These are chat archives for BSData/wh40k

18th
May 2016
S Raev
@afraeve
May 18 2016 03:13 UTC
The "Space Wolves Detachment" is from the old codex, where they were allowed twice as many HQ units compared to the standard FOC. It should be deleted, but that'll bork any rosters people've saved that use it.
S Raev
@afraeve
May 18 2016 04:04 UTC
I just saw #2181 and #2184. Didn't want to comment on the public github board, but @cartag, you are way out of order. This is a community, we've all put in countless hours producing this work for free, and I don't think it's too much to ask for people to show each other just a little respect. How long do you think things will last if we were all to start rewriting each others work?
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 04:06 UTC
Whoa, I was just trying to be helpful, there was no disrespect meant there, I'll just delete tehm
That wasn't me trying to rewrite your work, that was as a user trying to start out a Renegade army and finding it confusing as hell, albeit not explaining myself in the slightest and causing hurt feelings.
Ivan Milanov
@SuperPranx
May 18 2016 05:14 UTC
Since the SW detachment says 1 HQ and 2 Troops and gives no bonuses for taking it, I'd say the Wolves Unleashed is a better choice if you want to go with a loadout requiring more than 2 HQs. I say we remove it, but I don't know how such things have been handled in the past.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 10:45 UTC
Whao @afraeve calm down.
@cartag didn't mean to offend anyone, and he surely didn't offend me. Don't go off the deep end on behalf of everyone because you were.
@SuperPranx I'd vote remove it. It's an invalid detachment - it doesn't exist anymore. If it breaks lists, it's not like those can't be remade pretty easily.
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 15:27 UTC
@efalsken re: #2143, I'd agree with you on Flyer Aces, that it is only part of the campaign. Flyer Ace special rules are contingent on multiple kills, spread out over the campaign, but I wouldn't consider Wing Leader to be that.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 15:28 UTC
Yea, the old Flyer Ace rules could've been used per game as a 35pt upgrade, but now I'd agree it's an optional rule only part of campaigns.
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 15:30 UTC
There are two sets of Flyer Ace style upgrades though in the new book. One is for head of Flyer Wings, similar to anything that a Champion in an infantry unit would get, a way to set them apart. The other is Flyer Ace, the one meant just for campaigns. The Wing one should be included IMO, the Flyer Ace not so much.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 16:32 UTC
So i'm adding wings for SM ... I don't want to play the person who brings a wing of thunderhawks.
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 16:33 UTC
I play nothing but
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 16:33 UTC
Haha
Wing benefits with 5" D blasts.
I quit.
The game is yours, for between 800 and 1600 GBP
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 16:36 UTC
Stupid phone
Nothing but chaos, how do you think I feel ;)
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 16:37 UTC
Haha You're just at a lifelong disadvantage.
Maybe the rumors are true with the shop going sold out on Chaos models.
Either rescuplts/packages or gasp a new codex.
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 16:41 UTC
I've been hurt too many times before.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 16:42 UTC
I solve that by enjoying armies GW still likes :smile:
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 16:42 UTC
At least KDK is decent, if over pointed on some models. Possessed at same cost as Wulfen? Somethings not right here...
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 16:42 UTC
KDK always looked interesting
Also, who in their right mind would take a wing of Thunderhawk Transporters
Are those for days when you just have to take 4 freaking land raiders to the table next to you?
"Hey guys, just crashing your party. Let me drop off some presents."
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 16:54 UTC
You bring those to games of Floorhammer
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 16:55 UTC
Nvm, Ignore the thunderhawks.
I want to see a wing of Mantas.
It's the answer to the never-asked question: "How do you transport an entire sept-world's population onto the battlefield".
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 17:00 UTC
Question on skies of death since I don't have the book in front of me
Flyer Ace is now free right?
Since it's really just a "Campaign Rule" now based on model kills
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 17:24 UTC
Flyer ace as we knew it is now the campaign thing. Now there is a flyer wing ladder special rule that is free for one flyer in the wing
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 17:33 UTC
Changing that rule entry in SM.
That's what I'd thought, thanks
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 17:39 UTC
Jesus, why would anyone ever run regular termies again. Just glue some cloth strips to them and bam, cataphractii armor.
