These are chat archives for BSData/wh40k

3rd
Jul 2017
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 01:28
IMG_1367.JPG
that + a null rhino, a repressor, and 2 pen engines is 2k lol
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 01:43
also updated wiki to include mobile multi-detachment instructions
François Beaulieu
@francoisbeaulieu
Jul 03 2017 02:22
@alphalas Re: #567 do you think it's a BS or a data bug?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 02:23
data prob - collective is my bet
i'll get to it tonight or tomorrow
François Beaulieu
@francoisbeaulieu
Jul 03 2017 02:41
sweet, tnx!
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 02:41
that's what I'd guess, collective
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Jul 03 2017 02:46
So played in local RTT today. Got third. Amusingly enough, one of my opponents had havocs in a Chaos bastion. It didn't help him. Reaper Chainsword and Sister's melta popped it right open and then Celestine dissolved what was inside.
My only loss (a minor loss) was my first game...guy brought a Falchion with a volcano cannon and 8 las cannons, 2 knights, a BA captain and Mephiston.
I just couldn't kill the damned Falchion after my knights went down (I took his two knights, the capt and Mehpy with me though)
François Beaulieu
@francoisbeaulieu
Jul 03 2017 02:52
So played in local RTT today. Got third. Amusingly enough, one of my opponents had havocs in a Chaos bastion. It didn't help him. Reaper Chainsword and Sister's melta popped it right open and then Celestine dissolved what was inside.
woups, ignore that.
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 02:53
woups, ignore that.
François Beaulieu
@francoisbeaulieu
Jul 03 2017 02:53
lol
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Jul 03 2017 02:53
woups, ignore that.
I'm not as clever as I think I am LOL
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 03:03
I'm not as clever as I think I am LOL :P
samn
damn. Was supposed to be the "HA HA" finger pointing. I fail.
That backfired on an epic scale.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 03:05
@francoisbeaulieu sorry i haven't gotten to it sooner - between having lost power for 36 hours and having 4 kids, one of which is 4, my last week's been pretty crazy
François Beaulieu
@francoisbeaulieu
Jul 03 2017 03:06
No apologies necessary man, this is a hobby fir you too!
You guys have been doing a bang-up job recently. I don't think I could deal with all the anonymous repeated bullshit reports.
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Jul 03 2017 03:42
Anyone else notice the nerfbat hitting the Wave Serpent?
James
@miproductions
Jul 03 2017 03:58
where are FW dreads meant to be now?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 03:59
In FW Astartes
James
@miproductions
Jul 03 2017 03:59
k ty
skyengel
@skyengel2_twitter
Jul 03 2017 04:52
Hi i have a little problem with the conditions in the walking dead data. Maybe someone can help me out.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 05:05
I'm sure someone can - you definitely came to the right place lol
skyengel
@skyengel2_twitter
Jul 03 2017 05:09
I know this room is about 40k but i think here are a lot of people whivh know BSData very well
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Jul 03 2017 05:26
maybe, what's the issue?
skyengel
@skyengel2_twitter
Jul 03 2017 05:29
We wanted to create a condition for the characters. We have sometimes a different name of one character like "Lori Grimes" and "Lori Grimes, Carrying Mother" both have different abilitys. So we wanted to make it that if you choose"Lori Grimes" the other entry is hidden.
we set the modifier to "set hidden to true" and the condition "if equal to 1 selection in rooster of..." but we can not choose the other entry. It writes only <no child>
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Jul 03 2017 05:31
are there only two of these per character? I'm not familiar with the system
so the hide system is buggy as hell
you can make it work forcibly by selecting another item in your data after setting it
skyengel
@skyengel2_twitter
Jul 03 2017 05:32
yes there are two but in next expansion there also can be 3 or 4 different types of the same character
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Jul 03 2017 05:32

basically >set condition parameters

set condition target
immediately select another entry, entry link, anything but the condition

