# GW goes after Wolflair, maker of Army Builder



## MadCowCrazy (Mar 19, 2009)

Saw this over at Faeit 212



> A few days ago, we learned that www.datafilecentral.com, a hosting site for Army Builder data files, has been notified by Games Workshop that all GW-related files need to be taken down. This was completely unexpected, as the site has been operating for many years without complaint from Games Workshop (or anyone else). The AB user who manages the site informed us about this over the weekend, and he said that he has no choice but to comply with GW's demands.
> 
> We've already notified the data file authors for any games that are impacted, allowing them to migrate their files to new hosting sites. If all goes smoothly, nobody will even notice the change. However, given the number of game systems involved, it's possible that there will be a temporary hiccup with at least one of them. In the interests of transparency, we want to give everyone early warning of potential problems.
> 
> ...


----------



## Eleven (Nov 6, 2008)

I'm not exactly adept at these kind of legal things so correct me if i'm wrong but the tl/dr is:

Army builder can't host the data files themselves anymore, so now third parties will have to take the blame?

Oh GWS.....I can only hope that this means that they are releasing their own version of army builder soon. But knowing our luck it will be an app that is only for ipad and it will cost 80 dollars. probably have to buy it new each addition too.


----------



## Sakura_ninja (Apr 29, 2012)

Gw did an army builder once already...it was a huge success...no really it was...no I'm serious.........ok I lied, it was utter shite


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

I believe the problem here is that alot of the army builder files now include the stats and rules etc from the codexs and so-forth, meaning people could just get the army builder file and not have to buy the relevate army rule book... Ergo, GW sees this as someone undermining their business. If it had remained as simply a way of organising the points cost of the list, GW wouldn't have had a problem with it.


----------



## OpTi (Aug 29, 2009)

GrizBe said:


> I believe the problem here is that alot of the army builder files now include the stats and rules etc from the codexs and so-forth, meaning people could just get the army builder file and not have to buy the relevate army rule book... Ergo, GW sees this as someone undermining their business. If it had remained as simply a way of organising the points cost of the list, GW wouldn't have had a problem with it.


Actually almost all the rules have been removed for the recent codex's you just have page ref's now, the stats and points costs are in there but without a codex you don't really know what anything does.


----------



## Sakura_ninja (Apr 29, 2012)

And now with 6th even with a codex and rushed poorly done FAQ's you have no idea how things work.


----------



## GrizBe (May 12, 2010)

OpTi said:


> Actually almost all the rules have been removed for the recent codex's you just have page ref's now, the stats and points costs are in there but without a codex you don't really know what anything does.


I've not used it for a while, so I admit i'm going off how I knew it. Point still stands though, there do exist ones with the rules in, and the stats are there.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

Sakura_ninja said:


> And now with 6th even with a codex and rushed poorly done FAQ's you have no idea how things work.


Not sure if you've actually read the FAQs, but they clear up almost all of the issues with the transfer to 6th, but i guess


----------



## Sakura_ninja (Apr 29, 2012)

mcmuffin said:


> Not sure if you've actually read the FAQs, but they clear up almost all of the issues with the transfer to 6th, but i guess


if you say so, I guess those multiple topics we have ongoing at the moment of people getting confused by the FAQ's don't exist


----------



## Dawnstar (Jan 21, 2010)

Sakura_ninja said:


> if you say so, I guess those multiple topics we have ongoing at the moment of people getting confused by the FAQ's don't exist


If most of them stopped and actually sat down for a day with the rulebook and read it front to back, and used common sense and logic while doing so I bet things would be a lot simpler. I'd bet a kidney that there's only confusion because the book has been out for about 2 days.


----------



## boreas (Dec 4, 2007)

Dawnstar said:


> If most of them stopped and actually sat down for a day with the rulebook and read it front to back, and used common sense and logic while doing so I bet things would be a lot simpler. I'd bet a kidney that there's only confusion because the book has been out for about 2 days.


QFT. Compared to the giant clusterfuck that was 5th ed. transition, this one is wonderful. Apart from some nitpicking lawyers (Like GK thunderhammers being AP3, come on, use your common sense...), there are very few real problems.

Now, GW going after Army Builder is another of their imbecilic moves. AB provides a great service to the whole GW community by providing clear rosters that are proprerly added up (compared to the sometimes... shady... hand-made ones).

Come on, GW, either buy AB and provide the service OR let them be...

Phil


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Pen paper and calculator works. Plus the layout of army builder is horrendous. So much easier to use a mind.

In other words, /care.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Army Builder charges you, Openoffice .calc doesn't. Alternatively, if you have it, Excel. Any spreadsheet program.

I've never seen the appeal of Army Builder, to be honest. Games Workshop provides roster sheets free if you want them.

Midnight


----------



## Pssyche (Mar 21, 2009)

"Pen paper and calculator works."

Yes, it should do. But it doesn't.

I can't remember the last time I was provided with a copy of somebody's army list that was hand written.

But I can remember many, many times playing against people who "Know Their Army So Don't Need A Written List" and after the game finding out that they've fielded around 20% more points than they should.

And I can remember many, many times when I've handed an opponent my printed list and seen them instantly tailor a list to combat what I've brought and declared.

Personally, I normally have two copies of my army list printed in advance, one of which is for my opponent to keep as a reference during the game and to take away and digest after the game if they so wish.

Anything that promotes open and fair play should be commended.


----------



## LukeValantine (Dec 2, 2008)

Dawnstar said:


> If most of them stopped and actually sat down for a day with the rulebook and read it front to back, and used common sense and logic while doing so I bet things would be a lot simpler. I'd bet a kidney that there's only confusion because the book has been out for about 2 days.


What confusion I understand it about as well as 4-5th at this point...well until the army specific WTF's come up but those typically take 1-3 months or even a year to be fully sniffed out.....and maybe I haven't memorized the 5 psychic tables or the missions, but then against I never did for fantasy so why break a trend now?


----------



## Firewolf (Jan 22, 2007)

Vaz said:


> Pen paper and calculator works. Plus the layout of army builder is horrendous. So much easier to use a mind.
> 
> In other words, /care.


