Difference between revisions of "Talk:Technical Readout 3028"
Sarna News
- Bad ‘Mechs - Sentinel
- HEXTECH Review - Wave 3 Brings More Urban Options To Your Battlefield
- Your BattleTech News Round-Up For March, 2024
- Crashing 'Mechs With Jennifer Brozek, Author Of The Rogue Academy Trilogy
- Getting The Word Out With Rem Alternis, Catalyst Community & Marketing Director
- Read more →
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Hi. I'm totally against this being on the server. We went though a purge years ago to remove this so Sarna would stand out being source of canon or at least non-fan made materials. Why is this here? [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] ([[User talk:Wrangler|talk]]) 18:30, 23 November 2016 (PST) | Hi. I'm totally against this being on the server. We went though a purge years ago to remove this so Sarna would stand out being source of canon or at least non-fan made materials. Why is this here? [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] ([[User talk:Wrangler|talk]]) 18:30, 23 November 2016 (PST) | ||
:It isn't. This is just an article about it (which is in line with [[Policy:Fanon]], as it's a sufficiently high-profile product), and like in other such articles it includes a download link. All good. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 22:20, 23 November 2016 (PST) | :It isn't. This is just an article about it (which is in line with [[Policy:Fanon]], as it's a sufficiently high-profile product), and like in other such articles it includes a download link. All good. [[User:Frabby|Frabby]] ([[User talk:Frabby|talk]]) 22:20, 23 November 2016 (PST) | ||
| + | ::I understand, I'm just worried having it listed on the server. No offense, but I'm worried despite it having the Fandom Template on it. I worry in search a new player will think it is canon. We don't have great rep on the forums due to some of the early fan stuff in the past. -- [[User:Wrangler|Wrangler]] ([[User talk:Wrangler|talk]]) 11:20, 26 November 2016 (PST) | ||
Revision as of 15:20, 26 November 2016
Highlander
Happy to add a different camo scheme for the Highlander - anyone know of a unit that has one at this time period? Justin_Kase (talk) 08:34, 23 November 2016 (PST)
- I'm drawing a blank here. Something in the back of my mind says it was associated with House Liao, but generally the Highlander is not exactly a 3025 era posterchild... Frabby (talk) 22:20, 23 November 2016 (PST)
- Quite correct, the Highlander first became a Capellan manufactured design (under license) with Technical Readout: 3025 Revised thanks to the Unseen removals, Technical Readout: 3039 expanding on these Capellan rebuilt models. That said, no Capellan line units circa 3028 are noted as being Highlander users, but Combat Manual: Mercenaries has at least two merc units (with Capellan ties no less) who are confirmed as having/preserving Highlanders during the late Succession Wars - the 15th Dracons and the Northwind Highlanders.Cyc (talk) 01:26, 24 November 2016 (PST)
- Thank you both! I will work up a camo spec for one of them, likely the 15th Dracon, seeing as I had never heard of them before and it will help to expose people to another cool new unit. Hopefully, the new model that PGI releases in December will make for a Gray Death Legion mech (or be a good swap out for another that can then be GDL). That should fix that anachronism :) Justin_Kase (talk) 07:05, 24 November 2016 (PST)
- Quite correct, the Highlander first became a Capellan manufactured design (under license) with Technical Readout: 3025 Revised thanks to the Unseen removals, Technical Readout: 3039 expanding on these Capellan rebuilt models. That said, no Capellan line units circa 3028 are noted as being Highlander users, but Combat Manual: Mercenaries has at least two merc units (with Capellan ties no less) who are confirmed as having/preserving Highlanders during the late Succession Wars - the 15th Dracons and the Northwind Highlanders.Cyc (talk) 01:26, 24 November 2016 (PST)
Non-Canon, Fan made products should not be on server
Hi. I'm totally against this being on the server. We went though a purge years ago to remove this so Sarna would stand out being source of canon or at least non-fan made materials. Why is this here? Wrangler (talk) 18:30, 23 November 2016 (PST)
- It isn't. This is just an article about it (which is in line with Policy:Fanon, as it's a sufficiently high-profile product), and like in other such articles it includes a download link. All good. Frabby (talk) 22:20, 23 November 2016 (PST)
- I understand, I'm just worried having it listed on the server. No offense, but I'm worried despite it having the Fandom Template on it. I worry in search a new player will think it is canon. We don't have great rep on the forums due to some of the early fan stuff in the past. -- Wrangler (talk) 11:20, 26 November 2016 (PST)