DA alpha strike

[Agerjag]

Wow, why are there so many trolls today.....there is an easy question that needs to be answered. Why would it tell you not to use reserve rolls if they are not in reserve? If they are in magical deathwing assault space there is no need for that at all, but they are not. They are in reserve using a special rule called deathwing assualt in order to drop in on time....is that hard for people to understand? Doesnt matter that you declare it ahead of time, they are put into reserve as per deepstrike rules, which they are using and then have no need to roll(because they are in reserve). They can errata this to not be included in the 50% but as it is you have to as they are in reserve.

[Avon Rekaes]

Really? You can't see where the other side is coming from? You see fluff justification as being the same as "This is clearly a decision made at a newly defined and seperate game step than deciding what goes into Reserves, so it is ambiguous whether the rules for Reserves applies"?

 

I think this discussing is getting too personal and vindictive. No one here is stupid, no one here can't read. We all are coming at this with our own internal logic. Just because you don't agree with it doesn't make it illogical.

 

Sorry but logic is not "my own" or "internal", that's the main beauty of logic, it is formal and pretty well defined.

And by the way, I had not definite opinion on the subject when I started reading the thread. So I can perfectly well see were the doubt comes from but once you read pg36, pg122, pg124 and the DWA in detail the issue is almost crystal clear if you just pay attention.

 

Logic may be formal, sure, but I was using the word colloquially to define internal thought processes (and by saying no one is being illogical, I meant that no one is making insane points with no reasoning behind them). My apologies for using the wrong word.

 

The point is that there are peopel on both sides of this argument making clear, reasoned points, and we are disagreeing on an already vaguely worded rule. No one here can claim RAW for the entirety of their point, because the RAW are vague enough to be causing this discussion in the firs place.

 

I believe that DWA doesn't apply to 50%. Can I understand why you think it does? Sure. I just disagree.

 

I get that you think that Reserves are Reserves are Reserves, I just disagree that DWA are Reserves at all.

 

I get that you're using the "it's a choice" point to say that it DWA'd units should count toward the limit because they don't HAVE to be put in DWA. I just disagree, again, that DWA are Reserves at all and further point to units embarked on transports that must start in reserves also not counting toward the limit, despite it being "your choice" to put the unit onto that transport.

 

Certainly you can disagree with me even still. The point of my previous post was not even to further my argument. It was to get people to stop attacking each other with blatantly hostile posts. Such as implying that those reasoning on the "doesn't count toward the limit" side are using insane or crazy, or even just irrelevant reasoning equal with using fluff to justify rules.

[Avon Rekaes]

Wow, why are there so many trolls today.....there is an easy question that needs to be answered. Why would it tell you not to use reserve rolls if they are not in reserve?

 

This was already stated that it can clearly go either way.

 

A: "It's stated not to use reserve rolls because they aren't in reserve and this is a clarification."

 

B: "It's stated not to use reserve rolls because they are in reserve and this is an exception."

 

Both are entirely valid interpretations, so that sticking point doesn't hold water to any side.

 

Also, the only trolling I see is you asking "is that hard for people to understand?" as if people who picked option A are mentally slower to grasp clear concepts than you. As if the rule isn't incredibly ambiguous.

[Avon Rekaes]

Even though you can place units into DWA, I don't think it will pan out that players will find it acceptable to not place 1/2 your units onto the table. 2000 points of terminators deep striking into the opponents front lines reeks of cheese on top of creating rule conflicts.

 

But 2000 points of Power Armored squads entirely deployed in Drop Pods aren't? Well, maybe it is cheese, but it's also entirely legal.

[Remmy]

Even though you can place units into DWA, I don't think it will pan out that players will find it acceptable to not place 1/2 your units onto the table.  2000 points of terminators deep striking into the opponents front lines reeks of cheese on top of creating rule conflicts.

 

But 2000 points of Power Armored squads entirely deployed in Drop Pods aren't? Well, maybe it is cheese, but it's also entirely legal.

 

2000 points of power armored troops is much easier to deal with than 2000 points of 2+/3+ with twin linked split fire on the drop. I regularly face all drop pod alpha strike armies and while they sound scary their effectiveness is greatly reduced with proper deployment and an aegis defense line

[Avon Rekaes]

Even though you can place units into DWA, I don't think it will pan out that players will find it acceptable to not place 1/2 your units onto the table. 2000 points of terminators deep striking into the opponents front lines reeks of cheese on top of creating rule conflicts.

 

But 2000 points of Power Armored squads entirely deployed in Drop Pods aren't? Well, maybe it is cheese, but it's also entirely legal.