>> Pen? Paper? Calculator? What are these things you talk of. If My PC cant do it for me, then I dont want it. But seriously, Imagine having to do some math all by yourself WTF!!!:shok:


----------



## Arcane (Feb 17, 2009)

Pssyche said:


> "Pen paper and calculator works."
> 
> Yes, it should do. But it doesn't.
> 
> ...


Why can't I play more people like you? I swear ever kid under 20 I play against totaled his army points up in his head and is just sure that he is kosher. List, what list? Meanwhile I spent hours trying to decide where to spend those last 5 points and if I should take that melta bomb off a squad or give someone else a heavy weapon.


----------



## SilverTabby (Jul 31, 2009)

To be honest, this looks like a first move in clearing the way for what people have been asking GW to do for years, which is go digital more. Which would include more codeces online, and army builder would be in direct conflict with anything roster-related GW chose to release. 

And did someone mention Army Builder charges? That's making money off GWs IP, which they've been coming down hard on whenever they can of late. 

If people really want GW to make new things for them, then other companies that do it *will* be gone after. You protect your source of income, especially when it's your sole product (ie "warhammer").


----------



## Sakura_ninja (Apr 29, 2012)

Who asked for gw to be more online?, I certainly never did, and never would, especially if it all involves apple, screw digital crap, if some fat geek wants his codex to be digital he can waddle over to a scanner barely able to breath and scan his codex into a suitable format before rolling his fat ass down to his local to table a 12yr old because it "excites him"


----------



## scscofield (May 23, 2011)

Sakura_ninja said:


> Who asked for gw to be more online?, I certainly never did, and never would, especially if it all involves apple, screw digital crap, if some fat geek wants his codex to be digital he can waddle over to a scanner barely able to breath and scan his codex into a suitable format before rolling his fat ass down to his local to table a 12yr old because it "excites him"


Could you tone the bile down some please, your posts are getting more and more spiteful.


----------



## boreas (Dec 4, 2007)

SilverTabby said:


> To be honest, this looks like a first move in clearing the way for what people have been asking GW to do for years, which is go digital more. Which would include more codeces online, and army builder would be in direct conflict with anything roster-related GW chose to release.
> 
> And did someone mention Army Builder charges? That's making money off GWs IP, which they've been coming down hard on whenever they can of late.
> 
> If people really want GW to make new things for them, then other companies that do it *will* be gone after. You protect your source of income, especially when it's your sole product (ie "warhammer").


I don't have a problem with GW going after AB. Just as long as they provide just as good a service. Actually, the one logical way to go about that would be to offer the service first, and then go after WL. Otherwise, it's just pissing off customers...

Oh and, yeah, pen and paper is crap because I don't want to have to recalculate my opponent's list. And also, I like to fiddle around those few leftover points. Or just sit around and toy with Ab, making various lists. Oh, and sending the lists over email when planning 2 vs 2 games. etc...


----------



## davespil (Apr 28, 2008)

AB isn't infringing on GW IP. The people who make the files for Warhammer 40k and FB are. AB supports many different game types including ones you make up yourself. If you by the product which I do and I enjoy it you can download a free program to design army files yourself. Also, I'm not lazy I just like starting with a blank canvas and dropping units in and out at the click of a mouse to come up with new list ideas.

For those complaining about those who use AB and don't do it with pen and calculator, I bet you guys walk everywhere instead of using a car, right? Its not lazy, it technology.

I honestly don't want GW to put one out there unless it results in a lower cost for AB. I'm not fond of anything GW does other then models.


----------



## Sakura_ninja (Apr 29, 2012)

davespil said:


> For those complaining about those who use AB and don't do it with pen and calculator, I bet you guys walk everywhere instead of using a car, right? Its not lazy, it technology.


Actually...yes I do walk everywhere.


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

Sakura_ninja said:


> Actually...yes I do walk everywhere.


Are you Amish? If so why are you using the internet!


----------



## Sakura_ninja (Apr 29, 2012)

Necrosis said:


> Are you Amish? If so why are you using the internet!


I was unaware that to use the internet I had to stop walking?, but I certainly would not want to play a game where all the rules are on my computer or phone, it would be especially difficult if the computer was at home, its hard to carry a pc everywhere, and reading a codex on my phone?, Piss off.


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

Sakura_ninja said:


> I was unaware that to use the internet I had to stop walking?, but I certainly would not want to play a game where all the rules are on my computer or phone, it would be especially difficult if the computer was at home, its hard to carry a pc everywhere, and reading a codex on my phone?, Piss off.


It was joke. Amish are a group of religious people who don't believe in electricity.


----------



## Tim/Steve (Jan 25, 2009)

Eleven said:


> Oh GWS.....I can only hope that this means that they are releasing their own version of army builder soon. But knowing our luck it will be an app that is only for ipad and it will cost 80 dollars. probably have to buy it new each addition too.


Doubt it... I expect its just GW legal trying to prove to senior brass that they are doing something of worth and helping to stop breachers of GW IP. Of course it'll be completely ineffective since you can't stop things spreading round the internet and does nothing but make GW seem like a bully... but that doesn't mean it was a bad idea... right?


This seems to be perfectly in tune with GW legal's normal actions, but I really can't see any reason for it or benefit to GW from going through with it


----------



## Truefaith (Oct 11, 2009)

Have you seen some of the 40k communities hand writing abilities? I couldn't read a guys email address for a league that he wanted to play in...

I couldnt imagine trying to read 20 hand written lists for a tourney...


----------



## Bubblematrix (Jun 4, 2009)

Tim/Steve said:


> Doubt it... I expect its just GW legal trying to prove to senior brass that they are doing something of worth and helping to stop breachers of GW IP.


My guess too, it is about time that GW legal hammered something, they are like bored schoolkids and AB data files was an easy one to start on.

To be honest AB is doing nothing wrong (maybe taking links to IP infringing files will be asked for, but that is the limit) and GW wont be able to chase down then data files on all the internet, it just might get a little more difficult to find them and they may be slower in coming when a new codex is out.

