A
armybuilder at yahoogroup
Guest
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck
Monitoring Service trial
http://us.click.yahoo.com/MDsVHB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/IMSolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, email
armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 17 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Noob Question
From: tzeench <DavidR@riskinc.com>
2. RE: Duh question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
3. Re: Correct Syntax
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
4. Re: Strange error in 40k files / ab2.2a
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
5. Re: Comp group % max & validation question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
6. Re: Noob Question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
7. Re: Comp group % max & validation question
From: woodywalton@hotmail.com
8. Re: Noob Question
From: DavidR@riskinc.com
9. Re: Tau
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
10. Harlequin Q
From: "matthew" <mvile@uno.edu>
11. Re: Comp group % max & validation question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
12. V2.2c Released
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
13. Re: Comp group % max & validation question
From: woodywalton@hotmail.com
14. Intersting Situation
From: "KoWind" <kowind7@yahoo.com>
15. Re: Intersting Situation
From: Ghazhkull_Thraka@dakkadakka.com
16. Re: Noob Question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
17. Re: Comp group % max & validation question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 22:18:58 -0700
From: tzeench <DavidR@riskinc.com>
Subject: Noob Question
Help-
I need some expert help here- Im trying to make a list for a local ruleset. But i cant figure how to make it work right. Heres the problem.
You have the main unit (A) it gets its troops and such, upgrades and addons- But if you chose this unit you can get 1 or 2 sub units. But you have to have this unit inorder for you to chose them.
Also sone of the units if you pick certain command squads changes the way the troops are avaible (aka from rare to common) any ideas?
Thanks
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 03:29:28 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: RE: Duh question
At 12:10 PM 9/18/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Can't change stat names within ABCreator, so I need the Save to text
>option -- which is disabled, so I'm assuming this puppy is locked.
>
>Does *anybody* have the source files for the compiled .wrm files?
The author of the files would have them. His email address ought to be
included in the data files. If not, it should be on the Wolf Lair web-site.
Go to the data files section and it his contact info should be listed next
to the download link.
If the author remains AWOL for an extended period (i.e. not just on
vacation for a few days), let me know and I'll try to flush him out.
However, if he's not willing to provide unlocked files for you to use, then
that's his option.
Thanks, Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 03:32:07 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Correct Syntax
Er, you can't do that. The syntax for the "catg" attribute, as given within
ABCreator, does not include any additional qualifiers, such as race
constraints. If you wish to impose race constraints on a "catg" attribute,
you need to create a separate option that contains the "catg" attribute and
an appropriate "lglx" attribute with the desired constraints.
Thanks, Rob
At 11:49 AM 9/15/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>What is the correct syntax for catg
>
>I want to do
>
>catg:wiz with a race modifier on it but can't work out what the
>seperator before the race code should be
>
>Anyone anyideas?
>
>Mike M
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 03:38:45 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Strange error in 40k files / ab2.2a
Unfortunately, this is the first report of this problem I have witnessed.
Given that a large number of AB users utilize the 40K files, I'm certain I
would have had this reported at least once previously if this was a problem
within AB - especially if it has occurred with more than one set of 40K
data files.
Are you sure that you are running V2.2a? This may sound ridiculous, but did
you install it after downloading it? [Note: At least two users have
downloaded updates and neglected to install them.] Please go to the Help
menu within AB and select "About Army Builder". Verify that the version
number displayed is V2.2a. If not, you need the update. If so, then contact
me directly at support@wolflair.com and I will try to come up with ideas of
what might be the problem for you.
Thanks, Rob
At 02:29 PM 9/15/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>I have a weird one:
>
>I cannot install the 40k files on my system.
>
>When I try, it goes through all the motions - even tells me that the
>installation is complete, but 40k system doesn't show up on the game-
>select menu. I checked the data folder to find that none of the files
>gets copied.
>
>I have had this problem since I upgraded to version 2.2a, with two
>versions of the 40k files. These are the only files I have had this
>problem with.
>
>I own the 1.4 cd, and have observed the same problem using Windows ME
>and on a newly installed 98SE - cleaned down the machine in hope of
>fixing it; didn't help.
>
>Today I will try to copy the installed files from my friends machine
>(where it all works out perfectly) and put them in manually, in the
>hope that it will work this way.
>
>Hope there is something you can do to fix this, as it is rather
>annoying.
>
>Lars Gottlieb.
>Denmark.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 03:48:49 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Comp group % max & validation question
I'll bet you $5 that AB is working correctly.
