What rules/era does the MUL team uses to determine rules level? The latest one (3145), the era of production, or something else?
-
Is there a place for units we discover in fiction that have no stats? I notice the MUL does have several on it, but I've found one that isn't. The Sylvester WarShip apparently had a "DropShip-sized" version produced for a long period of time. TRO3057r page 196, last paragraph.
-
Those reports go in here.
-
DOUBLE EDIT: BV for Basilisk 3 is currently found under its cost.
-
In the ER3145 a lot of the equipment gets downgraded from experimental and advanced to standard. What rules/era does the MUL team uses to determine rules level? The latest one (3145), the era of production, or something else?
The one on the official record sheet, which is going to be the roughly the era of production. All of TR Prototypes is presumed post all the changes in TR Prototypes for example.
-
The Heavy Wheeled APC and it's MG variant both have an intro date of ES, that should be 2470, the date that Standard Armor came in
-
I noticed that most dropships are missing their rules level, for example the Leopard : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4493/MUL
Is there a reason for the missing rules level?
-
And the TRO3145:ROTS units still don't have a faction availability.
-
I noticed that most dropships are missing their rules level, for example the Leopard : http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4493/MUL
Is there a reason for the missing rules level?
Because there is no Catalyst era record sheet for them. Mostly a concern for BV, but that's the reason I didn't bother with the rules level either.
-
Because there is no Catalyst era record sheet for them. Mostly a concern for BV, but that's the reason I didn't bother with the rules level either.
So would it be safe to assume that dropships with level 1 tech are intro level tech, those with level 2 tech are standard rules, etc?
-
Since most were designed using legacy rules sets, I'd set them all at Advanced/Experimental until new versions can be created.
-
So would it be safe to assume that dropships with level 1 tech are intro level tech, those with level 2 tech are standard rules, etc?
DropShips are always at least Standard Rules.
JumpShips, Space Stations and WarShips are at least Advanced Rules.
Introductory Rules are very focused on the most basic game play. The minute you bring a DropShip to the fight, it is no longer simple.
-
What about not using them ingame but just to say "okay this is the dropship you use to get on planet"?
-
What about not using them ingame but just to say "okay this is the dropship you use to get on planet"?
Then you haven't brought it to the fight. You've provided yourself backstory.
Introductory Tech is anything covered in the Box Set rules. DropShips are not. DropShips are not Introductory tech no matter how simple their weapons loadout.
-
A question of clarification: The Gravedigger Grasshopper (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4233/grasshopper-ghr-7k-gravedigger)'s Alpha Strike card on the MUL has a point value of 41, while the Alpha Strike card included with the Assault Lance has PV 49. Given the pilot's Skill is printed on the card as 3 and the notes on the back of the card lists a +8 modifier to PV for the skill, am I correct in assuming the PV on the front of the card already includes his skill, but not the Jumping Jack SPA?
-
Yes, but SPAs don't have a PV cost. So 49 is the final PV.
-
According to the MUL, the STG-A10 has Alpha Strike PV 18, while the STG-A5 has PV 33! ??? The only difference between the two is one point of medium-range damage.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5139/stinger-lam-stg-a5
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5138/stinger-lam-stg-a10
-
According to the MUL, the STG-A10 has Alpha Strike PV 18, while the STG-A5 has PV 33! ??? The only difference between the two is one point of medium-range damage.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5139/stinger-lam-stg-a5
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5138/stinger-lam-stg-a10
Neither are correct :) (or maybe :( ). I don't believe we have a rule for the new PV and LAMs. Researching...
-
The Alpha Strike card in the Master Unit List for the HNT-152 Hornet shows the IF0* Special Ability, but the HNT-152 is a field refit with an SRM 4 replacing the LRM 5 so it should not have any Indirect Fire ability.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1546/hornet-hnt-152 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1546/hornet-hnt-152)
On the other hand, the HNT-161 Hornet does have an LRM 5, but is missing the IF0* special ability.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1547/hornet-hnt-161 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1547/hornet-hnt-161)
Xotl: IF0* removed and PV dropped a point on the -152, IF0* added to the -161. Thanks!
-
Neither are correct :) (or maybe :( ). I don't believe we have a rule for the new PV and LAMs. Researching...
I hope that's not true... hard to believe Catalyst would release rules for them without PVs.
-
I hope that's not true... hard to believe Catalyst would release rules for them without PVs.
We've got a new PV in beta, not surprising at all.
In addition not everyone use PV, so getting game play rules out are never held up for BV or PV. We went over two years from the publishing of TechManual to the release of the MUL with official BV 2.0.
-
Does the PV system still count as a beta? I would've thought it was official, now that it's been published in Alpha Strike Companion.
It just seems a little strange to me to publish a book with a PV system, and new unit types, but not apply the PV system to those unit types.
-
We're taking care of it right now - no worries. You should have updated LAM values in a few days if all goes well.
-
We're taking care of it right now - no worries. You should have updated LAM values in a few days if all goes well.
That's great news! :)
-
Hello, not sure if this is intentional or not, but I just want to report that the MUL entry for the Templar Omni "R"
variant model number of "TLR-OR" should be "TLR1-OR" to match the rest of the original Templar variants. http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6852/templar-tlr-or
Also, again, not sure if this is intentional or not, the Ares Super Heavy Tripod MUL AlphaStrike "special" for http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6685/ares-ars-v1-zeus and all variants, are missing the "Omni" keyword.
-
The Alpha Strike Card for Falcon FLC-4Nb (Saho) shows armor and structure values of 2 and both should be 3.
According to the record sheet on pg. 27 of Record Sheets: Operation Klondike the mech has a standard fusion engine and an Armor Factor of 88.
The chart on pg. 98 of Alpha Strike Companion (ASC) shows a 30 ton mech with a standard fusion engine to have a structure value of 3.
Armor value (from ASC pg. 95): 88/30=2.93 which rounds to 3.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1024/falcon-flc-4nb-saho (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1024/falcon-flc-4nb-saho)
-
As per Welshman's request:
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/ask-the-lead-developers/shogun-shg-2h-intro-date/
All TROs with info on this unit say it was an "SLDF design" and intended for Kerensky's war against the Amaris Empire. But in 2771, the production date, the SLDF was nowhere near Graham IV or Mitchell Vehicles' satellite installations. They didn't arrive to liberate this world until 2776. So...
(1) Was this a design commissioned by the SLDF during the Reunification War, but put into service with by Amaris Empire?
..or..
(2) Is the 2771 intro date in error?
-
We're taking care of it right now - no worries. You should have updated LAM values in a few days if all goes well.
Just checking back about this... the PVs don't look like they've been updated yet.
-
No, sorry - I've been hopelessly busy as it's the end of the semester. I'll make a post here when something's been nailed down for sure.
Thanks for the poke.
-
Not an errata but I don't know where to ask this question.
The MUL is still missing faction availability for RS3145:NTNU and RS3145 RoTS.
Is there a plan to change this? As far as I understand there are already faction availability notes for each new design.
Some of these are very interesting units IMHO.
Once again a congratulation is in order for every one working on the MUL it's a wonderful resource.
-
Yes, there is a plan. No, I don't know when it will be.
-
JAW-67 Jabberwocky MilitiaMech
Problem: Missing, no profile is listed.
Sources: Record Sheets: Vehicle Annex, IndustrialMechs & Exoskeletons (PDF p.90) and Technical Readout: Vehicle Annex, Revised (p. 228)
Thank you!
-
Pompier GM-3A FireMech (and variants)
Problem: Profiles for standard model and variants are not update. None of the entries have Battle Values from Record Sheets: Vehicle Annex - IndustrialMechs and Exoskeletons.
Thank You
-
We haven't done any updates based on RSVA, you don't need to list them all individually.
-
The Oni (Bearhunter) BattleArmor is listed as having 0 points for Alpha Strike.
-
The Hatamoto-Chi HTM-27T does not have an Alpha Strike Card.
-
The Hatamoto-Chi HTM-27T does not have an Alpha Strike Card.
done
-
I use the MUL a lot, and I like it, but I would really like to see wider faction & era support. Right now we have quite a lot of missing factions such as 'The Society' and such. But even existing (old) factions that are there such as the 'Star League Royal' and 'Rim Worlds Republic' are often not filled with units.
I know that all this would take a lot of time, but is there any plan for tackling these blind spots?
-
Yes, but it's going to be a long process.
-
Yes, but it's going to be a long process.
Anything we can do to help?
-
Anything we can do to help?
You guys do a lot. We just have to populate a faction with the basics and then put it out for Beta. That still takes time.
Also the MUL team works on other projects now and it's always a factor of priority. We are doing our best.
-
Hi, I realize that Record Sheets for Vehicle Annex's 'Mechs and Exoskeletons will be done when MUL Team has time.
However, i found a non-Record Sheet issue related to one of the units listed on the MUL. So I'm reporting it so it's can be listed as issue.
*Unit Name: CattleMaster
*Source: Technical Readout: Vehicle Annex, Revised
*Problem: Unit model designation is wrong in the MUL. Technical Readout:VAR's notes that Herder and Hunter variants as CTL-3R "Herder" and CTR-2R "Hunter", the MUL lists them as RA-4 (Herder) and RA-4 (Hunter).
-
As per Welshman from here - http://bg.battletech.com/forums/ask-the-lead-developers/the-fc-ecm-'mechs-from-fasa's-battletech-the-battle-for-twycross-canon/msg1013358/#msg1013358, I'm re-asking this question here.
My question is are the 'Mech designs mentioned in FASA's BattleTech: The Battle For Twycross #1653, still canon ?, as they were described in the source book but I've never seen any canon Record Sheet(s) for the various 'Mech designs described (pages 30-31 of pdf) no variant designations are given besides 'Mech types :
Commando(s)
Javelin(s)
Jenner(s)
Ostscout
Cicada
What is to be replaced is mentioned and to add ECM but as per old FASA "days" nothing is mentioned about left over weight(s) if any.
As from what was mentioned in the 'fluff text' these 'variants seemed to be common ECM / Recon units in Federated Commomwealth service rather than "in House" company variants.
Thank you.
-
I have a feature request I'd like to see: would it be possible for units to be searchable without their accents?
EG: Gún would also show up under Gun.
It'd certainly make finding certain units a lot easier.
-
I have a feature request I'd like to see: would it be possible for units to be searchable without their accents?
EG: Gún would also show up under Gun.
It'd certainly make finding certain units a lot easier.
I've added it to our product backlog, can't say right now when we can get to it.
-
Sniper artillery
This seems redundant
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5092/sniper-artillery-tank-standard
Also TRO/RS is MH(?) which only contains this vehicle...
When you already got this
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6327/sniper-artillery-standard
Especially when this one is the one with all the stats (into year, BV, AS card, etc.)
Suggestion: either erase one, or copypasta the stats.
-
I love the BV adjustment chart for pilot / gunnery. Is there a way to label the X-axis as 'Piloting' and the Y-axis as 'Gunnery'?
-
From RS: 3075 - The Cutting Edge
Basilisk 3 BV marked at 296, should be 306 from my calculations.
Calculated by hand:
Defensive BV
31 (total armor) x 2.5 = 77.5
17(total IS) x 1.5 = 25.5
(77.5 + 25.5) x (1.3 [+3 TM] + 0.1 [proto])= 144.2
Offensive BV
108 (er medium laser) x 1.5 (speed factor) = 162
162 (offensive BV) + 144.2 (defensive BV) = 306.2, round down to 306
Basilisk 3 is also missing introduction date.
-
Second request: could someone take a look at the Satyr 4s introduction date?
The MUL has it listed as 3074, while the Wars of Reaving RATs give it to multiple factions in the 3072 tables.
-
I have a feature request I'd like to see: would it be possible for units to be searchable without their accents?
EG: Gún would also show up under Gun.
It'd certainly make finding certain units a lot easier.
This is done. We think we have them all.
-
This is done. We think we have them all.
Fantastic news, thank you!
From RS: 3075 - The Cutting Edge
Basilisk 3 stuff
Something else I just saw: the BV (which should be 306) is currently listed under cost, and it has no era icon associated with it.
-
BV for the Basilisk 3 should indeed be 306. I don't know what the cost is, and when I try to update the entry to correct the BV I get an error. We'll have to wait on this one.
-
BV for the Basilisk 3 should indeed be 306. I don't know what the cost is, and when I try to update the entry to correct the BV I get an error. We'll have to wait on this one.
You have to enter an alternate name, then you can update.
Ran into the same problem a few days ago.
-
I'm not sure if someone was working on the Clan Battle Armor for the MUL, but I've some calcs that'll change those "CAR4" to "CAR5" [Edit: using the Alpha Strike Companion]
Is this the right place to post those numbers? If not, can someone direct me please?
-
Issue with the new Late Succession Wars split - when you go through the units tab and then attempt to search by production era for either LostTech or Renaissance, it comes up with three and zero results respectively. All other eras appear to be working fine.
-
We have about 600 units that need to have their eras updated. Then that will fix the search problem. Thank you for pointing this out.
-
52 BM in LosTech era. 121 in the Renaissance era. Of course clan mechs are in there too.
-
CN9-AH Centurion
CN9-AL Centurion
Both 'Mechs are marked for "Federated Suns" in "Late Succession War - both sub-eras".
Both should be "Inner Sphere General", per Technical Readout: 3025, p.54, third column, and Technical Readout: 3039, p. 132, third column.
-
We have about 600 units that need to have their eras updated. Then that will fix the search problem. Thank you for pointing this out.
Just to elaborate some more on this, we have a fair number of units that will need to have their production eras updated. I think it is about 600 minus 20 or so units that do not have a solid introduction date due to only being stat-less referenced. We are looking to see if we can do this via a query and change them all at once or if we will need to hand alter them. I'm hoping to have them done by the end of the weekend either way. You may see the old plain Late Succession War era reappear briefly while this work is being done. It was on the to do list already but it got bumped higher on the to do list to correct this.
-
FLE-17 Flea
Introduced in 3049. No Late Succession War - Renaissance (3020 - 3049) entry.
CDA-2A Cicada
Listed as Kell Hounds, Mercenary, Periphery General - Should also include Inner Sphere General (Or at least Free Worlds League)
Source: TRO3039, Page 118
"The Free Worlds League was able to put the design back into very limited production. Since FWDI’s refit, the Free Worlds League has become the ’Mech’s largest user."
FLC-4N Falcon
Listed as Wolf's Dragoons - Should also include Kurita
Source: TRO3039, Page 248
"After the Fourth Succession War a number of Falcons appeared in the Draconis Combine."
HER-1A, HER-3S, HER-3S1, HER-3S2 Hermes
Introduced in 3047-3049. No Late Succession War - Renaissance (3020 - 3049) entry.
-
FLE-17 Flea
Introduced in 3049. No Late Succession War - Renaissance (3020 - 3049) entry.
3049 introduced units go into the Clan Era for the most part. We review each 3049 unit by hand and determine if it was around long enough to justify LSW. If it has advanced tech and wasn't specifically a design platform, then it will usually end up in Clan Era.
-
EXT-4A Exterminator
Listed as "Federated Suns" in both "Succession Wars" sub-eras.
It should be "Free Worlds League", per Technical Readout: 3050 Upgrade, p. 208, third column.
-
EXT-4A Exterminator
Fixed. My goof. FW got transposed to FS instead of FWL. I even knew it was supposed to be Marik.
