Been playing with it a bit right now with the app updated, making my Harlequins list. I really like it. This will be my army builder moving forward, especially as it's so much easier to read and use than battlescribe.
It's there which is a plus. It still has issues, (Ie I was able to give a Daemon prince from a Deathguard detachment warlord traits from Nurgle Daemons codex and the Daemons Toll relic even though he is not eligible for it.
So basically, it's nice for friendly building but it is 100% not ready for being used as a RAW source.
But that's what I expect from a BETA product so I am happy so far.
Worth noting the "free beta" is for subscribers only from what I can see.
Sorry to clairfy - it still wants to charge me £3.99, it's not clear how "free" that is tbh.
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Dudeface wrote: Worth noting the "free beta" is for subscribers only from what I can see. Sorry to clairfy - it still wants to charge me £3.99, it's not clear how "free" that is tbh.
I take back what I initially said--they do bill it as free for a month. Might be they haven't 'activated' that correctly?
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Dudeface wrote: Worth noting the "free beta" is for subscribers only from what I can see.
Sorry to clairfy - it still wants to charge me £3.99, it's not clear how "free" that is tbh.
Even then as per that image I expect the subscription screen not to be asking me for £3.99. "Free for 1 month, £3.99 thereafter" isn't a big thing to amend.
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Can you even do that in this though? I've been told you have to click through to another page to read the full rules, you just get the statline
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Is that worth $5 a month though?
For me, yes. Especially as I'm already paying the $5 a month to get all the rules for my main army, as it doesn't have a 9th edition codex yet.
Do you have trouble adding up numbers? A calculator beyond the scope of your abilities? Pen and paper just too "out there"? Does Microsoft Excel scare you?
Then pay monthly for an army builder that you can use on a tiny mobile phone touch screen.
Kanluwen wrote: Like my amended post says, maybe they haven't activated it correctly?
I genuinely cannot think of a good way to word it so that certain folks don't just keep subscribing/unsubscribing for the free month.
The T&C's cover that the free month period is only eligible is a subscription is placed before 9th Jan, then your books and codes won't carry over if you used a new account each time.
It's just a lazy hurdle that's off putting, the archaic subscription mechanism and the lack of clarity has immediately put me off. It would be better to actually genuinely make it free and just suspend the service after 1 month unless you enter payment details, more people will get on board and provide feedback. Hell if they like it they might even subscribe properly.
Doohicky wrote: It's there which is a plus. It still has issues, (Ie I was able to give a Daemon prince from a Deathguard detachment warlord traits from Nurgle Daemons codex and the Daemons Toll relic even though he is not eligible for it.
So basically, it's nice for friendly building but it is 100% not ready for being used as a RAW source.
But that's what I expect from a BETA product so I am happy so far.
No army building software can nor should be used as raw source. Nor is that purpose.
Btw one function it has that i have missed from bs is ability to move unit from 1 det to another as is. But am i missing unit duplication?
Hell, make it so you can have 1 list for free, and if you subscribe you unlock multiple lists. Or just lock saving behind the paywall. There are countless better ways of doing this than making you subscribe, and telling you in the small print that don't worry, they won't bill you yet, so that's kind of free
H.B.M.C. wrote: Do you have trouble adding up numbers?
A calculator beyond thE scope of your abilities?
Pen and paper just too "out there"?
Does Microsoft Excel scare you?
Then pay monthly for an army builder that you can use on a tiny mobile phone touch screen.
Bargain!
This is such a tired argument against list building apps. Having the ability to do the math for building a detachment is irrelevant when you can hardly determine what all the options available to you are. The 9E unit cards have certainly helped with that, but there's so much housekeeping and flipping between pages to determine options that make an app appealing. Why would you not want something that presents an easy to use dropdown for what weapons a unit can take from multiple lists, or caps you at the right limit of options so you don't make a mistake.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Do you have trouble adding up numbers?
A calculator beyond the scope of your abilities?
Pen and paper just too "out there"?
Does Microsoft Excel scare you?
Then pay monthly for an army builder that you can use on a tiny mobile phone touch screen.
Bargain!
Your "argument" falls apart the moment you remember stuff like battlescribe exists . Thus revealing your sole purpose in thread is to troll
Even for an Alpha Vetsion this would be garbage, let alone Beta:
No way to give Wraithblades Axes, no psychic powers, no Exarch powers, Wraithlords only with the base loadout, cannot take more than 6 Dire Avengers, no way to make a model the Warlord, no custom Craftworlds. What were they thinking to go public with this? Was their reputation not trashed enough after the non-launch in the summer?
The app is completely useless. No comparison to BattleScribe.
edit: I have found the Wraithlord options.
edit2: ...or not. The options have vanished again.
efit3: It seems that Ynnari Wraithlords do not have loadout option, but Alaitoc Wraothlord do. For a second I thought, the mistake was my own... How naive.
Vovin wrote: Even for an Alpha Vetsion this would be garbage, let alone Beta:
No way to give Wraithblades Axes, no psychic powers, no Exarch powers, Wraithlords only with the base loadout, cannot take more than 6 Dire Avengers, no way to make a model the Warlord, no custom Craftworlds. What were they thinking to go public with this? Was their reputation not trashed enough after the non-launch in the summer?
The app is completely useless. No comparison to BattleScribe.
edit: I have found the Wraithlord options.
edit2: ...or not. The options have vanished again.
efit3: It seems that Ynnari Wraithlords do not have loadout option, but Alaitoc Wraothlord do. For a second I thought, the mistake was my own... How naive.
Ynnari Wraithlords and wraithblades have options for me (weapons and axes), and you can choose psychic powers and warlord traits. The warhammer community article says that the custom traits are coming soon. It's a Beta, there will be issues at launch, but the bugs will be worked out. But, there is no obligation to use the new app. I'm excited to have options besides just battlescribe.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Do you have trouble adding up numbers?
A calculator beyond the scope of your abilities?
Pen and paper just too "out there"?
Does Microsoft Excel scare you?
Then pay monthly for an army builder that you can use on a tiny mobile phone touch screen.
Bargain!
Your "argument" falls apart the moment you remember stuff like battlescribe exists . Thus revealing your sole purpose in thread is to troll
The existence and popularity of Piratescribe would appear to prove two things - firstly, that a lot of people appear to fall into groups along the lines HBMC suggested. Secondly, a lot of people appear to feel entitled to get access to rules content for free, rather than paying the content creator.
The release makes it sound like they don't even have sub-factions or stratagem-based abilities, so all the advertising copy above about how it's the "official way to make a 40k list" is obviously wrong. The lists you generate with this thing don't actually work yet and are not official, even aside from the myriad of the bugs that will no doubt be in it too.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Do you have trouble adding up numbers? A calculator beyond the scope of your abilities? Pen and paper just too "out there"? Does Microsoft Excel scare you?
Then pay monthly for an army builder that you can use on a tiny mobile phone touch screen.
Bargain!
B-b-b-but it's an official Games Workshop(tm) app! I have to use this because- I have to!
Also thanks for funding the alpha version to the people who were handing money over for this before I guess?
The existence and popularity of Piratescribe would appear to prove two things - firstly, that a lot of people appear to fall into groups along the lines HBMC suggested. Secondly, a lot of people appear to feel entitled to get access to rules content for free, rather than paying the content creator.
I'm pretty sure the vast, vast majority of people - like 99% of them - who were using Battlescribe had already paid money for the codexes. All Battlescribe did was facilitate an alternative way to write up an army list.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Do you have trouble adding up numbers?
A calculator beyond the scope of your abilities?
Pen and paper just too "out there"?
Does Microsoft Excel scare you?
Then pay monthly for an army builder that you can use on a tiny mobile phone touch screen.
Bargain!
Your "argument" falls apart the moment you remember stuff like battlescribe exists . Thus revealing your sole purpose in thread is to troll
The existence and popularity of Piratescribe would appear to prove two things - firstly, that a lot of people appear to fall into groups along the lines HBMC suggested. Secondly, a lot of people appear to feel entitled to get access to rules content for free, rather than paying the content creator.
Well when the codices are actually worth the $50+ they want to charge let us know.
Battlescribe is nice for poking around on building lists before you commit to a new army and buy all the stuff for it, too. I'd expect it earns GW far more sales than it loses them. As would a good, free official app.
I was holding out hope for this app. I thought the army builder might save it. Now that I've seen the (admittedly beta version) list builder, I can conclusively say I for one will stick with BattleScribe. Or, if that was not an option, Excel. Or pen and paper. Anything other than this app. Even if it were free.
This is less a player resource than a DRM tool for GW. You cant put a unit in list if you haven't unlocked it first by entering the code from the book into the app. Which makes sense if your biggest priority is making sure only people who have paid for your books can read the rules.
However, one of the biggest benefits to battlescribe is I can send my opponant my roster file and he can see what my units do, even if he doesnt own my codex.
Without that functionality, this list builder is practically useless.
This is less a player resource than a DRM tool for GW. You cant put a unit in list if you haven't unlocked it first by entering the code from the book into the app. Which makes sense if your biggest priority is making sure only people who have paid for your books can read the rules.
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Uh, what? Battlescribe has an army view that puts all the rules for the selected force in a single scrollable list, Battle Forge requires you to drill into each unit entry to see what it does while the relics/psychic powers/etc are not with the unit data card. My captain's stats and his base equipment stats, what equipment, relic and warlord traits I gave him, what that warlord trait does, and what that relic does are all in different places.
That's actually the make-or-break feature for me, if the final version doesn't have an army summary view then it's garbage.
On the other hand, Battlescribe chugs like a cottage cheese margarita when I open a list and it crashes altogether loading after an update, Battle Forge beats it like a rented mule on that front.
GaroRobe wrote: I like that they show off the "Ancient in Terminator armor" which was the Japenese exclusive terminator from the Space Marine Heroes paint set
It was available as a blind box in the RoW Series 2 boxes.
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Uh, what? Battlescribe has an army view that puts all the rules for the selected force in a single scrollable list, Battle Forge requires you to drill into each unit entry to see what it does while the relics/psychic powers/etc are not with the unit data card. My captain's stats and his base equipment stats, what equipment, relic and warlord traits I gave him, what that warlord trait does, and what that relic does are all in different places.
On the other hand, Battlescribe chugs like a cottage cheese margarita when I open a list and it crashes altogether loading after an update, Battle Forge beats it like a rented mule on that front.
Try actually reading what I wrote. Here's what I'm talking about: In Battle Forge, the weapons, Warlord options, and Relics give your their rules when you go to select them. For Battlescribe, you HAVE to go to the Army View to read what they do. If I want to look at what the various options do in Battlescribe, I have to continuously go back and forth between the unit options and list view. For Battle Forge, all I need to do is pull up the list of options. If I hit the Relics button, I have a list of all valid Relics AND their rules, that isn't a thing in Battlescribe, you just get a list in which you have to select one and then go to list view to see what that ONE does, repeat ad nauseum.
GaroRobe wrote: I like that they show off the "Ancient in Terminator armor" which was the Japenese exclusive terminator from the Space Marine Heroes paint set
It was available as a blind box in the RoW Series 2 boxes.
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Uh, what? Battlescribe has an army view that puts all the rules for the selected force in a single scrollable list, Battle Forge requires you to drill into each unit entry to see what it does while the relics/psychic powers/etc are not with the unit data card. My captain's stats and his base equipment stats, what equipment, relic and warlord traits I gave him, what that warlord trait does, and what that relic does are all in different places.
On the other hand, Battlescribe chugs like a cottage cheese margarita when I open a list and it crashes altogether loading after an update, Battle Forge beats it like a rented mule on that front.
Try actually reading what I wrote. Here's what I'm talking about: In Battle Forge, the weapons, Warlord options, and Relics give your their rules when you go to select them. For Battlescribe, you HAVE to go to the Army View to read what they do. If I want to look at what the various options do in Battlescribe, I have to continuously go back and forth between the unit options and list view. For Battle Forge, all I need to do is pull up the list of options. If I hit the Relics button, I have a list of all valid Relics AND their rules, that isn't a thing in Battlescribe, you just get a list.
Ah, I follow you now. They're each missing an important piece of functionality, Battlescribe won't tell you what Trophy Hunter or The Burning Blade does until after you select them, Battle Forge doesn't give me a summary view that says what my Captain with Trophy Hunter and The Burning Blade does while leaving out the Power Fist and Plasma Pistol that I didn't give him. Battle Forge is a better reference for building a list, Battlescribe is a better reference for playing a list.
Obviously we have different priorities there, hence why I read what you wrote as "I need to flip back and forth in Battlescribe because the army list doesn't show me what my relics do" instead of "I need to flip back and forth in Battlescribe because only the army list shows me what my relics do".
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Uh, what? Battlescribe has an army view that puts all the rules for the selected force in a single scrollable list, Battle Forge requires you to drill into each unit entry to see what it does while the relics/psychic powers/etc are not with the unit data card. My captain's stats and his base equipment stats, what equipment, relic and warlord traits I gave him, what that warlord trait does, and what that relic does are all in different places.
That's actually the make-or-break feature for me, if the final version doesn't have an army summary view then it's garbage.
On the other hand, Battlescribe chugs like a cottage cheese margarita when I open a list and it crashes altogether loading after an update, Battle Forge beats it like a rented mule on that front.
I really haven't had any issues running Battlescribe and I have what is maybe a late 00's laptop doing it.
Also you already have a standard idea of what relics there are and the requirements to take them. There's only so many entries to memorize.
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Uh, what? Battlescribe has an army view that puts all the rules for the selected force in a single scrollable list, Battle Forge requires you to drill into each unit entry to see what it does while the relics/psychic powers/etc are not with the unit data card. My captain's stats and his base equipment stats, what equipment, relic and warlord traits I gave him, what that warlord trait does, and what that relic does are all in different places.
That's actually the make-or-break feature for me, if the final version doesn't have an army summary view then it's garbage.
On the other hand, Battlescribe chugs like a cottage cheese margarita when I open a list and it crashes altogether loading after an update, Battle Forge beats it like a rented mule on that front.
I really haven't had any issues running Battlescribe and I have what is maybe a late 00's laptop doing it.
Also you already have a standard idea of what relics there are and the requirements to take them. There's only so many entries to memorize.
I'm running it on a mobile device, I've had all kinds of performance issues with Battlescribe.
Also, you might have a standard idea of what all your relics and warlord traits do, but I sure as heck don't. I own four armies (because I apparently have a problem) and I couldn't begin to tell you what the Custodes warlord traits or relics are off the top of my head. I doubt that even a Tyranid player who doesn't own another army could tell you what their warlord traits are outside of "god awful". Even for Marines I wouldn't trust that I remember what The Burning Blade does and I use that one all the time.
Especially with GW's "re-use the name of the item/rule/etc but subtly change how it works every year or two so you can't just rely on your recollection". But yeah I guess "just memorize all the info" is technically a solution
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Uh, what? Battlescribe has an army view that puts all the rules for the selected force in a single scrollable list, Battle Forge requires you to drill into each unit entry to see what it does while the relics/psychic powers/etc are not with the unit data card. My captain's stats and his base equipment stats, what equipment, relic and warlord traits I gave him, what that warlord trait does, and what that relic does are all in different places.
That's actually the make-or-break feature for me, if the final version doesn't have an army summary view then it's garbage.
On the other hand, Battlescribe chugs like a cottage cheese margarita when I open a list and it crashes altogether loading after an update, Battle Forge beats it like a rented mule on that front.
I really haven't had any issues running Battlescribe and I have what is maybe a late 00's laptop doing it.
Also you already have a standard idea of what relics there are and the requirements to take them. There's only so many entries to memorize.
I'm running it on a mobile device, I've had all kinds of performance issues with Battlescribe.
