These are chat archives for BSData/wh40k

1st
Nov 2017
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Nov 01 2017 03:44 UTC
....dammit
someone posted this in autarch discussions and it's too funny not to share
for the sniper/reaper combo
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 03:45 UTC
LOL
Thought "dammit" kinda sums up my thoughts on today as a whole
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Nov 01 2017 05:25 UTC
ok, been out of the loop for a about a week now. how crafty are the pointy-eared ones?
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Nov 01 2017 05:30 UTC
not too bad
there are a couple of nasty tricks but nothing groundbreaking
just solid improvements reducing the overall overcosted nature of most index CWE units
average aspect warrior squad is ~65 points base now
most things are usable or have a niche
GW went pants-on-head-retarded when doing autarch entries
warlock conclaves are still complete garbage
they might start to be worth it at 9 warlocks, and even that's highly debatable
and -1 to hit in every form results in butthurt crybabies that rage even if the unit affected is pretty much useless except as a target or speedbump
flakpanda
@flakpanda
Nov 01 2017 05:38 UTC
so autarchs are OP AF now?
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Nov 01 2017 05:38 UTC
not really
the combo the blue shell references is the "Mark of the Imcomparable Hunter" warlord trait, which gives all the autarch's weapons sniper targeting rules, and then taking a reaper launcher
so you can plink at characters (that usually have invulns anyway) with 1/8/-2/3 or 2/5/-2/2
its really not even as scary as a vindicare
but is probably the most easily accessible and reliable method of eventual character removal CWE now have
Since Illic nightspear is alaitoc-specific and so you have to throw him in his own little detachment with some ranger friends
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Nov 01 2017 05:44 UTC
and even then he's not that much better, same BS, same wound chance as the reaper single shot most of the time, and same damage. it just has -3 instead of -2 and the ability to generate MW on a 6 to wound.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 10:40 UTC
@FarseerVeraenthis, I've done a quick pass on the Craftworlds changes. It's mostly nit-picky stuff tbh. I haven't included Craftword selection or the Runes of Battle changes you said you haven't done yet.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 12:54 UTC
Yup, saw it, cheers :smile: hopefully I can finish it off tonight but have to see if real life allows me the time :+1:
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 12:55 UTC
what is this real life you speak of?
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 13:04 UTC
Hehehe :smile:
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 14:00 UTC
Hey @ilaunchbury what do you mean, white space?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 14:04 UTC
it has things like INFANTRYunit, instead of INFANTRY unit
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 14:29 UTC
Ahhhh ok
ePub copy-paste formatting errors
I still don’t understand why it happens, but that’s what it is - I’ll get to it
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 14:56 UTC
@ilaunchbury @FarseerVeraenthis hey guys, @zopha pointed something out to me that is a reason why doing abilities as wargear entries is a wise choice – that way you still get an indication of the unit having it when it set to summary mode or off
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 15:07 UTC
I knew there was a good reason for doing it like that in the first place, I just couldn't remember it :+1:
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 15:29 UTC
I just fixed it
#1692 that is
PR created n'shiz
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 15:43 UTC
Can you see which model has a given piece of wargear?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 16:11 UTC
@capitaladot, in what context?
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 16:16 UTC
@alphalas, as i said in the ticket, it's just my personal preference.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 17:18 UTC
@ilaunchbury understood; but doing it in that fashion ensures that abilities/wargear are always listed, even if profiles are hidden.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 18:48 UTC
so should everyone be doing it that way then?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 19:19 UTC
quite potentially
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Nov 01 2017 19:33 UTC
farseer/warlocks acquired, unbent, built and primed
blue for DA basecoat acquired and applied
just need to do a 1ksons blue spraycoat for : wave serpents, guardians, farseer/locks and autarch on bike. and I'll be basically done basecoats aside from reapers/spectres/spears
then just detail work and recess shading which isn't too bad
zopha
@zopha
Nov 01 2017 19:35 UTC
Which ticket is it for shown/hidden profiles?
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 20:27 UTC
@ilaunchbury context being, if Rules are replaced with Wargear Items.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 20:51 UTC
Rules with profiles he means
@FarseerVeraenthis have we seen the updated Ynarri rules?