CN9-AH Centurion
CN9-AL Centurion
fixed
CDA-2A Cicada
FLC-4N Falcon
HER-1A
HER-3S
fixed
FLE-17 Flea, HER-3S1, HER-3S2 Hermes
Welshman already noted these.
-
"Succession Wars" era
HER-2S Hermes II
Listed as: FWL, CapCon, Magistracy, Draconis Combine, Marian Hegemony, Mercenary, WD
Should be: Free Worlds League, Mercenary, WD, per Technical Readout: 3039, p.122, second column, "Deployment" section
-----------------------------------
"Succession Wars" era
HER-4K Hermes III
Listed as: Draconis Combine, Free Rasalhague Republic
Should be: Free Worlds League, Mercenaries, WD, per Technical Readout: 3039, p.122, second column, "Deployment" section and "Variants" section
-
"Succession Wars" era
HER-4K Hermes III
Listed as: Draconis Combine, Free Rasalhague Republic
Should be: Free Worlds League, Mercenaries, WD, per Technical Readout: 3039, p.122, second column, "Deployment" section and "Variants" section
This variant originally appeared in the Sorensen's Sabre's scenario book and carries the designation -4K, giving it some precedence in being a DC/FRR design.
-
This variant originally appeared in the Sorensen's Sabre's scenario book and carries the designation -4K, giving it some precedence in being a DC/FRR design.
Sure, but Starterbook: Sword and Dragon, p.47 says that this particular 'Mech was just a salvaged piece, and it was Hermes II when it was captured. Only after that it was customized with large lasers.
So it's just one salvaged and rebuilt machine. There is no mention in TRO3025, TRO3039, Sorenson's Sabres or Starterbook: Sword and Dragon that would suggest that there are more twin-laser Hermes III in the Draconis Combine than just the aforementioned refitted 'Mech.
-
The 4K is made for use by the DC.
-
The 4K is made for use by the DC.
Very interesting. What canon TRO or sourcebook says that? I'd like to read it for myself.
Technical Readout:3039: "Found almost exclusively in the Free Worlds League, a few Hermes IIs have made their way out of the League either as battle salvage or with mercenary units."
-
All canon examples of the 4K are Kuritan. It's labeled K. Both of those facts are specific to the 4K and can override comments about the chassis overall. It's not the main variant, so all the comments about the overall chassis are not conclusive in referring to a variant.
If you have evidence that actually refers to the 4K and not the Hermes II in general, let me know.
Otherwise the MUL is canon (or will be once out of beta).
Clarification: I'm saying 4K will keep DC (and FRR). I'm open to discussing (among the MUL team), adding FW.
And hopefully final clarification: House Marik says Kurita bought stock Hermes II and parts in order to do the refits themselves. Along with the other information (it only ever being listed as used by Kurita), the Hermes III 4K is DC (and FRR) only.
-
Flashman-9B
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1125/flashman-fls-9b (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1125/flashman-fls-9b)
Listed as introduced 3068.
TRO:3050U indicates this variant went into production (along with the Flashman-9M) when Word of Blake took over the production facilities on Hesperus II, while Blake Ascending p250-251 indicates Word of Blake didn't have control of the factory until 3070.
The -9B's introduction date should probably be moved back to 3070 (the -9M is already listed as such). I'm unaware of any source that indicates it was introduced as a refit at an earlier time, and given that it uses a different engine and cockpit than any previous model it makes more sense as a factory model.
-
Very interesting. What canon TRO or sourcebook says that? I'd like to read it for myself.
Hello, while NCKestrel has kindly provided you with our development reasoning, I will remind you that the Master Unit List is a Canon instrument and sits above sourcebooks for determination of faction access, introduction date, battle value and Alpha Strike stats.
So if the MUL says a unit belongs to a certain faction, that supercedes prior published text. And the MUL team creates the MUL, based on well defined development guidelines.
As we all know, continuity has always been a challenge and under previous companies it was even more of a challenge. That requires Catalyst to make decisions which may not always align with prior written work.
Thank you,
Joel BC
- Catalyst MUL Coordinator
-
TRC-4B Chameleon
Star League design which survived Succession Wars as a Combat Trainer. No Late Succession War entry. Should probably have the Inner Sphere General faction availability.
Source: TRO3058, Page 132
"Since the production line was within the impenetrable Hesperus II facilities, the Chameleon never suffered the same fate as hundreds of other BattleMech lines that were destroyed in the Succession Wars."
"Every academy in the Inner Sphere and the Periphery (and, according to some rumors, the Clan home worlds) has at least one Chameleon in its ranks. Though not seeing action often, the Chameleon is commonly trotted out for actual combat for when invaders attempt to overrun an academy."
STC-2C Striker
Star League design which survived Succession Wars. No Late Succession War entry. Should probably have Capellan Confederation and Lyran Commonwealth faction availability.
Source: TRO3058, Page 222
"Most of the current day Strikers are deployed among Steiner and Liao units."
STC-2D Striker
Striker Variant. No Late Succession War entry. Should probably have Lyran Commonwealth faction availability.
Source: TRO3058, Page 222
"A variant seen among several Steiner militia units trades the large laser and AC/5 in favor of a Mydron Model B AC/10."
LGB-7Q Longbow
Longbow Variant. No Late Succession War entry. Should probably have the Inner Sphere General (and everyone else and their mother) faction availability.
Source: TRO3058, Page 152
"With factories in the Federated Suns, Free Worlds League, and Lyran Alliance that have been producing the 0W and 7Q models for centuries..."
ICR-1S Icarus II
Age of War design which survived Succession Wars. No Late Succession War entry. Should probably have Free Worlds League faction availability.
Source: TRO3075, Page 260
"A small number of 1S Icarus II ’Mechs survived the Succession Wars as part of provincial militia..."
QUA -51T Quasit MilitiaMech
"Military" grade industrial 'Mech which never left production. No Late Succession War entry. Probably Periphery faction availability.
Source: TRO3075, Page 300
"CT&T has continued to manufacture the ’Mech, marketing it as a MilitiaMech rather than a BattleMech."
"However, its low cost appeals to some cash-strapped consumers, and so the Quasit is still found in the Periphery, deployed with smaller BattleMechs."
-
Factions --> Unique yields a lot of results for units that are clearly not unique (nor possess a Unique tag for availability)
-
DRG-1N Dragon
Listed as Draconis Combine, Kell Hounds, Mercenary, Wolf's Dragoons - Should probably also include Free Worlds League, Federated Suns and Lyran Commonwealth.
Source: TRO 3039, Page 142
"So many have been produced and used that salvage has spread the ’Mech to the Federated Suns and the Lyran Commonwealth in limited numbers..."
Source: House Marik (The Free Worlds League), Page 133
"In return, Janos Marik has recently contracted to purchase 50 new heavy 'Mechs including Marauders and Dragons..."
The Free Worlds League entry is really dated reference, so it might not fly, but hey... Dragons!
-----------------------------------------------------
GLD-3R, GLD-4R Gladiator
Age of War design which survived Succession Wars. No Late Succession War entry. Should probably have Draconis Combine and Mercenary faction availability.
Source: TRO3075, Page 206
"A handful of -3R and -4R Gladiators can still be found in the hands of planetary militias and low-tier mercenary commands."
-
Factions --> Unique yields a lot of results for units that are clearly not unique (nor possess a Unique tag for availability)
Examples?
-
Examples?
I must have gotten my wires crossed or had the wrong tab open or something because the list under Uniques that I see now isn't the one I was looking at this morning with all sorts of generic 3050 omnis and the like mixed in. Now I'm irritated because I have no idea what I did to get that particular list. It's apparently working as intended, whatever the case.
-
Factions --> Unique yields a lot of results for units that are clearly not unique (nor possess a Unique tag for availability)
We got it fixed this afternoon.
-
Huron Warrior-4L and -4M
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=huron+warrior (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=huron+warrior)
Introduction dates listed as 3055 and 3056 respectively, but TRO:3055U (and MUL availablity listings) indicates the Huron Warrior was never deployed to Federated Commonwealth forces. Corey returned to the Confederation during Op Guerrero in 3057 per Handbook: House Liao p60.
Suggested fix: change introduction dates to 3057 or 3058 - it's unclear exactly when the Confederation retook the world, only that they had control by 3058; it's also not clear when Hollis Incorporated got the line up and running.
-
Huron Warrior-4L and -4M
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=huron+warrior (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=huron+warrior)
Introduction dates listed as 3055 and 3056 respectively, but TRO:3055U (and MUL availablity listings) indicates the Huron Warrior was never deployed to Federated Commonwealth forces. Corey returned to the Confederation during Op Guerrero in 3057 per Handbook: House Liao p60.
Suggested fix: change introduction dates to 3057 or 3058 - it's unclear exactly when the Confederation retook the world, only that they had control by 3058; it's also not clear when Hollis Incorporated got the line up and running.
This is due to an error in the original TR3055 that has persisted. I'm not advising one way or the other, just adding some information so the MUL guys can make a decision.
-
The Huron Warrior managed to be manufactured in Corry, for the Capellans. Yes, there must be some story there.. But the Huron Warrior was definetly in production by 3055.
-
Harvester Ant KIC-3 AgroMech
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4265/harvester-ant-kic-3-agromech
Wrong stats in AS card. I'm not wizard with AS stat calculations, but it obviously been mistakenly given the stats of an assault battlemech, rather than an unarmed, light AgroMech.
Also, in the jihad faction list, I find it unlikely that Wolf's Dragoons, Kell Hounds and other mercs would have much need for said light, unarmed AgroMech.
-
The Huron Warrior managed to be manufactured in Corry, for the Capellans. Yes, there must be some story there.. But the Huron Warrior was definetly in production by 3055.
Given that the fluff for the R4M is it being a variant the FWLM wanted to try as alternative to the base R4L, they were delivering to two foreign powers. Maybe the story is that the customs inspectors on Corey are just really bad at their jobs. :D
-
Harvester Ant KIC-3 AgroMech
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4265/harvester-ant-kic-3-agromech
Wrong stats in AS card. I'm not wizard with AS stat calculations, but it obviously been mistakenly given the stats of an assault battlemech, rather than an unarmed, light AgroMech.
Assault Tank, actually. And good catch...
-
Source: House Marik (The Free Worlds League), Page 133
"In return, Janos Marik has recently contracted to purchase 50 new heavy 'Mechs including Marauders and Dragons..."
"A handful of -3R and -4R Gladiators can still be found in the hands of planetary militias and low-tier mercenary commands."
This is a good time to remind folks that the Master Unit List considers Faction Access to be "sufficient numbers as to be able to to make an appearance in a good portion of a faction's military." It does not track every instance and edge case of units being in a Faction's possession.
The Faction List answers the question "Is this something the faction has reliable access to?" There will always be exceptions to the rule, which allows the "If it works for your table" spirit of BattleTech to prevail. It also allows writers to use any units they feel fits their story, without worrying about the MUL Faction level access.
So if Sun-Tzu were to give his darling bridge a lance of Osprey BattleMechs for a wedding present, that does not mean the Magistracy of Canopus now has faction access to the Osprey.
oh, so i'm not going crazy. excellent :D
The Master Unit List can neither confirm nor deny such a state. It only can tell you if you have Faction access to insanity.
Thank you,
Joel BC
- MUL Coordinator
-
The Champion CHP-1N2 is listed as being available to IS General, as well as Mercenaries, the Kell Hounds and Wolfs Dragoons in the Late Succession Wars - LosTech Era. I can accept the 'Goons, being of Clan descendant and all.
But the rest? This Mech seems to be way to advanced for general distribution in this time frame.
In the late renaissance era why not. The Powers had to beginn with the modernization somewhere, somewhen and with something.
But in between 2901 and 3019 it seems a little bit weird.
-
This is a good time to remind folks that the Master Unit List considers Faction Access to be "sufficient numbers as to be able to to make an appearance in a good portion of a faction's military." It does not track every instance and edge case of units being in a Faction's possession.
The Faction List answers the question "Is this something the faction has reliable access to?" There will always be exceptions to the rule, which allows the "If it works for your table" spirit of BattleTech to prevail. It also allows writers to use any units they feel fits their story, without worrying about the MUL Faction level access.
So if Sun-Tzu were to give his darling bridge a lance of Osprey BattleMechs for a wedding present, that does not mean the Magistracy of Canopus now has faction access to the Osprey.
What about naturally rare Battlemechs like Hellstar and Dire Wolf, that are rare even among the clans (and in the Daishi case not even in production anymore, as far as we know), yet are listed as available to many IS factions, who are likely to have maybe a dozen each with no reliable access to spare parts?
-
What about naturally rare Battlemechs like Hellstar and Dire Wolf, that are rare even among the clans (and in the Daishi case not even in production anymore, as far as we know), yet are listed as available to many IS factions, who are likely to have maybe a dozen each with no reliable access to spare parts?
The rarity of the design also factors in. Also not all fluff is created equal either. TRO fluff has said the Daishi is very rare, fiction and actual usage in canon products seems to go the other way.
The art/ science of MUL Faction list is deep and murky. There is a reason we offer mental health benefits for the MUL team.
Best,
Joel BC
- MUL Coordinator
-
There is also a bit of usability.
The Inner Sphere has clan tech in use. An IS player needs something to use when told in a Field Manual that the regiment has 10-15% clan tech. Perhaps most of it is "custom refits", but most of those do not have canon sheets. Assuming most came from Smoke Jaguar, we assigned a few of the most common Smoke Jaguar mechs as available to the IS so there is something they can fill those spots with.
-
There is also a bit of usability.
The Inner Sphere has clan tech in use. An IS player needs something to use when told in a Field Manual that the regiment has 10-15% clan tech. Perhaps most of it is "custom refits", but most of those do not have canon sheets. Assuming most came from Smoke Jaguar, we assigned a few of the most common Smoke Jaguar mechs as available to the IS so there is something they can fill those spots with.
Yes, thank you for clarifying.
As always, folks, we must remember this is a game and the goal of the MUL is to be a useful tool to enhance game play, not a straight jacket for rules lawyers to bind up their fellow players in.
Best,
Joel BC
- Catalyst
-
Might it be possible to add an Alpha Strike PV column next to the BV column?
-
Might it be possible to add an Alpha Strike PV column next to the BV column?
And also that it would be one of the search criteria?
-
Might it be possible to add an Alpha Strike PV column next to the BV column?
It's in our product backlog.
Thanks,
Joel BC
-
Does the Fulcrum Heavy Hover tank need to be split into two separate lists?
I.E.:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Fulcrum+Heavy+Hovertank
and
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=Fulcrum+Heavy+Hover+tank
-
I think I've caught up on the Late Succession War availabilities.
-
LM5/P Lumberjack MiltiaMech
Problem: Broken/Missing Alpha Strike Card
Summary:The Profile for the LM5/P has been updated with recent Vehicle Annex info. There appears to be a link for Alpha Strike Card for this variant. However, the image does not appear, and error message comes up when you click the link to it.
-
Why are some units listed as 'Unavailable' during the Jihad though they debut during that era ?
For example: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/942/ebony-meb-9
Insufficient production levels until after 3086? Bad salesmen? Shipments stuck in customs and a forest of Lyran-produced red tape?
-
The date of the end of the Jihad moved..
-
The date of the end of the Jihad moved..
So the Jihad ends... 3081? There are still a number of units (~15 mechs) that debuted between 3082 and 3085 that have factional assignments for the Jihad era. Does this mean a sufficient quantity of them existed in the late 3070s / early 3080s to get them on the list before they reached full production?
