Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads

[ntin]

Not sure if this is a big deal but on the Total Warfare thread post #60 has the errata

WITH:
"F: Flak. When used by any unit against airborne aerospace units or VTOLs and WiGEs, apply a –2 to-hit modifier in addition to any other modifiers such weapons might convey."

The wrong conjunction is being used in the first half of the sentence in “or VTOLs and WiGEs”. For the rule to follow the second unit identified would need to be both a VTOL and WiGE. It is also somewhat ambiguous as aerospace is classified as a type of unit where VTOLs and WiGEs are not. 

"F: Flak. When used by any unit against airborne aerospace, VTOL, or WiGE, units apply a –2 to-hit modifier in addition to any other modifiers such weapons might convey."

[Paul]

I see what you mean. I think the issue is that VTOLs are WIGE are both technically Ground Units, who have some special rules associated with them, and the phrasing tries to grasp at that. I'll clean up the phrasing.

[Snake Eyes]

I just down loaded the updated infantry tables, i've gotta ask, the listing for the Federated-Barrett M61A Laser Rifle shows 3.83 damage, is this per rifle or for the whole infantry platoon. Same question regarding the Mauser IIC (9.82 damage)

[Xotl]

As far as I know that is per weapon, just like it always has been.  That does mean a Mauser IIC is as good as a Heavy Support Laser though, which surprises me.  However, I know earlier reports of inflated damage were confirmed as accurate, so... 

You might want to post a question in Ask the Writers with any values you feel are out of whack.

[Snake Eyes]

As far as I know that is per weapon, just like it always has been.  That does mean a Mauser IIC is as good as a Heavy Support Laser though, which surprises me.  However, I know earlier reports of inflated damage were confirmed as accurate, so... 

You might want to post a question in Ask the Writers with any values you feel are out of whack.

Ok, will do

[HABeas2]

Hi,

I just down loaded the updated infantry tables, i've gotta ask, the listing for the Federated-Barrett M61A Laser Rifle shows 3.83 damage, is this per rifle or for the whole infantry platoon. Same question regarding the Mauser IIC (9.82 damage)

I show the Federated-Barrett M61A as 0.75 damage, and the Mauser IIC as 1.37 w/ non-infantro ammo (0.90 w/ Inferno ammo) in my latest errata (dated 29 March 2013)

The values you quoted are actually the Battle Values per rifle.

Thanks,

- Herb

[Xotl]

Yeah, I missed that damage was mentioned, but BV was being used.  I take it that everything is all clear then, Snake Eyes?

[Snake Eyes]

Yeah, I missed that damage was mentioned, but BV was being used.  I take it that everything is all clear then, Snake Eyes?

Thanks Herb & Xotl, that does clear things up O0

[Snake Eyes]

Not sure if this deserves errata, but it seems that every variant of the Mad Cat Mk IV has 2 tons left over, and enough room to add either extra heat sinks or ammo

[Paul]

Did you notice the armored gyro?

And yes, errors like that would require errata in the respective TRO. While underweight designs are permissible by the rules, we don't make em that way.

[Snake Eyes]

Did you notice the armored gyro?

And yes, errors like that would require errata in the respective TRO. While underweight designs are permissible by the rules, we don't make em that way.

Ok, now i know i have bad eyes #P

Thanks Paul

[Paul]

Ok, now i know i have bad eyes #P

Thanks Paul

No worries, it's easy to miss.

[Mr Balk]

The Wars of Reaving Supplemental

Just noticed the Osteon loadout MOD and noticed that a number of these actually have hand actuators noted on the Record Sheets:
B Page76
C Page 77
D Page 78
Jaguar page 83 

What is troubling is that the D (RA & LA hands) and Jaguar (LA with the retractable blade arm) being relases by IWM as Online Exclusive models do not have the hands present.

Is the error in The Wars of Reaving Supplemental or a quality check issue on approving the mini for IWM to produce?

Mr Balk

[Snake Eyes]

I looked in the TRO-3075 errata & the RS-3075 errata, but it seems that the JES 1 is 4 tons underweight....has there been a correction to this?

[jymset]

I get 50 tons when I count it all up?

[Dragon41673]

The Wars of Reaving Supplemental

Just noticed the Osteon loadout MOD and noticed that a number of these actually have hand actuators noted on the Record Sheets:
B Page76
C Page 77
D Page 78
Jaguar page 83 

What is troubling is that the D (RA & LA hands) and Jaguar (LA with the retractable blade arm) being relases by IWM as Online Exclusive models do not have the hands present.

Is the error in The Wars of Reaving Supplemental or a quality check issue on approving the mini for IWM to produce?

Mr Balk

There are a lot of people waiting to hear back on this question...could someone please look in to it & post in here...thanks!

[Kit deSummersville]

Huh, if only there was a place one could ask questions of the lead developers....

[A. Lurker]

Hello,

That's not an error. The data presented is as intended.

