A
armybuilder at yahoogroup
Guest
To unsubscribe from this group, email
armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
2. Re: More Noisy Cult Termies
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
3. RE: Serious Update Problems
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
4. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
5. Re: More Noisy Cult Termies
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
6. Re: Restricting options based on unit size
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
7. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
8. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
9. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
10. Guard problems
From: "James" <praetorian-guard@home.com>
11. Re: Guard problems
From: vidcin@spray.se
12. Suggestion
From: vidcin@spray.se
13. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "Shawn Campbell" <shawn@electricstitch.com>
14. some AB Lite questions
From: "Josh Liller" <JL_Stinger@yahoo.com>
15. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
16. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
17. Re: Suggestion
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
18. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
19. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
20. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: Versif <petark@ntlworld.com>
21. Re: Suggestion
From: vidcin@spray.se
22. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
23. Are Upgrades to Army Builder Free???
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
24. Re: ABCreator wish list 2
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
25. Re: Restricting options based on unit size
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:35:06 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> >From the UK GT Clarifications:
>
> "Lootas may take the transport option from a squad."
Only applies to the UKGT and not normal 40k play.
> And from the online Q&A:
>
> "Can Lootas take the transport option from a squad?
> Yes they can."
Has this been printed in a WD issue?? If not then I can safely ignore it as
a pile of crap.
> Which is why Colen allows Lootas to take the squads vehicle options
> in the 40K files.
AB datafiles follow the codex/rulebook and OFFICIAL clarifications. If it
aint official then it should be removed.
Jimi, another example of GW idiots not following their own rules
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:52:16 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: More Noisy Cult Termies
At 18:40 20/08/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Okay, that's fine. However, there still remains the minor issue of
>the check box that does nothing.
Yes, that's a mistake.
>Hmmmm.... There is a difference between noise marines and their
>weapons and SM scout snipers. The sniper rifles are optional weapons
>that are purchased as upgrades for a squad. In the case of noise
>marines, sonic blasters are the normal weapon for the squad.
>Sergeants or Aspiring champions may not be entitled to a squad's
>upgrades but they should be able to take the default weapon
>regardless of whether it is a bolter, bolt pistol and CCW, or a sonic
>blaster. The squad upgrade weapon is a blast master which you can't
>give to the aspiring champion.
Just because they're Noise Marine Terminators, their normal weapon is still
the Combi Bolter. Sonic Blasters still cost 10 points to upgrade to, for
example.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:26:14 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: RE: Serious Update Problems
At 16:35 20/08/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>I would suggest totally uninstalling AB, reboot, and then reinstall. If
>that doesn't fix it...I'm not sure from there.
If that doesn't work, email support@wolflair.com with as much information
about the problem as possible. There's a Mysterious Printing Bug around,
which means that some people get crash problems while most are totally
unaffected; as such, it's quite difficult to reproduce and fix.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:48:39 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
At 20:55 20/08/2001 +0100, you wrote:
> > Devastator and tactical squad selections for lootas allows them to take
> > either rhinos or razorbacks. Under looted vehicle they are permitted
> > smoke launchers but not under the lootas option. Is there a reason for
> > this? I assume that if the smoke launchers are an option (like indirect
> > fire) that they can take it, especially as it appears under the looted
> > vehicle options.
>
>Lootas can use the *options* from certain SM/IG squads - vehicles arent an
>*option*. Look at the relevent entries in either C:SM or C:IG and see.
It was specifically stated in a Q&A that transport vehicles are allowed, so
I've added them in. Since they're from the 'black codex' armies, they
should be allowed Smoke Launchers.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:50:13 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: More Noisy Cult Termies
At 12:17 20/08/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>I thought Champions got a Doom Siren and Power
>weapon (for next to no price) when you upgraded
>them to Champion status. And that you could give
>them a Sonic Blaster for a couple few extra
>points.
That's Noise Marine champions, not Terminator Champions. And you can't give
them Sonic Blasters - it specifically states they have a Doom Siren, Bolt
Pistol & CCW.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:42:38 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Restricting options based on unit size
At 12:57 20/08/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>I am trying to find out how to restrict the number of options available
>based on unit size.
>
>Example
>
>Unit Foo gets 'Option Alpha'
>Up to 1/2 of Unit Foo may exchange their 'Option Alpha' for 'Option Beta'.
>
>So far, I have made it so Option Alpha decreases when I add Option Beta, but
>I am not sure how to make Option Beta limited to 1/2 of the unit size. The
>best I could do was limit the rang to half of the maximum number in Unit
>Foo. But, if less than the maximum are taken, I have to create a conflict
>message. I'd prefer to make it so you are not able to add to Option Beta
>unless more are added to Unit Foo.
