Total Warfare - 17 September 2023 (v11.01)

[jayoung]

    * VERSION:
Corrected Seventh Printing; Sixth Printing by Catalyst Game Labs (PDF)
    * LOCATION:
Index, page 301, "Industrial Mech" section
    * THE ERROR:
3rd sub-entry, "modifier, 110" refers to the wrong page. There is so mention of Industrial Mechs.
    * THE CORRECTION:
The correct page is 108; it mentions Industrial Mechs without an advanced fire control system suffer a +1 to all weapon attacks.

[jayoung]

    * VERSION:
Corrected Seventh Printing; Sixth Printing by Catalyst Game Labs (PDF)
    * LOCATION:
page 301, "I" section of the index.
    * THE ERROR:
There is no index reference for ICE Engine critical hits. I believe this should be there, as on the same page, in the "F" section this entry exists:
Fission Engine, critical hit, 126
    * THE CORRECTION:
Add a new entry in the "I" section ICE Engine, critical hit, 126


    * VERSION:
Corrected Seventh Printing; Sixth Printing by Catalyst Game Labs (PDF)
    * LOCATION:
page 301, "I" section of the index, "IndustrialMech" sub-section.
    * THE ERROR:
There is no reference to the rules for industrial mechs risking destruction if submerged - this is important and easy to miss rule.
    * THE CORRECTION:
Add a new entry, water, 52 (or whatever wording seems appropriate - "submerged" would work too) to the "IndustrialMech" sub-section.

*EDIT - found another issue*

    * VERSION:
Corrected Seventh Printing; Sixth Printing by Catalyst Game Labs (PDF)
    * LOCATION:
page 144, "Physical Attacks" section, IndustrialMechs sub-section.
    * THE ERROR:

The controlling player makes only one roll per turn, regardless of the number of successful physical attacks the IndustrialMech suffers

This does not also reference that there is only 1 roll per turn regardless if the source of the roll is from falling or being hit by a physical attack unlike the rules on page 69 ("Falling Damage to a 'Mech" section, "IndustrialMechs" subsection):

The controlling player makes only one roll per turn, regardless of the number of falls (or successful physical attacks) the IndustrialMech suffers.

    * THE CORRECTION:
The Physical attack rules should be updated to mention it is only 1 roll per turn regardless of source.

[pokefan548]

Version: 7th Printing (still present in 9th)

Location: Page 80

Error: The section on units restricted from using atmospheric aerospace movement prohibits airships from entering the low- or high-altitude maps. This prevents the unit from lifting off.

Correction: Remove any mention of airships from the sentence paragraph of Restricted Units, and add a new sentence after it which reads:

Airships are only prohibited from entering the high-altitude map.

[ArcFurnace]

On page 11 of the most recent errata document (v9.0), it mentions that in the "Failed Braking Maneuver table" (on page 87 of Total Warfare), in the third effect, "landing gear is destroyed" should be replaced with "landing gear is damaged". This includes an annotation indicating that this change occurred in the 5th printing of Total Warfare.

However, in my TW 9th printing PDF, this change has not actually been implemented on page 87; it still reads "landing gear is destroyed".

An equivalent change is mentioned on page 54 of the errata document (table on page 311 of TW), but this change appears to have been implemented, so no further action is needed there.


Separately, effects of destroyed landing gear are mentioned on TW pages 86 and 88 (preventing launch or lift-off, and preventing taxiing of aerodyne aerospace units while landed), but after the errata above is properly implemented, there appears to be no remaining ways that landing gear can actually be destroyed. You may wish to adjust this somehow.

[reinar]

product link takes you to a video, not the actual total warfare book, purchase page
can you confirm what is the picture on the 9th printing?

[Bren]

2021 - ninth printing (Catalyst/Topps; new Atlas art cover)

Page 229

Error: "Additionally, when ever a battle armor trooper that is not equipped with Fire Resistent armor and ..."
Should be: "... Fire Resistant ...