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 21:27 UTC
Aren't we talking about Profile objects called Rules that replace Rules?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 21:30 UTC
Profile objects that are called abilities that replace rules here in 40k yes
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Nov 01 2017 21:31 UTC
@alphalas there aren't any, the new rebox just had the index stuff
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 21:32 UTC
Just disambiguating from "Rules with Profiles", which sounds like a Rule XML entity with a Profile entity as a child or something.
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 22:01 UTC
I'm not talking about replacing Rules with Profiles. I'm talking about making Selection Entries for Profiles.
The way I've done it is as below
image.png
where Ability Profiles are not in their own Selection Entry, they are attached to the unit.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 22:02 UTC
@alphalas I've not seen any different rules for Ynnnnaaarriiii yet no, I think it was just a re-box
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 22:04 UTC
How @FarseerVeraenthis has done it is, that the Ability Profiles are within a Selection Entry
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 22:04 UTC
@ilaunchbury the problem with doing it like that is that if you select "Summary" for profiles there is no link between the unit and its profiles
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 22:04 UTC
image.png
and I'm not saying you're wrong.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 22:04 UTC
yeah, it's all for roster output
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 22:05 UTC
OK, but if that's how it should be done, and how everyone should be doing it, it needs to go into the Cat Creation page.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 22:07 UTC
yeah, that is a fair point
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 22:07 UTC
b/c I didn't know and so all of my work is done the other way.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 22:08 UTC
hmmm... I don't know if we actually made a hard and fast ruling either way
I came to create the Eldar CAT later than some of the others, and it was my choice to do it like this purely for the output control because I try to print my rosters when I got to games because it is easier than trying to look on a tiny phone screen
we did have a discussion about it, like, waaaaaay back when we were creating the initial CAT's
but like I said, it's not in the Wiki because I don't think we made a concrete decision
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:14 UTC
@ilaunchbury to be fair, so is mine
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Nov 01 2017 22:14 UTC
I think quite a lot of design decisions were left in this state of, well, indecisiveness; mostly because BattleScribe still doesn't have a good output settings range, so you don't see keywords/categories (currently a lot of work is simply useless b/c of that), can't have rules written just under units like profiles can and many other small adjustments.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:14 UTC
So you’re not the only one who’d have to rewrite
And @ilaunchbury @amis92 and @FarseerVeraenthis are correct, it was a discussion we shelved in favor of waiting on @Jonskichov
But I don’t think the discussion was ever actually brought back up so we all just kinda assumed
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Nov 01 2017 22:16 UTC
I believe Tau are also not in line with that convention, so ;D
It definitely has some merit, although I'm not really happy because then wargear is mixed with abilities even more
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:17 UTC
@zopha, @capitaladot, and I were discussing the conversion for 30k in the 30k gitter - that’s where this whole line of discussion was rebirthed from
Agreed @amis92, it’s not perfect
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 22:19 UTC
It definitely adds more "stuff" in the roster editor... I find it a helpful reminder though...
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 22:20 UTC
I guess I've just never noticed because I always print with Inline turned on
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:20 UTC
And with that in mind, and everything else, I’m actually thinking converting over to one over the other for 30k right now will do nothing to help the oversize issue it has, so probably (unfortunately) should be shelved for future rev’s of BS
@capitaladot I admit you were right
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Nov 01 2017 22:20 UTC
True that, for 8th it seems inline everything is the best output setting
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:21 UTC
Except for submitting to a tournament or something like that - then none is great
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Nov 01 2017 22:21 UTC
None it is :D
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:21 UTC
But for personal reference; inline is awesome imo
Which is why I was advocating it in 30k
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 22:22 UTC
I mean, it was a UX improvement GW made intentionally in 8th: don't make people flip to a USR chapter.
So, I get it... it is just a bummer that it would take more XML entities to accomplish than just having Rules.
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 22:22 UTC
yeah, and for a large part it works fine
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:22 UTC
But; 30k rules are also dramatically LONGER then 8e rules - which is part of the issue
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 22:23 UTC
but yes, it would be more XML bloat for 30k
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 22:23 UTC
And there are way more of them and they are on way more units, conditionally.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:23 UTC
@capitaladot yeah with that in mind it kinda sucks
That too
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Nov 01 2017 22:23 UTC
....gw are sneaky fucks. it took 2 editions for me to realize that "priority orders recieved" is card #66
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 22:23 UTC
'cause really, 30k Astartes is munging together basically every playstyle from 40k into options for spehss mehrines.
