War Room FAQ, revised

[jandrese]

Yeah, If I use this I would try and use it one a cheaper device.

My phone is too important to risk on a game of Warmahordes, for something that is superfluous and really adds little to the game.

Are you expecting the app to cause your phone to melt or something??

[MadJack]

Are you expecting the app to cause your phone to melt or something??

I'm guessing he's worried about accidentally knocking it off the table during a game, or something similar.

[jandrese]

How often do you knock stuff off of your table when gaming? I occasionally lose a die or a token (usually when it sticks to my arm after I lean over the table to move something), but something like my phone should be pretty safe.

[Trygle]

Well I have to hand it to my opponent. I am not the most dextrous person at the shop, and that will be my weak link.

My Kindle Fire though cost no where near as much as my phone did. That little guy can take a licking.

[WarpedWolf]

Speaking as someone who's just getting into Hordes/Warmachine, I'm actually looking forward to War Room. It'll make it easy for me to proxy in models I don't have as I build my collection, making it easier to build my army to suit my play style. Being able to track damage without marking cards sounds useful as well.

Questions:

Does anyone have a definitive answer about whether War Room will be available for Kindle Fire? My wife got me one for Christmas, and I love it! Being able to manage my armies on it would be awesome. (If they need testers, I'll volunteer!)

Will we be able to track Fury/Focus/other tokens with it as well?

[Mod_Redphantasm]

Speaking as someone who's just getting into Hordes/Warmachine, I'm actually looking forward to War Room. It'll make it easy for me to proxy in models I don't have as I build my collection, making it easier to build my army to suit my play style. Being able to track damage without marking cards sounds useful as well.

Questions:

Does anyone have a definitive answer about whether War Room will be available for Kindle Fire? My wife got me one for Christmas, and I love it! Being able to manage my armies on it would be awesome. (If they need testers, I'll volunteer!)

Will we be able to track Fury/Focus/other tokens with it as well?

It was stated earlier in the thread by PPS_Simon that the App would be available from the Amazon App store and therefore available for Kindle Fire. I can't wait to use mine for it either.

As far as I know token tracking will not be available with the App because tokens must be placed next to models.

[Jota]

I find it a step backwards if PP officially allows War Room to replace physical cards at tournaments. It will eat my time if every time I would like to have a look at an opponents card the opponent has to scroll it up and hand me the phone/tablet. Further I do not want anyone to track damage in such a "closed" way, phone/tablet facing the opponent. I haven't seen any real cheating in this game so far, and hopefully, wont but this would sure encourage it. This would make it easer to move over to other games.

I am really hesitant to pay for cards that I have already bought, this smells GW to me and puts me of the whole thing.

I do hope PP shapes this thing up tough, because iBodger was such a great tool - if PP killed it for a sub-par "replacement" they are the losers. I do hope that they create something that I actually like so I hold my fingers crossed for that something that actually can replace iBodger.

[eliassmith27]

I find it a step backwards if PP officially allows War Room to replace physical cards at tournaments. It will eat my time if every time I would like to have a look at an opponents card the opponent has to scroll it up and hand me the phone/tablet. Further I do not want anyone to track damage in such a "closed" way, phone/tablet facing the opponent. I haven't seen any real cheating in this game so far, and hopefully, wont but this would sure encourage it. This would make it easer to move over to other games.

I am really hesitant to pay for cards that I have already bought, this smells GW to me and puts me of the whole thing.

I do hope PP shapes this thing up tough, because iBodger was such a great tool - if PP killed it for a sub-par "replacement" they are the losers. I do hope that they create something that I actually like so I hold my fingers crossed for that something that actually can replace iBodger.

Have they let you down yet? (I mean really let you down, not just small disagreements) I'll trust them, they've earned it.

So far they have been a great company that seems to care about the game as much as the players.

[AJ the Ronin]

I find it a step backwards if PP officially allows War Room to replace physical cards at tournaments. It will eat my time if every time I would like to have a look at an opponents card the opponent has to scroll it up and hand me the phone/tablet. Further I do not want anyone to track damage in such a "closed" way, phone/tablet facing the opponent. I haven't seen any real cheating in this game so far, and hopefully, wont but this would sure encourage it. This would make it easer to move over to other games.

I am really hesitant to pay for cards that I have already bought, this smells GW to me and puts me of the whole thing.