The reason is that this WAS a problem when V2.0 was first released, and it
was a subtle one. My guess is that you're falling prey to the inverse
situation of how I messed up within V2.0.
Consider the following. You are creating a 2000 point roster. Composition
group X is limited to a maximum of 50% of the total points in the roster.
The rule is given as "<=50%", which is interpreted to mean that the roster
is valid when you have exactly 50% or less. Now let's say you currently
have 1001 points of X in your roster, which translates to 50% after
reasonable rounding is performed. So the percentage will display as 50%
within AB. However, the REAL percentage is 50.05%, which is MORE than 50%.
Therefore, AB will report this as a validation error, even though the
rounded percentage displayed by AB will appear to be valid.
Please double-check this subtle distinction within your rosters. I've got
$5 riding on AB doing this correctly, so don't make we wait too long for
verification. Besides, V2.2b just went final and is ready to be
released, and I *REALLY* don't want to run into a new bug like this. So
I'll hold off releasing it for 24 hours so you can verify that AB is
working correctly and let me know.
Thanks, Rob
At 12:48 AM 9/19/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>All,
>
>
>In general, if a comp group is set to a max of x% is the validation
>supposed to trigger when that maximum % is reached, exceeded, or
>both? I have many percentage based maximums defined for comp groups
>in my datafiles and some are triggered when they reach the exact %
>and have not gone over. The default text for the validation message
>states "Composition group 'name' does not satisfy requirements
>(<=x%)" The issue is that the comp group is actually in agreement
>with the expression 'less than or equal to x percent' because it is
>equal to x percent.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Woody
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 04:10:53 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Noob Question
At 10:18 PM 9/18/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>You have the main unit (A) it gets its troops and such, upgrades and
>addons- But if you chose this unit you can get 1 or 2 sub units. But you
>have to have this unit inorder for you to chose them.
This simplest solution is to use either the "trat" race attribute or the
"reqd" unit attribute. For "trat", you would assign a type to each of the
special sub-units and another type to the main unit. You would then verify
that the appearance of type "subunit" also requires the presence of type
"mainunit". For "reqd", you could specify an explicit requirement on the
presence of the main unit in the roster.
>Also sone of the units if you pick certain command squads changes the way
>the troops are avaible (aka from rare to common) any ideas?
This is a bit more difficult to model. There is no way to change the
behavior of one unit (e.g. the composition group it belongs to) based on
the characteristics of other units. So this will need to be solved specially.
One option is to use the "mode" attribute and create a separate scenario
for each special command squad. You could then use the "xcmp" unit
attribute to control the composition group properly for each mode. You
would also need to use the "need" race attribute to require the
corresponding command squad for each scenario.
Another solution would be to have options associated with each unit that
allow the user to change the composition group from its default to the
proper one. You would also need to utilize types on these options in
conjunction with "trat" attributes to verify that the user changes the
composition groups correctly. You could also use the "tlmt" attribute with
the "-istype" qualifier to perform the validations.
Hope this helps,
Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 12:28:05 -0000
From: woodywalton@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Comp group % max & validation question
Rob,
All the numbers I work with for costs have no decimal places. I
have tried it with multiple lists from all five races. It throws
the validation message when the number is right on the max.(500pts
of 1000 at 50%). I have changed the roster sizes and it does not
seem to be tied to a specific size or range (100 to 5000 points in
50 point increments). I sent you the datafiles earlier last weekend
so you can verify the behavior yourself if you would like. The
demonworld.ab file is up on ab-fiels as well.
Woody
--- In armybuilder@y..., Rob Bowes <rob@w...> wrote:
> I'll bet you $5 that AB is working correctly.
>
> The reason is that this WAS a problem when V2.0 was first
released, and it
> was a subtle one. My guess is that you're falling prey to the
inverse
> situation of how I messed up within V2.0.
>
> Consider the following. You are creating a 2000 point roster.
Composition
> group X is limited to a maximum of 50% of the total points in the
roster.
> The rule is given as "<=50%", which is interpreted to mean that
the roster
> is valid when you have exactly 50% or less. Now let's say you
currently
> have 1001 points of X in your roster, which translates to 50%
after
> reasonable rounding is performed. So the percentage will display
as 50%
> within AB. However, the REAL percentage is 50.05%, which is MORE
than 50%.
> Therefore, AB will report this as a validation error, even though
the
> rounded percentage displayed by AB will appear to be valid.
