These are chat archives for BSData/warhammer-age-of-sigmar

15th
Feb 2018
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 00:30
@Mad-Spy any pics for the implementation guidelines? Or a good set of examples to use from the chaos cat?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 07:51
@alphalas, can you make me an admin on the AoS repo, please?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 10:05
@/all, wiki now updated with images. I'll be adding more.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Feb 15 2018 10:52
@Mad-Spy I’ll try in a bit
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 11:00
cheers
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 11:45

@Mad-Spy The first item on the SSE for units says “Unit/Model entries should be created as Shared Selection Entries with the Unit type. Battlefield Role Categories (Leader, Behemoth, Battleline, etc.) should be applied to this entry, but no Primary Category should be assigned. These entries should never be hidden.”

Should the role categories reference be for RSEs?

The wiki doesn’t cover where the unit keywords should be linked
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 11:53
Yes, it does. IT ALWAYS HAS. WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN AT WAR WITH EURASIA.
I have updated it...
Having role categories on SSEs was a holdover from when I thought I could make Battalion validation work nicely.
Which I'm not convinced is going to happen.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 11:58
I thought the example with the modified shared checkbox “made that work”?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 11:59
It can work, but it duplicates categories in some cases which makes the output look odd.
Because you need the battlefield role entry on both the SSE and the RSE.
It's especially annoying when units can change role, because you have to choose one to be on the SSE.
and if the army comp allows the other, it will be wrong when selected in a battalion, or show both on the unit when not in a battalion.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 12:09
At the minute, the only solution which resolves all the problems would be to completely duplicate the unit SSE.
which is not a pleasant solution.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 12:16
Would creating a separate RSE for the battalion manage that issue?
Hmmmm... no I think my mental visualization of that is wrong
So the real solution is being able to do a category modification or change on the sse
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 12:23
Yes, being able to manipulate categories based on conditions would be the ultimate solution.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 12:32
That should probably be documented ... the “battalion validation causes display problems with units that can be deployed in different battlefield roles”
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 12:47
I've put Battalions on the back burner for now. At the end of the day, validating them is a "nice to have" not a "must have". Let's get full profiles for everything and Allegiance/PBF unit visiblity working and then worry about it.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 13:04
Reasonable enough.
I don’t think that is really any different than how the scrollbuilder (official builder) handles it. Users still have to have the data
Okay. Question: Single model unit. Why are we using an SSE?
Or should we be building closer to the Skarbrand with no sse for those?
For those SSE that has no weapon options, can/should they be built basically with everything as a profile at “Unit root”?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 13:34
They should be an SSE. There shouldn't be an Selection Entry inside it for the unit because there's no number of models to change
image.png
^^ that is WRONG
image.png
^^ this is RIGHT
They can just all be "Unit" type SSEs though, because we're not doing any model level validation.
I've stuck in a screenshot and a bit more explanatory text.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 13:39
For those SSE that has no weapon options, can/should they be built basically with everything as a profile at “Unit root”?
Yes
it should still have SEs for the weapons, spells, etc.
it makes the output nicer.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 13:42
So, if there is no weapon choice, a single sse, without an sse inside. If all models in the unit have the same kind of weapons and those weapons don’t have any special rules then a sse for the weapon isn’t used. And the base weapon profile should be at the root of of the unit.
Okay ... sse for weapons with no choices because it makes it look pretty
I will say that pretty is nice though time consuming.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 13:56
SE
not SSE
SSEs contain SEs, or links to other SSEs
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 13:59
Sorry, bad terminology reference :(
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 14:00
nw. I guess I'm just used to putting the SEs in for weapons etc. I tend to do one, then make multiple copies of one type and amend the names and descriptions.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 14:15
So... why don’t we use the “Rules” type instead of loads of profiles?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 14:18
Because rules don't appear inline.
If you select the "Inline" option for Rules when outputting in the Roster Editor, the text of the rule is not output.
which is unhelpful