-
I'm saying the Jihad date moved later, from 3080 to 3085, and apparently some units did not get updated to have Jihad era availabilities that need them now.
-
According to the MUL, the 25 ton ForestryMech ED-X3 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7160/forestrymech-ed-x3) is listed as entering production in 2865, but has an Era of Late Succession War - Lostech (2901 -3019). It's heavier progenitor, the 30 ton Crosscut LoggerMech ED-X1 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7166/crosscut-ed-x1-loggermech) series, is shown to have started production back in 2650, per the MUL as well.
My question, based on the Crosscut ED-X4 LoggerMech (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4024/crosscut-ed-x4-loggermech) being listed as entering production in 2876 with an Era of Early Succession War (2781 - 2900), is whether or not the lighter version should be rolled into Early Succession War status instead?
I know this is really picky, but for some reason it's striking me as odd.
-
Crosscut ED-X4X LoggerMech (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4026/crosscut-ed-x4x-loggermech)
Source: RS: Vehicle Annex - IndustrialMechs and Exoskeletons PDF pg 70, MUL Entry "Crosscut ED-X4X LoggerMech (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4026/crosscut-ed-x4x-loggermech)", Solaris Skunk Werks v0.6.83.1
Error: Battle Value is grossly incorrect somewhere between Solaris Skunk Werks (SSW), RS:VA-I&E, and the MUL. SSW and RS:VA-I&E have the final BV at 230, while the MUL has it listed as 430.
Defensive BV Calculation Breakdown
________________________________________________________________________________
Total Armor Factor (42) * Armor Type Modifier (1.0) * 2.5 105.00
Total Structure Points (51) * Structure Type Modifier (0.5)
* Engine Type Modifier (1.0) * 1.5 38.25
Mech Tonnage (30) * Gyro Type Modifer (0.5) 15.00
Total Defensive BV of all Equipment 0.00
Excessive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Explosive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Explosive Item Penalty 0.00
Subtotal 158.25
Defensive Speed Factor Breakdown:
Maximum Ground Movement Modifier: 1.20
Maximum Jump Movement Modifier: 0.00
Defensive Speed Factor Bonus from Equipment: 0.00
Minimum Defensive Speed Factor: 0.00
(Max of Run or Jump) + DSF Bonus = 1.20
Total DBV (Subtotal * Defensive Speed Factor (1.20)) 189.90
Offensive BV Calculation Breakdown
________________________________________________________________________________
Heat Efficiency (6 + 0 - 0) = 6
Adjusted Weapon BV Total WBV 14.00
-> Chainsaw 7.00
-> Chainsaw 7.00
Non-Heat Equipment Total NHBV 0.00
Excessive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Mech Tonnage Bonus 30.00
Subtotal (WBV + NHBV - Excessive Ammo + Tonnage Bonus) 44.00
Offensive Speed Factor Breakdown:
Adjusted Running MP (5) + ( Adjusted Jumping MP (0) / 2 ) - 5 = 0.00
0.00 / 10 + 1 = 1.000
1.00 ^ 1.2 = 1.0 (rounded off to two digits)
Total OBV (Subtotal * Offensive Speed Factor (0.9)) 39.60
Total Battle Value (DBV + OBV, round off) 230
Resolution: Change the BV of the Crosscut on the MUL to match the Record Sheets/SSW, unless something is missing on the Record Sheets being used for input into SSW.
-
As requested in the forum rules, please post the version number of the software used to get your calculation. An attachment containing the BV breakdown would be appreciated as well. Thanks.
-
Buster BC XXI HaulerMech
Source: RS: Vehicle Annex - IndustrialMechs & Exoskeletons PDF pg 89, Solaris Skunk Werks 0.6.83.1
Error: Has no entry on the MUL, despite having a recently published Record Sheet. Solaris Skunk Werks provides the following BV breakdown that matches the Record Sheet's listed BV:
Mech Name: Buster HaulerMech XXI Tonnage: 50
Rules Level: Tournament Legal Total Cost: 2,029,500
Tech Base: Inner Sphere Total BV: 228
Item DefBV OffBV Cost
Internal Structure - Industrial 62 0 15,000.00
Engine - I.C.E. Engine 0 0 125,000.00
Gyro - Gyro 25 0 600,000.00
Cockpit - Industrial 0 0 250,000.00
Heat Sinks - Single Heat Sink 0 0 0.00
Musculature - Triple-Strength 0 58 600,000.00
Actuators 0 0 58,000.00
Power Amplifiers 0 0 0.00
Armor - Commercial Armor 60 0 6,000.00
Lift Hoist 0 0 50,000.00
Lift Hoist 0 0 50,000.00
Cargo, Standard (1.0 tons) 0 0 0.00
Cargo, Standard (5.0 tons) 0 0 0.00
Cargo, Standard (5.0 tons) 0 0 0.00
Cost Multiplier 1.125
Dry Cost 2,029,500
Total Cost 2,029,500
Defensive BV Calculation Breakdown
________________________________________________________________________________
Total Armor Factor (48) * Armor Type Modifier (0.5) * 2.5 60.00
Total Structure Points (83) * Structure Type Modifier (0.5)
* Engine Type Modifier (1.0) * 1.5 62.25
Mech Tonnage (50) * Gyro Type Modifer (0.5) 25.00
Total Defensive BV of all Equipment 0.00
Excessive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Explosive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Explosive Item Penalty 0.00
Subtotal 147.25
Defensive Speed Factor Breakdown:
Maximum Ground Movement Modifier: 1.20
Maximum Jump Movement Modifier: 0.00
Defensive Speed Factor Bonus from Equipment: 0.00
Minimum Defensive Speed Factor: 0.00
(Max of Run or Jump) + DSF Bonus = 1.20
Total DBV (Subtotal * Defensive Speed Factor (1.20)) 176.70
Offensive BV Calculation Breakdown
________________________________________________________________________________
Heat Efficiency (6 + 0 - 0) = 6
Adjusted Weapon BV Total WBV 0.00
Non-Heat Equipment Total NHBV 0.00
-> Lift Hoist 0.00
-> Lift Hoist 0.00
-> Cargo, Standard (1.0 tons) 0.00
-> Cargo, Standard (5.0 tons) 0.00
-> Cargo, Standard (5.0 tons) 0.00
Excessive Ammunition Penalty 0.00
Mech Tonnage Bonus 57.50
Subtotal (WBV + NHBV - Excessive Ammo + Tonnage Bonus) 57.50
Offensive Speed Factor Breakdown:
Adjusted Running MP (5) + ( Adjusted Jumping MP (0) / 2 ) - 5 = 0.00
0.00 / 10 + 1 = 1.000
1.00 ^ 1.2 = 1.0 (rounded off to two digits)
Total OBV (Subtotal * Offensive Speed Factor (0.9)) 51.75
Total Battle Value (DBV + OBV, round off) 228
Resolution: Add the Buster BC XXI HaulerMech to the MUL.
-
The Bombard BMB-013 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/419/bombard-bmb-013) is incorrectly listed with a cost of 4,827,575.
The actual cost should be 4,835,000.
This is because SSW incorrectly calculated the cost of Spikes at 25 each where they should be 2,500.
-
Tiamat II (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6822/tiamat-ii-3112)
Source: Record Sheets: 3145 New Tech Upgrades
Problem: Not linked to related variants
Summary: Record Sheet book's fluff mentions Tiamat II (3118) is listed as updated version of the original manned version of the Tiamat (standard). However, MUL has the vehicle listed separately from Tiamat (Standard) and the (Caspar II Drone) versions and does not list other related variants when profile is looked at.
Suggested Solution: Link the MUL files together so users can click between them.
Tiamat Pocket WarShip (Standard) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5243/tiamat-pocket-warship-standard)
Source: Technical Readout: 3085 Supplemental
Problem: Battle Value not listed on MUL, Not coming up regular search, only Casper Drone variant.
Summary: The Tiamat (Standard) battle value is missing, which was published in the Supplimental book when it was originally published in PDF form. However, the Tiamat Pocket WarShip (Caspar II Drone) version which does have battle value shown on the MUL . Tiamat (Standard) can only be found after clicking on Casper II Drone profile.
Suggested Solution: add missing battle value and fix search so Tiamat Pocket Warship (Standard) pops up in searches of Tiamat.
-
Linking records together is only done if they have the same name. We have no control over that except by changing the name.
The Tiamat will show on a standard search if you have it include 0 BV units. I added the BV so it should show now even if you don't uncheck the box about BV.
-
Mobile Army Surgical Truck aka MASH Truck
Source: TRO: 3039
Problem: No Entry in Mule for the unit.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1971/mash-truck-standard
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1971/mash-truck-standard
It doesn't come up if you do standard filtered search. Other units with name MASH come up.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=mash
-
M.A.S.H. vs MASH. I'll add an alias for it.
-
I think I found an error, but I'm not sure if the error is in the Record Sheets, or on the MUL ...so I'm posting it here.
MadCat (Timberwolf) "Bounty Hunter" variant: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1976/mad-cat-timber-wolf-bounty-hunter
Current Specials: ECM, LTAG, ENE, OMNI
Current PV: 50
According to Record Sheets 3050 Upgrades Unabridged, Clan and Star League (p.119), this variant also mounts an Active Probe which, per the AlphaStrike Companion (p.117) confers the "PRB" and "RCN" specials.
This change will also directly increase the PV cost of the variant by +3 (+1 for PRB, +2 RCN) per the Ground Unit Force Bonuses Table (ASC p.140)
Suggested Change to Specials = "ECM, LTAG, PRB, RCN, ENE, OMNI"
Suggested PV = 53
Xotl: It should be 53 pts. Thanks!
-
M.A.S.H. Truck (ICE)
Source: MUL Profile
Problem: Introduction Date is incorrect
Summary: Technical Readout: 3039 entry for the variant describes that the vehicle wasn't introduced in 2810, but usage ceased by 2810. The intro date for the vehicle is mixed up, the date is when it was discontinued.
-
I have a question on the Buccaneer -3R. The MUL states that post Jihad, the design is in use by the FWL substates, but I can't find any factory in either the Marik-Stewart Commonwealth or the Regulan Fiefs that produces the design, nor does it appear in their RATs in FM:3085 and 3145. And since the only factory for the design was on Gibson, I have to ask if it's just oversight or are these two factions using salvaged chassis?
-
The Buccaneer 3R was sent to the whole FWLM before it split, and some remain in service in the Jihad.
-
Right, but the MUL also has it in use in the Early Republic era, which is why I asked.
-
They had enough chassis and parts to keep them going. That is a common theme for many, many mechs.
-
For the pre-Phoenix Ostroc, Ostsol, and Ostscout, outline and/or PP art is still being used. Per this post (http://"http://bg.battletech.com/forums/miniatures/the-unseen-a-reseen-iic-explanation-and-a-list-(updated-november-2014)/msg326119/#msg326119"), those models are no longer Unseen and may use the original TR3025 and 3050 art.
NCKestrel: Done, egg 'mechs have pictures again!
-
Wolfhound WLF-5 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3569/wolfhound-wlf-5)
Cost is incorrectly listed as 9,065,880. My calculations as well as SSW have the cost being 6,602,130.
-
Can you post those calculations please?
-
Here's the cost breakdown for the Wolfhound:
Internal Structure: Endo Steel (58 pts) 56,000.00
Engine: 245 XL 2,286,666.67
Heat Sinks: 10 Double 60,000.00
Gyro: Standard 900,000.00
Cockpit: Standard 200,000.00
Life Support: 50,000.00
Sensors: 70,000.00
Myomer: MASC 560,000.00
Actuators: 37,800.00
Armor: Standard (112 pts) 70,000.00
Total Structural Cost: 4,290,466.67
Weapons and Equipment: Light PPC 150,000.00
Light PPC 150,000.00
Snub-Nose PPC 300,000.00
Total Weapons and Equipment Cost: 600,000.00
Final BattleMech Cost Multipliers: 1.35
Total BattleMech Cost: 6,602,130.00 C-bills
-
I think I see what the issue is here.
Record Sheets 3085 lists the Wolfhound without the ejection system. Record Sheets 3085 Unabridged The Cutting Edge lists it with the ejection system. I believe the one in CE is right as the TRO makes reference to ejection system.
-
A couple suggestions:
It would be awesome to include the faction and operation dates for each unit. Our group tries to do a lot of Era/date specific battles and having that info on the Alpha Strike cards is a huge help.
Our group is playing Classic BattleTech with a lot of custom made mechs. The biggest issue we have is with the PV calculation as there does not appear to be a good tool for that. Are there any plans to provide a web based tool for converting mechs?
Also, I have been saving each card I use to a local file so I can create lances easily. When I save the image it tries to save without a file extension instead of the JPG.
-
Source:
Von Rohrs (Hebi) VON 4RH-5 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3455/von-rohrs-hebi-von-4rh-5)
Von Rohrs (Hebi) VON 4RH-6 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3456/von-rohrs-hebi-von-4rh-6)
Problem: Incorrect 'Mech designation
According to this post: The correct name of Von Rohrs (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/ask-the-writers/the-correct-name-of-von-rohrs/msg1051555/#msg1051555), the correct name is Hebis, not Hebi.
Suggestion: Change both MUL entries to Von Rohrs (Hebis).
-
Thanks, Hebis fixed.
-
No, sorry - I've been hopelessly busy as it's the end of the semester. I'll make a post here when something's been nailed down for sure.
Thanks for the poke.
Just checking again if there's any news about PVs for the LAMs... I'm dying to play with these, but my opponents are real PV sticklers!
-
Many of the designs that showed up first in SO, and then were subsequently stat'd out in the FR2765 products have two listings in the MUL. One presumably a placeholder with just the SO information, and then another with all the information that was released after the design was stat'd.
For instance, the Athena is Here (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3746/athena-standard) and Here (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6993/athena-standard)
The Faslane, League, and Narukami also examples of this, and might be a few more, not sure.
-
Just checking again if there's any news about PVs for the LAMs... I'm dying to play with these, but my opponents are real PV sticklers!
No problem - it's totally a fair bump. I'm sorry - I'm just really really busy right now. I promise I'll tackle it as soon as I can. Thanks.
-
LRM/SRM Carrier (Primitive) both lack intro dates. The AC Carrier (Primitive) gives 2440 which is also what is listed for all three in Primitives 2 (actual intro shows circa 2440). The entry in Primitvies 2 gives two possible names for the AC Carrier. The first is AC Carrier under the main unit stats, but in the weapons loadout section it shows AC/2 Carrier. Wouldn't this make the MUL entry also need to show AC/2 Carrier rather than AC Carrier?
Randolph Support Vehicle has no intro date in the MUL but shows Circa 2300 as its intro in Primitives 2. As the AC Carrier does not use an exact date wouldn't the date listing in Primitives be used rather than a blank field?
NCKestrel: intro date fields updated.
-
Should the HT special on this Heavy Infantry Alpha Strike card (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1436/heavy-infantry-heavy-urban-response-platoon-608th-lyran-mtr-3rd-lyran-guards) have range bands?
NCKESTREL: Yep, thanks. Card should update tomorrow.
-
Mustang Fighter (Standard)
XTRO Primitives 4 Lists tonnage at 80, the MUL shows 75
Xotl: corrected, thanks!
-
The units from XTRO: Republic I, XTRO: Gunslingers and Historical: Wars of the Republic Era are missing from the MUL.
