Future of Battlescribe with impending army app?

[MegaVolt87]

With the launch of GW's 40k app, digital copy with every physical I would say battlescribe's days are numbered before they get a cease and desist from GW legal. That's what I would do to protect my new product in the same space and GW is well within their legal rights to get battlescribe shut down one way or another. 

[Zephaniah Adriyen]

With the launch of GW's 40k app, digital copy with every physical I would say battlescribe's days are numbered before they get a cease and desist from GW legal. That's what I would do to protect my new product in the same space and GW is well within their legal rights to get battlescribe shut down one way or another. 

Aha, here's the kicker: if I'm not mistaken, Battlescribe itself is not responsible for the 40k content therein. Battlescribe is a general wargaming roster app. It's up to the fans to upload it, and that *will* be updated, no matter what GW does. They can make it harder to get data updates, but if they take Battlescribe to court, they will lose, because Battlescribe isn't doing anything wrong. GW is not in their legal rights to get Battlescribe shut down because Battlescribe is an app, not a 40k rules repository. The 40k rules repository is generated by other people, and someone else can and will take up the banner of 40k roster guy if GW shuts them down.

[MegaVolt87]

 

With the launch of GW's 40k app, digital copy with every physical I would say battlescribe's days are numbered before they get a cease and desist from GW legal. That's what I would do to protect my new product in the same space and GW is well within their legal rights to get battlescribe shut down one way or another.

 

Aha, here's the kicker: if I'm not mistaken, Battlescribe itself is not responsible for the 40k content therein. Battlescribe is a general wargaming roster app. It's up to the fans to upload it, and that *will* be updated, no matter what GW does. They can make it harder to get data updates, but if they take Battlescribe to court, they will lose, because Battlescribe isn't doing anything wrong. GW is not in their legal rights to get Battlescribe shut down because Battlescribe is an app, not a 40k rules repository. The 40k rules repository is generated by other people, and someone else can and will take up the banner of 40k roster guy if GW shuts them down.

Battlescribe would be obligated to block the content of its users, revise it's useage policy and actively take down such content. Being the host, then saying you are not responsible for copyright infringement is no excuse or good defense in a court. That's why B&C wouldn't host PDF codexes for example, same issues.

[Panzer]

With the launch of GW's 40k app, digital copy with every physical I would say battlescribe's days are numbered before they get a cease and desist from GW legal. That's what I would do to protect my new product in the same space and GW is well within their legal rights to get battlescribe shut down one way or another. 

 

Didn't happen with AoS, won't happen with 40k. Battlescribe isn't providing the rules anyway. Those are completely community made. Battlescribe is just the construct to host those rules. Like, you could make a fairly extensive list builder in excel too (it's just not very user friendly) and of course Microsoft wouldn't be the ones to blame there.

[MegaVolt87]

 

With the launch of GW's 40k app, digital copy with every physical I would say battlescribe's days are numbered before they get a cease and desist from GW legal. That's what I would do to protect my new product in the same space and GW is well within their legal rights to get battlescribe shut down one way or another.

 

 

Didn't happen with AoS, won't happen with 40k. Battlescribe isn't providing the rules anyway. Those are completely community made. Battlescribe is just the construct to host those rules. Like, you could make a fairly extensive list builder in excel too (it's just not very user friendly) and of course Microsoft wouldn't be the ones to blame there.

Lets not beat around the bush on what battlescribe is doing. Its basicly a straight transcription of the core offical rules minus the pretty formatting. Its accurate enough to be accepted in tournements and pick up games to use without owning the offical rule books. Thats plagiarism. Using another wargaming example, flames of war had a fan made army builder which they quietly asked to be shut down as they were releasing the offical in house app. They invited him to help run the offical one though.

 

Battlescribe competes directly with the new app, its easy to acess and obtain. Its not a matter if battlescribe will no longer host 40k content, its when. GW may be clueless in rules development, but at a corporate level they operate shrewdly and intelligently. App development is expensive and a risk, so a competing product that is free and infringing on your IP is going the way of the dodo. Again GW is in a strong position to have battlescribe no longer host its content.

[AenarIT]

The only thing GW can do is making it harder to find the BS repositories, but knowing the internet and especially this fanbase, it would be a war they can't win. The data will still get updated regularly and be pretty easy to find. 
If they get control of the tournament scene and enforce a "no BS, official app only" rule for list submission it wouldn't change much. Outside official tournaments and official stores, they can't do anything (just like with rules in pirated PDF). 

I would very much like to use an official app that is instantly updated, contains all the rules of my army and allows for smooth list building, but its competition is fierce. It has to be better than BS while not being (too) expensive as well. 
That said, there's certainly some people (I'd argue a lot) that do not like the idea of paying for a BS-like service and will continue to use and support BS and its 40K repositories for free. 

