BattleTech - The Board Game of Armored Combat

Catalyst Game Labs => BattleTech Game Errata => Topic started by: Xotl on 13 April 2012, 14:43:14

Title: Tactical Operations - 6 December 2019 (v3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 13 April 2012, 14:43:14
NOTE: This thread was for the original, single-volume, edition of Tactical Operations.  New threads have been established for the two-volume split reprint.
Advanced Rules: https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=69700.0
Advanced Units & Equipment: https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=69701.0



This thread is for all issues and problems with Tactical Operations.

Product Link: http://bg.battletech.com/?wpsc-product=tactical-operations

There were three main revisions of Tactical Operations - be sure to cite which release you're working from:
2008 - first printing (Wizkids)
2012 - second printing (Topps)
2018 - third "printing" (Topps: retro art cover).  This release was PDF only.  However, it was mistakenly made using the build files from the first printing.  As such, it is essentially the first printing with second-to-third printing errata on top, and thus is missing everything that was fixed in the first-to-second printing (which is a lot).  I cannot recommend using this as a source: instead, either use the second printing with the final 3.03 errata document, or get the new two-volume TacOps re-release.

Current errata version is 3.03, and can be found here:
https://bg.battletech.com/errata/

Please remember to follow the errata report template (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,2412.msg171290.html#msg171290) when reporting issues.  Thanks.



Developer-Level Errata:
In case of any contradiction, developer-level errata takes precedence over the current errata document.

None.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 13 April 2012 Update (3.0)
Post by: MrKiasu on 13 April 2012, 15:40:09
Errata for Errata?

Page 33) Combat Vehicle Fuel Cell:

New text is "Introduced: circa 2470 (Terran Alliance [Primitive]); 2470 (Terran Hegemony [Modern])"

I assume, based on the old text, that the primitive date should be 2046.


Xotl: noted, thanks!
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 13 April 2012 Update (3.0)
Post by: jymset on 13 April 2012, 19:24:59
Battle Armor Combat Data (p. 412) - p. 51 of errata PDF

Missing info for the "Ammo (Weight per ton)" column. This will be on the right of the table and reads as follows:

Angel ECM: NA
BA LB-X AC: 4 kg (10)
BA Tube Artillery: 15 kg (2)
Heavy Flamer: 1 kg (10)
Laser-Reflective Armor: NA
Reactive Armor Armor: NA


Xotl: noted, thanks!
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 13 April 2012 Update (3.0)
Post by: MadCapellan on 14 April 2012, 03:36:43
Xotl,

You, myself, Moonsword, Randall & Joel had discussed eliminating the -4 immobile target bonus for area-effect mortar rounds, and it was my understanding it was agreed upon, but it doesn't seem to appear in this errata.  Could you see to it that it is added?  I can forward all the relevent emails to you again if necessary.


Xotl: noted, thanks!
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 13 April 2012 Update (3.0)
Post by: BritMech on 14 April 2012, 22:47:47
2008 printing. Checked Errata. Bay Personnel Table is missing from the Compiled Tables at the end of the book.


Xotl: noted, thanks!
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 13 April 2012 Update (3.0)
Post by: sillybrit on 20 April 2012, 20:53:28
Specialist Munitions for Battle Armor Grenade Launchers.

On p41-42:

* Chaff Grenades (p. 363)
Change the header in the first bar from “Chaff Grenades” to “Chaff Grenades [VGL]”


* Incendiary Grenades (p. 364)
Change the header in the first bar from “Incendiary Grenades” to “Incendiary Grenades [BA GL/VGL]”


* Smoke Grenades (p. 364)
Change the header in the first bar from “Smoke Grenades” to “Smoke Grenades [BA GL/VGL]”


However, on p52:

4) “Grenade Launcher (Vehicular): change the row name to “Grenade Launcher”, and under the “Used By (Weapon)” column change the Chaff and Smoke entries from “VGL” to “BAGL, VGL”.

So what are the specialist grenades that can be fired from Battle Armor Grenade Launchers: Incendiary and Smoke as per p41-42, or Chaff and Smoke as per p52?
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 13 April 2012 Update (3.0)
Post by: jymset on 20 April 2012, 21:58:13
p52:

4) “Grenade Launcher (Vehicular): change the row name to “Grenade Launcher”, and under the “Used By (Weapon)” column change the Chaff and Smoke entries from “VGL” to “BAGL, VGL”.

This is in error and should be changed to:

4) “Grenade Launcher (Vehicular): change the row name to “Grenade Launcher”, and under the “Used By (Weapon)” column change the Incendiary and Smoke entries from “VGL” to “BAGL, VGL”.


Xotl: noted, thanks!
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 25 April 2012 Update (3.01)
Post by: Xotl on 25 April 2012, 12:58:55
3.01 released, containing several error fixes and adding a few clarifications made since the original 13 April release (and shrinking the watermark).  Thanks for the extra sets of eyes - your corrections made it to the reprint.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 25 April 2012 Update (3.01)
Post by: BirdofPrey on 25 April 2012, 17:15:54
Shouldn't the addition of TAG infantry note that 2 TAG troopers are required per squad?


Xotl: noted on p. 341, thanks!
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 25 April 2012 Update (3.01)
Post by: Neufeld on 26 April 2012, 15:55:13
Tactical Operations, 2010 version (+ errata), page 380:

Calculating BV for modular armor says:
"Modular Armor: Modular Armor increases the total armor carried. Include this additional armor when calculating the
Defensive Battle Rating using the Armor Type Modifier for the armor fitted in the same location as the modular armor."

However, it does not say anything if the speed reduction from modular armor affect, or not, the calculation of the Defensive factor, and the Offensive Speed Factor.

Suggested solution:
Clarify the issue.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 26 April 2012, 21:46:28
3.02 update released with a handful of minor updates and corrections.  A list detailing all the updates made since 3.0 is available below:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/357573/TacOps%20-%20Last%20Minute%20Corrections%2026%20April.doc

These will all appear in the new printing.  Thanks again.


Anything reported after this is new errata for the new printing.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: chanman on 28 April 2012, 21:07:25
Page 15, the House Liao (Capellan Confederation) Tech Rating is D

Is this correct, or should it be E like the other Great Houses?
This is from the 2008 CGL PDF
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: mbear on 11 May 2012, 12:32:42
PDF released 5/10/2012

page 390, index, X section, misspelled word:

Quote
Xenoplanetary condition-trained troups,

Should be
Quote
Xenoplanetary condition-trained troops,
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: sillybrit on 24 May 2012, 17:25:26
TacOps 2nd printing, 3rd release, p374:

Flare Mortars currently are listed as "Flare Mortars [’Mech Mortars]", but as per this entry from the v3.02 errata p44, flare ammunition should be available for Battle Armor mortars as well:

Quote
* Flare Mortars (p. 374)
Change the header in the first bar from “Flare Mortars” to “Flare Mortars [BA Mortar/’Mech Mortar]”
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 30 May 2012, 14:05:45
Third Release, p. 299, CASE II

New corrected text, Game Rules, first paragraph:

"When ammunition protected by CASE II explodes (including any ammunition-like explosions, such as critical hits to Gauss weapons), only 1 point of internal damage is inflicted to the location (with the normal chance of critical effects), while any remaining damage is applied to the location’s rear armor. If the location is a limb, remove all remaining armor in the location, or half the location's total original armor, whichever is less. Any remaining damage from the explosion does not transfer after that. (For fighters, CASE II reduces ammunition explosion effects against such units—such as described on p. 161, TW—to 1 point against the unit’s SI.) Furthermore, for any critical hits rolled up as a result of an ammunition explosion vented by CASE II, the controlling player rolls 2D6 again for each one, and disregards the critical effects on a result of 8+. Otherwise, the critical hit applies as normal. Critical hits on slots occupied by the CASE II itself have no effect and should be re-rolled."

And delete the third paragraph ("In the case of an explosion in an arm or leg...")
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: A. Lurker on 14 June 2012, 11:30:22
According to this post by Welshman back in January (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,15427.msg354538.html#msg354538), the "Airborne Targeting" rules on pp. 180/181 should apply only to airborne aerospace units while airborne ground units like VTOLs use the standard artillery targeting rules (and would thus, incidentally, be able to fire non-Arrow IV artillery weapons while airborne). If true, this would need to be spelled out in the actual rules text, which currently doesn't make that distinction.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: A. Lurker on 01 July 2012, 17:19:52
Handheld weapons game rules, p. 316 in Tactical Operations and pp. 34/35 in the v3.02 errata document:

At the moment, we seem to technically have both rules telling us how to resolve physical attacks with a handheld weapon...and a rule that forbids ever actually performing such an attack. To wit, point 3 in the Game Rules errata of that document spells out to resolve such attacks as basically club attacks if indeed they ever happen -- yet the list of physical attacks actually allowed while carrying a handheld weapon, in both the original text and point 2 of the same errata, is explicitly limited to "a charge, Death From Above or kick". No mention of clubs or indeed physical attacks with the handheld weapon at all at that point.

Suggestion: Add physical attacks with the handheld weapon to the list of physical attacks allowed while carrying it. :)
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: SCC on 08 July 2012, 00:25:46
This is the best place I could find to put this

TacticalOperations_RecordSheets_and_CompiledTables.pdf
Exact printing unknown, internal copyright is dated 2008 and my copy has a creation date of 21/10/2010
Page 6, Advanced V.T.O.L. Record Sheet
The record sheet has sufficient Internal Structure circles for a Super Heavy vehicle of this class but only had normal left/right IS/armor set up and not the super heavy front and rear left/right arangment
Note: this PDF no longer appears to be downloadable

PS: the Rules, Errata Index, and Official Errata Link thread link still points to the old thread and needs updating
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Moonsword on 08 July 2012, 09:52:58
Something got left out of the errata document.

* Super-Heavy Vehicles (p. 378)
First column, last paragraph.  Change
"All Super-Heavy Combat Vehicles use the Super-Heavy Vehicle Hit Locations Table, and must apply armor and structure to 6 facings (plus any rotors or mounted turrets) rather than 4." to
"All Super-Heavy Combat Vehicles apart from VTOLs use the Super-Heavy Vehicle Hit Locations Table, and must apply armor and structure to 6 facings (plus any mounted turrets) rather than 4."


Xotl: added to the first post; thanks!
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: jymset on 14 August 2012, 06:19:32
Incomplete errata for 2012 printing: the table on p. 239 now lists the maximum mass of Satellites as 300 tons, but the table on p. 241 lacks that change.

Errata suggestion:

Advanced Support Vehicle Weight Table, p. 241
Satellite (Large) line
change "Weight Range" from "100.5 - 200" to "100.5 - 300"


Xotl: added to the first post; thanks!
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: jymset on 14 August 2012, 06:41:40
While on topic...

Satellite Record Sheet, p. 398
Delete the "Heat Data" box entirely.