Also, have any of the infantry units and battle armors been updated to deal 0* damage?
NCKestrel: Conventional Infantry have now been updated. Cards should update tomorrow. Battle Armors...are awaiting technical difficulties.
-
Posting this here and in the WoRS thread. BV for Hobgoblin and Hobgoblin 2 are incorrect.
Calculated by hand.
HOBGOBLIN
Defensive BV
Total Armor Factor: 55 x 2.5 = 137.5
Total Internal Structure: 27 x 1.5 = 40.5
(137.5 + 40.5) x 1.3 = 231.4
TOTAL: 231.4
Offensive BV
AP Gauss Rifle: 21
AP Gauss Rifle Ammo: 3
Fusillade: 11
MagClamps: 1
(21 + 3 + 11 + 1) x 1.12 = 40.32
TOTAL: 40.32
Final Total: 231.4 + 40.32 = 271.7, round up to 272
TOTAL: 272
HOBGOBLIN 2
Defensive BV
Total Armor Factor: 49 x 2.5 = 122.5
Total Internal Structure: 25 x 1.5 = 37.5
(122.5 + 37.5) x 1.3 = 208
TOTAL: 208
Offensive Rating
AP Gauss Rifle x4: 21 x 4 = 84
AP Gauss Rifle Ammo: 1.5
MagClamps: 1
(84 + 1.5 + 1) x 1.12 = 96.88
TOTAL: 96.88
Final Total: 208 + 96.88 = 304.88, round up to 305
TOTAL: 305
-
Not that I want to add to the pile, but I believe I found an error on the MUL.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6804/heimdall-ground-monitor-tank-d
The listed PV cost is "23"
I believe this value should be "47"
per ASC. p90-141
per RS3145_NewTechUpgrades p.67
Xotl: spreadsheet error. Thanks!
-
The Fennec FEC-5CM is mislabeled as FEC-5MC.
Xotl: corrected, thanks!
-
Two questions involving the Behemoth (Stone Rhino).
First off, the variant introduction date order is currently: 4, 5, 1, 6, 2, 3. Is that correct? Did the 4 and 5 appear before the standard?
Second question: is the art ok? The 4, 5 and 6 use the original Behemoth artwork, which is (to the best of my knowledge) still unseen. Meanwhile, the 1, 2 and 3 use the reseen artwork - but it's blacked out. I can understand that for the standard, but why the 2 and 3?
-
The 4 and 5 were very early models that predated the standard. However, they were only assigned official designators more recently in the Inner Sphere, so the nomenclature is a bit confused.
I can't comment on the artwork.
-
The 4, 5, and 6 are using the Unseen artwork and should be changed ASAP. Properly, the 2, 3, and 6 should use the Reseen art and the 1, 4, and 5 should use the black silhouette.
NCKestrel: Fixed. 6 using silhoutte not Reseen.
-
No problem - it's totally a fair bump. I'm sorry - I'm just really really busy right now. I promise I'll tackle it as soon as I can. Thanks.
Looking forward to it! :D
-
Just a headsup -- as of 1:00 PM CST, EVERY printable AlphaStrike Force-built cards are coming up without PV values in place (coming back "0"s)
Individual units are still listed with their PVs, but the moment they goto Print after being added to the Force Builder, they come back with 0s.
-
Skyhigh is working on some improvements to the Force page.
-
As with the infantry I mentioned up thread the Karhu Prime (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1752/karhu-prime) does not have range bands for the HT special on the Alpha Strike card.
NCKestrel: card should update tomorrow. Found about a dozen others and fixed. Hopefully that's all of them.
-
The 4, 5, and 6 are using the Unseen artwork and should be changed ASAP. Properly, the 2, 3, and 6 should use the Reseen art and the 1, 4, and 5 should use the black silhouette.
NCKestrel: Fixed. 6 using silhoutte not Reseen.
Huh. Actually, I've made a discovery that might just affect this. Will report back after posting a question to the writers.
Edit: Never mind, I found where I'd made a mistake. I had thought that some of the TR3055 Clan second-line machines might not be Unseen after all*, but I was led astray by the copyright date on TR3055 Revised. The same volume is also very clear that the 'Mech designs were copyrighted by VMI, not just the specific pieces of art. Oh, well.
* Four 'Mechs were included in the Clan Jade Falcon sourcebook, and several others were pictured, such as the Behemoth.
-
Just a headsup -- as of 1:00 PM CST, EVERY printable AlphaStrike Force-built cards are coming up without PV values in place (coming back "0"s)
Individual units are still listed with their PVs, but the moment they goto Print after being added to the Force Builder, they come back with 0s.
I'm pushing a fix now. While working on the new Alpha Strike Builder (http://masterunitlist.info/force/build) I made a change to how cards are generated that caused that way to be missing the PV.
-
Some standardization needs to apply (atleast I think).
The YHC-3Y Yinghouchong (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/6456?skill=4) has TSEMP
while the
MEB-12 Ebony (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/6942?skill=4) has TSEMP1.
Both have the same TSEMP Cannon
NCKestrel: Yep, should be TSEMP#. Should be corrected when the cards refresh tomorrow. There were a couple others that were missing the 1 as well.
-
Posting this here and in the WoRS thread. BV for Hobgoblin and Hobgoblin 2 are incorrect.
Bumping this.
-
Bumping this.
Thanks, now corrected.
-
Conflicting intro dates?
LRM Carrier (Standard) 2407 MUL
LRM Carrier (Primitive) 2440 XTRO Primitives II
SRM Carrier (Standard) 2407
SRM Carrier (Primitive) 2440
Shouldn't those dates be reversed?
The only option I really see is using the intro from the AC/2 Carrier (Standard) of 2520
I bring this up as the following quote would actually fall in line with the gap of 2440 and 2520 (or perhaps errata Primitives 2 intros to 2420 or 2407 to be in line with the LRM intro of 2400 and/or 2370 for SRMs)
From TRO 3039 on the missile carriers (LRM and SRM)
Based on designs centuries older, the current Missile
Carriers (Quik-based or otherwise) follow roughly the same
template.
It's a minor nit pick but does make more sense and gives the primitive version almost 100 years of service life.
-
Okay, updated PVs for all standard LAMs have been entered (no Scorpion or Shadow Hawk LAM update); as always, give the update 24 hours to propagate through to the MUL site itself.
Also, for those wondering what was going on with that one Stinger LAM with the incredibly high PV, the spreadsheet had its move as 112, instead of 12, which inflated its move cost just a bit. :)
Thanks for your patience all.
-
I may be mistaken but I believe the KGC-009 King Crab (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6635/king-crab-kgc-009) Alpha Strike card should have AC 1/1/-
NCKestrel: It would, if it weren't for heat. Twin LAC/5s would be, in ASC terms, 1 damage and therefore meet the 1 damage requirement to list AC. But it can build up 38 heat and only has 28 heat sinks. 1 * 28 / (38-4) = .82. That no longer meets the 1 damage requirement and so the KGC-009 does not receive the AC special ability.
-
The current Alpha Strike card for the KSC-6L Koschei (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6881/koschei-ksc-6l) lists damage as 3/3/1. I believe it should be amended to 3/3/0.
NCKestrel: Yep, those medium lasers aren't going to give it a long range damage value... Updated card and PV should show up tomorrow.
-
The Blackjack -1X, Flea Fire Ant, and Trebaruna -XL still have the base HT1 ability, rather than having been updated with range bands.
NCKestrel: fixed.
-
* VERSION: Printed 1st Edition
* LOCATION: Page 125, Wolf's Dragoon's Heavy Mechs
* THE ERROR: The version given is the ARC-2W which (according to the Master Unit List) didn't appear before 3022 (Anton's Revolt is set in 3014).
* THE CORRECTION: Either switch to the standard Archer ARC-2R in the table or lower the date of creation for the ARC-2W in the MUL. I would suggest the latter as the 2W's are factory refits from Hephaistos Station and Hephaistos Station (and it's rebuilding capabilities) was with the Dragoon's from the beginning.
NCKestrel: ARC-2W intro date changed to 3010.
-
From RS: 3075 - The Cutting Edge
Basilisk 3 BV marked at 296, should be 306 from my calculations.
Calculated by hand:
Defensive BV
31 (total armor) x 2.5 = 77.5
17(total IS) x 1.5 = 25.5
(77.5 + 25.5) x (1.3 [+3 TM] + 0.1 [proto])= 144.2
Offensive BV
108 (er medium laser) x 1.5 (speed factor) = 162
162 (offensive BV) + 144.2 (defensive BV) = 306.2, round down to 306
Basilisk 3 is also missing introduction date.
Bumping this. Its BV is also currently under the cost heading, and it lacks an intro date and era.
NCKestrel: fixed.
-
PV updates have been made to many units with HT, as until now units weren't being charged the 0.5 points for the ability to deal HT at medium or long range.
Also, the Tatsu and Morgenstern aeros were missed in the initial round of post-errata aero updates: their costs have been increased to be in line with all other aerospace fighters.
-
OK, a few more BV fixes. These were mostly the result of the AP Gauss Rifle ammo weight being reduced from 40 kgs per shot to 25 kgs per shot on ProtoMechs. Interestingly enough, the incorrect value was only used for BV calculations - all of the affected units have no weight issues. Changes are:
-Siren 5: from 105 BV to 104 BV
-Satyr 4: from 109 BV to 107 BV
-Hydra 4: from 221 BV to 220 BV
-Roc 4: from 297 BV to 295 BV
Calculated by hand.
SIREN 5
Defensive BV
12 (armor) x 2.5 = 30
8 (IS) x 1.5 = 12
(30 + 12) x 1.5 = 63
Total DBV: 63
Offensive BV
21 (APG)
0.6 (APG Ammo)
(21 + 0.6) x 1.89 = 40.824
Total OBV: 40.824
Final BV: 63 (DBV) + 40.824 (OBV) = 103.824, round to 104
FINAL BV: 104
SATYR 4
Defensive BV
12 (armor) x 2.5 = 30
10 (IS) x 1.5 = 15
(30 + 15) x 1.5 = 67.5
Total DBV: 67.5
Offensive BV
21 (APG)
1.5 (APG Ammo)
(21 + 1.5) x 1.76 = 39.6
Total OBV: 39.6
Final BV: 67.5 (DBV) + 39.6 (OBV) = 107.1, round to 107
FINAL BV: 107
HYDRA 4
Defensive BV
35 (armor) x 2.5 = 87.5
17 (IS) x 1.5 = 25.5
(87.5 + 25.5) x 1.3 = 146.9
Total DBV: 146.9
Offensive BV
63 (APG x3)
2.25 (APG Ammo)
(21 + 21 + 21 + 2.25) x 1.12 = 73.08
Total OBV: 73.08
Final BV: 146.9 (DBV) + 73.08 (OBV) = 219.98, round to 220
FINAL BV: 220
ROC 4
Defensive BV
38 (armor) x 2.5 = 95
18 (IS) x 1.5 = 27
61 (ECM)
(95 + 27 + 61) x 1.4 = 256.2
Total DBV: 256.2
Offensive BV
21 (APG)
1.2 (APG Ammo)
(21 + 1.2) x 1.76 = 39.072
Total OBV: 39.072
Final BV: 256.2 (DBV) + 39.072 (OBV) = 295.272, round to 295
FINAL BV: 295
-
With a handful of exceptions, TSEMP units were being undercosted. Thanks to work by nckestrel, all such units have been adjusted to reflect their proper cost.
Also, the Shadow Hawk LAMs have been given updated costs (only increased by a point). These may change further as we continue to tinker with the PVs for these units prior to errata being issued.
All updates will appear in 24 hours.
-
Okay, updated PVs for all standard LAMs have been entered (no Scorpion or Shadow Hawk LAM update); as always, give the update 24 hours to propagate through to the MUL site itself.
Also, for those wondering what was going on with that one Stinger LAM with the incredibly high PV, the spreadsheet had its move as 112, instead of 12, which inflated its move cost just a bit. :)
Thanks for your patience all.
Fantastic, thanks!
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/78/archer-arc-4m
According to Heavy Metal Pro (and verification of the math by hand), the cost for the Archer 4M should be 7,352,274. It's listed as 6,944,274 on the MUL. RS3085 does not have a price listed.
-
Heavy Metal Pro lists loaded (with ammo) costs. Some time ago (before my time, I think with the release of Tech Manual?, maybe), the decision was made to list costs unloaded.
-
All AS cards for units with IATM have had their PVs raised to reflect the recent errata granting IATM a cost equal to its Long range rating. Changes live in 24 hours.
-
Heavy Metal Pro lists loaded (with ammo) costs. Some time ago (before my time, I think with the release of Tech Manual?, maybe), the decision was made to list costs unloaded.
Ah, okay. Good to know. I'll consider it working as intended then.
-
OK, a few more BV fixes. These were mostly the result of the AP Gauss Rifle ammo weight being reduced from 40 kgs per shot to 25 kgs per shot on ProtoMechs. Interestingly enough, the incorrect value was only used for BV calculations - all of the affected units have no weight issues. Changes are:
-Siren 5: from 105 BV to 104 BV
-Satyr 4: from 109 BV to 107 BV
-Hydra 4: from 221 BV to 220 BV
-Roc 4: from 297 BV to 295 BV
Double checked and updated. Thanks.
-
Forces will not print when pop ups are blocked. This is not clear and there should probably be a note on the page.
-
Forces will not print when pop ups are blocked. This is not clear and there should probably be a note on the page.
I am hoping to find a better way to launch the PDF so that it does not have to be considered a pop-up by the browser.
-
The Battlemaster BLR-1G (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/283/battlemaster-blr-1g) displays a reseen picture.
NCKestrel: Fixed, thanks.
-
So do a lot of the older Battlemasters such as the BLR-1D, BLR-1G-DC, BLR-1Gb, BLR-1Gbc, BLR-1Gc, BLR-1S. At least all of them intro before 3025 so I *think* they should not use the reseen image.
-
Adding units to a force while searching on the "Alpha Strike Force Builder" page is adding two identical units for every click to add a unit.
-
Ahhh yes if you click on the + icon it is. I'll remove that one since I changed it to add by clicking anywhere on the Unit information.
-
Wraith Battle Armor (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6236/wraith-standard) is displaying CamoSpecs linked images of the Wraith 'Mech.
This also applies to the Wraith (Anti-Infantry) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6237/wraith-anti-infantry) as well.
-
Wraith Battle Armor (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6236/wraith-standard) is displaying CamoSpecs linked images of the Wraith 'Mech.
This also applies to the Wraith (Anti-Infantry) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6237/wraith-anti-infantry) as well.
Yup, not much I can do with that until the day I finish rebuilding the CSO website and figure out how to more closely tie the MUL data with the CSO data.
-
Yup, not much I can do with that until the day I finish rebuilding the CSO website and figure out how to more closely tie the MUL data with the CSO data.
Understood, was just browsing the new Battle Armor cards and noticed it. Thanks.
-
Not that there's not someone already still working on this... but I am still unable to select the CAR5 and CAR6 cards for printing, whether I use the "+Force" icon on the unit page or the AS Builder.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/960/elemental-battle-armor-laser
I only want to bring attention to this issue. I can still copy/save/print the cards directly from the unit link (or "recreate" the images using the Custom Card generator)
-
Not that there's not someone already still working on this... but I am still unable to select the CAR5 and CAR6 cards for printing, whether I use the "+Force" icon on the unit page or the AS Builder.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/960/elemental-battle-armor-laser
I only want to bring attention to this issue. I can still copy/save/print the cards directly from the unit link (or "recreate" the images using the Custom Card generator)
Heh, ya I realized that too...will have to figure out how to make those work.