 

2000 points of power armored troops is much easier to deal with than 2000 points of 2+/3+ with twin linked split fire on the drop. I regularly face all drop pod alpha strike armies and while they sound scary their effectiveness is greatly reduced with proper deployment and an aegis defense line

 

2000 points is 2000 points. While I understand the individual models are much more scary, there would be a hell of a lot more models with the PA, and I suggest that different tactics would make either 2000 point Deep-Striking army just as difficult/easy to handle. (The PA army can also take that Dakkapole, remember)

[dswanick]

Even though you can place units into DWA, I don't think it will pan out that players will find it acceptable to not place 1/2 your units onto the table. 2000 points of terminators deep striking into the opponents front lines reeks of cheese on top of creating rule conflicts.

 

But 2000 points of Power Armored squads entirely deployed in Drop Pods aren't? Well, maybe it is cheese, but it's also entirely legal.

 

2000 points of power armored troops is much easier to deal with than 2000 points of 2+/3+ with twin linked split fire on the drop. I regularly face all drop pod alpha strike armies and while they sound scary their effectiveness is greatly reduced with proper deployment and an aegis defense line

 

2000 points is 2000 points. While I understand the individual models are much more scary, there would be a hell of a lot more models with the PA, and I suggest that different tactics would make either 2000 point Deep-Striking army just as difficult/easy to handle. (The PA army can also take that Dakkapole, remember)

2,000pts of TDA on turn 1 is not the same as 1,000pts PA on turn 1, and a random amount of the remainder on turns 2-4. Claiming otherwise is disingenuous.

[Avon Rekaes]

No it is not disingenuous. I am not a liar. I am not tricking you. I am not being dishonest. We have a difference of opinion, and claiming that yours is the ONLY honest one is incredibly insulting.

 

To anyone that claims 100% reserved army isn't fair because of the potential loss of their first turn facing no opponents, whether I come in one round or later rounds, makes no difference, their entire first turn is still (largely) wasted. That I can see as being an issue, and whether doing DWA or DPA results in the same thing.

 

Also note that I may not put my entire army as a 1st turn DWA.

[BigGumbo]

No it is not disingenuous. I am not a liar. I am not tricking you. I am not being dishonest. We have a difference of opinion, and claiming that yours is the ONLY honest one is incredibly insulting.

 

To anyone that claims 100% reserved army isn't fair because of the potential loss of their first turn facing no opponents, whether I come in one round or later rounds, makes no difference, their entire first turn is still (largely) wasted. That I can see as being an issue, and whether doing DWA or DPA results in the same thing.

 

Also note that I may not put my entire army as a 1st turn DWA.

Do you mean "may not" as in "are not permitted to" or as in "might choose not to"?

[Agerjag]

Ok lets say I ascribe to your off kilter deathwings magical space theory, since characters can only join units when deployed together or when in reserve together...that means that you cannot join deathwing characters to deathwing units when deathwing assaulting. They must make seperate scatter roles as well. Its like your ignoring the intent(our percieved intent of course), how things are written and digging yourself a giant hole to live in.....

 

You still have not answered why they mention no need to make reserve roles when they are not supposedly in reserve.

 

To be honest metally slow doesnt really come into it as weve had enough time to think it through regardless of your mental speed. Look at the implications of what happens when the rule goes one way or the other. Look at the word reserve that is printed. There is no reason at all for them to mention reserve in any way shape or form unless you are in it. It states that you use the deepstrike rules for deploying which deploy from reserve.

[dswanick]

No it is not disingenuous. I am not a liar. I am not tricking you. I am not being dishonest. We have a difference of opinion, and claiming that yours is the ONLY honest one is incredibly insulting.

To anyone that claims 100% reserved army isn't fair because of the potential loss of their first turn facing no opponents, whether I come in one round or later rounds, makes no difference, their entire first turn is still (largely) wasted. That I can see as being an issue, and whether doing DWA or DPA results in the same thing.

Also note that I may not put my entire army as a 1st turn DWA.

So now you're claiming that a couple of units of TDA DWA on turn 1 and the remainder of 2,000pts of TDA DWA on turn 2 is "no less fair" than 1,000pts of PA on turn 1, and the remainder randomly arriving over turns 2-4? Seriously?!?

Especially when you can claim that as they are not "Reserves" they are unaffected by Interceptor shots, I've Been Expecting You, and any of your opponent's Reserve affecting special rules and wargear...

[Excessus]

WAAC#1: Oooh, we got this really cheesy move.

WAAC#2: Yeah, cool, but how can we make it even more cheesy?