Can't be done, as far as I know; everywhere this applies to the 40k files,
there are validation rules that give error messages when you have less than
the maximum number of models in the unit.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:23:09 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
At 13:35 21/08/2001 +0100, you wrote:
> > Which is why Colen allows Lootas to take the squads vehicle options
> > in the 40K files.
>
>AB datafiles follow the codex/rulebook and OFFICIAL clarifications. If it
>aint official then it should be removed.
Anything printed in the Q&A is also incorporated - for example, Chaos
Rhinos get Combi-Bolters instead of Storm Bolters because of this.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:30:33 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> >AB datafiles follow the codex/rulebook and OFFICIAL clarifications. If it
> >aint official then it should be removed.
>
> Anything printed in the Q&A is also incorporated - for example, Chaos
> Rhinos get Combi-Bolters instead of Storm Bolters because of this.
IIRC, this was clarified in a White Dwarf issue and thus is official - 95%
of the online Q&A aint.
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:34:44 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> It was specifically stated in a Q&A that transport vehicles are allowed,
so
> I've added them in.
Is this the infamous online Q&A or a WD printed one??
> Since they're from the 'black codex' armies, they
> should be allowed Smoke Launchers.
'black codex'??
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:46:22 -0500
From: "James" <praetorian-guard@home.com>
Subject: Guard problems
I have found abug in the guard ab file. you cna choose your 2 command platoons and then the 4 infantry squads. Then assign them to there commnaders.. but the system will only recognize one association not both. It keeps saying that i need 1 more. Any fixes for this..?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:42:52 -0000
From: vidcin@spray.se
Subject: Re: Guard problems
I had this problem to, and I solved it like this. It's difficult to
see which Lieutenant you associate the groups with. Let the both
Lieutents have different wargears or/and names. That way you can see
who is who when you associate to them. After you can do some changes
to them. Alternative you can make one complete Troop chooice with 1
Lieutenant and 2 Groups. Then you just Duplicate the unit.
Tommy
--- In armybuilder@y..., "James" <praetorian-guard@h...> wrote:
> I have found abug in the guard ab file. you cna choose your 2
command platoons and then the 4 infantry squads. Then assign them
to there commnaders.. but the system will only recognize one
association not both. It keeps saying that i need 1 more. Any fixes
for this..?
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:52:34 -0000
From: vidcin@spray.se
Subject: Suggestion
Hello
A short suggestion. I play 40K and I miss a note in Armybuilder which
tells me what kind of Choice the unit is. If I play against Eldar and
there is Rangers in the Army, I want to see if it is a Troop choice
or a Elite choice. Can this be done?
Tommy
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:06:44 -0700
From: "Shawn Campbell" <shawn@electricstitch.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
----- Original Message -----
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
> 'black codex'??
The "black codex" is the lists at the back of the main rulebook. The main
rulebook is black.
-Shawn
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:52:00 -0000
From: "Josh Liller" <JL_Stinger@yahoo.com>
Subject: some AB Lite questions
1) In the Necromunda, I can't for the life of me find the
Exterminator upgrade for Redemptionist weapons. Where is it listed?
2) In the light version at least, I noticed a few bugs: bolt pistols
are only listed at 2 pts, power weapons at 10 pts, and power fists at
15 pts. Great for IG, but the Marines are being left out
3) If I pay for the full version of AB, does that entitle me to free
upgrades for life for Army Builder?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:05:51 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
At 14:34 21/08/2001 +0100, you wrote:
> > It was specifically stated in a Q&A that transport vehicles are allowed,
>so
> > I've added them in.
>
>Is this the infamous online Q&A or a WD printed one??
The "infamous" online Q&A, I'm afraid. Why is it infamous?
> > Since they're from the 'black codex' armies, they
> > should be allowed Smoke Launchers.
>
>'black codex'??
Basic rulebook lists, i.e. not the codex.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:25:32 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> > 'black codex'??
>
> The "black codex" is the lists at the back of the main rulebook. The main
> rulebook is black.
A-ha - I see!! Arent those army lists in the rulebook redundant when the
relevent codex is available??
Because if they arent then the ability to upgraded a looted Basilisk with
Indirect Fire no longer exists as it only appears in the IG codex and not
the rulebook.
You cant have it both ways - either use the rulebook army lists or use the
codexes.
