Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Which do people consider to be the definitive set of rules? The pdfs on warcom, or the app? If there is a conflict, which is correct?

 Trickstick wrote:
Which do people consider to be the definitive set of rules? The pdfs on warcom, or the app? If there is a conflict, which is correct?

The PDF, because it is more widely available. Anyone with internet access, regardless of how they access it, can get the PDF.

 nordsturmking wrote:
from the app
Custodes FW weapons but with no infoon special rules:

RIP kinetic destroyer...ap1 1d...

punchy telemon with flamers looks fun given how good flamers are now

looks like disintegration is MIA on the adrastus bolt calivers, same stat line on bolt volley though which is good.

The app really pinpoints how strange the ”free upgrades” rules are…

Oooh....this gave me an idea to put wireshark on and see if I can scrape the data. Might need a debugger on compile if they were crafty.

All they had to do to outcompete the third party options was to make a free app. It's baffling why they didn't.

 RaptorusRex wrote:
All they had to do to outcompete the third party options was to make a free app. It's baffling why they didn't.

As long as points are free it doesn't matter much. It looks to me like the datasheets will be available, but not the builder and that's all that I need. If the sub cost is just having Warhammer+ then all the better.

 RaptorusRex wrote:
All they had to do to outcompete the third party options was to make a free app. It's baffling why they didn't.

At this stage, what 3rd party options? I'm sure they won't be far behind, but we've no idea what anything will cost atm.

Daedalus81 wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:
All they had to do to outcompete the third party options was to make a free app. It's baffling why they didn't.

As long as points are free it doesn't matter much. It looks to me like the datasheets will be available, but not the builder and that's all that I need. If the sub cost is just having Warhammer+ then all the better.

Dudeface wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:
All they had to do to outcompete the third party options was to make a free app. It's baffling why they didn't.

At this stage, what 3rd party options? I'm sure they won't be far behind, but we've no idea what anything will cost atm.

While Battlescribe and its offshoots are on the ropes right now, they will eventually scrounge together something that will have less errors than the app. I've already personally seen plenty of Guard players confused over the Infantry Squad's loadout because of discrepancies between the datasheet and the app.

And while I don't really engage in salty posting, it is telling that GW is the sole holdout in a wargames scene full of free listbuilder apps. Mantic, Warlord, etc. all have one.

It's pretty surprising that they would want to lock the app behind a WH+ subscription. I would think that the marketing and data collection opportunities of having a free app that every Warhammer player uses would justify the costs of creating and maintaining such an app.

 nordsturmking wrote:
from the app
Custodes FW weapons but with no infoon special rules:

Spoiler:

Did they happen to have the FW Knight stuff in there too?

Dudeface wrote:

Sunno wrote:
The new 40K app is just very very very poor.

Compare it to other apps from other companies.

Are you comparing it to other companies apps in the niche on their launch day state though?

The new app is a little rough in some places and clearly didn't hire enough or listen to SQA, but it's a solid enough foundation if they don't just stall and call it done.

Are you saying we should give a multi million dollar company with thousands of people working for them the same excuses as a small indi company with 10 people

Not like GW had 3 years time to make something useful and ready at launch

 Pariah Press wrote:
It's pretty surprising that they would want to lock the app behind a WH+ subscription. I would think that the marketing and data collection opportunities of having a free app that every Warhammer player uses would justify the costs of creating and maintaining such an app.

You would be right. But, in the words of a GW CEO of the past, market research is otiose in a niche. It seems that for all that has changed, GW is still the same when it comes to them not understanding the value of user data and business intelligence.

Okay, so I'm gonna be honest. With this edition, no wargear cost, unit blocks and datacards printable. An app kinda feels uneeded. I use it for HH to quickly reference stuff. In 10th you can just have the card there to reference units and list writing is straightforward if a little boring.

Got a very large early morning delivery today.

 kodos wrote:
Are you saying we should give a multi million dollar company with thousands of people working for them the same excuses as a small indi company with 10 people

Wouldn't be the first time he's suggested that this week.

I just talked to my local GW store manager who told me it's more than 50% likely that our Leviathan pre-orders will not arrive by Saturday.

So, business as usual I guess.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:

I love how the default weaponry of the Relic Comtemptor - Heavy Plasma Cannons - aren't even on the Contemptor's datasheet.

[EDIT]: In fact, the Heavy Plasma Cannons are no where in the entire Index.