 

This is so funny to watch... :D

[cielaq]

Brothers, let's close this topic and wait for a FAQ/ The further discussion is pointless, as one side will not convince the other, I'm afraid.

[Brother Immolator]

WAAC#1: Oooh, we got this really cheesy move.

WAAC#2: Yeah, cool, but how can we make it even more cheesy?

This is so funny to watch...

Enjoy your popcorn.

[worloch]

Wow, lots of posts since yesterday. I won't copy'n'paste quotes and what not - just a few quick points, many of which have been stated in some form but deserve a quick nod to support my original post.

 

1) DWA is a choice, but once it is made, entering play from Reserves via Deepstrike is not, and hence you are in the "forced to" section of the Reserves rules, with all that entails. That includes not being counted against the 50% and being able to Deepstrike from Reserves even in missions where the Reserves rule is not detailed. This is why timing is important, and is specified.

 

2) Even though the required to enter from Reserves via Deepstrike already covers it, Terminator Armor would allow the option to use Reserves and Deepstrike in missions where those rulesets aren't detailed. This is important as it allows one to choose to Deepstrike from Reserves after having declined to DWA (in which case they do count against the 50% limit).

 

3) The integer 5 is "immediately following" the integer 4, but that doesn't make integer 5 "simultaneous" to integer 6. Now, that isn't to say that one couldn't use the phrase "immediately following" to describe an event that is also "simultaneous" to another event properly, but it does mean you can't just assume that "simultaneous" is correct. In this case, I believe most reasonable interpretations would correlate "immediately following" with a new event being insterted in to a timeline, as also implying "immediately preceding" the normal subsequent step. A FAQ could be issued on this specific timing issue, but I would argue it is unecessary, as the larger issue getting a FAQ would make it moot.

 

4) Intrepreting the rules in this manner keeps DWA within the existing ruleset with a minimum of disruption, which has the benefit of ensuring DWA plays nice with prior rulesets regarding Reserves and Deepstrike.

[Avon Rekaes]

While I appreciate your reasoning worloch, as I am in the "doesn't count toward 50%" side of this debate, this discussion has become too intertwined with personal attacks and flames. Your reasoning would be, or is about to be, called disingenuous, crazy, or otherwise discounted as the insidious rules-lawyering of a WAAC scoundrel, despite your best intentions. It's best this topic was just closed so no one else will be called insane for having a perfectly valid opinion.

[Agerjag]

Wow, lots of posts since yesterday. I won't copy'n'paste quotes and what not - just a few quick points, many of which have been stated in some form but deserve a quick nod to support my original post.

 

1) DWA is a choice, but once it is made, entering play from Reserves via Deepstrike is not, and hence you are in the "forced to" section of the Reserves rules, with all that entails. That includes not being counted against the 50% and being able to Deepstrike from Reserves even in missions where the Reserves rule is not detailed. This is why timing is important, and is specified.

 

2) Even though the required to enter from Reserves via Deepstrike already covers it, Terminator Armor would allow the option to use Reserves and Deepstrike in missions where those rulesets aren't detailed. This is important as it allows one to choose to Deepstrike from Reserves after having declined to DWA (in which case they do count against the 50% limit).

 

3) The integer 5 is "immediately following" the integer 4, but that doesn't make integer 5 "simultaneous" to integer 6. Now, that isn't to say that one couldn't use the phrase "immediately following" to describe an event that is also "simultaneous" to another event properly, but it does mean you can't just assume that "simultaneous" is correct. In this case, I believe most reasonable interpretations would correlate "immediately following" with a new event being insterted in to a timeline, as also implying "immediately preceding" the normal subsequent step. A FAQ could be issued on this specific timing issue, but I would argue it is unecessary, as the larger issue getting a FAQ would make it moot.

 

4) Intrepreting the rules in this manner keeps DWA within the existing ruleset with a minimum of disruption, which has the benefit of ensuring DWA plays nice with prior rulesets regarding Reserves and Deepstrike.

 

While I agree that being DWA units do go into reserve Im not sure you can make a statement like, choose to deathwing assault and then forced to deepstrike. It is a choice, though this will need to have some clarification as I can see it both ways. When DWA, I personally believe that you are choosing to deep strike. RAW and how phases work(or dont work...as per normal GW shenanigins) I would most likely side with your argument. That being said I do not have my BRB on me at the moment so I cannot check the exact wording of the forced to deep strike section, as that will really determine things.

[Avon Rekaes]

While I agree that being DWA units do go into reserve Im not sure you can make a statement like, choose to deathwing assault and then forced to deepstrike. It is a choice, though this will need to have some clarification as I can see it both ways. When DWA, I personally believe that you are choosing to deep strike.

