some naming convention errors i noticed

[dusktiger]

not really a bug so i figured i'd just post here.

looking at the files, i noticed that the file name for the eldar files still says el5Dat instead of el6Dat to show its one of the files updated to a 6th edition codex.

i also noticed that you guys came up with a cleaner naming convention for codex and supplement in the choose army box, which looks MUCH cleaner btw. however, the iyanden eldar supplement wasn't renamed so it shows up the same way. it's still showing up as Codex: Eldar Supplement - Iyanden.

similarly, Raven Guard just show up as Raven Guard and not Codex: Raven Guard.

and while they are my main army, i dont think red scorpions really need their own army box selection. they're a successor chapter with it's own traits, but can just as easily have the 3 versions of Culln, plus sgt Haas and sevrin loth just added into the generic space marine army like all the other imperial armour characters from the badab war are done.

[shaggai]

Some files may need to be changed however, it is usually a big pain as we have to make a warning when updating things like this as it would require you to delete the old folder and then import the new folder. Some people don't notice these things and thus renaming existing files is only done as in an emergency basis to prevent us from fieldig emails.

As to the "non-Codex" armies, it does form a nice basis in that it a clear sign that that is an older file (one that has not been updated to 6E). Codex armies which are not necessarily a book, e.g., Codex: Ultramarines are there as under the Codex: Space Marines you need to choose a chapter so you no longer have "vanilla" marines. All in all, there will not be a "Codex: Space Marines" once all the others have been done properly. When the Red Scorpions is updated properly they would fall into "IA: Red Scorpions" (under the assumption that FW will do something more to flesh them out in the future in terms of Chapter Tactics and the like).