Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads

[Sartris]

This is a dead end topic.

[ArcFurnace]

In an errata to TO:AR, a note was added to the "Searchlights" sections of Light Conditions (page 56) under "Full Moon Night/Glare" and "Moonless Night/Solar Flare" headings, indicating that a unit with an active searchlight can ignore the movement penalty from Full Moon Night or Moonless Night (which seems very logical).

Was it intentional that Pitch Black was left out of this adjustment? It did not have any such note added. I believe the original errata was to resolve rules differences between BMM and TO:AR, and BMM does not mention the Pitch Black light condition, but logically a searchlight should do something about the movement penalty even in total darkness.

[ShroudedSciuridae]

Don't think there's an errata thread for this.  In the Downloads, Inner Sphere at War Hex Map: 3025, hex 3040 Jodipur should be Neukirchen by now per House Davion (The Federated Suns); Handbook: House Davion, p. 70; Handbook: House Davion, p. 72

[Ardent Fury]

Going to bring this up again because it wasn't addressed last time I posted it.

Artillery Cannons with Fuel-Air Munitions have some issues... As it stands there is a 4BV increase for Sniper cannons to go from dealing 10 damage in 1 hex to dealing 20/10/5 at radius 2. Thumper Cannons have 2 BV increase for a similar increase in damage and LTCs have a 16 BV increase and each one at least doubles the potential damage output of  the weapons.

[S.gage]

Hello,

I found something that may require retcons going a way back. Depending upon the record sheets, the Man O' War (Gargoyle)'s free critical pod space is either (arms:legs) 10:1 or 9:2.

Re-reading the ilClan Rec Guides, specifically volume 11, I was surprised to see Ferro-Fibrous armor criticals in the left and right arms. I thought the criticals were in the legs, but indeed TRO: 3050, p. 36 (FASA); TRO: 3050 Revised, p. 34 (FASA); and TRO: 3050 Upgrade, p. 138 (CGL), the Man O' War (Gargoyle) places one critical of Ferro-Fibrous armor in the left and right arm.

However, I dug a little deeper, and found that the answer is not so clear. The Wave One Record Sheets do have 1 Ferro-Fibrous critical in each of the legs, and the Gargoyle E has an ATM-12 and 3 tons of ATM ammo in the right arm (10 criticals), meaning at least TRO: 3050 U configuration needs to be corrected, or it was designed with having FF criticals in the legs. Could someone confirm if the free criticals should be arms:legs 10/1 or 9/2.

Thanks!

S.gage

[Empyrus]

I believe i've reported this as errata already around Battle of Tukayyid book out, and the original ferro arrangement was confirmed as the correct one. That is, 2 free slots in the legs.
But perhaps someone can double confirm it, never hurts!

[Empyrus]

Incidentally this reminds me, if the Gargoyle does indeed have all its leg slots free, does the Gargoyle C have 2xA-pod and ERSL (BV 2437) or 3xA-pod (BV 2417) (like it originally had)? Currently MUL's BV indicates the former.

[pokefan548]

The Raven RVN-3X is listed as debuting in 3028, the same year as TSM-X, and is listed in its TRO entry in TRO 3039 as suffering from the effects of myomer-catalytic gas. Full TSM does not reach production until 3050. However, predating bespoke rules for TSM-X, TRO 3039's RVN-3X sheet has it mounting standard TSM. If I'm not mistaken (and please correct me if I'm wrong), RS:SW uses the same build; this is corroborated by the MUL listing the RVN-3X as having the TSM special ability instead of TSMX.

Since we now have rules for TSM-X (IO:AE p. 98), should the RVN-3Xs' sheet be corrected to list TSM-X instead of standard TSM (and its MUL entry adjusted accordingly)?

EDIT: Same question stands for the Locust LCT-1L and Black Knight BL-6-KNT (Ian)

[pokefan548]

Need a thread opened for Dominions Divided.