I do hope PP shapes this thing up tough, because iBodger was such a great tool - if PP killed it for a sub-par "replacement" they are the losers. I do hope that they create something that I actually like so I hold my fingers crossed for that something that actually can replace iBodger.

War Room won't replace cards. It will be an additional option. And we don't know if it will be slow, good, bad or the next great (evil) thing since none of us had try it.

Also is not the first time we have to pay for cards we already bought. I'm sure won't be the last. At least this time is optional (like you don't need War Room to play).

Which sounds awfully like similar actions of a company from Nottingham, England who also make toy soldiers....if that doesn't set the alarm bells clanging then there is something VERY wrong.

As I and others have said, the more we hear the less I see a clash between iBodger and Warroom.

Nah, it sounds like most business work.

Privateer partnered with another company. Other company notice that there are competing products on the marked, some of them (sort of) officially endorsed by Privateer. Other company ask Privateer to remove competing products to continue partnership. This, being business, Privateer agrees.

[Vex]

I find it a step backwards if PP officially allows War Room to replace physical cards at tournaments.

There isn't any IF about it. They have already stated that you can use the app instead of cards at official events and tournaments.

[Trygle]

There isn't any IF about it. They have already stated that you can use the app instead of cards at official events and tournaments.

I have to stop myself from shouting

"WELL CALL ME VEXED" every time you post Vex.

[razcalking]

Not sure if I would want to constantly be handing my iPhone over to strangers at the LGS or a tournament for them to see my "cards" or damage.

[PG_Steampunk Jim]

Not sure if I would want to constantly be handing my iPhone over to strangers at the LGS or a tournament for them to see my "cards" or damage.

Then bring your cards. I'll use war room for my reference and to mark damage, and my opponent can flip through my binder if they want to look at the cards.

For damage just hold up your phone so they can see the grid. That's how I do it with physical cards, shouldn't be any different for digital cards.

[fuzbuckle]

So it's coming on the kindle fire, but how about the nook tablet? Will it be available through the barnes & noble app store as well or will I have to root my nook tab?

[ennuii]

@ fezbuckle Nobody has mentioned it, you will probably have to root it. Cyginomod. It takes like 5 minutes and allows full access to android market. I'm planning on getting one soonish and doing just that.

[Lord of ???]

I think the comparing of PP to GW are a little uncalled for. It's most likely pure oversight rather than malicious scheming.

[Ikuinen Kaamos]

I think the list building system is good, it's like Army Builder*, when you exceed the point limit or other restrictions you get a warning and numbers turn red but you can still add it to the list if you want. That system works quite well so I see no problem there.

The only thing I don't understand is the "fear" (lacking a better word) of implementing Theme Forces because it might be limiting in the future. The app is going to be updated quite regularly anyways with the new releases. They could then update the app to manage all the new wacky theme forces that the game designers come up with. Again simply a flag system (like in "regular" list building) will do.

edit: *I actually meant the program made by lone wolf.

[Vex]

I think the list building system is good, it's like Army Builder, when you exceed the point limit or other restrictions you get a warning and numbers turn red but you can still add it to the list if you want. That system works quite well so I see no problem there.

I do. It has been mentioned that the app does not understand reinforcements, which means that pretty much all lists will be over on points, making even the standard list-checking tools rather useless.

[PG_LunarSol]

I think the list building system is good, it's like Army Builder, when you exceed the point limit or other restrictions you get a warning and numbers turn red but you can still add it to the list if you want. That system works quite well so I see no problem there.

The only thing I don't understand is the "fear" (lacking a better word) of implementing Theme Forces because it might be limiting in the future. The app is going to be updated quite regularly anyways with the new releases. They could then update the app to manage all the new wacky theme forces that the game designers come up with. Again simply a flag system (like in "regular" list building) will do.

It's a tech matter. There's a big difference in code between updating something with new data and updating something with new logic. Stuff like pushing a new card is pretty easy, to the point where I'd assume PP has been given the ability to push updates completely independent of TinkerHouse. It's actually very similar to adding a new post to the forum. You supply the necessary data, click a button, and it goes into the database where it's read by the system.

