Talk:Roughneck

In short

Roughneck: https://mwomercs.com/roughneck

Non-canon Heavy Mech created by PGI for the MechWarrior Online.

May be fully canonical; see below. Frabby (talk) 14:32, 23 March 2018 (EDT)

Discussion

Thanks for writing article for this mech, Cyc :) --ManganMan (talk) 15:09, 3 December 2016 (PST)

Loader King?

I am not familiar with the Loader King am I right in thinking that they have actually added two 'Mechs to the BTu in one fell swoop?--Dmon (talk) 18:29, 3 December 2016 (PST)

Correct. Technical Readout: Vehicle Annex mentions Achernar make multiple IndustrialMechs and the naming format matches the Dig King, but cannot locate it being specifically mentioned before.Cyc (talk) 19:03, 3 December 2016 (PST)

Model Designation

Might want to keep an eye on the model prefix. While the lore article uses the "RGK" prefix, the sale page and FAQ both use the "RGH" designation.

Also built them in Skunkwerks, and the 1A's cost comes to 5,209,573 c-bills. 68.51.25.163 19:35, 3 December 2016 (PST)

MechWarrior Online Picture

Is there a specific rules here on Sarna to use MwO graphics? Or it's just a placeholder?--ManganMan (talk) 02:44, 4 December 2016 (PST)

Non-Canon?

I was under the impression that the Roughneck was specifically canon. With a blessing from Catalyst and even a potential appearance in the upcoming Battletech strategy game. Though admittedly, I can't seem the exact point where this was declared. Apparently at some point during MechCon 2017? --R0sshk (talk) 16:09, 8 December 2016 (PST)

Many people have indicated this to be the case at panel with Randal and Alex, but cannot locate eveb video of it or any other written confirmation by CGL, thus Sarna erroring on the side of caution.Cyc (talk) 16:19, 8 December 2016 (PST)

Personally I am the opinion they should remain apocryphal until they ever appear (which sounds like a huge IF at this point) rather than pre-preemptively giving them 'canoncity' sections, right now I see no citation for things Randall has apparently said Thehawk (talk) 14:33, 22 March 2018 (EDT)

Randall's citations are on the main MechWarrior Online page. I found Ray Arrastia's recent statements to Frabby on the CGL forum. My understanding is that fluff=canon, design=not canon, image=not canon.--Cache (talk) 18:29, 22 March 2018 (EDT)

I recommend centralizing this discussion at Talk:MechWarrior_Online --Cache (talk) 18:34, 22 March 2018 (EDT)

Agree. In the meantime, I've updated the Canonicity section (here and for the Sun Spider as well. Given that there doesn't seem to be user consensus as to wether or not these 'Mechs are canon after all, the default should be to tag them as apocryphal and explain the situation in the Canon section of the respective articles, so that users have all the facts and can decide for themselves. Frabby (talk) 14:32, 23 March 2018 (EDT)