and it will stick
but if you clock back on the conditional it will instantly void to <no child>
I've had a similar problem with my show/hide logic in the mobile 40k files
skyengel
@skyengel2_twitter
Jul 03 2017 05:34
How do i set the condition parameters?
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Jul 03 2017 05:35
so create the set hidden modifier
then create a condition: if at least 1 selections in (force, I think?) and childe selections, uncheck shared
skyengel
@skyengel2_twitter
Jul 03 2017 05:37
I understand
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Jul 03 2017 05:37
once that's done, select the target model/endy by pasting the ID code
and then before clicking anything else, select something other than your conditional in the data tree
it should 'stick' and stay there
skyengel
@skyengel2_twitter
Jul 03 2017 05:38
Yes it works
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Jul 03 2017 05:38
but if you click the conditional again it will void out
but as long as you don't touch it it should stay working
I've no idea why BS is like that currently
skyengel
@skyengel2_twitter
Jul 03 2017 05:44
Thats a little bit weired but i am happy that it works now.
and whats the difference between force and rooster?
skyengel
@skyengel2_twitter
Jul 03 2017 06:06
Thank you for the help. Now it works fine.
tekton
@tekton
Jul 03 2017 06:31
I don't have my book with me, but is there a rule still for "stealing initiative"?
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 06:44
Yes. Each mission has that specified separately. All matched play ones have it for sure, IDK about others.
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 06:49
seizing always is just terrible. Here, have all the advantages first turn due to a single rnd dice roll!
because fuck your opponent
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 07:26
sorry, was out yesterday, catch up... @capitaladot Wave Serpents hardly got hit hard with the nerf bat, to me, it's kinda obvious that discharging the serpent shield is a shooting attack, then, perhaps I'm not WAAC enough to think I could use it for Overwatch, or in the Fight phase or something! Of more importance for Aeldari players is that Starcannon went from a straight 3 Damage, to D3 damage <-- that makes a massive change
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Jul 03 2017 07:28
yeah, I'm not liking the Starcannon change either
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 07:28
also, Aeldari melta bombs lost 2" of range
so they're the same as "normal" bombs now
(how far should I go with the changes to the CAT...)
Deathwing terminators can take plasma cannons... ?!
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 07:31
yes we can
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 07:34
fabulous :smile:
also, wrt Deathwatch squad sizes, it seems they changed the unit size list to match the datasheets, which means proper squads of Deathwatch only from now on... It is annoying that this makes transport tricky, but don't forget you can still get units without bikers in a land raider
and the Corvus is awesome
ah yes, @Thairne just reviewed the previous DA Codex, I never realised Plasma Cannons were in the Terminator HW list!!
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 07:40
plasma is the DA shtick
nobody took it though since plasma cannons were just a waste on termies
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 07:43
and now??
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 07:47
now flamers are worthless :D
I'd still say PC are easier to get on a cheaper platform, but they can provide some medium firepower if you supercharge it with a reroll nearby
basically its a cheaper cyclone
Heavy D3 8 -3 2 if supercharged 21 pts vs
Heavy 2 8 -2 D6 52 pts
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 07:49
righto, yes, what's happened to flamers? Apart from the downside of not being able to fire them after deepstrike?? I thought this was "flamer edition"??
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 07:49
exactly that
DS 9" with an 8" range gives up the entire round of shooting whereas everything else already can reach out
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 07:50
righto, that's cool, just checking I hadn't missed anything else :smile:
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 07:50
flamers are imo more for LR ferried termies than the DSing ones
and then your preferred target is not very vulnerable to flamers cause DW Knights deal better with hordes
or was it the other way around?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 07:53
yeah, flamers & deep strike is not a good combination
also, I think the change to the Tau drones ruling is actually more fluffy
you've already suffered a wound, you just choose to remove a drone rather than a tau dude
DW knights are nasty, because their excess damage is not lost
so, DW knights are better against hordes, but then, you have to get into melee, whereas a flamer can shoot without suffering damage in return
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 07:57
nope
only the knight master has that abilitiy
normal knights weapons loose wounds as any other weapon
knights are WORSE at hordes. So flamers can make sense if you want Termies to deal with chaff.
those Knight maces at a fixed 3 damage tho... that hurts big stuff. bad.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 08:07
oh right, yeah, read the datasheet too quickly, thought they could all take flails!!
on the subject of Deathwatch, looks like I need to pick up a Land Raider
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 08:20
I'm glad they've cleared up what happens to the models inside a transport that explodes
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Jul 03 2017 08:24
However, the Ynnari FAQ now (technically) says that a unit which has disembarked from destroyed transport can't Soulburst ever again. :)
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 08:27
it doesn't, does it, that's just silly. they are referring to the Ynnari unit using the death of the transport to make a soulburst action. this is a nonsense question because the unit is not on the battlefield when the transport is destroyed
therefore, the unit embarked on the transport is not "within 7"" when the transport is destroyed, so it couldn't soulburst anyway
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Jul 03 2017 08:28
of course, that's not what it means, but I bet you'll find someone on dakka that says that what it means :)
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 08:29
but yes, you could interpret it that way
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Jul 03 2017 08:29
is what it means
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 08:29
it is always funny which questions they choose to include in these FAQ's, why not include anything about the warlock conclave destructor damage output
??
urgh, I suppose we wait
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Jul 03 2017 08:30
I also like the "if I set my models up 9" away from an enemy unit, how far do I have to charge?" question.
How could the answer to that ever be anything other than 9?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 08:37
well... this comes from an old discussion about measuring, that each phase is a separate measure. e.g. if you setup 9" away in the movement phase, some knocks the table and your models falls over and you shuffle them forwards a little when you stand them up, then measure your charge range and the models are now only 8" away, you only need an 8 to make the charge - because you effectively cheated and claimed "the phases aren't related"
and then, if models moved their charge roll, whether he charge failed or succeeded, you then get into a whole another world of "what is 1" away"
i.e. if you don't bother to read and follow the rules properly
that answer effectively say "don't cheat"
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 08:43
also, as much as I appreciate the opportunity to create soup armies, I much preferred the original intent of the Ynnari wording that your whole army is Ynnari or not
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 08:52
at least they fixed the whole Tyrannid massive crushing thingies granting infinite loop + attacks
so mild Hyperbole there .. but yeah
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 08:53
uhuh, that was good
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 08:56
tyranids infinite loop?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 09:06
you have crushing claws, you get an extra attack, but you have three sets, so you get three attacks
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:08
scything talons you mean?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 09:08
Q. Monstrous scything talons say that if the bearer has more
than one pair it can make one additional attack. How many
extra attacks does a Trygon, which has three pairs of monstrous
scything talons, make?
A. It makes a total of one additional attack.
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:08
is that an infinite loop?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 09:08
yup, but that's hardly an infinite loop so perhaps @sk_Father_Price_twitter was referring to something else
also, that would seem to contradict the ruling about having two chainswords: Q. If a model is equipped with two chainswords, do they get to
make 2 extra close combat attacks?
A. Yes (though both must be made with a chainsword).
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:11
ah, but the wording is different on the weapons
the chainsword simply says "the bearer makes 1 additional attack...", whereas the scything talons say "more than one of these weapons makes 1 additional attack..."
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:12
The scytals have always worked like that in 8th; you don't get an extra attack per pair
With melee weapons if there are 2 (or more) instances of that weapon they're effectively grouped together and the effects don't stack unless stated
It's basically IF scytals = 2+ THEN receive +1A
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 09:26
yes, there is a difference in the wording... @sk_Father_Price_twitter is that the infinite loop you were talking about?? seems fairly NOT-infinite to me...
also @M4uler the chainsword FAQ wording suggests that additional attacks DO stack
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:30
Just for chainswords
The difference is that the scytals ability specifies "two or more" instances of scytals which groups them all together to give just +1A
The chainsword entry is "can make one additional attack with this weapon" - there's no grouping of weapons mentioned
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:34
but it does seem a little odd that they would give some creatures more than two if it makes no difference
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:34
The Tyranid rule only affects Raveners & Trygons so it's not really a biggie
Aye
I think it's just to cover the fact that a handful of creatures have more than two pairs of scytals and only two of 'em can't swap those out
Even more of a reason to switch to rending claws on Ravs :D
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:36
raveners only have 2 sets though
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:36
Ah, the models have three lol
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:37
i guess the tiny baby arms dont count :P
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:38
Ahhh, that's right; the models which actually have a third pair of scytals already have a higher A stat than those of the same genus which don't, that's what I was thinking of
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:38
wait, nvm. i just googled it and the models are wildly different from when i had any
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:38
Warriors & Shrikes = 3A, 4A with two pairs
Raveners = 4A, 5A with two pairs
So they're kinda represented
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:39
yeah, its probably just to make the rending claws an actual choice
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:39
Aye
I always put rending claws & spinefists on my Raveners as the go-to loadout
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:40
also, did you see warrior now pay points for spinefists. did anyone actually take them before that?
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:41
I never do on Warriors but if you're taking a dedicated melee unit with boneswords it's worth considering
An extra 3 shots in melee before melee attacks is pretty decent
Per model
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:42
yeah, i guess. strangely the prime still doesnt have a defined points cost for them
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:43
Must be fweeeeeeeeee :D
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:44
undefined != 0
but yeah, im leaving them as free for now and let people make up their own mind
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 09:52