Explanation: The Heat Data is similar to that on DropShips, etc. But Satellites are a sub-type of Support Vehicle and thus abide the 0-sum heat rules for vehicles. In this they work differently to other Aero/Space units and don't need to track heat sinks. The application of this construction maxim for Sats is explicitly stated on p. 251: "This applies to all advanced Support Vehicle types, even those that function as aerospace units (such as Airships and Satellites)."


Xotl: added to the first post; thanks!
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 01 September 2012, 16:01:35
Completely replace the Game Text of the following two Mortar Ammunition entries as follows:

Airburst Mortars (p. 373)
“Airburst Mortars are area-effect weapons that are fired at a hex, rather than at a target unit. Airburst Mortars inflict 1 damage point per shell to all targets in the hex, and deliver their damage in 1-point clusters (conventional infantry treat Airburst Mortars as a burst-fire weapon that delivers 1D6 ÷ 2 damage per shell). Only units inside buildings avoid this damage (though the building itself suffers damage to its CF). Each shell of Airburst Mortar ammunition inflicts 2 points of damage in an ammunition explosion (multiplied as normal by the mortar rack’s size and the total number of unfired rounds). Under no circumstances do Airburst Mortars apply the –4 immobile target to-hit modifier.”

Anti-Personnel (AP) Mortars (p. 374)
“Anti-Personnel (AP) Mortars inflict 1D6 burst-fire damage points (rounded up) per shell to conventional infantry units (for example, a full flight of 8 AP Mortars delivers 8D6 damage to a conventional infantry platoon). Against all other units, AP Mortars inflict 1 damage point per shell, applied in 1-point clusters. Each shell of AP Mortar ammunition inflicts 1 point of damage in an ammunition explosion (multiplied as normal by the mortar rack’s size and the total number of unfired rounds).”
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 06 September 2012, 15:23:57
PDF, Third Release, p. 352:

Flak Autocannon Ammo, Game Rules
"Against all other units—including battle armored infantry and grounded aerospace units—flak AC ammo inflicts half its normal rated damage.
Change to:
"Against all other units—including battle armored infantry and grounded aerospace units—flak AC ammo inflicts half its normal rated damage (round up)."

Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 11 September 2012, 18:58:25
PDF, Third Release

p. 80, Glancing Blow,
Under "Convention Infantry"
Change "Mech scale" to "’Mech-scale"

p. 308, Advanced Engine Master Table
Adjust the * footnote as follows:

Fighter slots (if applicable) are located in the rear, with any extras divided evenly among the side wings.
Change to:
Fighter slots (if applicable) must be located in the rear.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 11 September 2012, 19:02:05
PDF, Third Release, p. 306, Drone (Remote) Operating Systems, last paragraph:

Modifiers to Piloting Skill checks from Small Cockpits are ignored.
Change to:
Modifiers to Piloting Skill checks from Small and Torso-Mounted Cockpits are ignored.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 12 September 2012, 15:16:33
PDF, Third Release, p. 350, VTOL Mast Mount, Game Rules, first paragraph, second sentence:

"(if using the Mast to spot for itself, treat the Mast as a separate, non-firing unit doing the spotting). even if the unit with the Mast Mount is hovering just behind the highest level of a hill, building or other obstruction that would otherwise block its line of sight."
Change to:
"(if using the Mast to spot for itself, treat the Mast as a separate, non-firing unit doing the spotting; apply the unit's movement modifier once, and then add the Indirect modifier), even if the unit with the Mast Mount is hovering just behind the highest level of a hill, building or other obstruction that would otherwise block its line of sight. The Mast Mount does not enable direct-fire over/through cover."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 21 September 2012, 15:07:46
Heavy Weapons & Equipment Construction Table, Developer-Level Errata:
In the Space column for P (ProtoMech), change the following items from "NA" to "1":

Chemical Laser, Large
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 23 September 2012, 15:42:57
PDF, third release, p. 377, third paragraph.

At the end of the paragraph, insert the following new sentence:
"A unit may also not mount armor types illegal for that unit type to mount."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: SCC on 14 October 2012, 05:30:40
PDF, Tactical Operations v3.02 2012-04-26, pg. 48

"BattleMech - jump pack: Change page reference to 292, 293, 380."

There is no mention of BattleMech jump packs on page 380 nor does this errata add any

Suggested fix: add rules for BV calculation for units using BattleMech jump packs on page 380
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 17 October 2012, 13:47:18
PDF, third release, p. 18, Evading:

"An Evading unit generates 2 Heat Points per turn, in addition to the standard 2 Heat Points for running,"
Change to:
"An Evading unit generates 2 Heat Points per turn, in addition to the Heat Points it would normally generate for running,"
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 31 December 2012, 13:10:47
PDF, third release, p. 311, Field Guns:

"Each Field Gun requires a number of troopers equal to its weight in tonnage to operate (to a minimum of 2 troopers per Field Gun)."
Change to:
"Each Field Gun requires a number of troopers equal to its weight in tonnage to operate, rounding up (to a minimum of 2 troopers per Field Gun)."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 02 January 2013, 00:50:29
There's a bit of a contradiction in the 3.02 errata versus the current print of TacOps:

TacOps p 285 says "In ground combat, Artillery Cannon attacks may be resolved normally or using the rules for indirect LRM fire (see p. 111, TW),"

TacOps errata v3.02 says different (and wrong).  The current print of TacOps is right (the statement above), and the next TacOps errata release will be updated to reflect this.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 26 April 2012 Update (3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 02 January 2013, 21:29:41
I've uncovered some older rulings (and a couple things I noticed while typing them up) that were not incorporated into the current printing.  I'm enclosing them here in a single post for convenience's sake.  They will appear in the next major TacOps errata revision (3.1).  All references are to the PDF, 3rd release:

pp. 18-19, Evading (Movement Mode)
Add a clarifying note that, despite the 'Mech-centric nature of the text, any unit that has Running or Flanking MP can use Evading.  In addition, a unit does not have to run/flank to evade (it can just walk/cruise, and would also generate less heat as a result).

p. 32, Expanded Movement Costs
Add footnote 24 to "Sand"

p. 33
Note to self, move the #6 footnote up to p. 32.

p. 35, Expanded Movement Costs
Add footnote 23 to "Torrent"

p. 44, Fire Tables
"§Except under the following conditions: in Vacuum and Trace Atmospheric Pressures and in Tornado F1-F3 and Tornado F4+, no fire is possible. For Castles Brian hexes, fire is not automatic; instead, divide the standard Heavy and Hardened modifiers in half (round down) and apply a +2 modifier when making the roll to start a fire."
Change to:
"§Except under the following conditions: in Vacuum and Trace Atmospheric Pressures and in Tornado F1-F3 and Tornado F4+, no fire is possible. For Castles Brian hexes, fire is not automatic; instead, divide the standard Heavy and Hardened modifiers in half (round down) and apply a +2 modifier when making the roll to start a fire. Otherwise, any hex (whether water, clear and so on) struck by any of these munitions is automatically on fire. Do not check for weather conditions extinguishing fires in the turn they are started by these munitions. At the start of the following turn, however, they are treated as a standard fire; meaning that such a fire in a Water or Clear hex would be extinguished at the end of that turn."

p. 50, Ice
"Every time a unit enters a hex not using careful movement (see p. 63)"
Change to:
"Every time a unit enters an ice-coated hex not using careful movement (see p. 63)"

p. 51, Swamp, Quicksand
"During every End Phase after the turn in which the swamp hex becomes a quicksand hex, the unit will sink 1 level; apply a +3 modifier to the Piloting Skill Roll to get unstuck from a quicksand hex, as well as a cumulative +3 modifier for each level under the surface."
Change to:
"During every End Phase after the turn in which the swamp hex becomes a quicksand hex, the unit will sink 1 level (treat 'Mechs one level down as in partial cover; they are unable to fire any leg-mounted weapons). Apply a +3 modifier to the Piloting Skill Roll to get unstuck from a quicksand hex, as well as a cumulative +3 modifier for each level under the surface."

p. 57, Fog
Change both references to Careful Movement from "p. 62" to "p. 63"

p. 62, Bog Down Rules
"Jump-capable units that use Walking or Running movement to enter tundra, magma, deep snow or mud may get stuck,"
Change to:
"Jump-capable units that use Walking or Running movement to enter sand, tundra, liquid magma, deep snow or mud may get stuck,"

p. 62, Bog Down Rules
"Additional Modifiers: For tundra, magma crust, deep snow and mud hexes,"
Change to:
"Additional Modifiers: For tundra, deep snow and mud hexes,"

p. 63, Careful Movement, fourth paragraph, last sentence
"In all other terrain, the crash ends the vehicle’s movement, and the vehicle sustains damage to its Front side as if it had charged."
Change to:
"In all other terrain, the crash ends the vehicle’s movement, and the vehicle sustains damage to its Front side as if it had charged an identical unit to itself."

p. 63, Careful Movement, fourth paragraph, last sentence
"If both fog and ice are present, the modifiers are cumulative,"
Change to:
"If both fog and ice are present, the movement modifiers are cumulative,"

p. 64, Careful Movement
Between "Hover and WiGE Vehicles" and "Terrain Factor", add a new subsection: "ProtoMechs"
"ProtoMechs use their Gunnery Skill to check when moving through a hex at full speed. Treat a ProtoMech like a vehicle if it fails."

p. 105, Heat Sink Coolant Failure
Change this section's name to "Heat Sink Coolant Failure ('Mechs Only)"

p. 221, Visual Range Tables
Move Gusting Rain up to the same row as Heavy Rain.  Also, add Torrential Downpour and Ice Storm to the Heavy Rain row (and delete the extra space between the slash and Blowing Sand)

p. 221, Sensor Spotting, third paragraph
"A result of 7 or 8 means the sensor detects any unit within its short range. A result of 5 or 6 means the sensor detects units out to its medium range. A result of 2 to 4 means the sensor detects units out to its long range."
Change to:
"A result of 7 or 8 means the sensor detects any unit within its short range band. A result of 5 or 6 means the sensor detects units within its medium range band. A result of 2 to 4 means the sensor detects units within its long range band."

p. 222, Infrared Sensors
"add 1 additional hex if the unit has been hit by an inferno attack, or is standing in a hex that is on fire."
Change to:
"add 1 additional hex if the unit has been hit by an inferno attack in the last turn, or is standing in a hex that is on fire."

p. 222, Infrared Sensors, last paragraph
"Units that are not “hot” cannot be detected by an IR sensor scan."
Change to:
"Units that are not “hot” (i.e. those without one or more heat points on a Heat Scale) cannot be detected by an IR sensor scan."

p. 224, Change "Undewater Combat" to "Underwater Combat"
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 2 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 02 January 2013, 22:24:21
3.03 has been released.  This update is much longer page-length-wise, though it actually features slightly fewer rulings.

There's two sections to this one: "new additions", which has everything new to version 3.0-3.03, and a collected "full errata" section, which is all errata for TacOps, period.  This is standard practice for core rulebook errata releases, but when I originally finished v3.0 last year it was hours before I went on vacation I didn't have the chance to do things properly before I took off.