-
One more ProtoMech BV fix, I swear I'll stop one day. Sprite 3 BV should be at 439, currently at 420. Calculated by hand.
SPRITE 3
Defensive BV
65 (armor) x 2.5 = 162.5
35 (IS) x 1.5 = 52.5
(162.5 + 52.5) x 1.4 = 301
TOTAL: 301
Offensive BV
11 (fusillade)
11 (fusillade)
37 (medium chem laser)
37 (medium chem laser)
5 (mcl ammo - 30)
(11 + 11 + 37 + 37 + 5) x 1.37 = 138.37
TOTAL: 138.37
301 (defensive BV) + 138.37 (offensive BV) = 439.37
FINAL BV: 439
-
The Mad Cat Mk IV (Savage Wolf) PR (Standard) and Mad Cat Mk IV (Savage Wolf) PR 2 do not have images. The standard Mad Cat Mk IV image should suffice.
-
Fixed, thanks.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7182/swordsman-swd-2
Intro Date is wrong, should be 2482 (Experimental Technical Readout Primitives IV, page 4)
-
So do a lot of the older Battlemasters such as the BLR-1D, BLR-1G-DC, BLR-1Gb, BLR-1Gbc, BLR-1Gc, BLR-1S. At least all of them intro before 3025 so I *think* they should not use the reseen image.
I think this came out off.. So here goes again. The above Battlemasters are using the reseen picture when they shouldn't be.
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7182/swordsman-swd-2
Intro Date is wrong, should be 2482 (Experimental Technical Readout Primitives IV, page 4)
I think it was changed to accommodate a conflict with the introduction of the Wolverine.
-
Just a point of clarification: it would be nice, when looking at the Pilot/Gunnery BV chart of a unit, to know which is the Piloting skill and which is the Gunnery skill at a glance.
-
Just a point of clarification: it would be nice, when looking at the Pilot/Gunnery BV chart of a unit, to know which is the Piloting skill and which is the Gunnery skill at a glance.
Seconded.
-
Per Primitives IV
Swordsman SWD-1 Intro correct
Swordsman SWD-2 Intro should be 2482 based on the following
Fluff
ultimately debuting the SWD-2 model in 2482
Quirk for the SWD-1 Obsolete (2482)
-
Conflicting intro dates?
LRM Carrier (Standard) 2407 MUL
LRM Carrier (Primitive) 2440 XTRO Primitives II
SRM Carrier (Standard) 2407
SRM Carrier (Primitive) 2440
Shouldn't those dates be reversed?
The only option I really see is using the intro from the AC/2 Carrier (Standard) of 2520
I bring this up as the following quote would actually fall in line with the gap of 2440 and 2520 (or perhaps errata Primitives 2 intros to 2420 or 2407 to be in line with the LRM intro of 2400 and/or 2370 for SRMs)
It's a minor nit pick but does make more sense and gives the primitive version almost 100 years of service life.
And I kinda forgot to check the errata for the above. With the LRMs coming out as late as 2315 for the larger series, suggest that the LRM Carrier Intro could be moved to 2340 (instead of 2440) which gives the primitive about 70 years of service and *almost matches the fluff from 3039. As for the SRM Carrier.. 2377 maybe, I really don't know.. but the intro for the primitives version of both vehicles should not be after the standard vehicles.
-
It's under discussion, we'll let you know when we post a final decision.
-
Thanks, didn't know if the first post on that was being ignored since I fumbled the LRM intro so badly.
-
Seconded.
Thirdified.
-
Merkava Heavy Tank Mk VI tonnage incorrect.
MUL 80 tons
Primitives I 75 tons
NCKestrel: Thanks, fixed.
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1035/fast-recon-cavalry-point-67th-battlemech-cluster-iota-galaxy (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1035/fast-recon-cavalry-point-67th-battlemech-cluster-iota-galaxy)
Should this infantry unit only have 1 Armor point.
20 Trooper / 15 (Damage Divisor 2 / 2 (Mechcanized) ) = 1.33 Fraction round normal = 1
Please let met me know if that is correct
Thanks
-
Clicking on units from XTRO: Republic I leads me to this page
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter
NCKestrel: because they are still being worked on. There aren't any to show yet.
-
The Uraeus has no faction availability displayed at all, despite being pretty clearly available exclusively to ComStar and the Republic of the Sphere.
NCKestrel: None of the TR3145RS units have faction availability yet. It's on our to do list...
-
Problem: RD-1R Roadrunner (Emerald Harrier) introduction date is given as 3112 in both the MUL and XTRO:Republic I. However, its canonical fluff in XTRO:Republic I states that the design is much older. It predates the Clan Invasion and individual units were observed with Jade Falcon forces in the 3050s, when the Emerald Harrier was already out of production again.
The actual initial production date would thus have been significantly earlier than 3050, "during the Golden Century" according to the writeup.
In a similar vein, the DVS-2 Devastator was initially designed by Kerensky himself just before the outbreak of the Amaris Civil War, the original specs were recovered in 3023 and the original 'Mech put in production by 3048 (after the downgraded DVS-1D in 3036). But in this case only six prototypes were built before 3048 so that year is arguably correct for proper line manufacture.
-
I believe the 3050s Roadrunner was not the 1R.
-
Source: Experimental Technical Readout Primitives, Volume II
Units: LRM Carrier (Primitive), AC Carrier (Primitive), and SRM Carrier (Primitive).
Problem: Missing from MUL.
-
They are under Support Vehicles.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5590/srm-carrier-primitive
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5589/lrm-carrier-primitive
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5588/ac2-carrier-primitive
-
They are under Support Vehicles.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5590/srm-carrier-primitive
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5589/lrm-carrier-primitive
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5588/ac2-carrier-primitive
Then none of the primitives you listed above are not coming up in a normal search. If you just type "SRM Carrier" without being specific, everything named "SRM Carrier" comes up except for primitive version. Shouldn't come up when you have no specific options listed?
-
They are support vehicles. They show up on that tab when you search for them. I found them all through the search feature. (they will not show on the combat vehicle tab sincethey are not combat vehicles.)
-
The MUL lists the HTM-30Z as the Hatamoto-Suna but TRO 3145 Draconis Combine lists in both the variants and on the RS as the Hatamoto-Godai HTM-30Z
Link to Mul
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6419/hatamoto-suna-htm-30z
In the TRO the unit is on pg 46 and 106
Wondering what the correct name is.
-
Godai is correct.
-
From TRO 3145 FWL
Red Kite Attack VTOL
MUL intro 3121
Fluff intro 3093
-
From TRO 3145 LC
Winterhawk APC
MUL intro 3113
Fluff intro 3059 (first run), restarted in 3119
Per fluff here
Originally produced in 3059, it was unusual
for the time in utilizing a fuel cell engine.
As such it was distrusted by the LAAF command
and relegated to backwater militias and corporate
forces. The Winterhawk performed acceptably
in such roles, and over the intervening decades
fuel cells came to be commonly accepted
in military vehicles. The LCAF restarted production
in 3119 to meet demand for a new infantry
transport.
Should the mul intro be the initial run (3059) or the restart (3119)?
-
Scapha Hovertank A has no intro entry. Switch intro to follow all other Scaphas (3123)
JES III Missile Carrier (MML) has no intro entry. Suggestion, follow the missile crowd and use 3133 or 3134
Night Stalker (all) have no intro entry though era pic is set to dark ages. Fluff suggests an intro of the year of, or year before, the Republic enacted Fortress Republic (3135??)
-
All Lightning -16* variants do not have roles listed. Or rather, have "None" as a role. I'm willing to bet that's an error.
-
Sure they do. They'll just take up to 24 hours to show on the card. ;)
-
Missing units: Aurora Dropship
The MUL only lists 5 Aurora (Standard), Aurora (Armor Carrier), Aurora (Cargo), Aurora (CV), Aurora (Gunship)
RS 3075 lists 8. Aurora, Aurora (BA), Aurora (Cargo), Aurora (Combined Arms), Aurora (CV), Aurora (Gunship), Aurora (Tanker), and Aurora (Vehicle.)
-
Squad 5 Card is showing as Squad 0.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/961/elemental-battle-armor-mg
NCKestrel: Fixed, thanks.
-
Was going over Clan Gladiator (Executioner) and found some errors for the "F", "G", and "I" variants
"F" and "I" both have a current Movement of {10"/8j"}
per their record sheets, each have both MASC and Supercharger... which should give them a Movement of {12"/8j"}
per ASC p.94 (x1.25 for either system, x1.5 for both)
There is no change to these variants TMM (12" is still +2)
There is a +0.25 increase in the MoveFactor bonus (under Defense Factor formula) but this is not a significant increase for their respective PVs (per my calcs)
"F" = http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6842/gladiator-executioner-f
"I" = http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6840/gladiator-executioner-i
"G" variant lists "WAT" for Clan Watchdog CEWS which should have ECM, LPRB, and RCN specials. ECM and LPRB are missing (per ASC p.133)
Currently 59 PV (which looks correct) w/ CASE, OMNI, RCN, WAT specials
Recommended Change: 62 PV w/ CASE, OMNI, WAT (ECM, LPRB, RCN) specials
"G" = http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6841/gladiator-executioner-g
-
Gladiator F should be 52 pts.
Gladiator I should be 52 pts.
Gladiator G should be 60 pts.
MUL updated. Thanks!
-
The MUL is really looking good.
There is a login. Is this the same login for the forum?
Also...I realize this is a living document, but are downloadable versions available, or are they neigh-impossible with the size and scope of the project?
Thanks!
-
The login is for MUL team to enter and modify things. This is a living document and downloads are not available. Just for a frame of reference (a tiny, tiny look behind the curtain), the faction data that was added this past week consisted of 18070 distinct pieces of data.
-
Osteon G: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5828/osteon-g
Glad to see this got updated with the new Artillery rules. However I believe the recalculation cost is missing the x1.1 Offensive Blanket Modifier for the Nova CEWS "C3" similarity.
Currently listed at 64.
My estimate: 67.5, or 68 PV
-
Osteon G: http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5828/osteon-g
Glad to see this got updated with the new Artillery rules. However I believe the recalculation cost is missing the x1.1 Offensive Blanket Modifier for the Nova CEWS "C3" similarity.
Currently listed at 64.
My estimate: 67.5, or 68 PV
You are correct (actually, no unit with NOVA was being charged for C3. I'm off to fix that right now). The Osteon -G would be 67 pts by my calcs (26.5 offence, 34 defence, 6 force multiplier).
-
I used the "D" variant of the Osteon as my "bench test" to see if the multiplier was included, so, if I can save you some work, I think it was only the Artillery adjustments that might've thrown it off.
And I'm not trying to make more work for you - I was merely testing it because of the change in artillery (it actually looked like too much but actually wound up being too little?!)
I also have Ground Force Bonuses @6 and Defensive Factor Value @34 (to match yours).
I calculated The Osteon [G] Offensive Factor Value to be 27.5
=[(2+2*2+0)+ 2 size + 1 OverHeat + 2@(4 * 2 Artillery Damage)] * [1 + 0.1 Offensive Blanket]
=[(6) + 3 + (16)] * 1.1
=25 * 1.1, or 27.5
***Edited for clarification. Sorry Xotl!***
-
There's the issue: I don't have it listed as having any overheat. Not sure which is right, offhand.
-
There's the issue: I don't have it listed as having any overheat. Not sure which is right, offhand.
Overheat looks right. Wars of Reaving Supplement p.83
38 weapon heat, +2 for Nova, +2 for XL engine = 42 max heat... and on a budget of 10 DHS...
-
Not trying to beat a live horse here but...
After rechecking the TM errata while building some support tanks, the LRM/SRM Carrier should have an intro of 2470 as the Combat Vehicle chassis intro was changed to 2470. This should help with the earlier intro date question regarding the Standard and primitive versions of said vehicle.
That being said, the following combat vehicles are also invalid at their current intro and will need to be changed to 2470. All of the APCs could use a primitive support vee version to keep them available during the earliest years of the Age of War and pre-Terran Alliance civil war.
Heavy Hover APC (MG) - current intro ES
Heavy Wheeled APC (MG) - current intro ES
Heavy Wheeled APC (Standard) - current intro ES
Heavy Hover APC (Primitive) - currently 0. This one is a good candidate for an XTRO and change to a support vee
Heavy Hover APC (Primitive SRM) - current intro 2370. Same as above I guess
Heavy Wheeled APC (SRM) - current intro 2370
Heavy Hover APC (Primitive LRM) - current intro 2400. Same as above I guess
Heavy Wheeled APC (LRM) - current intro 2400
Sand Devil Scout Hovertank (Standard) - current intro 2452
LTV-4 Hover Tank (Standard) - current intro 2464
Merkava Heavy Tank Mk VIII - current intro 2465
Sorry to keep causing so much work for the MUL team :P Keep up the good work! ;D
-
Sorry guys got another one for you.
Mosquito Radar Plane IX - intro 2448. Problem, the ER Medium laser has an intro of 3058. Also, the era icon is Civil War. Suggestion, change intro to 3062.
Mosquito Radar Plane I - intro ES. The fluff mentioned an original prototype/production but does not label as a Mk I. However, the fluff does go on about a revamped Mosquito released in 2448 which would probably be the Mk I.
-
Looking at PVs for the Wars of Reaving units.
As far as I can tell, the Savage Coyote Z should be 9/9/6 OV 1. THe MUL has it at 9/7/5 OV 2. Before I dig into the rest, can you confirm my calcs?
-
It should be 8/7/5 with OV 2
The HAG-30 has insufficient ammo.
-
Overheat looks right. Wars of Reaving Supplement p.83
38 weapon heat, +2 for Nova, +2 for XL engine = 42 max heat... and on a budget of 10 DHS...
I think you're bouncing back and forth between the D and G here. The D actually has 38 dissipation on 44 heat. The G (the one with artillery) has the 20 dissipation.
-
Overheat looks right. Wars of Reaving Supplement p.83
38 weapon heat, +2 for Nova, +2 for XL engine = 42 max heat... and on a budget of 10 DHS...
I think you're bouncing back and forth between the D and G here. The D actually has 38 dissipation on 44 heat. The G (the one with artillery) has the 20 dissipation.
I was quoting the "G" heat. Wrong page number though; I meant WoR-S page 81 {my bad}
Unless Mechs stopped tracking Heat from Artillery like vehicles, it should generate a maximum of 44 heat with only 20 dissipation, or x0.5 whatever weapon total there is (Artillery being unaffected)
2 Arrow IV = 20(10) heat
2 Medium ER Pulse = 12(6) heat, 1.47(0.735) at Short/Medium
2 Medium Pulse = 8(4) heat, 1.54(0.77) for Short/Medium
Engine = 2 heat
Nova CEWS = 2 heat
. Pre-Heat damage = 1.47 + 1.54 = 3.01
Heat Modified Damage Calc [per ASC p.115]
. 3.01 * 20 = 60.2
. 60.2 / (44-4) = 1.505 ~ 2 (rounds up)
"2/2/0, OV1" for Osteon G...unless I did that wrong?
-
That is correct, and it's what the MUL card reads.
-
I think I know where I threw Xotl off then...