Also, you might have a standard idea of what all your relics and warlord traits do, but I sure as heck don't. I own four armies (because I apparently have a problem) and I couldn't begin to tell you what the Custodes warlord traits or relics are off the top of my head. I doubt that even a Tyranid player who doesn't own another army could tell you what their warlord traits are outside of "god awful". Even for Marines I wouldn't trust that I remember what The Burning Blade does and I use that one all the time.
I have run it on multiple laptops of different brands and 4 mobile devices (all Android) and haven't had a single issue (well maybe a couple of small ones that were patched up a few days later with an update but nothing that wont happen with BattleForge or any other app).
I don't know by hart almost any rules, to see them I add the same character/unit with various loadouts in the same roster, compare them on the summary page and then delete those that I don't want to keep. Some people might fin that tedious but it takes just a couple of extra minutes.
H.B.M.C. wrote: Do you have trouble adding up numbers?
A calculator beyond the scope of your abilities?
Pen and paper just too "out there"?
Does Microsoft Excel scare you?
Then pay monthly for an army builder that you can use on a tiny mobile phone touch screen.
Bargain!
Your "argument" falls apart the moment you remember stuff like battlescribe exists . Thus revealing your sole purpose in thread is to troll
The existence and popularity of Piratescribe would appear to prove two things - firstly, that a lot of people appear to fall into groups along the lines HBMC suggested. Secondly, a lot of people appear to feel entitled to get access to rules content for free, rather than paying the content creator.
His entire premise is that people are too lazy or stupid to build lists using simpler tools, and that's just bs. It's equivalent to telling people that buying a car is stupid because you have two healthy legs that you could use instead, completely ignoring that using a car/ list builder is a much faster and easier way to get the same result.
Your argument regarding piracy and entitlement is completely separate from that, and I have to agree - although the real question is if it's really worth 5 euros a month, and I'm tending towards "no" even if there was no battlescribe - as I'd probably use Excel instead as thats available on desktop PCs.
Nostromodamus wrote: Must be too busy trying to shine this turd of an app to answer my emails about my Deathwatch codex code not working.
There's a few characters that are poorly distinguished in the font they used. I had to go through 1/l/I ("one"/"el"/"eye") until I figured out the right character in mine.
Billicus wrote: I'm not seeing any reason to use this over Battlescribe and at least one good reason not to
Not having to constantly go back and forth between the unit entry and full list to see what each relic or Warlord trait does is more than enough to put it over Battlescribe for me. All the other ease of use features are icing on the cake past that.
Uh, what? Battlescribe has an army view that puts all the rules for the selected force in a single scrollable list, Battle Forge requires you to drill into each unit entry to see what it does while the relics/psychic powers/etc are not with the unit data card. My captain's stats and his base equipment stats, what equipment, relic and warlord traits I gave him, what that warlord trait does, and what that relic does are all in different places.
That's actually the make-or-break feature for me, if the final version doesn't have an army summary view then it's garbage.
On the other hand, Battlescribe chugs like a cottage cheese margarita when I open a list and it crashes altogether loading after an update, Battle Forge beats it like a rented mule on that front.
I really haven't had any issues running Battlescribe and I have what is maybe a late 00's laptop doing it.
Also you already have a standard idea of what relics there are and the requirements to take them. There's only so many entries to memorize.
I'm running it on a mobile device, I've had all kinds of performance issues with Battlescribe.
Also, you might have a standard idea of what all your relics and warlord traits do, but I sure as heck don't. I own four armies (because I apparently have a problem) and I couldn't begin to tell you what the Custodes warlord traits or relics are off the top of my head. I doubt that even a Tyranid player who doesn't own another army could tell you what their warlord traits are outside of "god awful". Even for Marines I wouldn't trust that I remember what The Burning Blade does and I use that one all the time.
You really don't need to memorize every detail outside playing the game. I generally know what the Burning Blade or Axe of Medusa are and what they replace for example. I don't need their rules present though to know that Primaris Captains basically won't have access to the Axe since they don't have Power Axes standard. I wouldn't even really call that a shortcut.
Try actually reading what I wrote. Here's what I'm talking about: In Battle Forge, the weapons, Warlord options, and Relics give your their rules when you go to select them. For Battlescribe, you HAVE to go to the Army View to read what they do. If I want to look at what the various options do in Battlescribe, I have to continuously go back and forth between the unit options and list view. For Battle Forge, all I need to do is pull up the list of options. If I hit the Relics button, I have a list of all valid Relics AND their rules, that isn't a thing in Battlescribe, you just get a list in which you have to select one and then go to list view to see what that ONE does, repeat ad nauseum.
The good news is you can use the lookup feature without subscribing for Codices you own. I've been using that in tandem with Battlescribe when I don't have the hard copy. Granted, that doesn't solve the horrendous sorting they have in the app or the way rules are scattered into multiple subcategories, but it does give me a solid list of these things. I'm hoping the app can solve this for me eventually, but the cost is pretty ridiculous. They need to at least have a 12 month discount or something to be even remotely competitively priced.
Just reading the reviews of this list builder doesn't inspire me to subscribe for that feature of the app.
Biggest issue I've run into is that with this update I can no longer access my Supplement: Blood Angels rules even though I redeemed the code. My buddy with a subscription and no supplement can view all the rules for the new BA book, but I cannot =\. Hopefully an email to their support team gives results.
I'm interested in a full-access app, for $5 CAD per month.
All books, all rules, all WD articles, all the bits and pieces that get released across a dozen books.
GW would make much more money off of me in terms of rules buying if that were the case. Because right now, I don't buy new. I'll buy used, because to me the books aren't worth $50 CAD period... I don't mind spending $20 on a codex but that's about my limit. Expension books? Pfft. If you're getting rid of it and I'm already buying something from you? I'll add $10.
But I honestly would pay $5 a month to have access to any and all rules related to the game. That's fair to me.
Mulletdude wrote: Just reading the reviews of this list builder doesn't inspire me to subscribe for that feature of the app.
Biggest issue I've run into is that with this update I can no longer access my Supplement: Blood Angels rules even though I redeemed the code. My buddy with a subscription and no supplement can view all the rules for the new BA book, but I cannot =\. Hopefully an email to their support team gives results.
For what it's worth, outside of the lack of a consolidated "Army View" feature I actually really like what I'm seeing of Battle Forge. It loads quick, it runs without any visual stutter, it's pretty easy to navigate, the polish is there that I'd expect out of an app I'm actually paying for, and it does work well as a reference for building an army. Add the Army View and I'm sold. Unfortunately that Army View is the critical feature, because as far as I'm concerned the app is a game aid and if it doesn't work well as a reference for actually playing the army then it's broken.
greatbigtree wrote: I'm interested in a full-access app, for $5 CAD per month.
All books, all rules, all WD articles, all the bits and pieces that get released across a dozen books.
GW would make much more money off of me in terms of rules buying if that were the case. Because right now, I don't buy new. I'll buy used, because to me the books aren't worth $50 CAD period... I don't mind spending $20 on a codex but that's about my limit. Expension books? Pfft. If you're getting rid of it and I'm already buying something from you? I'll add $10.
But I honestly would pay $5 a month to have access to any and all rules related to the game. That's fair to me.
Agreed. I'd be happy if $5 a month got you all the datasheets, and then faction specific stuff (Relics, powers, sub-faction rules) required the armybook code. At least then, I can see the stats of my opponents units in game. The app will loose that versatility with every release.
But, I'm also the person who likes to buy the collectors edition codex for my two armies every time they get a new book lol. I love having the fancy covers.
No... I'm talking full access. No codes, nothing other than I put $5 from my pocket into GW's pocket (EDIT - each month) and they give me digital access to anything they make, rules wise.
That is what would get me to buy in. Unlimited access. Price is negotiable, but the "purchase" is access to everything.
Decided to give it a try.... two of the DW Kill Teams don't exist so... not a great start. Specialisms also don't appear to work.
Takes a hilariously long time to load pre-game strategems. Doesn't include the DW ones. DW Warlord traits exist but it can't handle Paragon of the Chapter. Doesn't give Master of Sanctity an extra Litany... Master of Sanctity doesn't add to the Battalion's point total even though its added to the army....
Unplace is a mildly hilarious feature but helps you discover the void of All Units. You CAN use this view to look up the stats on models in your army pretty quickly, but the extended rules are sadly pretty hidden. A more robust view for play would be hugely appreciated.
So.... it's not terrible. It's got more mistakes than Battlescribe for my army currently but it does a lot of things better, some things worse, but its not beyond salvage. Worth the cost? Not currently? Will it ever be? Probably not, but if you like it and can afford it its not the worst excess I've seen.
I like the app layout..I like the quick reference rules..
However if this app is ever going to work it needs at bare minimum the ability to build and add options to units in the app even for units you don’t have the book code for. I don’t care if they block out the rules references from those books but I need to see what those options do... but as it is designed it is less useful then BattleScribe for list building.
Once they fix that and speed up the memory issues (I still can’t add strats the app just freezes) in certain spots and fix a few illegal builds/options this app will be decent... maybe not $5 good but decent.. from There they can add a reduce cost yearly subscription price like $29.99 for a year with the app.
Paying for a product that's still in the beta stage is perhaps not unusual (in e.g. video games), but I don't think I've seen it in a subscription service before. Sure, nice to get the first month free, but how long will it take before the product is in a fully functional state; how many paid months have passed by then?
My thanks to those trying the app and sharing their experiences already, so others won't have to.
Prometheum5 wrote: This is such a tired argument against list building apps.
It's not an argument against a list building app. It's an argument against this list building app. Y'know, the one that'll have a monthly fee just to use, and you still have to buy the Codices on top of that, and you don't even get a digital copy of the Codex.
tneva82 wrote: Your "argument" falls apart the moment you remember stuff like battlescribe exists . Thus revealing your sole purpose in thread is to troll
You don't pay for Battlescribe, so all that was really revealed is that you didn't understand my post.
Back in the days when Army Builder was the thing everyone used, I used it all the time. There were periods where I always had the program open - literally never closed for weeks - as I'd always find myself jumping in to tinker around with a new concept or a new list. It was fun. And I owned every fething Codex they put out. It wasn't "Army Pirater" or whatever nonsense nickname you might have given it had this very conversation taken place back then.
Trying to pin the anger towards this app on some form of entitlement or a want to "pirate" rules is pants on head moronic. It's bad because GW are taking people for a ride. You'd have to be mad to pay monthly for this garbage.
And just to clarify, because people still don't seem to get it:
I'm not arguing against army-building programs/apps. I'm arguing against this specific one. My post, hyperbolic as it was, was meant to point out that literally anything, even pen and paper, is better than giving GW money for their pathetic app.
And GW have done this before, y'know. They've released army builder programs, promising the world, under-delivered, and then abandoned them. Now this one wants you to pay per month to build lists? And you can only use the list building part if you first purchase a Codex and scan it in, which doesn't even give you an electronic version of the Codex (which they've also stopped selling).
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Why are some of you expecting a different result?
Have you guys actually tested what you're criticizing ? I don't own IAC , but I'm able to add and configure Leviathans and Deredeos just like any other marine unit. The limitation is that I don't see the actual rules for them, those are locked - but it gives me the option to add 0-3 HKMs and so on
H.B.M.C. wrote: The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Why are some of you expecting a different result?
And lets not forget what happened with GW's other digital subscription service - White Dwarf - where one day they just deleted the app and all four subscribers lost access to all of the digital issues they'd paid for...
It surprises me how much GW seems to push Crusade, but the app doesn’t support it at all. In addition to the codex rules not including any of the Crusade rules, now the army builder only does Points, no option for Power.
H.B.M.C. wrote: The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Why are some of you expecting a different result?
And lets not forget what happened with GW's other digital subscription service - White Dwarf - where one day they just deleted the app and all four subscribers lost access to all of the digital issues they'd paid for...
Not true - I've just re-downloaded the app on my phone and all my issues are still there.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
AduroT wrote: It surprises me how much GW seems to push Crusade, but the app doesn’t support it at all. In addition to the codex rules not including any of the Crusade rules, now the army builder only does Points, no option for Power.
To be honest, I don't need another monthly subscription just to centralise army building on my phone, I'll stick to Battlescribe for now, as it's free and not in Beta.
The ship has sailed in my opinion for this to be a credible app.
5$ a month may not feel like much, but it adds up, and it's more than I want to spend on a GW app when I'm already giving them more than I want to for over expensive models and rapid fire burn and churn books.
That and I actually like to make lists the old fashioned way I find it helps you remember your options, points, set ups a bit easier because you have to actually think for it. Just something I find that helps me.
AngryAngel80 wrote: 5$ a month may not feel like much, but it adds up, and it's more than I want to spend on a GW app when I'm already giving them more than I want to for over expensive models and rapid fire burn and churn books.
$5 a month is $120 a year. The choice between a barely functional app and two additional boxes of miniatures is a rather easy one.
AduroT wrote: It surprises me how much GW seems to push Crusade, but the app doesn’t support it at all. In addition to the codex rules not including any of the Crusade rules, now the army builder only does Points, no option for Power.
From the questions they're asking they went with points first because they think that's the most popular. Adding PL is one of the options they give for what we'd like to be added next.
Remember this is a work in progress, and giving feedback like this is important - even if you don't plan on using the app in its current state you can give your opinion and hopefully they'll add what you wanted soon.
There's a link at the end of the article announcing the beta, please use it
Maybe they'll rethink their pricing if enough people tell them they're being unreasonable. I'm certainly not going to pay 100+ euros a year for this if I'm still basically forced to buy all the books. The price would be reasonable if it unlocked all book codes like it does with the 8th edition stuff, at least to me.
nekooni wrote: Maybe they'll rethink their pricing if enough people tell them they're being unreasonable. I'm certainly not going to pay 100+ euros a year for this if I'm still basically forced to buy all the books. The price would be reasonable if it unlocked all book codes like it does with the 8th edition stuff, at least to me.
Agree, a stable app with good enough usability and all the rules inside would be worth 5€ to me as well.
AngryAngel80 wrote: 5$ a month may not feel like much, but it adds up, and it's more than I want to spend on a GW app when I'm already giving them more than I want to for over expensive models and rapid fire burn and churn books.
$5 a month is $120 a year. The choice between a barely functional app and two additional boxes of miniatures is a rather easy one.
I agree with you, but isn't it 60$ a year at that cost ?
Still for me not worth it with all the other costs that this hobby has with it.
I love the psychology of app subscription prices. I’m actively playing 40k, don’t want to pay $5 a month for the app. I haven’t played AoS in over a year, but have never bothered unsubscribing from Azyr’s $1 a month. I’m not sure where the line between those two price points falls exactly.
AduroT wrote: I love the psychology of app subscription prices. I’m actively playing 40k, don’t want to pay $5 a month for the app. I haven’t played AoS in over a year, but have never bothered unsubscribing from Azyr’s $1 a month. I’m not sure where the line between those two price points falls exactly.
£60 is a lot more than £12.
£60 will buy you a couple of boxes, £12 won't even get you a character sprue these days.
Maybe they'll rethink their pricing if enough people tell them they're being unreasonable. I'm certainly not going to pay 100+ euros a year for this if I'm still basically forced to buy all the books. The price would be reasonable if it unlocked all book codes like it does with the 8th edition stuff, at least to me.
I'm informing them of their unreasonability by not buying it or using it.
Conversely, I've bought a number of digital books/products for D&D beyond and roll20 for the D&D campaigns I'm playing/running - a couple hundred dollars at least by now. I'm not afraid to spend the money if the value is there - but right now the benchmark for functionality is the likes of Battlescribe (and the old Army Builder) and this app doesn't even meet those standards. Hell, the dead FFG X-Wing app makes this one look like an insult.
nekooni wrote: Have you guys actually tested what you're criticizing ? I don't own IAC , but I'm able to add and configure Leviathans and Deredeos just like any other marine unit. The limitation is that I don't see the actual rules for them, those are locked - but it gives me the option to add 0-3 HKMs and so on
Testing before critique? Novel concept around here.
H.B.M.C. wrote: The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Why are some of you expecting a different result?
