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

7th
Mar 2018
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 00:03
@
@alphalas Oh .... I believe folks are focusing on KO and the new lizard women in the order Faction. The horrible murder death kill ones ... and Sylvaneth ... which may or may not be the same thing ...
Once I get Death out of the way if they still need help (and if @Mad-Spy doesn’t need any help with chaos... Because Everyone Should all have a little Change ...) Incan see about helping out.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 00:08
@alphalas Do you want me to stand up a Dropbox repo for you To test out the TK for me?
I don’t have Death allegiance Abilities or Artefacts in yet.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 07 2018 00:55
Sure I can totally do that
Looks like I’m gunna be snowed in next 2 days
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 00:59
Uuuuf
So, do you need me to set up a repo for you? Or do you just want to pull the files yourself!
.. ignore the ! ... whee autocorrect
Or me mistyping a ?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 07 2018 01:08
I’ll just pull them down lol - just point me in a direction
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 02:19
@alphalas You'll want death.cat and Age of Sigmar.gst from https://github.com/BSData/warhammer-age-of-sigmar/tree/Chaos-updates
They don't ally with anyone. So unless you're trying to pull units from a generic death alliance, that covers what you're working with.
We're moving to the AoS 2.0 branch ... so my next set of updates will likely end up there.
But that's just covering the legions of nagash, and then I'll get FEC profiles in.
And then I'll get the command traits and artefacts
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 07 2018 03:08
Go ahead and start on the DoK @FreylisUK. I am back from holiday and will continue with the minor factions - those w/o battletomes.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 11:37
@/all, thanks to inspiration from @FreylisUK, I am now thinking that we should be able to split the catalogues along Allegiance/Faction lines and maintain Allies validation. I know we've all done a decent amount of work towards maintaining the monoliths, but are people amenable to changing tack at this stage?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 11:43
Having studied Azyr a bit as well, I'm thinking we should lose Pitched Battle Faction at the same time.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 11:54
@Mad-Spy what’s the plan?
Right now I’m not entirely sure that Death (specifically LoN) is amenable to being split (though pulling out FEC and TK is likely not too terrible)
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 11:59
Yeah, I think LoN is going to have to be one cat with a sub-faction switch, otherwise you'll be duplicating, but it should still work.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:00
The only other question I might have is the potentials for duplication with all of the units in Chaos that can be flagged with a mark of Chaos
So, what’s the vision?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 12:01
They won't need duping, because they'll be in a "SLAVES TO DARKNESS" cat, which is an allegiance.
We will need to move the Force Entries to the individual cats. Then you can allow child forces, and then disallow keywords in those forces which can't be allies.
or allow acceptable ones, maybe
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:02
Soul Grinder? Some of the Daemons? (And the Daemon Prince is amusing as it is listed in StD... but has no Slaves keyword)
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 12:03
it's Slaves PBF (and Slaves Allegiance in Azyr)
You can let me worry about those ones :)
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:04
I happen to have a slightly vested interest in Tzeentch
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 12:04
:)
image.png
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:05
I’m going to be slightly mean.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 12:05
something like this, where PRIEST is the keyword which can't be an ally.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:05
Why are we actually breaking Pitched Battle values it into point ranges?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 12:06
Because you can't do the limits properly using percentages.
I tried it while looking at this and couldn't get it to work
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:06
Wait ... why are you needing to do percentages?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 12:06
because it's effectively 20% of your points can be allies
at each bracket
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:07
It’s a max / min point bracket ...
At least that was how I did it. The only challenge I ran into was that doing a name append in the gst didn’t stick through re-saves and edits of the gst
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 12:09
can you put up an example? I don't really understand what you mean
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:11
I’ll have to pull it up.
I’m on my mobile and it doesn’t work well with pictures.
Ahh here we go this was the ticket where I reported the issue: and a picture of the gst example. BattleScribe/Desktop-Alphas#168
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:16
Instead of changing just the name one could use the same kind of constraints to modify the min/max values for the unit types.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 12:16
I feel like the current way is fine... ;)
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:20
Shrug
Don’t forget that the rules give the option of using The specific levels at +/- 250 points. p.75 GHB 2017
eg 750 point Vanguard or 2750 point Warhost
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:34
How does the proposal work for the chaos deities, and changing categories?
So, the ALLIES table is entirely managed in the gst?
Do we have a working example of what the proposal looks like with an actual force. Not just keywords inside the GST?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 12:46
It looks like we would have to put all of the Allegiance keywords into the gst if I’m understanding the proposal correctly.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:05
Yes.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:15
So, main allegiance keywords in the GST, all secondary in the .CAT
Which then IE if there is a “battleline if” Or an allegiance ability that needs to be in the gst
Correction allegiance or is in the GHB or a battletome as an allegiance
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:17
yes, that sounds about right. Allegiance abilities don't need to be in GST, just the categories.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:19
Okay ... so ... what is the Inspiring Presence shared Rule working off of?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:19
general
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:20
So, the category?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:20
yes
I think that's what I did...