Overall, it's a pain, but not that concerned - and if it means a GW version of AB then so long as it works and is multi-platform, I am all for it


----------



## boreas (Dec 4, 2007)

I think I'd rather program my own AB files. Did it a few years ago for an alternative Tau BFG army (the FW list, I think) and it wasn't that hard...

Phil


----------



## mattjgilbert (Feb 28, 2007)

They already prevented Battlescribe from using the IP. This is a prelude to them bringing out their own army building software. It's easy to imagine this is part of the going-digital strategy.

As noted by other posters, GW cannot go after Wolflair because they do not provide the data files. They have asked the unaffiliated group who host the AB data files to remove them.


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

There is a problem with GW not going after people infringing their IP. They loose the right to that IP. As the IP is pretty much the thing that keeps GW in business they cannot afford to not go after the data file providers. To be honest it surprises me they have not done it sooner.


----------



## boreas (Dec 4, 2007)

humakt said:


> There is a problem with GW not going after people infringing their IP. They loose the right to that IP. As the IP is pretty much the thing that keeps GW in business they cannot afford to not go after the data file providers. To be honest it surprises me they have not done it sooner.


I read that a lot, but I wonder how true that is. Not sniping at you, but is there some real authority on this? When using GW-related terms to produce models, I can understand. But using GW-related terms in a list compiler? GW might as well sue this site for using "Heresy" combined with the eye of Horus logo. Or "Bolter and Chainsword"? Or any site proposing strategies, gaming amterial or fan-fic!?

Phil


----------



## xa0s (Jun 8, 2008)

All the more reason for me to buff up my database design/model with SQL and M$ Access.


----------



## Grokfog (May 4, 2009)

It is a shame, hopefully GW and Wolflair will be able to come to some agreement that benefits both companies, and the hobby as a whole. Personally I don't use the digital method, I'd rather use a pen and paper (keeps my handwriting relatively neat too, with all the practice), but I could see the appeal for ease of use on an ipad or whatever


----------



## Karyudo-DS (Nov 7, 2009)

boreas said:


> But using GW-related terms in a list compiler? GW might as well sue this site for using "Heresy" combined with the eye of Horus logo.


Don't think it's a question of the terms, but the stats/point values from the codexs which would make the codex's mostly unneeded.


----------



## Arcane (Feb 17, 2009)

boreas said:


> I think I'd rather program my own AB files. Did it a few years ago for an alternative Tau BFG army (the FW list, I think) and it wasn't that hard...
> 
> Phil


Do you know any guides on teh interwebz for such a thing?


----------



## boreas (Dec 4, 2007)

Arcane said:


> Do you know any guides on teh interwebz for such a thing?


The wolflair site has the module and "how-to" on the dowload page, IIRC.... You can use a current datafile and modify it also. Easier that re-programming the whole thing.


----------



## SilverTabby (Jul 31, 2009)

Truefaith said:


> Have you seen some of the 40k communities hand writing abilities? I couldn't read a guys email address for a league that he wanted to play in...
> 
> I couldnt imagine trying to read 20 hand written lists for a tourney...


I work mine out by hand, on and off throughout the day on pieces of paper, thinking and tweaking. Then I sit down at the pc, write it up and check everything with the computer calculator. That way I a) keep up my handwriting, b) keep up my mental arithmatic, and c) end up with something readable.

I've used excel, word, printed squad cards, never army builder. I simply don't see the need, personally. Part of this hobby is doing things by hand.


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

Pen Paper calculator, word processor and calculator same difference. Dont be obtuse. As to whethernI walk everywhere, yes dave, I do walk everywhere because I can entirely see your point in the correlation between a crappy piece of software coding that my mind and hand can do the same job for much better effects, laid out in a clearly designed manner.

Take a look through my armylists in the forums, which of those are hard to read? Using armybuilder is akin to using the car to go to the paper shop when walking takes 5 mins anyway.

Army Builder does not stop a retard being a retard. Do what I do, force a gaming etiquette by getting them to bring a list conforming to a local stndard and all relevant rules. Otherwise don't play.


----------



## gen.ahab (Dec 22, 2009)

I have a four function calculator, so this isn't exactly going to be a huge loss for me, though it sucks for them.


----------



## Serpion5 (Mar 19, 2010)

Never used AB and don't really care for losing it. 

I've always just typed out a list including options and points. I use the codex or a copy of the summary page when I can to convey weapon or unit stats and rules. Honestly, given what I pay for the codexes I might as well fucking put them to use.


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

Maybe GW are considering licensing the rights to make an army builder like application? To do this they might need to clear the way for whoever buys the license. They did the same for bloodbowl if I remember correctly.

As for the last attempt at GW to make an army designer, it wasn't too bad. It was pretty and functional which is about as much as you can ask for. As for m I just use a word processor and a calculator. Makes for a nice an easy to read list.


----------



## Cougar (Feb 28, 2012)

It will be a shame it GW does stop AB from using its info.
The AB40k guys that maintain the rules have always stated they will respect GW's wishes if they ever asked them to stop.

Been using it for years. I find its alot easier than writing it out as when i get to the end i always need more points and end up changing things. 

Unticking a box is much easier than re-doing a whole hand written section.

I had GW's original spacemarine army builder app, from memory it wasn't to good.


----------



## Dave T Hobbit (Dec 3, 2009)

boreas said:


> humakt said:
> 
> 
> > There is a problem with GW not going after people infringing their IP. They loose the right to that IP. As the IP is pretty much the thing that keeps GW in business they cannot afford to not go after the data file providers. To be honest it surprises me they have not done it sooner.
> ...


I studied IP law as part of my postgrad and in the UK it is not quite as simple as "letting people use your IP=losing the right to enforce"; however it is never a good idea to let your IP be used without a licence, so acting as if "use=damage" is a good guideline.

GW could start proceedings against Heresy-Online for use of imagery and words; if the combination of two-headed eagle and eye with the word heresy is close enough they might win, but certainly would not make any money from it. However, we are not cutting into on their profit sector by doing it (potentially as a great place to be, we are boosting the likelihood of people playing GW games), whereas Warhammer AB files do something GW could do so are competition.