And lets not forget what happened with GW's other digital subscription service - White Dwarf - where one day they just deleted the app and all four subscribers lost access to all of the digital issues they'd paid for...
Not true - I've just re-downloaded the app on my phone and all my issues are still there.
Issues from the current digital run, or the previous one which ended July 2018?
AduroT wrote: It surprises me how much GW seems to push Crusade, but the app doesn’t support it at all. In addition to the codex rules not including any of the Crusade rules, now the army builder only does Points, no option for Power.
Feature creep. GW has a giant list of things to add to the app that got cut down to the minimum viable product to get it out the door. Crusade is on there... somewhere, but given basically all they initially got out the door was the old dataset and a payment system.... it's probably way down the list.
Maybe they'll rethink their pricing if enough people tell them they're being unreasonable. I'm certainly not going to pay 100+ euros a year for this if I'm still basically forced to buy all the books. The price would be reasonable if it unlocked all book codes like it does with the 8th edition stuff, at least to me.
I'm informing them of their unreasonability by not buying it or using it.
I'd recommend also giving them that feedback through their dedicated feedback page for the app: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FPBZ89Y After giving Feedback it'll ask you to fill out an optional questionaire, too.
Maybe they'll rethink their pricing if enough people tell them they're being unreasonable. I'm certainly not going to pay 100+ euros a year for this if I'm still basically forced to buy all the books. The price would be reasonable if it unlocked all book codes like it does with the 8th edition stuff, at least to me.
I'm informing them of their unreasonability by not buying it or using it.
I'd recommend also giving them that feedback through their dedicated feedback page for the app: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FPBZ89Y After giving Feedback it'll ask you to fill out an optional questionaire, too.
Thank you for the feedback link. I have paid for the subscription since day 1 in hopes to have a great single point of reference for my army and all rules. There have been numerous errors in the codecies and this army building portion is really poor and incomplete (I can't even build my Craftworld army that I regularly use). I am most likely cancelling subscription as a result.
nekooni wrote: Maybe they'll rethink their pricing if enough people tell them they're being unreasonable. I'm certainly not going to pay 100+ euros a year for this if I'm still basically forced to buy all the books. The price would be reasonable if it unlocked all book codes like it does with the 8th edition stuff, at least to me.
Agree, a stable app with good enough usability and all the rules inside would be worth 5€ to me as well.
Yep, 5 quid a month for all the rules - ALL of them - and they'd even get me, notorious GW-hater that I am, on board.
I'm torn on the app. I actually pay for Battlescribe Pro, so I'm not against paying for apps, but the difference in features is pretty stark for what is essentially a $60 a year product vs $10 a year for not just phone but computer as well. While it has a lot of great features, slick, easy to read look, and is usually pretty intuitive, the few glaring features missing and the price really turn me off.
The key issues being what one would consider basic features, or at least I would.
*No way to copy paste units
*No way to copy paste models in units, very annoying for units with lots of options like vanguard vets or nobs. If you want shoota boyz for example you have to manually switch each boy over to a shoota, and when you add more boyz they default to choppa, very annoying
*No way to save customized units with names, one of my favorite BS features. All my usual setups are saved in battlescribe so I can have certain models with lots of wargear in my collection be added with a single tap
*0 Legends support, although I guess that's to be expected
*Clunky implementation of pregame strategems and abilities such as tank ace.
There are some really nice pros though
*All the codexes are built in, or at least they are on mine. I can pull up IG and Ork rules willy nilly, be that strategems, wargear, profiles, warlord traits, etc. I really like how when you're scrolling through they show the rules right there so you can read your options without having to manually view yeah one like BS does. Most rules and profiles are easy to find, quick to view, and read very easily, making it easy to pick out what you're looking for quickly.
*Just looks good all around, and having pictures for units is nice when you're in a hurry
*The list sharing feature seems much more easy to read than Battlescribes abominations of army list printouts can be.
Overall, I think if they fix the bugs and rules issues it could be a nice little app. I'd much rather a newbie show me his list with this than Battlescribe, since stuff like pictures and big, easy to read entries make it a lot more usable during a game without having to zoom in on a tiny black and white pdfs. Really my biggest issue is price, it just doesn't feel remotely worth $5 a month as it sits, even if it was fully functional. That said I remember back in the day of ArmyBuilder I want to say that was 20-30 bucks a year so I guess it's not too far off. If I got access to all the codexes and rules with the 5$ a month subscription I'd be more tempted. After all that's about a codex and a half a year, so considering it updates itself for you and can consolidate in faqs/errata it would probably be worth it to me. But since I need to buy my codexes AND pay subscription to get full features, it's just not worth it to me.
MrMoustaffa wrote: *No way to copy paste units
*No way to copy paste models in units, very annoying for units with lots of options like vanguard vets or nobs. If you want shoota boyz for example you have to manually switch each boy over to a shoota, and when you add more boyz they default to choppa, very annoying
*No way to save customized units with names, one of my favorite BS features. All my usual setups are saved in battlescribe so I can have certain models with lots of wargear in my collection be added with a single tap
Quick fyi: they're aware unit duplication is missing,it's one of the items they offer as "what should we add next" options. Go vote for it
I perfectly agree with above. 5 quid a month and I still have to buy my Codex ata premium price any 2-3 year?
Insanity. With all the Codex and rules included and some extra functionality, it could be a killer app (for tournament player, but also for casual gamers), a way to test and plan new armies and a good tool even if 5 qla month is pretty steep for an app.
As it is, it's one of the many whale-buyer harpoons GW had, but it's irrelevant for my gaming environment, and even more irrelevant in time of Covid
MrMoustaffa wrote: *No way to copy paste units
*No way to copy paste models in units, very annoying for units with lots of options like vanguard vets or nobs. If you want shoota boyz for example you have to manually switch each boy over to a shoota, and when you add more boyz they default to choppa, very annoying
*No way to save customized units with names, one of my favorite BS features. All my usual setups are saved in battlescribe so I can have certain models with lots of wargear in my collection be added with a single tap
Quick fyi: they're aware unit duplication is missing,it's one of the items they offer as "what should we add next" options. Go vote for it
Figured it was just missing or something. That seemed pretty obvious. My other issues still stand unfortunately. I don't really feel like this app is designed by people that play this game on a regular basis. Some of these features are brutally obvious if you play this game even once a month.
Argive wrote:Yeh Id pay a £5 sub for all codex rules and army builder.
But £5 a month on top of several £20+ books ? nuhuhhh...
AduroT wrote:If $5 a month gave you all Codexes ever and all the stuff in the app I’d pay that.
Cybtroll wrote:I perfectly agree with above. 5 quid a month and I still have to buy my Codex ata premium price any 2-3 year?
Insanity. With all the Codex and rules included and some extra functionality, it could be a killer app (for tournament player, but also for casual gamers), a way to test and plan new armies and a good tool even if 5 qla month is pretty steep for an app.
As it is, it's one of the many whale-buyer harpoons GW had, but it's irrelevant for my gaming environment, and even more irrelevant in time of Covid
I have a feeling there's a large amount of players that would be in this boat. Of course the issue is if you offer this subscription service your codex sales are going to fall off a cliff, so I don't really have any hope that it will eventually be implemented that way. At least you can view all the basic rules, wargear, and strategems (or at least appear to be intended to, given a few missing options like Kustom Jobs have their equivalent showing up for other armies) However, Battlescribe already does this, so they're not really beating Battlescribe in any way other than nice looks, which admittedly is a real selling point that I agree with. The real test will be to see if GW is quick at updating the rules in it quickly and without errors. For a team of volunteers the Battlescribe roster editors are pretty quick on updates and have done a pretty decent job of avoiding errors for the most part. Which is pretty impressive when you remember, they're not employed by Battlescribe, they're technically just random guys volunteering their time.
I think a good compromise GW could do would be to include a free code for the list builder with each codex/book they sell that just unlocks the rules for that faction. So if I bought the space marine codex, I could write lists for Space marines, but that's it. Unless I buy the supplement, I don't have the fancy extra rules for Ultramarines or what have you. While not ideal, I'd take that compromise as it gives us "free" access to go alongside our free digital codex, but GW keeps their codex sales. In fact I'd recommend people try including that in feedback forms. Well never get codexes with the subscription, but we might just be able to get the roster editors thrown in for free with codex sales, and it'd be a nice selling point to say that each codex comes with a code for a ready to go army roster editor. Heck you don't even need to throw in an extra code, you just have the app check for the Book code, and when it's entered it also unlocks that army roster.
Plus, this gives the subscription of the app a purpose too, as it keeps rules for ALL the factions and all the army builders. Granted it would be for more hardcore tournament players at that point, but the ability to pull up every single rule quickly at a moment's notice for a tournament player would definitely be worth it.
I actually don't hate the codex unlock system. Obviously its not the most consumer friendly thing out there but they're a great product for the FLGS and functions well in the app with no subscription.
The main issue is that the codex works so well that it highlights you're paying $5 for JUST the list builder, which you're going to have a hard time telling me is ever worth that price even with every feature on my wish list.
"Not the most consumer friendly but great for LGS" seems to be the battlecry these days. At some point LGS are going to have to stop relying on anti-consumer behaviour from companies and actually innovate their dinosaur business model.
I'd rather pay dues each month to a great place to play games(I did for years at a local club) than have the plight of Poor Ickle Game Store Owners used to browbeat people into paying dues to GW for the square root of nob all.
Yodhrin wrote: "Not the most consumer friendly but great for LGS" seems to be the battlecry these days. At some point LGS are going to have to stop relying on anti-consumer behaviour from companies and actually innovate their dinosaur business model.
And yet... stores that attempt a membership or table fee model get immediately villified as greedy and trying to exploit the community because players expect it to be a free service.
Part of the problem with the "consumer friendly" argument is simply that the only friendly thing for consumers is free. It's just not a practical reality for anyone involved.
Table fees aren't terrible depending the fee itself though. The idea itself isn't bad as it helps contribute to the store. After all, I wouldn't sit at a Starbucks using their wifi for 2+ hours if I didn't buy at least a $3-4 cup of coffee.
Any store telling you that you have to be a customer to use the bathroom can go feth themselves with a cactus though.
Slayer-Fan123 wrote: Table fees aren't terrible depending the fee itself though. The idea itself isn't bad as it helps contribute to the store. After all, I wouldn't sit at a Starbucks using their wifi for 2+ hours if I didn't buy at least a $3-4 cup of coffee.
Any store telling you that you have to be a customer to use the bathroom can go feth themselves with a cactus though.
Lavendel isnt saying it's saying that it's bad behaviour of the store to have fees like that, they're saying it's a bad idea because many customers will call them greedy.
But now, thanks to a huge new update going live today, Warhammer 40,000: The App includes short-form datasheets for every unit in the game – whether you own their codex or not.
Each datasheet shows you the unit’s characteristics and weapons, which makes them a great way of getting a feel for how the unit performs – perfect if you’re thinking of including them in your army or simply wondering how best to obliterate them in your next game.
These short-form datasheets don’t include unit abilities – for those and other army-wide rules, Warlord Traits, Relics, psychic powers, and all the other good stuff from codexes, you’ll want to redeem the codes from your books on My Warhammer. But until then, the app has everything you need to jump into some open play games to test out different units and weapon options to see what works for you.
xttz wrote: My app updated 2 hours ago but i can't access any datasheets
When you add a unit to your list, then open the unit it seems locked - to get to the short profile you can hit the button in the top right corner, shows the stat line as well as weapon profiles to me.
I think they're not really done, or it's not working 100% right now.
For datasheets I do own it will show the stat line immediately when you open a unit in your army list, and you have to hit the button in the top right corner to show the full datasheet - a decent solution, although I would prefer them merging both screens.
For datasheets I don't own it will show a lock instead of the statline, and the statline and weapon profiles (and loadout options) are shown when you hit the top right button, with special rules etc being locked in the datasheet.
I don't think they're getting the "this is not worth this much money if we still have to buy your books" argument, or more precisely they're not willing to allow people to go digital-only via subscription.
Yodhrin wrote: "Not the most consumer friendly but great for LGS" seems to be the battlecry these days. At some point LGS are going to have to stop relying on anti-consumer behaviour from companies and actually innovate their dinosaur business model.
And yet... stores that attempt a membership or table fee model get immediately villified as greedy and trying to exploit the community because players expect it to be a free service.
Part of the problem with the "consumer friendly" argument is simply that the only friendly thing for consumers is free. It's just not a practical reality for anyone involved.
Ehhh, that seems like a USA problem, and not even a universal one since I've seen plenty of people from over that side of the pond referencing paying dues or table fees.
That said, a lot of gaming stores over there seem to have pretty meagre provision in terms of wargaming, with low-effort terrain and limited availability for everyone except CCG players, so yeah if a store like that suddenly turned around and just started demanding fees from people, I can see how people would vilify them as greedy and exploitative - because that would be the truth. I've also seen plenty of occasions described where stores start charging for table usage, but continue to be actively hostile to using third party models, Forgeworld models, models bought online, or basically anything else that the store itself doesn't sell them.
A new business model for stores isn't just "charge fees for things you used to give away as a free incentive", it requires a fundamental rethink of how the business is run to turn it into a venue that people want to visit and play in, rather than just being the place they go to because they have no other choice. Because here is the simple hard reality: local game stores aren't necessary anymore. The internet allows people to meet, organise games, and buy product(often with a steep discount compared to brick & mortar retail), and it allows companies to market direct to consumers. Providing a "destination" venue that people visit by choice is the only thing of value local stores have left, but that means stepping up their game. The ball is in their court now, innovate or die, and stop blaming customers if they refuse to.
I'm pretty happy to see updates so soon. The app is very promising, and I look forward to when the bugs are all ironed out. I can build lists no problem with my current armies so far, just some ironing out needed with pregame strats, and relics.
I'm glad they added in quick reference datasheets for free, I love that feature of the app so far, so I can see what my opponents units stats are. I was worried they'd lock down everything with each new book, this is a feature I'll want the app for.
Despite the flaws, I can see a lot of potential in the software. It runs fast, and the search tool works really well. I like how the army builder works too.
Despite the flaws, I can see a lot of potential in the software. It runs fast, and the search tool works really well. I like how the army builder works too.
I agree! Careful saying that around here though, I think people are allergic to positivity.
Despite the flaws, I can see a lot of potential in the software. It runs fast, and the search tool works really well. I like how the army builder works too.
I agree! Careful saying that around here though, I think people are allergic to positivity.
"Don't think, don't post criticism, just consume the product."
Despite the flaws, I can see a lot of potential in the software. It runs fast, and the search tool works really well. I like how the army builder works too.
I agree! Careful saying that around here though, I think people are allergic to positivity.
Imagine paying for potential instead of a finished product to begin with.
To be fair it is quite clearly listed as a BETA so moaning the product 'isn't finished' is rubbish. They've never claimed the army builder was finished. In terms of everything else the app does, it works fine for me and always has done since day 1.
As for criticism, its fine if it is constructive but very little of the criticism on here is constructive. Destructive criticism is just moaning which does nothing to help solve any issues. Same with cost. I am sure you would love to be able to access all of GW's rules for $60-120 a year but that doesn't mean it is a viable business model or even a desirable one. GW have to pay their bills just like everyone else as well as make profit which is not always a dirty thing. The more profit they make the more stuff they can produce and release which we can then consume and enjoy
Necronmaniac05 wrote: To be fair it is quite clearly listed as a BETA so moaning the product 'isn't finished' is rubbish. They've never claimed the army builder was finished. In terms of everything else the app does, it works fine for me and always has done since day 1.
As for criticism, its fine if it is constructive but very little of the criticism on here is constructive. Destructive criticism is just moaning which does nothing to help solve any issues. Same with cost. I am sure you would love to be able to access all of GW's rules for $60-120 a year but that doesn't mean it is a viable business model or even a desirable one. GW have to pay their bills just like everyone else as well as make profit which is not always a dirty thing. The more profit they make the more stuff they can produce and release which we can then consume and enjoy
Based on the fact that the same company is able to operate a similar app at a much lower price point i don't think that criticism of their pricing is "destructive" by default. Trying to charge too much while offering too little will simply result in the service failing, and GW having to shut down the app in a year.
