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.

So just want to make sure I understand this right. I can have 1000 points in drop pods and have 1000 points in deep strike according to current rules? I’m probably gonna have one squad on the ground but my plan is for everything else to move in the sky.

GameDadZ wrote:
So just want to make sure I understand this right. I can have 1000 points in drop pods and have 1000 points in deep strike according to current rules? I’m probably gonna have one squad on the ground but my plan is for everything else to move in the sky.

There is some dispute about this, so discuss with your opponent.

My interpretation is if you have a 2000pt list and 1000 is in drop pods then you must have 500pts on the table.

We don't know because GW are incompetent and refused to answer the one question we wanted answered in the FAQ.

As Stux says, there are multiple answers depending on how you define things.

Well... that’s annoying. So in one version, you must have at least 500 points.

GameDadZ wrote:
Well... that’s annoying. So in one version, you must have at least 500 points.

Assuming I'm understanding your scenario correctly, you have 1000pts of drop pods and units in drop pods, then you could have a maximum of 500pts using other methods of deep strike. The 1000pts in pods are ignored, leaving 1000pts at least half of which must start on the table.

However if you meant that 1000pts was just drop pods themselves and the other 1000pts was units in the pods, then you could null deploy - however note that there are other interpretations.

In my opinion, while I believe this to be accurate it does go against the spirit of the game.

To be fair, the 500 pts on the board version is less likely to cause a salty "pack up and leave" than a null deployment, so a little annoyance is probably fine compared to that.

 flandarz wrote:
To be fair, the 500 pts on the board version is less likely to cause a salty "pack up and leave" than a null deployment, so a little annoyance is probably fine compared to that.

i would still.
Because the idea behind the implementation of 50% of the army was meant to be 50% of the army.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
To be fair, the 500 pts on the board version is less likely to cause a salty "pack up and leave" than a null deployment, so a little annoyance is probably fine compared to that.

i would still.
Because the idea behind the implementation of 50% of the army was meant to be 50% of the army.

And plenty of other armies get to break core rules, I'm not sure why people find this so egregious when the simple counterplay is, good you'll now deploy in this little are I don't zone out enjoy playing with 90% of your amy stuck in the corner.
Or oh you have 1 unit on the table grat it's dead it's turn 2 and your tabled. Though I will admit I'm not sure how this works with acceptable casualties I assume it's still a tabling end off but the acceptable casualties is kinda weirdly worded.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
To be fair, the 500 pts on the board version is less likely to cause a salty "pack up and leave" than a null deployment, so a little annoyance is probably fine compared to that.

i would still.
Because the idea behind the implementation of 50% of the army was meant to be 50% of the army.

And drop pods allow you to ignore that rule. Much the same way that some rules allow you to ignore the -1 to hit for moving and shooting heavy weapons.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
To be fair, the 500 pts on the board version is less likely to cause a salty "pack up and leave" than a null deployment, so a little annoyance is probably fine compared to that.

i would still.
Because the idea behind the implementation of 50% of the army was meant to be 50% of the army.

And drop pods allow you to ignore that rule. Much the same way that some rules allow you to ignore the -1 to hit for moving and shooting heavy weapons.

And, what the rule Raw states is not what was intended to happen, and i am at a point where i simply do not condone GW powercreep anymore

And sure technically it's legal, in a pickup game however, na fam, i am good i find another person to make a match



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ice_can wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
To be fair, the 500 pts on the board version is less likely to cause a salty "pack up and leave" than a null deployment, so a little annoyance is probably fine compared to that.

i would still.
Because the idea behind the implementation of 50% of the army was meant to be 50% of the army.

And plenty of other armies get to break core rules, I'm not sure why people find this so egregious when the simple counterplay is, good you'll now deploy in this little are I don't zone out enjoy playing with 90% of your amy stuck in the corner.
Or oh you have 1 unit on the table grat it's dead it's turn 2 and your tabled. Though I will admit I'm not sure how this works with acceptable casualties I assume it's still a tabling end off but the acceptable casualties is kinda weirdly worded.

you would need to play an army that can reach that one tiny hidden unit or two.
Which i do not. and i frankly got better things to do then get blocked in by a bunch of SM droppods that restrict me more then 500 boyz fill up the ork players starting ground.

Not Online!!! wrote:
And, what the rule Raw states is not what was intended to happen, and i am at a point where i simply do not condone GW powercreep anymore

And sure technically it's legal, in a pickup game however, na fam, i am good i find another person to make a match

Do you also pack up if someone brings Genestealers? After all, they ignore the rule that says you cannot charge if you advance. Sure, technically it's legal...

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
And, what the rule Raw states is not what was intended to happen, and i am at a point where i simply do not condone GW powercreep anymore

And sure technically it's legal, in a pickup game however, na fam, i am good i find another person to make a match

Do you also pack up if someone brings Genestealers? After all, they ignore the rule that says you cannot charge if you advance. Sure, technically it's legal...

i diversify:

Is counterplay decently possible ergo the chance there that there is a propper match and not just a gotcha combo that i can't deal atm with due to model and transprot restrictions?