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:24:46 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Suggestion
At 16:52 21/08/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Hello
>
>A short suggestion. I play 40K and I miss a note in Armybuilder which
>tells me what kind of Choice the unit is. If I play against Eldar and
>there is Rangers in the Army, I want to see if it is a Troop choice
>or a Elite choice. Can this be done?
Ah yes, it has been since AB2.2 has come out I think. The only problem is,
once it's been added, it will be tricky to turn off.
A question to everyone: Would this be a valuable thing to have in the 40k
files, or should it be an opt-in basis only (i.e. an extra file you have to
download)?
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:04:47 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
At 14:30 21/08/2001 +0100, you wrote:
> > >AB datafiles follow the codex/rulebook and OFFICIAL clarifications. If it
> > >aint official then it should be removed.
> >
> > Anything printed in the Q&A is also incorporated - for example, Chaos
> > Rhinos get Combi-Bolters instead of Storm Bolters because of this.
>
>IIRC, this was clarified in a White Dwarf issue and thus is official - 95%
>of the online Q&A aint.
I don't RC, unfortunately. Which issue of WD was it clarified in?
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:45:16 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> The "infamous" online Q&A, I'm afraid. Why is it infamous?
Its 'infamous' because only those parts of the Q&A that have been published
in White Dwarf or similar magazine/book are considered official.
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:13:02 +0100
From: Versif <petark@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
In this article -= JIMI =- <james.tubman@btinternet.com> wrote
>A-ha - I see!! Arent those army lists in the rulebook redundant when the
>relevent codex is available??
>
>Because if they arent then the ability to upgraded a looted Basilisk with
>Indirect Fire no longer exists as it only appears in the IG codex and not
>the rulebook.
>
>You cant have it both ways - either use the rulebook army lists or use the
>codexes.
Now you're asking for consistency, which is the last thing we can expect
from GW
Strictly by the wording, lootas shouldn't be allowed to take the
vehicles since they are listed under the vehicle rather than options
section. On the other hand this presupposes that GW was using the phrase
'options' in a very strict sense whereas all evidence points to GW being
anything but precise
I argued in the past with Colen that the options referred to should be
the codex rather than the blackdex options and pointed to the indirect
fire rule as proof positive, but to no avail I think Colen came up
with a very cunning response that shot my argument down in flames,
albeit indirectly. (g) This would make the looted chimera cheaper, not
that I'd ever loot a chimera when their are better things to loot.
On a related note KOS ors can only ever take one looted rhino since the
mandatory addition of grot riggers takes them to 51+ points. I was
messing about creating a KOS army from the normal list by using 3 looted
rhinos when the smoke launcher discrepancy hit me. My rationale was this
was an ork warband in the throws of becoming a KOS but didn't benefit
from the KOS special rules but got mobbing up etc instead. In 1800
points I can take 93 models with 4 trukks, 3 Rhinos and 1 battlewagon.
And the rhinos have benefits over normal trukks. Just because I could.
Cheers
Grotfang, not so humble ork warlord.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:36:27 -0000
From: vidcin@spray.se
Subject: Re: Suggestion
I want it!!!
Tommy
> If I play against Eldar and
> >there is Rangers in the Army, I want to see if it is a Troop choice
> >or a Elite choice. Can this be done?
>
>
> A question to everyone: Would this be a valuable thing to have in
the 40k
> files, or should it be an opt-in basis only (i.e. an extra file you
have to
> download)?
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:48:50 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> Now you're asking for consistency, which is the last thing we can expect
> from GW
Both Lootas and Looted Vehicles mention the rulebook - only AB allows you to
mix the rulebook and codex options, so it isnt GW at fault here (for once!!)
> Strictly by the wording, lootas shouldn't be allowed to take the
> vehicles since they are listed under the vehicle rather than options
> section.
Thats my take on it too.
> On the other hand this presupposes that GW was using the phrase
> 'options' in a very strict sense whereas all evidence points to GW being
> anything but precise
Hehehehe
> I argued in the past with Colen that the options referred to should be
> the codex rather than the blackdex options and pointed to the indirect
> fire rule as proof positive, but to no avail
I must have missed that thread - anyway, I'm with you on this one
> On a related note KOS ors can only ever take one looted rhino since the
> mandatory addition of grot riggers takes them to 51+ points.
Arent Grot Riggers classed as a vehicle upgrade (albeit mandatory for KoS)
and not an inherent part of a Rhino?? Thus you should be able to take a
looted Rhino at 50pts but it automatically gets the riggers and changed to
52pts??
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:48:43 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Are Upgrades to Army Builder Free???