----------



## boreas (Dec 4, 2007)

Dave T Hobbit said:


> I studied IP law as part of my postgrad and in the UK it is not quite as simple as "letting people use your IP=losing the right to enforce"; however it is never a good idea to let your IP be used without a licence, so acting as if "use=damage" is a good guideline.
> 
> GW could start proceedings against Heresy-Online for use of imagery and words; if the combination of two-headed eagle and eye with the word heresy is close enough they might win, but certainly would not make any money from it. However, we are not cutting into on their profit sector by doing it (potentially as a great place to be, we are boosting the likelihood of people playing GW games), whereas Warhammer AB files do something GW could do so are competition.


Cool, thanks!


----------



## Rathios1337 (Jul 2, 2010)

Sakura_ninja said:


> Who asked for gw to be more online?, I certainly never did, and never would, especially if it all involves apple, screw digital crap, if some fat geek wants his codex to be digital he can waddle over to a scanner barely able to breath and scan his codex into a suitable format before rolling his fat ass down to his local to table a 12yr old because it "excites him"


you know, I have been back at heresy for about 10 mins and I already dont like you...


Anyway, on topic. Perhaps GW could start an online builder and with every codex you buy you get a code for the builder?


----------



## Vaz (Mar 19, 2008)

GW give stuff away for free? Hardly. Nice idea.


----------



## Sakura_ninja (Apr 29, 2012)

Rathios1337 said:


> you know, I have been back at heresy for about 10 mins and I already dont like you...


I'm happy for you *goes back to adding stuff with and without a calculator and writing on paper*


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

Sakura_ninja said:


> I'm happy for you *goes back to adding stuff with and without a calculator and writing on paper*












It had to be done


----------



## Rathios1337 (Jul 2, 2010)

Sakura_ninja said:


> I'm happy for you *goes back to adding stuff with and without a calculator and writing on paper*


you appear to be under the impression that I give a shit about AB. I do not. Personally I use the codex and a spreadsheet, much better.


----------



## Iron Angel (Aug 2, 2009)

Dawnstar said:


> If most of them stopped and actually sat down for a day with the rulebook and read it front to back, and used common sense and logic while doing so I bet things would be a lot simpler. I'd bet a kidney that there's only confusion because the book has been out for about 2 days.


----------



## Dawnstar (Jan 21, 2010)

Iron Angel said:


>


All I was merely pointing out is that in a few weeks time most people should have read the rulebook enough to understand it, and when it happens the number of people whining about X unit/army/rule will decrease quite a lot


----------



## Pssyche (Mar 21, 2009)

I read it as Iron Angel was agreeing with you there, Dawnstar.
Many people aren't giving it a chance because they don't want to give it a chance. 
And they'll find no end of "fault" with it for the time being.
Sooner or later they'll find something else to whine about.
Then they can all hate that...


----------



## Dawnstar (Jan 21, 2010)

Pssyche said:


> I read it as Iron Angel was agreeing with you there, Dawnstar.
> Many people aren't giving it a chance because they don't want to give it a chance.
> And they'll find no end of "fault" with it for the time being.
> Sooner or later they'll find something else to whine about.
> Then they can all hate that...


Hope I'm not the only one wishing it was sooner rather than later :laugh:

Also, it seems like people have forgotten about BattleScribe as well. It does the exact same thing as Army Builder, is arguably easier to use, and is free. Why not use that instead


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

What is the whole "big picture - haters going to hate " thing ? 

why is it always an oddly casual figure strolling along that is depicted?


----------



## Sothot (Jul 22, 2011)

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/haters-gonna-hate 

Basically, it's a figure saying whatever, no matter what happens there will be... Well, haters. I used to ve among the pen and paper crowd, but I've been using battlescribe lately. Until they put out a 6th installment I guess it's back to the notebook. If games workshop puts out their own army builder, I suppose that means i'm sticking with pen and paper. I can't justify spending money on things I can do for free.


----------



## Pssyche (Mar 21, 2009)

Games Workshop did a similar thing to Battlescribe around a year or so ago.
It's still going, although the datafiles are now hosted in a different website to the program files.
I use both, but personally prefer Army Builder out of the two.

As for calculators fine. 
But why use a calculator? 
Why not use mental arithmetic?

As for pen & paper. 
Yes, but I'd accept your arguement so much more readily had you hand written your messages with that self same pen & paper, placed it in an envelope, attached a stamp, addressed it, posted it to Heresy instead of lowering yourself to using electronic media.
And no sneaky using ballpoints or fountain pens either!
Quills & parchment or even earlier writing tools & implements.

Let's not be selective Luddites.


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

Pssyche said:


> Games Workshop did a similar thing to Battlescribe around a year or so ago.
> It's still going, although the datafiles are now hosted in a different website to the program files.
> I use both, but personally prefer Army Builder out of the two.
> 
> ...


Screw all that work and using tools, just use your head. It's not like you went to school for nothing! Do all the calculations in your brain and keep your list in your head.


----------



## Pssyche (Mar 21, 2009)

"Screw all that work and using tools, just use your head. It's not like you went to school for nothing! Do all the calculations in your brain and keep your list in your head."

Keep your list in your head?
Don't make me laugh!
As I said earlier...
"But I can remember many, many times playing against people who "Know Their Army So Don't Need A Written List" and after the game finding out that they've fielded around 20% more points than they should."

Nah, sick of being cheated. Not happening.

Plus Rulebook p.118 "...you should always allow your opponent to read your roster after a game..."

Whether it's handwritten, typed or printed off from a computer program is irrelevant.
The rules clearly state that you provide a roster for your opponent to read.


----------



## Necrosis (Nov 1, 2008)

It was a joke, just like your post. Besides your can always recite the list off the top of your head.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

+1 on a fully detailed points listing and balance sheet.

I also like to provide my unit stats and special rules which is why AB is so great.


----------



## Pssyche (Mar 21, 2009)

I also put photos of my units on mine.

It helps my opponent in a large Apocalypse Battle, to keep track of what's what, particularly if they are unfamiliar with Forge World's Eldar models.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

I like that idea, mainly because I generally can't remember what's what


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

lol - I just realised - I am a selective luddite  It's the only time I use paper and pen...