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:24 UTC
Yeah pretty much
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Nov 01 2017 22:24 UTC
and that went into the wrong chat, sorry
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 22:24 UTC
Shouldn't we just use the things as they are named?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:24 UTC
And your 6 basic squads change 18 different ways -.-
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 22:24 UTC
Profiles for...well...profiles
Rules for Rules
That sort of thing?
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 22:25 UTC
I.e., rules for rules? I guess it is a desire to get something @Jonskichov has not blessed us with, namely inline display of a unit's rules?
Jon Kissinger
@alphalas
Nov 01 2017 22:25 UTC
The reason why we’re going to profiles for most everything is so that it all displays in the unit entry
@capitaladot exactly
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 22:25 UTC
^^ I have always disliked having the rules separated out at the end of the output.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 22:26 UTC
Agreed
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 22:26 UTC
Really seems like it should be a @Jonskichov thing; basically asking him to make Rules behave like Profiles and make an inlining option.
That is, in the view/print settings.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 22:27 UTC
While we're at it
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 22:27 UTC
But then, if they're functionally the same, why have two types anyway?
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 22:27 UTC
(and here's where everyone throws things at me)
Can't we just output a simple sexy grid like AB ?
CrusherJoe @CrusherJoe ducks and runs
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 22:27 UTC
That's it, they're not functionally the same.
LOL
Iain Launchbury
@Mad-Spy
Nov 01 2017 22:27 UTC
:)
CrusherJoe @CrusherJoe likes grids.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 22:27 UTC
Easy to read
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 22:27 UTC
Or, as the 30k podcast wankers always demand, the iOS only Quartermaster.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 22:28 UTC
Yes well iOS only can blow me
And I have both devices
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 22:28 UTC
I don't even really know what their output looks like, but I can appreciate what AB output was like.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 22:28 UTC
And both a MacBookProLaptopUghNamingConvention and a Win10 workstation/gaming rig
Austin C.
@capitaladot
Nov 01 2017 22:28 UTC
Trust me, @CrusherJoe , I agree; loathe fruit-flavored devices; still not used to the stupid macbook I work on.
Joe Beddoe
@CrusherJoe
Nov 01 2017 22:29 UTC
I call them Crystal Prisons
Though as hard as it is to unlock a bootloader these days Android isn't much better
ANYWAY
BS needs better output options, I think we can all agree on that
Ideally it would be something like:
Checkboxes for each option
Profile Wargear Abilities Rules
Points Keywords
And Widow/Orphan control.
Because if you're printing something, it REALLY sucks when you get two lines of a "box" then the next page
Ugh
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 22:59 UTC
Here's a tricky one, if you go for an Index Autarch, can it have a Relic from the Codex...?
Will Pattison
@GenWilhelm
Nov 01 2017 23:00 UTC
yes, the only requirement for taking a relic is being a character from the appropriate faction
Amadeusz Sadowski
@amis92
Nov 01 2017 23:02 UTC
I take it's the way Dreadnought weapons work, just mix and match the options. Index is like a full reference, whereas Codex is just current stock and updated rules
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 23:06 UTC
sounds good to me, will be easier to implement too I think...
right, that's the first page of Relics added, I'll finish the rest off tomorrow, taking care of some of the other optimisation took longer than I'd hoped!
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Nov 01 2017 23:15 UTC
@FarseerVeraenthis thoughts on the best use for the free relic? I know I'm using a reaper autarch for a warlord, but what to use for the relic has me stumped tbh
iyanden trait
Simon Porter
@FarseerVeraenthis
Nov 01 2017 23:26 UTC
hmmm... the relic doesn't have to go on the warlord... so I'd be tempted to put the psytronome on a spiritseer and use it to support a wraith construct
or, use the shimmer plume on the Autarch to help his survivability
it does depend on who your other characters are and how you intend to use them
:sleeping:
WindstormSCR
@WindstormSCR
Nov 01 2017 23:29 UTC
pretty much just farseers/warlocks as needed, no wraith constructs in list (yet)
using iyanden because it helps the most with yme-loc style tank warfare