These are chat archives for BSData/wh40k

20th
Dec 2016
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 03:30
Hey, heads up - GW just updated red thirst edition - don't know what the changes are yet
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Dec 20 2016 04:12
Hmm I wonder what is in the update
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 04:13
I'm not sure - they pushed something through iBooks for my enhanced edition
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 07:43
@alphalas Learn something new every day. Damn that's archaic!
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 07:54
Wow, that was definitely worth a download...! Cheers for the link alpha :+1:
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 14:01
New stuff in Jan. Sisters, BT, mechanicum and some other bits - http://image.bolterandchainsword.com/uploads/gallery/album_7255/gallery_59703_7255_3972.jpg
There's a summary of a GW live stream on the new book here - http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/328953-gathering-storm-fall-of-cadia/?p=4598191
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 15:47
awesome share! ... there was something else I was going to say... oh yes, thanks @GenWilhelm for pushing a release - I completely forgot to do that last night...!! :+1:
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Dec 20 2016 15:50
No worries, also got that SM bike bug patched up so people stop posting issues about it. :D
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:21
@alphalas Sisters v2005 is the latest version? Because I'm seeing some stuff I don't understand right off the bat and I want to be sure it's not something messing with the cat on my end.
And with that I mean first HQ, Canoness, uses counters for stuff that should be yes or no and mutually exclusive with the stuff around it.
Capture.PNG
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 20:29
Had a quick look and I'm seeing the same thing with the v2005 file.
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:31
In that case I'm presuming it's working as intended.
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 20:32
The errors trigger when you have more than one item selected but I doubt it's intended.
I'd add it as a bug.
Otherwise the bolt pistol section would be the same.
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:33
It's doing what it's supposed to be doing. Those aren't errors, they're warnings that you're taking an illegal setup. Scroll down and you'll see the same setup for the othe weapons she can choose.
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 20:33
Same thing for the priest and it's ranged weapons.
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:34
You may be right, mind. I'll just wait for @alphalas to get back with a clear answer.
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 20:34
Sorry, have them as validation errors rather than warning in my mind :)
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:35
If it is intended this way then it's just a setup I'm not familiar with, that's all.
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 20:37
:+1:
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:38
I think it's not that easy to get a decent layout for her (Canoness) choices. I mean, going by the codex there's option A (bolt pistol and the rest), option B (chainsword and the rest) and option C (Storm bolter and the rest). If C replaces A you have to take B, but if C replaces B you have to take A.
Eldar is such an easy codex compared to most other stuff. Blessing and a curse.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 20:45
Yeah that is exactly how it's supposed to be - she has a Bolter/bolt pistol, that she can replace with other weapons, then she can ALSO take weapons freely from Ranged, Melee, Special, and Relics lists.
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 20:46
The replace "one weapon" thing is a pain when that weapon can be the ranged or melee weapon. I haven't had to deal with it yet so no idea how to make it work.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 20:47
I left it as counters instead of radio buttons to cut down on code
Just constrain it to 1 per, so that it throws validation errors and be done with it
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:48
kk, now I know how to look at this cat I'll try and check it out tonight or tomorrow.
That's her datasheet, just so you can see what I mean
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:49
Yeah, I got the C:IA so I can fact-check it beter
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 20:50
Alright @all, how do I fix #3114? I tried using conditional hides, but they weren't working
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:52
But that's fairly straightforward, really. The only thing complicating matters is -if- you take a Storm bolter, etc. because that replaces one set of the weapon choices and forces the other set.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 20:55
It shouldn't with her - so she should be able to have a bolter, bolt pistol, and condemnor boltgun
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:55
But yeah, I get why you set it up like that. Like I said, Eldar codex and cat are easy compared to this kind of stuff.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 20:55
And a chain sword too - and the mantle
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:57
I don't think that's what it says. She has two weapons off the bat: Bolt pistol and Chainsword. Those may be exchanged for a boltgun in the one case and a Power weapon or Eviscerator in the other. That's the first part of her options. Thén you get the option to exchange one of those with one from the list below. Not both. That's how I read it.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 20:57
A priest theoretically can have his chainsword, a plasma gun, a condemnor, an evicerator, and the mace relic
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 20:57
Wouldn't the condemor boltgun repalce the pistol or chainsword?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 20:57
No
"May take"
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:58
May replace
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 20:58
Since it says "May replace one weapon"
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 20:58
Not replace
Look at the sheet again
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 20:59
I got in front of me. "May replace one weapon with one of the following:" That's what my sheet says.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 20:59
You may take x to replace bolter, y to replace bolt pistol
Then, on the separate line, may take ranged special etc
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 21:00
Condemnor is on the ranged list
Shit you're right
My bad, I thought it was on the ranged list
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 21:01
Yeah well, I think GW is doing it's best to write their rules as convoluted as possible. Needed to parse that bit a couple of times before I got what it meant.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 21:01
Oh I remember now
I just double- checked the sheet - I was thinking about priest
You all are right about cannoness
Mea culpa
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 21:02
Yeah, I see that one now. Hadn't read that far yet.
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 21:03
The priest has a crazy list? :)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 21:03
So priest gets bonkers with warheads
Yeah
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 21:03
Even funnier, the cat has it right, it says "Replace one weapon with:" above the weapon options :stuck_out_tongue:
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 21:03
The cannoness is reasonable
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 21:03
Must have oursourced that entry to FW!