----------



## humakt (Jan 2, 2008)

I am one of the only people in my office that always has a pad of paper and a pen on my desk for making notes. But then Im old school as they like to say.


----------



## Dave T Hobbit (Dec 3, 2009)

25% of the surface of my desk is used for storing paper-based notes. I find hard copy easier to read than screens so, for something I will reuse frequently or spend time reading I use paper.

I use AB to build lists as adding the list up over and over to tweak the points or try different combinations uses time I could spend on other things.


----------



## Pssyche (Mar 21, 2009)

I'm just hoping one of the pen & paper only brigade looks up the meaning of Luddite on their computer's search engine and not in a dictionary from their bookshelf...


----------



## Zodd (Jul 27, 2009)

Pssyche said:


> I'm just hoping one of the pen & paper only brigade looks up the meaning of Luddite on their computer's search engine and not in a dictionary from their bookshelf...


I just did that...in one of my dictionaries, and i only use pencil and paper ( and eraser ) for list building.







i know, i know.. old fart and all that :stinker:


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Pssyche said:


> I'm just hoping one of the pen & paper only brigade looks up the meaning of Luddite on their computer's search engine and not in a dictionary from their bookshelf...


Probably not, as the pen and paper brigade were educated "back in my day" when language was still king, so were taught what luddite means already.


----------



## mcmuffin (Mar 1, 2009)

Magpie_Oz said:


> Probably not, as the pen and paper brigade were educated "back in my day" when language was still king, so were taught what luddite means already.


I guarantee that at least 50% of people googled it to find out, it's not exactly a commonly used term.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Pssyche said:


> "Screw all that work and using tools, just use your head. It's not like you went to school for nothing! Do all the calculations in your brain and keep your list in your head."
> 
> Keep your list in your head?
> Don't make me laugh!
> ...


can i just say
"its in my head you are welcome to mind meld with me to take a butchers", most opponents will decline, those that dont soon will when your rub your hands on your thighs and lick your lips at the prospect of human contact


----------



## Gret79 (May 11, 2012)

mcmuffin said:


> I guarantee that at least 50% of people googled it to find out, it's not exactly a commonly used term.


 
Nahh - I knew that one already. Just made me laugh as I'd never considered myself as a 'selective luddite' and it seems strange (now I think about it) to me that I do use paper and pen for army lists. 

And I'm thoroughly impressed by "I also put photos of my units on mine."

I use my best handwriting...:blush: just sounds somewhat...daft

Although when I was younger, I will admit to being bored to tears by my parents dragging me round clothing museums and the like while on holiday...


----------



## Truefaith (Oct 11, 2009)

So from Wolflair http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=21779

And from AB40k Maintainers http://www.ab40k.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=2600&p=10904#p10904 post #8

Just in case people wanted to read the "Facts".


----------



## Sinsinaty (Jul 13, 2012)

Does this mean if Army Builder goes down, we will get our money back for paying for Army Builder, as this is disgraceful and I would like to atleast have a army builder without having to write every list again and again.


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

Sinsinaty said:


> Does this mean if Army Builder goes down, we will get our money back for paying for Army Builder, as this is disgraceful and I would like to atleast have a army builder without having to write every list again and again.


you get the torches and i will fetch my pitch fork!


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Sinsinaty said:


> Does this mean if Army Builder goes down, we will get our money back for paying for Army Builder, as this is disgraceful and I would like to atleast have a army builder without having to write every list again and again.


Army Builder can't be targeted by GW. They make the program but they have nothing to do with the 40K .dat files. That's handled by a group of volunteers who do it on their own time.

All Army Builder did was stop hosting the .dat files on their server. Nothing else changed.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Army Builder will still be around, it does do other game systems, it's just that perhaps the data files for 40k won't be.

You can always make the data files yourself OR maybe all they need to do is take out a lot of the additional information that they have in the data files. I mean they go way beyond just simply doing the points.


----------



## MidnightSun (Feb 10, 2009)

Use Excel, suck it up.

Midnight


----------



## bitsandkits (Mar 18, 2008)

MidnightSun said:


> Use Excel, suck it up.
> 
> Midnight


but but but ... what about the angry mob i was forming?


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Magpie_Oz said:


> Army Builder will still be around, it does do other game systems, it's just that perhaps the data files for 40k won't be.
> 
> You can always make the data files yourself OR maybe all they need to do is take out a lot of the additional information that they have in the data files. I mean they go way beyond just simply doing the points.


They are moving to making you reference the book more often, but the folks who do the .dat files aren't going anywhere. In fact you can find there site here.

As I stated before, the only thing that changed is that the .dat files aren't kept on the Wolf Lair server. You can still update them as new updates come out, you just might have to ensure Army Builder checks the AB40k Maintainer's server for them instead.


----------



## Pssyche (Mar 21, 2009)

The following two letters are pretty self explanatory. 
The originals can be found on Lone Wolf Development Forums > Army Builder Forums > Army Builder 
Important News about Army Builder Data Files for GW Games – Please Read...

1.
"Quote:
Originally Posted by philosopherof40k 
So I hope that means those of us that purchased a license that is still active that purchased this for 40k will be either credited extra months of updates equal to the time it takes to resolve this issue or refunded our purchase price seeing as how we were mislead to believe that this was a legal contract with GW to use their name. I mean it's not like this program was only ten bucks. If you are no longer providing updates for 40k and 6th edition then I am effectively getting burnt for over half the money I paid for AB seeing as I have more than half a year left on my updates which will be wasted. I mean isn't there anyone on the Lonewolf team that can buy a 6th edition rulebook and incorporate the new rules into the update, I mean that is why we paid for this product right? 

You were never misled to believe that there was a contract between GW and Lone Wolf. Everything on this site and when buying the Army Builder software makes it clear that Army Builder is only a framework and other people have to provide the data files for Army Builder to work properly. You can go build your own data files for 6th edition if you want, just takes a lot of effort. In the FAQ Lone Wolf states that they don't develop most of the data files.