[sasha111000]

9th printing
page 250, GROUND-TO-AIR ATTACKS

If the Shiva had been at Altitude 1 (NOE), the WiGE in Hex 1 would have applied a +1 to-hit modifier, while the ’Mech in Hex 2 would have applied a +2 to-hit modifier for terrain.

must be: "while the ’Mech in Hex 2 would have applied a +3 to-hit modifier for terrain"

because of the rule on p.112, Non-Aerospace Units Firing at Airborne Aerospace Units
Apply a +3 to-hit modifier against any aerospace unit at Altitude 1 (NOE), unless the attacking non-aerospace unit lies in the attack/flight path of the aerospace fighter, or within one hex of the flight path, in which case apply a +1 modifier.

[ShroudedSciuridae]

9th Printing

Omitted Rule on p. 109, currently only in the C3 example on p. 132.
"The VTOL in Hex B is closest to the enemy, at a Range of 2; even though it is at Elevation 10, elevations are never taken into consideration when determining range to target."

Solution: Add equivalent sentence to p. 109. Alternatively if the absence of this rule means elevation does now affect range, remove this blurb from p.132 and add clarifying language based on p. 81's Low-Altitude Table. Elevations are 6 meters high (p. 31), Altitudes varies in meters of height. If Elevation does add to range then the 1 Altitude=+2 hexes of range (p.109) that could be expanded since VTOLs can reach Elevation 500 (p. 54) which at 3,000 meters is the equivalent of Altitude 9.

[Alfaryn]

7th ed print, 9th ed pdf.

The following errata suggestions was discussed earlier in this rules questions thread: https://bg.battletech.com/forums/total-warfare/length-of-multi-hex-vehicles-from-reinforcements-ci-box/ You may want to read it if you find my explanations below insufficient. Just note that the recently published renders of the upcoming Battlefield Support: Objectives Force Pack there most likely won't be any changes to rules which would invalidate my reasoning in that thread (or in this post) regarding lengths of vehicle set, which is why I decided to post the following in this errata thread.

There are three related problems with tractor/trailer vehicle set in TW:

1. As far as I can tell the book fails to explain properly how many tractors/trailers from a single set can be in a single hex. Trailers section on p. 57 say that two small, two medium or one small and one medium trailer together "act as a single Support Vehicle" (and trailer rules on p. 205 say more or less the same on the topic), which combined with the general stacking rules on the same page can lead to conclusion that you can have up to four such trailers belonging to the same vehicle set in a single hex. This is incorrect as far as I can tell. An example on p. 19 TO:AE shows that you should have only up to one large vehicle or up to two small or medium vehicles belonging to the same set on a single hex. Technically that example is for rail support vehicles that aren't covered in TW, but I can't anything in the rules in TO books that suggests that rail vehicles are in any ways an exception in this regard. Recently published renders of the upcoming Mobile Long Tom minis (one medium tractor and three medium trailers taking up two hexes) also seem to support this rules interpretation.

2. TM has has rules for constructing tractor/trailer sets of Combat Vehicles. Other official sources (certain TROs for example) have a number of such vehicles. TW however seems to assume that all tractor/trailer sets may consist of Support Vehicles only.

3. Both p. 57 TW and p. 205 TW say that one small or medium trailer counts as part of a tractor for purposes of movement and stacking. in light of the example on p. 19 TO:AE I believe it should only be the case if the tractor is not a Large Support Vehicle.

I suggest the following:

Ad 1. Add one or two sentences to Trailers section(s) on p. 57 TW and/or p. 205 TW stating clearly that only one large tractor or trailer and only up to two small or medium tractors/trailers belonging to the same set may occupy one hex and any following trailers must be placed in separate hexes down the line.

Ad 2. Since TM doesn't divide combat vehicles into small, medium and large ones change any references to "small and medium Support Vehicle trailers" in Trailers sections on pp. 57 TW and 205 TW so that they refer to something like "small or medium Support Vehicle trailers and combat vehicle trailers". In Combat Vehicles chapter (possibly in or below Movement section on p. 192 TW) add a note that if a Combat Vehicle has any trailers, rules from p. 205 TW of Support Vehicles chapter apply accordingly.

Ad. 3 Change first sentence in the Tractors section on p. 57 TW and the first sentence of the second paragraph on p. 205 TW to make it clear that only one small, medium or combat trailer counts as part of a tractor for purposes of stacking and movement only if the tractor isn't a large support vehicle itself.