In this release I've trimmed a few typo reports that slipped by me the first time (I generally leave those out because they aren't important to the average reader and take up a lot of space if all left in).  I've also cut a few obsolete/double-entries, and outright removed three entries - on CASE II, Airburst Mortar ammo, and AP Mortar ammo - that were new to v3.0 but have since been replaced here in this thread with more updated rulings.  Also, a conflict between how Artillery Cannons & Indirect worked in the third release of TacOps vs. 3.02 has been corrected.  No sense keeping the old rulings around to potentially spread confusion.

No new rulings have been added.  Everything in that regard is the same as 3.02 - the goal here was just ease of use, not new material (hence the tiny version number increase).

All-new rulings made since TacOps was reprinted will appear in the next major errata release, which will be 3.1.  Cheers.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 2 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: BirdofPrey on 03 January 2013, 04:01:44
Errata to the eratta:
Pg. 2
Quote
* Lance Movement (p. 24)
Under “Unusual Unit Types”, second sentence
“For example, the Clans use units of ten, called Stars.”
Change to:
“For example, the Clans use units of five, called Stars.”
Clan vehicular stars contain ten units (a point being 2 vehicles), and Lance movement relates to vehicles, so the first sentence should be the correct one.

(On a side note, my copy of TO which should be up to date as of the most recent printing [Corrected Second printing] says 'units of five, called stars' on page 24)


To clear up any confusion between vehicle stars and mech stars perhaps the section should say
“For example, the Clans use units of ten vehicles, called Stars.”
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 2 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 03 January 2013, 14:30:33
Errata to the eratta:
Pg. 2Clan vehicular stars contain ten units (a point being 2 vehicles), and Lance movement relates to vehicles, so the first sentence should be the correct one.

(On a side note, my copy of TO which should be up to date as of the most recent printing [Corrected Second printing] says 'units of five, called stars' on page 24)


To clear up any confusion between vehicle stars and mech stars perhaps the section should say
“For example, the Clans use units of ten vehicles, called Stars.”

Thanks - I've reupped the file and deleted that entry (since it isn't represented in the new printing any more).  The file number is the same, though the date has been updated.  This is the only change.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Garner on 14 January 2013, 18:29:20
Hi Xotl,

Can I clarify a slight discrepancy/redundancy on the errata on Artillery Cannons. Page 26 and page 84 of the errata both modifiy:

Artillery Cannons (p. 285)
1) Under “Game Rules”, first paragraph, second sentence


The entry on page 26 has the replacement text:

“In ground combat, Artillery Cannon attacks may be resolved normally or using the rules for indirect LRM fire (see p. 111, TW),”

The entry on page 84 has the replacement text:

“In ground combat, Artillery Cannon attacks are resolved using the same to-hit modifiers as indirect LRM fire (see p. 111, TW),”

Does this mean that while I can fire directly or indirectly, either way will incur the same (relevant) to-hit modifiers?
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 14 January 2013, 18:59:52
Hi Garner,

"In ground combat, Artillery Cannon attacks may be resolved normally or using the rules for indirect LRM fire (see p. 111, TW),"

is intended to be the correct text (emphasis on the "or"); thanks for the catch.  I'll be upping a 3.04 later on.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 27 January 2013, 16:05:33
Third release PDF, p. 282, Armored Components, first paragraph, last sentence:

"The only exception is the cockpit location, which adds 1 ton of armor to the cockpit weight."
Change to:
"The only exception is cockpit systems (including Cockpit Command Consoles), which adds 1 ton of armor to the cockpit weight."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 31 January 2013, 14:49:20
COMPLETE GHOST TARGETS OVERHAUL

This will be featured in the upcoming 3.1 TacOps errata release, but I'm enclosing it here until that is released.  It completely replaces the Ghost Targets rules as currently found in all printings of Tactical Operations.

If you have any questions, as always, Errata General Discussion is the place, not any active errata thread.

[link deleted - see TacOps errata v3.1 and later]
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: SCC on 08 February 2013, 04:37:14
TacOps, first printing

Anti-Radiation (ARAD) Missiles box (p. 368) header is missing missile/launcher types

The current errata for ARAD is off but it's so bad I'm taking it to the rules questions

EDIT: Asked that question, see here: http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,26824.new.html
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Paul on 28 March 2013, 14:40:20
PDF, Second Printing, p. 354

"The Arrow IV Homing Missile does not make its own to-hit roll. Instead, the homing missile may only attack units that have been successfully designated by a friendly TAG unit in the turn of the missile’s arrival."

CHANGE TO:

PDF, Second Printing, p. 354

"The Arrow IV Homing Missile does not make its own to-hit roll. Instead, the homing missile may only attack targets that have been successfully designated by a friendly TAG unit in the turn of the missile’s arrival."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 28 March 2013, 15:17:07
PDF, third release

* Void-Signature System (p. 349)
Under “Game Rules”, add a fifth bullet point after the rest:

“When the Void-Signature System is engaged, any ECM on the unit has no effect, other than to make the Void-Signature System functional.”

Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 31 March 2013, 15:13:05
PDF third release p. 181

"If an artillery attack is made from Altitudes 1-8, the attack lands
the turn after it was fired; if it is made from Altitude 9, the attack
lands two turns after it is fired."

Change to:

"If an artillery attack is made from Altitudes 1-8, the attack lands
the turn after it was fired; if it is made from Altitude 9 or 10, the attack
lands two turns after it is fired."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Yeti on 02 April 2013, 19:08:30
PDF third release p413 in the Infantry Construction Data table

Beast-Mounted Infantry gets an Intro Date of ES/ES

change to PS/PS

People were riding on animals a long time before they invented space flight.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: BeeRockxs on 17 April 2013, 13:53:10
PDF third release page 382, Inner Sphere Weapon And Equipment BV Table (Addendum)
The PPC (Heavy) + PPC Capacitor and ER PPC + PPC Capacitor are missing the double dagger footnote that the other PPC + Capacitor combinations have.
These combinations also explode like the others and should have the same double dagger, because they logically should also reduce the BV for explodiness.

PDF third release page 383, Inner Sphere Weapon And Equipment BV Table (Addendum)
The M-Pod is also missing the double dagger footnote that the other explosive equipments have, denoting reduced BV for being explosive.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 17 April 2013, 15:21:02
PDF third release page 382, Inner Sphere Weapon And Equipment BV Table (Addendum)
The PPC (Heavy) + PPC Capacitor and ER PPC + PPC Capacitor are missing the double dagger footnote that the other PPC + Capacitor combinations have.
These combinations also explode like the others and should have the same double dagger, because they logically should also reduce the BV for explodiness.

I do not have my books in front of me at the moment, but this is already noted in the current errata (p. 106).  Can you confirm it has not been implemented in the current (third) release of Tactical Operations?  If it hasn't, I'll update the in-progress errata.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: BeeRockxs on 17 April 2013, 15:31:27
You're right, it's in there. What's missing is the double dagger for the M-Pod.
Edit: Nevermind, I just confirmed with Welshman that the M-Pod should not subtract one from defensive BV, but the 5 BV should be added to the defensive BV of the unit. So the M-Pod is actually missing the single dagger in the table that signifies that it's defensive BV.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 05 May 2013, 19:25:31
PDF, third release, p. 281:

"When a location containing a slot of Modular Armor is hit, the damage is subtracted from the Modular Armor capacity first."

AFTER THIS ADD

"If any damage remains, it should be treated as a new attack against the unit's armor using the remaining damage, and then applying the effects of the armor (if any) against that damage. Concerning eligibility of penetrating critical hits, or armor piercing weaponry, resolve such effects based on the capabilities of the underlying armor."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: AJC46 on 18 May 2013, 22:17:56
suggesting a change to protomech AC wording to remove confusion over being able to use alternate ammo.

current: "ProtoMech Autocannons use the same rules as standard autocannons. When mounted on ProtoMechs, ProtoMech ACs are treated in the
same manner as ballistic weapons on vehicles, and so do not generate heat."

according to the Line Dev Herb in the battlechat today Proto AC's can load and use all the alternate ammo types usable by standard and light autocannons and the current wording in TO doesn't say it can causing confusion it just says uses the same rules not if it can use alternate ammo. and this is my suggestion for clearing the confusion also got rid of some redundant info too.

"Protomech ACs PACS use the same rules as standard autocannons, and can use all standard and special AC ammunition types available to standard or light ACs"

"for figuring out the chances for Armor piercing rounds working with the PAC the PAC/2 uses the (L)AC/2's chances the PAC/4 uses the (L)AC/5's and the PAC/8 uses the AC10 armor piercing chances"

well?
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: jymset on 22 May 2013, 01:30:43
Dev-Level Errata:

p. 408, Extended LRM 20
Change Heat from "12(12)" to "10(10)"
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Paul on 30 May 2013, 11:21:10
p. 185
"The base to-hit number is modified normally for the attacker’s movement and for firing through (not into) woods and for other terrain features."

CHANGE TO:
"The base to-hit number is modified normally for all other to-hit modifiers such as the attacker’s movement and for firing through (not into) woods and for other terrain features."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Pa Weasley on 11 June 2013, 18:46:00
p. 384
Clan Weapons and Equipment Table [Addendum]
Improved Heavy Laser (Small), (Medium), and (Large) are not listed as being explosive though they are described as such on p. 321 and in the Heavy Weapon and Equipment Combat Data table on p. 406. Should they should be treated as Gauss weapons for the purpose of defensive BV explosive penalty calculations?
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Paul on 18 June 2013, 18:27:49
p. 311:


"parts, but they may not be fi red in the same turn that the platoon has moved or delivered any attack using its own infantry weapons."

AFTER THIS ADD:
"Unlike regular infantry attacks, field guns may not be used to attack targets in the same hex as the attacker. Any infantry unit with Field Guns cannot engage in Anti-'Mech attacks such as Leg and Swarm Attacks."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Paul on 20 June 2013, 10:19:55
p.275:

"Modular (Omni) Technology: Unless otherwise noted, all of the items presented below may be pod-mounted on appropriate modular or Omni unit types."

CHANGE TO:

"Modular (Omni) Technology: Unless otherwise noted, all of the items presented below may be pod-mounted on appropriate modular or Omni unit types. The following items may not be pod-mounted: Armor (except Modular Armor), Structure, Cockpits, Engines, Gyros, Musculature, Muscular enhancers (such as AES and MASC).

p.288:

"Except for the shield (which may only be installed as fixed equipment), OmniMechs may mount all of these weapons as pods or as fixed equipment. A ’Mech can mount only one physical attack weapon per location, unless one of the weapons is a shield or spikes."

CHANGE TO:

"OmniMechs may mount all of these weapons as pods or as fixed equipment. A ’Mech can mount only one physical attack weapon per location, unless one of those weapons is a shield or spikes, such that a single location might have a single physical attack weapon, one shield and spikes."


<>


"Shields are hard-mounted, and so Shield-based movement modifiers apply to the unit at the time of construction."