Edited May 28, 2020 by AenarIT

[Noserenda]

Also, can you imagine the optics? It would look super bad to start bully lawyering community projects filling the hole you left. GW would do alot better to just provide a superior product and leave battlescribe be, people will then inevitably move over to their app anyway with no doubt a much shinier interface, pictures and in theory less errors.

Plus, trust me, relying on battlescribe will end badly when you reach a long rule that just refers to the rulebook :D 

[Tyriks]

Battlescribe already has rules in it, yet GW has done nothing.  There's no reason that would suddenly change.  

[The Yncarne]

The best thing GW could do to ensure its app's success is to make it useful, useable, and desirable. Previous attempts weren't successful largely because it wasn't feature competitive with Army Builder and they dropped support after its release. It was neither useful nor useable.

 

Where is Army Builder now? In the shadow of Battlescribe.

[NTaW]

Battlescribe already has rules in it, yet GW has done nothing.  There's no reason that would suddenly change.  

 

I imagine GW's plan is to come out with an app so perfectly applicable to the hobby/9th edition that BS just can't compete. I'm sure it will still be maintained but because it's designed for use with any gaming system it can't be tailored -just- to 40k's needs, hence the circus it can be for people to for example add FW units to a SM roster (clear to some, not to all).

 

I'm a paying Battlescribe user and have lists for several gaming systems so I'll continue using it moving forward but it wouldn't be hard for GW to create a better experience for 40k users.

Edited May 28, 2020 by NTaW

[Tyriks]

I use Battlescribe now, but it's not great for much beyond simply getting a unit or weapon's statlines.  If the 40k app shows us more, with a clean and intuitive UI (Battlescribe's biggest weakness, I think), then I don't think there'd be a reason to use Battlescribe anymore.  

[Special Officer Doofy]

 

 

With the launch of GW's 40k app, digital copy with every physical I would say battlescribe's days are numbered before they get a cease and desist from GW legal. That's what I would do to protect my new product in the same space and GW is well within their legal rights to get battlescribe shut down one way or another.

 

Didn't happen with AoS, won't happen with 40k. Battlescribe isn't providing the rules anyway. Those are completely community made. Battlescribe is just the construct to host those rules. Like, you could make a fairly extensive list builder in excel too (it's just not very user friendly) and of course Microsoft wouldn't be the ones to blame there.

Lets not beat around the bush on what battlescribe is doing. Its basicly a straight transcription of the core offical rules minus the pretty formatting. Its accurate enough to be accepted in tournements and pick up games to use without owning the offical rule books. Thats plagiarism. Using another wargaming example, flames of war had a fan made army builder which they quietly asked to be shut down as they were releasing the offical in house app. They invited him to help run the offical one though.

 

Battlescribe competes directly with the new app, its easy to acess and obtain. Its not a matter if battlescribe will no longer host 40k content, its when. GW may be clueless in rules development, but at a corporate level they operate shrewdly and intelligently. App development is expensive and a risk, so a competing product that is free and infringing on your IP is going the way of the dodo. Again GW is in a strong position to have battlescribe no longer host its content.

It's only a matter of time.

[Brother Tyler]

Just to keep things in context, BattleScribe will continue to exist regardless because it is not tied to Games Workshop games. The app itself is harmless and system-agnostic. All GW can hope to impact are the files for GW games. BattleScribe will continue to exist as support for all of the other wargames out there that don't have an official app.

[BitsHammer]

 

With the launch of GW's 40k app, digital copy with every physical I would say battlescribe's days are numbered before they get a cease and desist from GW legal. That's what I would do to protect my new product in the same space and GW is well within their legal rights to get battlescribe shut down one way or another. 

Aha, here's the kicker: if I'm not mistaken, Battlescribe itself is not responsible for the 40k content therein. Battlescribe is a general wargaming roster app. It's up to the fans to upload it, and that *will* be updated, no matter what GW does. They can make it harder to get data updates, but if they take Battlescribe to court, they will lose, because Battlescribe isn't doing anything wrong. GW is not in their legal rights to get Battlescribe shut down because Battlescribe is an app, not a 40k rules repository. The 40k rules repository is generated by other people, and someone else can and will take up the banner of 40k roster guy if GW shuts them down.

 

That's the same approach other similar programs worked under. Plus Battlescribe and other such apps work with other game systems too so it's still useful outside of 40k.

[MARK0SIAN]

I’d say they’ll leave BS alone. Firstly I’d bet money that there’s a sizeable portion of people who get into the game or try out new models/armies because there’s a free app for the rules. Whilst that’s admittedly lost money for GW on a rules front they’re still profiting from those people buying models. Whereas I think a lot of people would be reluctant to try out a new game or army if they know the very first thing they’ll have to do is buy several rulebooks. If they end up liking the army or game they’ll probably buy the rulebooks anyway.