>
> Please double-check this subtle distinction within your rosters.
I've got
> $5 riding on AB doing this correctly, so don't make we wait too
long for
> verification. Besides, V2.2b just went final and is ready to
be
> released, and I *REALLY* don't want to run into a new bug like
this. So
> I'll hold off releasing it for 24 hours so you can verify that AB
is
> working correctly and let me know.
>
> Thanks, Rob
>
>
> At 12:48 AM 9/19/2001 +0000, you wrote:
> >All,
> >
> >
> >In general, if a comp group is set to a max of x% is the
validation
> >supposed to trigger when that maximum % is reached, exceeded, or
> >both? I have many percentage based maximums defined for comp
groups
> >in my datafiles and some are triggered when they reach the exact %
> >and have not gone over. The default text for the validation
message
> >states "Composition group 'name' does not satisfy requirements
> >(<=x%)" The issue is that the comp group is actually in agreement
> >with the expression 'less than or equal to x percent' because it
is
> >equal to x percent.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Woody
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
> Rob Bowes (rob@w...) (650) 726-9689
> Lone Wolf Development
www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 08:40:33 -0700
From: DavidR@riskinc.com
Subject: Re: Noob Question
Thanks that should help alot- Was just imputing them in the same unit class
with a @ in front till i could get some help. Yeah the second one was the
doosy. To mabe i should just base it around points instead of points and
comp groups.
Anyone know if someone is makeing the AB files for the Warhammer Panzer
Rules? (aka hate to be doing this for nothing)
Dave
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 20:42:00 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Tau
At 21:40 18/09/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Not sure if this has been asked yet but is anyone doing the Tau
>for armybuilder? And if so, when could we expect it out?
I shall skin you alive*&$*&$
ahem. Someone else (Shawn someone? Search for 'Tau' in the archives) has
started writing it, and who am I to stop them. It'll be ready whenever
they're finished
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 20:09:54 -0000
From: "matthew" <mvile@uno.edu>
Subject: Harlequin Q
Colen,
I think there be a small problem with the Add Troupe Leader option to
the HAJetbike Squad Unit. It appears that the datafile "forgets" that
the troop leader is still mounted on a jetbike. This becomes
problematic because it is possible to assign your troop leader to the
jetbike with the Shuriken Cannon upgrade (I see nothing in the codex
preventing this); however, there is no way to represent this on the
output.
Obviously, it's really not that big of a problem (the TL actually
shows no jetbike weps whatsoever, you just have to remember) but I'm a
bit obsessive Related to this, unlike when assigning a troop
leader to an Harlequin infantry troop. The datafile fails to reduce
the # of CCWs assigned to the troop, though it does reduce the number
of models in the troupe (thereby triggering a validation error). How
could this be fixed?
Matthew "electricblooz" Vile
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 18:30:32 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Comp group % max & validation question
Looks like I owe you $5 and Microsoft needs to receive more hate mail from
me. :-(
It turns out the problem is due to the behavior of the Microsoft C++
compiler and how it performs floating point calculations. According to VC,
the calculation "(50 * 1000) / 100" results in 499.999989 (for a 50% limit
on a 1000 point roster). So, when you compare a limit of 499.999989 to an
actual size of 500, the actual size is larger than the limit and a
validation error is triggered. :-(
The important thing to note on this is that it ONLY occurs in a RELEASE
build. In a debug build, the behavior is correct, because the calculations
are correct. Therefore, I never encountered this anomaly during all of my
testing. Joy. :-(
I just love Microsoft's consistency (i.e. their utter lack of it in their
products IS their consistency). I'm well into double digits on the number
of bugs and/or inconsistencies within the VC compiler that I've stumbled
over with AB - not to mention the bugs and inconsistencies I've encountered
in numerous other Microsoft tools along the way. It's quite depressing.
In any case, I will figure out a way to accommodate this problem and get a
fix for it into the imminent release of AB. Hit me up for the $5 at the
next Con.
Thanks, Rob
At 12:28 PM 9/19/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Rob,
>
>All the numbers I work with for costs have no decimal places. I
>have tried it with multiple lists from all five races. It throws
>the validation message when the number is right on the max.(500pts
>of 1000 at 50%). I have changed the roster sizes and it does not
>seem to be tied to a specific size or range (100 to 5000 points in
>50 point increments). I sent you the datafiles earlier last weekend
>so you can verify the behavior yourself if you would like. The
>demonworld.ab file is up on ab-fiels as well.
