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

31st
Mar 2018
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 01:16
If I'm reading this right ... the issue appears to be a conflict in the document naming convention for the book. Changing from a - to a :
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 01:21
@rweyrauch I was able to make a manual correction to the 'battle tome name' and then process the merge.
You'll want to merge the changes back into your branch, if you want to change the battle tome name with a - not a :
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 31 2018 03:19
@OftKilted Excellent thanks.
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 31 2018 16:56
@all The Order catalogs seem to be in reasonable shape. The main Order catalog is still using the unit naming convention of prepending the faction ([SA]) to the unit name. For consistency with the other catalogs, should this be removed?
@all What is the status of getting Battalion validation working? Is this something we are going to include in the first v2.0 release?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 16:59
@rweyrauch Battalion validation works just fine in LoN... and Flesh Eater Courts
tekton
@tekton
Mar 31 2018 16:59
@OftKilted i'll take a look later today how you did it and try to push through most of them for destruction tonight then
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 17:02
Basically you’re setting up an SSE with the name and copying the RSE for the associated variants into the SSE.
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 31 2018 17:04
@OftKilted I will have a look at FEC for battalion validation.
tekton
@tekton
Mar 31 2018 17:05
i think that's kind of how destruction was done already, but i'll triple check when i get back from the warhammer store opening near by
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 31 2018 18:05
@all I am starting to test (with 'anger' per @FreylisUK ) the Order catalogs.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 18:20
I think we should leave Anger in the KHORNE catalog ....
Simon Barlow
@FreylisUK
Mar 31 2018 18:21
I guess 'in anger' is a British thing, then? :)
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 18:21
:wink:
I tend to be more deliberate and planning ...
Rick Weyrauch
@rweyrauch
Mar 31 2018 18:22
Ok, how about I test ORDER with 'stern determination'.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 18:22
And like my models to have loads of color ...
lol
So ... that might be why I enjoy Tzeentch ...
And technically ... the Compendium Battletomes ... don't really have Battalions anymore ...
So, they probably need to be pointed at 0, and referenced as 'Open Play' ...
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 21:47
working on seraphon; doing custom wound tracks for the carni and steggy like we have for vehicles in 40k
Screen Shot 2018-03-31 at 5.48.31 PM.png
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 21:50
@alphalas Take a look at what I did in FEC for the Terrorgheist
Instead of adding the “wound” as the first line, that is put in as a 00-0x and listed as a “<unit name> Wound Table”
Then the additional lines are added in. (AoS makes it easy, as they do wounds suffered ... so it handles nicely for increasing wound tracks)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 21:53
:+1:
i approve lol
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:00
KHORNE and FEC are good examples for data entry. FEC also has Warscroll Battalion validation.
Basically it’s a copy of the RSE into the Warscroll Battalion
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:06
everything important is in master now, yes?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:12
Screen Shot 2018-03-31 at 6.12.07 PM.png
also what is the point of this decrement?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:13
For units that have 'sub' choice options it makes it possible to handle the 'discount' that some Horde units get.
Take a look at FEC ghouls.
When you take a maximum amount(in this case 4 sets of 10), the last selection is discounted due to the horde discount.
So, a unit of 40 crypt ghouls costs 360 points, instead of 400 points.
IF you have a discount that is a fractional amount per unit, discounting inside the loop doesn't work properly.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:16
and that’s displayed in the GHB as xxx/xxx, the escond number being the max size cost yes?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:16
Basically the points don't match in the root, and displayed in the unit.
Yep
We've also been putting the weapons into SE
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:17
kk so i can delete this specific decrement
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:17
No ...
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:17
yes
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:18
Which specific decrement?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:18
Chamelions lost their discount
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:18
Ahh, there are two discounts handled.
Pull up FEC and take a look at the Crypt Ghouls entry.
So, the core cost is 100 points per 10.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:18
…. god damnit i wish i could get Mac reliably to run 2 instances
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:19
open -n /Applications/BattleScribe\ Tools/Data\ Editor.app
Run that from the terminal.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:20
BUENO!
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:20
Assuming that battlescribe isn't in a folder and is in the root of Applications.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:20
last time someone told me that they must have told me something different and it didn’t work in java anymore or some bs like that
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:21
Okay ... so the core cost is 100 points. That's listed at root.
And the 'sub selection choice' is 0 points cost.
I'm going to list the 'root' as 'Unit' and the 'SE' for the unit as 'Model'
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:22
mmhm following so far
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:22
So, we increment the points by 100 for each SE ....
But by doing that we already have a core cost of 100.
So, if we don't do the decrement by 100 if greater than 0 then the base cost is 100 points too much.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:23
couldn’t you just do the point on the SE and save a layer of decrement?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:23
Ahh, that's where the problem comes for horde units.
I can decrease the points for the horde. But the points end up not matching in the list.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:24
? Really?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:24
IE it shows 360 for the root cost, and lists it at 400 inside the unit.
Also, if I have a unit that doesn't handle the split with even points ... then it goes wonky.
For example ... max number of Brimstone Horrors is 30.
They have a discount of 20 points at max size.
... 20 doesn't divide by 3 nicely.
So, I can't handle the points inside the SE for the Brimstone Horrors ...
And then the discount display gets wonky.
