Army Builder 7th edition 40K rules v1.02 is out. UPDATED 9/11/14

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**MajorWesJanson**

Anpu42 wrote:
Looky Likey wrote:
Anpu42 wrote:
None of the HH units are showing up, is there an update I need?
Showing where? I see them fine if I select Age of Darkness as my armyA type, then choose primary detachment.

All I Show is:
Allied Detachment
Lords of War (Sons of Horus)
Primary Detachment (Sons of Horus)

Click on the primary detachment, and it will expand. It's a little wonky.

**Anpu42**

MajorWesJanson wrote:
Anpu42 wrote:
Looky Likey wrote:
Anpu42 wrote:
None of the HH units are showing up, is there an update I need?
Showing where? I see them fine if I select Age of Darkness as my armyA type, then choose primary detachment.

All I Show is:
Allied Detachment
Lords of War (Sons of Horus)
Primary Detachment (Sons of Horus)

Click on the primary detachment, and it will expand. It's a little wonky.

Thank you and a little Wonky!

**Aerethan**

Updated the first post with most current file.

**filbert**

I notice that file version v1.43 came out yesterday - does this include the recent Imperial Guard codex? Anyone know? It's not always entirely obvious if the latest codex has been applied or not.

According to the release notes, Codex Tyranids hasn't even been added yet (at least, there is no mention of it being added in the release notes so I guess not) so I assuming the Imperial Guard codex is still awaiting being added too.

AB Release Notes wrote:AB 40K Files 6th Edition Revision History:
v1.00: 04 August 12: Initial 6th edition release.
v1.01: 11 August 12: Updating files for 6th edition compliance.
v1.02: 16 August 12: Updating files for 6th edition compliance.
v1.03: 19 August 12: Updating files for 6th Edition compliance.
v1.04: 23 August 12: Updating files for 6th Edition compliance.
v1.05: 27 August 12: Updating files for 6th Edition compliance.
v1.06: 12 September 12: Updating files for 6th Edition compliance.
v1.06: 25 September 12: Updating files for 6th Edition compliance.
v1.07:
v1.08: 27 October 12: Updating files for 6E compliance. Addition of Codex Chaos Space Marines.
v1.09: 28 October 12: Updating files for 6E compliance. Bugfixes and corrections for new Chaos Space Marines.
v1.10: 14 November 12: Updating files for 6E compliance. Bugfixes and corrections for new Chaos Space Marines.
v1.11: 21 November 12: Updating files for 6E compliance. Bugfixes and corrections for new Chaos Space Marines.
v1.12: 28 November 12: Updating files for 6E compliance. Bugfixes and corrections for new Chaos Space Marines.
v1.13: 12 February 13: Addition of Codex Dark Angels. Updating files for 6E compliance. Bugfixes and corrections.
v1.14: 14 February 13: Updating files for 6E compliance. Bugfixes and corrections for new Dark Angels.
v1.15: 18 February 13: Updating files for 6E compliance. Bugfixes and corrections for new Dark Angels.
v1.16: 25 February 13: Updating files for 6E compliance. Bugfixes and corrections for new Dark Angels.
v1.17: xx February 13: Addition of Imperial Armour 1 (second edition), Death from the Skies, Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.18: 15 May 13: Addition of Codex Tau Empire, updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.19: 20 May 13: Corrections to Codex Tau Empire, updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.20: 27 May 13: Corrections to Codex Tau Empire, updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.21: 29 May 13: Corrections to Codex Tau Empire, updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.22: 24 June 13: Codex Eldar, updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.23: 1 July 13: Corrections to Codex Eldar, updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.24: 8 July 13: Corrections to Codex Eldar, updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.25: 29 July 13: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.26: 5 August 13: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.27: 26 August 13: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.28: 23 October 13: Addition of Codex Space Marines, Horus Heresy, many other updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.29: 28 October 13: Corrections to Codex Space Marines, Horus Heresy, many other updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.30: 11 November 13: Corrections to Codex Space Marines, Horus Heresy, many other updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.31: 18 November 13: Corrections to Codex Space Marines, Horus Heresy, many other updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.32: 27 November 13: Necron Dark Harvest. Corrections to Codex Space Marines, Horus Heresy, many other updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.33: 4 December 13: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.34: 15 January 14: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.35: 22 February 14: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.36: 26 February 14: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.37: 5 March 14: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.38: 12 March 14: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.39: 20 March 14: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.40: 27 March 14: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.41: 20 April 14: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.42: 5 May 14: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.
v1.43: 8 May 14: Updates, bugfixes and corrections.

**Looky Likey**

There was a version yesterday and a version earlier in the week, I think the one yesterday was an emergency bug fix as the one from earlier in the week was pretty broken, it was expecting me to have Tau stuff in my Space Marine army.

Nids was added before this week. New AM hasn't been added yet, I'm not sure its been a month yet since AM released?

I'm waiting for the 3rd HH book to be added as well.

