Silverwolfsigil
02/20/14 03:43 PM
142.206.2.14
|
If I am calculating the star type and recharge rate correctly, Addicks numbers are off. I believe a K4 system should be 195 hours and a G2 is 183. I am not sure if the star type or recharge rate are off.
Perhaps there is a local feature that modifies the value.
|
ghostrider
02/20/14 04:30 PM
24.30.128.72
|
I am assuming this is a question about the recharge rates on jump cores.
Do they have information on the k3 and k5 as well as the g1 and g3?
There should be some sort of pattern to see if it is an error.
I am only going on logic, since I do not have the basics for this question. Hopefully you can find out from the little I can offer.
|
Silverwolfsigil
02/20/14 04:46 PM
142.206.2.14
|
The math I am using is:
O B A F G K M L
0 141 151 161 171 181 191 201 211
1 142 152 162 172 182 192 202 212
2 143 153 163 173 183 193 203 213
3 144 154 164 174 184 194 204 214
4 145 155 165 175 185 195 205 215
5 146 156 166 176 186 196 206 216
6 147 157 167 177 187 197 207 217
7 148 158 168 178 188 198 208 218
8 149 159 169 179 189 199 209 219
9 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220
It seems to work for all entries I have found so far.
|
Cray
02/20/14 06:42 PM
71.47.122.85
|
Quote:
The math I am using is:
O B A F G K M L
0 141 151 161 171 181 191 201 211
1 142 152 162 172 182 192 202 212
2 143 153 163 173 183 193 203 213
3 144 154 164 174 184 194 204 214
4 145 155 165 175 185 195 205 215
5 146 156 166 176 186 196 206 216
6 147 157 167 177 187 197 207 217
7 148 158 168 178 188 198 208 218
8 149 159 169 179 189 199 209 219
9 150 160 170 180 190 200 210 220
It seems to work for all entries I have found so far.
O-type and L-type stars are not addressed by BT's recharging rules, which are found in DropShips & JumpShips, BattleCorps, Explorer Corps, AT2, AT2R, and Strategic Operations. The standard recharge tables (unchanged for 26 years) are found in those books.
If Addick's entry was found in one of the old House Sourcebooks, then there's a chance it was wrong since the House SBs were hit-and-miss with their adherence to recharge times. Late-era FASA, FanPro, and CGL all made the reviewing point that any erroneous recharge times would be corrected to follow the standard recharge table.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
ghostrider
02/20/14 09:39 PM
24.30.128.72
|
wouldn't be the first time information in source books were wrong either by not doing the math, or a typo. Battle tech isn't the only one that has done this in the past.
And thanks for the table. Now I don't have to figure it out myself 
|
Frabby
02/22/14 06:14 PM
87.182.255.244
|
I've looked up the sources cited in the Addicks article, and they do indeed describe it as a K4III star with 183 hours of recharge time just like it is noted down in the article. In the absence of an official correction, that's the canonical information we have.
|
Cray
02/23/14 12:25 PM
71.47.122.85
|
Quote:
I've looked up the sources cited in the Addicks article, and they do indeed describe it as a K4III star with 183 hours of recharge time just like it is noted down in the article. In the absence of an official correction, that's the canonical information we have.
The official rule for BT fact checkers is, "If the recharge time differs from the table in Strategic Operations, then it gets changed to match the table in Strategic Operations."
Page 87 Strategic Operations says K3 stars have a 193-hour recharge time. Addicks thus canonically has a 193-hour recharge time.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Frabby
02/23/14 12:57 PM
87.182.247.30
|
Quote:
The official rule for BT fact checkers is, "If the recharge time differs from the table in Strategic Operations, then it gets changed to match the table in Strategic Operations."
Page 87 Strategic Operations says K3 stars have a 193-hour recharge time. Addicks thus canonically has a 193-hour recharge time.
Has this ever been officially published to the general public as a canonical ruling?