In my opinion they should offer the full experience (Datasheets and BF) at 5, BF with short Datasheets for free (you still can't play the game like that!) and unlock BF for factions - without a subscription - via codes in the physical book. Also offer the codes on their own for people that don't need the physical book, at like half the price of the physical book.
Necronmaniac05 wrote: To be fair it is quite clearly listed as a BETA so moaning the product 'isn't finished' is rubbish. They've never claimed the army builder was finished. In terms of everything else the app does, it works fine for me and always has done since day 1.
As for criticism, its fine if it is constructive but very little of the criticism on here is constructive. Destructive criticism is just moaning which does nothing to help solve any issues. Same with cost. I am sure you would love to be able to access all of GW's rules for $60-120 a year but that doesn't mean it is a viable business model or even a desirable one. GW have to pay their bills just like everyone else as well as make profit which is not always a dirty thing. The more profit they make the more stuff they can produce and release which we can then consume and enjoy
The problem is you're wrong here, if they make the app too expensive, not many people will sign up, and they won't make much profit, aka what is happening now. Very few people are subscribing because why would you? It's got the main rulebook, basic rules that you get with battlescribe, and that's about it. Not every single service needs to directly make you money to contribute to your profits. Believe it or not you can actually offer small services for free that have a big impact on how the customer sees your company. Free breakfasts at hotels, free bread or mints at a restaurant, you get the idea. Yeah you're still technically paying for that in other ways but that's the point, they're making record profits elsewhere, they can eat the small cost of an app, or even just lower the price. That is in fact constructive criticism, because if GW wants people to subscribe they're going to need to make major changes to their subscription model.
You need to remember that GW is not in a bubble here like they are with codexes. Battlescribe already exists as a listbuilder and despite a few little annoying quirks is overall an excellent app. GW can't just stick their fingers in their ears or sue it or ban it at their stores, they are forced to compete with it. Not to mention it's base form is free and it's annual subscription for mobile is less than one month of subscription for the GW app. Or, you can pay 2 months GW equivalent and have it's premium subscription on mobile AND PC. If GW wants people to subscribe to this app, they need to beat Battlescribe in an objective way that players will prefer GW's app, not just saying "it's official so you can only use our app". It didn't work for 3rd party models, it won't work here. But that's the thing, they've got a few viable choices to actually compete with battlescribe, because their app has some legitimately good features, and when finished will likely be a very good product. I've actually been sending them feedback on issues the app has, because I think it has genuine promise to be a really good app. Most of the criticisms I even have appear to be things that either slipped the first round of quality control or they just haven't gotten around to implementing. The problem is that at the price they are offering, they need to beat Battlescribe in some way other than just looking sharp, which is the situation now. GW has a couple ways it could actually compete with battlescribe which I'll constructively offer again here
*Make the app free for codex purchasers, or at least have a trimmed down version of it be free, I.E. you get your editor included with your online codex code, but you can't use it for armies you don't own. GW gets to keep selling overpriced codexes, people get a useful tool included with their codex at no additional cost, everyone is happy. People have additional incentive to buy the codex, and GW keeps their old business model. I would actually argue that if GW finishes polishing the roster editor app and includes it with a digital copy of the book that autoupdates with FAQ/errata, the codexes would infact be worth their current price point. I know I would happily buy them for my armies I don't play as much as opposed to what I do now, where I just use Battlescribe and cross reference it with pictures of the book online and faqs because I'm not paying $50 for a book I'll use maybe 5 times. I would argue this is the most realistic and likely model for GW. It costs them practically nothing to do, they're not losing money from it and gaining a lot of goodwill.
*Make the subscription worth the $5. This means making the app worth the $60 year. That means including every rule, in a handy to reference place, like they've done, but also including the codexes and the roster app. This way if you want to be cheap and only play one army or two, you buy your codex and that's it. But for folks who have multiple armies, you are getting them to pay even if they don't really play some armies much and they KEEP paying. It's a subscription, a player who plays xenos and doesn't get a release for a year will keep paying even though he didn't get a new book. It's not even like GW is losing money, as the costs to maintain an app are nowhere near the cost it takes to manufacture, store, and ship thousands of books all over the world. I don't see this one happening as GW loves selling codexes and books, but it would be a viable option for them. Keep in mind for every whale who owns 6 armies and is saving a ton of army, you're now getting consistent income from players with only one or two armies, who depending on the life of the edition and their books could actually pay more for the subscription than they would just buying the codex. Not to mention the app is guaranteed income every month, investors and management love that kind of stuff. Not as likely to happen though, because it would drastically cut into codex sales even if the app is more profitable.
GW has a lot of potential in this app, but they can't force people to use it. So if they want to make money on it, they have to concede that they actually need to compete with battlescribe. Competing with Battlescribe means they need to actually compete and not just stick their fingers in their ears or ban it. To compete means the app, in its basic structure, has to change. If they refuse to adapt and continue to charge $5 a month for this app, the only real subscribers they're going to have are the people that forget to unsubscribe after their one month free trial is up. Oh yeah, which reminds me
Don't forget to unsubscribe from the GW app before your 30 days are up or you will get charged for it
Necronmaniac05 wrote: To be fair it is quite clearly listed as a BETA so moaning the product 'isn't finished' is rubbish. They've never claimed the army builder was finished. In terms of everything else the app does, it works fine for me and always has done since day 1.
As for criticism, its fine if it is constructive but very little of the criticism on here is constructive. Destructive criticism is just moaning which does nothing to help solve any issues. Same with cost. I am sure you would love to be able to access all of GW's rules for $60-120 a year but that doesn't mean it is a viable business model or even a desirable one. GW have to pay their bills just like everyone else as well as make profit which is not always a dirty thing. The more profit they make the more stuff they can produce and release which we can then consume and enjoy
None of this makes much sense. The product was supposed to be out on July 11. They're 5 months late, just released a "beta," and yet are charging for it (no, a free month to get your credit card details doesn't count). People have every right to criticize a company that delivers a product 6 months late, still charges for it, and then has the nerve to say "but it's only a beta!" and use that as an excuse for why it doesn't work the way it should.
The second point is even less convincing. Most of GW's profits come from selling plastic, not rules. If GW could extract $60 to $120 a year from all their customers simply for their rules, even they, greedy as they are, would be very happy with that. Getting customers to pay that much a year simply for rules is any game company's dream.
It's downright absurd to claim that GW needs to charge more than $120 a year only for rules in order to have a viable business model. It's doubly silly because GW's profit margin on rules delivered via books is actually very low compared to its profit margin on plastic, or on rules delivered electronically. Printing and shipping hard-back, all-color books is very expensive.
LunarSol wrote: And yet... stores that attempt a membership or table fee model get immediately villified as greedy and trying to exploit the community because players expect it to be a free service.
Part of the problem with the "consumer friendly" argument is simply that the only friendly thing for consumers is free. It's just not a practical reality for anyone involved.
Ehhh, that seems like a USA problem, and not even a universal one since I've seen plenty of people from over that side of the pond referencing paying dues or table fees.
That said, a lot of gaming stores over there seem to have pretty meagre provision in terms of wargaming, with low-effort terrain and limited availability for everyone except CCG players, so yeah if a store like that suddenly turned around and just started demanding fees from people, I can see how people would vilify them as greedy and exploitative - because that would be the truth. I've also seen plenty of occasions described where stores start charging for table usage, but continue to be actively hostile to using third party models, Forgeworld models, models bought online, or basically anything else that the store itself doesn't sell them.
A new business model for stores isn't just "charge fees for things you used to give away as a free incentive", it requires a fundamental rethink of how the business is run to turn it into a venue that people want to visit and play in, rather than just being the place they go to because they have no other choice. Because here is the simple hard reality: local game stores aren't necessary anymore. The internet allows people to meet, organise games, and buy product(often with a steep discount compared to brick & mortar retail), and it allows companies to market direct to consumers. Providing a "destination" venue that people visit by choice is the only thing of value local stores have left, but that means stepping up their game. The ball is in their court now, innovate or die, and stop blaming customers if they refuse to.
I wish more stores would charge table fees.
A few FLGSes near me went bankrupt during the pandemic, I got a look at their books. High level, they lacked the revenue to generate more than a 5% margin, even with foot traffic. Seasonal traffic related to college semesters, debt to distributors, bad lease agreements, high state taxes, etc all contributed to a bad situation before the lockdowns started. Their businesses were unsustainable after a month.
Some of the owners are friends of mine. Would never have guessed how close they live to the poverty line. Hate to think how close they were cutting it 9 months out of the year, waiting for some big new release to keep them from having another month of losses.
I know the competition with internet sales is fierce, but going to a hobby store should be more like a restaurant. When you go to McDonalds, you are paying for the product and nothing else. When you go to full service place, you are paying for the ambiance. It costs more precisely because they are investing in you having a better experience than you would get somewhere else.
I'm put off by the app because it's directing revenue away from places that are primary points of interaction for people in the hobby. It means the people who put up tables where you play are going to have it even harder going forward because you're spending in the app instead of the store. Aside from diverting revenue away from the businesses who support their products, there's the question of consumer psychology. If you're used to spending in the app, you're going to be less likely to spend in the store for anything else you might need.
So charge for tables. People invest thousands of dollars annually in the hobby, spending a few bucks to stand around in retail space the owner is renting should not be that big a deal. Owners should be looking at scheduling systems, adding some white glove service to make the experience even more exciting for the people who come out.
The way things are set up, I don't think they can, unfortunately.
BattleScribe provides a platform, which (I believe) isn't tied inherently to any one system. Without data, it doesn't do much on its own.
The "community" generates data files for different games, and different factions within games, and makes these available as a shared resource. As this is decentralised, and not endorsed by the BS merchants *cough* *cough* GW can't go after the data files to get rid of them.
I'm not 100% certain, but unfortunately I think the only way they can do anything about this would be to buy out BS and close it down - no idea what the cost/benefit on such an action would be, though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
techsoldaten wrote: I'm put off by the app because it's directing revenue away from places that are primary points of interaction for people in the hobby. It means the people who put up tables where you play are going to have it even harder going forward because you're spending in the app instead of the store. Aside from diverting revenue away from the businesses who support their products, there's the question of consumer psychology. If you're used to spending in the app, you're going to be less likely to spend in the store for anything else you might need.
So charge for tables. People invest thousands of dollars annually in the hobby, spending a few bucks to stand around in retail space the owner is renting should not be that big a deal. Owners should be looking at scheduling systems, adding some white glove service to make the experience even more exciting for the people who come out.
I think I'm missing something here, techsoldaten - given you need to buy a 9th ed book to get the code to unlock the content in the app, I don't see how it is directing revenue away from a LGS. They can still sell the customer a Codex (or Codex Supplement), after all. And while there's a lot of 8th ed material included as part of the subscription, the value there decreases each time a new book is released.
I do agree with charging for table space, btw - though I think a LGS needs to put a bit of effort in regarding the quality of the tables/terrain provided at the start. If they're planning on adding more stuff over time - say an MDF urban layout for Infinity - and they aren't there yet, but they have a good mix of sci-fi and fantasy terrain to cover 40k and AOS, that's fair enough. One of those things where community updates are useful, if that makes sense.
What's "unfortunate" about GW not being able to shutter Battlescribe? People use it, people like it, and it doubtless sells models by virtue of existing and giving people easy access to the rules.
Jidmah wrote:Or another insane idea: They could also just do an app that is just a good as BS but updated immediately on release, and then watch BS wither and die.
That might also work, but inertia is a thing - and that's before you get the crowd that think they're entitled to get all the rules without paying for them.
I was working on the assumption that Argive's question regarding suing them was as a way to get rid of BS without doing something within the market
Billicus wrote:What's "unfortunate" about GW not being able to shutter Battlescribe? People use it, people like it, and it doubtless sells models by virtue of existing and giving people easy access to the rules.
Because - and say it with me, kids - piracy is not a good thing...
And yes, I acknowledge that the BS platform in and of itself isn't... generating the pirated materials. That would be the so-called "community". But because of the distributed - and I assume anonymous, or near-so - nature of said "community", GW can't go after them.
I own a number of 8th ed books, but if I were to download this BS and the 40k files, and start reading rules and building lists for books I don't own? Then I'm distinctly in the wrong.
As it stands, we have a number of posters on here who think just using BS and a copy of the core rulebook - or even just the rules pamphlet - is a legitimate way to play the game. This is one of the few areas where I'm in favour of the tournament approach, btw, given that most rules packs I've looked at mandate bringing the material you're using in your list to the event with you.
Billicus wrote:What's "unfortunate" about GW not being able to shutter Battlescribe? People use it, people like it, and it doubtless sells models by virtue of existing and giving people easy access to the rules.
Because - and say it with me, kids - piracy is not a good thing...
And yes, I acknowledge that the BS platform in and of itself isn't... generating the pirated materials. That would be the so-called "community". But because of the distributed - and I assume anonymous, or near-so - nature of said "community", GW can't go after them.
I own a number of 8th ed books, but if I were to download this BS and the 40k files, and start reading rules and building lists for books I don't own? Then I'm distinctly in the wrong.
As it stands, we have a number of posters on here who think just using BS and a copy of the core rulebook - or even just the rules pamphlet - is a legitimate way to play the game. This is one of the few areas where I'm in favour of the tournament approach, btw, given that most rules packs I've looked at mandate bringing the material you're using in your list to the event with you.
Actually piracy hasn't that much of an adverse effect for a company. Atleast in the videogame industry and GW's TG is close enough to profit from the same people first planning out a list in BS and then buying the corresponding material, leading to a net gain for GW:
Secondly, GW could go after BS, forcing them to remove the issue Datapacks.It does not, probably because it estimated that it'd be a net loss to do so.
Thirdly: And this is to be taken into account, GW is behaving in a monopolistic fashion. Verifyably so through IP and copyright law it even is. GW is also not consumer friendly and further there are serious issues with quality assurance, especially in regards to rules sold at a premium. It is this lackluster service that pushes a lot of players to get "inventive" with where they get their rules, or even models from. Now two wrongs don't make a right, but considering the average defense of GW is along the lines of "voting with your wallet" it is that position applied to GW's model of sale.
I tested the app after the update again and it is not as horrible as before. Actually you can imagine it being in a spot that would be worthwile if they only modified the monetization strategy. There are notably fewer bugs, but some still exist. For example, you cannot deequip Wych weapons, or cannot include Yvraine in a non-Ynnari Detachment.
There are some things that are clunky UI-wise - for example warlords powers, psychic powers and relics are really hidden. I thought their omission was a bug, it was only the tutorial video that made me realize the options were there all the time, just very well hidden. If you need a tutorial video for this, your UI design is clearly not up to the task. Otherwise ithe UI is clean and professionally made. Maybe in a couple of month the app will be usable. And if you spend the money to have full access, on mobile, it will be superior to BattleScribe. BattleScribe has to be more versatile, so the the user experience for a single gaming system can never be as good as an app that is designed for just this task. BattleScribe has still its own niche, though: It is free, it has a Desktop version, it has a more detailed army list generator. I see no reason why the two systems cannot coexist.
But I don't think it is true that GW cannot go after BattleScribe. It is surely more difficult than going after armybuilder, but they can if they want to. They can notify BattleScribe, that the 40k ressource files infringe their copyright and that BS has to do something about it. At the very least they have to remove the 40k repository from the automatic updater or have to use other technicals means to ban the infringing content. If BS fails to do so, GW can go after them directly. Similar to Twitch being liable if they don't enforce that streamers don't use copyrighted background music. Another attack vector would be to go after the Github repository directly. The same logic applies: The content infringes GWs copyright, so Microsoft has to shut it down, once it is aware of the situation. At the very least they disrupt the infrastructure of the community and prevent further updates for a time.