I used the Osteon "D" as a benchmark for the Nova's "C3-like" multiplier when calculating PV (to make sure that was the cost)
The Osteon "G" needs the multiplier as well, with the addition of the Overheat value (+1) to make the cost 68, not 67
OFV = 27.5
DFV = 34
GFB = 6
Total PV = 67.5 ~ 68
*edit: changed my original post (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/errata/master-unit-list-(mul)-online-database-read-the-first-post/msg1079909/#msg1079909) to reflect the edit. Sorry for the confusion guys*
-
The main problem for me was the missing OV, but that was because the spreadsheet I have has wrong values for all the Wars of Reaving units (some have OV 5 or even 6, which is impossible). I'll be going over them all once again to make sure everything is correct.
Thanks GoldBishop and Alexander Knight for the assist.
-
Not sure if this should be reported here or not, but the skills randomizer for a force errors out for Veteran or Elite skills almost every time.
-
Not sure if this should be reported here or not, but the skills randomizer for a force errors out for Veteran or Elite skills almost every time.
Can you post a screen shot that includes the full URL in the browser?
Thanks,
Joel BC
-
Pictures attached. The error occurs when veteran or elite is selected and then the skills button is pressed.
The developer in me wants to say that the skills randomizer is giving negative values for skill and that is not an accepted value and thus error.
-
I was able to recreate [Stinger]'s error.
When I select "Random: Green", the best skills I get are 2s for Gunnery and 3s for Piloting ...
When I select "Random: Regular", I get 0s and 1s ...
Based on the table in Total Warfare p.273 (Random Experience Rating Table), these rolls look more like the Veteran and Elite rolls.
Now, I'm not an expert in coding, but if the Skill values are calculated by subtracting specific numbers from base "7" I'm of the same opinion as Stinger: that the "error" is when the formula feeds back a negative Skill value.
(Of a dozen attempts, I have rolled only one "Random: Veteren" that did not come back as an Error; the skills were all either 0/1, 1/2, or 2/3)
-
The login is for MUL team to enter and modify things.
Could you add a note about that somewhere? I looked for a registration page for a while thinking that I could log in to save forces.
Are there any plans to provide an API for the data for people to build their own applications?
-
Eisensturm's art isn't the Eisensturm, at least according to the TRO image from 3067 and from the miniature.
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4114/eisensturm-est-o
Unless there's some undocumented Eisensturm art out there?
-
That's from Aerotech 2
-
looks nothing like the current art and miniature :D
MUL
(http://img.masterunitlist.info/Aerospace%20Fighters/Eisensturm.gif)
3067u
(http://solaris7.com/files/members/3402/Screen_Shot_2015-06-15_at_8.21.32_PM.png)
-
As I said, it's the art from Aerotech 2.
-
Still, it should/will be updated to the newer art. When I or somebody else can get to it.
-
Fixed.
-
If updating to newer art is a thing, any chance of changing the Cauldron-Born's? The old art isn't its most flattering piece.
NCKestrel: Yep, there you go.
-
Ran into some searching strangeness. I had queried all mechs with an intro date of zero. Three mechs showed up with that clearly had an assigned intro date.
(http://puu.sh/itDZP/9d377e6a91.png)
Oddly, when you search for the intro years of these three units, they do not appear.
Also, the support vehicles from XTRO Primitives v2 have assigned intros of 'circa 2440', which dumps them into the no intro date / year 0 crowd.
-
Awesome, Crossbow and Battleaxe should be fixed now.
-
two more units with intro-but-no-intro-date bug
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5587/ltv-4-hover-tank-standard
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5585/strike-falcon-attack-vtol-standard
-
Ok, fixed those, and a couple more I found. Hopefully that's all of them now :).
-
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4987/scavenger-sc-v-scavengermech
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5334/vampyr-sc-v-1-scavengermech
Both of these designs are called "ScavengerMechs" in the MUL but in TRVA and RS:VA they're called "SalvageMechs"
Suggest changing it to SalvageMechs on the MUL.
-
Done
-
The BV for the Sha Yu (Bulldog) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6980/sha-yu-bulldog) is incorrectly listed as 1,488 whereas it should be 1,379. Below are my calculations (which also happen to match those in SSW):
===============================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Stealth): 136 x 2.5 x 1 340.000
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 67 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 50.250 = 390.250
Gyro (Standard): 40 x 0.5 (+) 20.000 = 410.250
Defensive Equipment:
Guardian ECM Suite (+) 61.000 = 471.250
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (w/ Stealth) (*) 1.60 = 754.000
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 754.000
===============================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Large Laser 123.000
Large Laser (+) 123.000 = 246.000
Medium Laser (+) 46.000 = 292.000
Medium Laser (+) 23.000 = 315.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 40.000 = 355.000
Speed Factor: 11 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.760 = 624.800
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 624.800
===============================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 754.000
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 624.800 = 1,378.800
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,379
-
The BV for the Wraith TR2-X "Alexander" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3590/wraith-tr2-x-alexander) is incorrectly listed as 1,684 whereas it should be 1,816. The value listed in the MUL matches what is in SSW, but SSW incorrectly lists the unit as having single heat sinks instead of double. Below are my calculations:
================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Ferro-Fibrous): 163 x 2.5 x 1 407.500
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ XL Engine): 91 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.75 (+) 102.375 = 509.875
Gyro (Standard): 55 x 0.5 (+) 27.500 = 537.375
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (*) 1.40 = 752.325
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 752.325
================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Medium Laser 108.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 108.000 = 216.000
Snub-Nose PPC (+) 165.000 = 381.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 55.000 = 436.000
Speed Factor: 11 (Run) + 5 (Jump) (*) 2.440 = 1,063.840
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,063.840
================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 752.325
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,063.840 = 1,816.165
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,816
-
The BV for the Spatha SP2-X "Warlord" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2999/spatha-sp2-x-warlord) is incorrectly listed as 1,973 whereas it should be 1,953. Below are my calculations (which also happen to match those in SSW):
=================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Laser Reflective): 184 x 2.5 x 1.7 782.000
Internal Structure (Standard w/ XXL Engine): 99 x 1.5 x 1.2 x 0.25 (+) 44.550 = 826.550
Gyro (Standard): 60 x 0.5 (+) 30.000 = 856.550
Defensive Equipment:
Angel ECM Suite (+) 100.000 = 956.550
Laser Anti-Missile System (+) 45.000 = 1,001.550
Explosive Equipment: 7 Critical Spaces (-) 7.000 = 994.550
Defensive Movement Factor: +4 (*) 1.40 = 1,392.370
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,392.370
=================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Large Laser 163.000
Medium VSP Laser (+) 56.000 = 219.000
Medium VSP Laser (+) 56.000 = 275.000
Sword (+) 12.075 = 287.075
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 90.000 = 377.075
Speed Factor: 11 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.760 = 663.652
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 663.652
=================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,392.370
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 663.652 = 2,056.022
Cockpit (Small): (*) 0.95 = 1,953.221
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,953
-
The BV for the Juggernaut JG-R9TX1 "Leapin' Lil" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1716/juggernaut-jg-r9tx1-leapin-lil) is incorrectly listed as 1,951 whereas it should be 1,944. Below are my calculations (which also happen to match those in SSW):
=========================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Light Ferro-Fibrous): 271 x 2.5 x 1 677.500
Internal Structure (Standard w/ Light Fusion Engine): 138 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.75 (+) 155.250 = 832.750
Gyro (Standard): 90 x 0.5 (+) 45.000 = 877.750
Explosive Equipment: 8 Critical Spaces (-) 8.000 = 869.750
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (*) 1.20 = 1,043.700
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,043.700
=========================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Anti-'Mech Pod 5.000
Anti-'Mech Pod (+) 5.000 = 10.000
Anti-'Mech Pod (+) 5.000 = 15.000
Anti-'Mech Pod (+) 5.000 = 20.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 31.000 = 51.000
Large X-Pulse Laser (+) 178.000 = 229.000
Large X-Pulse Laser (+) 178.000 = 407.000
Medium X-Pulse Laser (+) 71.000 = 478.000
Medium X-Pulse Laser (+) 71.000 = 549.000
Snub-Nose PPC (+) 165.000 = 714.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 90.000 = 804.000
Speed Factor: 5 (Run) + 1 (Jump) (*) 1.120 = 900.480
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 900.480
=========================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,043.700
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 900.480 = 1,944.180
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,944
-
This makes it almost a clean sweep for incorrect BV listings with regards to XTRO: Gladiators...
The BV for the Warhammer WHM-X7 "The Lich" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3499/warhammer-whm-x7-the-lich) is incorrectly listed as 1,807 whereas it should be 1,818. Below are my calculations (which also happen to match those in SSW):
===========================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Light Ferro-Fibrous): 217 x 2.5 x 1 542.500
Internal Structure (Endo Steel w/ Light Fusion Engine): 107 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.75 (+) 120.375 = 662.875
Gyro (Heavy-Duty): 70 x 0.5 (+) 70.000 = 732.875
Armored Components:
Cockpit (+) 5.000 = 737.875
Light Fusion Engine (+) 50.000 = 787.875
Sensors (+) 10.000 = 797.875
Explosive Equipment: 3 Critical Spaces (-) 3.000 = 794.875
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (*) 1.20 = 953.850
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 953.850
===========================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Medium Laser 31.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 31.000 = 62.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 31.000 = 93.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 31.000 = 124.000
Snub-Nose PPC w/ Capacitor (+) 252.000 = 376.000
Snub-Nose PPC w/ Capacitor (+) 252.000 = 628.000
Streak SRM 6 (+) 59.000 = 687.000
Streak SRM 6 (Ammo 15) (+) 15.000 = 702.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 70.000 = 772.000
Speed Factor: 6 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.120 = 864.640
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 864.640
===========================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 953.850
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 864.640 = 1,818.490
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,818
-
Can SSW do Frankenmechs now? Note the 12 internal on the Right/Left Arm on the WHM-X7. It has heavier arms from a Marauder, hence the extra internal structure.
The BV does seem odd though, having 2 (1 per arm) extra Internal Structure wouldn't explain the BV being lower.
And the RS appears to have the wrong leg armor values. Working on confirmation/errata for the leg armor.
-
Can SSW do Frankenmechs now? Note the 12 internal on the Right/Left Arm on the WHM-X7. It has heavier arms from a Marauder, hence the extra internal structure.
The BV does seem odd though, having 2 (1 per arm) extra Internal Structure wouldn't explain the BV being lower.
And the RS appears to have the wrong leg armor values. Working on confirmation/errata for the leg armor.
I completely missed the fact it was a Frankenmech! I wish the record sheets would somehow indicate this. :)
Other than the discrepancy in the armor n the legs between the RS and TRO which needs resolving, I think you can ignore the BV issue on this one.
-
Rommel Tank Standard has two AC specials
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2737/rommel-tank-standard
Card shows AC (2/2/-) twice on the card. Typo?
Showing up on the Patton as well.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2450/patton-tank-standard
Ultra Variant is missing the AC special.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2451/patton-tank-ultra
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2737/rommel-tank-standard
Card shows AC (2/2/-) twice on the card. Typo?
Nope. It's saying that you have AC (2/2/-) if you use the standard attack or if you use the TUR special
-
Nope. It's saying that you have AC (2/2/-) if you use the standard attack or if you use the TUR special
I stand corrected then.
-
Ultra Variant is missing the AC special.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2451/patton-tank-ultra
Ultra Autocannons do not qualify for the AC special. They can't fire special AC ammo, they're can only fire standard ammo.
-
Ultra Autocannons do not qualify for the AC special. They can't fire special AC ammo, they're can only fire standard ammo.
I'll just go put on the cone of shame now, thank you.
-
The BV for the Sha Yu (Bulldog) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6980/sha-yu-bulldog) is incorrectly listed as 1,488 whereas it should be 1,379. Below are my calculations (which also happen to match those in SSW):
Correct - updating MUL.
The BV for the Wraith TR2-X "Alexander" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3590/wraith-tr2-x-alexander) is incorrectly listed as 1,684 whereas it should be 1,816. The value listed in the MUL matches what is in SSW, but SSW incorrectly lists the unit as having single heat sinks instead of double. Below are my calculations:
Correct again, 1,816 it is. The difference due to the incorrect single heat sinks. Updating MUL.
The BV for the Spatha SP2-X "Warlord" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2999/spatha-sp2-x-warlord) is incorrectly listed as 1,973 whereas it should be 1,953. Below are my calculations (which also happen to match those in SSW):
TSM affects the sword damage and subsequently the weapon's BV. 1,973 is correct.
The BV for the Juggernaut JG-R9TX1 "Leapin' Lil" (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1716/juggernaut-jg-r9tx1-leapin-lil) is incorrectly listed as 1,951 whereas it should be 1,944. Below are my calculations (which also happen to match those in SSW):
1,951 is correct. Per TacOps errata (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/errata/tactical-operations-4-june-2014-(v3-3)/msg661514/#msg661514), M-Pods only have a defensive BV and no explosive penalty.
-
Thanks for the response. The M-Pod one is kind of weird given that it explodes, yet this has no impact to the BV. I'd question if this is the case, why even make mention of it exploding at all in the BV tables? In any case, it doesn't have the double-dagger, so I'll go with that. I do have further issues with the following response, however:
TSM affects the sword damage and subsequently the weapon's BV. 1,973 is correct.
Your answer actually makes perfect sense. What gives me pause is that neither HMP nor SSW uses the TSM-enhanced damage during the BV calculations. Further, the following sampling of a half-dozen units in the MUL which are equipped with TSM and a Hatchet or Sword also don't take the TSM-enhanced damage into account for BV calculations:
- No-Dachi NDA-1K (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4730/no-dachi-nda-1k)
- Vindicator VND-5L (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3430/vindicator-vnd-5l)
- Ti Ts'ang TSG-9H (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3254/ti-tsang-tsg-9h)
- Black Knight BL-10-KNT (Ross) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/355/black-knight-bl-10-knt-ross)
- Berserker BRZ-C3 (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/331/berserker-brz-c3)
- Scarabus SCB-9T (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/2814/scarabus-scb-9t)
So was there an errata or some sort of clarification on this that indicated the BV should use the TSM-enhanced damage (vs the non-active TSM damage)? If so, the BV calcs for the designs I indicated above (and likely many others) are incorrect.
-
Thanks for the response. < Snipped for brevity>
M-Pods: They are mounted on the outside of the unit's armor and are essentially claymore mines. So when they explode, they don't have any explosive force going in towards the Mech.
TSM and weapons: We'll see about working with the MM and SSW developers to update their code. Heavy Metal does not support Total Warfare rules, so it's BV is not accurate.
We'll look into the units you just listed. The Juggernaut was done entirely by hand, as no software supported it then, and went through a full MUL review (which includes several folks who helped update the BV 2.0 rules), so that's why it's sword is factored there.
Best,
Joel BC
-
M-Pods: They are mounted on the outside of the unit's armor and are essentially claymore mines. So when they explode, they don't have any explosive force going in towards the Mech.
TSM and weapons: We'll see about working with the MM and SSW developers to update their code. Heavy Metal does not support Total Warfare rules, so it's BV is not accurate.
We'll look into the units you just listed. The Juggernaut was done entirely by hand, as no software supported it then, and went through a full MUL review (which includes several folks who helped update the BV 2.0 rules), so that's why it's sword is factored there.
Best,
Joel BC
M-Pods makes sense now with regards to explosions, thanks for putting me on the straight-and-narrow there.