At 03:52 PM 8/21/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>3) If I pay for the full version of AB, does that entitle me to free
>upgrades for life for Army Builder?
No. If you buy the full version, you are entitled to free UPDATES, but NOT
UPGRADES. This is an important distinction that is potentially confusing.
Updates are minor enhancement releases and bug fix releases. For example,
V2.2 was a minor enhancement release, and V2.2a was a bug fix release.
These are updates and free for existing users. In contrast, upgrades are
major enhancement releases, which include lots of significant new features.
Upgrades are typically denoted by a change in the "major" version number,
such as a V3.0 release of Army Builder. Upgrades are NOT free.
If anyone believes I ever claimed all upgrades were free, I recommend that
person re-read the materials where the information was seen. There is a
critical distinction between updates and upgrades in the software industry.
Being a software developer, I wouldn't be surprised if I made a statement
like "updates are free" and didn't think to clarify the definition of
"update" to the reader, thereby enabling a misinterpretation.
For users who purchased the V1.x CDs, I chose to allow them to upgrade to
V2.x for free. This was NOT policy nor had it been promised to them.
However, for various reasons, I made that decision as a special-case
exception. If a V3.0 of Army Builder is released at some point in the
future, all existing users will need to purchase the upgrade, just like any
other piece of software. Discounted upgrade pricing would be made available
to enable existing users to upgrade at a lower cost than new purchasers.
This model is consistent with the vast majority of the major software
publishers. Notable exceptions to this are online games such as Everquest
and Asheron's Call, but users pay them a monthly service fee, so the
developer is already being indirectly paid for the upgrades.
I hope this clarification makes sense to everyone. This question has come
up a couple of times in the past few months, so I decided to make a formal
statement here to eliminate any confusion that might still exist.
Thanks, Rob
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:50:46 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: ABCreator wish list 2
At 12:00 PM 8/17/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>I would like to see in the "options" area of the record,....when you add
>an option link there it defaults to "cost" which is good howvere I would
>like to be able to set it to the (last item ) so all proceeding options
>added in to this record or another record would be the last one for
>example (hide). etc.
Added to the wish list.
>I would also like to see 2 mode's be available for the race record. so one
>could set up a "rules set" and diffrent senerios or dates of time.
>
>Bear with this - now you can set the mode and to have other modes you
>would have a list of modes on the selection area. I propose 2
>selection drop down menus. This way you could set up a rule set (or ion
>the case I was thinking a Scale) and the second one could be used to set
>up the time/senerios, etc.
Also added to the list. This one would be a good bit more work, but I can
see a few instances where it would be convenient.
Thanks, Rob
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:05:10 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Restricting options based on unit size
If you are using the "rang" attribute to control the selection count for
both options, you can't solve this directly. The trick to solving this is
to use a separate hidden stat in the background. Start with a hidden stat
named "Beta". When Option Beta is increased, use "base" to increase the
value of "Beta". Then use the "lcmp" unit attribute to verify that the
value of "Beta" is less than or equal to the model count of the unit. You
now have validation for Option Beta.
Tip! I usually create a few hidden stats that are kept in reserve just for
this purpose. You might call them "temp1", "temp2", etc. These stats are
reused for this type of thing across various units, where the specific use
differs from one unit to the next. But they serve a very useful purpose in
this regard.
Hope this helps,
Rob
At 12:57 PM 8/20/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>I am trying to find out how to restrict the number of options available
>based on unit size.
>
>Example
>
>Unit Foo gets 'Option Alpha'
>Up to 1/2 of Unit Foo may exchange their 'Option Alpha' for 'Option Beta'.
>
>So far, I have made it so Option Alpha decreases when I add Option Beta, but
>I am not sure how to make Option Beta limited to 1/2 of the unit size. The
>best I could do was limit the rang to half of the maximum number in Unit
>Foo. But, if less than the maximum are taken, I have to create a conflict
>message. I'd prefer to make it so you are not able to add to Option Beta
>unless more are added to Unit Foo.
>
>This would be similiar to Space Wolves Blood Claws and how they can have a
>number of power weapons equal to 1/5 of the models in the unit.
>
>Please help.