>
>Woody
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:04:39 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: V2.2c Released
It's official. Army Builder V2.2c has now been released. This new version
includes a handful of bug fixes that have been reported since V2.2a was
released. Please check the release notes for details.
Why is it V2.2c and not V2.2b? Good question. Yesterday, the Gold Master a
new production run of AB Demo CDs was sent off with V2.2b on it. The plan
was to released V2.2b online last night. But a bug report rolled in that
was rather important last night. So that bug has been fixed and
incorporated into V2.2c. In order to distinguish whether a user does or
doesn't have this bug fix, the version number needed to be changed to
V2.2c. Hence the apparent "skip" of V2.2b.
The Construction Kit did not encounter any last minute bug reports, so it
remains V2.2b. This is the version that is now available on the web-site
and via the "Locate Files" mechanism within AB.
Thanks, Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 04:48:29 -0000
From: woodywalton@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Comp group % max & validation question
Rob,
All I can say is that you know who I work for and you were more than
diplomatic in your response/comentary regarding the powers that be! ;-
)
-Woody
--- In armybuilder@y..., Rob Bowes <rob@w...> wrote:
> Looks like I owe you $5 and Microsoft needs to receive more hate
mail from
> me. :-(
>
> It turns out the problem is due to the behavior of the Microsoft
C++
> compiler and how it performs floating point calculations. According
to VC,
> the calculation "(50 * 1000) / 100" results in 499.999989 (for a
50% limit
> on a 1000 point roster). So, when you compare a limit of 499.999989
to an
> actual size of 500, the actual size is larger than the limit and a
> validation error is triggered. :-(
>
> The important thing to note on this is that it ONLY occurs in a
RELEASE
> build. In a debug build, the behavior is correct, because the
calculations
> are correct. Therefore, I never encountered this anomaly during all
of my
> testing. Joy. :-(
>
> I just love Microsoft's consistency (i.e. their utter lack of it in
their
> products IS their consistency). I'm well into double digits on the
number
> of bugs and/or inconsistencies within the VC compiler that I've
stumbled
> over with AB - not to mention the bugs and inconsistencies I've
encountered
> in numerous other Microsoft tools along the way. It's quite
depressing.
>
> In any case, I will figure out a way to accommodate this problem
and get a
> fix for it into the imminent release of AB. Hit me up for the $5 at
the
> next Con.
>
> Thanks, Rob
>
>
> At 12:28 PM 9/19/2001 +0000, you wrote:
> >Rob,
> >
> >All the numbers I work with for costs have no decimal places. I
> >have tried it with multiple lists from all five races. It throws
> >the validation message when the number is right on the max.(500pts
> >of 1000 at 50%). I have changed the roster sizes and it does not
> >seem to be tied to a specific size or range (100 to 5000 points in
> >50 point increments). I sent you the datafiles earlier last weekend
> >so you can verify the behavior yourself if you would like. The
> >demonworld.ab file is up on ab-fiels as well.
> >
> >Woody
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> Rob Bowes (rob@w...) (650) 726-9689
> Lone Wolf Development
www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:34:16 -0400
From: "KoWind" <kowind7@yahoo.com>
Subject: Intersting Situation
Multi question post here....
Say I have a Chaos Lord with Termie armor and MoN.
Now I want to give him a retinue of Cult Termies (specifically Nurgle).
1) Can I upgrade any/all of the CT/N's to Asp Champs?
(C:CSM p7 - Chaos Lord's Retinue - Options - "However, any number of
members of the Retinue may be upgrade to Aspiring Champions, rather than
just one as is normally the case" )
2) Can I only upgrade one (1) CT/N to an Asp Champ?
(C:CA p59 - Character : "Up to one model may be designated as an aspiring
champion blah...blah...blah)
If it's #1, then the datafiles need to be fixed...
If it's #2, then I've made an a** of myself again!! =)
Next Question!
If I take a retinue of CT/N's, with the sacred number of Nurgle (7), I'm
supposed to be able to upgrade one to a Asp Champ for free...it does not let
me do this...it charges me the 15 points...