Regarding TSM and weapons. MM does actually calculate it the way you indicated, so that looks like it's already accounted for, which just leaves SSW needing an update. Looking at the Sparta design, that also seems to calculate it the new way. So maybe it's just the older designs that have this issue, and some of the newer ones are OK.
But thanks for the clarifications. Most helpful! I'll be sure to get these two right moving forward so I don't report false errors anymore!
-
MM is usually pretty fast on updates. We use MML to create the record sheets, so the guys over there are usually great about fixing bugs for us.
Which means that MM is almost always the most up to date on BV rules.
-
MM is usually pretty fast on updates. We use MML to create the record sheets, so the guys over there are usually great about fixing bugs for us.
Which means that MM is almost always the most up to date on BV rules.
After checking all the weapons whose BV would be impacted by TSM within MML; Claws, Hatchet, Lance, Mace, Retractable Blade, Sword, and Talons, you might want to let them know (and potentially be aware yourself?) that the BV for Claws and Talons is calculated incorrectly still.
-
After checking all the weapons whose BV would be impacted by TSM within MML; Claws, Hatchet, Lance, Mace, Retractable Blade, Sword, and Talons, you might want to let them know (and potentially be aware yourself?) that the BV for Claws and Talons is calculated incorrectly still.
Talon BV should be the _additional_ damage they do when compared to a normal kick. MM(L) does calculate that correctly, including the 50% for TSM:
returnBV = Math.round(Math.floor(entity.getWeight() / 5.0) * 0.5);
if (entity.hasWorkingMisc(MiscType.F_TSM)) {
returnBV *= 2;
}
-
Talon BV should be the _additional_ damage they do when compared to a normal kick. MM(L) does calculate that correctly, including the 50% for TSM:
returnBV = Math.round(Math.floor(entity.getWeight() / 5.0) * 0.5);
if (entity.hasWorkingMisc(MiscType.F_TSM)) {
returnBV *= 2;
}
According to TacOps pg. 385, the BV for Talons is listed as "(Kick Dmg x 1)". Would the kick damage on a 50 ton mech with Talons not be 30?
50 ton 'Mech kick damage is 50 / 5 = 10
Per TacOps pg. 291, this damage is multipled by 1.5, so 10 * 1.5 = 15
Per Total Warfare pg. 143, this damage is double due to TSM, so 15 * 2 = 30
So I'm conused why the above code is multiplying the kick by 0.5 and not 1.5, which seems to be the difference in the math. Is there an errata that states "(Additional Kick Dmg x 1)"?
-
Always check the errata. Especially with TacOps, which has so much of it.
3) Talon: change its Item BV from “(Dmg x 1)” to “(Kick Dmg x 1)”.
This was fixed in the very earliest TO errata, so you must have the first print, meaning every single thing in the TO document applies to your release.
-
Always check the errata. Especially with TacOps, which has so much of it.
3) Talon: change its Item BV from “(Dmg x 1)” to “(Kick Dmg x 1)”.
This was fixed in the very earliest TO errata, so you must have the first print, meaning every single thing in the TO document applies to your release.
Was this directed towards me or BeeRockxs? Because this is what my TO has and I believe supports the BV calcs I have.
Also, for what it's worth, the BV for the Eyrie (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6263/eyrie-standard) is listed as 1,415. This implies a BV of 11 for the Talons, which is the standard kick damage. If it were only the difference, the BV for the talons would be 4, and the overall BV would be lower.
-
It was directed at you, but the mistake was mine -- I see what you mean now. My apologies for the hastiness (I saw you ask if there was errata and I assumed you meant "is there any on this at all").
-
Hunchback 7S
The source is listed as XTRO:Corps but it should be XTRO:Republic II
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7346/hunchback-hbk-7s
-
Fixed although it looks like it still needs AS stats.
-
It was directed at you, but the mistake was mine -- I see what you mean now. My apologies for the hastiness (I saw you ask if there was errata and I assumed you meant "is there any on this at all").
Welshman told me in an email conversation that the Talon damage should be the extra damage when compared to a normal kick, since the normal kick damage is already accounted for in BV calculation. He also said that the TO errata would be changed accordingly.
-
First I've heard of it. What should the errata be exactly?
-
"Calculate how much additional damage a kick attack will do with the
talons. This additional damage is the BV of the Talons."
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3721/archer-arc-1a
Archer ARC-1A, has no tonnage listed
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3721/archer-arc-1a
Archer ARC-1A, has no tonnage listed
Because it's not known yet.
-
Ahhh....ok then...just thought it odd it was showing at the top of all my searches.
But would it really be a different weight other than 70 tons? Every other Archer is 70 tons.
-
Ahhh....ok then...just thought it odd it was showing at the top of all my searches.
But would it really be a different weight other than 70 tons? Every other Archer is 70 tons.
It could be. Several Primitives are different weights from their post-Age of War incarnations.
-
First I've heard of it. What should the errata be exactly?
Whoops... :)
-
The Battle Value for the Crossbow D (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/736/crossbow-d) is incorrectly listed as 1,154 whereas it should be 1,144. The calculations are below, which happens to match SSW. It appears the difference is due to the fact that MML is assigning the 'Mech Mortar/8 a BV of 7.2?
================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 192 x 2.5 x 1 480.000
Internal Structure (Standard w/ Fusion Engine): 104 x 1.5 x 1 x 1 (+) 156.000 = 636.000
Gyro (Standard): 65 x 0.5 (+) 32.500 = 668.500
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (*) 1.30 = 869.050
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 869.050
================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
'Mech Mortar/8 50.000
'Mech Mortar/8 (+) 50.000 = 100.000
'Mech Mortar/8 (Ammo 4) (+) 6.000 = 106.000
'Mech Mortar/8 (Ammo 4) (+) 6.000 = 112.000
'Mech Mortar/8 (Ammo 4) (+) 6.000 = 118.000
'Mech Mortar/8 (Ammo 4) (+) 6.000 = 124.000
'Mech Mortar/8 (Ammo 4) (+) 6.000 = 130.000
'Mech Mortar/8 (Ammo 4) (+) 6.000 = 136.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 65.000 = 201.000
Speed Factor: 8 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.370 = 275.370
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 275.370
================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 869.050
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 275.370 = 1,144.420
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,144
-
The reason MML is assigning the ammo a BV is 7.2 is as follows;
TO p. 374 - Armor Piercing (Shaped-Charge) Mortars - "The standard round used in most 'Mech mortars, ..."
TO p. 386 - Alternative Munitions Table - Armor Piercing has a BV modifier of 0.2
Essentially, armor piercing rounds are the default ammo type for 'Mech Mortars so each ton of ammo gets the BV modifier. Thus with the MM/8 rounds 6 + (6 * 0.2) = 7.2.
-
The reason MML is assigning the ammo a BV is 7.2 is as follows;
TO p. 374 - Armor Piercing (Shaped-Charge) Mortars - "The standard round used in most 'Mech mortars, ..."
TO p. 386 - Alternative Munitions Table - Armor Piercing has a BV modifier of 0.2
Essentially, armor piercing rounds are the default ammo type for 'Mech Mortars so each ton of ammo gets the BV modifier. Thus with the MM/8 rounds 6 + (6 * 0.2) = 7.2.
That makes sense. I seem to be learning something new every day here!!
-
Minor Issue:
Issue: Naming Problem
Unit name: Dillinger Police Vehicle
Source: Technical Readout: Vehicle Annex, Revised
Details: MUL Entry for the Vehicle is listed as the Kressly Dillinger Police Vehicle (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4464/kressly-dillinger-police-vehicle-standard). Vehicle is never been called by it's manufacture's name first.
-
Noticed yesterday when I was scooping up a few Alpha Strike cards that the card for Kobold Battle Armour [SL/TAG] has not been amended to the new 4/5/6 squad format, all the other variants are fine, just that one
-
Unit Name: Pegasus
Source: Technical Readout: Vehicle Annex, Revised
Issue: Missing from MUL, possibly wrong image used for different unit.
Details: This is a VTOL Support Vehicle, not the tank. Technically it could be referred to as Pegasus (VTOL).
This civilian passenger VTOL (Helicopter) sold in the Lyran Allance. The vehicle first appeared in the original publication of TRO: VA, but usually there is a entry for it with minimum information. There is none. The vehicles in this book are typically paired with related model, which is the Baronet Passenger VTOL (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3832/blackstone-baronet-passenger-vtol-standard). The MUL article uses smaller Pegasus's image instead of the bigger vtol image in the background which is the Baronet. Baronet has similar problem as the above mentioned Dillinger, with manufacture's name mixed into it's name for some reason as well.
edit: Fixing this link. sorry.
-
The manufacturer's name being included is occasionally used. Any of the DI series is an example. It isn't done often.
-
All of the TRVA entrees need to be reviewed for changes in TRVAr.
TRVA (the original) did list the manufacturer first on all the names. TRVAr dropped the manufacturer names.
The Pegasus is already in the MUL.
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3833/blackstone-pegasus-passenger-vtol-standard
-
I went through almost the entire MUL, compiling C3 units and discovered what I think are a few anomalies.
Does the Peacekeeper-2k (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6836/peacekeeper-pkp-2k) cost 47 or 48 points? Card says one thing, the MUL entry the other.
and
Why doesn't the Tenmaku (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5206/tenmaku-command-trailer-standard) show a result when you search for C3M units? (if the ballista shows up when you search for C3S, I'd think the tenmaku should for C3M)
and
Is the Bolla Tank Configuration B (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/411/bolla-stealth-tank-rots-b) supposed to have both a C3 master and a C3 slave? Is there a way to use both of them in the same game?
-
Peacekeeper is 48 PV, you caught mid update. It's also getting C3S and MHQ1. The card image hasn't been refreshed yet.
Tenmaku, perhaps you have the only show units with Battle Value box checked on your search? It should show up on a search for C3M.
Bolla, no. It can use one or the other but not both.
-
The MUL currently lists the intro date of the SWD-2 Swordsman (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/7182/swordsman-swd-2) as 2571. This is inconsistent with the source, XTRO: Primitives IV, which states that "Jerricho Industries nonetheless continued to refine and upgrade the design, ultimately debuting the SWD-2 model in 2482..." as well as the references to the SWD-2 and the remaining SWD-1s being the mainstay of the Federated Suns Terran March forces throughout the Davion Civil War, as the Davion Civil War ran from 2525-2540. From the text, 2571 is the date that Alexander Davion apparently transferred the bulk of the remaining Terran March units and the bulk of the Swordsmen in service to the Star League.
-
SWD-2 intro date fixed.
-
Some minor stuff:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4713/newgrange-iii-yardship-eyrines
Change spelling to "Erinyes"
cannot be reached by searching "erinyes"
cannot be reached by searching "yardship"
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4714/newgrange-iii-yardship-standard
cannot be reached by searching "yardship"
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4715/newgrange-yardship-standard
cannot be reached by searching "yardship"
"s" in "Yardship" should be capitalized
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5802/faslane-yardship-standard
"s" in "Yardship" should be capitalized
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=newgrange
Are the "Newgrange Yardship (Standard)" and "Newgrange III YardShip (Standard)" actually different ships?
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4715/newgrange-yardship-standard
The "Newgrange Yardship (Standard)" is listed as appearing in Jihad Hot Spots 3076, but without a record sheet. Did that really happen, or should its record sheet be listed as JHS3076 also?
-
I believe your "can't be searched by.." Are because you have the (checked by default) "only show units with battle value" option is checked. Uncheck that option and they should show up.
-
Some minor stuff:
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4713/newgrange-iii-yardship-eyrines
Change spelling to "Erinyes"
cannot be reached by searching "erinyes"
cannot be reached by searching "yardship"
umm... spelling? Did ya check your own first?? :P Do be careful on that as searching for erinyes pulls up protomechs instead of a yardship.
Also, I was able to pull it up with and w/o the BV checked. The search for "yardship" does require the Only units w/Battle Value to be unchecked to work.
-
Intro Dates are missing from the following ProtoMechs...
Procyon Z - 0 showing for Intro Date
Sprite Ultraheavy ProtoMech 3 - 0 showing for Intro Date
-
Yardship is not camel caps. If it was written that way in any book, the book is where the typo lies.
There are very few Camel caps in BattleTech.
-
I believe your "can't be searched by.." Are because you have the (checked by default) "only show units with battle value" option is checked. Uncheck that option and they should show up.
Thanks, I didn't think to try that, gimme a sec... nope, doesn't change anything for me. And even with that box checked, the newgranges all still show up when I search for "newgrange."
That's with Firefox 38.0.5 - I'm updating to 39 now to see if that makes a difference.
umm... spelling? Did ya check your own first?? :P
"Erinyes" should be correct for the ship too. That is how the books have it, isn't it?
Yardship is not camel caps. If it was written that way in any book, the book is where the typo lies.
There are very few Camel caps in BattleTech.
Explorer Corp writes it as "yard-ship" but I think the Jihad books all elevate it to the "DropShip, JumpShip, WarShip" format. Could make sense either way; guess it depends how weird you think it sounds to address it as a JumpShip (no standard KF core) or a WarShip (not meant for combat) instead. And half the entries are named with camel caps, so something will need fixing no matter which way you decide.
-
Also...
Rogue Bear-HR from XTRO: Clans - Missing from MUL
Rogue Bear-Hybrid from TRO: Prototypes - Missing from MUL
Thunderbird Upgrade LB-X - 0 showing for Intro Date
Thunderbird Upgrade ER Small Laser - 0 showing for Intro Date
Thunderbird Upgrade Small Pulse Laser - 0 showing for Intro Date
-
Okay: searching "yardship" gives me all four entries *IF* I enter it in the search box in the left column. When I enter it in the searchbox to the right on the menu bar, that's when it gives me just the Faslane and zero Newgranges. EDIT: Because when you search from the menu bar, the page resets the checkbox to its default value before executing the search! Please tell me you can fix that. :( /EDIT
All three Newgranges still show up no matter which box I search from, and still with no regard for whether the "Only Units w/ Battle Value" box is checked or not.
-
You doany have to list units with no intro date. If it doesn't have an intro date, it's because we don't know yet. We already there are units with no intro date. Thanks.
If you have information on what the intro date should be, then post.
-
Also...
Rogue Bear-HR from XTRO: Clans - Missing from MUL
Rogue Bear-Hybrid from TRO: Prototypes - Missing from MUL
Thunderbird Upgrade LB-X - 0 showing for Intro Date
Thunderbird Upgrade ER Small Laser - 0 showing for Intro Date
Thunderbird Upgrade Small Pulse Laser - 0 showing for Intro Date
http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4932/rogue-bear-heavy-battle-armor-hr
The hybrid is also already on the MUL.
-
You doany have to list units with no intro date. If it doesn't have an intro date, it's because we don't know yet. We already there are units with no intro date. Thanks.
If you have information on what the intro date should be, then post.
Ok, sorry, I didn't know that missing intro dates were known to you guys. I don't have that kind of info to provide...if I did, I would have provided it.
Not sure why the Rogue Bears did Not come up previously, they are showing now when I search, but not when I had posted that.
Thanks for your answer...
-
As per Welshman's request:
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/ask-the-lead-developers/shogun-shg-2h-intro-date/ (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/ask-the-lead-developers/shogun-shg-2h-intro-date/)
All TROs with info on this unit say it was an "SLDF design" and intended for Kerensky's war against the Amaris Empire. But in 2771, the production date, the SLDF was nowhere near Graham IV or Mitchell Vehicles' satellite installations. They didn't arrive to liberate this world until 2776. So...