Note that due to how TO (p. 77 TO:AR) handles superheavy combat vehicles it may be easier (both to fit on a page and to understand for the reader) to add a blanket statement on p. 57 TW and possibly 205 TW or 192 TW that in TW combat vehicle tractors and trailers are always treated as medium support vehicles for purposes of movement, stacking etc. instead of changing all instances of "small and medium Support Vehicle trailers/tractors" to "small and medium Support Vehicle and Combat Vehicle trailers/tractors" on pp. 57 and 205 TW.

[sasha111000]

* VERSION: Corrected Ninth Printing
* LOCATION: page 178, example text: The modified to-hit target number for the LRM jump platoon is 8 (4 Gunnery, + 2 because the Siren ran, + 2 for the building hex the target occupies and the difference in levels), making that unit the only one suitable for attack. However, even if the attack strikes the infantry unit, the Siren’s machine guns will only do their standard 2 points of damage to the platoon rather than the brutal 2D6 points of damage each, if the LRM jump platoon was not in a building hex. In addition, the 2 points will be reduced to 1 point because the infantry unit occupies a hardened building hex; a quick check of the Infantry Damage From Attacks Inside Buildings Table shows that the building absorbs 50 percent of any damage dealt to an infantry unit.
* THE ERROR: example based on older edition of the section (above): Burst-Fire Weapons and Conventional Infantry
* THE CORRECTION: please update example text in accordance with Burst-Fire Weapons and Conventional Infantry, above (damage to infantry, if both units are in a building, must be half of damage per the Burst-Fire Weapon Damage Vs. Conventional Infantry Table).

[Alfaryn]

Corrected seventh printing (sixth printing by CGL), print

1. pp. 118, 307 Attack Modifiers Table, Physical Attacks Only subtable, Other Modifiers section

PROBLEM: Modifiers for Charging and Death from above attacks reference page 40 which does not explain how relative Piloting Skills are calculated.
RECOMMENDATION: Change the reference to Physical Modifiers Table (pp. 144, 308).

2. pp. 144, 308, Physical Modifiers Table, first note

PROBLEM: Assuming that the way a to-hit modifier for unintentional charges should be determined as described in Collisions with 'Mechs section on p. 71 BMM the note question should mention that during unintentional charges you should use a flat +3 to-hit modifier instead of a difference between Piloting Skills of pilots/drivers involved.
RECOMMENDATION: Add a following sentence to the note: "If the attacker is performing an unintentional charge (see Skidding p. 62-63) use a +3 modifier instead." You may also consider changing the second bracket in the first sentence on Other Units section on p. 63 from "[...](including these for unintentional charges)[...]" to a proper explanation that during such unintentional charge you should use a +3 modifier to attack roll instead of the Piloting Skill difference usually used for charge attacks.

[Xotl]

Errata for the just out in PDF tenth printing is now posted.  Please note that due to the lengthy lead times between finalization of the errata and release of the actual book/PDF (the reason the printing is dated as 2022 despite only coming out around now), a bunch of the items directly above are not included.  They will be reviewed in any future printing.

[SANSd20]

Errata for the just out in PDF tenth printing is now posted.  Please note that due to the lengthy lead times between finalization of the errata and release of the actual book/PDF (the reason the printing is dated as 2022 despite only coming out around now), a bunch of the items directly above are not included.  They will be reviewed in any future printing.

For those that got the book via the Humble Bundle, how would they go about getting this, and any other updates?


Xotl: Post in the thread titled "Errata Discussion Thread - Questions HERE, not in Errata Threads"

[paladin2019]

    * VERSION: Total Warfare, 8th printing
    * LOCATION: Pg 215, Attacks Against Conventional Infantry and pg 216, NON-INFANTRY WEAPON DAMAGE AGAINST INFANTRY TABLE
    * THE ERROR: These sections do not directly address rounding. The table's note †<dagger>'s last sentence is

Attacks by non-infantry weapons against mechanized infantry double the number of troopers eliminated; round all fractions up.