You haven't lost any functionality and the AB40K team has said they are going to continue developing 6th edition.

Lone Wolf owes you absolutely nothing."


2.
"This is a portion of the Please Read First post in the 40K section of the forums

"Intellectual Property. All games systems have copywrights on their game material. If we developed our files and charged for the service, we could be sued by GW for instance as we are making money on their product. As such we do develop our files, but they ARE NOT a replacement for the printed codex rules. In fact, you are still required to own the Codex rules if you use the datafiles.

As for LW making the files themselves, these same issues would arise for them. This is a key reason for LW specifically NOT providing datafiles. They also DO NOT HOST the files. They do however provide a services that when files are updated and those datafile maintainers provide the file locations, AB will get the updated files for you. You however are not required to use the auto-update feature and therefor not pay the annual subscription."

Also in the home page of Lone Wolf, there was never anything to suggest that they had any type of sanction from GW, product is a list building program compatable with game systems like 40k and Fantasy, nor do you need to continue to pay the subscription to import the new data files created by unpaid volunteers and not Lone Wolf, again from the please read first post

"The purchase of Army Builder did not provide you the purchase of datafile rulesets also. It DID however provide you the tools to create any datafile ruleset you wish. Every person is more than able to maintain their own files. I personally recommend against it, as if everyone did their own files then how do you know their version is correct? But if we are not getting something done fast enough, that is an option provided." 

The data file maintainers also have not been sued or had any action taken against them, it was the host server that had to remove the files, the maintainers are still planning on updating the files. "


Many thanks to Al G and Crimsonshark.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

bitsandkits said:


> but but but ... what about the angry mob i was forming?


I'm sure there are plenty of other things to lynch, seeing as how you've gone to all that trouble to gather and anger them.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Zion said:


> They are moving to making you reference the book more often, but the folks who do the .dat files aren't going anywhere. In fact you can find there site here.
> 
> As I stated before, the only thing that changed is that the .dat files aren't kept on the Wolf Lair server. You can still update them as new updates come out, you just might have to ensure Army Builder checks the AB40k Maintainer's server for them instead.


Yep so pretty much, "be patient"


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Magpie_Oz said:


> Yep so pretty much, "be patient"


Yup. We're officially in the "6th Edition Any Day Now" territory for those .dat files! :biggrin:


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Zion said:


> Yup. We're officially in the "6th Edition Any Day Now" territory for those .dat files! :biggrin:


Thing is they aren't really going to be all that different, just a rejigging of the FoC's really.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Magpie_Oz said:


> Thing is they aren't really going to be all that different, just a rejigging of the FoC's really.


Well that and adding in Fortifications and adjusting all the USRs to match, and setting it up so you can specify what kind of power weapon you're using (I assume that's being added at least since it'd muck with stat lines so they'll likely include it).


----------



## Aramoro (Oct 7, 2009)

Magpie_Oz said:


> Thing is they aren't really going to be all that different, just a rejigging of the FoC's really.


To get allies to work will take a bit of time. Doing some work on the Battlescribe version myself.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Aramoro said:


> To get allies to work will take a bit of time. Doing some work on the Battlescribe version myself.


I'm sure it will. I have no real understanding of how it all works but there is a fair bit of leg work involved it seems on the functionality but what I am meaning is that there isn't a huge data entry effort. It's not like they have to start it all from scratch.


----------



## Glokkss (Jul 31, 2011)

I like how some people are saying "Maybe GW's planning to do something with AB!" Oh god no. PLEASE GOD NO! I remember the old software they came out with for what they called "Army Building"..... anyone else remember?? Holy god it was bad. To this day, I still want my money back. I hope GW leaves AB alone. Just forget about it, I really can't see people using just AB for list building and not the actual codex's. Honestly I think their going after the wrong people. The companies that have all the Codex pdf's online are the ones that are harming GW's business. 

Army builders a really useful tool, and the fact is people that hand write lists (most) have not so great hand writing. I know people with "challenges" or in some case "disabilities" when coming to right lists, LOVE AB. I being one of them (I've had parkinson's my entire life) think of AB being my saviour. I don't want to go ask my roommate to right all of these things down on paper for me because I can't do it. Either way, I don't mind paying for the added neatness, organization, and built in list building. People with certain challenges in areas like this aren't necessarily thought of very often. I don't think I've seen it mentioned once, simply because very few of GW's customer base have problems like I do. Its great, I love Ab and I'll always use it. I just hope GW doesn't ruin that for me. Im not paying another 40 dollars for another GOD AWFUL program like GW released a few years back. 

-Glokkss


----------



## SilverTabby (Jul 31, 2009)

Not using AB doesn't mean you have to write by hand. That's what Word or Excel, and printers are for. :wink: 

A codex, a calculator, and a PC are all things virtually every gamer on this forum has access to. The only difference is needing to read a bit harder, add a little, and take a bit more time. Personally I love writing lists, it's part of the fun prior to actually playing a game...


----------



## Glokkss (Jul 31, 2011)

Buts its much faster and quicker. Much easier. Much more reliable I find. Either way, I find this whole GW going after AB thing ridiculous. Which is what the threads about!


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

Glokkss said:


> Buts its much faster and quicker. Much easier. Much more reliable I find. Either way, I find this whole GW going after AB thing ridiculous. Which is what the threads about!


You're overreacting just a bit.

First, GW told AB to stop hosting the data files for their games. AB took them off their server. The groups that still produce these files haven't been contacted or bothered in anyway. Service has not been interrupted.

Secondly, even if GW went after AB they don't have a legal leg to stand on. If a third party makes .dat files that are compatible with Army Builder and they aren't hosted by AB and no one is making money from them GW can get mad, but the .dat files aren't made by AB, aren't hosted by AB, and are only functional with AB because someone else made them to work in AB (which is a program designed around use in a wide array of miniature wargames so it's not a surprise this could happen.)

AB in this case is just the means to the end and not responsible for the .dat files. For AB to be held at fault would be similar to a beer company being held at fault for someone getting a drunk driving charge.

So GW can tell AB to not host the files on their servers but that's about as far as it can really go.