(1) Was this a design commissioned by the SLDF during the Reunification War, but put into service with by Amaris Empire?
..or..
(2) Is the 2771 intro date in error?
- Bump
-
The only entry specifically on the 2H is in Operation Klondike. It provides the 2771 date and Graham IV as the primary factory. The original design for it was from the late 26th century. Mitchell was not awarded the contract to produce it until after Graham IV was liberated.
-
The only entry specifically on the 2H is in Operation Klondike. It provides the 2771 date and Graham IV as the primary factory. The original design for it was from the late 26th century. Mitchell was not awarded the contract to produce it until after Graham IV was liberated.
Impossible, since Graham IV wasn't assaulted until 2776. (Liberation of Terra II, Page 47)
-
That would be a question for the developers and possibly errata for OP:K (and then the MUL). OP:K only lists the primary production facility. It does not indicate if there was a smaller site or temporary production facility prior to the contract being awarded. With the sharing of a lot of components with the Stalker, it may have been some alternative form of production other than mass production for the first five years. It could just be a wrong date although the later date clashes with all fluff due to timing. No matter which it is, it isn't an issue for the MUL until a date gets changed elsewhere.
-
We'll review it. The Ask the Developers already pushed it to us :).
-
When searching for Raven Alliance units during the Dark Ages, IS Clan General units aren't showing up in the search results (i.e. The Koshi 2 will show up in IS Clan General or Clan Wolf but NOT for the Raven Alliance.) Is that supposed to be that way or is that errata? Thanks!
-
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1035/fast-recon-cavalry-point-67th-battlemech-cluster-iota-galaxy (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1035/fast-recon-cavalry-point-67th-battlemech-cluster-iota-galaxy)
http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3116/submersible-mechanized-infantry-kraken-unleashed-the-mermen (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/3116/submersible-mechanized-infantry-kraken-unleashed-the-mermen)
Should these infantry units only have 1 Armor point.
20 Troopers / 15 (Damage Divisor 2 / 2 (Mechcanized) ) = 1.33 Fractions round normal = 1
Thanks
-
Should these infantry units only have 1 Armor point.
This is a great way of raising up issues with the MUL. Thank you for posing this as a question and letting the team review to see if there is really an issue.
Best,
Joel BC
Catalyst
-
Issue : Phoenix Hawk LAM Mk 1
Problem: Pictures from Camspecs zeroing in on the wrong "Phoenix" Instead of the Phoenix Hawk LAM MK 1 its showing the Phoenix Medium Mech from Rim Worlds Republic.
Location: (Here) http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4824/phoenix-hawk-lam-mk-i-phx-hk1 (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4824/phoenix-hawk-lam-mk-i-phx-hk1)
NCKestrel: Unfortunately, that's not something we can fix any time soon. The links are generated by the server following an algorithm and there's no manual control. It's a known issue, but not one we can fix at this time.
-
Impossible, since Graham IV wasn't assaulted until 2776. (Liberation of Terra II, Page 47)
Date changed to 2777. Thank you for pointing this out.
-
The Banshee BNC-1E's damage values are calculated incorrectly. I suspect that the heat values for a standard PPC were used, while the Primitive Prototype PPC that it mounts increases the heat burden enough to render it 2/2/2 with OV1. Considering that the intro date of the standard PPC is 2460 and the intro date of the -1E is 2445 I'm pretty sure this is the discrepancy.
Clarifying with calculation:
(2.425 * 16)/(25-4) → (38.8/21) → 1.8 short range damage
(2.5 * 16)/(25-4) → (38.8/21) → 1.9 medium range damage
(1.5 * 16)/(18 – 4) → (24/14) → 1.7 long range damage
This should modify the -1E's PV down to 38, as well (-3 for change in damage, +1 for OV1)
-
The Archer ARC-9K (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/87)'s Alpha Strike card gives it both the LRM and SRM specials. If I understand the relevant ruling on MMLs (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/alpha-strike/conversion-of-mmls-with-artemis-iv-to-alpha-strike/msg1062320/#msg1062320) correctly, it should have neither because its MMLs would need to combine for at least 2 points of heat-adjusted medium range damage to qualify...and even before taking heat into account four MML 5s only add up to 1.8 there.
And while I'm looking at it for comparison purposes, there's got to be something fishy with the as far as I'm aware all-but-identical ARC-9KC (http://masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/6875/archer-arc-9kc). Not only does it lack the specials, it also loses one point of damage at all ranges by comparison...which doesn't make sense as it only trades a single light PPC in for an ER medium laser so it can upgrade its C3 slave to a boosted model. That should leave its damage output at short and medium ranges identical to the 9K's (the small short-range boost gets lost in rounding), and adding up the numbers at long range where the ERML cannot contribute still comes out to 2.2 rounded up to 3 as well.
NCKestrel: yes, the SRM and LRM should be removed from ARC-9K. and the 9KC should be 4/4/3. Adjusted cards, and PV on 9KC.
-
The Banshee BNC-1E's damage values are calculated incorrectly. I suspect that the heat values for a standard PPC were used, while the Primitive Prototype PPC that it mounts increases the heat burden enough to render it 2/2/2 with OV1. Considering that the intro date of the standard PPC is 2460 and the intro date of the -1E is 2445 I'm pretty sure this is the discrepancy.
Clarifying with calculation:
(2.425 * 16)/(25-4) → (38.8/21) → 1.8 short range damage
(2.5 * 16)/(25-4) → (38.8/21) → 1.9 medium range damage
(1.5 * 16)/(18 – 4) → (24/14) → 1.7 long range damage
This should modify the -1E's PV down to 38, as well (-3 for change in damage, +1 for OV1)
The rules for Prototype PPC in XTR Primitives vol2 doesn't mention anything about increased heat. Are there updated prototype ppc rules somewhere that have the increased heat?
-
That could very well be an error on SSW's part. It's listed as 15 heat there, and that's my only access to the design (I don't have Primitives Vol. 2).
-
The tables in the AS Companion have it at 15 Heat, as does IntOps.
-
And just to add Jihad Secrets p. 146: "Primitive prototypical energy weapons (lasers and PP Cs) will produce 50 percent more heat when fired (rounding up)."
-
Yeah, I was worried I had missed a rule...
BNC-1E being updated to 2/2/2 with OV1 and PV 38. Card should update within 24 hours.
-
Any update on the LRM Carrier (Primitive/Standard) issue?
-
After the recent errata to artillery on airborne aerospace units, are there any aerospace units that have artillery weapons that didn't have the special before? This applies even to those that still can't fire them while airborne, such as the Transit 13G (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/5274?skill=4), which mounts a Long Tom Cannon but does not have the special.
-
After the recent errata to artillery on airborne aerospace units, are there any aerospace units that have artillery weapons that didn't have the special before? This applies even to those that still can't fire them while airborne, such as the Transit 13G (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Card/5274?skill=4), which mounts a Long Tom Cannon but does not have the special.
Artillery Cannons are treated as normal direct-fire weapons when mounted on Aerospace units.
-
Even when landed? As is, even landed the Transit can't use the Long Tom as if it were a ground unit.
-
Not even when landed.
Artillery cannons for aerospace are included in their base damage values. They're effectively auto cannons.
-
Even when landed? As is, even landed the Transit can't use the Long Tom as if it were a ground unit.
It can use the Long Tom Cannon as a grounded artillery cannon just fine. The artillery cannon is not and has never been an artillery piece.
-
It can use the Long Tom Cannon as a grounded artillery cannon just fine. The artillery cannon is not and has never been an artillery piece.
Not as of right now it can't! It does not have the ARTLTC special, so it's completely unable to, regardless of whether it can in TW or not.
Thanks for the clarification, nckestral.
-
The Grand Dragon DRG-9KC (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/1263/grand-dragon-drg-9kc) has its Battle Value listed as 1,147. According to my calculations (as well as those from MML v0.1.40), the BV for this unit should be 1,144. My calculations are as follows:
=============================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Light Ferro-Fibrous): 160 x 2.5 x 1 400.000
Internal Structure (Standard w/ XL Engine): 99 x 1.5 x 1 x 0.5 (+) 74.250 = 474.250
Gyro (Standard): 60 x 0.5 (+) 30.000 = 504.250
Explosive Ammunition: 2 Critical Spaces (-) 30.000 = 474.250
Defensive Movement Factor: +3 (*) 1.30 = 616.525
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 616.525
=============================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Medium Laser 46.000
Medium Laser (R) (+) 46.000 = 92.000
MML 5 (+) 22.500 = 114.500
MML 5 (Ammo 20) [SRM] (+) 6.000 = 120.500
MML 5 (Ammo 24) [LRM] (+) 6.000 = 126.500
Snub-Nose PPC (+) 165.000 = 291.500
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 60.000 = 351.500
Speed Factor: 9 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.500 = 527.250
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 527.250
=============================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 616.525
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 527.250 = 1,143.775
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,144
-
The Hatamoto-Chi HTM-28T (Shin) (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5457/hatamoto-chi-htm-28t-shin) has its Battle Value listed as 2,192. According to my calculations (as well as those from MML v0.1.40), the BV for this unit should be 2,213. The calculations are as follows:
================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Standard): 247 x 2.5 x 1 617.500
Internal Structure (Standard w/ Fusion Engine): 122 x 1.5 x 1 x 1 (+) 183.000 = 800.500
Gyro (Standard): 80 x 0.5 (+) 40.000 = 840.500
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (*) 1.20 = 1,008.600
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 1,008.600
================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
Gauss Rifle 320.000
Gauss Rifle (Ammo 8) (+) 40.000 = 360.000
Gauss Rifle (Ammo 8) (+) 40.000 = 400.000
Gauss Rifle (Ammo 8) (+) 40.000 = 440.000
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 48.000 = 488.000
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 48.000 = 536.000
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 48.000 = 584.000
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 48.000 = 632.000
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 48.000 = 680.000
Medium Pulse Laser (+) 48.000 = 728.000
Sword (+) 31.050 = 759.050
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 120.000 = 879.050
Speed Factor: 6 (Run) + 2 (Jump) (*) 1.370 = 1,204.299
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 1,204.299
================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 1,008.600
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 1,204.299 = 2,212.899
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 2,213
-
There are numerous (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=&HasBV=true&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasRole=None&HasBFAbility=&MinPV=&MaxPV=&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=) unit that have a role of "None", including 66 aerospace units.
Most of those are dropships and small craft, but there are also a few ASFs that surely shouldn't be "None". They include 3 sabres, (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=sabre&HasBV=true&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasRole=None&HasBFAbility=&MinPV=&MaxPV=&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=) 3 Centurions (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=centurion&HasBV=true&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasRole=None&HasBFAbility=&MinPV=&MaxPV=&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=), 3 eagles (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Filter?Name=eagle&HasBV=true&HasBV=false&MinTons=&MaxTons=&MinBV=&MaxBV=&MinIntro=&MaxIntro=&MinCost=&MaxCost=&HasRole=None&HasBFAbility=&MinPV=&MaxPV=&BookAuto=&FactionAuto=), a hellcat (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4299/hellcat-hct-313) and a deathstalker (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/4056/deathstalker-f-77a).
Surely those ASFs at least should have a specified role?
-
Surely those ASFs at least should have a specified role?
We'll look into it. And stop calling us Shirley. :)
Seriously, remember that on the internet no one can see you smile. When we read a line like this, given the number of trolls on the net, our first instinct is to assume sarcasm or snark and desire not to act.
Of course, being professionals, we still will.
Thanks,
Joel BC
Lead MUL Minion
-
(Copy-pasted from an earlier post in the wrong forum section)
Sorry if this is the wrong forum section for this (or if it's already been reported/asked)- long time reader, first time asker.
I was in the middle of writing up a "news timeline" timeline of sorts for a campaign I'm running, with manufacturers announcing new variants and the like when I came to 2769 and saw the BlackJack BJ-1X listed in MegaMek. Looking on MUL, the introductory date for the BJ-1X is indeed listed as 2769, whereas the BJ-1 is listed as 2757.
This strikes me as odd, as looking at TRO: 3039's Blackjack listing, under "Variants", the following is stated about the Blackjack:
"Early BlackJack prototypes differed from the production model significantly. Originally armed with twin GM Flashpoint flamers and additional heatsinks in place of each autocannon, it lacked jump jets but was powered by a VOX 225 power plant."
I'm assuming the "Early BlackJack prototype" is meant to be the BJ-1X variant, as it meets all the descriptors from TRO: 3039. As you can see, there's a clear contradiction there. How can the "Early BlackJack prototype" have an introduction year later than the BJ-1, the standard model of the BlackJack? Are the dates perhaps swapped mistakenly? Or am I just misreading something? Hopefully you guys can help me figure this out.
TL;DR
Blackjack BJ-1 introduction year on MUL is listed as 2757
Blackjack BJ-1X introduction year on MUL is listed as 2769
Blackjack BJ-1X is presumably the "Early Blackjack Prototype" listed on page 128 of TRO: 3039 (meets all descriptors), whereas the BJ-1 is the standard model. This doesn't make sense. Please clarify. Thanks!
-
The Mauler MAL-2R (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5460/mauler-mal-2r) has its Battle Value listed as 1,596. According to my calculations (as well as those from MML v0.1.40), the BV for this unit should be 1,586. The calculations are as follows:
================================================================================================
Defensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Armor (Ferro-Fibrous): 206 x 2.5 x 1 515.000
Internal Structure (Standard w/ Fusion Engine): 138 x 1.5 x 1 x 1 (+) 207.000 = 722.000
Gyro (Standard): 90 x 0.5 (+) 45.000 = 767.000
Defensive Movement Factor: +2 (*) 1.20 = 920.400
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Defensive Battle Rating: 920.400
================================================================================================
Offensive Battle Rating
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Offensive Equipment:
ER Medium Laser 62.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 62.000 = 124.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 62.000 = 186.000
ER Medium Laser (+) 62.000 = 248.000
LRM 10 (+) 90.000 = 338.000
LRM 10 (+) 90.000 = 428.000
LRM 10 (Ammo 12) (+) 11.000 = 439.000
LRM 10 (Ammo 12) (+) 11.000 = 450.000
Ultra AC/2 (+) 28.000 = 478.000
Ultra AC/2 (+) 28.000 = 506.000
Ultra AC/2 (+) 28.000 = 534.000
Ultra AC/2 (+) 28.000 = 562.000
Ultra AC/2 (Ammo 45) (+) 7.000 = 569.000
Ultra AC/2 (Ammo 45) (+) 7.000 = 576.000
Total 'Mech Tonnage: (+) 90.000 = 666.000
Speed Factor: 5 (Run) + 0 (Jump) (*) 1.000 = 666.000
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final Offensive Battle Rating: 666.000
================================================================================================
BattleMech Battle Value
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Defensive Battle Rating: 920.400
Offensive Battle Rating: (+) 666.000 = 1,586.400
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Final BattleMech Battle Value: 1,586
-
The Mauler MAL-2R (http://www.masterunitlist.info/Unit/Details/5460/mauler-mal-2r) has its Battle Value listed as 1,596. According to my calculations (as well as those from MML v0.1.40), the BV for this unit should be 1,586. The calculations are as follows:
Thanks for these, Mordel. If you think you know where the error is, that would be helpful in our analysis. Often these turn out to be bugs in the code for MML or SSW.
-
Locked at 50 pages. See the new thread at:
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=47774.0