Thanks,

- Herb

So it would be safe to assume that

(a) the Clan Small Aerospace Cockpit is functionally identical to and follows the same rules as the Inner Sphere model (as is the case for their BattleMech equivalents, except that there it's explicitly pointed out in a footnote) and

(b) "~3081" covers both the level transition and the Clan introduction date?

[HABeas2]

Hi,

Yup.

Thanks,

- Herb

[Moonsword]

Ladies and gentlemen, again, please do not post responses or comments in the errata threads.  The exceptions to this are outlined in the special rules for this forum.  I've moved the offending post and the response by the line developer into this thread.

[WeaponX]

As there's no errata thread for TRO 3057 Revised and this somewhat relates a rule on page 296 of Strategic Operations regarding how to calculate the maximum number of Dropships a Jumpship could carry (Jumpship Tonnage divided by 50000, rounded down), I'd like to point out that the Starlord (274,000 tons, 6 Dropships) and Monolith (430,000 tons, 9 Dropships) in TRO 3057 Revised don't adhere to the rules as the Starlord should only be able to carry 5 Dropships (274,000/50000 = 5.48, rounded down to 5) and the Monolith 8 Dropships (430000/50000 =  8.6, rounded down to 8 ). 

The way I see it there are two options, either change the stats on TRO 3057 Revised, or simply tweak the rule in Strategic Operations into something like:  To determine the maximum Dropship carrying capacity of a Jumpship or Warship, divide its Tonnage by 50000, and for ships under 250000 tons, round down the calculated figure to get a whole number, but for ships 250000 tons and over, round up the calculated figure instead.

[A. Lurker]

Found what may be an error in the current TacOps errata document (version 3.03). It states on p. 111 that the C-bill cost for the Extended LRM-15 should be 218,750. This doesn't seem to fit well into the general ELRM cost progression (see below), but would appear to be a better match for the Enhanced LRM-15, whose C-bill cost is indeed a bit the odd one out:

ELRM-5: 60,000 C-bills
ELRM-10: 200,000 C-bills
ELRM-15: 350,000 C-bills pre-, 218,750 (?) post-errata
ELRM-20: 500,000 C-bills

NLRM-5: 37,500 C-bills
NLRM-10: 125,000 C-bills
NLRM-15: 157,000 C-bills
NLRM-20: 312,500 C-bills

So...typo? Should that erratum refer to the Enhanced LRM-15 instead of the Extended one?

[Moonsword]

Post that in Ask the Writers, please.

[Moonsword]

As there's no errata thread for TRO 3057 Revised and this somewhat relates a rule on page 296 of Strategic Operations regarding how to calculate the maximum number of Dropships a Jumpship could carry (Jumpship Tonnage divided by 50000, rounded down), I'd like to point out that the Starlord (274,000 tons, 6 Dropships) and Monolith (430,000 tons, 9 Dropships) in TRO 3057 Revised don't adhere to the rules as the Starlord should only be able to carry 5 Dropships (274,000/50000 = 5.48, rounded down to 5) and the Monolith 8 Dropships (430000/50000 =  8.6, rounded down to 8 ). 

The way I see it there are two options, either change the stats on TRO 3057 Revised, or simply tweak the rule in Strategic Operations into something like:  To determine the maximum Dropship carrying capacity of a Jumpship or Warship, divide its Tonnage by 50000, and for ships under 250000 tons, round down the calculated figure to get a whole number, but for ships 250000 tons and over, round up the calculated figure instead.

Technical Readout: 3057 Revised has a number of issues in its stats.  To my understanding, we're not currently collecting errata for those statistics (hence the lack of an errata thread).  I have forwarded the matter on for greater review, however.

[Snake Eyes]

The ECM is part of the Interdictor configuration and is mounted in the turret.

If thats the case, then the two need to be separated into to two entries the way other TROs have them.....

[Moonsword]

Ladies and gentlemen, again, please do not post responses or comments in the errata threads even if you're responding to someone like a member of the MUL Team who is authorized to reply in those threads.

[Paul]

If thats the case, then the two need to be separated into to two entries the way other TROs have them.....

There's 6 configurations indicated, to separate them all would've taken up too much space.

[Snake Eyes]

Ladies and gentlemen, again, please do not post responses or comments in the errata threads even if you're responding to someone like a member of the MUL Team who is authorized to reply in those threads.

Sorry about that, lack of sleep and too much caffeine...

@Paul: Yeah, looking at the Shen Long again, i just realized that all modular BA are listed the same...
fault on my end

[Paul]

@Paul: Yeah, looking at the Shen Long again, i just realized that all modular BA are listed the same...
fault on my end

No worries.
But does that mean you once thought it had ALL those weapons at once? Because that's an awesome visual. Even the guns have guns! =)

[Snake Eyes]

No worries.
But does that mean you once thought it had ALL those weapons at once? Because that's an awesome visual. Even the guns have guns! =)

;D Yeah, thats exactly what i was thinking ;D
That would be cool to have all those weapons mounted at once....

The problem is i knew those were different variants, but my brain was telling me otherwise......that will be the last time i try reading the TRO while adding units to HMBA