Register Register

Author Topic: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads  (Read 141307 times)

Daryk

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16628
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Heh... I would expect no less of the CGL Rule Ninja Corps!  :D

monbvol

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10596
  • Flogging will continue until morale improves
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #991 on: 05 June 2020, 20:19:46 »
And I already have a question.

The pdfs are marked fourth printing but since they are new products shouldn't they be first printing again?

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9573
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #992 on: 05 June 2020, 21:27:09 »
It's still Tactical Operations, so no.  It's the same content, just split in two.

(Also, it should be the third printing: the previous release was supposed to be the third printing, but was never released in print, so this is the third.  This borks the errata document numbering, so I'll need to jigger things around a bit).
3028-3050 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info and Quirk lists.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

monbvol

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10596
  • Flogging will continue until morale improves
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #993 on: 05 June 2020, 21:53:43 »
Just trying to figure out what I need to notate when submitting errata as I am still rather inclined to submit official errata for that word salad at the end of the third paragraph of Patchwork Armor.

I do not envy you your task, especially as people will just notate it as the fourth printing because that is what the pdfs list them as.

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9573
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #994 on: 05 June 2020, 22:18:57 »
Yeah, I've held off doing anything for TacOps for the past six months since this was coming and I wanted to have everything moved over to the new version. 

For notations in general, all TO references should now use the new two-volume version.  But yes, please do submit errata for it.
3028-3050 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info and Quirk lists.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9573
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #995 on: 06 June 2020, 14:28:50 »
Errata for the year is out, though it's only a handful of new rulings in three products.

Over the next while if I can find the time I'm going to try for an inaugural release for the two TacOps books, collecting whatever has generated since December.  But if there's not a lot then it just might wait until next year's June release instead.
3028-3050 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info and Quirk lists.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Daryk

  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 16628
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #996 on: 06 June 2020, 14:35:23 »
Hopefully you saw my PM...

Dies Irae

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 725
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #997 on: 08 June 2020, 03:36:04 »
A bit of pedantry, but since there's no real way to submit errata for a novel?


BattleTech: Divided We Fall Novel

Print-on-Demand Edition
Page 120, Dominator Class BattleMech entry:

Power Plant: 225 XL Fusion (with Supercharger)

Possible typo as considering the 'Mechs speed is listed as a base 54 kph, would the Engine not be a 325 XL rather than a 225 XL?


Maelwys

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4663
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #998 on: 11 June 2020, 22:39:31 »
Its also listed as a Biped OmniMech, despite it apparently being a standard mech (assuming the actuators aren't messed up).

I was sort of wondering for Shrapnel, since the sniper weapons have some some issues, like missing the Dark Age Equipment rating, and for some odd reason the Star League sniper rifle isn't available in the Star League era...

monbvol

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10596
  • Flogging will continue until morale improves
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #999 on: 17 August 2020, 01:02:48 »
Noticed something that I know I warned about here made it into the Total Warfare 6.1 errata document for page 207 and Penetrating Critical Hits.

Put a preliminary errata to the errata in the appropriate thread to make sure information is not duplicated.

Which leaves the question of what would be a better replacement to the 5th paragraph should be?

Personally I'd go with either an example of a strike going directly to internal structure, possibly doubling up with damage/critical transfer depending on how much space winds up being available.

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9573
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1000 on: 17 August 2020, 01:25:44 »
It's not supposed to be there at all: it was supposed to have been replaced.  Looks like it's been like that since the fourth printing.  I'll flag it again for deletion.
3028-3050 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info and Quirk lists.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

monbvol

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 10596
  • Flogging will continue until morale improves
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1001 on: 17 August 2020, 01:56:54 »
Maybe it is that I am making myself stay up past when my body is demanding sleep but I have a sneaking suspicion I need to restate what I'm getting at to be safe.

As Total Warfare stands in the corrected 6th printing:

A tracked Support Vehicle with an Armored Chassis
modification and a BAR of 7, with 12 armor points per side,
takes a hit from a large laser to its front side (Hit Location
Roll result of 7). Because the laser’s 8 points of damage
exceeds the Support Vehicle’s BAR, a penetrating critical
hit has occurred, even though 4 points of armor remain in
the front.


Because the Support Vehicle has an Armored Chassis
modification, however, the roll for the penetrating critical
is modified by –1. When the attacker rolls for the critical,
his result of 6 becomes a 5, narrowly saving the unit from
a possible critical hit.


In a later turn, the same Support Vehicle takes a second
large laser hit to its front, in this case from a Hit Location
Roll result of 2. The laser causes a penetrating critical hit, has
breached the armor, and has struck a location that gives the
attacker an additional possible critical hit. The attacker rolls
three times for critical hit effects, modifying only the first
roll—the one for penetrating critical hits—by –1.


