Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • 01:27

    cartag on v2.1.3

    (compare)

  • 01:23

    cartag on v1.50.10

    (compare)

  • 01:23

    cartag on master

    Cities of Sigmar initial release (compare)

  • 01:22

    cartag on master

    Added support for Cities of Sig… (compare)

  • 01:21
    cartag closed #1059
  • 01:21
    cartag commented #1059
  • 01:21
    cartag edited #1059
  • 01:21
    cartag edited #1059
  • 01:21
    cartag edited #1059
  • 00:31
    cartag edited #1059
  • 00:31
    cartag edited #1059
  • 00:31
    cartag edited #1059
  • Oct 13 22:52
    cartag edited #1059
  • Oct 13 22:52
    cartag edited #1059
  • Oct 13 21:36
    cartag edited #1059
  • Oct 13 21:14
    cartag edited #1059
  • Oct 13 21:14
    cartag edited #1059
  • Oct 13 20:51
    cartag closed #1034
  • Oct 13 20:51
    cartag closed #1049
  • Oct 13 20:51
    cartag commented #1049
OftKilted
@OftKilted
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
I’ll just pull them down lol - just point me in a direction
OftKilted
@OftKilted
@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
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
@/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
Having studied Azyr a bit as well, I'm thinking we should lose Pitched Battle Faction at the same time.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
@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
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
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
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
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
it's Slaves PBF (and Slaves Allegiance in Azyr)
You can let me worry about those ones :)
OftKilted
@OftKilted
I happen to have a slightly vested interest in Tzeentch
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
:)
image.png
OftKilted
@OftKilted
I’m going to be slightly mean.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
something like this, where PRIEST is the keyword which can't be an ally.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Why are we actually breaking Pitched Battle values it into point ranges?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
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
Wait ... why are you needing to do percentages?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
because it's effectively 20% of your points can be allies
at each bracket
OftKilted
@OftKilted
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
can you put up an example? I don't really understand what you mean
OftKilted
@OftKilted
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
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
I feel like the current way is fine... ;)
OftKilted
@OftKilted
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
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
It looks like we would have to put all of the Allegiance keywords into the gst if I’m understanding the proposal correctly.