**Aerethan**

http://dl.dropbox.com/s/04pt44k4pah6smn/AB40K6v1_43.ab?dl=1 updated

**Skinnereal**

Yay, fortifications from SA.

**Marius Xerxes**

Still waiting for AM..

**NecronLord3**

Yes now they have taken the time to add sub sections to all the forum topics, but still fail to update the program for books released last year. +1 for battlescribe.

**Skinnereal**

1.45 is out, and has a fair few updates.
AM is in, and I'll look for more later.

Missing options: CCS, vox caster

**filbert**

Army Builder is dead in the water at the moment it seems. The volunteer team over at AB40K are pretty much a couple of blokes left and they don't seem to be able or willing to keep up with the pace of new releases. No 7th ed files yet, for example. If only Battlescribe had better output templates. Battlescribe with Army Builder style output would suit me just fine.

**daedalus**

filbert wrote:
Army Builder is dead in the water at the moment it seems. The volunteer team over at AB40K are pretty much a couple of blokes left and they don't seem to be able or willing to keep up with the pace of new releases. No 7th ed files yet, for example. If only Battlescribe had better output templates. Battlescribe with Army Builder style output would suit me just fine.

Yeah. A friend of mine and I were brainstorming a army list creator that would be web based quite a long time ago, and one night a couple weeks ago, while getting dinner at the nearby pub, he turned to me and said, "You know, if we would have actually finished the site, we would have had to redo literally everything we'd done so far to accommodate for 6th, and then we'd have had to adjust again for 7th."

I gave him a high five and we went on eating, and drinking.

**Skinnereal**

What does AB need ti add for 7th? It's not like GW lets them add rules any more, so I'm using 6th versions for now. It'll not change the points or anything.

I expect the AB listbuilders are swamped with the books getting thrown at them from GW. As-and-when is enough, if we know things are moving at all. It looks so, so I'll wait around for them to drop.

**daedalus**

Allies come to mind. So do 7th edition psychic powers.

Also, escalation units would be nice, since that's a part of the game now.

**NecronLord3**

This was posted on the AB40k forums by one of the maintainers, and sums up the position at it stands nicely so I thought it was worth posting here. Dan

Bear with us. We have just brought a new maintainer on board. I did Imperial Guard, he has started up with Astra Militarum and Militarum Tempestus. You might have noticed from the laundry list of bugs he is quite busy. Once that is stable, we have a whole bunch of Imperial Armour as well as Apocalypse to update. I have to nuke Eldar, Iyanden and Corsairs starting from the ground up to get 6th edition allies working right. Then we can start on 7th edition. Also, you might have noticed our lead maintainer has had to step away to take care of real world issues. Rest assured, we don't do this because we have to, we do it because we want to. A complete list of what has changed would help us immensely. Here is a link: http://www.ab40k.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=3174 to collect them in one place.

Regards,
Homer

P.S. BTW, you can always set Apocalypse on and it is like having an unbound list anyway.

Glad those who couldn't keep up with this decided to walk away, for what ever reason. I totally understand real life getting in the way. I just hate it when those in control hang on to the programs when they know they can't do it any more. Look at Rick Raisley, the creator of Heavy Metal Pro for Battletech, that guy refused to give up the license and yet has produced a new program in over a decade.

**Shandara**

Well in this case noone is stopping anyone from writing their own AB 40k files.

**davethepak**

Shandara wrote:
Well in this case noone is stopping anyone from writing their own AB 40k files.

^ This.

If they really have "walked away" then make your own (I am ignorant as to anyone quitting - last I read they were just on reduced staff and behind).

NOTHING is stopping anyone from making a new set of files - especially since you can install into different directories.

If you actually read the documentation, and look over the files - its not hard to figure out how to do it.

What is hard, is the amount of work - and this is what we all who use it owe thanks to the AB maintainers.

I have in the past updated my own codexes while waiting for official updates.

**NecronLord3**

I tried to add in Be'Lakor and couldnt make it work.

**Looky Likey**

I wouldn't blame them if they have walked away with the dog's abuse they have over the timeliness of updates considering they are unpaid volunteers.

I think it needs a donation pot to get it started again, actually start paying people to update would be good.

I would imagine all of the custom FoCs that the 7th edition codex are running with would be a right pain to sort out as well, it feels like a total rewrite of a lot of the core stuff in the data file.

**daedalus**

Looky Likey wrote:
I think it needs a donation pot to get it started again, actually start paying people to update would be good.

That is a compelling idea.

**jlong05**

daedalus wrote:
Looky Likey wrote:
I think it needs a donation pot to get it started again, actually start paying people to update would be good.

That is a compelling idea.

compelling, but illegal. It will bring GW IP lawyers back into the mix which we don't want.

**daedalus**

jlong05 wrote:
daedalus wrote:
Looky Likey wrote:
I think it needs a donation pot to get it started again, actually start paying people to update would be good.

That is a compelling idea.

compelling, but illegal. It will bring GW IP lawyers back into the mix which we don't want.