That the 40k repo infringes GWs copyright is pretty obvious. Were it only point values and unit names, the case would be more difficult to make. But since special rules are copied verbatim, it is pretty unambiguous, at least in the EU.
I just went back to the app after a few days. My original army list disappeared. I tried to rebuild it and every time I touched the options for the Farseer, the app would close. This product from the beginning has been rife with errors, shut downs, and lack of functionality. I support GW but this product is simply terrible.
Because - and say it with me, kids - piracy is not a good thing...
And yes, I acknowledge that the BS platform in and of itself isn't... generating the pirated materials. That would be the so-called "community". But because of the distributed - and I assume anonymous, or near-so - nature of said "community", GW can't go after them.
I own a number of 8th ed books, but if I were to download this BS and the 40k files, and start reading rules and building lists for books I don't own? Then I'm distinctly in the wrong.
As it stands, we have a number of posters on here who think just using BS and a copy of the core rulebook - or even just the rules pamphlet - is a legitimate way to play the game. This is one of the few areas where I'm in favour of the tournament approach, btw, given that most rules packs I've looked at mandate bringing the material you're using in your list to the event with you.
OK, you're wrong though. Anything that gets people playing, buying models, talking about GW's games, etc is objectively a good thing for GW in terms of sales. There's no logical counterargument itself, just this "it's wrong" fannying about.
The fact that some people don't buy the codexes anymore is more indicative of the codexes being recycled low-effort crap with an abusively short shelf life than anything else. Making the books "necessary" purely by vilifying people sharing the pertinent rules info with other players, rather than making them objectively good products people *want* to buy, is a horrible way to treat customers and plainly won't work.
Tournament players amount to about 1% of the playerbase, by the way.
there are those people who don't buy rules but still buy models and play the game
hard to tell how many of them would still play the game if they had to pay full price
also, paying for rules has no advantage as they are often obsolete on release because of errors or changes made afterwards
the other point is that GW can go after the GitHub repository for Copyright infringement, but they only would hurt themselves as rules are not their product that makes the money
and they cannot give it away for free because they are a premium brand and free has no value
Because - and say it with me, kids - piracy is not a good thing...
There's yet to be a study to prove this is true. Also, if piracy is rife for your products, it means you either priced a large part of the community out of the product, or they no longer see it a worth the asking price.
I’ve hoisted the black flag simply because GW no longer sells digital 40k codexes. I could still pay them for the new Blood Bowl pdf, but they removed the option for me to give them money for a 40k one, thus I didn’t.
The app is way too expensive though I do have to admit I have zero idea what an app is actually "worth" anymore. The initial splurge of $1 apps that relied on a new market to make up the difference in sales volume crashed and burned a long time ago. The new cost is "free" but constantly bombard the user with ads and "opportunities" to spend absurd amounts on the product. Most of them are kept "free" on the backs of a few fools who compulsively dump laughable amounts into it. As an app expecting its users to pay for it individually rather than exploiting a few and annoying the rest.... I actually have no idea what it should cost.
All that said, they're charging way way more than anything comparable. It's less a question for me of whether its overpriced and more a question of how overpriced it is.
App users get a chance to win an army (some locations are excluded due to local laws etc)
To enter, just download the app and claim your one-month free trial to gain access to Battle Forge. Then, once you’ve put together the force you’ve always wanted, export your list and share it on Twitter or Instagram along with #40KBattleForge to enter. It’s that easy.
so if you have got it and twitter or Instagram make sure to post an army (up to $1000 value) you never know you could be one of the winners
Smells like desperation. Apparently giving a free month wasn't enough to get people's credit card details, so now we'll give away $5,000 worth of stuff that costs us about $1400 and try to get people's credit card data that way!
I own a number of 8th ed books, but if I were to download this BS and the 40k files, and start reading rules and building lists for books I don't own? Then I'm distinctly in the wrong.
This is such a bizarre take. GW sends out its rules free to promoters like Goonhammer that then post articles or youtube videos listing pretty much every rule in every rulebook for anyone to read. Clearly GW does not have a problem with it, or they would not send these people free copies and let them put all the info up on the internet for free.
It's doubly absurd because to play the game competitively you have to know the rules for all the armies. And not even GW is crazy enough to think everybody is going to buy every single codex and supplement and PA book just to compete.
It's one of those things where GW is still in the 1990s, running on inertia. They'd probably actually make more money giving the rules away free, because plastic is where they make their real money. I can tell you from personal experience BS has made GW hundreds of dollars from me I would not have spent otherwise.
App users get a chance to win an army (some locations are excluded due to local laws etc)
To enter, just download the app and claim your one-month free trial to gain access to Battle Forge. Then, once you’ve put together the force you’ve always wanted, export your list and share it on Twitter or Instagram along with #40KBattleForge to enter. It’s that easy.
so if you have got it and twitter or Instagram make sure to post an army (up to $1000 value) you never know you could be one of the winners
You can also enter via email if you don’t tweet or whatever it’s called when you post on Instagram.
yukishiro1 wrote:Smells like desperation. Apparently giving a free month wasn't enough to get people's credit card details, so now we'll give away $5,000 worth of stuff that costs us about $1400 and try to get people's credit card data that way!
You think GW is trying to steal people’s credit card info?
It's not so much about stealing them as getting people to set up a subscription and then hopefully forget / be too lazy to cancel it. That's why there's no option to just buy a month at a time etc. Then you're earning passive income for literally nothing.
App users get a chance to win an army (some locations are excluded due to local laws etc)
To enter, just download the app and claim your one-month free trial to gain access to Battle Forge. Then, once you’ve put together the force you’ve always wanted, export your list and share it on Twitter or Instagram along with #40KBattleForge to enter. It’s that easy.
so if you have got it and twitter or Instagram make sure to post an army (up to $1000 value) you never know you could be one of the winners
You can also enter via email if you don’t tweet or whatever it’s called when you post on Instagram.
yukishiro1 wrote:Smells like desperation. Apparently giving a free month wasn't enough to get people's credit card details, so now we'll give away $5,000 worth of stuff that costs us about $1400 and try to get people's credit card data that way!
You think GW is trying to steal people’s credit card info?
Many people will forget to cancel after the 1 month free, and they'll get automatically charged. If they're offering to give away $1500, they would need just 300 people to break even. That's not even a lot of people either.
Is that SUPER cynical and almost bordering on conspiracy theorist for me? You betcha.
If people Do forget, you can just file for a refund. Apple at least puts that thru really quick. Heck, Ive encouraged canceling via refund on the assumption that kind of chargeback is more noticeable than just dropping subscriptions.
App users get a chance to win an army (some locations are excluded due to local laws etc)
To enter, just download the app and claim your one-month free trial to gain access to Battle Forge. Then, once you’ve put together the force you’ve always wanted, export your list and share it on Twitter or Instagram along with #40KBattleForge to enter. It’s that easy.
so if you have got it and twitter or Instagram make sure to post an army (up to $1000 value) you never know you could be one of the winners
You can also enter via email if you don’t tweet or whatever it’s called when you post on Instagram.
yukishiro1 wrote:Smells like desperation. Apparently giving a free month wasn't enough to get people's credit card details, so now we'll give away $5,000 worth of stuff that costs us about $1400 and try to get people's credit card data that way!
You think GW is trying to steal people’s credit card info?
The thievery!
Loads of companies have this set up and work on hoping you’ll just forget after a free trial.
No one shouts at Netflix, Disney and Amazon for it.
Phone contracts used to literally be this, they’d be charging you the (now separated out and itemised) handset portion of your contract even after the two years you’d paid it off by..
I wasn't saying it's illegal or unusual. The "free X to get you to put in your credit card details" is super common because it works. You'd be shocked at how many people just forget to cancel, or can't be bothered to do so.
But just because something is a common scheme to fool people out of their money doesn't mean it isn't a scheme to fool people out of their money. The reason they are giving away $1500 worth of stuff is because they have calculated that doing so will result in greater than $1500 in future profits from people who would not otherwise have signed up.
... on the backs of a few fools who compulsively dump laughable amounts into it.
All that said, they're charging way way more than anything comparable. It's less a question for me of whether its overpriced and more a question of how overpriced it is.
Why does someone need a logical counterargument for piracy? You are literally breaking the law. It might be a law you don't like or don't agree with or whatever but still, you are breaking the law thus you are in the wrong.
All those arguements about 'no study suggesting that piracy harms sales' well guess what? Not worth a damn. If you ever get caught plead it to the court and see how far it gets you.
The real question is what models to I put in a list for a brand new army I don’t have, and what army do I pick..?
Idoneth? Behemat? Gitz? Maggotkin?
Or maybe a Guard army that doesn’t use any horrible/old Cadian troops..
Necronmaniac05 wrote: Why does someone need a logical counterargument for piracy? You are literally breaking the law. It might be a law you don't like or don't agree with or whatever but still, you are breaking the law thus you are in the wrong.
All those arguements about 'no study suggesting that piracy harms sales' well guess what? Not worth a damn. If you ever get caught plead it to the court and see how far it gets you.
1) Nobody has done anything illegal by using Battlescribe
2) He was saying it's "wrong" not that it's "illegal" so you've moved the goalposts
Danny76 wrote: The real question is what models to I put in a list for a brand new army I don’t have, and what army do I pick..?
Idoneth? Behemat? Gitz? Maggotkin?
Or maybe a Guard army that doesn’t use any horrible/old Cadian troops..
I might be building a Necron list with the Silent King, Void Dragon, and a Monolith...
Necronmaniac05 wrote: Why does someone need a logical counterargument for piracy? You are literally breaking the law. It might be a law you don't like or don't agree with or whatever but still, you are breaking the law thus you are in the wrong.
All those arguements about 'no study suggesting that piracy harms sales' well guess what? Not worth a damn. If you ever get caught plead it to the court and see how far it gets you.
"When the law is sufficiently wrong, disobedience becomes duty."
Personally I submitted a 'nidZilla list to fill out my existing collection, with three Ripper swarm selections in the troop section to thumb my nose just a bit at GW for not selling an independent kit for them.
Necronmaniac05 wrote: Why does someone need a logical counterargument for piracy? You are literally breaking the law. It might be a law you don't like or don't agree with or whatever but still, you are breaking the law thus you are in the wrong.
This doesn't hold up to basic logical scrutiny. The fact that something is illegal does not by definition make it wrong. I'm sure we can all think of many real world examples of bad laws in the past that immediately disprove this thesis; I would mention a few, except that I think it'd get the thread locked.
It's especially funny in this context, too, because nobody has discussed actual piracy. Actual piracy is downloading a free PDF of a codex. Using BattleScribe is not piracy. At the very most, GW might be able to go after the creators of the BS databases; they absolutely could not go after the users. It doesn't violate any laws to use someone else's summary of something.
But just because something is a common scheme to fool people out of their money doesn't mean it isn't a scheme to fool people out of their money. The reason they are giving away $1500 worth of stuff is because they have calculated that doing so will result in greater than $1500 in future profits from people who would not otherwise have signed up.
There are apps that exist to track all of the apps you have subscriptions to.
Otherwise, like I mentioned earlier, they'd give an option for a non-recurring payment i.e. buy one month at a time. They specifically don't do that because it would lead to catching fewer people out. It's seedy.
If they really just wanted to offer you a free month, they'd just do that: offer you a free month. No credit card sign-up required.
The whole point of the "free trial" is to get your credit card data so they can keep billing you. It doesn't matter a bit to them whether they can keep billing you because you like it, or just because you forgot to cancel.
Nevelon wrote: Or that you enjoy the product enough to keep your subscription.
I mean, yes, but the way they are structured is to catch people with that first surprise payment, and the hope that people forget.
I agree that’s a result, but I don’t think it’s the intent.
Just like they know that some people are going to game the system by signing up, entering the contest, and immediately canceling.
This is a marketing ploy to try to get people to look again at a product with a shaky initial launch. Some will stay, some will go. More eyes on the product is what they are after, with as much retention as they can muster.
No malice, just marketing.
(not that there isn’t some intrinsic overlap, but that’s just me being a little bit cynical)
Necronmaniac05 wrote: Why does someone need a logical counterargument for piracy? You are literally breaking the law. It might be a law you don't like or don't agree with or whatever but still, you are breaking the law thus you are in the wrong.
All those arguements about 'no study suggesting that piracy harms sales' well guess what? Not worth a damn. If you ever get caught plead it to the court and see how far it gets you.
"When the law is sufficiently wrong, disobedience becomes duty."
I knew someone would pull the Robin Hood claim but in this case it doesn't stack up. Intellectual Property law could hardly be said to operate in a tyrannical way that justifies the theft of a creative work. Trying to pass yourself off as such just smacks of desperation.
You made the totalizing statement that doing something illegal automatically places you in the wrong. He refuted it. You can't really blame him for doing it in the most obvious and quick way.
Also, the whole reason we have IP laws is because it *isn't* theft. Theft involves depriving someone of their property, an element which cannot be met when there is no physical thing to be deprived of.
That doesn't mean that IP laws are moral or immoral, mind you. But it does mean that the metaphor is ill-advised. IP laws exist precisely because the appropriation of someone's idea is not something that would normally be recognized as problematic in the rest of our legal system.
GW can't go against Battlescribe for the same reason the recording company can't go against BitTorrent.
Copyright protect contents, and (correctly) doesn't impact on infrastructure that can be used also to infringe copyright.
That's the reason: I am sure that if GW had a legal hook will sue Battlescribe tomorrow first thing in the morning.
Well, they could try to go after the host of the databases if they really wanted to. It'd be a bit of a waste of time though, because at the very best all they'd accomplish is forcing them to shift the hosting to somewhere else.
It'd also be risky, because there's a non-zero chance that if it ever went to court, a judge would tell them they can't copyright information, and that because the BS databases are just relaying information, not actually copying the works, there's no violation. And they'd rather not have a case like that out there on the books.
The other factor is that Battlescribe generates far more in sales for GW than it costs, and GW is probably self-aware enough to realize that. GW seems to have mostly learned its lesson from the Chapterhouse debacle and moved away from a "sue the competition into the ground" strategy.
yukishiro1 wrote: You made the totalizing statement that doing something illegal automatically places you in the wrong. He refuted it. You can't really blame him for doing it in the most obvious and quick way.
Also, the whole reason we have IP laws is because it *isn't* theft. Theft involves depriving someone of their property, an element which cannot be met when there is no physical thing to be deprived of.
That doesn't mean that IP laws are moral or immoral, mind you. But it does mean that the metaphor is ill-advised. IP laws exist precisely because the appropriation of someone's idea is not something that would normally be recognized as problematic in the rest of our legal system.
If you're breaking the law you are in the wrong. You might be justifiably in the wrong but you are still in the wrong in the eyes of the law. And yes, comparing illegally downloading copyrighted material to overthrowing some tyrannical regime is a nonsensical counter argument. Nobody who downloads protected content is fighting for any kind of greater good. They are stealing and you can wrap it up in whatever terminology you like but its as simple as that.
Nah, stealing's when I take something from you without your consent. You can't steal some summary data from a book. It'd be like stealing the table of contents. It's unauthorized copying and dissemination if it's anything. Long story short it really isn't as simple as you are making out. You're also using "in the wrong" and "in the wrong in the eyes of the law" interchangeably which is difficult/pointless to interface with
Danny76 wrote: The real question is what models to I put in a list for a brand new army I don’t have, and what army do I pick..?
Idoneth? Behemat? Gitz? Maggotkin?
Or maybe a Guard army that doesn’t use any horrible/old Cadian troops..
I might be building a Necron list with the Silent King, Void Dragon, and a Monolith...
Yeah it’s gotta be a list with big pricy models in it!
But I need to pick something I don’t have any models for already, otherwise I’m wasting spots getting repeats or surplus..