----------



## Insanity (Oct 25, 2011)

I'll contribute to the resurrected thread 

Personally I just use Excel or Word, It gives you more time to go over and refine your list.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Zion said:


> So GW can tell AB to not host the files on their servers but that's about as far as it can really go.


True enough. In fact I'm not even 100% sure they can do that either. I guess from a certain perspective you could say they are making money by hosting the files as a service to their members but they themselves are not infringing any IP in doing so.

AB contains the programming to create an Army Builder set up for any game system. If I give you my Codex and ask you to make a dat file for me there is no law being broken nor copyright being infringed. It is the same as if I did it myself. 

I can even pay you to do that programming for me and it still doesn't breach IP because I am paying you for the programming not the data, the data is mine because I paid for it.

The only time that problems arise is if someone who doesn't own the data (i.e. a Codex) pays for the .dat file as they are in effect paying someone for the data.


----------



## Dave T Hobbit (Dec 3, 2009)

Magpie_Oz said:


> ...I'm not even 100% sure they can do that either. I guess from a certain perspective you could say they are making money by hosting the files as a service to their members but they themselves are not infringing any IP in doing so.


In the UK IP infringement does not require the infringer to profit, merely to have used the IP without permission; however, as enforcement is expensive it is usually not taken unless the infringer either has significant resources, or is cutting into the IP owner's revenue (either by taking profits or damaging product reputation with a shoddy copy).

Also, internet hosting is currently a grey area: it could be viewed as a library where they are not responsible for an author's infringements or it could be viewed as publishing the information making them equally responsible for an author's infringements. At the moment it depends in which jurisdiction action is taken and which analogy to print media advanced in court seems closest to the individual facts.


----------



## Lord Commander Solus (Jul 26, 2012)

I could never just click buttons to work my list out. Have _got_ to use paper and a pencil to get the list down. It'll be messy, and for most games that's all I will bring. Heck, when the majority of my opponents are people who don't even have their own codex, and often ask to borrow my spare models to proxy theirs, why should I come with a fancy list? They just slap down whatever's "roughly equivalent" and get going.

If I was in a tournament, or playing against a civil opponent (I've only been fortunate to play a few of those and it was wonderful) then I will supply a typed-up version of the list I'd originally worked out on paper. I don't just include the unit totals, or, as some people have done to me, a list of units then a big "1500" at the top. (No, you can't fit that many Terminators into 1500pts...). When I supply a proper list, it has the cost of the base unit (cost-per model multiplied by model-count) and then the cost of any upgrades listed next to the upgrade, before a final total next to the unit taking into account every upgrade. 

But like I said, it's rare that I'll need to be that civil as in the majority of cases my opponents may as well be cavemen with a mass of plastic grey plonked in front of them.

/rant

Not sad to see AB being told to take something down which is cutting into GW profits. Think of it this way: GW could be *really* nice to all these companies and let its IP be whored around like the village bicycle. And then they'd have to raise the cost of the figures even more to compensate...

Pen and paper with high prices VS AB with obscene prices. I choose the former.


----------



## Zetronus (May 9, 2012)

As far as copyright goes, you cannot copyright numbers or stats, only the arrangement of them.

as long as army builder didn't contain any images or output an arangement to that of the BRB or Codex, then legally theres nothing GW should be able to do.

Sadly though copyright is a civil matter and as such only need to be proven to 51% in court.... this is where the saying, copyright ownership belongs to those with the most money.

If I was AB, and I was sure that my product didn't contain any GW copyright then I would fight it in court - but thats just me.


I have been thinking of building a free web-based one for space-marines anyway - I was going to approach GW.... I still might.


----------



## TrentLanthier (Apr 28, 2008)

I totally miss Army builder I loved how quick it was to build a list, and the print outs were awesome.

Now I'm going down the road of printing off all my units on Queue cards, with point values etc, that way I can have the cards present and make a list quickly by looking at the card choosing what I want and then writing it down on a "master list" 

Also means i"m not looking things up as much (Being someone who hasn't memorized everything about the game I need to look up almost everything)


----------



## nevynxxx (Dec 27, 2011)

TrentLanthier said:


> Now I'm going down the road of printing off all my units on Queue cards, with point values etc, that way I can have the cards present and make a list quickly by looking at the card choosing what I want and then writing it down on a "master list"


I was reading the Epic books the other week where that's exactly what they suggest you do, and it seemed a really sensible idea.


----------



## Zetronus (May 9, 2012)

wow - looks like I got to the thread a little late....


----------



## Lord Commander Solus (Jul 26, 2012)

See comments _in blue._ 



Zetronus said:


> As far as copyright goes, you cannot copyright numbers or stats, only the arrangement of them.
> 
> as long as army builder didn't contain any images or output an arangement to that of the BRB or Codex, then legally theres nothing GW should be able to do.
> 
> ...



I think, or rather I hope, that I might have misunderstood you on a couple of the points. The one regarding GW buying judges has me most worried. :grin:


----------



## boreas (Dec 4, 2007)

I think what he meant is that in civil cases evidence has to give the judge a symbolic "51%" proof (mainly compared to a criminal trial where the evidence has to be 100% proof).

But GW would lose against AB (or rather WL) because AB provides a blank interface only... If you buy AB, you get nothing but a (rather complex) template! GW would have to go against either the servers where the datafiles are kept or the datafiles builder themselves. In the latter case, GW will possibly have to contend with "free-internet" radical groups like Anonymus if any of the datafiles builder are in that sort of thing...


----------



## TrentLanthier (Apr 28, 2008)

nevynxxx said:


> I was reading the Epic books the other week where that's exactly what they suggest you do, and it seemed a really sensible idea.


I decided this was the way to go after looking at Warmachine as a possible escape from the vast money pit of 40k. I saw the cards and thought "Damn good idea!"


----------



## Zetronus (May 9, 2012)

Hello Commander - 



Lord Commander Solus said:


> I think, or rather I hope, that I might have misunderstood you on a couple of the points. The one regarding GW buying judges has me most worried. :grin:


No worries, copyright is a bit of a mine field so lets have a look at your concerns, 



"As far as copyright goes, you cannot copyright numbers or stats, only the arrangement of them. As long as army builder didn't contain any images or output an arangement to that of the BRB or Codex, then legally theres nothing GW should be able to do."