[Empyrus]

Regarding the Locust's quirks. Asking here because not sure if BattleMech Manual related or Recognition Guide, or if even actual errata.
BMM gives the Locust Compact 'Mech and Cramped Cockpit, while Recognition Guide vol16 has Ubiquitous for it instead (other quirks are shared between the listings).
BMM's Ubiquitous Quirk description also explicitly calls out the Locust as being ubiquitous.

Are these both lists valid, or should this reported as errata for one product?

[Kerfuffin(925)]

Hey in Rec Guide 29 page 13 the Charger C blurb says

Upgraded to a fully Clan-spec mech…

While the record sheet later shows it using a IS 400XL (3 crits per torso)

Either the description or the record sheet needs to change. (Also if the record sheet changes you’ll have to get the MUL team on a new card, the card reflects the IS engine)

[Kerfuffin(925)]

In Dominions Divided on page 141 in the Fed Suns RAT, assault column, row 12 there is a -2 to the ‘roll on republic RAT’. Is this meant to be there, as the other weight classes do not have the minus 2 Maulus, or is it meant to keep super heavies away from all but tHe best republic roll?

[Xotl]

In Dominions Divided on page 141 in the Fed Suns RAT, assault column, row 12 there is a -2 to the ‘roll on republic RAT’. Is this meant to be there, as the other weight classes do not have the minus 2 Maulus, or is it meant to keep super heavies away from all but tHe best republic roll?

The penalty is deliberate, yes: only the best FedSuns units are meant to have access to superheavies.

[SANSd20]

The amount of work that would require of me and/or the layout team makes that unfeasible, I'm afraid.

It just occurred to me that you have already done that work when a new edition with corrections is printed. So, owners of the previous editions can get the PDF version and just print out the page/section onto the label paper. Over the last couple of weeks I have been contacting support on getting the PDF versions of books I just bought, and the thought never even crossed my mind until now!

[Jal Phoenix]

Do we do errata for pilot cards? I ask because Hammond, Battle Cobra pilot in the Clan Support Star kind of can't exist. His story is that of a Capellan national turned mercenary who was taken as bondsman for Clan Steel Viper and is now a warrior. During the Invasion years, Clan Steel Viper does not have ANY freebirths in their touman (FM Warden Clans, p140), much less an Inner Sphere mercenary. Freebirths were not allowed in the touman until after the return to the Homeworlds, at which point the idea of the Inner Sphere taint had taken hold. I'm not sure if it's worth errata, but I wanted to bring it to someone's attention just in case.

[nckestrel]

He's not just a pilot card.  He's a notable mechwarrior for the Battle Cobra in TR3058U (Capellan, captured and made bondsman by Steel Viper).

[jasonf]

Was the planet Liberty renamed to Carver V at some point in the Dark Age, or is the fluff for the Harrier (RE-Laser) in error?
[RG 31, p. 6]

(It was Carver V when the FedCom introduced the PPC variant, but I think it should be liberty for the current production variant's location).

[Jal Phoenix]

Was the planet Liberty renamed to Carver V at some point in the Dark Age, or is the fluff for the Harrier (RE-Laser) in error?
[RG 31, p. 6]

(It was Carver V when the FedCom introduced the PPC variant, but I think it should be liberty for the current production variant's location).

For the Primary Factory location, it should say Liberty, because that's what the planet is known as in 3150. When the FedSuns seized it, it was known as Carver V, so the reference in the Variants section is correct. It's up to editing staff to decide if that one is worth changing for clarity, or to leave it for factual accuracy.

[Daryk]

Carver V had HISTORY... I'm surprised it would be renamed at all.

[Sartris]

it happened some time between 3059 and 3062

[Weirdo]

It happened during the story of MechCommander 2, I believe. The populace renamed it at the same time they told the Houses to piss off.

[SANSd20]

From Dark Age Republic Worlds:

Captured by the Federated Commonwealth after the Fourth Succession War, Carver V experienced a major upheaval when the Commonwealth fractured in 3057. Torn by fighting between the Capellan Confederation, Federated Suns, Lyran Alliance, Free Worlds League, and even the Word of Blake, only the spirit of the planet‘s citizens allowed the world to recover when the shooting finally stopped. Carver V was renamed Liberty by a popular movement to unify the world that rose during this terrible crucible, and the name was ratified formally after the Jihad, when the world was accepted into The Republic.

