Author Topic: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads  (Read 307903 times)

theothersarah

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 781
  • Girls just wanna have fun
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1410 on: 05 January 2024, 17:21:50 »
Yeah, when it gets rolled into the PDF/print copies maybe it should include a note like "For situations where an engine rating for this vehicle is needed, ..."

Xotl

  • Dominus Erratorum
  • Moderator
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 11643
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1411 on: 13 January 2024, 14:46:09 »
The link to BattleTech CGL-Era Fiction thread located in the Errata Index post is broken.

Yeah, the change to URLs meant that lot of the links were broken.  I've been fixing them bit by bit when I have the time, but time is something I'm pretty short on lately.  Thanks for the note.
3028-3057 Random Assignment Tables -
Also contains faction deployment & rarity info.

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

DevianID

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1696
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1412 on: 15 January 2024, 03:35:02 »
Not sure if it was mentioned in the past, but the BV for rocket launchers is wrong.
Currently RL10=18, rl15=23, rl20=24

The prices should be RL10=15, RL15=18, RL20=19

The discrepancy is *likely* due to using a 1.5 weapon multiplier on the range damage, instead of a 1.2 multiplier like all other OS weapons, as that produces the 18/23/24 values.  Not accounting for the +1 to hit could also be the issue, but that results in 18/22/24.  Either way, the correct values should be 15/18/19.

DevianID

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 1696
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1413 on: 15 January 2024, 03:45:17 »
Artillery Cannons underwent an errata, that removed the +1 penalty to hit (caused by being required to fire indirect, like LRMs).  They now can fire direct, and suffer no penalty to hit when doing so.

The BV for Artillery Cannons on their release includes a +1 to hit penalty.  When this penalty was removed via errata, the BV for artillery cannons needed to go up, for example from 41 on the thumper to 53.

NeonKnight

  • Freelance Writer
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 6345
  • Cause Them My Initials!
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1414 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: 11643
  • Professor of Errata
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1415 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: 1087
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1416 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: 19848
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1417 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

  • Sergeant
  • *
  • Posts: 191
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1418 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: 19848
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1419 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 #1420 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: 1410
  • BTU.org & LotB.com Member
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1421 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: 19848
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1422 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: 1410
  • BTU.org & LotB.com Member
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1423 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: 7904
  • Miss Chitty finds your honor rules quaint.
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1424 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

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 50
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1425 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. 

Liam's Ghost

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7904
  • Miss Chitty finds your honor rules quaint.
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1426 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: 19848
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1427 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

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 50
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1428 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

Sartris

  • Codex Conditor
  • BattleTech Volunteer
  • Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 19848
  • Kid in the puddle eating mud of CGL contributors
    • Master Unit List
Re: Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads
« Reply #1429 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 #1430 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 #1431 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?

 

Register