 

You can also choose to place a tactical squa in a Drop Pod, and then the tactical squad no longer counts toward the 50% limit because it then must start the game in reserve because of the Drop Pod you chose to put it in.

[Agerjag]

While I agree that being DWA units do go into reserve Im not sure you can make a statement like, choose to deathwing assault and then forced to deepstrike. It is a choice, though this will need to have some clarification as I can see it both ways. When DWA, I personally believe that you are choosing to deep strike.

 

You can also choose to place a tactical squa in a Drop Pod, and then the tactical squad no longer counts toward the 50% limit because it then must start the game in reserve because of the Drop Pod you chose to put it in.

 

And you can choose to put a flyer in your army in the first place....your logic is astounding.....really sticks to the rules....

Choosing to DWA is choosing to deploying via deepstrike with the caveat that you inform your opponent ahead of time in order to always land in the turn you desire. Making it more then that is stretching the rules. If they intend for you to make an all deathwing 1st turn deepstrike list (which was never possible before) then im sure they will errata the rules for that contingency. I really doubt they will.

[march10k]

I would think that GW would want to have it both ways...waive the 50% rule for a pure deathwing force, but count DWAing units in a mixed force. As such, I can't decide which way to read this...both are reasonable interpretations of the author's intent (and RAW is dead people, stop applying it!)

 

For me, it doesn't matter, I've always been a mechanized deathwing player. Even one vene-raider with Bels and squad on board lets me DWA three squads, so the 50% limitation is no limitation at all! More likely, it'll be two mounted and three DWAing, plus Bels....in a pure DW army. But why do that, when lascannon devastators got a big haircut and we have new toys to play with? Zeke with lascannon devs, Bels in a crusader to drop in 2-3 squads on turn 2, a dark talon or two, all of these sound yummy!

[Avon Rekaes]

And you can choose to put a flyer in your army in the first place....your logic is astounding.....really sticks to the rules....

 

Uhg. My god, already with the personal attacks.

 

You can select a Drop Pod as the dedicated transport to your squad, but you're not forced to deploy them in the Drop Pod. Ergo, it's entirely up to you whether the squad gets put in that Drop Pod you're taking. The Drop Pod can come down, empty, on it's own, and just used as a random gun/missile station, like how a 10-man Tac squad can take a Razorback as a mobile gun platform.

 

So chosing to take the Drop Pod is irrelvant. It's roughly analogous to chosing to take Deathwing squads. Okay, you made your choice, and its in your army list. But when you get to your turn in Deploy Forces, whether that Tac Squad goes in Reserves with it's Drop Pod or not is entirely up to you. It's a choice, just like whether I decide to field my Deathwing squads with DWA or not is choice.

 

Do you get the analogy yet or am I just

 

CRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYY INNNNNNNSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNE?!

[elphilo]

Uhg. My god, already with the personal attacks.

You can select a Drop Pod as the dedicated transport to your squad, but you're not forced to deploy them in the Drop Pod. Ergo, it's entirely up to you whether the squad gets put in that Drop Pod you're taking. The Drop Pod can come down, empty, on it's own, and just used as a random gun/missile station, like how a 10-man Tac squad can take a Razorback as a mobile gun platform.

So chosing to take the Drop Pod is irrelvant. It's roughly analogous to chosing to take Deathwing squads. Okay, you made your choice, and its in your army list. But when you get to your turn in Deploy Forces, whether that Tac Squad goes in Reserves with it's Drop Pod or not is entirely up to you. It's a choice, just like whether I decide to field my Deathwing squads with DWA or not is choice.

Do you get the analogy yet or am I just

CRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAZZZZZZZZZZZYYYYYYYYYYY INNNNNNNSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNE?!

Whoa,

wait,

slow down there bud.

You're telling me I get to CHOOSE what I play with? You're insane

[Avon Rekaes]

*random sputtering noises*

[Agerjag]

I cant make those calls im no psychologist. But yes you can choose to not put guys into the drop pod. You can choose to slog your DW as well, it really has no bearing on whether or not DW counts for the 50% or not or in the earlier sections fo this thread whether DW are in reserve or not. I was merly stating that your logic in that case goes nowhere because it has nothing to do with this situation. If you choose to DWA you are at that very moment CHOOSING to deep strike as that is how DWA are deployed. You can of course choose to start on the board instead.

[elphilo]

*random sputtering noises*

/pat on the back

It's okay, soon all the bad men will be gone. ;)