@FarseerVeraenthis

also, I think the change to the Tau drones ruling is actually more fluffy
you've already suffered a wound, you just choose to remove a drone rather than a tau dude

Not exactly. Allocating a wound is before Save. So previously a drone popped up and took a shot, taking appropriate saves and taking damage as normal. It was more fluffy IMO. Now a drone pops up and just dies no matter if that was a lasgun or railgun. O.o And no one gets any save.

Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 09:53
Should it be submitted as a bug when you can't create undersized units?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 09:55
well, @amis, as I read it, you can still choose to assign that wound to a drone or not, so you only assign serious wounds to drones now, i.e. I think the Fire Warrier can save that lasgun shot, but he definitely can't take that lascannon shot - which shall I assign to a drone...?
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:56
Stops people cheesing a tide of drones IMO
It's not like Tau players aren't known for taking a mile when given an inch lol
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:57
@Szeras I think understrength units is a whole other can of worms we dont want to open
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:57
7th was a nightmare for it with vague rules like the Co-ordinated Firepower rule, etc
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 09:57
yeah, @Szeras is right, why not implement undersized units in BS...?? they're legal, it's not for us to police how users build their lists... although, it might cause trouble filling the minimum members in a squad
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:58
I wonder if it's worth implementing an "Understrength" tickbox option
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 09:58
we would have to add constraints and modifiers to every unit that has more than one model by default
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:58
Once it's ticked it applies modifiers to cap the min & max unit size to 1
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 09:58
@GenWilhelm Oh, I agree, it's a bad rule, but unless TOs specifically prohibits it, you will see it
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 09:58
And also sets that unit to Max = 1 in Roster
Could be copy 'n' pasted into each unit once perfected
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:00
i dont see the benefit of using such a rule, how could it be abused?
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:00
mostly to fulfill requirements for a brigade
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:01
That is pretty difficult and impossible if only using one Faction
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:01
eg. for tyranids you can bring 20xgenestealer, 20x genestealer, 1xhormagant, 1xtermagant, 1xtyranid warrior, 1xripper swarm.
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:01
but you still have to pay the points cost for the minimum sized unit, why not just take the whole unit?
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:01
That's in PR play only now
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:02
and that's illegal, what you suggested @Szeras
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:02
In Matched you just pay for what you bring
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:02
It's unfortunately legal
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:02
He's right, Wil :(
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:02
did they change it in the errat?
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:02
And you pay Power Rating for whole, point only for what you bring
Yep
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:02
@GenWilhelm page 242
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:02
That's why we even discuss it
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:03
oh yeah, so you only pay the point for the models, but you can only take one of those types of units
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:03
It'd be no prob if you had to pay points for minimum as it requires us to do nothing. A guy just doesn't set up some models
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:03
Aye
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:03
But now it's hell
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:03
I don't agree with the FAQ, pretty annoying
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:04
so its still illegal with the errata
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:04
yeah, changing that wording really opens up the options for abuse
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:04
It's legal - people can bring understrength units but only one of each unit
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:04
*each unit type
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:04
No, it's legal. One of that type of unit. So you can do that for every type of unit
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:04
oh, when i read the comment the first time i thought it had multiple of the same type
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:04
Nay :D
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:05
20x horma, 1x horma
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:05
I left "type" out as it confuses FOC slots with units
Yeah, so that would be illegal
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:05
yeah, you can do that, but you can't take a second understrength unit of 1 x horma
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:05
No
You can't take a min size and then an understrength
As soon as you take an understrength unit the legit unit of that model is off
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:06
yeah, thats dumb af. why on earth would they change that?
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:06
sorry, got dragged into a meeting ... on the monstrous scy talons , I had a nice chat with a chap that wanted to extrapolate out that for every set of talons he attacked with he'd get additional +2 attacks per other pair, each attacking in turn, while not an infinite loop per se, I labelled it as such and him a scumbag for trying it on :)
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:07
and almost "rules-illiterate"
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:07
bit of an inside joke that doesn't quite make it in translation
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:07
@FarseerVeraenthis you're right it's not right for us to police things. But before we try to implement it, let's discuss it. It's a very, very bad rule and if we do it we must closely coordinate the effort.
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:07
UNDERSTRENGTH UNITS
Each unit's datasheet will describe how many models make up that unit. Sometimes you may find that you do not have enough models to fieId a minimum-sized unit; if this is the case, you can still include one unit of that type in your army with as many models as you
have available.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:07
oh yeah, totally, but the response earlier were along the lines of "it's rubbish, no chance"
just beause it's tricky, doesn't mean we shouldn't think about it :wink:
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:08
True
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:08
So you can only include one of that type of unit if you go understrength
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:08
I'll happily take 1 6pt gargoyle in a brigade over a 60pt squad or just puutin gin spores etc to fill out slots
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:09
^ this is exactly why its bad
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:09
Aye, it was much better as it was :fire:
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:09
That shouldn't ever make it in the matched play
:<
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:09
yeah, most armies can just pay a couple hundred points to gain +9 CP
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:09
yeah not saying its good for the game, but it's now a legal option
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:09
we're all agreeing :smle: :+1:
:smile:
stupid I key...
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:10
@Entropy1986_twitter it's even "better", because you can bring one meiotic spore, one spore mine, one shrike, and you have two backfield objective grabbers and one backfield synapse
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:10
Seriously though, which armies does it really affect? Tyranids, as we have 5 Troop types
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:10
how many imperium or chaos or aeldari choices are there?
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:10
If you're looking to abuse CPs I mean
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:10
thats 85% of armies
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:10
Marines just have 2 Troops so they're stuffed
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:10
I'll just look it up (soupy armies and all :wink:)
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:11
Eldar have...5 or 6 between them? So it's more of a problem once you mix them in together
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:12
not going to be just troops though, if someone wants the extra CP but doenst want to run whole squads of say fast attack, then can spend the single models for it.
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:12
marines can bolster with guardsmen and sisters
CloverFox
@CloverFox
Jul 03 2017 10:12
I think its just fluff, it says "as many models as you have available", are we going to start making people take pictures of there collections to make sure they don't have enough models "hey i saw you use 5 of them last night, what happend to the other 4"
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:12
@M4uler They still get an easy Battalion: 10xTacs, 1xtac, 1xscout
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:12
cant take 2 units of tac
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:12
No, they can't include 10xTac if they have 1x
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:12
Eldar have 4, Drukhari 3, harlequins 1 <-- 8 choices in total
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:12
cheap libby, 2 5 man tacs, 1 scout
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:12
just take 1x guardsman and 1x conscript
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:12
well, that's a relief then
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:13
Once you go under-min you can't take any other squads of that type
Which is a minor cap lol
Why the hell would GW change this?! :'(
Divs
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:14
Marines can take a 211pt Battalion
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:14
because they hate necrons and tau for what they did to the previous edition?
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:14
They still want to sell 'em, the change makes no sense any way you look at it lol
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:14
yeah, that is the main route for abuse, cheap CP's
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:14
211pts, how?
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:15
Techmarine, 2 5 man tacts, 1 scout model
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:15
To be fair they're only saving what, 50 points for 4 Scouts?
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:15
or if you ally the marines with your other imperial army, 193 pts. 1 marine and 2 scout squads
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:16
whats the second HQ in that battalion?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:16
so you can go lower than that with 1 conscript, nd a guardsman
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:16
True, they do need a 2nd HQ :D
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:16
:D always forget that 2nd HQ
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:16
Haha
Tricksy 8th!
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:16
Hate it as a nid player too, no cheap options
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:17
they can still use it to work against a brigade 3 x 5 tacs, 1 scout, 1 intercessor, 1 crusader
James
@skonk
Jul 03 2017 10:17
@WindstormSCR yeh, the Chaos version has errors in the Index where the Veil (the Chaos version is a different name to the Imperium one but it's the same thing, projects a 5+ inv save to nearby stuff) is missing from the wargear options and just shows as an Ability.
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:17