[jasonf]

It goes back to at least FM: Updates because Lindon's Bn. and the 379th Com Guard Div. are listed as being on "Liberty," and I have a feeling it might go back to the original FM: Mercs, but I'd have to check.

Either way, looks like the Harrier (RE-Laser) is produced on Istanbul Liberty and the Harrier (PPC) was produced on Constantinople Carver V
(and hopefully you now have They Might be Giants stuck in your head...  >:D)

 

[truetanker]

Is Spiderholm still on Roche?

TT

[SANSd20]

[...] I have a feeling it might go back to the original FM: Mercs, but I'd have to check.

Lindon accepted a contract to support the independent government of Liberty (previously known as Carver V), where Chaos March raiders and pro-Capellan terrorists were making the world especially vulnerable to the Blakists’ “gunboat diplomacy”.

[Alfaryn]

I've noticed a few errors in the Force Pack Record Sheets published in the downloads section of this site, and I can't find an errata thread for them. Should I report the errors here, ni the Force Pack thread (https://bg.battletech.com/forums/errata/force-packs/) or somewhere else?

[GreekFire]

I've noticed a few errors in the Force Pack Record Sheets published in the downloads section of this site, and I can't find an errata thread for them. Should I report the errors here, ni the Force Pack thread (https://bg.battletech.com/forums/errata/force-packs/) or somewhere else?

Please post them here unless they have to do with the Snord or UrbanMech sheets, in which case I'd ask you to wait.

[Alfaryn]

A list of Rules Level mistakes I've found in the recently published record shet pdfs. For completeness sake despite GreekFire's request I've added an error from Snords Irregulars, since it is just one of a few entries. While doing this list I assumed that the sheets should reflect Technology Advancement Tables from TROs Prototypes and 3145 if they are appropriate for given 'Mechs introduction dates from MUL. Otherwise the following list would be much longer.

ForcePack Record Sheets Kell Hounds

Wolfhound WLF-1
"Rules Level: Standard" should be "Rules Level: Introductory".

ForcePack Record Sheets Hansens Roughriders

Enforcer ENF-5R
"Rules Level: Standard" should be "Rules Level: Advanced", due to Large Re-engineered Laser.

ForcePack Record Sheets Northwind Highlanders

Warhammer C 2
"Rules Level: Standard" should probably be "Rules Level: Experimental" - as a mixed tech mech introduced in 3052 (according to MUL).

ForcePack Record Sheets Snords Irregulars

Guillotine GLT-7M
"Rules Level: Standard" may need to be changed to "Rules Level: Advanced", since, according to MUL, it was introduced in 3099, so Technology Advancement Table from TRO Prototypes is probably better for determining it's rules level than the one in TRO 3145, and it mounts CASE II.

By the way, I've noticed that Record Sheets – Wave Two pdf is linked twice in the downloads section - once with an appropriate thumbnail below Wave One sheets, where it belongs, and once without a thumbnail below A Game of Armored Combat Record Sheets (& Counters), where I think it doesn't.

[GreekFire]

"Rules Level: Standard" may need to be changed to "Rules Level: Advanced", since, according to MUL, it was introduced in 3099, so Technology Advancement Table from TRO Prototypes is probably better for determining it's rules level than the one in TRO 3145, and it mounts CASE II.

In these cases, no, the tables from 3145 supersede Prototypes.

[Alfaryn]

A minor typo in ForcePack Record Sheets Snords Irregulars pdf. The first mech in the document should be "Type: Rifleman RFL-3N (Hybrid FrankenMech Sneede)", not "[...]FrankeMech[...]".

And sorry for reporting yet another error in RS Snords despite what you asked three posts above this one GreekFire. Feel free to have mods remove this post and/or PM me about when to report it again.