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:21
Because if it isn’t the category ... it needs to be linkable for the “other generals” that aren’t using the SSE
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:21
There will still need to be an allegiance switch in the main force, to allow for sub- and parent allegiances.
and the battleline switches
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:23
Okay. So an SSEG for Allegiance in the cat?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:28
yes, as there is now
but it might only have two entries, cat allegiance and grand alliance allegiance
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:35
Hmmmm
What’s the lift to change from how we’re doing this now ... to the new paradigm? And do we get rid of the PBF in this process?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:36
I think we can repurpose the PBF picklist for the Allegiance abilities switching.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:37
“Allegiance Ability Switching”?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:37
Because any sub allegiance may use the alliance allegiance powers, so we need to have some way of switching it
unless we put it under allegiance....
which is an option
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:38
Why wouldn’t we put it directly under Allegiance?
It’s potentially cleaner from describing an implementation perspective
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:39
yeah, proabbly.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:39
Do you have to go all one or the other?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:39
yes
and Grand Alliance picklists should move to the GST so we don't have to replicate them
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:41
Hmmm ... if the pick lists are moving to the gst ... to keep the Allegiance Abilities out of the gst the PBF repourpose might be good
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:41
I'll try and do a proof of concept tonight
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 13:46
No worries. It sounds positive, and potentially less overall work. We just need to manage the work in the GST
I’m assuming that “Allies” becomes the Primary type for the Allies?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 13:48
no, you add a child detachment of the catalogue that you want to ally with.
tekton
@tekton
Mar 07 2018 14:29
Does that move ally “validation” to the user and out of the cat/gst at that point?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 14:30
sort of, but we should be able to at least flag when a user adds a unit which isn't allowed, based on keywords
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 14:48
In theory ... if something is hidden, they wouldn’t be able to even see the unit
tekton
@tekton
Mar 07 2018 14:59
I’m all for making it more on the user for that part- esp when it comes to narrative. The hidden part is a quasi validation which might be more intuitive anyway. So overall this (breaking up the cats) all sounds like copy-paste-hell with a huge payout at the end
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 15:01
Not sure there is actually any copy paste really required
You could potentially do a duplicate of a cat, rename it and change the Guid ...
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 07 2018 15:02
^this
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 15:02
And then clean out the items not in the list
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 07 2018 15:02
and then you only need to purge
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 15:03
And clean up the references
Which means that cats can be stripped out of the main list in progress. My only side concern is that we’re looking at ~60 cats ... and how this impacts “Grand Alliance” lists ...
tekton
@tekton
Mar 07 2018 15:08
A purge is still a form of that technically, but yes it does have to be actual copy/paste
Wouldn’t that be the same concern as Imperial lists in 40k right now?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 15:09
Dunno.... but potentially.
So, how is that being handled in the imperial 40k lists?
And where there are battalions that have cross allegiance units
tekton
@tekton
Mar 07 2018 15:10
Child detachments under a randomly chosen “main” faction detachment
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 15:16
However the main faction in this case is the key piece. And we will likely get folks asking “where is Unit x”
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 15:24
Azyr has 33 allegiances for Chaos. However, a number of them are effectively duplicates (we don't need separate Khorne, Khorne Bloodbound, Daemons of Khorne)
and I would likely leave the small factions (monsters of Chaos, Warherds, Thunderscorn) in a single file, as (I assume) they are vanishingly unlikely to be chosen as main Allegiances.
Skaven could in theory also be a single file, which brings the list down to about 10-12
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 15:30
Technically all of the separate Khorne allegiances are all “Khorne” and could be included in a “Khorne Army”
We need to have the answer to “If there isn’t battleline” where does it go? Do you split Pestilins out, include it in Nurgle
As examples
As Pestilins could be included in both a Skaven Army, and a Nurgle Army.
As core forces, not even Allies.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 15:40
only in Open or Narrative. In Matched they are not Allies of Maggotkin.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 15:47
so you can't have a "Nurgle" allegiance army with Pestilens allies. You can however, have a Pestilens army with "Nurgle" allies.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 16:24
So ... there is a Nurgle Allies.
Pestilins have the Nurgle keyword. The Maggotkin books refer to “Nurgle Allies” not “Maggotkin Allies”
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 16:56
While Pestillins has their own Allegiance, they also qualify for “Nurgle Allegiance”
So, you’re not actually including Pestillins as Allies ... they’re part of the main “Nurgle” force.
(Like a whole bunch of the Tamurkhan’s Horde units. Ignoring Sayl and Nightmaw)
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 17:08
This is mainly an issue in Chaos ... but the new Death battletome LoN has a similar issue
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 17:17
Most of the Pestillins units don’t have good synergy (and can’t be part of any Of the Maggotkin Warscroll Battalions ... but amusingly the Verminlord Corruptor has The Nurgle, Daemon, and Hero Keywords ... and could be put into at least the “Munificent Wanderers” battalion.
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 07 2018 18:38
@/all what's the plan? Are separate catalogs the new plan? I agree that separate catalogs are an improvement. How close are we to releasing a set of useful (all be it not complete ) monolithic set of catalogs?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 18:39
Death has all the points in... and LoN/TK/VC all have profiles entered
FEC still needs profile entry. Then I’m digging into Artefacts/Spell Lores
But FEC is my next point for the monolithic keywords
Whee autocorrect. Catalog
I know that Chaos and Order are not in a solid state.