The Heavy Plasma Cannon is an option for the Boxnaught on its datasheet. There's also a Twin Heavy Plasma Cannon available for the Storm Raven.

Dudeface wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:
All they had to do to outcompete the third party options was to make a free app. It's baffling why they didn't.

At this stage, what 3rd party options? I'm sure they won't be far behind, but we've no idea what anything will cost atm.

Excel? Pen and paper? With baby points, it's not like the math is hard anymore.

In the assembly instructions for the Sternguard in the Leviathan box, the Combi-Plasma and Combi-Melta have different rules, the former being Anti-Monster/Hazardous, he latter being Anti-Vehicle/Melta. The Lieutenant's Combi-Flamer has Ignores Cover as well.

Hmm...

 Insectum7 wrote:
The Heavy Plasma Cannon is an option for the Boxnaught on its datasheet. There's also a Twin Heavy Plasma Cannon available for the Storm Raven.

Which is fantastic, but neither of those sheets are in this Index. And, again, these are the base weapons of this unit, and aren't in its rules. That is quite silly.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
In the assembly instructions for the Sternguard in the Leviathan box, the Combi-Plasma and Combi-Melta have different rules, the former being Anti-Monster/Hazardous, he latter being Anti-Vehicle/Melta. The Lieutenant's Combi-Flamer has Ignores Cover as well.

Hmm...

Maybe the Sternguard sprue and instructions are future-proofed for a Codex release where Combi-plasma, combi-melta, and combi-flamer are restored as datacard options?

Man, I can almost make myself believe that. Clap a little harder...

It's not impossible that the codex will re-introduce some of the consolidated wargear options. In fact, I'd say its more than likely, with the indexes being free, the codexes need to have a bunch of new stuff to justify their purchase

Imagine if all Melta-Weapons got Anti-Vehicle 4+ like these Combi-Meltas have. That'd certainly solve a few issues...

Trickstick wrote:Which do people consider to be the definitive set of rules? The pdfs on warcom, or the app? If there is a conflict, which is correct?

The PDFs that are available to everyone.

terennNash wrote:

 nordsturmking wrote:
from the app
Custodes FW weapons but with no infoon special rules:

RIP kinetic destroyer...ap1 1d...

punchy telemon with flamers looks fun given how good flamers are now

looks like disintegration is MIA on the adrastus bolt calivers, same stat line on bolt volley though which is good.

I wouldn't be surprised if they turned the disintegration on the Bolt Caliver into the Sagittarum's special ability.

 kodos wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Sunno wrote:
The new 40K app is just very very very poor.

Compare it to other apps from other companies.

Are you comparing it to other companies apps in the niche on their launch day state though?

The new app is a little rough in some places and clearly didn't hire enough or listen to SQA, but it's a solid enough foundation if they don't just stall and call it done.

Are you saying we should give a multi million dollar company with thousands of people working for them the same excuses as a small indi company with 10 people

Not like GW had 3 years time to make something useful and ready at launch

It is useful and "ready". GW did exactly what most multi-million dollar companies with thousands of employees none of which will be app devs do with the last one. They outsource it because they don't know wtf they're doing. They likely hired a small team in the interim, which if memory serves right they were hiring devs about 18 months ago. If they got this far in 18 months from a standing start then that's not terrible depending on team size.

Although I appreciate dodging the question completely.

Dudeface wrote:

 kodos wrote:


Are you saying we should give a multi million dollar company with thousands of people working for them the same excuses as a small indi company with 10 people

Not like GW had 3 years time to make something useful and ready at launch

It is useful and "ready". GW did exactly what most multi-million dollar companies with thousands of employees none of which will be app devs do with the last one. They outsource it because they don't know wtf they're doing. They likely hired a small team in the interim, which if memory serves right they were hiring devs about 18 months ago. If they got this far in 18 months from a standing start then that's not terrible depending on team size.

Although I appreciate dodging the question completely.

It's also worth pointing out that pointing out that GW have thousands of employees is disingenuous at best, their last annual report shows 2,554, but design and development is only 348. The lion's share is production, distribution and retailing, hell they have more admin staff that design staff.

Sure that's a fair few more than a small indi company with 10 people, but by the time you take out middle managers, sculptors, painters, artists etc, there won't be that many actually working on game design or on the app.