Logic is a lot harder, because it requires updating code, which which requires TinkerHouse programmers alter the structure of the system to accommodate new logic. When you talk about things like Xerxis's new NQ theme force, where you take Grunts from one unit and make them WAs for another, you're talking about things that almost certainly weren't accounted for in the initial design. That means a programmer needs to go in and code new logic, which is more expensive and a regular source of bugs and loss of performance. Generally speaking, you want to leave the code alone as much as possible once its in flight, only changing it to address bugs and introduce new, robustly designed features. Making a code change for every new card or theme force would probably make for an extremely messy program in a pretty short time.

[quindraco]

It's a tech matter. There's a big difference in code between updating something with new data and updating something with new logic. Stuff like pushing a new card is pretty easy, to the point where I'd assume PP has been given the ability to push updates completely independent of TinkerHouse. It's actually very similar to adding a new post to the forum. You supply the necessary data, click a button, and it goes into the database where it's read by the system.

Logic is a lot harder, because it requires updating code, which which requires TinkerHouse programmers alter the structure of the system to accommodate new logic. When you talk about things like Xerxis's new NQ theme force, where you take Grunts from one unit and make them WAs for another, you're talking about things that almost certainly weren't accounted for in the initial design. That means a programmer needs to go in and code new logic, which is more expensive and a regular source of bugs and loss of performance. Generally speaking, you want to leave the code alone as much as possible once its in flight, only changing it to address bugs and introduce new, robustly designed features. Making a code change for every new card or theme force would probably make for an extremely messy program in a pretty short time.

You can solve all of the current wacky tiers that I know of strictly via data by allowing tiers to introduce new cards. For example, Xerxis' list would introduce a new WA card based on the grunts, while Zerkova's would introduce a Khador Vanguard. This seems like a much better compromise than the current solution.

They can also solve their logic problems by open-sourcing that part of the application; as whicken has amply demonstrated, the fanbase has skilled developers in it, so it would probably be very feasible to make the tier logic community-driven. In fact, a viable solution could have been keeping iBodger, and developing an API so the two apps can communicate, allowing people to build their list in iBodger (putting the onus of tier logic on whicken) and then import it into War Room. Naturally, there would be no reason at all for this to be iBodger specific, allowing anyone (including PP in house) to develop a robust list creator of their own down the road.

[Sinsation]

What sort of method for user submitted update requests will War Room have? Will it have a separate subforum here on the main PP site? That would be extremely nice.

[PG_LunarSol]

You can solve all of the current wacky tiers that I know of strictly via data by allowing tiers to introduce new cards. For example, Xerxis' list would introduce a new WA card based on the grunts, while Zerkova's would introduce a Khador Vanguard. This seems like a much better compromise than the current solution.

They can also solve their logic problems by open-sourcing that part of the application; as whicken has amply demonstrated, the fanbase has skilled developers in it, so it would probably be very feasible to make the tier logic community-driven. In fact, a viable solution could have been keeping iBodger, and developing an API so the two apps can communicate, allowing people to build their list in iBodger (putting the onus of tier logic on whicken) and then import it into War Room. Naturally, there would be no reason at all for this to be iBodger specific, allowing anyone (including PP in house) to develop a robust list creator of their own down the road.

I like the idea of new cards for theme forces, though I'd have to sit and think if they would solve all the problems. That's the primary challenge with the whole concept of course. Can you think of all the things that anyone could think of? As for open sourcing, I can't imagine TinkerHouse would allow such a thing.

[MadJack]

Logic is a lot harder, because it requires updating code, which which requires TinkerHouse programmers alter the structure of the system to accommodate new logic. When you talk about things like Xerxis's new NQ theme force, where you take Grunts from one unit and make them WAs for another, you're talking about things that almost certainly weren't accounted for in the initial design. That means a programmer needs to go in and code new logic, which is more expensive and a regular source of bugs and loss of performance. Generally speaking, you want to leave the code alone as much as possible once its in flight, only changing it to address bugs and introduce new, robustly designed features. Making a code change for every new card or theme force would probably make for an extremely messy program in a pretty short time.

Take a look at the post I made earlier about how I would set up the tables in a list builder program to handle virtually any possibility for theme forces. If you set it up with enough flexibility in the first place (and my post was based on thinking about it for about 15-20 minutes - there may be holes in it, but if I had spent a decent amount of time on it, and consulted with some other people to see if they could see any flaws, I'll bet it could be very foolproof), you should almost never have to make a code change later on, regardless of how the theme force changes the logic.