>
>Thanks,
>-Shawn
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 25 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
2. Re: More Noisy Cult Termies
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
3. RE: Serious Update Problems
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
4. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
5. Re: More Noisy Cult Termies
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
6. Re: Restricting options based on unit size
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
7. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
8. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
9. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
10. Guard problems
From: "James" <praetorian-guard@home.com>
11. Re: Guard problems
From: vidcin@spray.se
12. Suggestion
From: vidcin@spray.se
13. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "Shawn Campbell" <shawn@electricstitch.com>
14. some AB Lite questions
From: "Josh Liller" <JL_Stinger@yahoo.com>
15. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
16. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
17. Re: Suggestion
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
18. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
19. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
20. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: Versif <petark@ntlworld.com>
21. Re: Suggestion
From: vidcin@spray.se
22. Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
23. Are Upgrades to Army Builder Free???
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
24. Re: ABCreator wish list 2
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
25. Re: Restricting options based on unit size
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:35:06 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> >From the UK GT Clarifications:
>
> "Lootas may take the transport option from a squad."
Only applies to the UKGT and not normal 40k play.
> And from the online Q&A:
>
> "Can Lootas take the transport option from a squad?
> Yes they can."
Has this been printed in a WD issue?? If not then I can safely ignore it as
a pile of crap.
> Which is why Colen allows Lootas to take the squads vehicle options
> in the 40K files.
AB datafiles follow the codex/rulebook and OFFICIAL clarifications. If it
aint official then it should be removed.
Jimi, another example of GW idiots not following their own rules
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:52:16 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: More Noisy Cult Termies
At 18:40 20/08/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Okay, that's fine. However, there still remains the minor issue of
>the check box that does nothing.
Yes, that's a mistake.
>Hmmmm.... There is a difference between noise marines and their
>weapons and SM scout snipers. The sniper rifles are optional weapons
>that are purchased as upgrades for a squad. In the case of noise
>marines, sonic blasters are the normal weapon for the squad.
>Sergeants or Aspiring champions may not be entitled to a squad's
>upgrades but they should be able to take the default weapon
>regardless of whether it is a bolter, bolt pistol and CCW, or a sonic
>blaster. The squad upgrade weapon is a blast master which you can't
>give to the aspiring champion.
Just because they're Noise Marine Terminators, their normal weapon is still
the Combi Bolter. Sonic Blasters still cost 10 points to upgrade to, for
example.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 22:26:14 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: RE: Serious Update Problems
At 16:35 20/08/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>I would suggest totally uninstalling AB, reboot, and then reinstall. If
>that doesn't fix it...I'm not sure from there.
If that doesn't work, email support@wolflair.com with as much information
about the problem as possible. There's a Mysterious Printing Bug around,
which means that some people get crash problems while most are totally
unaffected; as such, it's quite difficult to reproduce and fix.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:48:39 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
At 20:55 20/08/2001 +0100, you wrote:
> > Devastator and tactical squad selections for lootas allows them to take
> > either rhinos or razorbacks. Under looted vehicle they are permitted
> > smoke launchers but not under the lootas option. Is there a reason for
> > this? I assume that if the smoke launchers are an option (like indirect
> > fire) that they can take it, especially as it appears under the looted
> > vehicle options.
>
>Lootas can use the *options* from certain SM/IG squads - vehicles arent an
>*option*. Look at the relevent entries in either C:SM or C:IG and see.
It was specifically stated in a Q&A that transport vehicles are allowed, so
I've added them in. Since they're from the 'black codex' armies, they
should be allowed Smoke Launchers.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:50:13 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: More Noisy Cult Termies
At 12:17 20/08/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>I thought Champions got a Doom Siren and Power
>weapon (for next to no price) when you upgraded
>them to Champion status. And that you could give
>them a Sonic Blaster for a couple few extra
>points.
That's Noise Marine champions, not Terminator Champions. And you can't give
them Sonic Blasters - it specifically states they have a Doom Siren, Bolt
Pistol & CCW.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:42:38 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Restricting options based on unit size
At 12:57 20/08/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>I am trying to find out how to restrict the number of options available
>based on unit size.
>
>Example
>
>Unit Foo gets 'Option Alpha'
>Up to 1/2 of Unit Foo may exchange their 'Option Alpha' for 'Option Beta'.
>
>So far, I have made it so Option Alpha decreases when I add Option Beta, but
>I am not sure how to make Option Beta limited to 1/2 of the unit size. The
>best I could do was limit the rang to half of the maximum number in Unit
>Foo. But, if less than the maximum are taken, I have to create a conflict
>message. I'd prefer to make it so you are not able to add to Option Beta
>unless more are added to Unit Foo.
Can't be done, as far as I know; everywhere this applies to the 40k files,
there are validation rules that give error messages when you have less than
the maximum number of models in the unit.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:23:09 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
At 13:35 21/08/2001 +0100, you wrote:
> > Which is why Colen allows Lootas to take the squads vehicle options
> > in the 40K files.