Thanks
KoWind
Get your FREE credit report with a FREE CreditCheck
Monitoring Service trial
http://us.click.yahoo.com/MDsVHB/bQ8CAA/ySSFAA/IMSolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
To unsubscribe from this group, email
armybuilder-unsubscribe@egroups.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------
There are 17 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Noob Question
From: tzeench <DavidR@riskinc.com>
2. RE: Duh question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
3. Re: Correct Syntax
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
4. Re: Strange error in 40k files / ab2.2a
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
5. Re: Comp group % max & validation question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
6. Re: Noob Question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
7. Re: Comp group % max & validation question
From: woodywalton@hotmail.com
8. Re: Noob Question
From: DavidR@riskinc.com
9. Re: Tau
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
10. Harlequin Q
From: "matthew" <mvile@uno.edu>
11. Re: Comp group % max & validation question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
12. V2.2c Released
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
13. Re: Comp group % max & validation question
From: woodywalton@hotmail.com
14. Intersting Situation
From: "KoWind" <kowind7@yahoo.com>
15. Re: Intersting Situation
From: Ghazhkull_Thraka@dakkadakka.com
16. Re: Noob Question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
17. Re: Comp group % max & validation question
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2001 22:18:58 -0700
From: tzeench <DavidR@riskinc.com>
Subject: Noob Question
Help-
I need some expert help here- Im trying to make a list for a local ruleset. But i cant figure how to make it work right. Heres the problem.
You have the main unit (A) it gets its troops and such, upgrades and addons- But if you chose this unit you can get 1 or 2 sub units. But you have to have this unit inorder for you to chose them.
Also sone of the units if you pick certain command squads changes the way the troops are avaible (aka from rare to common) any ideas?
Thanks
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 03:29:28 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: RE: Duh question
At 12:10 PM 9/18/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>Can't change stat names within ABCreator, so I need the Save to text
>option -- which is disabled, so I'm assuming this puppy is locked.
>
>Does *anybody* have the source files for the compiled .wrm files?
The author of the files would have them. His email address ought to be
included in the data files. If not, it should be on the Wolf Lair web-site.
Go to the data files section and it his contact info should be listed next
to the download link.
If the author remains AWOL for an extended period (i.e. not just on
vacation for a few days), let me know and I'll try to flush him out.
However, if he's not willing to provide unlocked files for you to use, then
that's his option.
Thanks, Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 03:32:07 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Correct Syntax
Er, you can't do that. The syntax for the "catg" attribute, as given within
ABCreator, does not include any additional qualifiers, such as race
constraints. If you wish to impose race constraints on a "catg" attribute,
you need to create a separate option that contains the "catg" attribute and
an appropriate "lglx" attribute with the desired constraints.
Thanks, Rob
At 11:49 AM 9/15/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>What is the correct syntax for catg
>
>I want to do
>
>catg:wiz with a race modifier on it but can't work out what the
>seperator before the race code should be
>
>Anyone anyideas?
>
>Mike M
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 03:38:45 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Strange error in 40k files / ab2.2a
Unfortunately, this is the first report of this problem I have witnessed.
Given that a large number of AB users utilize the 40K files, I'm certain I
would have had this reported at least once previously if this was a problem
within AB - especially if it has occurred with more than one set of 40K
data files.
Are you sure that you are running V2.2a? This may sound ridiculous, but did
you install it after downloading it? [Note: At least two users have
downloaded updates and neglected to install them.] Please go to the Help
menu within AB and select "About Army Builder". Verify that the version
number displayed is V2.2a. If not, you need the update. If so, then contact
me directly at support@wolflair.com and I will try to come up with ideas of
what might be the problem for you.
Thanks, Rob
At 02:29 PM 9/15/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>I have a weird one:
>
>I cannot install the 40k files on my system.
>
>When I try, it goes through all the motions - even tells me that the
>installation is complete, but 40k system doesn't show up on the game-
>select menu. I checked the data folder to find that none of the files
>gets copied.
>
>I have had this problem since I upgraded to version 2.2a, with two
>versions of the 40k files. These are the only files I have had this
>problem with.
>
>I own the 1.4 cd, and have observed the same problem using Windows ME
>and on a newly installed 98SE - cleaned down the machine in hope of
>fixing it; didn't help.
>
>Today I will try to copy the installed files from my friends machine
>(where it all works out perfectly) and put them in manually, in the
>hope that it will work this way.
>
>Hope there is something you can do to fix this, as it is rather
>annoying.
>
>Lars Gottlieb.
>Denmark.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 03:48:49 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Comp group % max & validation question
I'll bet you $5 that AB is working correctly.
The reason is that this WAS a problem when V2.0 was first released, and it
was a subtle one. My guess is that you're falling prey to the inverse
situation of how I messed up within V2.0.
