nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Beta 4.1 patch notes

Spear

Before anyone wonders, these are allowed to posted publically according Magnus K/Imaad from GOA.

Requiel from GOA has now said this was a screw up and can't be published. So forget what you saw.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

DanOB

thanks for this, although the majority of it means nothing to me

Kiith

Without knowing the game too well, do those debuff's from getting resurrected apply in RvR as well? Can res spells be cast in combat? And if so, is that not a bit ****?

Spear

Kiith wrote: »

Without knowing the game too well, do those debuff's from getting resurrected apply in RvR as well? Can res spells be cast in combat? And if so, is that not a bit ****?

Yes, yes and yes.

KoKane

Epic change log. Look forward to testing the Magus changes

DanOB

lol what a screw up

KoKane

And there was me thinking "why the fck am I reading all of this?"
lol

Man, I hyped up to the eyes atm.. this aint good

Maximilian

Spear wrote: »

Before anyone wonders, these are allowed to posted publically according Magnus K/Imaad from GOA.

Requiel from GOA has now said this was a screw up and can't be published. So forget what you saw.

I'm curious as to why you deleted it (assuming you posted the notes)

death1234567

rev: Lets not post these until it the situation is resolved.

1234567 :Okie doke.

KoKane

Maximilian wrote: »

I'm curious as to why you deleted it (assuming you posted the notes)

Requiel on the Warhammer forums (who is a moderator/admin there) removed it after posting it because he was told to do so. Patch notes were just for the beta players to keep informed but it spread around rapidly and it turns out that the forums and stuff like that are still under the NDA

Spear

Maximilian wrote: »

I'm curious as to why you deleted it (assuming you posted the notes)

We were initially told we could post it publically and that it would be posted on the front of the war-europe.com site as well. About two and a half hours later GOA admitted they had been wrong and that it wasn't meant for the public to see. Mark Jacobs has since said they aren't final and that there'll be more done yet.

Maximilian

Ok but once they were posted they are in the public domain and it's fair game to post it. Any NDA does not bind anyone who hasn't actually signed it. Anyway, doesn't matter I'm just being lawyery, sorry about that

Quick google search shows them anyway.

Spear

Maximilian wrote: »

Ok but once they were posted they are in the public domain and it's fair game to post it. Any NDA does not bind anyone who hasn't actually signed it. Anyway, doesn't matter I'm just being lawyery, sorry about that Quick google search shows them anyway.

But I am bound by the NDA, a signature isn't needed for a binding contract, there's also contract by behaviour.

whatduck

Google is your friend.

Maximilian

Spear wrote: »

But I am bound by the NDA, a signature isn't needed for a binding contract, there's also contract by behaviour.

Not to be argumentative or anything but there's no such thing as a contract by behaviour and yes, a signature or some alternative form of acceptance is essential in any contract including a NDA.

The only reason I even mention it is that some people seem to think that if they post information freely available and that may be the subject of a NDA between third parties, the cops or going to show up or something, which is nonsense. The only person who is really in trouble is the person that broke the NDA in the frst place by disclosing the information. After that the damage is done.

Spear

Maximilian wrote: »

Not to be argumentative or anything but there's no such thing as a contract by behaviour and yes, a signature or some alternative form of acceptance is essential in any contract including a NDA.

Implied by the acts of the parties then or whatever the phrase is. Either way it wouldn't do good to piss off GOA since they're here in Ireland and the law hasn't been too protective of boards.ie in the past.

Maximilian

Spear wrote: »

Implied by the acts of the parties then or whatever the phrase is. Either way it wouldn't do good to piss off GOA since they're here in Ireland and the law hasn't been too protective of boards.ie in the past.

I understand you mean mean now but my point is there is no law stopping anyone posting what's already out there. Apart from the NDA being lifted as far as the closed beta goes, the genie is out of the bottle as it were as far as those notes go, so its ok to re-post them. If GOA shouldn't have posted them up, then that's entirely their problem and nobody else's. Anyway, there's something funny about arguing the finer points of contract law on a Warhammer forum