[Mod_Redphantasm]

Please keep all discussion to the Warroom App and Frequently asked questions

[fishfleas]

As I newish player, I am really looking forward to this app. I love the fact that in casual games I'll be able to proxy forces before buying them. In todays economy anything that makes me spend my money more wisely on my hobbies is a win. I see that people are complaining about the list creator, but I feel Zreef is right in that this model seems to be a lot more flexible. In an ideal world I'ld like to have to option to turn on filters, but if I had to choose between the two modes i would go with the new Warroom way of doing things. It just makes more sense when you see all kinds of hokey formats out there for events.

I plan on supporting Warroom.

[quindraco]

I like the idea of new cards for theme forces, though I'd have to sit and think if they would solve all the problems. That's the primary challenge with the whole concept of course. Can you think of all the things that anyone could think of? As for open sourcing, I can't imagine TinkerHouse would allow such a thing.

I assume TinkerHouse is the development company PP hired for this? If I were PP, I'd tell them, "I'm the customer. Design the software to my specifications or you don't get my money." It's better for PP and for us, the customers, if PP retains control over their own software.

[LostBlue]

I'm fairly shocked reading WAR ROOM's handling of theme lists.

Personally, I can't imagine what type of theme list would necessitate this. As long as Privateer follows the basic model adds to a point total formula, any special rule that modifies list construction, or a model's personal rules/stats is quite easy to modify prior to bringing up the list of available models for any theme list.

I can only speak for my program which I've been maintaining since the 3rd week of the WM field test and had to jump through all the hoops as mk II evolved, but by the Legion book, after seeing enough theme lists, I can't think of a theme list that took me more than 20 minutes to type up and function.

If the code is set, a simple text script can handle theme lists even if its whacky one with no casters or making custom battlegroups with solos or mix of random models which all count as a unit, adding multiple attachments to model X, giving solos warjack points, or whatever.

Fundamentally, unless Privateer rewrites their point system, it's just a system where you add models and their options, get a total and compare it to a set limit. Unless this is broken, there really isn't something to break as far as list creation goes.

Personally, it's also a terrible format for smartphones which is the target audience (persumably) to have a user switch back and forth to check their lists. I hope Privateer reconsiders their approach to theme lists as this is more of a design choice not terribly difficult to code.

In my first version of my program, I did program code similar method to what WAR ROOM seems it is doing. Users had the choice to break list creation rules to how they see fit (ignore FA, anamosity, add whatever model as an attachment to another, etc) and flag those models when the checker was turn back on. I did not feel it offered what ppl wanted, esp when the theme forces started to roll out. When building a theme list, ppl want a more automated system. An example given to me is using word without a spellchecker and flipping through a dictionary instead to see if you made an error.

Please reconsider this approach.

[tiger8380]

I was planning to spend 60 bucks to get all the card packs for this. However, my main caster is morty and I use her tier list (as is very common) I do not want to have to go back and forth between a checklist and my list, as it seems you will need to do. Also, while I have become good a point counting a list, its still possible to mess it up when counting up to 50 point lists and adding or removing points because the app doesn't want to allow theme forces to be something that is enforced by the list building. This has ruined the app for me. I will not be buying it until they resolve this and I hope that others will follow. If a guy making an app for free can manage to get it right, then PP and Tinkerhouse should have no issues at all with it and if for some reason they can't get it right. Hire the dude who was able to.

[Temp22]

I assume TinkerHouse is the development company PP hired for this? If I were PP, I'd tell them, "I'm the customer. Design the software to my specifications or you don't get my money." It's better for PP and for us, the customers, if PP retains control over their own software.

Wouldnt this also take control away from Privateer Press? I'm sure PP is working very closely with them.

[PG_Mr. Golden Deal]

Open sourcing software doesn't remove control from the owners, it simply allows other people to see what's in the code. The individual users could make modifications to the software if they wanted to, but Privateer wouldn't need to actually incorporate those changes in the master copy of the source code unless they wished it. It would even be possible to ensure that the copy on people's devices was legit by having the devices generate a hash and comparing it to the binary's hash on PP's server, in order to prevent cheating.

[Inquisitor Wall]

It looks like the release date has been shifted to late April. Maybe they are trying to rework some things.
I guess I can stop checking the app store every morning.

