Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Danny Internets wrote:
"Troops Choice" has been clarified to mean "Entire Troops selection from the Force Organization Chart" so why wouldn't "HQ choice" mean "Entire HQ selection from the Force Organization Chart"? If you extend the same logic, each of the units composing the FOC selection should have to be within an objective.

There is your answer that will most likely be backed up by GW.

Just a note for those that asked, the clarifications, as originally posted at the beginning of this thread are now posted on the GW website, within the 'Ard Boyz Rules section.

Here's the link. Looks identical to what was posted here:
http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1880139_Ard_Boyz_Scenario_Clarifications.pdf

Okay, so this clarification has me a little confused:

Ardboyz Rules Clarifications wrote:Under deployment in missions 2 and
3, the Note about deploying all
troops and HQ choices does not
mean you must deploy all your
troops and HQ. You may still leave
troops and HQ in reserve, as long
as you still have at least 1 HQ and
2 troops choices on the table. You
may leave units in reserve if you can
legally do so. You may also leave
them off the table, and not in reserve,
to move on in turn 1 with the rest of
your army, as per the scenario rules.

This seems to be a mix of contradictions. It says you MAY deploy all troops and HQ's. But you MUST deploy at least 1 HQ and 2 troops (unlike the rulebook which says MAY). Then it says that units can be left in reserve as long as it is legal to do so (it is always legal when the Reserves rule is in play). Does the MUST language override the Reserves rule?

What do drop pod marines, drop IG, daemons, and Deathwing do?

dvdhwk wrote:

This seems to be a mix of contradictions. It says you MAY deploy all troops and HQ's. But you MUST deploy at least 1 HQ and 2 troops (unlike the rulebook which says MAY). Then it says that units can be left in reserve as long as it is legal to do so (it is always legal when the Reserves rule is in play). Does the MUST language override the Reserves rule?

What do drop pod marines, drop IG, daemons, and Deathwing do?

I would imagine since they can legally be kept in reserve, it's ok. I read that as saying that you can leave all but 1 HQ and two troop Choices (not units) off the board to arrive by turn one, but if you want to leave more than that, they need to be kept in reserves to arrive by normal reserve procedures. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

One question I had, or more of a clarification, is what to do with retinues that aren't attached to an IC, like a Warlock retinue or BA honor guard. For KP purposes are they "linked" to an IC so that you have to kill the retinue and one particular IC to get the points, or do they count as seperate. For example, I played my friend's Blood Angels, and he took Corbulo, Dante, and an honor guard. Normally, the honor guard is bought freely, and not in any linked to an IC. I killed all three, so I figured I only got 6 KP. But what if I had killed the honor guard and dante, but he said that the Honor Guard was bought "for" corbulo? How many Kps would I get? IMO, to play by the spirit of the rules, it seems that every retinue needs to be assigned to an IC, so you have to kill them both to get the KPs, but this must be announced before the game.

With the rules clarifications, Ard Boys is now all about the FOC and killing every model in the FOC. So depends on Codex:

SM can buy a command squad that is a retinue. The retinue does not takes up a separate FOC it is a part the same FOC as the IC. Therefore you have to kill the retinue and the IC to get the KPs.

SW can buy all thier WG models for a single FOC elite slot. I can then split the WG up amoungst my various units and IC. You would have to kill every WG in every squad and retinue to get the 2 KP. In this case killing the attached IC which is a separate FOC would net separate KPs.

I dislike KP immensely. Per the BGB, KPs are fairly easy (while still being slowed). With this set of rules, they are completely unclear and the majority of codexes need their own seperate clarification.

I suppose I'll just have to go for the kill'em all approach and not even hope to get into round 2.

They aren't unclear at all. KPs pertain only to FOC, which encompasses all of the units that may fall under one 'choice' on the Force Org table. Therefore, to get a KP for one FOC slot, you have to kill every last model within that slot except dedicated transports. It's actually a much simpler breakdown, we're just not used to it yet.

Now, the very valid problem that this does present is, currently, Imperial Guard and Orks can take 2500 point lists that give up 5-8 KP total when an "average" army is in the high teens to mid twenties.

The way i read the rules for deployment are just like the rule book with the exception that you can deploy ALL your HQ's and Troops.

The rule book states that in DoW deployment you must deploy 1 hq and 2 troops and that is it.

Ard Boyz have modified that to allow you to deploy all your Hq's and Troop's if you want to but you still have to deploy the required 1 HQ and 2 Troops. Those models must be on the table. they cannot be held in reserves as that is a rule in the normal deployment scenario in the book and they don't allow the Hq and 2 troops to be pulled back into hiding in reserves. Again, They must be on the table.

Now, since you are required to deploy all troops and HQ, if you take them off the board (down to the minimum 1HQ/2Troops) then they will be in reserves and not come on until at least turn 2.