Okay so anyone feeling like doing a prototype on a branch (just one squad as a proof of concept).

I think adding UNDERSTRENGTH checkbox (0/1 entry) which would modify lower limit of squad entry group AND activate constraint "max in roster" (set to 1).

M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:17
Aye, that's what I suggested
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:17
Yeah credit where it's due
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:17
Ta :D
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:18
guard can take a 114pts battalion
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:18
Would the modifier targets need changing each time that is copy/pasted?
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:18
haha, everyone starts allying guard for cheap CP
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:18
If it's SET TO MIN = 1 in Parent, etc it should just copy 'n' paste?
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:18
@M4uler You'd have to check that
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:19
Aye
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:19
no wait, its actually 87pts
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:19
@Entropy1986_twitter genestealer cults just got a lot better
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:19
@Szeras yeah?
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:20
in matched play is there a cap on the number of detachments ?
say three for 2000 pts
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:20
not officially
only guidelines
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:20
piratevoice "guidelines" /piratevoice
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:21
@GenWilhelm how'd you get 114pts?
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:21
welcome to the black pearl miss turner
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:21
Haha Wil
Ah, damn
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:22
1x CC 1x TP, 1x conscript, 1x guardsman, 1x scion
30+40+3+4+10
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:22
@Entropy1986_twitter they can include one AM detachment for each of their own, and life off of CP rerolls with cult ambush
*live
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:22
oh yeah for got you could understrength more than one unit
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:23
Adding in a UU checkbox...you have to put the modifiers on the min & max unit sizes, not the checkbox entry itself so it's not really a neat copy/paste job :(
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:23
er 77pts, 2 CC, 1 conscript, 1 guard, 1 scion
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:23
No, definitely not :<
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:24
oh yeah, forgot that CC can take more than 1
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:24
and now that's just getting silly...
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:24
What a pain
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:24
77pts for 3 CP :D
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:24
And that's available for every imperial army.
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:25
yup
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:25
except guard, funnily enough
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:25
haha
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:25
:D
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:25
and that right there is where you look the opponent in the eye and flip some table
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:25
unless your guard army is all flyers and super-heavies
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:26
find me a guard player that has only "1" bloody guardsman or conscript
/Raaaaage
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:26
yeah, we all think it bloody daft
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:26
While I'm fiddling, who ever runs the Guard index. Why is chainsword not the default on the CC?
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:26
but rules is rules
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:27
don't forget, they could have that super-min battalion, then a spearhead as well and bring 6 HS choices and 3 Dedicated transports
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:27
admittedly ... easiest first blood in the game ... but 6 free CP
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:28
then a flyer wing and tank army ftw
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:28
do you not have terrain on your boards?
CloverFox
@CloverFox
Jul 03 2017 10:28
but them in a bastion?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:28
or a dedicated transport
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:28
And there goes your easy FB :D
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:28
stop it! .. I can only get so angry :p
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:28
just hide them behind anything (including your own models)
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:28
that's why they're called WAAC
players
and we just because a room full of neck-beards - ARRRGHGH!! WHAT HAVE WE BECOME!!
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:29
And there we were, standing and believing they'd be hard pressed in 8th.
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:29
well this is matched play, its supposed to be a lot more competitive
and GW just opened the door to abuse
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:30
and also penalised Power Level games
which means they're even more likely to not get used
just out of interest, how customisable are units in AoS??
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:31
the rule was fine as it was. "you dont have enough to fill a minimum squad? that's fine just use what you have"
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:31
does AoS suffer from the same difference between PL and points?
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:31
I want to see the look on my friend's face when I put up a battalion at 1500 pts filling slots with 1 Vespid, 1 Kroot, 1 Drone, 1 Kroot Hound, 1 get-your-head-out-of-your-ass anything and just reroll the fuck out of him.
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:32
at this rate the Errata is going to be a fatter book than the core rules
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:32
(battalion is 9CPs right?)
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:32
The bloody Forge World FAQs will be :'(
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:32
battalion is 6, brigade is 9
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:32
574pt brigade :D
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:32
Battalion is 3, technically
(Sorry lol)
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:32
+3 for being battleforged
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:32
uh yeah, i meant 3
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:32
oh yea, so I meant brigade
CloverFox
@CloverFox
Jul 03 2017 10:33
aos doesnt have PL and points afair, therre is no wargear, or its all free, eg there are units that are "may take aditional shields", really you have no reason not to take them cos there free
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:33
time to trawl through the imperium indexes to come up with the cheapest brigade possible
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:34
@sk_Father_Price_twitter I think part of the problem is them clinging to rule books. Rules should be online only, freely downloadable and regularily updated. Stick lore and painting guides in physical books, as that stays the same (mostly).