So, this is basically for consistency. (and it always works)
But, you only need the wonky behavior for units that have multiple models in the unit.
If the unit doesn't have any discount then you don't need the 'discount' modifier.
Just the 'Decrement by <unit point cost>' to handle the initial point cost oddity. And then the supplemental incremental point increase.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:28
so with my chameleons i could just set the points in the SE and not the root and be fine, right?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:29
Are they a unit of 1 model?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:29
no it’s 5 dudes, and i can buy 4 groups
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:30
No, you would change the 'Increment by 0 points' to 'increment by <points cost of unit>'
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:30
so if i set points ONLY on the group of 5 guys, it’ll work exactly correctly
i’ll show you what i mean
ok first
before i touched those points at all
Screen Shot 2018-03-31 at 6.32.57 PM.png
this is what it looks like
i’m assuming that’s incorrect
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:35
That is because you have an increment by 0
It looks like it works. I know it's an issue for units that have discounts.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:35
Screen Shot 2018-03-31 at 6.35.28 PM.png
this is what i propose
Screen Shot 2018-03-31 at 6.35.12 PM.png
that’s what it outputs as
i’m not seeing where the issue is for units that don’t have discounts
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:37
@Mad-Spy Any thoughts on @alphalas reference for units that don't have discounts? Or are we just missing something?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:38
it also an overall savings on lines too
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:38
True. Not sure if some of the suggestion was due originally to handling discounts, and cross cat validation.
It also might be merely to keep catalogs consistent.
I'm not overly tied to any particular method for handling points costs.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:40
if it’s adding 2-3 line per unit that don’t need it just for consitency sake, that’s a dumb waste of line imo
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:41
I'm all for fewer data entry lines if it works in all cases.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:42
as long as there’s no discount i don’t see why to keep the decrement.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:42
I think the issue is that all the new catalogs basically have horde discounts for multi-model units.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:42
yeah skinks and saurus got discounts in GHB17 they didn’t have.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:43
I don't see a reason to make things overly complex for units that don't have.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:43
but those are the only 2 seraphon units that do
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:43
All the darkling coven units get discounts, all of the disciples of tzeentch do it looks like.
Oh ... most all the DoT do ...
Basically it's the stuff that has a minimum unit size of 10 models.
And some stuff with 5. (but not all)
there is a couple of 10 man unit base units in Order that don't have discounts.
It looks like units with primary ranged attacks (being their strongest attack) don't have horde discounts.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:50
Less Complexity means less 'number crunching' and processing required by the devices.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:50
ok
i think i just fixed all the issues.
hold on lol
Screen Shot 2018-03-31 at 6.51.36 PM.png
That outputs like this
Screen Shot 2018-03-31 at 6.52.09 PM.png
Screen Shot 2018-03-31 at 6.52.22 PM.png
and at less then max
winner winner?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:53
"10 x Saurus Warriors 90 points"
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:54
yes, but that’s only when there are 4 blocks
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:55
For situations where the points decreased by is divisible by the total discount. It works.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:55
that was your goofy one, brims?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:55
Brimstones ... 40 points per.
40 points per 10.
Max unit size of 30.
Discount of 20.
20/3 = 6.667
No bueno.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:56
ok
fair enough
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:57
Handling multiple 'cases'
For a new team that aren't 40K editors ...
Sometimes, it is just easier to work with a 'core solution that works for all potential cases'
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:57
are there any other… “problematic” units?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:58
Haven't seriously dug into it.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 22:58
i’ll flip through ghb17
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 22:58
I'm doing my points as 'increment pos by 100 (repeating) - Repeat 1 tie for every 1 selections in Parent of Model'
So, I can literally use copy my increments and decrements from unit to unit.
As long as I have them set to 'Unit' and 'Model' for my cat breakdown.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 23:01
That’s fair; I’d say If there aren’t more the say 5; go to the easier solution, and leave outliers as-is imo
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 23:02
I'm probably not going to go back and 'fix' everything I've already done.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 23:03
so far it’s stormvermin, furies, and brims that i’ve found
@OftKilted that’s fine; i’m thinking this should be more of a “going forward” thing
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 23:04
Either way, lets make sure that we're at consensus with @Mad-Spy ... perhaps I'm missing something that caused an issue.
I'm currently debating the Warscroll Battalion piece ...
Specifically, forcing selection for units that only have one RSE option. Because the units that don't have just one RSE (i.e. battle line units as an example) can't be 'forced' but that makes the 'Warscroll Battalion look like it costs more than 'normal'
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 23:10
eww half of destruction’s horde units don’t split well
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 23:10
i.e. Multitudinous Host costs 200 ... if I 'force' selection for the herald, that makes the battalion look like it costs more.
And ... there's our sign
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 23:10
yeah
maybe just leave it to maintainer’s discression
idk
As to your problem; thats a good question
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 23:19
What's your thought?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 23:22
i’m not sure
are battlaion units part of that battalion only?
Or can 1 unit validate multiple battalions?
its been a while and i don’t completely remember lol
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 23:23
A unit can only validate against a single battalion directly.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 23:23
ok
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 23:24
i.e. Unit A canot fulfil a requirement for two different battalions.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Mar 31 2018 23:24
so then treating a units cost as part of a battalion cost isn’t unreasonable imo
so forcing is ok
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Mar 31 2018 23:27
reasonable