Talk:Mad Cat III

This article is within the scope of the BattleMechs WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve BattleTechWiki's coverage of BattleMechs. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.

Is this a Clan Sea Fox Battlemech or a Clan Diamond Shark Battlemech? It's in the category of Clan Sea Fox, but it is described as being a Clan Diamond Shark mech.

Also: Should the pages Clan Diamond Shark Mechs and Clan Sea Fox Mechs be cross linked or combined?— The preceding unsigned comment was provided by (talkcontribs) 15:39, 30 August 2009.

I think having it in both categories is long as the 'Mech was used by the Clan when it used both names. If it was only introduced and used after the re-assumed the Sea Fox name, then it should only be listed as a Clan Sea Fox name. (I really don't know and will leave it to better informed Editors.) --Revanche (talk|contribs) 02:05, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
I disagree, the Mech was new when Dark Age Era began. Clan Diamond Shark name was no longer used, thus is only Clan Sea Fox BattleMech as well, Clan BattleMech. It was semi-widely used by Inner Sphere customers as well. Unless the design came into being prior to name change, it should not be listed as both. -- Wrangler 21:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Stats Retroconned[edit]

Hi guys/gals, the new upcoming TRO: Prototypes features the Mad Cat III, but it appears previous info on the 'Mech has been at the moment altered. This is due in part because TRO stats for MatCat III (prime) and Mad Cat III 2 are differient from the original Record Sheet Book's versions. The article is going need to be re-written and mentioned original Dark Age variants listed seperately. Its been mentioned that older stats may appear as renumber variants later. -- Wrangler 00:36, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Mad Cat III 5 Errata?[edit]

The Mad Cat III 5 is 1 ton underweight as presented in RS3145 NTNU. Has that been corrected anywhere? This page says it's got maxed out armor, which the record sheet doesn't have, although that'd correct the underweight issue.— The preceding unsigned comment was provided by ‎ (talkcontribs) .