They’re officially the largest of the catalogs.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 19:01
Chaos is maybe 60% done? Order probably less so.
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 07 2018 19:25
Order is missing a lot of validation, but most of the units have had their points and abilities updated. Is it worth it to continue with the current plan and release something or do we start again with the multi-catalog approach?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 19:52
I still have Slaanesh, Tzeentch, Nurgle and all the FW stuff to do. Skaven have profiles but not proper RSEs. 89 units are ready to go, 147 are in various states of disrepair.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 19:58
Before we go all-in on a new concept, I think we should do a quick prototype with actual data.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 19:59
I'm just going to knock something up now.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 20:00
Chaos and death are the two that I could see causing issues. And my question is still on the What groupings do we want to do?
tekton
@tekton
Mar 07 2018 20:03
Destruction is probably 80% or so at this point
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 07 2018 20:04
A prototype that exercises all of the ideas, problems and solutions is very wise.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 20:05
So ... identified issues:
Battalions that cross catalogs (Sylvaneth & SCE battalions ... or mixed city battalions)
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 07 2018 20:06
It may be best to finish up with the current plan and release something that is at least more useful than what currently exists.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 20:07
Units that can fit into multiple (potential) catalogs. Or can be cross compatible between allegiance due to keywords
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 07 2018 20:07
0
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 07 2018 20:20
@rweyrauch I'll finish up the KO tonight and then move onto the DoK. Based on the discussion today I'll enter the Battalions as we are currently doing them, i.e. as purely informational with no validation.
I feel like I've opened up a massive can of worms with my musings!
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 20:20
@Cupropituvanso How are Sylvaneth coming?
So, Allegiance and Artefacts/Spell lists are being painful ... based on the current proposed solution for keyword basing ... due to keywords being assigned to units that don’t have them normally ...
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 20:23
If only keyword visibility actually worked. :(
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 07 2018 20:25
I also agree that it might be best to finish up with the current plan given we're most of the way there. If we can get the data up-to-date and include validation at least on a per-unit level, the file will at least be useful for everyone. It also buys us some more time to work out the best way of implementing Battalions.
Also, I wonder if, from an end-user's point of view at least, it might make the most sense to only split out factions into separate catalogues if they have a Battletome? There's nothing stopping us keeping the Grand Alliance catalogues either, which would at least provides a sensible home for the minor factions that don't have their own books.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 20:28
it's not so bad for Destruction and Order, because your allegiances are mostly nicely self-contained.
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 07 2018 20:28
That's effectively what you have with the 40K files; Death Guard and Thousand Sons have their own books so are their own catalogues, but if I want to play World Eaters or Emperor's Children I have to use the Chaos Space Marines catalogue.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 20:29
They are their own catalogues because they significantly diverge in unit selection, not really because they have their own books.
they had separate catalogues while they were still all from the Index.
but I was planning to leave the minor factions in a big catalogue as suggested.
I said earlier, there are 33 allegiances for Chaos in Azyr.
but many of them are contained within others.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 20:31
True enough... and others have overlap. (Eg. Pestillins, Nurgle, Skaven)
Though, a Nurgle Army with Pestillins units isn’t optimal.
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 07 2018 20:32
Ah, I didn't realise that they were split even when we only had Indexes.
I'll stop muddying the waters and crack on with the KO and DoK :smile:
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 20:33
@OftKilted, what's more strange is that in Azyr, Pestilens units in Nurgle armies can only take CHAOS artefacts and command traits, but all the "true" Nurgle units can take the new ones!
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 20:33
So ... not entirely unusual
The only unit that I can see that could take the Nurgle Artefacts would be the Verminlord corruptor
Nothing else has the Nurgle Mortal or Nurgle Daemon Keywords in Pestillins
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 20:34
Yes, I suppose so!
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 20:35
And the Maggotkin/Nurgle Book has those as the keywords.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 20:35
ok, makes slightly more sense now.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 07 2018 20:35
But a Nurgle Army with Pestillins, That has a Verminlord Leader
Basically as an “Grand Alliance Nurgle” Army
Much like the early Realmgate Wars books where the forces of Nurgle are all collaborating with a Verminlord
So ... as a QA ... having a Nurgle Army, and add in a “Child Nurgle force” of Pestillins
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Mar 07 2018 22:09
Right, there's an example in the "multi-catalogue-test" branch. Only Brayherd, Monsters of Chaos and Everchosen are implemented.
Add Primary force of Pitched Battle (1000), then add a child force (which will be Allies).
currently there no denial of invalid allies, I'll try and look at that tomorrow. Allegiance only has to be selected in the primary.
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 07 2018 22:23
@FreylisUK I will work on finishing up the abilities, weapon options, etc on the remaining minor factions. After that I will finish the SE.
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 07 2018 22:28
Cool! I've added all the Sky-Ports and various other global rules to the KO now; I just need to work out how much validation I can feasibly do (i.e. certain Artycles allow extra Artefacts, for example).
@Mad-Spy Awesome! I'll try and take a look at it before the weekend.