even with the Summary turned on, all the rules are shown at the end of the Roster, with no clear indication of which unit they belong to.
Rules are good for army-wide stuff (hence I've made a root rule for "Inspiring Presence")
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 14:25
So... we’re not using them because of a BS problem?
/facepalm
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 14:26
and profiles look nicer in the output...
because of the grouping of types
All Rules are all "Rules", but profiles can be many things.
since the HTML formatting support got taken out, it's much harder to make rules look nice.
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Feb 15 2018 17:36
I see there is a lot of activity on the Chaos and Death catalogs. I'd like to spend some time to get the Order catalog updated. I see that the Implementation Guidelines page is reasonably up to date. How can I help contribute?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 17:55
Welcome @rweyrauch. @Cupropituvanso is working on Sylvaneth but I don't know his plans for the rest of Order.
I'm constantly updating the Guidelines at the moment. The main thing right now is to get everything to have a full profile and updated points.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 19:24
@rweyrauch Welcome aboard!
@Mad-Spy (Thanks for the implementation pics as well in the wiki)
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 20:31
No worries. There are a few more I need to get on there tomorrow or maybe later today.
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Feb 15 2018 20:42
just be careful not to work on the same .cat at the same time, or things get interesting
(and horrifying)
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Feb 15 2018 20:50
I have been tinkering with splitting the Order catalog into separate catalog per faction. This helps with the merge problem, but does present a few other problems. I'd like to experiment with splitting the catalogs again this time using your guidelines on how to implement various things.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 20:57
Order has the potential to be a good use case for the splitting. Stormcast having a crazy number of units.
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Feb 15 2018 20:57
going to make allies validation awful
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 20:57
^^ That is the primary challenge
You would need to move Alliance and Pitched Battle Faction references into the gst
At least that’s how I would do it. The advantage of hat approach is that splitting up stuff into smaller catalogs wouldn’t be horrible
But it would change how Allies are leveraged.
For example, in the warscrolls Edition, There is an allies switch.
That triggers if something is an ally and counts as an ally
What would be total “bees knees” is being able to programmatically control categories.
“If ally switch is flipped, change category from Battleline to Ally and remove primary type”
This is mainly an issue based on how we handle forces.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 21:03
Though, we basically are allowing folks to ignore points in BS because we create the multiple type levels. 1000/2000/2500
tekton
@tekton
Feb 15 2018 21:15
I was thinking about taking a whack at that as well this weekend (if I’m feeling better, stupids meds)
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 21:16
So, what were you looking at trying to work on?
Right now, nobody has Destruction in progress. I’m beating up Death, @Mad-Spy has Chaos, @rweyrauch and @Cupropituvanso are on Order.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 21:19
Do Allies remove Battlefield role? I don't remember seeing anything to that effect.
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Feb 15 2018 21:20
only if its allegiance battleline
at least that's how I read it, I could be fantastically wrong
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 21:21
So it just reverts to Other then as far as we're concerned
Allegiance battleline is an exception anyway.
The unit are Other unless the right allegiance is chosen. So in the majority of cases they are not.
We could do an ally switch, but then you're relying on the user to remember to switch it, where we can (relatively easily) enforce it.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Feb 15 2018 21:28
I'll try and get the RSE guidelines written up tomorrow so you can all see how it's supposed to work.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 21:33
Allies remove Leader and Battleline as I recall
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 21:41
Correction: Leaders can’t be the general
tekton
@tekton
Feb 15 2018 23:37
@OftKilted I was just going to look at some of the weird splitting/joining/battlelines stuff since you were taking Death (it's all I have in AoS in terms of reference books, etc)
Since we were thinking about doing some stuff with json and the 40k repos was just going to lump this in my thoughts as I worked on things
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Feb 15 2018 23:56
No worries! I figured I’d dig into Death as “it’s the new hotness” and someone else was pulling in Chaos.
Remember, that the warscrolls and their PDFs are free on the GW site.
The only thing that is unavailable would be the Battalions and the explicit Allegiance items.
tekton
@tekton
Feb 15 2018 23:58
If we weren't launching products last week and this I would have jumped on the Death stuff since I got it day 0, but no, had to be a responsible "adult"