Contemplate till end of year, list in, cancel app mid Jan after the last draw (just in case..), win!
Necronmaniac05 wrote: Nobody who downloads protected content is fighting for any kind of greater good. They are stealing and you can wrap it up in whatever terminology you like but its as simple as that.
1) Using Battlescribe isn't "downloading protected content." We went over this already. Copyright applies to expression, not to information. Using battlescribe is no more illegal than asking your friend to tell you the stats and rules of something in a codex he owns but you don't.
2) Even downloading protected content isn't stealing. If it was, we wouldn't need IP laws. We have been over this already too.
It clearly is not "as simple as that." If it was, you wouldn't be continuing to get it wrong.
GW can ask GitHub to take down the repo and Github would do it
problem are not the rules by itself, is they are only under copyright if the same 1:1 sentences are used as in the rulebook
but names and terms are a different story and as long as the 40k Repo uses the original names/terms GW has the possibility to act against it on Github (and any ohter similar hosting side)
I don't think using even the names are really a problem in the abstract. The names may be copyrightable or subject to trade marks, but that doesn't mean GW can stop people from referencing them, any more than Disney can get a fan site taken down if it posts plot summaries for the Star Wars movies and uses the real names.
Now if they could show the repo creators were profiting from GW's rules, that could be problematic, depending on the details - especially if they could show they were profiting at GW's expense. But it doesn't infringe anything to come up with and distribute summaries of copyrighted works.
yukishiro1 wrote: I don't think using even the names are really a problem in the abstract. The names may be copyrightable or subject to trade marks, but that doesn't mean GW can stop people from referencing them, any more than Disney can get a fan site taken down if it posts plot summaries for the Star Wars movies and uses the real names.
Now if they could show the repo creators were profiting from GW's rules, that could be problematic, depending on the details - especially if they could show they were profiting at GW's expense. But it doesn't infringe anything to come up with and distribute summaries of copyrighted works.
Whether or not you make money off of it doesn't really matter I think.
yukishiro1 wrote: I don't think using even the names are really a problem in the abstract. The names may be copyrightable or subject to trade marks, but that doesn't mean GW can stop people from referencing them, any more than Disney can get a fan site taken down if it posts plot summaries for the Star Wars movies and uses the real names
and still it happens that eg Youtube videos about it are taken down because if a small little detail
point is, those are 2 big companies who don't act user friendly, GW ask for it, Github will to it without checking if it would really hold before the court but just if the claim from GW is right (they use Trademarked/Copyright Names/Terms/Expression) and be done
the thing that BS files are still there just means that GW is aware that "free rules" help them and that there is no benefit in taking it down (things might change with progression in 9th and the App, as now those are mostly old rules anyway and the App is not really a competition)
I think as long as no "creative" works are being reproduced, such as lore and artwork (including photos of painted miniatures), GW doesn't really have a strong enough case to build on against BS. This is also why the codexes are full of such creative content; If they weren't, scanned rips of the dexes would be much more problematic regarding copyright law.
GW isn't too bothered about battlescribe, BS is generating mucho revenue for them!
Nah, scanning itself is a issue as somebody has had to arrange the text on the page, select the font etc and that can be protected,
having somebody type in the data again breaks that which is why the (legal) free ebook people only scan in the older versions of books rather than ripping off a more recent printing.
Still, they can just take it all down by following the procedures on github, like kodos has lined out - I actually put some effort in researching this last time they brought it up.
It would then require legal action from the owner of the repository to get it unlocked again.
It's always funny to think that code is protected (at least on Italy, but I think it's pretty widespread as approach) exactly like poetry. We don't have for example the equivalent of "functional" patents that (at least I believe) exist for example in the US.
Also, another important thought is the copyright (at least, as many on this thread seems to mean it) is literally the negation of the foundation of our societies and science: information are free. I could tomorrow create a perfect clone of WH40k with free rules, and none could stop me. I and GE would have to compete on marketing, price and clarity of our manuals. That's how market works.
I don't know the GitHub policies, I won't be surprised if they close everything without a lot of analysis. That said, GW can't legally do nothing about that (exactly like they can't stop us from sharing our manuals without friends or to purchase third party supplies).
Willingness to do is not right to do.
To go back on topic, I'm on board with those who said that ONLY with a FULL access to ALL the rule this app will be evenly remotely considerable for purchase by me. £5 a month aren't peanuts, but considering it's to have all the rules to check my enemies armies... i could consider it
Another thing is that most companies/hosting services etc. will shut down whatever a suitably large company asks regardless of it's legality (see Youtube removing 100% legal Fair Use content on request), cause they know it's easier to do that than spend money on a case defending the users' rights.
Cronch wrote: Another thing is that most companies/hosting services etc. will shut down whatever a suitably large company asks regardless of it's legality (see Youtube removing 100% legal Fair Use content on request), cause they know it's easier to do that than spend money on a case defending the users' rights.
This is absolutely true, though we were talking about what's legal and what isn't since the "pirating!!" guy brought it up, not what GW could get away with by abusing its power. I don't doubt GW could cause some headaches for Battlescribe if it really wanted to, at least until they found a host that didn't care about giving GW the finger.
Anyway the fact that GW has not done anything says it all. Nobody should feel the slightest compunction about using Battlescribe. GW is well aware of it and happy enough to let it be, and GW doesn't need champions to defend its virtue when it has no interest in defending that virtue itself.
Look if you want to believe that obtaining the rules contents of a book that costs £30 to buy and is absolutely a creative work protected by intellectual property/copyright law for free isn't piracy then obviously nothing i say is going to change your mind.
However the fact is It is no different to downloading a film or whatever from pirate bay or some other bit torrent site.
Cronch wrote: Space Marines have BS 3+ and 2W
There we go, according to you, you're now a filthy pirate, you have contents, however small, from a Codex.
Epic takedown.
---------
There is an new advertising article disguised as an MetaWatch article on the WC site: Sad to see that it didn't take more than a couple of entries for the series to deteriorate to this pathetic level. I am not against advertising articles, that's the purpose of the whole blog. But the MetaWatch series was described as a more serious set of articles than the normal GW "tactic" pieces. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/12/17/metawatch-warhammer-40000-mike-brandt-talks-battle-forge/
Is it just me, or is it still not possible to delete once chosen units from your battleforge detachments?
Since this app went live, I am not able to delete units.
Necronmaniac05 wrote: Look if you want to believe that obtaining the rules contents of a book that costs £30 to buy and is absolutely a creative work protected by intellectual property/copyright law for free isn't piracy then obviously nothing i say is going to change your mind.
However the fact is It is no different to downloading a film or whatever from pirate bay or some other bit torrent site.
You are simply wrong as a matter of law - and remember, it was you who brought up the law. The fact is that it is *not* the same legally to download a PDF of a codex vs using someone's summary of the rules contained in that codex.
You are free to be objectively wrong if you wish - this is the internet, after all - but people are going to call you on it.
There is an new advertising article disguised as an MetaWatch article on the WC site: Sad to see that it didn't take more than a couple of entries for the series to deteriorate to this pathetic level. I am not against advertising articles, that's the purpose of the whole blog. But the MetaWatch series was described as a more serious set of articles than the normal GW "tactic" pieces. https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/12/17/metawatch-warhammer-40000-mike-brandt-talks-battle-forge/
Yeah that was pretty disappointing. I mean it's not like there's even anything in there about competitive play. I thought it was going to be about using the app to track games the way BCP does to get data and that sort of thing...but it wasn't. It was just "we made this app and we're really excited to have you use it!" with literally nothing more. Totally content-free.
DaBraken wrote: Is it just me, or is it still not possible to delete once chosen units from your battleforge detachments?
Since this app went live, I am not able to delete units.
Did I miss something?
Tap the three dots on the right side of the unit and one of the options should be delete.
Yeah that was pretty disappointing. I mean it's not like there's even anything in there about competitive play. I thought it was going to be about using the app to track games the way BCP does to get data and that sort of thing...but it wasn't. It was just "we made this app and we're really excited to have you use it!" with literally nothing more. Totally content-free.
Well there was one thing, that the writing is pretty clearly on the walls that the app will be mandatory for events getting coverage or run by GW.
DaBraken wrote: Is it just me, or is it still not possible to delete once chosen units from your battleforge detachments?
Since this app went live, I am not able to delete units.
Did I miss something?
Tap the three dots on the right side of the unit and one of the options should be delete.
LOL. I hit the three dots like crazy, but it seems their hitbox is a bit small. Now, after 1 week it worked the first time while zooming in... Thanks a lot.
Yeah that was pretty disappointing. I mean it's not like there's even anything in there about competitive play. I thought it was going to be about using the app to track games the way BCP does to get data and that sort of thing...but it wasn't. It was just "we made this app and we're really excited to have you use it!" with literally nothing more. Totally content-free.
Well there was one thing, that the writing is pretty clearly on the walls that the app will be mandatory for events getting coverage or run by GW.
Quoting for posterity. I accept any and all ridicule if this turns out to be true.
AduroT wrote: There’s no way. If they go and do that now/later, the uproar from people who previously sold/gave away their app codes from the codexes will be crazy.
I'm fairly sure that GW doesn't care about the uproar of people selling/giving away things that they aren't supposed to sell or give away.
AduroT wrote: There’s no way. If they go and do that now/later, the uproar from people who previously sold/gave away their app codes from the codexes will be crazy.
And then die away, because at this point you could spit in your average 40k players' face and he'd thank the Emperor and GW.
AduroT wrote: There’s no way. If they go and do that now/later, the uproar from people who previously sold/gave away their app codes from the codexes will be crazy.
I'm hopeful that they enforces the use of the app so all the bugs and issue will be revealed in an explosive way...
Imagine being in a tournament, and finding that you opponent is exploiting a mistake in the app k or some differences between the paper codex and the all)... Those would be some funny moments.
More than likely the list data is held on some sort of database and at this stage it's not persistent. Chances are they have destructive changes happening still which means DB is being changed and data is lost.
The DB structure itself is probably being changed
Once it goes beyond Beta any DB changes will have to be non destructive and backwards compatible, allowing all data to be retained.
AduroT wrote: There’s no way. If they go and do that now/later, the uproar from people who previously sold/gave away their app codes from the codexes will be crazy.
They'll gripe, but buy another copy anyway.
Exactly. All y'all are awful when it comes to voting with your wallets. We already had people here defending this garbage app because "it has future potential". Like, any other app you'd just not buy into until it's a complete product.
Billicus wrote: Which for a product they're already charging for is bananas.
It's in beta and they gave you a free month, pretty sure that hasn't expired yet.
It's been going for what, four months or so now? This is also the first time they've labelled it as a beta I believe.
OK, sorry, I was assuming we're talking about Battle Forge here. What's the part of the app that's been out for months and allows you to create lists that could get wiped, then? Apparently I missed that.
Billicus wrote: Which for a product they're already charging for is bananas.
It's in beta and they gave you a free month, pretty sure that hasn't expired yet.
It's been going for what, four months or so now? This is also the first time they've labelled it as a beta I believe.
OK, sorry, I was assuming we're talking about Battle Forge here. What's the part of the app that's been out for months and allows you to create lists that could get wiped, then? Apparently I missed that.
It was supposed to launch with Battle Forge in July. They apologized and said that would be available soon. They Just Now got the Beta for that going. They’ve been charging full price on the app the entire time. Five times the price of the AoS app, which has a fully functional army builder.
Billicus wrote: Which for a product they're already charging for is bananas.
It's in beta and they gave you a free month, pretty sure that hasn't expired yet.
It's been going for what, four months or so now? This is also the first time they've labelled it as a beta I believe.
OK, sorry, I was assuming we're talking about Battle Forge here. What's the part of the app that's been out for months and allows you to create lists that could get wiped, then? Apparently I missed that.
It was supposed to launch with Battle Forge in July. They apologized and said that would be available soon. They Just Now got the Beta for that going. They’ve been charging full price on the app the entire time. Five times the price of the AoS app, which has a fully functional army builder.
battle Forge, which is the army builder, was just released as a beta with a month of free trial. That's what we're talking about here, right? You're complaining about that new feature which they're calling a beta and giving out for free right now. I'd see your point if they hadn't called it a beta AND OFFERED A FREE MONTH, but like this?
I am NOT saying the app is priced correctly or worth the money they're asking outside of that free month, though. See previous posts ...
Billicus wrote: Which for a product they're already charging for is bananas.
It's in beta and they gave you a free month, pretty sure that hasn't expired yet.
It's been going for what, four months or so now? This is also the first time they've labelled it as a beta I believe.
OK, sorry, I was assuming we're talking about Battle Forge here. What's the part of the app that's been out for months and allows you to create lists that could get wiped, then? Apparently I missed that.
It was supposed to launch with Battle Forge in July. They apologized and said that would be available soon. They Just Now got the Beta for that going. They’ve been charging full price on the app the entire time. Five times the price of the AoS app, which has a fully functional army builder.
battle Forge, which is the army builder, was just released as a beta with a month of free trial. That's what we're talking about here, right? You're complaining about that new feature which they're calling a beta and giving out for free right now. I'd see your point if they hadn't called it a beta AND OFFERED A FREE MONTH, but like this?
I am NOT saying the app is priced correctly or worth the money they're asking outside of that free month, though. See previous posts ...
Yes, they released a one month free trial Now of a beta product they’ve been charging people full price for for five months despite its absence. They’ve been charging monthly admission fees for a movie that’s not out, but then gave you a free trailer five months late.
battle Forge, which is the army builder, was just released as a beta with a month of free trial. That's what we're talking about here, right? You're complaining about that new feature which they're calling a beta and giving out for free right now. I'd see your point if they hadn't called it a beta AND OFFERED A FREE MONTH, but like this?
I am NOT saying the app is priced correctly or worth the money they're asking outside of that free month, though. See previous posts ...
you get a minimum discount because the product that should have been there from the beginning is now a public Beta Test
would have been even worse if GW let people pay to be part of a public Beta-Test and now we should be thankful and praise GW because they did not do something that is a big no-go anyway?
Billicus wrote: Which for a product they're already charging for is bananas.
It's in beta and they gave you a free month, pretty sure that hasn't expired yet.
They've been charging for the app for like, six months. But I'm sure the billion-pound company is grateful you're covering for them
>OK, sorry, I was assuming we're talking about Battle Forge here. What's the part of the app that's been out for months and allows you to create lists that could get wiped, then?
It's all the same product, they have been charging people since launch on the promise of the army builder coming soon*tm* and now that it's here it still isn't ready for launch. It's bananas. If you think it isn't bananas you put a very low value on your own money.
Cronch wrote: I am constantly amazed that people feel the need to give any slack to a billion-pound corporation.
And I don't understand why I have to be black-and-white about everything. What happened to "looking at pros and cons"?
If you're loudly shouting about a "free beta being too expensive and buggy" instead of looking at actual issues with the app, such as "this is not a reasonable price for what you're offering, even if all the bugs are gone", that's not going to fix anything because that's going to get your feedback dismissed entirely.
Again, since apparently this is a concept that's really hard to grasp: I am talking about Battleforge. Not the 4 months before.
I cancelled my initial subscription quickly because the App without BF was not remotely worth the asking price.
When BF came out, I took the free month, created a few lists, found that the builder itself is pretty good (as in: I like the flow of how you create your army list better than what BS does) but has three major issues to me:
* missing desktop PC support
* completely overpriced - I'd feel comfortable with 5 Euros a month if no book purchases were required, or if buying a book and unlocking a code would also unlock the army builder for that faction without subscribing.
* absolutely no Legends support
Out of these, only Legends might get fixed, but that wouldn't fix the other two issues. So I unsubscribed again and sent them my feedback. That's "voting with your wallet", and how Capitalism is supposed to work.
There are obviously other issues such as
* no duplication of units
* no proper export/share function
* list validation errors
that are easily fixed, and should be fixed by the end of the Beta, of course.