CHANGE TO:
"Shields may be pod-mounted, and so Shield-based movement modifiers apply to the unit once the Shields are added."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Paul on 20 June 2013, 12:54:05
p. 100

REPLACE:
"For this purpose, the Angel ECM suite (p.279) counts as two ECM or ECCM suites, or the player can chose to run the Angel at 1 ECM and 1 ECCM."

WITH:
"For this purpose, Angel ECM may only be countered by Angel ECCM.  Standard (Guardian) ECCM does not interfere with Angel ECM in any way. Similarly, 1 Angel ECCM can counter any amount of non-Angel ECM.  Alternatively, the player may elect to operate his Angel ECM Suite as if it were two standard ECM Suites, losing the additional jamming abilities of the Angel Suite but gaining the ability to operate ECM and ECCM simultaneously.  As with the election to operate an ECM suite in ECCM mode, the decision to operate an Angel Suite as two standard suites must be made in the End Phase of the preceding turn."

Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: SCC on 19 July 2013, 08:11:53
Working from the current (3.03, 2013-01-03) here, pages 102 and 103, mirrored else where in the document.

Page 102, in the section for titled ’Mech Mortar Ammunition (p. 373)
Quote
“’Mech Mortars (see p. 324) and Battle Armor Mortars (see p. 263, TM) may use a variety of ammunition types. If a unit with a ’Mech Mortar does not specify its ammo type, use the rules for Armor-Piercing (Shaped-Charge) ammo.
However according to the next page (103) BA Mortars aren't allowed to use Armor-Piercing (Shaped-Charge) ammo (Note: This is probably because BA Mortars have a different base damage to 'Mech Mortars)

On the next page (103 again) the section on Anti-Personnel (AP) Mortars (p. 374) is lacking a bit on changing the header
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: SCC on 22 July 2013, 01:49:50
TacOps, of course, first printing, Conventional Infantry Armor Table, pages 317 and 318 no correcting errata that I can find

Myomer, Suit has Availability of X-X-E and Introduction of 3047 and the Myomer, Vest has Availability of X-X-E and Introduction of 3045. Both of these dates are during the Succession Wars, as such their Succession Wars Availability codes should be changed to something other than X (Unavailable)

Additionally several of the Faction Specific kits have Availability codes that indicate they where available before they were introduced, these codes either need to be changed or a note added to indicate that the dates provided are the dates of adoption, not introduction
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: HABeas2 on 22 July 2013, 12:27:10
Hello,

TacOps, of course, first printing, Conventional Infantry Armor Table, pages 317 and 318 no correcting errata that I can find

Myomer, Suit has Availability of X-X-E and Introduction of 3047 and the Myomer, Vest has Availability of X-X-E and Introduction of 3045. Both of these dates are during the Succession Wars, as such their Succession Wars Availability codes should be changed to something other than X (Unavailable)

Additionally several of the Faction Specific kits have Availability codes that indicate they where available before they were introduced, these codes either need to be changed or a note added to indicate that the dates provided are the dates of adoption, not introduction

The Availability codes are correct for the myomer armor. Though 3045 and 3047 are Succession Wars era, they represent essentially the very end of that era, leaving some 300 years of that period in which the armor type did not exist at all. Allowing for its extremely limited usage in this period, the myomer armor types simply were not available in significant enough supply in these very-trailing years of the era to merit a better grade than "X".

Thank you,

- Herbert Beas
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Paul on 30 July 2013, 12:00:03
p. 382

In the ’MECH INTERNAL STRUCTURE MODIFIER TABLE ADDENDUM table:

Composite 1.0

CHANGE TO:

Composite 0.5
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: stoicfaux on 09 August 2013, 22:09:27
Not sure:  PDF, copyright is 2007-2011  (maybe "2010 - second release - NOTE: PDF ONLY"?)
Page:  page 301 Torso-Mounted Cockpit

Problem:  TacOps doesn't allow a Mech or a MechWarrior with a Torso Cockpit to survive head destruction.

Total Warfare pg 128 details Mech destruction and MechWarrior death thusly:
’Mechs
A ´Mech is considered destroyed and out of the game if its MechWarrior dies or the ´Mech suffers three engine hits (remember to count engine slots in the side torso if that torso is destroyed). The destruction of the head, cockpit or center torso has the same effects and renders a ’Mech destroyed. Mechwarrior survival: The MechWarrior dies when the destruction/loss of the head or cockpit occurs, or if the center torso is destroyed by an ammunition explosion or area-effect weapon. If the center torso is destroyed in any other fashion, the MechWarrior does not automatically die. CASE mounted in the center torso does not protect a MechWarrior from a center torso ammo explosion.


TacOps and the current errata do not state that Torso Mounted cockpits prevent Mech destruction or MechWarrior death upon head destruction.

Solution:  Add the following to the torso cockpit rules:
"A Mech with a torso mounted cockpit is not considered destroyed, nor is the MechWarrior considered killed, if the Mech's head is destroyed."


Disclaimer:  Yeah, it's common sense, but somewhere, there is a rules lawyer somewhere just dying to use that loophole.



Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 20 September 2013 Update (3.1)
Post by: Xotl on 20 September 2013, 21:57:22
Version 3.1 of the errata for Tactical Operations has been released; the link is in the first post, with the main website link to follow a while later.

Major items in this release include:
 - heavy rewrites to Handheld Weapons and Recon Camera
 - complete Ghost Targets revision
 - major revisions to ECCM, especially when concerned with Stealth Armour

However, there are a very large number of smaller corrections, especially to advanced terrain and weather.  Some of the changes have already been featured in this thread, but many more are new, or were only previously found in the rules forum.  As always, in case of conflict between previously posted answers in the rules forum or earlier drafts of errata posted in this thread, this newer errata compilation takes priority.

Thank you all for your help over the five years since this book was first released.  If you have any comments about the errata, please make them in the Errata Discussion thread.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 20 September 2013 (v3.1)
Post by: SCC on 08 October 2013, 00:29:07
First Printing, page 34
Footnote 21 for the EXPANDED MO VEMENT COSTS AND PLANETARY CONDITIONS TABLEs (cont .), or the part that appears on this page reads: "Unless rail tracks also exist in the hex; if the hex is a water hex, the track must be mounted on a bridge, or the rail must mount the Environmental Sealing Chassis and Controls Modification"

Rails themselves cannot have Environmental Sealing Chassis and Controls Modifications so I believe that it should read something along the lines of "or the rail vehicles traveling along the rail must mount the Environmental Sealing Chassis and Controls Modification" or words to that effect
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 20 September 2013 (v3.1)
Post by: CloaknDagger on 08 October 2013, 21:58:47
Tactical Operations, 2008 PDF
Page 21, Hull Down Vehicles

Quote
First, if a vehicle (including a landing VTOL/WiGE) enters a
half-level hex, it can go hull-down by spending 2 MP. Attacks
that would strike the vehicle’s Front side add a +2 modifier.
In addition, if the attacks hit, they will strike the turret if the
vehicle has one, or the front armor if it does not. Attacks from
other directions are resolved normally.

While the vehicle is hull-down, none of its front-mounted
weapons may fire (or weapons in the location oriented toward
a half-level hex, in the case of an adjacent half-level hex),
though the turret may fire to the front (or in the direction of
the adjacent half-level hex) as usual.

These paragraphs say that hull down, turretless vehicles will take damage to the front armor, but they can't fire back with front mounted weapons.

This doesn't make sense because if the front armor is taking damage, then logically you should be able to fire since that's near the area with the gun. And casemate vehicles do use hull down positions IRL.

A correction could be:

Quote
While the vehicle is hull-down, none of its front-mounted
weapons may fire (or weapons in the location oriented toward
a half-level hex, in the case of an adjacent half-level hex),
though the turret may fire to the front (or in the direction of
the adjacent half-level hex) as usual.

If the vehicle has no turret, then it may fire from the location oriented toward the half-level hex.

This would clarify that casemate vehicles take hull down positions that they can actually fire from.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,33984.msg792433.html#new
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 20 September 2013 (v3.1)
Post by: Xotl on 23 December 2013, 01:43:28
p. 332, Naval Comm-Scanner Suite construction rules:
"The Large NCSS may not be installed on Small Craft,"
Change to:
"The Large NCSS may not be installed on Small Craft or satellites,"

p. 333, Naval Comm-Scanner Suite:
 - Available To:
add "SV"

 - Game Rules, 1st paragraph:
"a Small NCSS doubles the maximum detection range for all such systems and provides a –1 modifier to the target number to detect a given vessel."
Change to:
"a Small NCSS doubles the maximum detection range for all such systems (with the exception of satellites, which doubles all but Emergence Wave detection ranges) and provides a –1 modifier to the target number to detect a given vessel."

 - Game Rules, 2nd paragraph:
"In addition, an NCSS of either size provides a +1 initiative modifier in space combat each turn in which the NCSS-equipped unit is in play"
Change to:
"In addition, an NCSS of either size not mounted on a satellite provides a +1 initiative modifier in space combat each turn in which the NCSS-equipped unit is in play"

p. 409, Naval Comm-Scanner Suites entry:
Under SV, change "0" to 1*"
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 20 September 2013 (v3.1)
Post by: Xotl on 09 January 2014, 17:39:28
PDF p. 405,
Under BattleMech Melee Weapons, for all three Shield entries, remove the asterisk next to their critical slot requirement.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 20 September 2013 (v3.1)
Post by: mordel on 14 January 2014, 15:30:46
All printed and PDF versions
Page 282, Reactive (Blazer) Armor:

Per the discussion in the Published years of intro and equipment date conflicts (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,36446.0.html) topic, the Prototype Design and production date should be brought in.

Issue: TO lists the Prototype Design and Production date as 3063. However, the fluff for the Longshot LNG-2 found in TR:3055u clearly states it's production was "late 3050s" (see Variants section). The MUL further backs this up by having an introduction date of 3058.
Correction: Change the Prototype Design and Production date found in TO to 3058 (or earlier). The Clan date should likely be brought in as well to match the update.

Note: These dates are also listed in the Jihad Technology Advancement table (TR: Prototypes) so would need to be updated there as well.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 20 September 2013 (v3.1)
Post by: Porkins on 24 January 2014, 00:27:26
Page 348 VTOL Chin Turret

Issue1: The game rules here do not make any mention of how the chin turret replaces position 4 (normally the rotors) on the VTOL Combat Vehicle Hit Location Table.  Only the record sheet sheet at the back of TO shows this on the table there.  As this specific piece of equipment changes the normal hit location table, some mention should be made here of the change. 
Issue 2: Also, there is no indication of what happens if the all the internal structure of the chin turret is destroyed i.e. does the excess damage or subsequent rolls to that location transfer to the front?  TW pg 121 indicates that damage on vehicles does not transfer and that they cannot survive the destruction of any location.  The diagram at the back of TO wouild seem to imply subsequent hits transfer to the front armor based on its positioning but I cannot be sure of this.  Clarification is needed. 