>
>AB datafiles follow the codex/rulebook and OFFICIAL clarifications. If it
>aint official then it should be removed.
Anything printed in the Q&A is also incorporated - for example, Chaos
Rhinos get Combi-Bolters instead of Storm Bolters because of this.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:30:33 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> >AB datafiles follow the codex/rulebook and OFFICIAL clarifications. If it
> >aint official then it should be removed.
>
> Anything printed in the Q&A is also incorporated - for example, Chaos
> Rhinos get Combi-Bolters instead of Storm Bolters because of this.
IIRC, this was clarified in a White Dwarf issue and thus is official - 95%
of the online Q&A aint.
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 14:34:44 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> It was specifically stated in a Q&A that transport vehicles are allowed,
so
> I've added them in.
Is this the infamous online Q&A or a WD printed one??
> Since they're from the 'black codex' armies, they
> should be allowed Smoke Launchers.
'black codex'??
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 08:46:22 -0500
From: "James" <praetorian-guard@home.com>
Subject: Guard problems
I have found abug in the guard ab file. you cna choose your 2 command platoons and then the 4 infantry squads. Then assign them to there commnaders.. but the system will only recognize one association not both. It keeps saying that i need 1 more. Any fixes for this..?
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:42:52 -0000
From: vidcin@spray.se
Subject: Re: Guard problems
I had this problem to, and I solved it like this. It's difficult to
see which Lieutenant you associate the groups with. Let the both
Lieutents have different wargears or/and names. That way you can see
who is who when you associate to them. After you can do some changes
to them. Alternative you can make one complete Troop chooice with 1
Lieutenant and 2 Groups. Then you just Duplicate the unit.
Tommy
--- In armybuilder@y..., "James" <praetorian-guard@h...> wrote:
> I have found abug in the guard ab file. you cna choose your 2
command platoons and then the 4 infantry squads. Then assign them
to there commnaders.. but the system will only recognize one
association not both. It keeps saying that i need 1 more. Any fixes
for this..?
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 16:52:34 -0000
From: vidcin@spray.se
Subject: Suggestion
Hello
A short suggestion. I play 40K and I miss a note in Armybuilder which
tells me what kind of Choice the unit is. If I play against Eldar and
there is Rangers in the Army, I want to see if it is a Troop choice
or a Elite choice. Can this be done?
Tommy
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 10:06:44 -0700
From: "Shawn Campbell" <shawn@electricstitch.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
----- Original Message -----
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
> 'black codex'??
The "black codex" is the lists at the back of the main rulebook. The main
rulebook is black.
-Shawn
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 15:52:00 -0000
From: "Josh Liller" <JL_Stinger@yahoo.com>
Subject: some AB Lite questions
1) In the Necromunda, I can't for the life of me find the
Exterminator upgrade for Redemptionist weapons. Where is it listed?
2) In the light version at least, I noticed a few bugs: bolt pistols
are only listed at 2 pts, power weapons at 10 pts, and power fists at
15 pts. Great for IG, but the Marines are being left out
3) If I pay for the full version of AB, does that entitle me to free
upgrades for life for Army Builder?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 15
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:05:51 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
At 14:34 21/08/2001 +0100, you wrote:
> > It was specifically stated in a Q&A that transport vehicles are allowed,
>so
> > I've added them in.
>
>Is this the infamous online Q&A or a WD printed one??
The "infamous" online Q&A, I'm afraid. Why is it infamous?
> > Since they're from the 'black codex' armies, they
> > should be allowed Smoke Launchers.
>
>'black codex'??
Basic rulebook lists, i.e. not the codex.
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 16
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:25:32 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> > 'black codex'??
>
> The "black codex" is the lists at the back of the main rulebook. The main
> rulebook is black.
A-ha - I see!! Arent those army lists in the rulebook redundant when the
relevent codex is available??
Because if they arent then the ability to upgraded a looted Basilisk with
Indirect Fire no longer exists as it only appears in the IG codex and not
the rulebook.
You cant have it both ways - either use the rulebook army lists or use the
codexes.
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 17
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:24:46 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Suggestion
At 16:52 21/08/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Hello
>
>A short suggestion. I play 40K and I miss a note in Armybuilder which
>tells me what kind of Choice the unit is. If I play against Eldar and
>there is Rangers in the Army, I want to see if it is a Troop choice
>or a Elite choice. Can this be done?
Ah yes, it has been since AB2.2 has come out I think. The only problem is,
once it's been added, it will be tricky to turn off.