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:34
574 to beat
dunno if that would be worth it over the 77 for 3 cp though
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:36
@Szeras I like a rulebook, if only for use as percussive rules enforcement ... but this edition while "simple" has stuff in stupid places ... I mean the index doesn't mention most of the keywords.. So I kinda 'know' what <FLY> does .. but if I need to refer to it specifically it takes me ages
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:36
I think that GW make far too much money from physical rulebooks to ever bin them
@sk_Father_Price_twitter When you say "percussive rules enforcement" you do mean "I hit my opponent with the BRB when they try to cheat"?
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:37
correct
makes a nice pleasant sound
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 10:37
THUD
insert Monty Python man-playing-a-woman shriek here
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 10:38
And then the rules are transferred via osmosis
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:40
if it works for faith healers it should work for us ... "By the Power of Games Workshop, I shall cure you of your Decurion! ... Praise Beeeee tah tha Lawd Duncahn!"
THUD
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 10:40
smooth
"rejoice, for I am healed" (and also injusred at the same time)
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 10:41
all I can think of is the beginning of the "bring out your dead scene" where the monks are banging their heads with rulebooks
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:41
now pass the donation plate quick while they're stunned
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:46
@GenWilhelm they nerfed catalyst :(
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:46
@Entropy1986_twitter 185pts for a brigade
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:46
Noice
who is that?
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:46
and how was cata nerfed?
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:47
no longer effects mortal wounds
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:47
its imperium, mostly guard, but some sisters and a space wolf
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:47
'‘Until the start of your next Psychic phase, each time
that unit loses a wound, roll a D6; on a 5+ the unit does
not lose that wound.’
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:47
they changed the wording so its any time the unit loses a wound
rather than a model suffering a wound
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:48
they removed the reference to mortal wounds that was there before though
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:48
but MWs still cause the unit to lose wounds
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:50
Ok, strange that they specifically mentioned it before then dropped it
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 10:51
it was because of the funky wording of suffering wounds i think
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 10:53
fair enough
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 11:01
Wait wait
Catalyst is still good vs Mortal Wounds
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 11:02
yeah, last question on BRB FAQ
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 11:02
Aye :]
Me myself and I.
@Entropy1986_twitter
Jul 03 2017 11:02
My missunderstanding
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 11:02
np
Entropy1986_twitter @Entropy1986_twitter
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 11:12
@amis92 #608 hahaha! dur, of course Necrons can't make soupy detachments - well, not battleforged ones at least! If only I'd read the post properly... (not exactly a clear and obvious post in the first place...!)
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 11:21
Someone needs to learn how to use the new BS lol
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 11:22
well we only hear from the cretins users who get it wrong
im assuming (hoping) that the majority of people have worked it out by themselves
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 11:45
Haha :'(
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 12:50
Cretin 5! Standing by!
Francesco Venturoli
@Crowbar90
Jul 03 2017 12:53
Hey :) what do you guys think about https://github.com/BSData/wh40k/issues/576#issuecomment-312637564 ? I really don't know if that could be the better way
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 12:55
If you include no validation check you'll get people complaining that it builds illegal lists, if you do and hide the model you'll get people complaining he isn't there
if you include both but with a validation check people won't read it and still complain that you can include both
Tl;dr - you can't win.
Price Van-Saint
@sk_Father_Price_twitter
Jul 03 2017 12:59
@cartag you should put this on all your reports
Francesco Venturoli
@Crowbar90
Jul 03 2017 13:12
@cartag I remember all those bug reports from people who couldn't add a Legion in your 7th Chaos file... How are you handling it currently? All units available as long as you don't select a Legion?
I'm editing GST to update all weapon profiles from the FAQ by the way
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 13:17
Right now I'm having legion for WE or EC for troop choices, and they hide HQ if nothing is selected. Anything DG or TS is in its own file though
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:18
i would just make all the characters visible, there's nothing saying you cant mix and match them. it's no different to taking vulkan and calgar in the same detachment
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:18
Chaps - I'm assuming that some of you are more familiar with the IG/AM than I am; in the FAQ GW changed Command Squads & the Tempestor Prime (IG & Tempestus) to one-per-Detachment...but I can't see a similar limit for Company Commanders
Am I missing it?
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:18
isnt it one per commander?
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 13:18
Not one per detachment, one per commander per detachment
set max to 0, then increment one per commander
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:19
Ahhhh, per Officer
rubs eyes
Francesco Venturoli
@Crowbar90
Jul 03 2017 13:20
@alphalas that's not what that paragraph means though - it just prevents you from changing Dante's keywords in order to give buffs to other chapters (let's say Flesh Tearers). It doesn't actually prevent you from taking Dante...
(Yeah, I'm moving the discussion here cause it's easier for me lol)
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:21
^ any blood angel can instead be a flesh tearer, except for the unique characters
there's nothing stopping you mixing blood angels and flesh tearers in a single detachment
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 13:22
I'd set to show all unless a specific chapter is noted. If one is selected, only show from that particular chapter
So if they select a chapter (say smurfs, I don't know Imp) then anything non-smurf wouldn't show, but if they didn't select anything, all snorks would show too
Francesco Venturoli
@Crowbar90
Jul 03 2017 13:24
Yeah, good suggestion. How would you handle <CHAPTER> and BLOOD ANGELS keyword then? I was thinking about leaving them the way they are printed on the Index or change them all to <CHAPTER>
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:27