 

Secondly I’m very sceptical about GWs own app. I’d be absolutely astonished if it works well and can replicate everything BS does let alone improve upon it. Remember the army builder they hyped at the start of 8th and when they released it like a year later it was basically a power level drop down menu that anyone could’ve made in excel in an afternoon.

 

I think the two apps will both coexist fine.

[Panzer]

I doubt GW has that kind of authority.

[RandyB]

GWs lack of action on the AoS rules in Battlescribe is a precedent of inaction and/or apathy. Announcing that they will come in full dakka over 40K rules is doommongering.

[Magos Takatus]

I've only just started using Battlescribe and have found it to be very useful. If GW can put out a product more specific to 40k and easier to use I can see myself adopting it. That would mean they would need to include Forge World models and old models (Legends?) for it to really be more useful to me. My Admech have Secutarii Hoplites and my Dread mob will eventually have a Mega Dread and various old Big Meks. If GW forget about these units it would make things more difficult for me to raise an army list.

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I really hope GW comes through. I’d love to see a real alternative to BS.

[redmapa]

Battlescribe plays by the same rules as 4chan and mega and those two sites actually host piracy on a daily basis and have done so for years, if they have not been taken down then Battlescribe will remain untouched because just like 4chan/mega they wash their hands by being only a hosting mechanism and not being responsible for what people use it for.

 

It'll be fine, at worst it wont get many updates if GW's app is actually good and people simply use that instead of Battlescribe.

[Dr. Clock]

The cost/benefit analysis on taking Battlescribe to court is strong in the cost and low in the benefit.

 

As the official brand for 'Warhammer 40,000', they can and should just leave Battlescribe where it should be: for fans of systems that may not receive or meaningfully expect any kind of accessible online support.

 

A ruling against Battlescribe may be a victory in court, but it's very unlikely to be a net-win in all the other ways that matter, and you still have to make your actual product good enough that someone else doesn't just take up the torch to spite you.

 

This goes back to Chapterhouse in a certain way, but GW severely overplayed its hand there, and the Management shakeup suggests that they won't be getting too litigious because they don't actually have enough money to play defensive in the community AND deliver on core offerings.

 

I will buy MORE Codexes if they commit to supporting the update of those rules online. I will even give them a bit of money to access 9th ed. rules for codexes I bought in 8th... Or indeed a modest subscription fee to access all their rules. But if that's the case, why would they bother with something like Battlescribe? They can very easily out-compete them just because they can do all updates in real time and deliver them to the customer without the inconsistency of having fans poring through and comparing every list to every other list every time something new comes out...

 

You CANT stop the internet. Not without ending it. GW is finally waking up to this lol.

 

Cheers,

 

E

[ThePenitentOne]

Yeah, if I was GW, I'd just use my considerable resources to build an app that's just so far away better than BS that folks will use it.

 

Personally, I hope it has a feature that lets you save and share your Crusade army and track its development. If it does, the only thing that would make people stick with BS would be an outrageous price tag. GW is bad with outrageous pricetags, so if anyone is going to mess it up on that front, well...

 

High volume low cost is the way GW needs to hit this- especially if its a subscription. 

 

The thing about buying books is that you have the book.

The thing about a subscription service is that the day you stop paying for it, you have nothing.

Would you rather rent an awesome property or own a modest one?

[Indefragable]

Thinking back to the college courses I may or may not have slept through...it seems like GW's options with Battlescribe are:

 

A. Do nothing (in business, doing nothing is always an option and actually a far more viable one than you'd think)

B. Build a competing app

C. Sue them/shut them down

D. Buy them out

 

As others have pointed out, options A and D are actually the most viable from a return-on-investment perspective. 

 

...but again, as others have pointed out, Battlescribe is more like a cafe that enables conversations about rules to be had rather than actually handing out the rules themselves. Yes, they could go the route of making the case that if the cafe management is "reasonably" aware that "criminal" activity is happening on their premises then they should do something about it, but a half-decent lawyer can at worst string that argument out until GW's legal fees are no longer worth it. 

 

It sounds like GW may actually be going route B, which when solely considering Battlescribe may seem not the best option...but it sounds like the GW app is going to be a bit more comprehensive than what Battlescribe does, so I can see their justification for it. 

[BLACK BLΠFLY]

I really doubt GeeDub wants to sue anyone after the Chapterhouse debacle. They are much wiser now for it.

[Lexington]

Remember the army builder they hyped at the start of 8th and when they released it like a year later it was basically a power level drop down menu that anyone could’ve made in excel in an afternoon.

That wasn’t GW’s, it was just a fan app that GW deputized into quasi-officialness. The official 40K app mentioned at the start of 8th never actually happened for whatever reason, or was just delayed so long that it became this 9th Edition one.

 

Tho, as a note, I would love to hear that the guy behind that fan app was working on this one in some official capacity. The technical capabilities weren’t anything special, but the UI was really solid.