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 17:58 UTC
I still only have the one army. Starting my Traitor Guard army soon, but that's just another extension of chaos
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 18:00 UTC
Is that 30k?
Or just a chaos IG army?
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 18:02 UTC
Just chaos IG. Using either IA13 or Vraks
I have 200 cultists from DV, they need to be used for something
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 18:02 UTC
That'd be cool to see
Blob?
Yeap ... Blob.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 18:15 UTC
So, i'm adding cataphractii to every formation that can take regular terminators now. And I see why the SM file is over 3megs.
There's no shared entry linking :(
I really am curious how much smaller it will be once I fix that and strip out the BRB rules.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 19:02 UTC
Hey guys - drudging up old issues here.
#1761 - any comments or input?
I'm thinking that I/we should leave profiles as what they are in the army list entry page
and add the invuln saves/etc to the wargear entry
essentially ... status quo, that's how it is now in C:SM
Any arguments otherwise?
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 19:07 UTC
Gah - ignore me, i'm blind .... I can modify profiles from other profiles.
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 19:15 UTC
Check CSM if you want to see how I modify saves there. Particularly chaos Lord and sorcerer
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 19:16 UTC
Silly @cartag Don't you know I'm using CSM and KDK as the basis for like, everything I do now.
Those two are so clean, I love it.
Which is funny ... since ... nurgle.
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 19:31 UTC
I'm glad my work can be beneficial lol
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 19:36 UTC
Oh it is Thanks for it :)
@OftKilted Just assigned you a pull to review if you want. It fixes the show/hide bug for mephrit relics in necrons.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
May 18 2016 19:42 UTC
@Kohato Ahh Thanks! If it fixes them, I'm all for you just approving it. Thanks for stepping in and helping me out. :+1: :)
(I can take a look at it tonite and do a 'doublecheck' if you think that it's necessary.)
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 19:43 UTC
I don't, was a simple flip of the conditional - nothing big to check, I just don't like merging commits that aren't mine :)
well, the commit was mine, but you know what I mean
I'll merge it though since you're good.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
May 18 2016 19:44 UTC
I'm fine with it. Every raindrop raises the sea :)
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 19:45 UTC
I felt like doing some work today :p so I kind of closed like 7 issues since lunch.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
May 18 2016 19:58 UTC
Well, thanks for the assistance :-)
arabviking
@arabviking
May 18 2016 20:34 UTC
Hey, the daemonic posession on land raider for khorne daemonkin is it wrong? 15 pts in the book, 20 pts in battlescribe?
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 20:36 UTC
Post an issue for it, I'll fix it when I get home tonight.
arabviking
@arabviking
May 18 2016 20:36 UTC
Through the application right?
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 20:36 UTC
Through Github.
arabviking
@arabviking
May 18 2016 20:36 UTC
thanks
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 20:37 UTC
Helps us track it better than via BSData Anon reports.
arabviking
@arabviking
May 18 2016 20:37 UTC
I am a TO, and a player submitted a list.
done
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 20:41 UTC
Thanks!
arabviking
@arabviking
May 18 2016 20:42 UTC
no problem.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 20:43 UTC
@cartag ... ever seen this on a pull?
18,925 Tyranids - Codex.cat
9,463 additions, 9,462 deletions not shown because the diff is too large. Please use a local Git client to view these changes.
I changed 3 lines ....
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 21:00 UTC
Holy hell... If you can, back out changes, resync latest release, then do change and upload again.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 21:01 UTC
Oh I didn't merge
Haha
I didn't even save the pull request from my fork
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 21:04 UTC
Should be easy to redo then lol
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 21:09 UTC
Oh yea. Just curious what happened. I changed 3 lines and deleted 1. It said 9800 deletions and 1 less addition. Not hard to redo just unexpected so I stopped.
