[Pet Peeve] Army Builder(R) Datafile Errors

[Homer_S]

Hello all!

I wanted to share a little pet peeve of mine. I use and edit datafiles for Army Builder(R). I hear at the LGS and see on forums people saying they don't use Army Builder(R) due to errors in the datafiles. What I don't see is people going to the datafile support sites and posting these bugs.

If everyone that spots an error in the datafile posts these errors in the support forums for them, they could all get fixed. If you look at the files you have, it will list the appropriate support website.

Remember, the maintainers of these files do so in their spare time. I personally do not intentionally do things wrong, but like everyone, I'm not perfect either. So my files have some errors and when someone notifies me, I jump in and fix them.

Please also remember, the maintainers have to choose some side of imprecise rules and it is usually the most conservative.

Thanks for reading!
Homer

[Melissia]

I've submitted several of these, honestly Army Builder is one of the most reliable third party programs I've used for any tabletop game, be it wargaming or pen and paper.

[B_Steele]

*looks over his shoulders*

I...I...I agree with Melissia.

*runs away before anyone catches him*

:)

-Bry

[pchappel]

Have to admit it's my primary way to throw together armies, still have the old 1.4 CD here (thankfully the 2.2 update was free), and I'm actually using your datafiles... No errors I could find, and just the normal "oddities" making strange/non-standard units like Wolfguard, but that might just be me :)

[Melissia]

But that's more a fault of the users, rather than of Army Builder. It's just a tool, and a good one, too. Just not the end-all be-all people want it to be.

[david5th]

It's the best program i've used and i still have the two Armies & enimies of the imperium disks lying about somewhere.

[DarkLink]

What bugs me more is when people post stuff like "well, army builder says I can do this..."

My first reaction is to think "have you never read your own codex?"



*looks over his shoulders*

I...I...I agree with Melissia.

*runs away before anyone catches him*

:)

-Bry

Hah, now when she sets you on fire for some future heresy, you'll only go to purgatory;)

[Lord of Deeds]

Two thumbs up for Army Builder (Thumbs down for their ridiculous C&D to Privateer Press).

My experience is those who complain about the supposed bugs are really complaining about;

1. Being put off by the fact the program costs money (They would be all over it if it was FREE)
2. The licensing scheme effectively prevents a lot of home brew cracking
3. Probably were looked down on one time when they went to a tournament and they got dirty looks for brining a hand written list and were asked why they didn't use Army Builder so that people could actually read their list and be assured to some degree that it was calculated correctly
4. Have a need to somehow, someway make themselves feel superior to others who have purchased Army Builder by pointing out the supposed inferiority of the product and by extension the inferiority of the people who bought it <--------- see what I did there!?

Seriously, never had a problem with the accuracy of the data files, but then maybe I wasn't trying to make lists that pushed the rule set to the limit.

A Big Thank You to the voluanteers who keep up with and maintian the data files.

[Shavnir]

My experience is those who complain about the supposed bugs are really complaining about;

1. Being put off by the fact the program costs money (They would be all over it if it was FREE)
2. The licensing scheme effectively prevents a lot of home brew cracking
3. Probably were looked down on one time when they went to a tournament and they got dirty looks for brining a hand written list and were asked why they didn't use Army Builder so that people could actually read their list and be assured to some degree that it was calculated correctly
4. Have a need to somehow, someway make themselves feel superior to others who have purchased Army Builder by pointing out the supposed inferiority of the product and by extension the inferiority of the people who bought it <--------- see what I did there!?


Let's see shall we?

1. Nope. I bought and own a copy of Army Builder 2.something. 2.2 maybe? At the time its disc check drove me to keep an ISO mounted on a virtual drive
2. Nope again. I just wasn't satisfied with the quality of the original product (they really need to get a good user experience team and sit down behind some one way mirrors and watch people that haven't used their product before) and the prospect of subscribing so that they could basically make money off of random volunteers stealing IPs from other companies ended up sounding a bit...off?
3. More like "have had to have the owner of the list explain what the hell was going on in their army list every single time I've faced against a list made with army builder as opposed to written down in Excel or Word". But sure, I guess.
4. More like the C+D fiasco shows just how slimy they really are.

[gwensdad]

What bugs me more is when people post stuff like "well, army builder says I can do this..."

My first reaction is to think "have you never read your own codex?"




I was playing our resident Blood Angel "player" and he was misreading his AB printouts and I (a GUARD player) had to point out that his LR Crusader had assault cannons.

(And it doesn't solve problems when you discover he's been putting jump troops in said Land Raider, then argues that it's "not a transport vehicle". I don't think I'll be playing him for awhile.)

[Papa Nurgle]

What bugs me more is when people post stuff like "well, army builder says I can do this..."

My first reaction is to think "have you never read your own codex?"




I run into these idiots all the time.

[gwensdad]

Every single list I've ever made was assisted by or done entirely by army builder, noone's ever complained. Mind, I don't ever actually use army builder's print function, I like to make my own formati, which you can see on this site and the IGMB when I post them.

How do you do that? I take it there's some sort of custom XML file you slip in there and the data fills in?

[Melissia]

Every single list I've ever made was assisted by or done entirely by army builder, noone's ever complained. Mind, I don't ever actually use army builder's print function, I like to make my own formati, which you can see on this site and the IGMB when I post them.

[Darkriver]

Not a personal fan of AB but I won't knock people for using it. I see the usefulness that the program brings. Guess I'm an old schooler pen/paper (or Word doc for Tournys) cause I like going through the codex and get side tracked at the pretty pictures. It's good to see a file writer want to try and help get their error issues fixed though.

[Melissia]

Usually I use notepad if I'm just making it for a forum . Wordpad if I'm printing it out.

[faolan]

I run into the occasional error (Ratlings max 1? LOL!) but tend to ignore it when it comes validation time.

My only real gripe is that despite being listed as having IA1-2 units in there, there's a few missing from IA1 (and maybe IA2).

It could use some updated functionality in regards to Space Wolf Wolf Guard packs, but I'm led to believe that's a problem in the software itself, not Homer's data packages.

(old AB2.X, btw)