Correction: Add to the game rules an indication of the change for the hit location and also provide guidance on damage transfer (or if none then destruction of the vehicle).  Assuming damage transfers to the front, an example might be:

"The VTOL Chin Turret can be hit in gameplay and replaces the number "4" location on the VTOL Combat Vehicle Hit Location Table.  Therefore rolls of 4 that would normally hit the Rotors instead hit the chin turret.  If a chin turret's internal structure is reduced to zero, then the chin turret is destroyed along with any equipment mounted there, but this does not destroy the VTOL itself.  Excess damage and subsequent hits to the number 4 location transfer to the front location on the VTOL, damaging armor and then internal structure as normal." 

A bit verbose but something to that effect anyways, depending on how excess damage and destruction of the chin turret location is handled. 
Paul requested a link to the original thread where Issue1 was discussed.
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,36625.msg852146.html#msg852146
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 14 March 2014 (v3.2)
Post by: Xotl on 14 March 2014, 05:21:44
A new release of the TacOps errata is now available (link in the first post, as normal).  Not a lot of changes, with the biggest being the formal implementation of the Arrow IV corrections posted here earlier, but I no longer want to wait until a huge release is ready each time, as it means too many rulings are left unavailable to the broader public for too long.

Thanks as always for your input.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 14 March 2014 (v3.2)
Post by: dirty harry on 24 April 2014, 07:14:06
Third printing, page 99, Dragging a mech:
In the example a Cossack is dragged away, said to be weighing 25 tons. A Cossack weighs only 20 tons.

Possible fix:
Replace Cossack with Commando.


Page 136, example calculation for fuel tank capacity:
Right at the beginning there is an error and the entire following calculation is going southwards. The estimated fuel consumption per day is 64 tons, not 54 tons ([80 hexes / 5 = 16] + [6 turrets with 4 heavy weapons each and 2 hours of activity per day (6*4*2 = 48 not 38) = 64 tons per day.
As this is a consecutive error, the entire example needs a redo.


Page 152, right column, first paragraph, calculation of ramming damage for the first trailer:
Quote
[12 (current front location internal structure) + 20 (current front location armor) = 32 / 10 = 3.2 x 3 (MP unspent in the turn) = 9.2
The result is 9.6, not 9.2. Luckily it will be rounded down and cause no further errors.


Page 224, double blind example, right column.
In the first paragraph it is mentioned, that the Mech in hex E mounts an Angel-ECM.
In the third paragraph, during the Beagle probe test, it is said, that the Mech in hex E doesn't mount any special equipment.
As an Angel-ECM is one of the most powerful adversaries of a Beagle probe, there must be something wrong. At least the player must be informed, that there is another sensor defying system out there.

Page 242, example Jormungand
It is a template E unit, but it is said to have a -3 attacker to hit modifier.
Table on page 241 says that a Template E has -4 attacker to hit modifier.
Needs to be corrected to -4.

Page 325, vehicular and Battle Armor dispensers, game rules, second paragraph:
The last sentence is repeated.
Fix: The repeat needs to be deleted.

Page 330, construction rules, mobile HPG, third paragraph:
Quote
Mobile HPGs may not be pod-mounted on Omni-units.
This would cancel out the Septicemia Z from 'The wars of Reaving' supplemental, which mounts a ground-mobile HPG in an Omnimech (at least i can't find an indication, that this Septicemia is not an Omnimech and the ground-mobile HPG is hardwired).

Page 363, fragmentation grenades, game rules:
Quote
Against all units except conventional infantry and Support Vehicles with armor BAR values of 5 or more, Fragmentation Grenades inflict no damage.
Should be "...Support Vehicles with armor BAR values of 4 or less..."

Page 375, smoke mortars, tech base (ratings):
It shows "Industrial" for mech mortar rounds.
Should be replaced with "Mech".

Page 382, laser - variable speed pulse laser:
The entry suggests, that VSP lasers have variable heat level. That is not true, they feature variable damage and to-hit-modifier, but constant heat.
Bombast laser is not mentioned, but maybe the one the author had in mind.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 14 March 2014 (v3.2)
Post by: Xotl on 12 May 2014, 14:55:37
I am a bit confused by the Arrow IV errata, the first paragraph in the errata says "An Arrow IV Homing Missile targets a mapsheet, not a hex" then the next bullet point says "within 8 hexes of the target hex"
There seems to be a disagreement there as far as targeting goes.

Oops, thanks.  It should read:

  •   When firing an Arrow IV Homing Missile either directly or indirectly, the player must first choose a mapsheet within range of the launcher. Next they choose a hex on the selected mapsheet. On the turn the homing missile arrives, it may attack any unit successfully designated by friendly TAG within 8 hexes of the chosen hex. If there are no such targets when the homing missile arrives, it explodes harmlessly over the battlefield. (Undirected or misdirected Arrow IV Homing Missiles do not scatter.)

I'm going to up a 3.3 soon that will have this corrected, along with a few new entries.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 14 March 2014 (v3.2)
Post by: dirty harry on 14 May 2014, 09:28:14
Page 250, Advanced support vehicle minimum crew tables, minimum gunners, support vehicle size:
Change 'medium/heavy' to 'medium/large' as this refers to size not weight.


Page 384, Clan capital weapon BV table (Addendum):
The subtitle Naval gauss has BV for weapon and ammo. The same for subtitles sub-capital missiles, Naval lasers and Naval PPC, the latter even incorporating ammo BVs.
Fix: delete those numbers.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 14 March 2014 (v3.2)
Post by: mbear on 23 May 2014, 07:36:41
Corrected Second Printing PDF, Page 325, Game Rules section, second sentence. Misspelled word:

Quote
Groundbased
units, including ’Mechs, ProtoMechs and Combat or Support Vehicles uusing wheeled,...

Remove extra U so it reads using.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 14 March 2014 (v3.2)
Post by: DarkISI on 27 May 2014, 16:46:47
Page 380
Under "Actuator Enhancement System" replace:
"Multiply by 1.5 the unmodified BV of any weapons (including all physical attack weapons, but not including any ammunition) linked to an AES."
with
"Multiply by 1.25 the unmodified BV of any weapons (including all physical attack weapons, but not including any ammunition) linked to an AES."

-----

I will take a look into affected units shortly and recalculate their BV.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: Xotl on 05 June 2014, 01:46:45
I would have made it a 6th of June release, but I'm leaving that day for the summer so I won't be available.  Here's the latest TacOps errata.  This one at last finishes wading through the many reports generated on this and the old forum going back to the book's release - as such, I consider it up to date at this point, and expect the errata for TO to slow markedly from here on in.  That having been said, it's by fair the most difficult book errata-wise, in that it's an entire book of almost completely new rules, and so lacking the decades of playtesting the base rules had.

Major elements of this release:

 - lots of weather fixes
 - AES clarified and made cheaper BV-wise
 - BA Mines can now be tracked individually, so that BA can have a greater variety of types
 - Flak ammo has become a LB-X antecedent, available in the Succession Wars as a poor-man's Golden BB
 - Arrow IV Homing rewritten a zillion times and hopefully clear at last
 - Acid Warheads affect FL armour
 - VTOL Mast Mount equipment clarification and BV change
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: A. Lurker on 05 June 2014, 02:27:24
...speaking of flak ammo, the new document now seems to contain both the old version of the errata (erroneously referring to p. 350 and presumably also now overruled by the entry following it) and the new one.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: Xotl on 05 June 2014, 02:59:15
Oops.  I'll re-up right now with a fix.

Thanks.


EDIT: and it's up.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 14 March 2014 (v3.2)
Post by: Paul on 03 July 2014, 13:06:44
Page 330, construction rules, mobile HPG, third paragraph:This would cancel out the Septicemia Z from 'The wars of Reaving' supplemental, which mounts a ground-mobile HPG in an Omnimech (at least i can't find an indication, that this Septicemia is not an Omnimech and the ground-mobile HPG is hardwired).

There's a distinction between the Mobile HPG and Ground-Mobile HPG. The latter can be pod-mounted, the former cannot. The latter can be mounted on a 'Mech, the former cannot. The latter has a crew requirement of 6, the former needs 10. Etc.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 3 January 2013 Update (3.03)
Post by: Yu Kigono on 04 August 2014, 17:29:03
Hi Garner,

"In ground combat, Artillery Cannon attacks may be resolved normally or using the rules for indirect LRM fire (see p. 111, TW),"

is intended to be the correct text (emphasis on the "or"); thanks for the catch.  I'll be upping a 3.04 later on.

I should note that this ruling does not actually appear in the Errata document. Errata for the Errata as it were.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: Xotl on 30 September 2014, 13:55:12
Inferno-IV Missiles (p. 356)
Under “Game Rules”, at the end of the section insert the following new bullet point:

•   When resolving an Inferno-IV attack on a hex with a unit carrying battle armor, the firing player rolls for five hit locations against that unit. Any battle armor riding in one of the locations hit is affected as though struck by a SRM Inferno round.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: Xotl on 30 September 2014, 14:36:15
BattleMech Turret (p. 347)
Under “Game Rules”, at the end of the section insert the following new paragraph:

BattleMech turrets (of all types) cannot be pod-mounted on an OmniMech. If used in the base configuration of an OmniMech, treat a BattleMech Turret as you would a turret on an OmniVehicle (see TM, p. 108).

Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: Xotl on 02 October 2014, 16:44:23
High/Low Gravity (p. 55)
Under “Weapon Attacks”

Add a +1 to-hit modifier to all direct-fire ballistic and missile weapon attacks for every .2 G (or fraction thereof) above or below the Terran standard 1 G.
Change to:
Add a +1 to-hit modifier to all direct-fire ballistic and missile weapon attacks for every full .2 G above or below the Terran standard 1 G.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: Xotl on 06 October 2014, 04:38:12
Autocannons (p. 100)
Under “Optional Firing Modes”, “Rapid-Fire Mode”, at the start of the third paragraph (“Double the heat generated […]”) insert the following:
Both rounds fired must be of the same ammunition type.