But sure, all I'm doing is kissing a billion-pound-companies ass no matter what they do wrong.
Spoiler:
That's not how capitalism works, you MUST demand the most for your money or the whole system falls apart ffs.
That's not how capitalism works though - this "I have to get the most out of everything, I don't care if that's an issue for the other party", that's just being an donkey-cave and has nothing to do with the economic system you live in. But this isn't a topic for dakkadakka.
Not Online!!! wrote: Treating GW as if it would be optional is a bit delusional considering it is a form of Monopolist.
Who are you responding to? I don't think anyone suggested that GW is optional to 40k.
Cronch wrote: I am constantly amazed that people feel the need to give any slack to a billion-pound corporation.
That's not how capitalism works, you MUST demand the most for your money or the whole system falls apart ffs.
to this, basically the market doesn't really play for 40k / GW in many ways, and it is shown in their attitude.
It's also more obvious in the apps case because there is a competitor, battle scribe, that does it better for cheaper.
Tries to create a black legion battalion with Abaddon, 1 sorceror, 1 dark apostle and 3 cultist units. This should be super easy right?
Doesn't allow me to set my sorceror psychic powers as weaver of fates and warptime even though I gave it mark of tzeenth.
Doesn't consider this battle forged... (I have no idea why).
I see if I can select council of traitors from pre game strategems. It says there are "zero" pre game stratgems I can use... wow ... so I can't even buy extra artifacts...
I kinda gave up after spending like a whole hour trying to create a relatively simply black legion army list...
Not Online!!! wrote: to this, basically the market doesn't really play for 40k / GW in many ways, and it is shown in their attitude.
It's also more obvious in the apps case because there is a competitor, battle scribe, that does it better for cheaper.
Ah, I get it now - thanks! Yeah, I think that's why they think they can get away with such a "unique" pricing model. Everyone else does either on demand or subscription, maybe both in parallel - but requiring both at the same time? That's just unreasonable, especially at premium prices.
It is funny how the their own contest highlights the shortcomings of the app. They are asking the user to share their lists on Twitter, but there is no easy and nice way to do this. You can share your list directly to twitter, but all it does is trying to cram serveral hundred of letters into a single tweet. This doesn't work obviously. The app clearly lacks the ability to compress the army list data into an image or a link or even a automatically generated text file. So most contest participants resolve this problem by taking several screenshots of their list. Some users put the raw text into a multiple posts. None of the solution are very appealing. Some poor users aren't even aware of this problem and post only the header of their army list or a single screenshot with the first couple of units out of their 3000+ points list. Maybe they think that GW can somehow read the contents of the army list in their app, so they it is sufficient to only post the name of the list and GW deduces all the details. If one of them is amongst the winners, it will either be a rude awakening, or GW has has to be extra generous to mitigate the fallout.
Yeah that was pretty disappointing. I mean it's not like there's even anything in there about competitive play. I thought it was going to be about using the app to track games the way BCP does to get data and that sort of thing...but it wasn't. It was just "we made this app and we're really excited to have you use it!" with literally nothing more. Totally content-free.
Well there was one thing, that the writing is pretty clearly on the walls that the app will be mandatory for events getting coverage or run by GW.
Quoting for posterity. I accept any and all ridicule if this turns out to be true.
Why do people say gak like this like an AoS App hasn't existed and NOT been mandatory for years.
Admittedly, a lot of large tournaments heavily prefer either the App or warscroll builder for the lists you turn in, but that's mostly to stop people from handing them 20 page battlescribe lists or handwritten lists that are too messy and grease-stained to read.
Vovin wrote: It is funny how the their own contest highlights the shortcomings of the app. They are asking the user to share their lists on Twitter, but there is no easy and nice way to do this. You can share your list directly to twitter, but all it does is trying to cram serveral hundred of letters into a single tweet. This doesn't work obviously. The app clearly lacks the ability to compress the army list data into an image or a link or even a automatically generated text file. So most contest participants resolve this problem by taking several screenshots of their list. Some users put the raw text into a multiple posts. None of the solution are very appealing. Some poor users aren't even aware of this problem and post only the header of their army list or a single screenshot with the first couple of units out of their 3000+ points list. Maybe they think that GW can somehow read the contents of the army list in their app, so they it is sufficient to only post the name of the list and GW deduces all the details. If one of them is amongst the winners, it will either be a rude awakening, or GW has has to be extra generous to mitigate the fallout.
Unsurprising. What we need is an FAQ for the competition. Should be here in 4 weeks.
Have you considered, that maybe we should just wAiT aND SeE if this turns out to actually be good or not?
Big think time: maybe it will be good if we just wait until it isn't bad. Eh?
Bound to be a good thought. there's no contrary exemple to this recently, over time GW allways improved, especially in regards to support for factions, right?
/obvious sarcasm based upon player faction is obvious.
Have you considered, that maybe we should just wAiT aND SeE if this turns out to actually be good or not?
yes, and if I could join the Beta-Test without the need to subscribe I would do that
but the need to join with a 2 free month were no one knows how long it will take until it is actual good, just no
Exactly. All y'all are awful when it comes to voting with your wallets. We already had people here defending this garbage app because "it has future potential". Like, any other app you'd just not buy into until it's a complete product.
As an outspoken "it has potential" member, I've yet to spend a cent on the app, nor wouldn't until it meets my level of quality to justify the price (which is rightly criticized as being high). I doubt anyone here spends money on the app for BF alone, unless it's for access to the 8E lists. Similar to Early Access on steam, some are worth the price, and some are not. GW would go a long way by making the beta version $2USD/mo to build some goodwill while keeping some cash flow.
The doom and gloom here is crazy. A lot of legitimate criticism but so much is just hating for hatings sake. Almost like some of you just need a soapbox to justify yourself. There is plenty of room for improvement, and I'll be the first to admit I have to use BS to cross reference my GW app list, which I find hilarious, but I do like what I see and hopefully with enough fixes, improvements, and content additions, it'll be worth subscribing to. Baring anything else, it must be nearly 100% accurate, and incorporate Crusade and Legends content as options, but I don't see all of that being a requirement to get it out the door and into peoples hands.
My concern is that improvement will be too slow to capture enough subscribers before they cancel the whole project, or that $5/mo IS the beta price and it'll go up from there, which is crazy talk.
I guess those people also spend hundreds of dollar a month on mantic products because they might be in future the best models on the market and they need the money to get there
Whelp, left gw my feedback for the app, which boils down to "app looks great and had a lot of potential, shame you've priced it out of usability." I really want this app to succeed, and that boils down to it having a reasonable price
Like I said, the app itself has a ton of potential and looks great, it's just too expensive for what it is. Now that we have Buttscribe to fix up lists for sharing with others, GW really needs to figure out a way to compete. They can't ban knowledge, they need to figure out a legitimate way to compete with Battlescribe. BS has done nothing illegal, and they can't just sue them out of the competition, nor do I really think they want to. If they did, it would be illegal for me to tell you a guardsman is Move 6", bs4+, ws4+, s3, t3, w1, a1, ld6, sv5+ during a game. You can't ban knowledge, and that's all BS is. You can't play without a codex with it, as much as people think you can, so battlescribe doesn't replace the codex.
The people arguing Battlescribe is illegal are essentially arguing it's illegal for me to share the stats of my units with you during a game unless you also own my codex, which is insane.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Whelp, left gw my feedback for the app, which boils down to "app looks great and had a lot of potential, shame you've priced it out of usability." I really want this app to succeed, and that boils down to it having a reasonable price
Like I said, the app itself has a ton of potential and looks great, it's just too expensive for what it is. Now that we have Buttscribe to fix up lists for sharing with others, GW really needs to figure out a way to compete. They can't ban knowledge, they need to figure out a legitimate way to compete with Battlescribe. BS has done nothing illegal, and they can't just sue them out of the competition, nor do I really think they want to. If they did, it would be illegal for me to tell you a guardsman is Move 6", bs4+, ws4+, s3, t3, w1, a1, ld6, sv5+ during a game. You can't ban knowledge, and that's all BS is. You can't play without a codex with it, as much as people think you can, so battlescribe doesn't replace the codex.
The people arguing Battlescribe is illegal are essentially arguing it's illegal for me to share the stats of my units with you during a game unless you also own my codex, which is insane.
to this, basically the market doesn't really play for 40k / GW in many ways, and it is shown in their attitude. It's also more obvious in the apps case because there is a competitor, battle scribe, that does it better for cheaper.
While you're right, all you need to do is see the outcome of the chapterhouse lawsuit to realize that GW probably doesn't have the guts to pull that kind of legal trick again. There's way more companies now that will openly say that they make guard/marine/Ork bits than before the lawsuit. GW thought they had an easy win only to have a vested interest side with chapterhouse and give them a public black eye most new players can't even comprehend.
Even if GW won a hypothetical lawsuit against battlescribe, the public backlash would be insane, and I think they know that. I know I wouldn't buy another GW book ever again if they did, I'd use my old copy of battlescribe out of spite. Heck I'd use a napkin if I had to. That's some Kirby level BS right there.
Necronmaniac05 wrote: Look if you want to believe that obtaining the rules contents of a book that costs £30 to buy and is absolutely a creative work protected by intellectual property/copyright law for free isn't piracy then obviously nothing i say is going to change your mind.
However the fact is It is no different to downloading a film or whatever from pirate bay or some other bit torrent site.
Rules aren't copyrightable, only the specific wording of the texts.
Exactly. All y'all are awful when it comes to voting with your wallets. We already had people here defending this garbage app because "it has future potential". Like, any other app you'd just not buy into until it's a complete product.
As an outspoken "it has potential" member, I've yet to spend a cent on the app, nor wouldn't until it meets my level of quality to justify the price (which is rightly criticized as being high). I doubt anyone here spends money on the app for BF alone, unless it's for access to the 8E lists. Similar to Early Access on steam, some are worth the price, and some are not. GW would go a long way by making the beta version $2USD/mo to build some goodwill while keeping some cash flow.
The doom and gloom here is crazy. A lot of legitimate criticism but so much is just hating for hatings sake. Almost like some of you just need a soapbox to justify yourself. There is plenty of room for improvement, and I'll be the first to admit I have to use BS to cross reference my GW app list, which I find hilarious, but I do like what I see and hopefully with enough fixes, improvements, and content additions, it'll be worth subscribing to. Baring anything else, it must be nearly 100% accurate, and incorporate Crusade and Legends content as options, but I don't see all of that being a requirement to get it out the door and into peoples hands.
My concern is that improvement will be too slow to capture enough subscribers before they cancel the whole project, or that $5/mo IS the beta price and it'll go up from there, which is crazy talk.
They SHOULD cancel the project and use that funding to get better writers.
Yeah that was pretty disappointing. I mean it's not like there's even anything in there about competitive play. I thought it was going to be about using the app to track games the way BCP does to get data and that sort of thing...but it wasn't. It was just "we made this app and we're really excited to have you use it!" with literally nothing more. Totally content-free.
Well there was one thing, that the writing is pretty clearly on the walls that the app will be mandatory for events getting coverage or run by GW.
Quoting for posterity. I accept any and all ridicule if this turns out to be true.
Why do people say gak like this like an AoS App hasn't existed and NOT been mandatory for years.
Admittedly, a lot of large tournaments heavily prefer either the App or warscroll builder for the lists you turn in, but that's mostly to stop people from handing them 20 page battlescribe lists or handwritten lists that are too messy and grease-stained to read.
AoS is a much smaller playerbase and thus less reciprocal to just rolling with the punches - if they blow it with something AoS it's more likely to harm the health game slash profits. Compare this to 40k which is such a juggernaut they could spit in your face with every purchase and they'd have enough people - be that sheer numbers or amount of whales - thanking them to justify continuing said spitting. AoS' competitive scene isn't nearly as big. It exists sure, but not to the scale of 40k and without the same buzz/clout.
That said if the app is a major success I wouldn't be shocked if we saw something similar for the Azyr app, with a price increase of course.
Yodhrin wrote: "Not the most consumer friendly but great for LGS" seems to be the battlecry these days. At some point LGS are going to have to stop relying on anti-consumer behaviour from companies and actually innovate their dinosaur business model.
And yet... stores that attempt a membership or table fee model get immediately villified as greedy and trying to exploit the community because players expect it to be a free service.
Part of the problem with the "consumer friendly" argument is simply that the only friendly thing for consumers is free. It's just not a practical reality for anyone involved.
I would balk at a membership fee for a store. But a reasonable table fee doesn't strike me as crazy, provided that comes with, like, terrain and such. 5 to 10 dollars as a rental for a table with quality terrain for a game seems fine.
The way things are set up, I don't think they can, unfortunately.
BattleScribe provides a platform, which (I believe) isn't tied inherently to any one system. Without data, it doesn't do much on its own.
The "community" generates data files for different games, and different factions within games, and makes these available as a shared resource. As this is decentralised, and not endorsed by the BS merchants *cough* *cough* GW can't go after the data files to get rid of them.
I'm not 100% certain, but unfortunately I think the only way they can do anything about this would be to buy out BS and close it down - no idea what the cost/benefit on such an action would be, though.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
techsoldaten wrote: I'm put off by the app because it's directing revenue away from places that are primary points of interaction for people in the hobby. It means the people who put up tables where you play are going to have it even harder going forward because you're spending in the app instead of the store. Aside from diverting revenue away from the businesses who support their products, there's the question of consumer psychology. If you're used to spending in the app, you're going to be less likely to spend in the store for anything else you might need.
So charge for tables. People invest thousands of dollars annually in the hobby, spending a few bucks to stand around in retail space the owner is renting should not be that big a deal. Owners should be looking at scheduling systems, adding some white glove service to make the experience even more exciting for the people who come out.
I think I'm missing something here, techsoldaten - given you need to buy a 9th ed book to get the code to unlock the content in the app, I don't see how it is directing revenue away from a LGS. They can still sell the customer a Codex (or Codex Supplement), after all. And while there's a lot of 8th ed material included as part of the subscription, the value there decreases each time a new book is released.
I do agree with charging for table space, btw - though I think a LGS needs to put a bit of effort in regarding the quality of the tables/terrain provided at the start. If they're planning on adding more stuff over time - say an MDF urban layout for Infinity - and they aren't there yet, but they have a good mix of sci-fi and fantasy terrain to cover 40k and AOS, that's fair enough. One of those things where community updates are useful, if that makes sense.
They can use the same DMCA system that companies and trolls use on places like youtube. Wether or not they have merit is immaterial because the owners of BS aren't about to go into a courtroom to fight a multimillion dollar corporation. Individuals just don't ever really win those situations. Even if you win, you still lose.
Jidmah wrote:Or another insane idea: They could also just do an app that is just a good as BS but updated immediately on release, and then watch BS wither and die.
That might also work, but inertia is a thing - and that's before you get the crowd that think they're entitled to get all the rules without paying for them.
I was working on the assumption that Argive's question regarding suing them was as a way to get rid of BS without doing something within the market
Billicus wrote:What's "unfortunate" about GW not being able to shutter Battlescribe? People use it, people like it, and it doubtless sells models by virtue of existing and giving people easy access to the rules.
Because - and say it with me, kids - piracy is not a good thing...
And yes, I acknowledge that the BS platform in and of itself isn't... generating the pirated materials. That would be the so-called "community". But because of the distributed - and I assume anonymous, or near-so - nature of said "community", GW can't go after them.
I own a number of 8th ed books, but if I were to download this BS and the 40k files, and start reading rules and building lists for books I don't own? Then I'm distinctly in the wrong.
As it stands, we have a number of posters on here who think just using BS and a copy of the core rulebook - or even just the rules pamphlet - is a legitimate way to play the game. This is one of the few areas where I'm in favour of the tournament approach, btw, given that most rules packs I've looked at mandate bringing the material you're using in your list to the event with you.
The morality of piracy is linked to the morality of the business practices of the thing being sold.