Error 1: The semi-colon tells us that the rounding clause is linked exclusively to mechanized infantry.

Error 2: It is unclear when to round. Information is not presented until the example of the Atlas on pg 217. However, the numbers in the example don't add up and the target platoon's type changes inexplicably, making it hard to follow.

    * THE CORRECTION:
Error 1: Change semi-colon to a period and make the rounding rule a new sentence.

Error 2: Make note in the rounding rule that rounding occurs as fractions occur rather than as a final step. The final sentence combining both corrections would look something like "Round all fractions up as they occur."


Note: I asked this question here https://bg.battletech.com/forums/ground-combat/big-guns-and-infantry/msg1946439/#msg1946439 before finding how to post in this thread.

Answered here: https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=77025.msg1948690#msg1948690 and will be included in errata at some point. Bottom line, round damage up as part of the initial division.

[Bosefius]

This was raised by a customer, I am just passing it on. I know it's not the correct format, I don't know what the format is, I apologize.

"I wanted to let you know that in Total Warfare, the "Fighters Return Table" is missing from Page 92 as well as the Aerospace Tables in the back of the book. This is present in both the physical copy of the 9th Printing as well as the PDF version of the 9th Printing. I've also found it missing in PDFs of Total Warfare's previous printings. The index refers to the table but it is not present. This table is also not present in the latest errata for Total Warfare.

Will you include this table in a future printing or errata update?"

[Empyrus]

Total Warfare 10th print PDF
Error1: Page 229 indicates Multi-Purpose Missile is only available to LRMs even though it should be available to SRMs too, per Tech Manual page 261 (and TM tables).
Correction: Change Weapon Type line to "Weapon Type: Standard LRMs/SRMs".

Error2: Page 229 section on battle armor torpedoes implies they are available to MRMs even though this is not the case and the Weapon Type line correctly does not list them.
Correction: Change line "Torpedoes use the same statistics as any standard SRM, LRM or MRM the battle armor unit mounts" to "Torpedoes use the same statistics as any standard SRM or LRM the battle armor unit mounts"

[ArcFurnace]

Total Warfare, 10th printing

Battle Armor Attacks (page 218, second paragraph, second sentence):
"Mark off ammunition on the record sheet for each missile fired."

Change to:
"Mark off one shot of ammunition on the record sheet for each missile weapon fired by the battle armor unit."

(can optionally remove the "by the battle armor unit", but it's definitely not one shot of ammo per missile fired ...)

[Alfaryn]

Tenth printing, pdf

P. 144

   Attacks Against Large Support Vehicles and Grounded Small Craft: As per page 110, all physical attacks against Large Support Vehicles (including Airships and Fixed-Wing Support Vehicles) and grounded DropShips receive a –2 to-hit modifier.
change to something like:
   Attacks Against Large Support Vehicles and Grounded Small Craft and DropShips: As per page 110, all physical attacks against Large Support Vehicles (including Airships and Fixed-Wing Support Vehicles) and grounded Small Craft receive a –2 to-hit modifier, and all physical attacks against grounded DropShips receive a –4 to-hit modifier.

P. 148

ProtoMechs: ProtoMechs cannot be targets of charging attacks
change to:
ProtoMechs: ProtoMechs cannot be targets of standard charge attacks

REASON: ProtoMechs, just like Infantry units, may be targets of unintentional charges - see Skidding rules on pp. 62-64.

P. 215

Delete the last sentence on the page ("Successful non-conventional infantry attacks against conventional mechanized infantry double the number of troopers eliminated in this fashion").

REASON: it needlessly repeats a part of the rule found on p . 217 ("Mechanized Infantry: Successful non-conventional infantry attacks against conventional mechanized infantry double the number of troopers eliminated unless they are made with burst-fire weapons").

[pokefan548]

Tenth Printing, p. 87

Damage taken upon a failed landing attempt is unclear. Per this thread, make the following edit:

If the roll fails the unit suffers 10 points of standard-scale damage on the nose (or aft for spheroid units) per point of MoF. Divide the damage into groupings of 5 points each, assigning any remaining points to one smaller group. Roll a location for each group of damage on the Nose (for aerodyne units) or Aft (for spheroid units) column of the Aerospace Units Hit Location Table.