VTOL Special Attacks (p. 107)
First sentence
In advanced-rules play, VTOLs may make strafing and bombing attacks in much the same way as aerospace fighters.
Change to:
In advanced-rules play, VTOLs (not including VTOL battle armor) may make strafing and bombing attacks in much the same way as aerospace fighters.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: Xotl on 09 October 2014, 14:11:20
Bloodhound Active Probe (p. 278)
Under “Game Rules”, replace the first paragraph with the following:

The Bloodhound Probe is an upgraded version of the Inner Sphere’s Beagle Active Probe and follows the same rules as that device (see p. 129, TW). However, in addition to boasting increased range, the Bloodhound can detect conventional infantry. It can also detect hidden units with stealth or sneak ability—including Battle Armor units with Stealth Armor, Mimetic Armor and ECM, as well as other units featuring ECM, Null-Signature Systems or Stealth Armor—with the exception of conventional infantry using ECM or stealth systems.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: Xotl on 30 October 2014, 17:36:06
Battle Armor Myomer Booster (p. 286)
Under “Construction Rules”, first paragraph, at the end of the paragraph insert the following:

Like armor, myomer slots may be broken up among the battle armor’s various body locations.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: Xotl on 12 November 2014, 21:44:35
Bonus MP (WiGE) [example text] (p. 26)
Eighth sentence (seventh line from the bottom)

As with hexes 1, 2 and 3,
Change to:
As with hexes 2, 3 and 4,

Conflicting Planetary Conditions [example text] (p. 30)
1)   First paragraph, second-last sentence

In the end, the Ultra-Heavy Jungle base terrain type and Mud terrain modification are applied to Hex B,
Change to:
In the end, the Ultra-Heavy Jungle base terrain type and Mud terrain modification are applied to Hex C,

2)   Replace the second and third paragraphs with the following:

     If the controlling player wished to move the ’Mech in Hex A to Hex B, it would require 4 MP [1 (entering the hex) + 1 (Light Woods) + 1 (Deep Snow) + 1 (Mud) = 4]; the ’Mech would have to run to enter the hex. However, the controlling player cannot move the ’Mech into Hex C, as a ’Mech cannot enter an ultra-heavy jungle hex.
     If the controlling player wished to move the infantry in Hex A to Hex B, it would require 3 MP [1 (entering the hex) + 0 (infantry do not pay any MP for Light Woods) +1 (Deep Snow) + 1 (Mud)]. As the infantry unit only has 2 Ground MP, it cannot enter the hex normally. However, the infantry could enter the hex using the Minimum Movement rule (see p. 49, TW).

Expanded Movement Costs and Planetary Conditions Table (Cont.) (p. 34)
On the first table, move all column entries for “Sprinting (’Mechs only)” over one column to the left.

Expanded Movement Costs and Planetary Conditions Table (Cont.) (p. 36)
Under “Heavy Snowfall”, Piloting/Driving/Control Modifier, Vehicles column, change +1v to +1.

Ice (p. 50)
Under “Jumping”, last line

(this time only on a 6 or greater).
Change to:
(this time only on a 6).

Charging (p. 91)
Delete the entire “Charging Terrain/Falling” subentry.

Coolant Systems (p. 106)
First paragraph on the page (continued from the previous page), first and second new sentences on the page

Additionally, for each turn after the first that the ’Mech is continuously hooked up to a coolant truck, remove 2 levels of coolant failure. For example, a ’Mech with a 3-level heat sink reduction due to coolant failures would reduce that number to 1 after the first turn; after the second turn, the drop would be eliminated.
Change to:
Additionally, the ’Mech removes two points of coolant failure.

Visual Range Tables (p. 221)
This ruling has changed from previous errata versions.
Second (double-asterisk) footnote

**If a unit mounts a searchlight, add 10 hexes; for infantry, add 5 hexes.
Change to:
**If the spotter has an active searchlight use the following ranges instead: mounted (30), handheld/infantry (10).  If the target is illuminated by another source (such as fire, or another unit’s searchlight) use a range of 45 hexes.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: Xotl on 17 February 2015, 23:47:23
Super-Heavy Vehicles (p. 378)
Under “Super-Heavy Combat Vehicle Game Rules”, at the end of the entry insert the following new paragraph:

     Non-Naval Super-Heavy Combat Vehicles may enter Depth 1 water, paying the MP costs for such as shown on page 52 of Total Warfare.


Super-Heavy Combat Vehicle Table (p. 378)
In the “Terrain Restrictions” column, change all four references to Depth 1+ to Depth 2+

Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 4 June 2014 (v3.3)
Post by: A. Lurker on 02 June 2015, 09:29:09
Okay, it's been while since I last brought this up...a possible problem with the current errata to page 409, to wit:

"5) Missile Launchers, Extended LRM-15: Cost should be 218,750" (found at the top of p. 89 in the current errata document)

What's interesting is that in older versions of the errata document -- such as an old copy of v1.4.1 I still have lying around -- a version of this was already present but referred instead to the Enhanced LRM-15, where the 218,750 C-bill cost indeed seems to fit better into the overall progression with increasing launcher size. I suspect this particular entry may have been accidentally changed in the course of some ELRM-specific update, messing up the original reference.

(Relevant Ask the Writers thread from a couple of years ago to be found here (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/ask-the-writers/extended-lrm-15-c-bill-cost/). BattleTech dropped a bit off my radar for a while not too long afterwards, but it seems nothing further has come of this in the meantime.)
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2015 (v3.4)
Post by: Xotl on 06 June 2015, 10:49:24
The Tactical Operations errata has been updated to v3.4 - Glorious 6th of June edition.

Major changes:

Landing Modifiers for all unusual terrain types found in TO (found in separate document)
ECM and Double Blind updated so that ECM doesn't suck
Field Gun flak possible
Years-old mortar errata folded in
Support Vehicle artillery space changed
Superheavy vehicles can enter depth 1 water
Artillery Cannons are now flak-capable
Thunder LRMs scatter as they did in the older rules, but do slightly less damage when scattering
And, finally, Arrow IV Homing Missiles updated again, in what is probably the BT record for number of separate updates

It's mostly misc stuff this time around.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2015 (v3.4)
Post by: Xotl on 06 June 2015, 17:43:12
Silent edit to address question asked about how the new Thunder rounding is applied.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2015 (v3.4)
Post by: Xotl on 16 June 2015, 14:43:37
Ejection and Abandoning Units (p. 197)
Under "'Mechs", second paragraph (first on the page), second sentence

If the auto-eject function is operational, the pilot will automatically eject at the end of any Phase in which an ammo explosion takes place (the pilot still receives the automatic 2 Damage Points for the ammo explosion; see Ammunition, p. 125, TW).
Change to:
If the auto-eject function is operational and an ammo explosion occurs, the pilot will automatically eject before damage to the 'Mech is resolved (though the pilot still takes 2 points of damage due to ammo explosion feedback; see Ammunition, p. 125, TW).
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2015 (v3.4)
Post by: Pezmotion on 25 August 2015, 17:58:54
I'm using a PDF version of the 2008 printing, so this may have been caught already but I couldn't see it mentioned anywhere.

Dead Zone Rule (pg 80). Paragraph following the numbered steps:
Quote
If the final result is greater than 0, the lower unit is in the dead zone and LOS is blocked. If the result is 0 or less, then LOS exists between the two units.

The examples below that appear to be using the number 1 as the break-point, not 0, including the example that's fixed in the online errata
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2015 (v3.4)
Post by: Xotl on 17 September 2015, 19:50:45
Chameleon Light Polarization Shield (p. 381)
Delete "but do not include the 6 points of heat generated by the system in all heat efficiency calculations."

Null-Signature System (p. 382)
Delete "but do not include the 10 points of heat generated by the system in all heat efficiency calculations."

Void-Signature System (p. 382)
When calculating the BV of a unit equipped with a Void-Signature System, include the maximum +3 to-hit modifier when calculating the Defensive Factor, but do not include the 10 points of heat generated by this system in all heat efficiency calculations.
Change to:
When calculating the Defensive Factor of a unit equipped with a Void-Signature System, use either the unit's normal target modifier or the maximum +3 to-hit modifier provided by the System, whichever is higher. In the case of a tie, apply a +1 to-hit modifier from the System in addition to the unit's normal target modifier.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2015 (v3.4)
Post by: Azakael on 23 October 2015, 04:43:31
Issue: Pg. 39 Sand still states that Sand has a +1/+2 movement, when it has been changed to +0/+1. Did not see anything in the errata that changes this, at this time.

Issue: Pg. 62 Blowing Sand states under the Moderate gale section that Blowing Sand includes all modifiers and effects of a Strong Gale. Later in the same section, when referring to the Shifting Winds rule, it says the effects of Blowing Sand returns when the winds shift back to a Moderate Gale. Between the implication of that being a starting point, and the name of the subheading being "Moderate gale".
Possible Resolution: It seems that it should either state: "Blowing Sand automatically includes all modifiers and effects of a Moderate Gale (see pg. 61)." or the subheading should be "Strong gale" and the reference further down should state "... until the winds shift back to a Strong Gale."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2015 (v3.4)
Post by: jymset on 18 January 2016, 16:28:12
Dev-level errata:

Turrets, pp. 347-348
BattleMech Turret, change Tech Base (Ratings) from "Both (C/F-X-F)" to "Both (Variable)"
Vehicular Dual Turret, change Tech Base (Ratings) from "Both (B/F-X-F)" to "Both (B/F-F-F)"
Vehicular Sponson Turret, change Tech Base (Ratings) from "Both (B/F-X-F)" to "Both (B/F-F-F)"

Heavy Weapons and Equipment Construction Data, p. 411, Turrets
- BattleMech Turret (Head), change Tech Base from "IS/Clan" to "IS", change Tech Rating from "C/F-X-F" to "C/X-X-F", and change Latest Intro Date (IS / Clan) from "3055 / --" to "3055P / --"
- BattleMech Turret (Quad), change Tech Rating from "C/F-X-F" to "C/F-F-F"
- Dual Turret (Vehicular), change Tech Rating from "B/F-X-F" to "B/F-F-F"
- Sponson Turret (Vehicular), change Tech Rating from "B/F-X-F" to "B/F-F-F"
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2015 (v3.4)
Post by: gomiville on 01 May 2016, 22:19:41
The errata downgrades the Piranha accuracy on p410, in the summary table, but not in the item description on p344.  Just for clarity.


Xotl: This is covered in the current errata for p. 344.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2015 (v3.4)
Post by: Jim1701 on 23 May 2016, 11:00:26
There was a errata update from a rules forum post that didn't make it into the last errata doc.

http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=21694.msg484243#msg484243 (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=21694.msg484243#msg484243)

Basically a clarification to TacOps pg. 180 that restrictions on what kinds of artillery can be fired while airborne are limited to Aerospace units and conventional fighters.  It came up in a recent forum discussion.


Xotl: errata was added in v3.1 to specify that only aerospace units can do this.  I realized when writing it up that the "(including conventional fighters)" part was redundant, as they are already aerospace units.  VTOLs are combat vehicles, not aerospace units, and so remain excluded even with the shortened wording.  Thanks.

Edit:  Sorry, I got fixated on the term VTOL when I checked errata and missed it.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2016 (v3.5)
Post by: Xotl on 06 June 2016, 11:48:54
And the new errata is out.  You'll have noticed that there are two versions, one for the first printing and one for the second.  That way, if you have the newest printing, you don't have to wade through piles of old errata to see what's changed.

Each year's TO release has less new errata, but there's still a decent amount.  Major new changes are:

 - Turn Modes clarified (matters for LAMs)
 - More terrain stuff
 - Command-Detonated Mines set during gameplay
 - Handheld Weapons changed yet again, to allow some physical weapons to be treated as they are, rather than clubs
 - Swarm LRMs vs. AMS covered at last
 - Tear Gas LRMs rewritten to not be the all-time slayer of vehicles
 - BV changes
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2016 (v3.5)
Post by: Empyrus on 04 November 2016, 20:11:52
Unless i'm blind and cannot find this from errata...

Second Printing PDF
Laser Anti-Missile System (Pg. 322)

Issue: LAMS is not available to Conventional and Aerospace Fighters.

