Published years of intro and equipment date conflicts

[mordel]

After recalculating availability across all years (2433 - 3144) for designs on my site I found the following irregularities with published units. It's possible these are Errata in one document or the other, but figured I'd run them by the folks here first before creating an official entry. Each of the below have introduction dates clearly listed which conflict with equipment introduction dates. So the question for each is, which source needs updating, the TR where the design date is listed, or the rulebook (TM, TO) where the equipment intro date is listed?

• Exterminator EXT-5E : TR3050u lists an introduction date of 3060, however TechManual has an introduction date for the Improved C3 as 3062
• Hussar HSR-500-D : TR3050u lists an introduction date of 3060, however TechManual has an introduction date for the Improved C3 as 3062
• Longshot LNG-2 : TR3055u lists an introduction date of "later in the 3050s", however Tactical Operations has an introduction date for Reactive Armor as 3063
• Onslaught SA-OS2 : TR3055u lists an introduction date of 3062, however TechManual has an introduction date for the Light AC/5 as 3068
• Tessen TSN-1C : TR3067 lists an introduction date of 3061, however TechManual has an introduction date for the Improved C3 as 3062

[Paul]

When in doubt, go with the TR date. The TM date indicates when a particular device has hit mass production, but it's possible for certain units to be introduced prior to that, in relatively small numbers. That's especially true for Solaris 7 designs.

Paul

[mordel]

That does make sense for some units assuming the dates listed were prototype dates. But they indicate they are "battle ready" or more formal mass introduction/production dates, definitely not prototype dates. So the Solaris 7 stuff would fall into the category of "trying new tech in a Prototype mode", but not the other stuff. Maybe it's ok if the dates are brushed off as such, but I would think we'd want everything in the universe to be as factual as possible.

[Paul]

Full production of a 'Mech can still be just a dozen or so in BT. Since we're only talking a 2 year gap in the case of the C3i examples, the explanation seems plausible to me. The KTO-21 is specifically identified as being the first to bring C3i to the frontlines.

Paul

[mordel]

Full production of a 'Mech can still be just a dozen or so in BT. Since we're only talking a 2 year gap in the case of the C3i examples, the explanation seems plausible to me. The KTO-21 is specifically identified as being the first to bring C3i to the frontlines.

Paul

Thanks Paul, this makes sense for everything but the Longshot. I agree that for the TM discrepancies, since TM only lists intro dates, the dates for Prototype Design and Production could easily fall several years prior to that date. Tactical Operations however clearly indicates that Prototype Design and Production is 3063 for Reactive Armor, not the general Introduction date. So for this, it means a unit technically couldn't even be in production before 3063 since the equipment was still in R&D and production of any type had not yet begun.

[Paul]

I agree with you on the Reactive Armor: the Prototype dates should be moved forward several years. The fluff of the Longshot extensively talks about its creation in the 3050s (not even late 3050s), so that change seems the best solution. Please drop an errata report in the TacOps thread, link to this thread, and it can be added to the review pile.

Paul

[mordel]

I agree with you on the Reactive Armor: the Prototype dates should be moved forward several years. The fluff of the Longshot extensively talks about its creation in the 3050s (not even late 3050s), so that change seems the best solution. Please drop an errata report in the TacOps thread, link to this thread, and it can be added to the review pile.

Done. I also added a note about how the dates appear in the Jihad Technology Advancement table so that can be tackled at the same time.

[Paul]

Nice, thanks! [applause]