Consider the following. You are creating a 2000 point roster. Composition
group X is limited to a maximum of 50% of the total points in the roster.
The rule is given as "<=50%", which is interpreted to mean that the roster
is valid when you have exactly 50% or less. Now let's say you currently
have 1001 points of X in your roster, which translates to 50% after
reasonable rounding is performed. So the percentage will display as 50%
within AB. However, the REAL percentage is 50.05%, which is MORE than 50%.
Therefore, AB will report this as a validation error, even though the
rounded percentage displayed by AB will appear to be valid.
Please double-check this subtle distinction within your rosters. I've got
$5 riding on AB doing this correctly, so don't make we wait too long for
verification.
Besides, V2.2b just went final and is ready to be released, and I *REALLY* don't want to run into a new bug like this. So
I'll hold off releasing it for 24 hours so you can verify that AB is
working correctly and let me know.
Thanks, Rob
At 12:48 AM 9/19/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>All,
>
>
>In general, if a comp group is set to a max of x% is the validation
>supposed to trigger when that maximum % is reached, exceeded, or
>both? I have many percentage based maximums defined for comp groups
>in my datafiles and some are triggered when they reach the exact %
>and have not gone over. The default text for the validation message
>states "Composition group 'name' does not satisfy requirements
>(<=x%)" The issue is that the comp group is actually in agreement
>with the expression 'less than or equal to x percent' because it is
>equal to x percent.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Woody
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 04:10:53 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Noob Question
At 10:18 PM 9/18/2001 -0700, you wrote:
>You have the main unit (A) it gets its troops and such, upgrades and
>addons- But if you chose this unit you can get 1 or 2 sub units. But you
>have to have this unit inorder for you to chose them.
This simplest solution is to use either the "trat" race attribute or the
"reqd" unit attribute. For "trat", you would assign a type to each of the
special sub-units and another type to the main unit. You would then verify
that the appearance of type "subunit" also requires the presence of type
"mainunit". For "reqd", you could specify an explicit requirement on the
presence of the main unit in the roster.
>Also sone of the units if you pick certain command squads changes the way
>the troops are avaible (aka from rare to common) any ideas?
This is a bit more difficult to model. There is no way to change the
behavior of one unit (e.g. the composition group it belongs to) based on
the characteristics of other units. So this will need to be solved specially.
One option is to use the "mode" attribute and create a separate scenario
for each special command squad. You could then use the "xcmp" unit
attribute to control the composition group properly for each mode. You
would also need to use the "need" race attribute to require the
corresponding command squad for each scenario.
Another solution would be to have options associated with each unit that
allow the user to change the composition group from its default to the
proper one. You would also need to utilize types on these options in
conjunction with "trat" attributes to verify that the user changes the
composition groups correctly. You could also use the "tlmt" attribute with
the "-istype" qualifier to perform the validations.
Hope this helps,
Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 12:28:05 -0000
From: woodywalton@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Comp group % max & validation question
Rob,
All the numbers I work with for costs have no decimal places. I
have tried it with multiple lists from all five races. It throws
the validation message when the number is right on the max.(500pts
of 1000 at 50%). I have changed the roster sizes and it does not
seem to be tied to a specific size or range (100 to 5000 points in
50 point increments). I sent you the datafiles earlier last weekend
so you can verify the behavior yourself if you would like. The
demonworld.ab file is up on ab-fiels as well.
Woody
--- In armybuilder@y..., Rob Bowes <rob@w...> wrote:
> I'll bet you $5 that AB is working correctly.
>
> The reason is that this WAS a problem when V2.0 was first
released, and it
> was a subtle one. My guess is that you're falling prey to the
inverse
> situation of how I messed up within V2.0.
>
> Consider the following. You are creating a 2000 point roster.
Composition
> group X is limited to a maximum of 50% of the total points in the
roster.
> The rule is given as "<=50%", which is interpreted to mean that
the roster
> is valid when you have exactly 50% or less. Now let's say you
currently
> have 1001 points of X in your roster, which translates to 50%
after
> reasonable rounding is performed. So the percentage will display
as 50%
> within AB. However, the REAL percentage is 50.05%, which is MORE
than 50%.
> Therefore, AB will report this as a validation error, even though
the
> rounded percentage displayed by AB will appear to be valid.
>
> Please double-check this subtle distinction within your rosters.
I've got
> $5 riding on AB doing this correctly, so don't make we wait too
long for
> verification.
