Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads

[NeonKnight]

Can we have a Thread for the ALPHA STRIKE COMPANION please and thank you!

[SpudBot]

I'm also new here, catching up on my BT history!  I noticed a missing/duplicate page in my .pdf of The Fourth Succession War Military Atlas, vol. I and just wanted to make Catalyst aware (pg. 60 appears where pg. 64 should be).  Didn't see that product listed anywhere.

[GreekFire]

Is:

"Sprite 2
Tech level is "Experimental", no experimental tech is mounted. Change to "Advanced"
500kg overweight. Suggest to remove Light TAG"

...official developer level errata? Another quick and simple fix would be to ditch the jump jets and the single point of added armor (compared to the other Sprites), which is why I'm asking.

From this thread:http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,18465.msg572389.html#msg572389

[Xotl]

Howdy.  I've gotten rid of the requirement to note a product's format (PDF or Print) when making an errata report.  It's tedious badgering people all the time to do it when I'm not sure it has ever mattered.

If for some reason it becomes relevant, I'll note it in a specific thread that requires it.  Thanks.

[Hussar2]

Could we get a thread for RS:VA Industrialmechs & Exoskeletons?

[Vandervecken]

Question:  When full versions of errata are released (like Total Warfare v4.1) are PDFs purchased in the Battleshop updated to reflect the changes?

[nckestrel]

Question:  When full versions of errata are released (like Total Warfare v4.1) are PDFs purchased in the Battleshop updated to reflect the changes?

For full version numbers.  So the Total Warfare PDF is v4.0, same as the most recent printing.

[Xotl]

Errata updates coincide with pdf updates/book reprints on X.0 releases.  The number X on the errata release coincides with the printing.  So Total Warfare 4.0 means its all the errata that found its way into the fourth printing of TW.

"Point" releases (X.X: like 3.3, or 4.1) are just updates to the errata - they are never in print anywhere.

[BirdofPrey]

I was certain a couple of PDFs have been updated at point releases.

[Vandervecken]

How would you recommend integrating extensive errata into physical books in a good way?  I could print it all out and stuff it in the back but that typically means you don't know there's errata.  How do other folks do it?

This is especially an issue in the core rulebooks.

[ColBosch]

I was certain a couple of PDFs have been updated at point releases.

Impossible; the integer (X.0) is incremented when the main book is updated, not the other way around. Here's how it works:

A book is published; it is designated Version 1.0.
Errata is found and compiled. If only minor issues are discovered, there might not be any compilations. If big bugs are found, "between-printings" errata compilations will be issued as 1.1, 1.2, etc.
The book comes up for reprinting. At that time, the current errata compilation (if any) and any outstanding issues the devs are aware of are folded into an updated document; the printing and a compiled errata document are designated Version 2.0.
Any further issues are collected as errata compilations 2.1, 2.2, etc.

[BirdofPrey]

Yes but I could have swore there were a couple of books that got updated between reprints (which would mean a PDF update but no print versions with new errata)

[Xotl]

Yes but I could have swore there were a couple of books that got updated between reprints (which would mean a PDF update but no print versions with new errata)

There were two - the second TacOps release and the recent TechManual re-release were both pdf-only.  In both cases it was a re-release nonetheless, and so I believe had a X.0 errata release to accompany it (I think so anyways: the TacOps release was before my time and version numbering was a bit chaotic if you go back far enough.  My archives for Total Warfare have errata that goes from v2 to v4 back to v2, for example.  But I know the TechManual one is numbered right).

[ColBosch]

Yes but I could have swore there were a couple of books that got updated between reprints (which would mean a PDF update but no print versions with new errata)

Maybe.

[GreekFire]

From this thread here: http://bg.battletech.com/forums/errata/field-manual-3145/msg778504/#msg778504

Nobody commented on this:

3) Periphery (General) Battle Armour rolls for A should be +6, with presumably +4 for B, and +2 for C.

However, current RATs for the Periphery only allow A or B-rated units to field BA. Is what Bergie posted correct, with a continuation to +0 for D? Or should it *just* be +6 for A and +0 for B, N/A for the rest?

[Scorpion]

Hey, I'm new here. I just purchased the Alpha Strike PDF from battlecorps and noticed that the changes from the Alpha Strike Errata v2.0 PDF aren't included. Is there something I'm missing?

[cavingjan]

No. Errata is rolled into the document when the book goes for a new printing.

[Scorpion]

No. Errata is rolled into the document when the book goes for a new printing.

Ok so, just to clarify, does that mean there is going to be a new Alpha Strike Pdf with the changes included?

[cavingjan]

If and when a second printing is done, a new pdf will be prepared.

[Xotl]

Ok so, just to clarify, does that mean there is going to be a new Alpha Strike Pdf with the changes included?

Yes, that's it exactly.  I don't do a X.0 release until I know there's going to be a new printing/pdf release.  So a second print of Alpha Strike is currently planned, and all the errata will appear in it, though I have no idea when it will hit stores.

[Amlop]

Apologies if I'm looking in the wrong place or something, but none of the errata pdf links are working here: http://bg.battletech.com/errata/

[nckestrel]

Apologies if I'm looking in the wrong place or something, but none of the errata pdf links are working here: http://bg.battletech.com/errata/

I tried the top three (Total Warfare, Tech Manual, Tactical Operations) and all three opened the errata PDFs for me.

[Amlop]

I tried the top three (Total Warfare, Tech Manual, Tactical Operations) and all three opened the errata PDFs for me.

? Weird....

They still won't work for me, they just give me 404s.

It doesn't give much information, but here's the message (for one of the links - the others are similar) it gives:
Not Found
The requested URL /wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Total-Warfare-v4.1-2014-05-19.pdf was not found on this server.
Apache Server at bg.battletech.com Port 443

I get the same result for both Firefox and Chrome.  I'm in Sydney, Australia, if that's of any interest.

[Xotl]

? Weird....

They still won't work for me, they just give me 404s.

It doesn't give much information, but here's the message (for one of the links - the others are similar) it gives:
Not Found
The requested URL /wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Total-Warfare-v4.1-2014-05-19.pdf was not found on this server.
Apache Server at bg.battletech.com Port 443

I get the same result for both Firefox and Chrome.  I'm in Sydney, Australia, if that's of any interest.

I've had this happen once before, though I don't know why.  Go to each book's thread: in the first post of each will be the errata file for that book.  I host those personally on Dropbox, so it should work fine.

[Amlop]

I've had this happen once before, though I don't know why.  Go to each book's thread: in the first post of each will be the errata file for that book.  I host those personally on Dropbox, so it should work fine.

These work, thanks!

[Liam's Ghost]

-More than one image from this period has the Toro being fielded, which is notably absent from the Taurian tables.

As per TRO 3075, the Toro was extinct during this period.

[TigerShark]

As per TRO 3075, the Toro was extinct during this period.

Indeed. That's what the TRO says, but it keeps popping up in the art from LoT. :-\ Artistic license, perhaps?

[Moonsword]

Gentlemen, you're not supposed to have discussions in the Errata threads.  Bring it in here next time, please.

Indeed. That's what the TRO says, but it keeps popping up in the art from LoT. :-\ Artistic license, perhaps?

Art does not trump TRO text.

[TigerShark]

BTW: What is this House-specific Wolverine mentioned in the Taurian Concordat's section?

[Moonsword]

I have no idea.  It may not have even been statted out.  Put it in Ask the Writers.