there's nothing stopping you mixing blood angels and flesh tearers in a single detachment

Isn't there? I'm pretty sure I've read somewhere on the Astartes faction page that there can only be single Chapter in any given detachment. I might be wrong however.

Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:29
that's how it was in 7e, but ive read the <Chapter> section twice now and it makes no mention of it
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:30
Aye, I think it's like mixing any Imperial units in a Detachment: perfectly legal but only abilities that affect <BA> will affect <BA> units and not other IG, Marines, etc
Here's a similar question
Francesco Venturoli
@Crowbar90
Jul 03 2017 13:32
exactly
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:33
Going by the 'Stealer Cults Brood Brothers section if I want to include IG units in my army, like a Valk, do I need an IG Detachment or do I just mix it into the Cults Detachment?
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:33
Separate detachment 100%
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:33
I'm leaning towards the latter due to "In such cases, simply ignore the Astra Militarum units when choosing your army’s Faction."
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:33
^^ it was in the errata
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:33
It was?!
Not seeing it
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:34
oh wait, that was something similar
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:34
Aye, was for an IG Detachment :D
"To represent the elements of such forces that have been subverted
by a cult, you can include ASTRA MILITARUM units and GENESTEALER CULTS units in the same matched play army, even though these units don’t have any Faction keywords in common."
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:34
brood brothers specifies that you only ignore the ASTRA keyword when picking your army's faction
you still need to share a faction within a detachment
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:35
Yeah, so you can't do that inside detachment
^^
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:36
Need to check the Match Play: Factions section <I>again</I> lol
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:36
Gosh now you've reminded me how stupid it is that Sisters can be GenCults
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:36
in fact it says you ignore the units, not the keyword
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:37
Hmmm
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:37
my next tyranid army will be led by uriah jacobus, thank you very much amis
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:37
yeah. That's exactly my point :D
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:38
Matched Play says that all Detachments need a Keyword in common, but Brood Bros negates that
Broods also says that you can have IG & Cult units in the same army
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:38
Why stop at Uriah, do that with Celestine
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:39
it says you can include them in the same army, not the same detachment
celestine isnt astra militarum
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:39
Then it says that the Detachments have to be 1:1 with AM/GCs
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:39
ohh wait right, I've gone a little too far ;D
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:40
But nowhere does it say that IG units have to be in their own Detachment
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:40
yeah, none of my 3 celestines can lead tyranids
dont be silly
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:40
Due to the Brood Bros rules saying to ignore the IG keyword
CloverFox
@CloverFox
Jul 03 2017 13:40
can only have 1 Celestine now
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:40
xD Didn't they fix that? (I mean no limit on Celestine)
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:40
yeah they did :P
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:40
good
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:41
K, here's the thing
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:41
@M4uler it doesnt say ignore the keyword
The influence of a Genestealer Cult permeates all aspects of a society, including any Astra Militarum regiments stationed on their world. To represent the elements of such forces that have been subverted by a cult, you can include ASTRA MILITARUMunits and GENESTEALER CULTSunits in the same matched play army, even though these units don’t have any Faction keywords in common. However, you can only include one Astra Militarum Detachment (one in which every unit has the Astra Militarum keyword) in a Battle-forged army for each Genestealer Cult Detachment (one in which every unit has the Genestealer Cults keyword) in that army. In such cases, simply ignore the Astra Militarum units when choosing your army’s Faction.
incase anyone was wondering
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:41
I'm looking at it now
The bit that's throwing me is
To represent the elements of such forces that have been subverted by a cult, you can include ASTRA MILITARUM units and GENESTEALER CULTS units in the same matched play army, even though these units don’t have any Faction keywords in common.
Units, not Detachments
If that said the Detachments can be fielded without a common keyword then fine, that's top-level
But units are bottom-level and that's what it specifies
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:43
it says units in the same army
CloverFox
@CloverFox
Jul 03 2017 13:43
they have to be in differernt detachments, but on the grand scale they will be "units" of both in the same "army"
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:44
Where's "army" defined again?
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:44
The point is:
  1. first sentence is fluff
  2. second sentence says that in matched play, you can use units from both factions
  3. third sentence says there's a limit on detachments done that way
  4. fourth sentence says how you achieve that to be in line with rules
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:45
"Units" is an in-game term; it's arguable that it's not just for fluff
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:46
there's no "units" in first sentence?
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:46
"Choose Armies" p214
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:46
Aye, I've moved away from the Brood page
Soz
An army is simply just a collection of units up to an agreed points/PR limit that may have to be organised a certain way
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:48
Exactly. And then you organize these units into detachments
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:48
Aye
Battle-forged part says they need to be in Detachments and the Detachments say that all units need a Faction keyword in common
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:49
exactly
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:49
Then the Brood rule says that IG & Cults can be in the same army despite the lack of a common keyword
Army is an all-encompassing term for all your units in one or more Detachments
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:49
yeah, allowing you to break the earlier requirement of all units in the army needing to share a faction
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:50
So there's nothing that states that the IG need their own Detachment 'cos the Faction keyword requirement is ignored
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:50