Besides, V2.2b just went final and is ready to be
> released, and I *REALLY* don't want to run into a new bug like
this. So
> I'll hold off releasing it for 24 hours so you can verify that AB
is
> working correctly and let me know.
>
> Thanks, Rob
>
>
> At 12:48 AM 9/19/2001 +0000, you wrote:
> >All,
> >
> >
> >In general, if a comp group is set to a max of x% is the
validation
> >supposed to trigger when that maximum % is reached, exceeded, or
> >both? I have many percentage based maximums defined for comp
groups
> >in my datafiles and some are triggered when they reach the exact %
> >and have not gone over. The default text for the validation
message
> >states "Composition group 'name' does not satisfy requirements
> >(<=x%)" The issue is that the comp group is actually in agreement
> >with the expression 'less than or equal to x percent' because it
is
> >equal to x percent.
> >
> >Thanks,
> >
> >Woody
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
--------
> Rob Bowes (rob@w...) (650) 726-9689
> Lone Wolf Development
www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 08:40:33 -0700
From: DavidR@riskinc.com
Subject: Re: Noob Question
Thanks that should help alot- Was just imputing them in the same unit class
with a @ in front till i could get some help. Yeah the second one was the
doosy. To mabe i should just base it around points instead of points and
comp groups.
Anyone know if someone is makeing the AB files for the Warhammer Panzer
Rules? (aka hate to be doing this for nothing)
Dave
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 20:42:00 +0100
From: Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister <demandred@skrill.org>
Subject: Re: Tau
At 21:40 18/09/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Not sure if this has been asked yet but is anyone doing the Tau
>for armybuilder? And if so, when could we expect it out?
I shall skin you alive*&$*&$
ahem. Someone else (Shawn someone? Search for 'Tau' in the archives) has
started writing it, and who am I to stop them. It'll be ready whenever
they're finished
--
Colen 'Skrillboy' McAlister, demandred@skrill.org
http://www.skrill.org/, http://www.incompetence-central.co.uk/
1 = 2, for large values of 1.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 20:09:54 -0000
From: "matthew" <mvile@uno.edu>
Subject: Harlequin Q
Colen,
I think there be a small problem with the Add Troupe Leader option to
the HAJetbike Squad Unit. It appears that the datafile "forgets" that
the troop leader is still mounted on a jetbike. This becomes
problematic because it is possible to assign your troop leader to the
jetbike with the Shuriken Cannon upgrade (I see nothing in the codex
preventing this); however, there is no way to represent this on the
output.
Obviously, it's really not that big of a problem (the TL actually
shows no jetbike weps whatsoever, you just have to remember) but I'm a
bit obsessive
Related to this, unlike when assigning a troop leader to an Harlequin infantry troop. The datafile fails to reduce
the # of CCWs assigned to the troop, though it does reduce the number
of models in the troupe (thereby triggering a validation error). How
could this be fixed?
Matthew "electricblooz" Vile
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 18:30:32 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: Re: Comp group % max & validation question
Looks like I owe you $5 and Microsoft needs to receive more hate mail from
me. :-(
It turns out the problem is due to the behavior of the Microsoft C++
compiler and how it performs floating point calculations. According to VC,
the calculation "(50 * 1000) / 100" results in 499.999989 (for a 50% limit
on a 1000 point roster). So, when you compare a limit of 499.999989 to an
actual size of 500, the actual size is larger than the limit and a
validation error is triggered. :-(
The important thing to note on this is that it ONLY occurs in a RELEASE
build. In a debug build, the behavior is correct, because the calculations
are correct. Therefore, I never encountered this anomaly during all of my
testing. Joy. :-(
I just love Microsoft's consistency (i.e. their utter lack of it in their
products IS their consistency). I'm well into double digits on the number
of bugs and/or inconsistencies within the VC compiler that I've stumbled
over with AB - not to mention the bugs and inconsistencies I've encountered
in numerous other Microsoft tools along the way. It's quite depressing.
In any case, I will figure out a way to accommodate this problem and get a
fix for it into the imminent release of AB. Hit me up for the $5 at the
next Con.
Thanks, Rob
At 12:28 PM 9/19/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>Rob,
>
>All the numbers I work with for costs have no decimal places. I
>have tried it with multiple lists from all five races. It throws
>the validation message when the number is right on the max.(500pts
>of 1000 at 50%). I have changed the roster sizes and it does not
>seem to be tied to a specific size or range (100 to 5000 points in
>50 point increments). I sent you the datafiles earlier last weekend
>so you can verify the behavior yourself if you would like. The
>demonworld.ab file is up on ab-fiels as well.