Hulksmash wrote:Ard Boyz have modified that to allow you to deploy all your Hq's and Troop's if you want to but you still have to deploy the required 1 HQ and 2 Troops. Those models must be on the table. they cannot be held in reserves as that is a rule in the normal deployment scenario in the book and they don't allow the Hq and 2 troops to be pulled back into hiding in reserves. Again, They must be on the table.

You're incorrect here; DoW does not prevent you from putting anything into Reserves. Per the Reserves rule, you may always choose to hold a unit in Reserve. In the case of Dawn of War, if you hold a unit in Reserve, it will not enter from your board edge on turn 1, as everything else does.

The ARD Boyz FAQ makes it pretty clear:

• Under deployment in missions 2 and 3, the Note about deploying all troops and HQ choices does not mean you must deploy all your troops and HQ. You may still leave troops and HQ in reserve, as long as you still have at least 1 HQ and 2 troops choices on the table. You may leave units in reserve if you can legally do so. You may also leave them off the table, and not in reserve, to move on in turn 1 with the rest of your army, as per the scenario rules.

Therefore by RAW you must have at least 1 HQ and 2 Troops on the Table. Special Scenario rules for ARD Boys trumps the DoW general rules and reserve special rules. If someone wants to put the rest of his army in reserves instead of putting the majority on the table in turn 1 and thus risk coming into the game piece meal...heah all the power to him.

Hulksmash wrote:The rule book states that in DoW deployment you must deploy 1 hq and 2 troops and that is it.

No it doesn't. You are changing the wording. The Rulebook scenario says that you "can deploy up to two units from [your] Troop selections and up to one unit from [your] HQ selections...."

The point I'm making is that in this respect the AB scenario is markedly different from the rulebook scenario.

Wyomingfox - The issue is which rule takes precedence. The scenario rule or the reserves rule. There's no authority that I can point to that says which one definitively takes precedence (except the general to specific argument). Either way its very poorly written, and the clarification makes it more confusing.

Agreed, and Jant i went back and your right, i misread it.

But the RAW of the rules clarification basically says the same thing i did. hehe.

oh and by the rulebook that meant that if you left those units off the table they would come after turn 1, unlike the rest of your army which comes in on turn 1

And now for something completely different...

... has it been established what level of victory is awarded for tabling your opponent? It seems obvious that it would be 'Massacre', but nothing about this tournament has been what it seems so I just want to confirm.

ubermosher wrote:And now for something completely different...

... has it been established what level of victory is awarded for tabling your opponent? It seems obvious that it would be 'Massacre', but nothing about this tournament has been what it seems so I just want to confirm.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that. Well at the GT there was nothing about tabling in the victory conditions of the GT scenarios. But Dave Taylor did confirm that tabling constituted a massacre. I realize that was put on by the US Community team, and Ardboyz is done by trade sales. But it's all we have to go on for now.

Well, my oppinion is that the Ard Boys scenario which has been FAQ overrides or modifies the general reserves rules. I really don't think the language in the FAQ is confusing at all. You still have reserves, it is just that 3 units in your army aren't eligible for them under normal curcumstance. It creates a few potentially confusing scenarios for codexes with special deployment...but codex deployement rules trump scenario deployement rules so I really don't see a problem there either.

Double Post

"Oh yeah, I forgot about that. Well at the GT there was nothing about tabling in the victory conditions of the GT scenarios. But Dave Taylor did confirm that tabling constituted a massacre. I realize that was put on by the US Community team, and Ardboyz is done by trade sales. But it's all we have to go on for now."

It is not in the FAQ so I wouldn't be holding my breath.

wyomingfox wrote:You still have reserves, it is just that 3 units in your army aren't eligible for them under normal curcumstance.

It's 3 "choices" not 3 "units" according to the scenario wording and the clarification. So I would have to deploy most of my army which is designed to deepstrike (drop IG).

I guess my point is that about as much forethought went into the clarifications as went into the original scenarios.

Yep, that was what I meant to say (3 FOC).

Well, if that is the case you must have pretty low KP, which is a bonus for you.

I wonder if the scenario rules would mess with SW WG? Probably not as I think the codex address this.

I don't generally post here but I thought I'd chime in with my biggest gripe about the changes that are now official for AB.

GW really didn't think this through. While I admit there were issues with the way KP worked in conjunction with IG lists they went to the complete opposite end of the spectrum. Now, I've seen more than one IG list that is now being played that not only makes massacre victories impossible without a total table wipe but makes that same table wipe nearly impossible due to the sheer number of models these lists field (150+). What the hell were they thinking? I saw one list that was only 7 kill points total and another that one only 6. Even getting a major victory will prove tricky against these lists.

Robert

Rule answered, disregard.