Author Topic: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads  (Read 317804 times)

NeonKnight

  • Freelance Writer
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 6449
  • Cause Them My Initials!
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1410 on: 23 January 2024, 09:53:30 »
Where do I put errata for the INITIATIVE DECK?

ERROR:

Page 10 of the rules Booklet
Initiative Sequenece
...proceeds in sequential order from A, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, K, D, S.

That was from the BETA RULES, where K was a Knight, D was a Duke and S was a Successor Lord. It is also missing the number 10.

The Final Product has the face cards defined on page 2 as: Mechwarrior (M), Duke (D), and Successor Lord (L). Those are also how the cards are printed: M, D, and L

CORRECTION
...proceeds in sequential order from A, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, M, D, L.
« Last Edit: 23 January 2024, 09:55:56 by NeonKnight »
AGENT #575, Vancouver Canada

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11839
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1411 on: 23 January 2024, 10:28:22 »
That's been corrected for the upcoming printing, along with a bunch of other items.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

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

CJC070

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1120
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1412 on: 04 February 2024, 10:12:31 »
In the Downloads section under the Eridani Force Pack the Cyclops C has a movement speed of:
Walking 4
Running 5

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19974
  • Cap’n-Generalissimost
    • Master Unit List
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1413 on: 04 February 2024, 10:33:08 »
hardened armor

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

SANSd20

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 203
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1414 on: 06 February 2024, 18:40:13 »
In the Downloads section under the Eridani Force Pack the Cyclops C has a movement speed of:
Walking 4
Running 5


What should it be?
Mecr KS back #244

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19974
  • Cap’n-Generalissimost
    • Master Unit List
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1415 on: 06 February 2024, 19:09:50 »
It should be 4/5

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

IronmanV2

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1416 on: 25 February 2024, 12:00:06 »
Diving into Strategic Battleforce using the Battle for Tuykayyid Supplemental...  it appears the Strategic Battleforce Formation Record Sheets starting on pg. 29 and continuing through pg. 65 are missing the TMM, Tactics and Morale scores for the associated Formations. These both seem to be integral to Strategic Battleforce play so not sure if this is just an oversight or I am missing something with the rules.
« Last Edit: 25 February 2024, 12:08:20 by IronmanV2 »

Grognard

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1428
  • BTU.org & LotB.com Member
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1417 on: 03 March 2024, 00:00:13 »
I've been looking, and I cannot find an entry for the HRN-7T Hornet of the BD era?
y'know... THIS guy?


GROGNARD:  An old, grumpy soldier, a long term campaigner (Fr); Someone who enjoys playing tactics and strategy based board wargames;  a game fan who will buy every game released in a certain genre of computer game (RTS, or computer role-playing game, etc.)

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19974
  • Cap’n-Generalissimost
    • Master Unit List
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1418 on: 03 March 2024, 01:07:49 »
it's from the original battledroids line

http://brianscache.com/battledroids/

IIRC the BD hornet has the same stats as the eventual BT hornet that appears in the WD sourcebook. it was in battletechnology... issue 9?

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

Grognard

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1428
  • BTU.org & LotB.com Member
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1419 on: 04 March 2024, 22:45:51 »
Yes, my dear friend, it IS a Battletech mini of the Battledroids era.

Unfortunately, I lost my issue 9 of Battletechnology, and the stats I can find for the HNT-171 don't match what I recall when I once did find stats.

IIRC, it was a large laser, plus a SRM-2 in each side torso and Advanced comms gear in the head?

I was hoping one of the other old grey heads like me might have an official ruling.

GROGNARD:  An old, grumpy soldier, a long term campaigner (Fr); Someone who enjoys playing tactics and strategy based board wargames;  a game fan who will buy every game released in a certain genre of computer game (RTS, or computer role-playing game, etc.)

Liam's Ghost

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7968
  • Miss Chitty finds your honor rules quaint.
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1420 on: 05 March 2024, 03:24:01 »
Yes, my dear friend, it IS a Battletech mini of the Battledroids era.

Unfortunately, I lost my issue 9 of Battletechnology, and the stats I can find for the HNT-171 don't match what I recall when I once did find stats.

IIRC, it was a large laser, plus a SRM-2 in each side torso and Advanced comms gear in the head?

I was hoping one of the other old grey heads like me might have an official ruling.

The hornet in battletechnology #9 has an extra medium laser and is a ton overweight, but otherwise does match the stats of the HTN-151. Though the entry in the magazine has the wiggle room of not listing actuators or the locations of heatsinks, I think it's fair to assume that the 151 is intended to be the corrected canon form of the battletechnology version, and the HRN-7T is purely apocryphal.
Good news is the lab boys say the symptoms of asbestos poisoning show an immediate latency of 44.6 years. So if you're thirty or over you're laughing. Worst case scenario you miss out on a few rounds of canasta, plus you've forwarded the cause of science by three centuries. I punch those numbers into my calculator, it makes a happy face.