So the second sentence overrules the core rule of building matched play army that has a common Faction keyword.
The third puts constraint. The fourth describes how then you select "army" faction keyword.

Nothing there intervenes with Detachment rules.

M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:50
Hmmmm
That is the logical way to look at it but isn't RAW IMO
This Brood rule needs to be more specific
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:51
Okay so point me where the requirement for Detachment to have common Faction is overruled.
because that requirement is separate from the Army-level one (which is overruled).
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:51
"...you can include ASTRA MILITARUM units and GENESTEALER CULTS units in the same matched play army, even though these units don’t have any Faction keywords in common."
Units it the keyword here, forgive the pun
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:52
army != detachment
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:52
Army = Units (collective)
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:52
Nope
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:53
Yes
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:53
:)
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:53
Haha
An army is just one more Detachments in Matched Play
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:53
Okay so you can say that but it still doesn't circumvent the Detachment requirement.
An Army is a group of units. Great. That group has a certain requirement for common keyword.
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:54
But the Detachment restrictions are specifically defined by a Faction keyword
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:54
  • p214: All units in an army must have the same Faction.
  • p240: All units must be in a Detachment.
  • p240: All units in a Detachment must have the same Faction.
  • Brood Brothers: Units in the same army dont have to share a Faction.
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:54
ty
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:54
Exactly
The Brood rule circumvents point 3 specifically
And 1 by default
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 13:55
No, only 1
there's nothing about Detachments there.
For some reason you extrapolate units to detachments
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:56
I realise that it's Army -> Detachments -> Units -> Models but an element belonging to one group doesn't negate it belonging to the next group up
waiting for the moment of realisation...
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 13:57
so a unit belongs to a detachment, which belongs to an army. so all units must belong to an army
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 13:58
I'm used to working with Active Directory security in IT where groups (and user accounts) can be included in other groups, if you've got a user inside a group inside another group the user belongs to both groups by inheritance
So I am used to dealing with structures like this, I'm not trying to be a WAACer - just trying to work out why I can't include a Valk in my Cults Detachment in a way that sits well with me lol
To me, "army" is an inclusive term; it's referring to every single unit under a player's control which in this case are organised into Detachments
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 14:00
so when you pick the faction of your army, you look at all the units in your army and pick a faction that they all share
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 14:00
Which is done via a specific keyword which is over-ruled by the Brood rule
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 14:01
the brood brother rule says when you do this, ignore the ASTRA units
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 14:01
If it said "You can include IG and Cult Detachments in the same army" I'd be 100% in agreement but it doesn't, it says units
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 14:01
Okay so imagine there's a group Army.
Army includes Detachments (groups).
Units belong to some detachments and also to the Army.
There's a restriction on Army group.
There's the same restriction on every Detachment group separately.
And now you remove the restriction from Army group.
It's now gone, but it still didn't remove the restriction from Detachment group.
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 14:01
Hmmmmm
That is how it should be, I agree
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 14:03
they couldn't write ASTRA MILITARUM detachments, because Detachments only have single Faction assigned and it could very well be CATACHAN or IMPERIUM. So they wrote units, because that's what has that keyword always.
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 14:04
Ho ho!
WELL DONE, YOU HAVE PASSED THE TEST
:D
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 14:05
I explained? Can I get a cookie?
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 14:05
well, that was anticlimatic. I was hoping for more gnashing of teeth, wailing and despair.
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 14:05
That's the click - Detachments don't have a keyword
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 14:05
@Thairne, sounds like a family reunion on fenris
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 14:06
Yeah, I must admit it took me a while to narrow it down to where my mind had that "sure it's that way" from.
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 14:06
Haha - no anguish here; I always agreed that's how it should be, I just needed more doubt removed for it to sit well with me
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 14:07
No better way to learn than to explain (at least for me).
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 14:07
Indeed
However
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 14:07
so anyway, back to creating conscript blobs for my tyrants
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 14:07
My Cults list for Weds night is now buggered up and I might just use an Aux choice to shoehorn a Valk in for -1CP
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 14:08
I have yet to play a game where I don't have CPs leftovers.
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 14:08
Weds is 'Nids + Cult vs Orks, 2.5k points
Might need those CP rerolls :'(
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 14:08
i keep forgetting they exist until it gets to round 5 and i still have all 6
nothing seems important enough to spend them on
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 14:09
Necrons are also a massive pain to defeat now, but oddly have trouble with massed armour in direct conflict to their previous incarnations
Me and a mate played our Daemons against them, close game in VPs but we almost lost everything
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 14:11
Well, I've rerolled every Longstrike's miss or unwound, which happens at least twice per game, so there's that for me. Not much else, though.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 14:29
For me it's usually re rolling charges because BA have no good charge manipulation
@Thairne #619
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 14:38
How old is the FAQ? how DARE we not have released them yet?!
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 14:42
I already got a couple of those for AM too
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 14:43
I actually did them 19h ago :P but its not released yet
closes the issue
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 14:43
I'm lazy and haven't gotten to them yet
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 14:43
