Where communities thrive


  • Join over 1.5M+ people
  • Join over 100K+ communities
  • Free without limits
  • Create your own community
People
Repo info
Activity
  • Dec 13 18:47

    OftKilted on master

    Merge pull request #6 from BSDa… Fixed Nagash problem, more to f… Fixed Nagash, incremented prope… and 1 more (compare)

  • Dec 13 18:47
    OftKilted closed #1143
  • Dec 13 18:39
    UrsinePatriarch opened #1143
  • Dec 12 16:09
    cartag commented #1042
  • Dec 11 16:26
    Tigerwraith commented #1138
  • Dec 11 13:53
    alphalas commented #1042
  • Dec 11 13:51
    alphalas commented #1042
  • Dec 11 13:48
    Ginjitzu commented #1042
  • Dec 11 12:50
    alphalas commented #1042
  • Dec 11 12:50
    alphalas commented #1042
  • Dec 11 12:49
    alphalas commented #1042
  • Dec 11 07:40
    Ginjitzu commented #1042
  • Dec 11 04:34
    BSDataAnon opened #1142
  • Dec 11 00:29
    cartag commented #1141
  • Dec 11 00:27
    cartag commented #1141
  • Dec 10 22:10
    crownedzoidberg edited #1141
  • Dec 10 22:08
    crownedzoidberg opened #1141
  • Dec 10 17:44
    cartag closed #1116
  • Dec 10 17:44
    cartag closed #1107
  • Dec 10 17:44
    cartag closed #1048
OftKilted
@OftKilted
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.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Yes.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
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
yes, that sounds about right. Allegiance abilities don't need to be in GST, just the categories.