Since it is largely identical to standard AMS, and because variants of the Sabre ASF use the LAMS, it probably should be allowed item for ASFs and CFs.

EDIT No wonder it wasn't in errata. It is correctly allowed for CFs and ASFs in the tables, those are just missing from the rules box.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2016 (v3.5)
Post by: pheonixstorm on 22 November 2016, 13:05:19
Second printing

Missing footnote from planetary conditions table pg36
Snow Flurries should include footnote 34 same as Moderate Snowfall as it includes effects of Moderate Snowfall and Moderate Gale.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2016 (v3.5)
Post by: pheonixstorm on 24 November 2016, 14:28:00
Second printing p44 Fire Table

Right side under weather
Change Heavy Gale to Strong Gale

Assumption:
Table is missing Sleet. Best guess it would fall under Light/Moderate Snowfall entry.

This is based on the fact that Ice Storm has an entry. Both cause ice after a certain number of turns though Ice Storm is in 10 turns rather than 15 for Sleet.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2016 (v3.5)
Post by: Daryk on 08 February 2017, 20:21:35
TacOps, page 278 states "...the Bloodhound can detect hidden units with stealth or sneak ability, including Battle Armor units with Stealth Armor, Mimetic Armor, and ECM..."

Issue: As written, the rule is unclear as to whether Stealth or Mimetic Armor in combination with ECM (either installed on the Battle Armor in question, or from a nearby friendly unit) can be detected or not.  Per this answer (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=56109.0) from the rules forum, the answer is "yes", the Bloodhound can detect such a unit.

Recommendation: Replace the sentence "In addition to boasting increased range, the Bloodhound can detect hidden units with stealth or sneak ability, including Battle Armor units with Stealth Armor, Mimetic Armor, and ECM, as well as other units featuring ECM, Null-Signature Systems or Stealth Armor." with:
"In addition to boasting increased range, the Bloodhound can detect hidden units with stealth or sneak ability, including Battle Armor units with both ECM and Stealth or Mimetic Armor, as well as other units featuring Null-Signature Systems, Stealth Armor, or ECM, to include those protected by friendly ECM aboard another unit."
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2016 (v3.5)
Post by: Daryk on 12 March 2017, 15:51:10
TacOps, pages 317-318 (the Conventional Infantry Armor Table):

Issue: The Federated Suns and Lyran Alliance/Commonwealth Faction Armor Kits (the two that have availabilities listed as B-B-B) are listed as providing a Damage Divisor of 1, but assuming these kits match their A Time of War counterparts (pages 292-293 in that book), they should provide a Damage Divisor of 2 per the conversion formula in the A Time of War Companion (page 171).  The Fed Suns and Lyran Jackets both provide the torso with 3/5/4/3 protection, a total of 15, which rounds to 2 when divided by 10 per the Companion formula.  Here is the page 171 rule from the Companion for convenience:

"Damage Divisor
Only personal armor that covers the wearer’s torso counts when calculating the Damage Divisor the armor applies. The find this value, the [sic] simply add up all four BAR values for the torso armor, divide the result by 10, and round normally (.5 rounds up). If the result rounds to 0, assign a Damage Divisor of 0.5 to the armor."

Recommendation: Change the Damage Divisors for the "Federated Suns" and "Lyran Alliance/Commonwealth" Armor Kits to 2.


Xotl: A Time of War is showing the post-3030 Fedcom infantry armor, which does have 2 on TO table.  A Time of War doesn't describe TO's pre-3030 FS/LC infantry armor.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2017 (v3.6)
Post by: Xotl on 05 June 2017, 05:07:37
New errata is up.  I know the ProtoMech Streak LRM errata is incomplete: that will be fixed for the final release that goes up to the website.  Cheers.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations -Hvy Weaps. & Equip. Combat Data Chaff pod p. 407
Post by: snrdg091012 on 21 October 2017, 11:30:43
Morning from WA,

Tactical Operations PDF ©2008-2012 The Topps Company, Inc. Corrected Second Printing Published by Catalyst Game Labs

The Tech Base for the Chaff Pod on p. 299 is Inner Sphere developed by the Lyran Alliance.

On the Heavy Weapons & Equipment Combat Data Table p. 407 the second entry is for a "Chaff Pod". The Tech Based is listed as IS while the Latest Intro Date (IS/Clan) is listed as NA/3062P.

Recommended errata entry

Chaff Pod: Under “Latest Intro Date (IS/Clan)”, change the NA/3062P, to “3062P/NA”
Title: Re: Tactical Operations -Hvy Weaps. & Equip. Combat Data Chameleon LPS p. 407
Post by: snrdg091012 on 21 October 2017, 12:16:25
Hello again,

The Tech Base for the Chameleon LPS on p. 300  is Inner Sphere, was introduced by the Terran Hegemony and was lost during the Succession Wars.

Heavy Weapons and Equipment Combat Data Table  (p. 407)

On the table the Chameleon LPS Tech Base is listed as IS. The Latest Intro Date (IS/Clan) is 2630X/2630.

Chameleon LPS: Under “Latest Intro Date (IS/Clan)”, change 2630X/2630 to 2630X/NA”
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2016 (v3.5)
Post by: Daryk on 21 October 2017, 12:42:36
I just noticed neither of my reports (below, for convenience) were included in the latest errata (v 3.6).  Please include them in the next version.

TacOps, page 278 states "...the Bloodhound can detect hidden units with stealth or sneak ability, including Battle Armor units with Stealth Armor, Mimetic Armor, and ECM..."

Issue: As written, the rule is unclear as to whether Stealth or Mimetic Armor in combination with ECM (either installed on the Battle Armor in question, or from a nearby friendly unit) can be detected or not.  Per this answer (http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=56109.0) from the rules forum, the answer is "yes", the Bloodhound can detect such a unit.

Recommendation: Replace the sentence "In addition to boasting increased range, the Bloodhound can detect hidden units with stealth or sneak ability, including Battle Armor units with Stealth Armor, Mimetic Armor, and ECM, as well as other units featuring ECM, Null-Signature Systems or Stealth Armor." with:
"In addition to boasting increased range, the Bloodhound can detect hidden units with stealth or sneak ability, including Battle Armor units with both ECM and Stealth or Mimetic Armor, as well as other units featuring Null-Signature Systems, Stealth Armor, or ECM, to include those protected by friendly ECM aboard another unit."
TacOps, pages 317-318 (the Conventional Infantry Armor Table):

Issue: The Federated Suns and Lyran Alliance/Commonwealth Faction Armor Kits (the two that have availabilities listed as B-B-B) are listed as providing a Damage Divisor of 1, but assuming these kits match their A Time of War counterparts (pages 292-293 in that book), they should provide a Damage Divisor of 2 per the conversion formula in the A Time of War Companion (page 171).  The Fed Suns and Lyran Jackets both provide the torso with 3/5/4/3 protection, a total of 15, which rounds to 2 when divided by 10 per the Companion formula.  Here is the page 171 rule from the Companion for convenience:

"Damage Divisor
Only personal armor that covers the wearer’s torso counts when calculating the Damage Divisor the armor applies. The find this value, the [sic] simply add up all four BAR values for the torso armor, divide the result by 10, and round normally (.5 rounds up). If the result rounds to 0, assign a Damage Divisor of 0.5 to the armor."

Recommendation: Change the Damage Divisors for the "Federated Suns" and "Lyran Alliance/Commonwealth" Armor Kits to 2.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2017 (v3.6)
Post by: snrdg091012 on 26 October 2017, 23:55:30
Tactical Operations Errata v3.6

The errata direction on page 39 is to change Small Craft support vehicle space requirements for 0* to 1*. The support vehicle Space requirement is NA.

Heavy Weapons and Equipment Construction Data (p. 409)
3) ② Naval Comm-Scanner Suites: change the Space value for SV from “0” to “1*”

I believe that the errata change is meant for SC since the space column entry is 0*.

Recommended change:
Heavy Weapons and Equipment Construction Data (p. 409) Naval Comm-Scanner Suites: change the Space value for SC from “0” to “1*”


Xotl: this was meant for SV.  This was part of the changes allowing it to be mounted on Satellites, which are support vehicles.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2017 (v3.6)
Post by: Alfaryn on 21 November 2017, 09:12:33
P. 102 - Machine guns - Rapid-Fire Mode

Lostech Streak Machine Guns?

Problem: I think it is clear that the intent of those rules is, that you are supposed to roll to determine ammunition consumption weather you hit or not, but according to the rules you use up "the number of rounds equal to damage it [the MG] inflicted x 3", so read literally they say, that if you miss your attack with an MG in Rapid-Fire Mode you consume no ammo.
Solution: The rules should be reworded to match their apparent intent.
Problem 2: It is not clear how much ammo is consumed, and heat produced if rapid-fire machine guns are used against conventional infantry.
Solution 2: Change the first sentence of the third paragraph to something like "Rapid-fire machine guns do not inflict increased damage on conventional infantry, though they consume ammo, and produce heat as described above when used against it." - see http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=59547.0 for confirmation.

P. 304 Corrected Second Printing, print edition.

Several problems with coolant pod rules:
1. They are mentioned as available to conventional fighters. This makes no sense, as conventional fighters operate on "zero heat principle". Solution - remove CF from the list of units coolant pods are available to.
2. The rules don't mention, that each coolant pod can be used only once per game (which seems to be the case judging from the fluff on p. 303, which describes coolant pods as one-shot systems). Solution - add it to the rules on p. 304.
3. The rules section needs to clarify that coolant pods can't explode when critically hit after being used (as ruled in http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=59493).
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 9 December 2017 (v3.0)
Post by: Xotl on 09 December 2017, 04:53:46
Version 3.0 is out, containing the errata that will appear in the upcoming third printing of TO.  If you don't have the second printing of TO, you should keep your old TO errata document, as this new document just lists every correction that is being made from the second to the third printing ONLY.

Yes, the previous version was 3.6, and this version is 3.0: what happened?  The last release of TacOps was a PDF-only release.  I try to have the number scheme of these errata documents line up with the physical printings whenever possible.  As the book is at last getting a new printing (the third), I'm changing the version number of the errata to 3.0 so that people using the document know that it lines up with the new printing.

No major changes in this new release, compared to the last one anyways.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2017 (v3.6)
Post by: snrdg091012 on 09 December 2017, 11:46:46
Morning from WA Xotl,

Tactical Operations Errata v3.6

The errata direction on page 39 is to change Small Craft support vehicle space requirements for 0* to 1*. The support vehicle Space requirement is NA.

Heavy Weapons and Equipment Construction Data (p. 409)
3) ② Naval Comm-Scanner Suites: change the Space value for SV from “0” to “1*”

I believe that the errata change is meant for SC since the space column entry is 0*.

Recommended change:
Heavy Weapons and Equipment Construction Data (p. 409) Naval Comm-Scanner Suites: change the Space value for SC from “0” to “1*”

Xotl: this was meant for SV.  This was part of the changes allowing it to be mounted on Satellites, which are support vehicles.