A question to everyone: Would this be a valuable thing to have in the 40k
files, or should it be an opt-in basis only (i.e. an extra file you have to
download)?
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 18
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:04:47 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
At 14:30 21/08/2001 +0100, you wrote:
> > >AB datafiles follow the codex/rulebook and OFFICIAL clarifications. If it
> > >aint official then it should be removed.
> >
> > Anything printed in the Q&A is also incorporated - for example, Chaos
> > Rhinos get Combi-Bolters instead of Storm Bolters because of this.
>
>IIRC, this was clarified in a White Dwarf issue and thus is official - 95%
>of the online Q&A aint.
I don't RC, unfortunately. Which issue of WD was it clarified in?
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 19
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:45:16 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> The "infamous" online Q&A, I'm afraid. Why is it infamous?
Its 'infamous' because only those parts of the Q&A that have been published
in White Dwarf or similar magazine/book are considered official.
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 20
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:13:02 +0100
From: Versif <petark@ntlworld.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
In this article -= JIMI =- <james.tubman@btinternet.com> wrote
>A-ha - I see!! Arent those army lists in the rulebook redundant when the
>relevent codex is available??
>
>Because if they arent then the ability to upgraded a looted Basilisk with
>Indirect Fire no longer exists as it only appears in the IG codex and not
>the rulebook.
>
>You cant have it both ways - either use the rulebook army lists or use the
>codexes.
Now you're asking for consistency, which is the last thing we can expect
from GW
Strictly by the wording, lootas shouldn't be allowed to take the
vehicles since they are listed under the vehicle rather than options
section. On the other hand this presupposes that GW was using the phrase
'options' in a very strict sense whereas all evidence points to GW being
anything but precise
I argued in the past with Colen that the options referred to should be
the codex rather than the blackdex options and pointed to the indirect
fire rule as proof positive, but to no avail
I think Colen came upwith a very cunning response that shot my argument down in flames,
albeit indirectly. (g) This would make the looted chimera cheaper, not
that I'd ever loot a chimera when their are better things to loot.
On a related note KOS ors can only ever take one looted rhino since the
mandatory addition of grot riggers takes them to 51+ points. I was
messing about creating a KOS army from the normal list by using 3 looted
rhinos when the smoke launcher discrepancy hit me. My rationale was this
was an ork warband in the throws of becoming a KOS but didn't benefit
from the KOS special rules but got mobbing up etc instead. In 1800
points I can take 93 models with 4 trukks, 3 Rhinos and 1 battlewagon.
And the rhinos have benefits over normal trukks. Just because I could.
Cheers
Grotfang, not so humble ork warlord.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 21
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 18:36:27 -0000
From: vidcin@spray.se
Subject: Re: Suggestion
I want it!!!
Tommy
> If I play against Eldar and
> >there is Rangers in the Army, I want to see if it is a Troop choice
> >or a Elite choice. Can this be done?
>
>
> A question to everyone: Would this be a valuable thing to have in
the 40k
> files, or should it be an opt-in basis only (i.e. an extra file you
have to
> download)?
>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 22
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 19:48:50 +0100
From: "-= JIMI =-" <james.tubman@btinternet.com>
Subject: Re: Orks - Lootas vehicle options
> Now you're asking for consistency, which is the last thing we can expect
> from GW
Both Lootas and Looted Vehicles mention the rulebook - only AB allows you to
mix the rulebook and codex options, so it isnt GW at fault here (for once!!)
> Strictly by the wording, lootas shouldn't be allowed to take the
> vehicles since they are listed under the vehicle rather than options
> section.
Thats my take on it too.
> On the other hand this presupposes that GW was using the phrase
> 'options' in a very strict sense whereas all evidence points to GW being
> anything but precise
Hehehehe
> I argued in the past with Colen that the options referred to should be
> the codex rather than the blackdex options and pointed to the indirect
> fire rule as proof positive, but to no avail
I must have missed that thread - anyway, I'm with you on this one
> On a related note KOS ors can only ever take one looted rhino since the
> mandatory addition of grot riggers takes them to 51+ points.
Arent Grot Riggers classed as a vehicle upgrade (albeit mandatory for KoS)
and not an inherent part of a Rhino?? Thus you should be able to take a
looted Rhino at 50pts but it automatically gets the riggers and changed to
52pts??
