Corrected fourth printing, pdfP. 25, fourth paragraph in Target Movement Modifier sectionThis is just a note that I've edited my report for this issue two posts above after Xotl posted his note about an errata update on 27th of April.P. 69, "Skidding Diagram 1: Collisions" example boxProblem: Unlike in a similar example on pp. 64-65 TW, there is no chance that any 'Mech will end up in hex 2D as a result of the skid discussed on p. 69 BMM.
Recommendation: remove "2D" label from the Skidding Diagram 1 and change the first sentence of the example text on the page from:
If the player rolls a 5 or less, the warrior failed to maintain control of the Phoenix Hawk and it skids down the 2A-2D hex row.
to:
If the player rolls a 5 or less, the warrior failed to maintain control of the Phoenix Hawk and it skids down the 2A-2C hex row.
P. 70, "Skidding Diagram 2: Skidding" example boxProblem: This sentence - "There, the controlling player—thinking ahead to where he wants his ’Mech to be in the next turn—will spend the Griffin’s remaining 1 MP to turn to Hexside 6, in preparation for moving to the light trees in Hex E." is problematic, because at this point in the example the Griffin has no MP left.
Solution: There are several ways to solve the issue. For example:
1. Change the 'Mech featured in the example to a bipedal 55-tonner which has 9 running MP, for example Ryoken/Stormcrow.
Note that this change requires not only substituting word "Griffin" with the new 'Mech's name, but also change of numbers mentioned in the first sentence of the example, from:
(it has a Walking MP of 5 and a Running MP of 8).
to:
(it has a Walking MP of 6 and a Running MP of 9).
and possibly a change of the graphic representing the 'Mech in Skidding Diagram 2.2. Remove the entire problematic sentence from the example text, and the "E" label from the diagram.
3. Move the Griffin graphic and the "A" label to the other Level 3 hex on the diagram, and make the following change to the example text:
To spend the required 8 MP, this ’Mech must run (it has a Walking MP of 5 and a Running MP of 8
). The Griffin runs to Hex B. When it attempts to enter Hex C, its controller must make a Piloting Skill Roll (due to the road) against a Target Number of 4 (4 for the MechWarrior’s Piloting Skill, + 0 because the ’Mech has only moved 3 hexes at this point).
change to:To spend the required 7 MP, this ’Mech must run (it has a Walking MP of 5 and a Running MP of 8
). The Griffin runs to Hex B. When it attempts to enter Hex C, its controller must make a Piloting Skill Roll (due to the road) against a Target Number of 3 (4 for the MechWarrior’s Piloting Skill, - 1 because the ’Mech has only moved 2 hexes at this point).
Pp. 78, 146, 148, Battlefield Support (T/t)able, footnotes†Scatters if misses; see page 77.
Change to:†Scatters if misses; see page 76.
P. 83, Distracting quirk descriptionProblematic sentence: "If using the Demoralizer Special Piloting Ability from Campaign Operations (see p. 74, CO), the Distracting quirk adds a +1 modifier to the demoralizer’s WIL score." The problem is that only the variant of Demoralizer SPA described on p. 225 AToW uses an Opposed WIL Attribute Check, while the one from CO is based simply on demoralizer's Piloting Skill Roll (with a +4 target modifier).
Partial Solution: The rules should probably say that if you use Demoralizer SPA from AToW, then Distracting quirk helps by adding +1 to attacker's WIL score, but they should also specify how Demoralizer SPA from CO interacts with the quirk, and that would most likely require writing an entirely new rule. I've made a rules question thread about this problem here:
https://bg.battletech.com/forums/supplementary-rules/problem-with-distracting-quirk-from-bmm-used-with-demorlizer-spa/msg1732937/#msg1732937P. 101, Improved Heavy Laser, Game Rules paragraphHowever, treat a critical hit to an improved heavy laser as an ammunition explosion, with the small improved heavy laser causing a 3-point explosion, the medium causing a 5-point explosion, and the large causing an 8-point explosion.
Change to:However, treat the first critical hit to an improved heavy laser as an ammunition explosion, with the small improved heavy laser causing a 3-point explosion, the medium causing a 5-point explosion, and the large causing an 8-point explosion. Subsequent critical hits to the same laser will not cause further explosions.
At least I assume this is the case, considering that while p. 133 TO:AE rules do not say explicitly that only the first critical hit to an Improved Heavy Laser causes an explosion, they seem to imply it by saying that such lasers explode "in the same manner" as Gauss Rifles. The mention of "powerful capacitors" as a reason behind Improved Heavy Lasers explosive nature (again - same as Gauss Rifles) in the fluff on p. 133 TO:AE also seems to suggest that such lasers should explode only once - like Gauss Rifles do.P. 130, answer to misconception number four under DamageProblem: The last sentence ("Only if using the optional Forced Withdrawal rules (see p. 81) does destroying a gyro also destroy that ’Mech.") does not match current Forced Withdrawal rules.
Solution: Remove the sentence or change it so something like "Only if using the optional Forced Withdrawal rules (see p. 81) destroying a gyro may also destroy that ’Mech, which happens if the 'Mech also lost all of its weapons."