If, on the other hand, the Support Vehicle were struck by
an AC/5 using armor-piercing rounds, it would be forced to
make a critical hit check regardless of its BAR (see ArmorPiercing Ammunition, p. 206). If it had a BAR of less than 10,
the vehicle would add a +2 modifier to this check.


If, on the other hand, the Support Vehicle were struck by
an AC/5 using armor-piercing rounds, the vehicle would be
treated as if it had a BAR of 4 (7 / 2 = 3.5, rounding up to
4) rather than 7 for purposes of determining penetrating
critical hits. Both hits might do critical damage because the
autocannon’s damage points exceed the unit’s effective BAR,
even though together the two autocannon hits would only
eliminate 10 of the Support Vehicle’s 12 armor points


I color coded the paragraphs to make them stand out a bit more.

Now we both agree as evidenced by the linked rules question that paragraph 5(red) is in error.

The 6.1 errata document has this:

Damage [example text] (p. 207)
Replace the fifth paragraph with the following:
“If, on the other hand, the Support Vehicle were struck by an AC/5 using armor-piercing rounds, it would be forced to
make a critical hit check regardless of its BAR (see Armor-Piercing Ammunition, p. 206). If it had a BAR of less than 10, the
vehicle would add a +2 modifier to this check.

This is a duplication of paragraph 4(green).

So yes 5 can just be deleted and all be fine but like I have suggested I think it would be better to replace it with a new example.

If my suspicion is incorrect, no worries.

Dragon41673

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2220
    • Aries Games & Miniatures
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1002 on: 17 August 2020, 21:34:28 »
Hate to ask a stupid question, as I cannot find it easily on a search, but roughly how long does it typically take for a PDF to get updated with corrections?

I'm speaking specifically of the TRO Golden Century. I was going to buy it, but then I saw how many issues there are with it regarding incorrectly listed stuff within the record sheets...and am holding off.

Thanks
Owner - Aries Games & Miniatures

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9573
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1003 on: 17 August 2020, 21:44:21 »
Not stupid at all, and we have no problem with questions here.

There's no "typically", I'm afraid.  In the past, errata (outside of particularly bad errors that force a re-release of the product in the first day or two) was only added to a product when it came up for a reprint.  That tended to limit it to core rulebooks and TROs, since most BT books aren't reprinted.

Print On Demand is a new process to CGL, and so there's no real established procedure for how often the file will be updated.  I gather than any changes mean that the file has to be updated on the points of sale and then needs to be reapproved for printing again, which takes some time.  As such, I wouldn't expect it to happen all that often.

If you want an official answer by someone in a position to know, I suggest you post this question in the Ask The Lead Developers forum.  Thanks.
3028-3050 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info and Quirk lists.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Dragon41673

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2220
    • Aries Games & Miniatures
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1004 on: 20 August 2020, 10:25:45 »
No problem...thanks Xotl!
Owner - Aries Games & Miniatures

Empyrus

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5987
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1005 on: 01 September 2020, 14:06:16 »
Regarding StratOps refitting rules, i really have to wonder if jump jets are truly within Class-B refits? For example, pull medium lasers from a BattleMaster and fit jump jets in place of those.
Logically, jump jets seem a bit more complicated than that. But i guess this is a case of "canonical examples exists" and "BattleTech Magic, don't think about it too closely"?
Kinnol tank, JES III missile carrier, Simian, Quirinus and Centaur battle armor, Blade BLD-XR variant, Valiant VLT-3E variant, DI Multipurpose VTOL, Void (Minelayer) for fan funding
(Also Atlas AS7-K2)

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9573
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1006 on: 01 September 2020, 14:14:47 »
There's two issues at play here: the desire to make these straightforward and simple (the previous version was more complex, and generated a ton of questions as a result), and the fact that there are a ton of refits out there in canon that I have to accomodate (in other words, the refits were made before the rules to allow them existed, and those designers were almost certainly not thinking about what should and should not be possible except in the broadest terms).

I don't want to introduce any more exceptions than I have to, and the existence of large numbers of refits in canon ties my hands a good deal.  For example, I'd prefer to have had refitting engine heat sinks something that can't be done in the field, but there's two mechs that are field refits that do that, so it has to be Class B.

So yeah, BattleTech Magic.
« Last Edit: 01 September 2020, 14:26:56 by Xotl »
3028-3050 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info and Quirk lists.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=1219.0

Empyrus

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 5987
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1007 on: 01 September 2020, 14:22:21 »
I understand, was mostly wondering (and confirming) the jump jet thing. BattleTech technicians must be magicians  ;D
Kinnol tank, JES III missile carrier, Simian, Quirinus and Centaur battle armor, Blade BLD-XR variant, Valiant VLT-3E variant, DI Multipurpose VTOL, Void (Minelayer) for fan funding
(Also Atlas AS7-K2)

 

Register