Editing Talk:MechWarrior 5: Mercenaries/BattleMechs

==Use of Italics==
The use of italics seems to be redundant now that we have a sortable source column. I'm wondering if we might be able to use it in another helpful way: There are a few dozen 'Mechs that can only be found in markets and will never spawn on the battlefield outside of scripted missions. These 'Mechs are identified in the Mech Database with factions of only ComStar, Mercenaries, or No Data Available (this is confirmed by a PGI dev in a Reddit post). Would anyone object to using the italics to identify these 'Mechs? --[[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 23:53, 25 February 2022 (EST)
:The table already contains a lot of info. I think you are reaching the point where you would need to remove some things in order to include other things. Doing things like using italics to indicate things sends us down the path of esoteric indicators. I think a point could be reached where somebody reading could potentially be better off going onto steam and reading a proper players guide.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 05:19, 26 February 2022 (EST)
::Well, the page has a lot of info but I think it's all very clearly and neatly presented. It's become the #1 resource for MW5 players and I think we can all be proud of that. I've seen only positive feedback about how the page has improved over the last few months. Regarding what I proposed, I don't think it's that esoteric, but no worries, I'm fine either way. --[[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 08:28, 26 February 2022 (EST) Updated: [[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 07:41, 2 March 2022 (EST)

==General Page Format and ideas==
Hello all, I am [[User:Black Lanner|Black Lanner]]. About the setup of the page, I personally believe that there should be no empty spaces in the table, no column should be wider than needed, and information for each 'Mech should be such that the average player should be able to decide for themselves what 'Mechs are best for them, based on the information, without too much trial and error. I have been working primarily with Csdavis715, for how the page currently looks. Questions? Comments? Critiques? Please, I know how I want to make it look, but, I am on the Autistic Spectrum, so, my way can be counter intuitive to others. I want this table to be as clean, crisp, and usable as possible.<br>[[User:Black Lanner|Black Lanner]] ([[User talk:Black Lanner|talk]]) 15:47, 26 December 2021 (EST)Black Lanner
:Good job, Black Lanner! You did most of the heavy work; I just did some formatting and minor edits in recent days to polish it up. You can be proud of your contributions to the page. --[[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 00:50, 9 January 2022 (EST)

=='Mech Costs==
Hello MW5 editors and fans!  I've encountered a problem trying to update the database with the costs of all the 'Mechs.  The price in the official technical manual seems to be different than in-game.  For example, the manual lists the BLR-1G at 8,612,678 but in-game I found one at a Federated Commonwealth hub (brand new of course) at 9,473,946 at indifferent faction standing.  Additionally, there may be some differences between playing the Core and DLC versions, as has been noted in the High Reward Quests.  If no solution can be determined, I would recommend removing this column from the page.  I think the majority of players have a +/- reputation with any given house anyway, which changes the cost values.
-csdavis715 (Aug 27, 2021)

: I think it would be good to remove it.  There are some Mechs listed as quest reward or no cost, so that could be noted in the source column. jgrahl 8/27/2021

: I concur with removing that column. (To sign your posts easily, use the button with the cursive lettering on the right-side of the button bar.) --[[User:Revanche|Revanche]] <sup>([[User_talk:Revanche|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Revanche|contribs]])</sup> 17:55, 27 August 2021 (EDT)

==SLDF Variants==
I think we need to clarify which mechs we want to highlight blue as SLDF variants.  There are a lot of mechs used in MW5 that, as far as I can tell from the Sarna database, are the same variants with the same weapons as they were during the SL era.  But then we'd be highlighting a couple dozen more mechs.  So far it seems only SLDF variants with Lostech weapons, FF, or ES have been getting highlighted.  Please advise for consistency.
-csdavis715 (9/25/21)
:Hey csdavis715, Looking at the list I am not entierly convinced why they are marked blue in the first place. If it is to do with what technology they carry then it would make more sense to mark them as "advanced tech" or something. If it is for lore purposes we can likely drop the tag entierly.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 21:39, 27 September 2021 (EDT)
::It looks like user Arcalane created/started the blue highlighting on June 21st this year. We can ask him/her. If we ultimately decide to keep it, I think we can do as you suggested and just mark the ones that come with default SL-era LosTech because most of them will coincide with SLDF mechs anyway. -csdavis715
:::I brought back the blue cell background specifically only for the SLDF Royals on user Black Lanner's suggestion. To keep your September comments in mind, I mentioned that they featured advanced tech. Hopefully this little test is appealing to all, and please let me know if you have strong feelings either way. --[[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 22:53, 24 December 2021 (EST)

==Equipment==
Looking through the list some of the info has me slightly confused as to its source, namely the FF, ES and XL technologies. As far as I know the game does not specify what tech is used?--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 04:55, 21 January 2022 (EST)
:There are a lot of ways to verify if a mech has FF, ES, or XL engine. People who have the knowhow to unpack game files can find this information within; those without can look at the free tonnage and compare different variants of the same 'Mech. If both are fully stripped of armor/gear and one has more free tons, this is the indication of ES or XL. The extra space with XL is significant, maybe 8-15 tons depending on 'Mech size (if the engine max speed is the same); while the extra space with ES is about 1.5-5 tons. With FF, the weight per point is different. IIRC, 10 points of normal armor is .31 tons, while 10 points of FF is .28 tons. Also, mechs with FF armor cost twice as much to repair. So things like free tons and damage costs are signs they have this tech and then there are ways to investigate in-game. Usually I check Sarna or other online references to confirm my results. --[[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 05:47, 21 January 2022 (EST)
::I thought that might be the answer, if it is buried in the game files or it is worked out by assessing free tonage and number crunching etc, that is "original research", as such it would not qualify for the wiki as the information is not presented in the game. We can use such info to "support" info, like your discovery of the T2 SSRM2 bug, that is a perfect example of something that should be noted and original research into the game files is good. As it stands, all the FF, ES & XL stuff would need a note explaining it.--[[User:Dmon|Dmon]] ([[User talk:Dmon|talk]]) 06:19, 21 January 2022 (EST)
:::Sounds good, we can add a note. Actually, it's a shame that it's not already presented. I think it's important to explain this info to players who are curious about how mechs are affected with this tech. --[[User:Csdavis715|Csdavis715]] ([[User talk:Csdavis715|talk]]) 06:35, 21 January 2022 (EST)