I only know this as a behind-the-curtain order for factcheckers, and as such it wouldn't affect published canon information. Though it could be argued that the single official statement existing for the recharge time was a typo, and was always meant to read 193 hours instead of 183.
|
ghostrider
02/23/14 03:05 PM
24.30.128.72
|
and what happens if you don't ever get to see the one statement? Any books that are written after the error was found should contain the correct information. I know they are looking to save money by not changing it, but that shows they don't care about anything but the bottom line. Simply fix it in the archives and from then on, all information should be accurate.
|
Frabby
02/23/14 03:38 PM
87.182.247.30
|
Not quite sure what you're saying. I'll try to explain my view:
We have a (one) canon source stating the recharge time for Addicks as 183 hours, and two stating it is a K4III-class sun.
We have no canonical source correcting/retconning those 183 hours or otherwise indicating they'd be wrong. No subsequent canonical source that I am aware of mentions a different recharge time (or any recharge time at all).
We do have game rules generally suggesting that a K4 sun should have a 193 hours recharge cycle.
Outside of canon we know that the Line Developer decreed recharge times should adhere to the table, and that entries that differ from the table (as is the case for Addicks) should be "corrected".
However, to repeat: No source has corrected the stated 183 hours recharge time on Addicks as of yet.
The LD ruling was not, to my knowledge, given as an official erratum automatically retconning/correcting/overriding all other data.
But until such time, it is just a behind-the-scenes guideline for the writers when they produce canonical data.
Which means the stated 183 hours stand as the ony canonically given data.
(It's easy to imagine Addicks as a slightly larger-than-normal subgiant that, because of its bigger size, emits somewhat more light and thus makes a recharge possible in only 183 hours. The recharge table makes a lot of assumptions and simplifications about stars in the first place and deviations are bound to be commonplace.)
|
ghostrider
02/23/14 03:55 PM
24.30.128.72
|
not everyone has every book published. If they said in one book that any error are to refer to book x, and they don't bother trying to fix them in future publishing, then it crap.
Any future publishing of the 'facts' needs to be correct. book a says something wrong, book b corrects it, but then book c has the incorrect version.. this is the sort of crap that needs to stop.
If there is a variation in something, it should be noted in that item. Technically every star is different, so you could say they all have different times, even though they are all classified as the same type.
|
Cray
02/23/14 04:46 PM
71.47.122.85
|
Quote:
Has this ever been officially published to the general public as a canonical ruling?
It's in Strategic Operations, p. 87. The rules say, "The time required for recharging the Kearny-Fuchida drive is governed by the star type of the current system. To determine the time, compare the star’s type with its sub-type [on the chart]." The rules don't say, "Look at planetary write-ups." The numbers given in planet write-ups are just conveniences so you don't have to flip open StratOps (or prior books with recharge rules.)
I've posted an official question in Ask the Writers on CBT.com:
http://bg.battletech.com/forums/index.php/topic,37564.0.html
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
Frabby
02/24/14 06:00 AM
87.182.247.30
|
Cray, now I'm seeing your point - you're essentially saying rules trump fluff here. Good call, didn't think to look at the question from this angle.
Thanks for raising the issue with Herb and getting us an official answer. This is the ruling I'd been waiting for - the recharge table takes precedence.
(Which, by extension, means it's redundant to state both the star class and the recharge time. Also, if they don't match, should we assume it's always the recharge time that needs to be adjusted, or could the recharge time be used to argue the star type was wrong?)
|
BrokenMnemonic
02/24/14 10:30 AM
82.110.109.215
|
We could strip the recharge time field out of the templates, so it no longer displays, and instead include a wikilink within the template that will display and link to a summary of the recharge times, if that would be more efficient than having to check and change all of the planet articles with a stated recharge time.
|
Cray
02/24/14 06:25 PM
71.47.122.85
|
Quote:
(Which, by extension, means it's redundant to state both the star class and the recharge time. Also, if they don't match, should we assume it's always the recharge time that needs to be adjusted, or could the recharge time be used to argue the star type was wrong?)
It's always convenient to have the recharge and transit times right there in the planet write-up so folks don't have to flip open another book or web page to find out the recharge time.
Mike Miller, Materials Engineer
Disclaimer: Anything stated in this post is unofficial and non-canon unless directly quoted from a published book. Random internet musings of a BattleTech writer are not canon.
|
skiltao
02/24/14 08:13 PM
68.77.110.60
|
If it matters, I believe the travel time given (4.12 days) is for K5 star.
|