[fuzbuckle]

Maybe I'm the exception to the rule but generally I have the rules for the theme forces that I use committed to memory and can build valid lists just in my head from having the point costs memorized. I know lots of folks on this forum have stats, abilities, point costs, etc memorized for multiple units across multiple armies. It's just weird to me that this would be such an issue given how most of us seem to know by wrote what we can take in our lists. Like I said, I guess I'm just the exception but given what this app can do, I'm not too worried about the whole theme force thing.

[Blighted Tyrant]

Maybe I'm the exception to the rule but generally I have the rules for the theme forces that I use committed to memory and can build valid lists just in my head from having the point costs memorized. I know lots of folks on this forum have stats, abilities, point costs, etc memorized for multiple units across multiple armies. It's just weird to me that this would be such an issue given how most of us seem to know by wrote what we can take in our lists. Like I said, I guess I'm just the exception but given what this app can do, I'm not too worried about the whole theme force thing.

Try that with four factions and 20+ casters, if you can do it then you are a smarter man than I.

[Sanguinary Dan]

If they need more time to "get it right" I'm all for giving them as much as they need. Theme forces are too important a part of the game to ignore. And it's not like I have to spend the money this week or never see it again. Is it?

[kolonelk]

Logic is a lot harder, because it requires updating code, which which requires TinkerHouse programmers alter the structure of the system to accommodate new logic. When you talk about things like Xerxis's new NQ theme force, where you take Grunts from one unit and make them WAs for another, you're talking about things that almost certainly weren't accounted for in the initial design. That means a programmer needs to go in and code new logic, which is more expensive and a regular source of bugs and loss of performance. Generally speaking, you want to leave the code alone as much as possible once its in flight, only changing it to address bugs and introduce new, robustly designed features. Making a code change for every new card or theme force would probably make for an extremely messy program in a pretty short time.

To me, even Xerxis' theme is still reasonably simple code. I'm going to assume that War Room is intelligent enough to only allow WAs to be attached to the correct units, and will hide them at all other times. Meaning that if Venators are a WA option only under that them and only to certain units, they can exist in the app as both a unit and a WA. Maybe with a slight name change to allow the database to cope (Venator shooty thing WA rather than Venator shooty things - I wish I could remember the unit name).

[The Happy Anarchist]

I can't confirm how much trouble it caused Whicken to put into iBodger, but Xerxis' NQ theme is in iBodger, works just fine for adding the Venator Reivers as WA rather than a unit.

[whicken]

I can't confirm how much trouble it caused Whicken to put into iBodger, but Xerxis' NQ theme is in iBodger, works just fine for adding the Venator Reivers as WA rather than a unit.

It doesn't really matter how much time it took me (or LostBlue) to implement any particular theme, Privateer seems to have decided not to. In my case, I'll continue to use iBodger for now, because it's not particularly hard to keep it up to date and I don't seem to have the alternative I was hoping for - I just won't be distributing it any more. I think this particular horse is well and thoroughly flogged.

Hopefully the card database features will deliver, I'm looking forward to having all the rules at my fingertips.

[Tiran]

It doesn't really matter how much time it took me (or LostBlue) to implement any particular theme, Privateer seems to have decided not to. In my case, I'll continue to use iBodger for now, because it's not particularly hard to keep it up to date and I don't seem to have the alternative I was hoping for - I just won't be distributing it any more. I think this particular horse is well and thoroughly flogged.

Hopefully the card database features will deliver, I'm looking forward to having all the rules at my fingertips.

How many of our collective firstborn would it take for you to explain how to update it ourselves? I understand not wanting to distribute but I'm more than happy to sink a few hours in to updating iBodger for myself over having to use a substandard list creator.

I was so excited about War Room, all this has me almost totally uninterested in it now. Please do yourselves a favour PP, do it properly or not at all; A half assed solution pleases no-one and just makes you look bad. I guess appeals to a good nature are rather innocently hopeful however, in the end people paying for a simple War Room will be better for their bottom line and that's what matters most to a company.

[PG_Enazel]

Agree with Tiran, can you give us some details into how to update it ourselves Whicken.

[zionson]

It doesn't really matter how much time it took me (or LostBlue) to implement any particular theme, Privateer seems to have decided not to.

I'm hoping they change their minds about this and see just how bad the decision not to hardcode lists is. They will lose a lot of potential sales, I guarantee it. In my playgroup alone, everyone who was excited to purchase the whole package have decided to wait and see.