Jimi
FREE 40k card scenery - http://www.crosswinds.net/~astronomican/
My Ebay Auctions - http://members.ebay.co.uk/aboutme/astronomican/
40k3 - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k3/
40k Fluff - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/40k_fluff/
Astartes - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/adeptus_astartes/
Grey Knights - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/greyknightchapter/
Imperial Guard - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/imperial-guard/
Sons Of Russ - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sons-of-russ/
Unforgiven - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unforgiven/
VDR - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/gw-vdr/
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 23
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:48:43 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Are Upgrades to Army Builder Free???
At 03:52 PM 8/21/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>3) If I pay for the full version of AB, does that entitle me to free
>upgrades for life for Army Builder?
No. If you buy the full version, you are entitled to free UPDATES, but NOT
UPGRADES. This is an important distinction that is potentially confusing.
Updates are minor enhancement releases and bug fix releases. For example,
V2.2 was a minor enhancement release, and V2.2a was a bug fix release.
These are updates and free for existing users. In contrast, upgrades are
major enhancement releases, which include lots of significant new features.
Upgrades are typically denoted by a change in the "major" version number,
such as a V3.0 release of Army Builder. Upgrades are NOT free.
If anyone believes I ever claimed all upgrades were free, I recommend that
person re-read the materials where the information was seen. There is a
critical distinction between updates and upgrades in the software industry.
Being a software developer, I wouldn't be surprised if I made a statement
like "updates are free" and didn't think to clarify the definition of
"update" to the reader, thereby enabling a misinterpretation.
For users who purchased the V1.x CDs, I chose to allow them to upgrade to
V2.x for free. This was NOT policy nor had it been promised to them.
However, for various reasons, I made that decision as a special-case
exception. If a V3.0 of Army Builder is released at some point in the
future, all existing users will need to purchase the upgrade, just like any
other piece of software. Discounted upgrade pricing would be made available
to enable existing users to upgrade at a lower cost than new purchasers.
This model is consistent with the vast majority of the major software
publishers. Notable exceptions to this are online games such as Everquest
and Asheron's Call, but users pay them a monthly service fee, so the
developer is already being indirectly paid for the upgrades.
I hope this clarification makes sense to everyone. This question has come
up a couple of times in the past few months, so I decided to make a formal
statement here to eliminate any confusion that might still exist.
Thanks, Rob
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 24
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 12:50:46 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: ABCreator wish list 2
At 12:00 PM 8/17/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>I would like to see in the "options" area of the record,....when you add
>an option link there it defaults to "cost" which is good howvere I would
>like to be able to set it to the (last item ) so all proceeding options
>added in to this record or another record would be the last one for
>example (hide). etc.
Added to the wish list.
>I would also like to see 2 mode's be available for the race record. so one
>could set up a "rules set" and diffrent senerios or dates of time.
>
>Bear with this - now you can set the mode and to have other modes you
>would have a list of modes on the selection area. I propose 2
>selection drop down menus. This way you could set up a rule set (or ion
>the case I was thinking a Scale) and the second one could be used to set
>up the time/senerios, etc.
Also added to the list. This one would be a good bit more work, but I can
see a few instances where it would be convenient.
Thanks, Rob
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 25
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2001 13:05:10 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Restricting options based on unit size
If you are using the "rang" attribute to control the selection count for
both options, you can't solve this directly. The trick to solving this is
to use a separate hidden stat in the background. Start with a hidden stat
named "Beta". When Option Beta is increased, use "base" to increase the
value of "Beta". Then use the "lcmp" unit attribute to verify that the
value of "Beta" is less than or equal to the model count of the unit. You
now have validation for Option Beta.
Tip! I usually create a few hidden stats that are kept in reserve just for
this purpose. You might call them "temp1", "temp2", etc. These stats are
reused for this type of thing across various units, where the specific use
differs from one unit to the next. But they serve a very useful purpose in
this regard.
Hope this helps,
Rob
At 12:57 PM 8/20/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>I am trying to find out how to restrict the number of options available
>based on unit size.
>
>Example
>
>Unit Foo gets 'Option Alpha'
>Up to 1/2 of Unit Foo may exchange their 'Option Alpha' for 'Option Beta'.
>
>So far, I have made it so Option Alpha decreases when I add Option Beta, but
>I am not sure how to make Option Beta limited to 1/2 of the unit size. The
>best I could do was limit the rang to half of the maximum number in Unit
>Foo. But, if less than the maximum are taken, I have to create a conflict
>message. I'd prefer to make it so you are not able to add to Option Beta
>unless more are added to Unit Foo.
>
>This would be similiar to Space Wolves Blood Claws and how they can have a
>number of power weapons equal to 1/5 of the models in the unit.
>
>Please help.
>
>Thanks,
>-Shawn
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/