I'm not sure it would be. I know you're in some way affiliated with the effort though, and I'm not a lawyer, so I won't talk out my ass against someone who's likely privvy to more information than me in the matter.

At any rate, I can understand simply not wanting to deal with the GW legal hellhounds.

**Skinnereal**

davethepak wrote:

NOTHING is stopping anyone from making a new set of files

I can throw together the bits to build a comms room, and wire up an office to get people in the internet, etc.
But, I cannot program for toffee.
So, the people who can work out how to get these lists working, at all, are getting what money I can spare to use AB (bought and subscribed) and Battlescribe (paid-for).
If there's anything I could do to help, I would, but that's usually already taken care of by the time I hear about these things.

**filbert**

As an addendum to this, I wonder if it is possible for the Army Builder 40K development guys to throw the data files out to Github and take advantage of more collaborative working if they are struggling for man power. Battlescribe does something similar with its repository I believe and it would help make keeping on top of versions/updates a little easier.

**jlong05**

filbert wrote:
As an addendum to this, I wonder if it is possible for the Army Builder 40K development guys to throw the data files out to Github and take advantage of more collaborative working if they are struggling for man power. Battlescribe does something similar with its repository I believe and it would help make keeping on top of versions/updates a little easier.

That is a possibly and I admit to never looking a battlescribe to see how the files interact there, but can say that the 40k files are heavily integrated and small changes for one army have sometimes huge impacts on another. This is mainly due to shared code and design that doesn't always lend well to collaborative projects. This is why we have a strict process for bringing new talent on the team as we need to see how they develope as well as if they can work with the team. Guys only wanting to do their thing without regard to the bigger picture don't work out to well, and unfortunately that is what those group efforts really end up working like.

**davethepak**

I for one salute the guys maintaining the files - its not small task managing such a large body of complicated work, especially when they are all volunteers.

I have reviewed the files quite a lot (and made my own versions while waiting for "official" updates) and have to say - they are quite intertwined.

There are some benefits to this, as when gw makes changes to some core aspects, only a few things need to get updated.

The drawbacks are that changing how things are done (i.e. allies, fortifications, USR's etc.) is a bit harder to do as you sort of need to be backward compatible.

Personally, I wish I had more time to contribute to their project, and given the nature of the data, am not put-off by the fact they need to vet new talent with a lot of scrutiny .
(Making simple updates for my own files is one thing - making updates for complex file interactions which are robust enough for distribution is something else).

If they did want to use a more open source model to support larger collaboration (which may or my not be a good idea) it would be a lot of work, but might enable them to take a step back and recast the architecture and file interdependence.

Regardless of all that - I have a ton of respect for those guys, and with I could help more.

**jlong05**

I think that the only real way for this to move to a more open collaborative effort(ala Battlescribe style)is to make each army book its own complete file set. No relational items, no shared code, LOTS of duplicated effort and unfortunately LOTS of differing opinions on how something looks instead of a more cohesive style that exists now. With the shared code, we reduce lots of bloat in that code by not having 10+ bolter items. instead we have 1 that is used by all 10 armies. This works, but has issues when GW releases rules that say 9 armies use that bolter but this new release users Bolter #10 which now is different.

My understanding on Battlescribe from what I have seen/heard is that each army is a separate file that is loaded. This would eliminate that changes in one affects the other, but makes for some excessively larger loading times due to how AB loads armies.

I am curious how BS deals with more complex ideas like Dataslates, Formations, different FOC armies, Allies, etc...

**Looky Likey**

The new 7th edition data file is out and includes detachments, LoW, Grey Knights and Assassins, no Space Wolves. Assassins is bugged as it gives you warnings about not having HQ/Troops etc.

I had an issue understanding how to add units to a detachment as I couldn't seem to drag and drop them properly into a detachment. You have to select the indented name of the unit not the main heading for the unit then drag it into the detachment, the arrows should change from facing << to >> when you've got it right.

**Crablezworth**

I'm notific the same remove hq error with the astra militarum. It seems to think the primaris psykers take up hq slots.

**Kangodo**

jlong05 wrote:
My understanding on Battlescribe from what I have seen/heard is that each army is a separate file that is loaded. This would eliminate that changes in one affects the other, but makes for some excessively larger loading times due to how AB loads armies.

That would depend on how the builder loads the data.
My BS-Blood Angel file is only 1.4MB and contains (unless I forgot something) everything in the game, from GW, to FW and Apocalypse-Formations.

Github is really excellent to have multiple people and crowds working on the same thing.
I think it could really help Army Builder, but it gets more complicated if armies are intertwined like that.

I am curious how BS deals with more complex ideas like Dataslates, Formations, different FOC armies, Allies, etc...

You add a Force.
Each Force needs a Force Type (CAD, Allied Detachment, Apocalypse/Unbound or Formation) and the Codex/Faction that you want to use.
Stuff like 1-2 HQ is determined in the Force Type.
Then you can select a second Force if you want.
The only issue is that there is nothing to prevent you from taking an Allied Detachment that has the same Faction as your main.