Note: This errata borrows phrasing from BattleMech falling damage rules (p. 69).

[Xotl]

The pre-release errata for the still multiple months out 11th printing of TW has been added to the first post for public review.  Any eyes you can give it for errors would be appreciated.

[Daryk]

The note about conventional infantry weapons on page 216 is still contradicted by TO:AUE page 129.  The example in TO specifically cites a "non-infantry weapon" and divides it by the Armor Divisor.

[Xotl]

The note about conventional infantry weapons on page 216 is still contradicted by TO:AUE page 129.  The example in TO specifically cites a "non-infantry weapon" and divides it by the Armor Divisor.

Sorry, can you be more specific about what the contradiction is?  Please post your clarification in the Errata Discussion Thread, to keep this clean.


EDIT: TW errata is now locked, so any comments on the errata draft from this point forward should focus on formatting errors only, as I can't make any more changes to the book.

[ShroudedSciuridae]

Page 84, 9th printing (applicable to 11 Pre as well)

Velocity Loss, Stalling and Overspeed
Issue: Unlike on the Space Map (p. 76) and High Altitude Map (p. 79) there's no explicit mention to the Thrust Point cost to increase velocity on the Low Altitude or Ground Maps.
Correction: Insert language giving the Thrust Point cost.


Xotl: Not resolved in time to make the reprint.  My apologies.

[pavelb]

In the current PDF version of Total Warfare, the table of contents metadata is missing any subchapters under Combat.

[Xotl]

Final errata version uploaded to the main website; a big thanks to those who contributed.  At the last minute I managed to get a change to how TAG and torso-twisting works in, so be sure to note that.


EDIT: A minor 11.01 update has been uploaded.

[Alfaryn]

Corrected Tenth Printing, pdf

p. 85, Special Maneuvers Diagram

Change "Slide-Slip" to "Side-Slip".

[SANSd20]

Xotl: Questions are for the Errata Discussion thread, not individual errata threads.  Thank you.

[ArcFurnace]

TW, 9th printing PDF.

Page 199: "Engine Damage" heading under WiGE Combat Vehicles: add Water hexes to the list of terrain in which an engine-hit WiGE can make a DSR to avoid crashing.

Clear hexes are already on the list, and page 55 indicates that all WiGE vehicles treat water hexes as Clear terrain; this errata is mostly for clarity.

[theothersarah]

9th printing PDF.

Problem: There are issues with current wording for ProtoMech pilots taking damage, specifically regarding the functionality of shaded critical hit boxes boxes.

Page 28 states "Shaded [ProtoMech critical hit] boxes represent damage to the MechWarrior."

Page 41 states "the ProtoMech pilot takes a point of damage each time the controlling player fills in a shaded critical hit box (see Damage, p. 185)."

However, Page 185 states "Each time an attack forces a player to cross off one or more critical hit boxes, the warrior takes a point of damage."

My reading of this last line is that any critical hit that results in the checking off any number of boxes causes pilot damage - even if none of them were shaded. Also, the entire ProtoMech chapter no longer mentions the functionality of the shaded boxes at all, contrary to the excerpt from page 41.

Solution: The wording in one or more of these sections I have cited needs to be changed to clarify the intent of how damage is assigned to ProtoMech pilots.

If the intent was to remove the functionality of the shaded critical hit boxes altogether, then the references to them need to be removed. (I think it is unlikely that this is the case, but the change to page 185 makes it seem like it is possible.)

If the intent is to damage the pilot in the event of any successful critical hit AND in the event of shaded boxes being checked off (which can happen via section destruction without critical hits) then page 185 should have an additional line that includes an explanation of how shaded boxes work.

If there was no intent to actually change functionality, then the wording on page 185 should be reverted. The current wording is not ideal because it suggests only attacks can cause pilot damage (not any other sort of non-attack damage), and that checking off multiple shaded boxes only results in one pilot hit rather than one hit per box.

[Eminog]

P146 Total Warfare Finding a club
Beyond what is noted above, carrying a club has no affect other than to occupy both ’Mech’s hands.

Effect is the correct word here, not affect.