(indirect accessory to the) Slayer of Monitors!

Gray_Noton_4lfe

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Unless to other People
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1421 on: 03 April 2024, 22:56:22 »
I would like to know what version this is and how it differs from the latest release. Couldn't find anything online about
it. 
Corporal: Were under attack general.
General: who's attacking?
Corporal: Those 25 Urbanmech Mechwarriors you offended last week on Solaris.
General: That's....unfortunate. Could you remind me what I said to offend them?
Corporal: You said their Urbanmechs look like Locust-1Vs Sir.
General: ahh... I remember now.

Liam's Ghost

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7968
  • Miss Chitty finds your honor rules quaint.
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1422 on: 03 April 2024, 23:40:46 »
I would like to know what version this is and how it differs from the latest release. Couldn't find anything online about
it. 

The last time it was discussed, the powers that be indicated that was the cover for the next printing, which hasn't been released yet.
Good news is the lab boys say the symptoms of asbestos poisoning show an immediate latency of 44.6 years. So if you're thirty or over you're laughing. Worst case scenario you miss out on a few rounds of canasta, plus you've forwarded the cause of science by three centuries. I punch those numbers into my calculator, it makes a happy face.

(indirect accessory to the) Slayer of Monitors!

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19974
  • Cap’n-Generalissimost
    • Master Unit List
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1423 on: 04 April 2024, 07:23:00 »
The image has been floating around on various secondary market sites for a while now. I’ve been tempted to order one just to see what shows up

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

Gray_Noton_4lfe

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Unless to other People
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1424 on: 04 April 2024, 10:01:05 »
The last time it was discussed, the powers that be indicated that was the cover for the next printing, which hasn't been released yet.

Thanks! Saw it for a reasonable price, just wanted to make sure it was one of the newer versions
Corporal: Were under attack general.
General: who's attacking?
Corporal: Those 25 Urbanmech Mechwarriors you offended last week on Solaris.
General: That's....unfortunate. Could you remind me what I said to offend them?
Corporal: You said their Urbanmechs look like Locust-1Vs Sir.
General: ahh... I remember now.

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19974
  • Cap’n-Generalissimost
    • Master Unit List
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1425 on: 04 April 2024, 10:57:16 »
The current printing uses the old succession wars box set art.

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your bt experience. Now what? | Modern Sourcebook Index | FASA Sourcebook Index | Print on Demand Index
Equipment Reference Cards | DIY Pilot Cards | PaperTech Mech and Vehicle Counters

Quote
Interviewer: Since you’ve stopped making art, how do you spend your time?
Paul Chan Breathers: Oh, I’m a breather. I’m a respirateur. Isn’t that enough?

Red wolf

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 35
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1426 on: 10 April 2024, 23:49:29 »
I don’t know if I am missing something or this is errata, but it seems contradictory at the least.

This is from a 9th printing and I didn’t see any errata on it in the 11.01 documanent.

TW page 247: Dumping Bombs
“No ammunition explosion results if a fighter dumping its bomb load is hit in the aft location.”

This section calls to use the rules from the following in non-emergency situations.

TW page 140: under Aerospace Units in the dumping ammunition section.
“…any hit against a dumping unit's aft armor causes the ammunition to explode.”

The two passages say the opposite of each other, with regards to the bombs exploding, when it comes to dumping bombs.

Which one is correct?

Red wolf

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Private
  • *
  • Posts: 35
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1427 on: 12 April 2024, 10:27:00 »
TW 9th printing:

Page 248, 7th bullet point at the top of the page.

“…the player controlling the player may choose what arc applies.”

Looking at the sentence after this it seems that the quote should be.

“…the player controlling the Shiva may choose what arc applies.”

Is that correct?

Gray_Noton_4lfe

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Unless to other People
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1428 on: 17 April 2024, 18:59:17 »
Will there be a new reprint of AToW companion?
Corporal: Were under attack general.
General: who's attacking?
Corporal: Those 25 Urbanmech Mechwarriors you offended last week on Solaris.
General: That's....unfortunate. Could you remind me what I said to offend them?
Corporal: You said their Urbanmechs look like Locust-1Vs Sir.
General: ahh... I remember now.