Yes? Then ok, i play. Can i stop an OT Charge, yes, for that i have screening units.

No? because i can't ignore LOS on my CSM and have no option to sudden death you because technically it is T1 when the SM droppods arrive and i need to go first to stand a chance to gain some room to manouvre, therefore making it very possible that i get to play 0% if i don't get first turn?


Conclusion i don't play into hardcounters or when i am the hardcounter to someones list, because the game is still a game and not T1 simulator the ALPHA STRIKENING.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Frankly got better things to do then get blocked in by a bunch of SM droppods that restrict me more then 500 boyz fill up the ork players starting ground.

Giving up and going home because you think the rules are unfair isn't very orky

EDIT: Oh, I thought you were the Ork player. Never mind.

Getting a bit off topic here. I'm sure there's a thread in General to discuss whether or not Drop Pods should work this way further.

 Bilge Rat wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Frankly got better things to do then get blocked in by a bunch of SM droppods that restrict me more then 500 boyz fill up the ork players starting ground.

Giving up and going home because you think the rules are unfair isn't very orky

My ork days are over, and i deal with enough BS.
I either get a propper round in , or i don't.

Newsflash, Hardcounters and skewlists are not particulary good experiences, i avoid that.
And also since there generally are a decent ammount of folks at my FLGS i can do that and still get a propper match in.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Stux wrote:
Getting a bit off topic here. I'm sure there's a thread in General to discuss whether or not Drop Pods should work this way further.

Indeed, which is:


Raw, sure you can put 500 on the field, fill 1000pts with droppods plus content and drop another 500 pts down via deepstrike.

It's perfectly legal.

Just don't be surprised when you will get nasty looks or no partners for a match.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
To be fair, the 500 pts on the board version is less likely to cause a salty "pack up and leave" than a null deployment, so a little annoyance is probably fine compared to that.

i would still.
Because the idea behind the implementation of 50% of the army was meant to be 50% of the army.

And drop pods allow you to ignore that rule. Much the same way that some rules allow you to ignore the -1 to hit for moving and shooting heavy weapons.

And, what the rule Raw states is not what was intended to happen, and i am at a point where i simply do not condone GW powercreep anymore

And sure technically it's legal, in a pickup game however, na fam, i am good i find another person to make a match :

How do you know that what RAW states is not what was intended? Do you have a reference for this?

 doctortom wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
To be fair, the 500 pts on the board version is less likely to cause a salty "pack up and leave" than a null deployment, so a little annoyance is probably fine compared to that.

i would still.
Because the idea behind the implementation of 50% of the army was meant to be 50% of the army.

And drop pods allow you to ignore that rule. Much the same way that some rules allow you to ignore the -1 to hit for moving and shooting heavy weapons.

And, what the rule Raw states is not what was intended to happen, and i am at a point where i simply do not condone GW powercreep anymore

And sure technically it's legal, in a pickup game however, na fam, i am good i find another person to make a match :

How do you know that what RAW states is not what was intended? Do you have a reference for this?

Simple, the implementation of the 50% rule, with the statement that to play against nulldeployment isn't funny from GW themselves.

Not Online!!! wrote:
Simple, the implementation of the 50% rule, with the statement that to play against nulldeployment isn't funny from GW themselves.

Can I get a page reference to which Rulebook or Codex GW said this? I cannot find it in any of my rulebooks or codexes.

Not Online!!! wrote:

 doctortom wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 flandarz wrote:
To be fair, the 500 pts on the board version is less likely to cause a salty "pack up and leave" than a null deployment, so a little annoyance is probably fine compared to that.

i would still.
Because the idea behind the implementation of 50% of the army was meant to be 50% of the army.

And drop pods allow you to ignore that rule. Much the same way that some rules allow you to ignore the -1 to hit for moving and shooting heavy weapons.

And, what the rule Raw states is not what was intended to happen, and i am at a point where i simply do not condone GW powercreep anymore

And sure technically it's legal, in a pickup game however, na fam, i am good i find another person to make a match :

How do you know that what RAW states is not what was intended? Do you have a reference for this?

Simple, the implementation of the 50% rule, with the statement that to play against nulldeployment isn't funny from GW themselves.

Nonsense. The implementation of the 50% rule doesn't take into account any rules that were made later in specific codexes that state that certain units (in this case drop pods and their passengers) don't count in that limit. If anything, I would argue the intent is evident in the drop pod rule that they did intend it since they specifically reference the rule you are relying on and say those units don't count toward that rule.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:
Simple, the implementation of the 50% rule, with the statement that to play against nulldeployment isn't funny from GW themselves.

Can I get a page reference to which Rulebook or Codex GW said this? I cannot find it in any of my rulebooks or codexes.

Belive was in one of the interviews, not sure which.




Automatically Appended Next Post:


Hmm, idc.

Not Online!!! wrote:


Belive was in one of the interviews, not sure which.

Even if thats true, interviews arent rules. GW had the chance to clarify in the FAQs, but they didnt.

If you have 1000 in drop pods/units inside, you have to deploy 500 on the table, and have 500 in reserves.