 H.B.M.C. wrote:
In the assembly instructions for the Sternguard in the Leviathan box, the Combi-Plasma and Combi-Melta have different rules, the former being Anti-Monster/Hazardous, he latter being Anti-Vehicle/Melta. The Lieutenant's Combi-Flamer has Ignores Cover as well.

Hmm...

This is so, so weird. I see no logic why they wouldn't just use those profiles then in the indexes. I know there doesn't need to be. But I still find it really weird. Interesting and hopeful as well. Although I'm not sure if I prefer more boring universal rules or more flavorful rules that are drip fed to the game via codexes... the fact that it will take years to get everyone a codex is to me the worst part of their current business/release model. Ugh.

Bencyclopedia wrote:

Sure that's a fair few more than a small indi company with 10 people, but by the time you take out middle managers, sculptors, painters, artists etc, there won't be that many actually working on game design or on the app.

but GW can hire ones

they don't need to have the 1 designer there is to do 3 other jobs because they cannot afford a dedicated app designer

and it is not that 10th was a surprised launch because somehow everyone expected it to be 5 years until the next edition

they could and can hire as many people as necessary as many years as necessary in advance without any problem to come up with an app were they just need to add in the digital version of the cards (and not copy&paste plain text and format it so that similar named rules get mismatched)

could have also made a database to manage all the cards no matter if they go into the app, the pdf, the codex or being printed standalone, so that all of those are the same and not with different typos each time

if you need 10 people to do that over 2 years, it is literally no problem to get 10 more people just for that task

for a company like GW there is no excuse not doing it and specially not the indi/start-up excuse that there are not enough people and not enough money

 kodos wrote:

Bencyclopedia wrote:

Sure that's a fair few more than a small indi company with 10 people, but by the time you take out middle managers, sculptors, painters, artists etc, there won't be that many actually working on game design or on the app.

but GW can hire ones

they don't need to have the 1 designer there is to do 3 other jobs because they cannot afford a dedicated app designer

and it is not that 10th was a surprised launch because somehow everyone expected it to be 5 years until the next edition

they could and can hire as many people as necessary as many years as necessary in advance without any problem to come up with an app were they just need to add in the digital version of the cards (and not copy&paste plain text and format it so that similar named rules get mismatched)

could have also made a database to manage all the cards no matter if they go into the app, the pdf, the codex or being printed standalone, so that all of those are the same and not with different typos each time

if you need 10 people to do that over 2 years, it is literally no problem to get 10 more people just for that task

for a company like GW there is no excuse not doing it and specially not the indi/start-up excuse that there are not enough people and not enough money

They're not a software development company, how would you expect them to know how many people or how long they need? They've little experience in the field, that's exactly the point. Half the problems the dev team will face will be the misunderstanding of people going "Oh it's easy my mate made an app in 2 weeks in a shed with a typewriter" because it's not as simple as a lot of people act like it is.

 kodos wrote:

Bencyclopedia wrote:

Sure that's a fair few more than a small indi company with 10 people, but by the time you take out middle managers, sculptors, painters, artists etc, there won't be that many actually working on game design or on the app.

but GW can hire ones

they don't need to have the 1 designer there is to do 3 other jobs because they cannot afford a dedicated app designer

and it is not that 10th was a surprised launch because somehow everyone expected it to be 5 years until the next edition

they could and can hire as many people as necessary as many years as necessary in advance without any problem to come up with an app were they just need to add in the digital version of the cards (and not copy&paste plain text and format it so that similar named rules get mismatched)

could have also made a database to manage all the cards no matter if they go into the app, the pdf, the codex or being printed standalone, so that all of those are the same and not with different typos each time

if you need 10 people to do that over 2 years, it is literally no problem to get 10 more people just for that task

for a company like GW there is no excuse not doing it and specially not the indi/start-up excuse that there are not enough people and not enough money

I feel like you missunderstand Games Workshops priorites, sure they could throw resources at it to make a fantastic app, but as Dudeface said they're not a software company. As far and GW is concerned they make and sell miniatures. The games are marketing tools, the app is at best, a small part of that marketing tool. It's never going to be a priority. I'm sure the individuals working on it want it to be good, but I doubt their bosses care provided that it's functional. Setting your bar much higher than that is setting yourself up for disappointment.

And yet they're going to charge for it.

If they're charging for it, then a level of quality shouldn't just be assumed, it should be required. You can't just go "It's a marketing tool!" when you're making your customers pay for your marketing.