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11839
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1429 on: 18 April 2024, 16:00:37 »
Unknown at this time, but I personally doubt it.  That's more of an Ask the Developers question than an errata question in any case.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

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

Gray_Noton_4lfe

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 131
  • Unless to other People
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1430 on: 18 April 2024, 20:45:17 »
Unknown at this time, but I personally doubt it.  That's more of an Ask the Developers question than an errata question in any case.

Thanks, wasn't quite sure were to post it. I think I'll post it in Ask the Developers
Corporal: Were under attack general.
General: who's attacking?
Corporal: Those 25 Urbanmech Mechwarriors you offended last week on Solaris.
General: That's....unfortunate. Could you remind me what I said to offend them?
Corporal: You said their Urbanmechs look like Locust-1Vs Sir.
General: ahh... I remember now.

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 339
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1431 on: 05 June 2024, 14:01:36 »
I have a request for errata maintainers. Back in 2021 Xotl put the following report in Clan Invasion box set errata thread:
The reference card in the boxed set doesn't have a "3" column on the cluster table.
However the exact contents of that column were never published in that thread or in any official errata document for the product. Could Xotl or anyone else involved in maintaining official errata either post the relevant numbers in that thread or release a document containing these numbers (official errata document or corrected reference card for CI box) and link it in the thread for the sake of people who own old printings of CI box but no product with the full table (like TW or BMM)? I would've done the former myself, except I don't feel comfortable posting fragments of official BT products online unrelated to my own rules questions or errata reports.

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11839
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1432 on: 05 June 2024, 14:27:35 »
I've edited the post to add the missing column.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

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

Alfaryn

  • Master Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 339
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1433 on: 05 June 2024, 14:52:54 »
Thank you.

Kastor

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Clan Woof
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1434 on: 23 June 2024, 15:46:25 »
Alpha Strike, Commander's Edition, 6th printing, p. 138, "Arming a Building". This is not about the "division by 5" errata point from here.

Quote
First, determine a maximum number of damage points the building’s weapons may deliver per weapon emplacement by taking the building’s CF These damage points must then be distributed among the emplacement’s Short, Medium, and Long range damage values.

Quote
wall method says:
If the wall method is chosen, a building may place one weapon emplacement in each of its outer walls, as long as each wall has a different facing direction.

rooftop method says:
If the rooftop method is chosen, the armed building may feature one rooftop turret for every (non-overlapping) 2-inch diameter area the building’s shape takes up on the underlying terrain.

Assuming a CF18 building (high range of Heavy), the wall method indicates that I get, say, 4 weapon emplacements, each 6/6/6. I'd also argue that rooftop method uses "turret" as another way to say "weapon emplacement" (since "Weapon Placement:" talks about multiples of those).

This seems not to be as intended? The intent seems to be for the player to divide those 18 points among all weapon placements (resulting in, for example, three turrets of 3/3/0 damage values). If this is the case, "Arming a Building" should specify "among all weapon emplacements" or to this effect, instead of "per weapon emplacement".

Kastor

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Clan Woof
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1435 on: 24 June 2024, 20:10:50 »
Anyone, please? :|

Paul

  • dies a lot at the Solaris Melee Challenge!
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 15802
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1436 on: 24 June 2024, 20:52:29 »
It can sometimes take a little time for a report to be evaluated.
The solution is just ignore Paul.

Kastor

  • Recruit
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • Clan Woof
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1437 on: 27 June 2024, 13:05:35 »
It can sometimes take a little time for a report to be evaluated.
I'm seeing people get answered to the same day or the day after. It's been several days though. Is this such a complex question or are folks away on vacation or such?

Paul

  • dies a lot at the Solaris Melee Challenge!
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 15802
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1438 on: 27 June 2024, 13:08:09 »
Sure, or maybe they're spending time on other things. The quick responses are a luxury, not a requirement. Please be patient, you will get a reaction.
The solution is just ignore Paul.

Kargush

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 186
  • Grenades cost extra
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1439 on: 06 July 2024, 10:16:52 »
I have some errors to report in The Art of Food, specifically the conversion chart on page 4.

In the book:
Quote
Dimensions
¹⁄₁₆ inch = 2 mm
⅛ inch = 3 mm
¼ inch = 1.5 cm
½ inch = 2 cm
1 inch = 2.5 cm

More correct values would be

Quote
Dimensions
¹⁄₁₆ inch = 1.5 mm
⅛ inch = 3 mm
¼ inch = 6 mm
½ inch = 1.27 cm
1 inch = 2.54 cm
Buy'ce gal, buy'ce tal
Vebor'ad ures aliit
Mhi draar baat'i meg'parjii'se
Kote lo'shebs'ul narit.

4th Donegal Guards
7th Sword of Light
1st Canopian Cuirassiers

 

Register