Necronmaniac05 wrote: Why does someone need a logical counterargument for piracy? You are literally breaking the law. It might be a law you don't like or don't agree with or whatever but still, you are breaking the law thus you are in the wrong.
All those arguements about 'no study suggesting that piracy harms sales' well guess what? Not worth a damn. If you ever get caught plead it to the court and see how far it gets you.
"When the law is sufficiently wrong, disobedience becomes duty."
I knew someone would pull the Robin Hood claim but in this case it doesn't stack up. Intellectual Property law could hardly be said to operate in a tyrannical way that justifies the theft of a creative work. Trying to pass yourself off as such just smacks of desperation.
IP laws are massively fethed up. Disney's lobby to extend copyrights unto the heatdeath of the universe stifles creativity something fierce. And patent laws lead to pharma people in board rooms literally calculating how much money they could make off of death and misery.
Cybtroll wrote: GW can't go against Battlescribe for the same reason the recording company can't go against BitTorrent.
Copyright protect contents, and (correctly) doesn't impact on infrastructure that can be used also to infringe copyright.
That's the reason: I am sure that if GW had a legal hook will sue Battlescribe tomorrow first thing in the morning.
The DMCA is actually 100 percent the way they could go against battlescribe. Infrastructure has the duty to make a good faith effort to investigate copyright violations on their platform in a DMCA notice is sent to them.
tauist wrote: I think as long as no "creative" works are being reproduced, such as lore and artwork (including photos of painted miniatures), GW doesn't really have a strong enough case to build on against BS. This is also why the codexes are full of such creative content; If they weren't, scanned rips of the dexes would be much more problematic regarding copyright law.
GW isn't too bothered about battlescribe, BS is generating mucho revenue for them!
The actual merits of such cases are not as important as a large company having outsized power to force compliance by virtue of size and the expense of court cases. The reason GW doesn't DMCA battlescribe is either they are too incompetent to, or they don't want to. I lean on the second because, honestly, GW knows where their bread is buttered.
stratigo wrote: The actual merits of such cases are not as important as a large company having outsized power to force compliance by virtue of size and the expense of court cases. The reason GW doesn't DMCA battlescribe is either they are too incompetent to, or they don't want to. I lean on the second because, honestly, GW knows where their bread is buttered.
There might be another reason: because, unlike the USA, in UK/EU law, the winner of a lawsuit gets their attorneys fees back, effectively as damages, against the party that lost the lawsuit, which makes it far more risky to issue any kind of frivolous lawsuit over here.
Yeah that was pretty disappointing. I mean it's not like there's even anything in there about competitive play. I thought it was going to be about using the app to track games the way BCP does to get data and that sort of thing...but it wasn't. It was just "we made this app and we're really excited to have you use it!" with literally nothing more. Totally content-free.
Well there was one thing, that the writing is pretty clearly on the walls that the app will be mandatory for events getting coverage or run by GW.
Quoting for posterity. I accept any and all ridicule if this turns out to be true.
Why do people say gak like this like an AoS App hasn't existed and NOT been mandatory for years.
Admittedly, a lot of large tournaments heavily prefer either the App or warscroll builder for the lists you turn in, but that's mostly to stop people from handing them 20 page battlescribe lists or handwritten lists that are too messy and grease-stained to read.
AoS is a much smaller playerbase and thus less reciprocal to just rolling with the punches - if they blow it with something AoS it's more likely to harm the health game slash profits. Compare this to 40k which is such a juggernaut they could spit in your face with every purchase and they'd have enough people - be that sheer numbers or amount of whales - thanking them to justify continuing said spitting. AoS' competitive scene isn't nearly as big. It exists sure, but not to the scale of 40k and without the same buzz/clout.
That said if the app is a major success I wouldn't be shocked if we saw something similar for the Azyr app, with a price increase of course.
You're making a bunch of very broad assumptions that frankly have no backing or merit.
40k does seem nominally to be the larger fanbase but it's pretty much impossible to know for sure how much bigger it is or even what impact that size difference would actually have.
You assume that 40k being larger means that GW can exercise more control over the tournament scene (the only place a mandatory 'use this app' rule would matter) when it could easily be argued that greater turn out (and thus greater revenues) would give TOs enough leverage to maintain their independence and more easily reject GW's support if using the app is something their attendees don't want. You also assume that just because 40k is 'too big to fail' (itself a suspect assumption) that individual tournaments would somehow not be subject to the will of their audience. Tournament players are actually notoriously fickle unless they're part of the larger circuit. Any additional barrier to entry, even a very small one could cut the number of large events a player goes to in a year, cause them to pick one event over another event (i.e. LVO vs Adepticon or Nova) or even just write off large events altogether. (plenty of people don't bother with large events in their own back yards simply due to painting requirements).
You also have to look at the timing, the US is likely not to have anything approaching a real intranational tournament scene again until late summer as is, do they really want to put up obnoxious barriers to entry at a time where the type of large events that function as great free advertising are just starting to recover?
Finally, the App isn't going to be a major success with the feature set it currently has. It offers nothing you can't do for free with battlescribe or your book and an excel spreadsheet. The Azyr App is MASSIVELY superior in basically all ways and still raising the price would kill it instantly as the only thing the subscription actually buys is the army builder, which is already not as good as GW's own FREE warscroll builder program.
I'm not saying it's impossible that GW events or events with heavy GW support start requiring the App, that would be naive. It's always within GW's wheelhouse to do something that ridiculous. What I am saying is that the reasons you've presented so far for why it's inevitable rely on nonsense assumptions, a complete lack of understanding of the tournament community, a complete lack of understanding of the AoS community, lack of knowledge of AoS's app and your own now medically worrying hateboner.
MrMoustaffa wrote: Like I said, the app itself has a ton of potential and looks great, it's just too expensive for what it is. Now that we have Buttscribe to fix up lists for sharing with others, GW really needs to figure out a way to compete. They can't ban knowledge, they need to figure out a legitimate way to compete with Battlescribe. BS has done nothing illegal, and they can't just sue them out of the competition, nor do I really think they want to. If they did, it would be illegal for me to tell you a guardsman is Move 6", bs4+, ws4+, s3, t3, w1, a1, ld6, sv5+ during a game. You can't ban knowledge, and that's all BS is. You can't play without a codex with it, as much as people think you can, so battlescribe doesn't replace the codex.
The "Open Information" aspect of the game - where you're required to tell people things about your army (I'm away from my rulebook, so don't have the specific wording to hand) - covers you there, I would think.
The morality of piracy is linked to the morality of the business practices of the thing being sold.
No. There is NEVER a moral justification for theft. EVER.
Some would say, that a monopoly is also theft.
Some would go further and point to anti trust laws. And others would point out how GW is defacto a monopolist in behaviour and definition.
The morality of piracy is linked to the morality of the business practices of the thing being sold.
No. There is NEVER a moral justification for theft. EVER.
Please read the earlier parts of the thread. Piracy (which battlescribe is not, to be clear) is not theft. Theft requires depriving someone else of their physical property. If piracy was theft, they wouldn't need specific laws to cover it.
It is disappointing to see people wheel out that particular false argument over and over and over.
The morality of piracy is linked to the morality of the business practices of the thing being sold.
No. There is NEVER a moral justification for theft. EVER.
Please read the earlier parts of the thread. Piracy (which battlescribe is not, to be clear) is not theft. Theft requires depriving someone else of their physical property. If piracy was theft, they wouldn't need specific laws to cover it.
It is disappointing to see people wheel out that particular false argument over and over and over.
There's also no moral justification for piracy, either. "I don't like a company of their business practices" is not a valid excuse to pirate. Hating Microsoft is not a free license to pirate Windows, for example.
I could quite easy find a situation that most people would say it is moral to pirate something.
Let's say you have been using software from a company for years and they suddenly changes the deal and increase the price of their product by 100x when they have told the users they wouldn't do something like that. Think software that other companies use to build up their companies. Effectively holding businesses ransom.
I know people who have made something that later got abused by a company using IP laws to the point that they freely pirated their own product and recommended other people to do it as well.
There are fair uses of IP law and their are also draconic uses of it. Pirating games might be hard to justify but it's not like piracy is a black and white subject.
Klickor wrote: ...but it's not like piracy is a black and white subject.
Actually, yes. Yes, it is.
Again, no it is not, just like microsoft has insofar a Monopoly and should get whacked with anti trust laws so does GW thanks to the IP right lobbying of Disney and consorts.
It is by far not as black and white as you proclaim it is. And just like with theft beeing itself possibly within a grey area, hence why f.e. someone stealing food whilest starving will get lower sentences f.e.
In this particular case, yes, it is. Regardless of your opinions of the company producing a product, 'I don't want to pay for it' is not a valid justification for just taking it without paying for it.
Since it seems a reminder is due - Dakka does not and can not endorse copyright infringement. Please drop the piracy discussion.
Where do we give feedback to GW for problems we run into when using the app for building lists...
I am having lots of problems as a chaos player, and I rather raise the issues up to them now before they make this app mandatory and then I will take 3 hours to make one single CSM in future because of how borky it is for CSM...
AduroT wrote: It’s not that I don’t Want to pay GW for my codex PDFs, it’s that they stopped selling them so I’m no longer able to get those thru them.
As a workaround, it is rather easy to remove the binding of GW's hardcover books, which allows you to scan them in very neatly and create a PDF yourself. That's what I did for the FW book, as I'm for sure not going to lug around that brick for the 2-3 datasheets I need per game.
Eldenfirefly wrote: Where do we give feedback to GW for problems we run into when using the app for building lists...
I am having lots of problems as a chaos player, and I rather raise the issues up to them now before they make this app mandatory and then I will take 3 hours to make one single CSM in future because of how borky it is for CSM...
AduroT wrote: It’s not that I don’t Want to pay GW for my codex PDFs, it’s that they stopped selling them so I’m no longer able to get those thru them.
As a workaround, it is rather easy to remove the binding of GW's hardcover books, which allows you to scan them in very neatly and create a PDF yourself. That's what I did for the FW book, as I'm for sure not going to lug around that brick for the 2-3 datasheets I need per game.
That's not a workaround, that's ruining a $40 book so that you can have scanned images on your electronic device. I can't exactly bind my codex back together after I take it apart.
AduroT wrote: It’s not that I don’t Want to pay GW for my codex PDFs, it’s that they stopped selling them so I’m no longer able to get those thru them.
As a workaround, it is rather easy to remove the binding of GW's hardcover books, which allows you to scan them in very neatly and create a PDF yourself. That's what I did for the FW book, as I'm for sure not going to lug around that brick for the 2-3 datasheets I need per game.
That's not a workaround, that's ruining a $40 book so that you can have scanned images on your electronic device. I can't exactly bind my codex back together after I take it apart.
AduroT wrote: It’s not that I don’t Want to pay GW for my codex PDFs, it’s that they stopped selling them so I’m no longer able to get those thru them.
As a workaround, it is rather easy to remove the binding of GW's hardcover books, which allows you to scan them in very neatly and create a PDF yourself. That's what I did for the FW book, as I'm for sure not going to lug around that brick for the 2-3 datasheets I need per game.
That's not a workaround, that's ruining a $40 book so that you can have scanned images on your electronic device. I can't exactly bind my codex back together after I take it apart.
Yes, that's what a workaround is - a less optimal solution to a problem.
I am mostly happy with with using the app with just the digital code from my codex as reference. There's good value in that. The app is far from optimal for that use, but its clunkiness that's inherent in the codicx as well. I'm much happier with this setup than my digital Battletomes for AoS.
stratigo wrote: The actual merits of such cases are not as important as a large company having outsized power to force compliance by virtue of size and the expense of court cases. The reason GW doesn't DMCA battlescribe is either they are too incompetent to, or they don't want to. I lean on the second because, honestly, GW knows where their bread is buttered.
There might be another reason: because, unlike the USA, in UK/EU law, the winner of a lawsuit gets their attorneys fees back, effectively as damages, against the party that lost the lawsuit, which makes it far more risky to issue any kind of frivolous lawsuit over here.
A large corporation has a lot of power to shop around, and since a lot of the infrastructure uses the US, they probably could sue through the US.
stratigo wrote: A large corporation has a lot of power to shop around, and since a lot of the infrastructure uses the US, they probably could sue through the US.
Unless they're trying to sue something that HQs within the US of A, that's a non-starter. You usually can't sue outside of the defendant's country.
We should probably get back to discussing Battle Forge or the thread will just get locked. I wonder if we are likely to see any more updates over the festive period (thinking most likely the period between Christmas and new year)?
Necronmaniac05 wrote: We should probably get back to discussing Battle Forge or the thread will just get locked. I wonder if we are likely to see any more updates over the festive period (thinking most likely the period between Christmas and new year)?
One would hope, or their free month of beta will expire without them having worked out the bugs.
but as long as you play 9th Editon 40k and buy models to do so, GW won't get the message
because GW cannot see the difference between
their product sucks but people still play it
and people not having the money to pay for it but because it is such a great product they want to get it anyway
kodos wrote: but as long as you play 9th Editon 40k and buy models to do so, GW won't get the message
because GW cannot see the difference between
their product sucks but people still play it
and people not having the money to pay for it but because it is such a great product they want to get it anyway
I've already made a pledge to get all my models, new or used, secondhand until they can get their act together. People here accept mediocrity as the greatest thing ever.
"Among the many changes and tweaks is a new lower price. For just £1.99 a month you’ll get access to the same premium app features as before, plus all of the new goodies being added as development continues.
That includes the aforementioned support for Crusade campaigns, plus a few fantastic things that we can’t quite talk about just yet. "
Still sounds like more pay us now and it will become worth it eventualy we promise..
However. at £24 a year I am actualy tempted to give it a go.
Doe sit now contain rules for DA with ot without codex? The blurb implies you get the new DA rules.
Also, important extra, the win your free army thing is now a monthly competition, drawn the first of the month.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Argive wrote: "Among the many changes and tweaks is a new lower price. For just £1.99 a month you’ll get access to the same premium app features as before, plus all of the new goodies being added as development continues.
That includes the aforementioned support for Crusade campaigns, plus a few fantastic things that we can’t quite talk about just yet. "
Still sounds like more pay us now and it will become worth it eventualy we promise..
However. at £24 a year I am actualy tempted to give it a go.
Doe sit now contain rules for DA with ot without codex? The blurb implies you get the new DA rules.
I read it as, they are updated in the app now, should you have the prerequisite.
It seems GW has been listening. The 40K App is going down to £1.99 a month.
Wonder how long that'll last.
Quite clever actually, get people to give it a try at half of the price and then in six months to a year crank it back it up £4 (or whatever it was) but by that point people will have 'settled' into it and be more reluctant to stop subscribing.
I find £1.99 a whole lot more appealing than £4.99 (or was it 3.99)? At this price I'm willing to check it out. Is it still the case that a MyWarhammer account and regular GW account are two separate entities that cannot be merged in any way?
I have been paying for the app, as I like having access to the rules for all the 8th edition stuff, and the army builder works for my armies quite well. lower price makes it even more appealing to me.
Us3Less wrote: I find £1.99 a whole lot more appealing than £4.99 (or was it 3.99)? At this price I'm willing to check it out. Is it still the case that a MyWarhammer account and regular GW account are two separate entities that cannot be merged in any way?
The new price range makes much more sense and if they improve it by providing proper Crusade support and Battleforge I'd say that 2 pounds is worth it unlike the previous price.
It's nice they have lowered the price, now at least it's not straight outrageous. However you still need to purchase the physical codexes to get access to new rules, so the main problem (for me) still persists. Either I buy the codex and get a free app, or pay for the app and get the rules, aything else just feels like paying twice for the same thing. A platform like D&DBeyond but for 40k would be awesome to have.
I've found it working pretty well, but cancelled my subscription due to the price. The reduced cost might be enough to pick it back up though. It's been updated faster than Battlescribe and the rules integration makes it better for researching model options mid build. Not sold yet, but we're a LOT closer now.