Thank you for the clarification that the errata is met for satellites, however the instructions indicate that you change a SC Space from 0 to 1 the column has a NA.

Heavy Weapons and Equipment Construction Data (p. 409)
3) ② Naval Comm-Scanner Suites: change the Space value for SV from “0” to “1*”

My new recommendation

Recommended change:
Heavy Weapons and Equipment Construction Data (p. 409) Naval Comm-Scanner Suites: change the Space value for SV from “NA” to “1*” allowing it to be mounted on Satellites.

Changed SC to SV in the new recommended change


Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 9 December 2017 (v3.0)
Post by: Alfaryn on 09 December 2017, 15:02:32
By Xotl's request from the errata discussion thread I'm reposting my errata report that did not end up in latest errata document:

P. 102 - Machine guns - Rapid-Fire Mode

Problem: It is not clear how much ammo is consumed, and heat produced if rapid-fire machine guns are used against conventional infantry.
Solution: Change the first sentence of the third paragraph to something like "Rapid-fire machine guns do not inflict increased damage on conventional infantry, though they consume ammo, and produce heat as described above when used against it." - see http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=59547.0 for confirmation.

-------------

New errata:

2012 Corrected Second Printing, print edition.

P. 341 Specialized Infantry (Cont.)

Problem: Minor formatting issue. TAG Troops are described between Paratroops and SCUBA units. To keep expected (mostly alphabetical, but with motorized and mechanized infantry after other sorts of infantry, as they are usually listed in the books) sequence they should be listed after SCUBA units.
Solution: Move entry for TAG Troops bellow SCUBA (Mechanized).

P. 341 Specialized Infantry Types Table

Problem: The table fails to explain, that each TAG weighs 20 kg (as discussed in http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=56272.0).
Solution: Change "Added Tons (per Trooper)" for TAG Troops from 0.0 to 0.02. Possibly add a footnote explaining that this weight (and 0.05 tons of weight under Paramedics) are counted only for troopers carrying relevant equipment.
Problem 2: The *** footnote under the table seems to suggest that TAG Troops only function if TAGs are assigned to a minimum 2 troopers per squad, but under TM rules a squad can only have up to 2 troopers with support weapons (which TAG-equipped troopers substitute), so word "minimum" is redundant. Also putting that note in the Prohibited Terrain column makes no sense, as it has nothing to do with movement.
Solution 2: Either delete word "minimum" in the footnote and move "***" mark in the TAG Troops line from the last to the second (or possibly first) column, or delete an entire footnote and explain how TAG Troops platoons are constructed - including answering my question weather you need to assign TAGs to all squads or only one squad in the platoon (see http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=59506.0).
Problem 3: Minor formatting issues. TAG Troops are listed in the table between Paratroops and Paramedics. For reasons explained under "P. 341 Specialized Infantry (Cont.)" above they should be listed at the bottom of the table. Also entries for Paratroops and Paramedics should be swapped to keep alphabetical sequence.
Solution 3: Move the line for TAG Troops bellow the SCUBA (Mechanized) line. Move the line for Paratroops bellow the Paramedics line.

Pp. 412-413 Conventional Infantry Combat Data and Infantry Construction Data tables
Problem: The table lacks entry for TAG Troopers, and SCUBA (Mechanized).
Solution: Add the entry for "SCUBA (Mechanized)" and "TAG Troops" under Specialized Infantry (between "SCUBA (Motorized)" and "Xenoplanetary Condition-Trained Troops"). Most values that should go into the tables are either obvious or can be found in the  Specialized Infantry Types Table on p. 341. Some like in "Cost (C-bolls)" and "Latest Intro Date (IS/Clan)" can probably be interpreted from AtoW (in particular p. 275 AtoW for TAG Troopers). Some may require designers decision. In particular I'm not certain where to find stats for those two columns for SCUBA (Motorized) units.
Problem 2: The weights in WT(kg) table don't match those in the Specialized Infantry Types table on p. 341. The weights on p. 341 are probably correct, and those on p. 413 are 1000 times to small.
Solution 2: In the Infantry Construction Data table on p. 413 in the WT (kg) column +1.4/trooper to +1400/trooper, +1.9/trooper to +1900/trooper, +0.1/trooper to +100/trooper and so on OR change the name of the column from WT (kg) to WT (tons). The first way is probably preferred, as it keeps the table in line with the Battle Armor Construction Data table above.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 30 December 2017 (v3.0)
Post by: Xotl on 31 December 2017, 00:08:06
The final version of 3.0 has been uploaded to the BT Errata page; please delete the PRE version.  The final has numerous formatting corrections over the PRE release (I forgot to note a few changes that were made, and I returned the notes I cut because the layout guy didn't need them).  There is only one actual rule change: the rule about a crew accidentally dropping munitions and having them explode while rearming under fire has been deleted (because some space needed to be created during layout ASAP and that was the easiest way to do it :) -- it's not like that rule wasn't suicidal enough as it was, anyways).

The document is available in the usual first and second printing versions.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 30 December 2017 (v3.0)
Post by: Empyrus on 18 September 2018, 18:56:03
Issue: Long Tom Artillery Piece availability for (superheavy) 'Mechs.
IO p.163 indicates superheavy 'Mechs can use artillery normally denied for 'Mechs but Tactical Operations construction data tables lack slots for 'Mechs for the Long Tom.

Correction: Rules question and answer regarding this https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php?topic=59836.msg1373155#msg1373155
Long Tom Artillery Piece should be available for (superheavy) 'Mechs, requiring 30 critical slots.

 
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 30 December 2017 (v3.0)
Post by: Sartris on 01 November 2018, 10:02:02
printing: 2018 classic art cover

Possible issue: Xth Corrected printing missing from copyright info on page 7 (it's present in both the new printings of TW and TM)

Issue: Pg 5 Table of contents heading "Avanced Battle Values"
Fix: Correct spelling
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 30 December 2017 (v3.0)
Post by: Liam's Ghost on 01 November 2018, 13:04:36
Printing: 2018 classic art cover

Issue: the Battle Armor LB-X autocannon (appearing on page 286 of the prior printing) has vanished. Both from its original place in the advanced weapons and equipment section and the Battle Armor Combat Data table.

Fix: add back the lost data from the prior printing.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 30 December 2017 (v3.0)
Post by: assaultdoor on 13 December 2018, 02:14:45
Printing: 2018 classic art cover

Issue: The subsection "Conventional Infantry" under "Battle Armor Infantry" as well as the sections "Infantry Mortars", "Battle Armor vs. Battle Armor", and "Battle Armor Underwater", all supposedly on page 108 as described in Tactical Operations errata v3.0 (December 2017), Are missing.

Fix: Integrate these sections from the errata document.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 30 December 2017 (v3.0)
Post by: Sartris on 21 January 2019, 19:44:46
Printing: 2018 Classic Art Cover

P.3
The table of contents lists Gauss Weapons as one of the subjects under "Other Combat Weapons and Equipment." The entry itself was removed (and consolidated more generally under the "Special: Shutting Off Equipment" paragraph on pg 99)

Solution: Delete the Gauss Weapons entry from the ToC. Further, add Special: Shutting Off Weapons under the same section of the ToC

Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 30 December 2017 (v3.0)
Post by: Sartris on 11 February 2019, 12:54:14
Printing: 2018 Classic Art Cover pdf

p181
the iNarc ecm pod errata was not included in the ECCM text

Quote from: Full TO Errata pg 21
ECM Pod: The iNarc ECM Pod (see p. 141, TW) can also be used to generate an ECCM field. Each time a player fires an ECM Pod, he declares whether it is a standard ECM Pod or an ECCM Pod.

solution: add text

unless it was rescinded and I didn't see?
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 30 December 2017 (v3.0)
Post by: Xotl on 11 February 2019, 15:04:29
There's an issue with the new PDF release where a bunch of errata was lost.  We're working to correct it.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 June 2019 (v3.01)
Post by: Xotl on 06 June 2019, 14:47:28
New errata for the year is up; link in the first post.  I continue to be too busy to do much deep digging, but there was an issue where a bunch of old errata was lost in the new PDF release.  This (amongst other things) has forced a delay in the new printing, and while it waits for layout time to be available, we've managed to sneak in some new pieces of errata.  Assume everything here will be in the future one-day reprinting of TO (and accompanying PDF re-release).
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 8 July 2019 (v3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 09 July 2019, 01:32:34
Had a little more time to wait, and so squeezed in two more pieces of quick errata (Shielding movement mode, and cost of BA Myomer Booster).  Version 3.02 upped to the main errata page.  Again, these should make the new printing.

I know there's more TacOps errata items currently unresolved, but I don't have time to handle them: these two items were already-resolved pieces lying around that I had missed in my haste during the previous sweep.  So if your issue was passed over, don't feel slighted.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 8 July 2019 (v3.02)
Post by: GBscientist on 12 August 2019, 12:23:37
Xotl, the version 3.02 errata is still missing the correction to the First Printing that changes the number of DropShip collar slots taken up by a Naval Repair Facility.

The entry in question is under Construction Rules on page 334, and reads as follows:
"Each repair facility mounted on a unit reduces its maximum number of DropShip docking collars by the facility's tonnage divided by 50,000 (rounded up to the nearest whole).  For example, a WarShip that mounts a repair facility with a maximum capacity of 280,000 tons would sacrifice 6 potential docking collars to do so (280,000 tons capacity / 50,000 = 5.6 rounded up to 6)."

I know that later versions of TacOps changed this rule, and that the Newgrange and Faslane were built using the updated rule.  I also know that the first version of the errata contained the update, but it has been absent from subsequent editions.

I don't know why this particular error sticks in my craw so much, but it does.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 8 July 2019 (v3.02)
Post by: Xotl on 12 August 2019, 14:16:00
I'll check and see what's up when I can find the time.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 8 July 2019 (v3.02)
Post by: plutonick on 05 September 2019, 06:41:47
p212
Morale Table

i believe there are a couple of typos in there.

1. Table Attack Source mofidier (inf. only)
Last row says 'elite' and has no modifier (dash). I believe this is a left over from the previous table, since nowhere did the rules previously written state anything about attacks from elite units.

Proposed correction: Delete row that states 'elite'

2. Table named 'Other modifiers modifier (Infantry Only)'
Error: modifier is typed twice
Proposed correction, correct it to - "Other modifiers (Infantry Only)"


Xotl: Was not able to get this for the reprint, IIRC, but tagging it here for myself to check once the new books are out.
Title: Re: Tactical Operations - 6 December 2019 (v3.03)
Post by: Xotl on 06 December 2019, 15:45:17
The final v3.0 update (v3.03) has just been uploaded to the website, containing all changes that will be made going into the new (split, two-volume) 3rd printing.

No further errata will be released for the single-volume version of Tactical Operations.  If you wish to make reports, they must be for the new two-volume edition.  Relevant threads:

Tactical Operations - Advanced Rules:
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,69700.0.html

Tactical Operations - Advanced Units & Equipment:
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,69701.0.html