>
>Woody
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:04:39 -0700
From: Rob Bowes <rob@wolflair.com>
Subject: V2.2c Released
It's official. Army Builder V2.2c has now been released. This new version
includes a handful of bug fixes that have been reported since V2.2a was
released. Please check the release notes for details.
Why is it V2.2c and not V2.2b? Good question. Yesterday, the Gold Master a
new production run of AB Demo CDs was sent off with V2.2b on it. The plan
was to released V2.2b online last night. But a bug report rolled in that
was rather important last night. So that bug has been fixed and
incorporated into V2.2c. In order to distinguish whether a user does or
doesn't have this bug fix, the version number needed to be changed to
V2.2c. Hence the apparent "skip" of V2.2b.
The Construction Kit did not encounter any last minute bug reports, so it
remains V2.2b. This is the version that is now available on the web-site
and via the "Locate Files" mechanism within AB.
Thanks, Rob
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 04:48:29 -0000
From: woodywalton@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: Comp group % max & validation question
Rob,
All I can say is that you know who I work for and you were more than
diplomatic in your response/comentary regarding the powers that be! ;-
)
-Woody
--- In armybuilder@y..., Rob Bowes <rob@w...> wrote:
> Looks like I owe you $5 and Microsoft needs to receive more hate
mail from
> me. :-(
>
> It turns out the problem is due to the behavior of the Microsoft
C++
> compiler and how it performs floating point calculations. According
to VC,
> the calculation "(50 * 1000) / 100" results in 499.999989 (for a
50% limit
> on a 1000 point roster). So, when you compare a limit of 499.999989
to an
> actual size of 500, the actual size is larger than the limit and a
> validation error is triggered. :-(
>
> The important thing to note on this is that it ONLY occurs in a
RELEASE
> build. In a debug build, the behavior is correct, because the
calculations
> are correct. Therefore, I never encountered this anomaly during all
of my
> testing. Joy. :-(
>
> I just love Microsoft's consistency (i.e. their utter lack of it in
their
> products IS their consistency). I'm well into double digits on the
number
> of bugs and/or inconsistencies within the VC compiler that I've
stumbled
> over with AB - not to mention the bugs and inconsistencies I've
encountered
> in numerous other Microsoft tools along the way. It's quite
depressing.
>
> In any case, I will figure out a way to accommodate this problem
and get a
> fix for it into the imminent release of AB. Hit me up for the $5 at
the
> next Con.
>
> Thanks, Rob
>
>
> At 12:28 PM 9/19/2001 +0000, you wrote:
> >Rob,
> >
> >All the numbers I work with for costs have no decimal places. I
> >have tried it with multiple lists from all five races. It throws
> >the validation message when the number is right on the max.(500pts
> >of 1000 at 50%). I have changed the roster sizes and it does not
> >seem to be tied to a specific size or range (100 to 5000 points in
> >50 point increments). I sent you the datafiles earlier last weekend
> >so you can verify the behavior yourself if you would like. The
> >demonworld.ab file is up on ab-fiels as well.
> >
> >Woody
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
> Rob Bowes (rob@w...) (650) 726-9689
> Lone Wolf Development
www.wolflair.com
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 14
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 21:34:16 -0400
From: "KoWind" <kowind7@yahoo.com>
Subject: Intersting Situation
Multi question post here....
Say I have a Chaos Lord with Termie armor and MoN.
Now I want to give him a retinue of Cult Termies (specifically Nurgle).
1) Can I upgrade any/all of the CT/N's to Asp Champs?
(C:CSM p7 - Chaos Lord's Retinue - Options - "However, any number of
members of the Retinue may be upgrade to Aspiring Champions, rather than
just one as is normally the case" )
2) Can I only upgrade one (1) CT/N to an Asp Champ?
(C:CA p59 - Character : "Up to one model may be designated as an aspiring
champion blah...blah...blah)
If it's #1, then the datafiles need to be fixed...
If it's #2, then I've made an a** of myself again!! =)
Next Question!
If I take a retinue of CT/N's, with the sacred number of Nurgle (7), I'm
supposed to be able to upgrade one to a Asp Champ for free...it does not let
me do this...it charges me the 15 points...
Thanks
KoWind