Lord Commander Solus said:


> _So when the AB had statlines for units, how is this not an "arrangement" of stats?_




you can copyright AN arrangement not all arrangements - such that I can write the data in a different way.


Sadly though copyright is a civil matter and as such only need to be proven to 51% in court.... this is where the saying, copyright ownership belongs to those with the most money.
 


Lord Commander Solus said:


> _Not sure what you mean by 51%. Civil cases aren't presented to a jury if that's what you mean, and even then 51% isn't a significant enough majority for a jury anyway. In civil cases you just have a judge; or two judges, or at most three. Quite how any configuration of 1-3 judges could split themselves 51% baffles me. The amount of money has nothing to do with it either, unless you're really saying GW just buys all their judges, which is quite a statement to be making..._




LOL no, GW doesn't buy judges, its about the amount of LAW you can buy - hence the burdon of proof. In civil court you only have to prove that a defendant is 51% guilt of (in this case) copyright infringement. 

" If I was AB, and I was sure that my product didn't contain any GW copyright then I would fight it in court - but thats just me."



Lord Commander Solus said:


> _An expensive court case that they're certain to lose? Maybe it's a good thing you aren't AB._ :laugh:


There are no certainties as such this is the common scare tactic of the copyright holders, most civil court cases of this nature can be held up for many thousands of pounds in court costs (thats lawyer speak for their sallary)


I have been thinking of building a free web-based one for space-marines anyway - I was going to approach GW.... I still might.



Lord Commander Solus said:


> _If you include points-costs and statlines, it's not going to happen. No matter how you try and put it, you're cutting GW's profit when you publish something that they are selling for free. If you charge money, like AB does, then it's even worse._


Firstly copyright is not employed the way you are thinking, you cannot copyright numbers or words (or a shopping list lol!) - However you can copyright the existing arrangement of them. I can take those numbers words and arrange them totally differently and it would not be infringement of copyright.

Images are completely different of course.

I would suggest that everyone in today's digital universe read up on copyright and how this applies to you. As a software and hardware engineer this is one area I have to make my living in.


In regards to my own Army Builder program it would be free for anyone to use or even update and it would contain NONE of GW's Intellectual property, just numbers and words arranged differently.

I hope that helped clear up some of the ambiguity that I may have originally posted.



PS, All rights reserved


----------



## davespil (Apr 28, 2008)

With laws protecting sites like youtube and photobucket, AB has a leg to stand on. These sites aren't shut down even if copyrighted material is shown on them, though they have to remove it. AB doesn't provide you any files. You have to go to third party sites to get Warhammer army lists. AB is just a tool, you can make your own gaming system up and apply it to AB. So people will always be able to make 40K files on their own independant of AB. I think that GW will not (and should not) win this case.


----------



## Zion (May 31, 2011)

davespil said:


> With laws protecting sites like youtube and photobucket, AB has a leg to stand on. These sites aren't shut down even if copyrighted material is shown on them, though they have to remove it. AB doesn't provide you any files. You have to go to third party sites to get Warhammer army lists. AB is just a tool, you can make your own gaming system up and apply it to AB. So people will always be able to make 40K files on their own independant of AB. I think that GW will not (and should not) win this case.


At this time there is no case. GW only asked AB to stop hosting the 40k .dat files on their server (Wolf Lair) which they did. Nothing else has come down since thing.


----------



## davespil (Apr 28, 2008)

Oh, didn't know that.


----------



## Lord Commander Solus (Jul 26, 2012)

Zion said:


> At this time there is no case. GW only asked AB to stop hosting the 40k .dat files on their server (Wolf Lair) which they did. Nothing else has come down since thing.


This is what I meant by GW's IP part; of course AB themselves didn't create the 40k files, so they're totally safe as long as they don't publish them on their website. The product itself was not ever really in jeopardy, I guess.


In regards to the 51%, that's interesting to know. I suppose it really sheds light onto the way of criminal cases are handled compared to civil ones. 

@ Zetronous: I still wonder how you'd get around posting statlines. Unless you renamed all the stats and inverted the numbers (so 2 = 8 and 4 = 6) or something odd like that I can't see how it wouldn't be GW's "arrangement" of the stats.

For example, is this is not illegal? "A Space Marine has WSX, BSX, SX, TX, WX, IX, AX, LdX SvX+. " (Replacing X with the correct numbers.) How can you get around that?

Would you do something like this:

Weapon Proficiency 5-1, Ranged Skill 6-2, Power 3+1, Hardiness 10-6, Life 1, Speed 2+2, Strikes 1, Bravery 7+1, Protection (2+1)+

Or do you mean something else?

For points-costs, would you say "it costs 7 Slaves" or something like that? I'm curious.


----------



## Zetronus (May 9, 2012)

No my friend, erm lets see if I can give an example...

*BoltPistol*
Type - Pistol
[ 4 ] Power
[ 5 ] Penetrative 
[ 12" ] Effective Distance​
see how I arranged that, its just data in a different way... had I have laid it out as in the codex with the exact labels etc - then that constitutes as an infringement on their copyright. the above isn't... its just numbers and these cannot be copyright.

I did take the opportunity to change the titles a little.


----------



## Magpie_Oz (Jan 16, 2012)

Zetronus said:


> No my friend, erm lets see if I can give an example...
> 
> *BoltPistol*
> Type - Pistol
> ...


I'd be tempted there to call in my Data/Information Theory and say that a rearrangement of the data that way does not change the information and so argue that the IP of the information that is being conveyed i.e. the creation of a game by GW is still present in the data.

Surely you couldn't get

WS BS S T I W L

and write it as 

L W I T S BS WS

and avoid copyright ?


----------



## Zetronus (May 9, 2012)

literal rearrangement (as Magpie show's) would be still copyright infringing, as the layout isn't distinctive enough.

this however would be



the image is a sketch of one I found online from a non GW source, the font is a freeware font.


----------