Bwahaha, I've already cared for Tau. peasants
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 14:44
Help! Help! I'm being supressed!
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Jul 03 2017 14:44
I use CP to re-roll the inevitable 1 on Celestine's miraculous return rolls (3 games in a row so far...)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 14:45
Probably could have yesterday, but I felt assembling a all-pewter Penitent Engine was more important lol
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 14:45
Maybe your fancy Emperor can help you @Thairne but that's what you get for not being enlightened by The Greater Good!
Whoa! Still pewter, still unassembled, that's what I call archival!
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 14:45
We will talk again once you have more than.. what 13? systems under your control, xenos :P
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 14:45
Numbers. ;)
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 14:50
Yeah I forget where I got it from, but it was unassembled still in the stupid GW clamshell they put pewter in
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Jul 03 2017 14:51
eyes the still-in-clamshell Exorcist beside his desk
@alphalas I feel your pain...
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 14:55
inserts meme I approve of the quantity of monty python references in the thread today
Dirk Bachert
@Thairne
Jul 03 2017 14:58
There can never be too many MP references.
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 15:01
Bloody peasants!
I think @cartag needs this one for "the next time": http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/001/125/265/03c.gif
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 15:29
Haha
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Jul 03 2017 15:37
I've added new label for big things, like new catalogues, Codexes, massive updates etc: https://github.com/BSData/wh40k/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22Task+-+massive%22
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Jul 03 2017 15:50
nice
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 16:21
@M4uler I think the answer to Necrons' AV needs are pylons with heat cannon in reserve. It's also the best anti air they have, because they hit so hard.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 16:29
@Crowbar90 did you see ASM now get access to melta guns too?
Francesco Venturoli
@Crowbar90
Jul 03 2017 16:36
@alphalas yeah, it's already merged. I renamed "marine with flamer" to "marine with special weapon" and it can choose between flamer, plasma and melta
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 16:36
:+1:
M4uler
@M4uler
Jul 03 2017 16:57
Aye @Szeras
Our two friends' combined Necron force smashed the granny out of our combined Daemons list and my mate's KD list but they really struggled against our other mate's Renegade Guard list with 3 Basilisks, 2 Russes, a Chimera & a Malcador
(Thankfully lol)
Right, laters guys - thanks for putting up with me today, haha
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Jul 03 2017 17:46
After thinking about it overnight, on the mobile file set I will not be supporting understrength units
because
1) it's a giant pain in the ass to implement and easy to misuse
2) because the option is there people are more likely to use it
while I know I have advocated not being the rules police, ease of access does have a lot to do with how often something gets abused.
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 17:56
Following the rules isn't abuse, even if you don't like it. You can always house rule it away if you want, or decline games against lists you don't like. Now, I don't think it's a good rule, but it's an official rule none the less.
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Jul 03 2017 18:02
fair
I guess I'll make it a to-do item and get to it when I've got the other high priotity stuff done
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 18:03
put it on a todo list then never do it. sounds familiar
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 18:03
:+1:
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Jul 03 2017 18:04
it'll get done eventually, probably
I don't think its as high priotity as this set because the mobile files are almost entirely designed for making lists for pickup and play games
Gisle Jaran Granmo
@Szeras
Jul 03 2017 18:05
Wait long enough and it may get faqed away
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 22:23
GST logic question: Why do both a UNIT profile, and a Psyker profile .... why not have the Psyker profile have all of the stats, and the description with the psychic abilities?
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Jul 03 2017 22:25
main reason i can think of is so that when you print a profile summary, you get all the unit profiles in one list
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 22:32
It also looks to make the description field easier to work with.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 22:43
And Keywords aren't shown currently?
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 22:52
They're not shown currently, the Psyker profile has been redone to show the stats pertaining to it
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 22:54
Saw the update for Psykers. I thought I recalled discussions on displaying categories / keywords in Battlescribe?
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 22:54
It's a BS limitation currently
Not that we're choosing to not show them. That would be preferable.
showing would be preferable., You know what I mean
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 22:56
Yeah ... technically one could make a 'Keyword' profile type, with a description field.
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 22:56
No. I'm not going back through seven CATs and redoing profiles because something in BS is borked and needs fixed.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 22:57
But if all of the keywords are being 'categories' then that's really crazy overkill.
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 22:57
You do realize the change to categories was done specifically to accommodate 40k, right?
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 22:58
It is actually beneficial for AoS as well.
But, I'm not entirely surprised.
(though I missed the reasoning for the change to categories)
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 22:59
I know it's beneficial to AoS as well, I play AoS. There's a lot of functionality I'd like to see included that isn't there yet. I am not going through seven CATs to redo keywords to another profile type. It simply will not happen.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 22:59
Not asking you to :)
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 23:00
With the keyword to new profile type, that's pretty much expecting people to in order to maintain a cohesive look.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 23:00
that would be crazyness
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 23:00
Jon is working on getting categories to show in BS.
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 23:01
well, that answers that question :)
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 23:01
He's been working on it for a while, since before 8th came out. I think it was deemed unimportant compared to things like making sure it would render output properly (sans categories, natch)
OftKilted
@OftKilted
Jul 03 2017 23:02
Yeah, there is still work on the display related aspect.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Jul 03 2017 23:48
@amis92 can we ban people?
cartag
@cartag
Jul 03 2017 23:55
check it now @alphalas :)