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 21:04
He comes with a CS and laspistol
However, he can take a set list to replace his las pistol; take from the ranged, special, melee, and relic lists without replacing any other weapons.
But ironically he always keeps his las pistol.
Owlsbane
@Owlsbane
Dec 20 2016 21:06
Thanks for the clear-uppance. I'll try and give the cat a rinse before tomorrow night.
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 21:06
Multiple armys, must be a hybrid.
*arms
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 21:07
Las*
God damn voice to text
Not the laspistol, he always keeps his chainsword
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 21:14
Not sure on #3114 Thought there was something in the HH files for it but I can't see it. There should be though. They've just been adding duplicate links to units in the selection entries and adding set modifier hide if some conditions aren't met.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 21:15
I initially tried hides though - they didn't work
@cartag @GenWilhelm @Kohato any ideas?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 21:16
Yes, sorry catching up, it is not too tricky...
right, have a peek at the Eldar CAT - it is setup to give an error if you try to take an Aux choice in the craftworld warhost before selecting a core choice
Earl Bishop
@DrTobogganMD
Dec 20 2016 21:18
What's the condition you want to check?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 21:19
I wouldn't hide, I'd increment minimums
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 21:19
I need to have one troops or one fast compulsory
But it's one or the other, not both
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 21:21
right, so the conditions work the same on force entries as they do on any other entry... "set max to 0 if equal to 1 selection of troops"
for the fast attack, the opposite for the troops and you'll be laughing - if someone selects both they'll get two errors :-)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 21:22
Ok - that makes sense I think
I'll look at it when I'm home
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 21:23
I realised I actually haven't downloaded the Codex to my computer so I'm just sorting that out then I'll check the formation IRL :-P
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 21:45
I'll let you do it, but yes, fairly straightforward, you can put constraints and modifiers on force entries so you can just bung them on the Strike Force per the Codex and away you go :-)
oh and you can add the Rites of Teleportation as a rule to the Formation as a whole too, so that will cover the whole bug :-)
(I'm just updating the black spear strike force for the same missing rules issue
)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 21:51
Is that the exact same as nemesis?
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 21:51
Thought there was something in the HH repo about this, BSData/horus-heresy#527 @cartag responded with some screenshots and description.
Similar to that issue in #3114
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 21:57
although, 3114 will take seconds to fix, whereas all I think of when I read the Horus Heresy bug description is "Burn the heretics!!"
zopha
@zopha
Dec 20 2016 22:01
hah
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 22:41
blob
did i do it right?
@FarseerVeraenthis ?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 22:44
im just checking it and reading the codex
you don't need the min constraints
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 22:45
sure you do - you have to take one troops or one fast attack
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 22:45
so that will shorten the code a little
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 22:46
that was part of the bugrep
and it's standard fare in the cad
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 22:47
ok, yes, sorry, I was thinking of how you take this force - you wouldn't need them in a formation detachment... but this is a Detachment, not a formation :-P
so you need to fix the error in the condition for the troop selection...
and both conditions need to be under the (or) section for the heavy support
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 22:48
yeah i saw that
i just cut that out - min on troops or FA should be enough i think.
yup just confirmed locally it workls
works*
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 22:50
yup, I was going to say the same :-) super :-)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 22:58
hey @Owlsbane i condensed all the KT errors into #3064 and renamed it - thanks for the help again
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 23:07
Gk up, LoTD up
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 23:09
oh i'm aware.
hence the comment i made on the bugrep thread
François Beaulieu
@francoisbeaulieu
Dec 20 2016 23:09
lol
Apparently, it's during the twitch stream on that page that they mentioned that IA does not supersede the codexes.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 23:11
i believe it - thank god i used my free prime twitch subscription to get that free.
now i actually havre to watch it >.<
ugh - do i want to do the new factions, or do i want to do bug reps? I'm not touching Inq right now - if it's half as bad as sisters was i'll basically have to rewrite half of it.
François Beaulieu
@francoisbeaulieu
Dec 20 2016 23:12
Happy times! I can't believe they release IA and announce St Celestine in a supplement to be released not even a month later.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 23:13
my guess is they wanted to fix Inq and actually make more reasonable ways tomake your mass imperial multi-source lists.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 23:13
hmmmm that does sound a little cruddy
fwiw, there is not much in the Inquisition CAT
and possibly, but it doesn't really - it just means you only need one book to do a half arsed job, rather tan all the books...
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 23:15
think of it this way, in a event where you're limited to two sources, this effectively allows you to take your main force, then 6 million other sources as one source
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 23:15
from a sources perspective yes, from a detachment perspecitve no :-(
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 23:16
so i can do BA, then Assassins/sisters/gk/dw/inq/lotd - all from 2 sources
fuck you, adepticon lol
François Beaulieu
@francoisbeaulieu
Dec 20 2016 23:18
Some tournaments limit by source book? Man...
New named inquisitor in January too...
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 23:18
major us tourneys, yes.
iirc its mainly adepticon - maybe its nova
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Dec 20 2016 23:19
and kill team... so theoretically you can have a SoB squad and some grey knights... (perhaps)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Dec 20 2016 23:24
hey @Owlsbane i was right about those goofy points costs - theyre that dumb from FW lol
also decimation shouldnt have a sgt