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 21:31 UTC
It may be if there was a previous one that introduced a change higher up, causing everything else to move down. That's the best I can come up with anyway
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 21:33 UTC
Hmm I wonder if "no force org" items are stored at the top
cartag
@cartag
May 18 2016 21:42 UTC
Could be. It would then force everything else down, but that seems unlikely. I'd revert to latest release, change one entry, then check in gut to see hope many lines it says were affected
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 21:45 UTC
Yea, I'm home now so I can. When I'm at work I have to work off of the website and not the desktop app so it won't show DIFs if they're too big.
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 21:54 UTC
I'm feeling dumb. I just synched and I ended up with a bunch of catz files that conflict with cat files. I can't test my work so long as those files are there. How'd I end up with these files?
If I blow them away on my branch will it cause problems for anyone else?
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 21:54 UTC
Are you on a branch of BSData or just a fork?
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 21:55 UTC
Also got a gstz
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 21:55 UTC
Either way I work off my own constantly deleted and re-made fork so it shouldn't touch my stuff.
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 21:56 UTC
I was trying to create a new branch. Those files are in the branch, and when I deleted the branch and resyched those files were still there.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 21:57 UTC
If you just made the branch I don't' think deleting it will cause anyone else issues.
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 21:57 UTC
Even when I do a pull request?
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 21:57 UTC
not 100% on anything git though ... I learn shit constantly
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 21:57 UTC
Yeah that's why I ask. I'm not familiar with Git.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 21:57 UTC
From where? If you delete the branch I wouldn't think there's anything to pull from
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 21:58 UTC
I want to create a branch before I do any work. I can't test my work with those files in place, so I'll delete them, but I'm worried that when I do a pull request from my new branch it will try to delete them for everyone, and somebody probably made those accidentally on purpose.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 21:59 UTC
Ok @cartag I think I found the reason for my 18,000 changes. Apparently if you increment/decriment on a linked entry that goes to the very top of the XML file. I deleted those, now Github desktop has decided to crawl like an infant through molassass
@tag8833 try forking instead? That's how I do my work.
I'll fork - clone my fork to my desktop, make changes, commit to my fork, then do a pull request from the fork to the main.
Couple extra (quick) steps, but it is a good safety net.
Then I'll delete the fork and re-do it If there's been other commits since my last changes.
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 22:01 UTC
How do I fork? I got a little tutorial when I installed Git on how to Branch. I'll hit youtube for Fork instructions if there isn't anything weird about it.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 22:02 UTC
Then from desktop you can click the "+"
blob
Then Clone - then click your own account and your fork should be there.
now any changes are on your own fork and won't kill the main one if you decide to make 18,900 line changes instead of 3.
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 22:04 UTC
If I branch I can keep my changes from infecting everyone else as well by just deleting my branch right?
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 22:04 UTC
I assume so, Never used branches though - other than @cartag's for 2.0 stuff.
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 22:04 UTC
Plus the branch pull updates the issue, and warns me about conflicts.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 22:04 UTC
So does fork if you comment your commit with it.
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 22:11 UTC
So I'm not entirely sure why a branch doesn't do everything that a Fork does. You are still doing a pull request, right?
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 22:12 UTC
I always assumed branches were for concurrent parent works by the same community. While forks were for separate/private works.
Like, I can merge commits into your branch, but not your personal fork.
that kinda thinking
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 22:14 UTC
But don't you want that? If you are in process on changes to the Sisters catalog, and someone else modifies Dark Eldar, might you not want to pull in their updated catalog?
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 22:15 UTC
@Randobar Sorry - the fix for the tyrant guard issue is going to be 18,900 line changes (overall 5 line changes I think) - The reason being, when we attach a conditional to an entry link (like was on tyrant guard originally), it's at the very top of the file. I removed that and placed a hide conditional on the shared entry itself to fix the issue but that moved everything up one line.
Yea, I think you can do that tag, not positive though - again, only worked with Forks ... not that it's the best, just the only way I know how :p @cartag is my go-to for all things here, perhaps he would know.
Troy Graber
@tag8833
May 18 2016 22:19 UTC
Yeah, his review of my 1st round of git changes were that I should have been using branches, so I deleted my clone, and created a new one, and branched it, and there are not compressed duplicates in there. So I think I'm good to go with a branch for today. Baby-step style changes in case I screw something up.
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
May 18 2016 22:20 UTC
Fair enough