Guard weren't nerfed and how do deal with it

Regarding Reinforcement Points, it seems like a really poorly-designed mechanic to me.

I get what they were trying to do, but I think there are much better ways to go about it.

I mean, in the case of IG, it just makes the rule entirely pointless.

So, I can either put aside X points (enough to replace one or two units), in the hopes that my opponent will destroy one of my infantry units and then I'll be able to replace said unit. Or I could just spend those points on units and start them on the table in the first place. Or in reserve. Or wherever would be most beneficial to my strategy. Gee, what a hard choice.

Of course, that's not even taking into account the minefield of horrible writing when it comes to the difference between models that have been 'destroyed' and models that have 'fled'. A difference that it completely ignored 99% of the time but then randomly comes up sometimes.

So if the last model(s) in the unit flee (including being shot by a nearby Commissar), can I bring the unit back? Do I have to keep track of every model in every unit that flees and not bring those back when I bring their units back? If so, then I think that alone is a good enough reason to never use this ability.

The mechanics are just fine. No fights with 1500 points against 3000+ of Demons anymore.

CptMetal wrote:

The mechanics are just fine. No fights with 1500 points against 3000+ of Demons anymore.

So why make it a universal rule?

Why not just put it into the rules for daemon summoning?

Quote :

Why not just put it into the rules for daemon summoning?

Seconded. It works fine to prevent the Daemon cheese, but it makes no sense for rules that imply Necrons or IG.

The rules seem clear: refresh a unit means don't spend extra points. Get a new unit: spend points

CptMetal wrote:

The rules seem clear: refresh a unit means don't spend extra points. Get a new unit: spend points

That's my understanding of the rules as well.
The point here (for me at least) is not to determine what's RAW, it's to determine what's intended, and thus what will be FAQed.
And i think it's pretty clear that the IG's stratagem is not intended to use reinforcement points. Those points were made to control the daemon cheese, not to render useless every single resurrection ability in the game. Necrons will have similar stratagems as well, and i doubt they'll use reinforcement points.

So here's my take on it : once again, GW forgot their own rules while writing the codex, they will see the players arguing this point, they will FAQ it, and all those speculations will vanish like dust in the wind.

Mppqlmd wrote:

So here's my take on it : once again, GW forgot their own rules while writing the codex, they will see the players arguing this point, they will FAQ it, and all those speculations will vanish like dust in the wind.

I don't think they did forget their own rules. The wording is very specific on all of these rules. All of the "resurrection" abilities except for the IG one the unit must still be alive for it to work. you are adding to an existing unit, or removing what is left of a unit and redeploying at full strength.

The IG one states that you are bringing in a dead unit, a "clone" of a unit if you will. this is the only one that triggers the matched play reinforcement rules regarding points.

Quote :

The IG one states that you are bringing in a dead unit, a "clone" of a unit if you will. this is the only one that triggers the matched play reinforcement rules regarding points.

As i said, i agree that the rules, as written, indicate the necessity of Reinforcement Points for this stratagem. But that's (most likely) not what they intended. They built some heavy hype over that stratagem. They wanted and expected people to love it. And guess what ? If you pay R. P. to use it, it has ZERO strategical value.

Disregarding the questions remaining about that particular strategem, anyone have any ideas on how to play against guard now

bondoid wrote:

Disregarding the questions remaining about that particular strategem, anyone have any ideas on how to play against guard now

My experience (might be biased from local meta) :

Guards is a little less about spamming conscripts, and a little more about spamming Leman Russes. Both were already necessary before, and still are, but you get my point : expect more vehicles in the Imperial Guard, and a bit less infantry blobs.

Which is great news for us : equip your 2000pts army with 20 Dark Lances, and go to town ! I strongly recommend to use cover to hide your vehicles in the first turn, because if you lose the initiative things are going to look grim. Alternatively, deploy very deep (far from them) into the table, to at least force them to move the LR and thus lose 50% of their main gun shooting.

Also, wyches are kinda more efficient at blending conscripts, since they now have 50% chance to fail the "retreat" order, and 50% chance to fail the "No retreat", rising your chances of keeping them in CC to 75%. Pretty good (this does not work against Vostroyans).

Dalamar wrote:

Here is the rule for Matched Play that effects Reinforcement Points, and that Stratagem.

"REINFORCEMENT POINTS
Sometimes a psychic power or ability will allow you
to add units to your army, or replace units that have
been destroyed. One of the most common examples of
such an ability might allow you to summon a unit of
DAEMONS to the battlefield. In a matched play game,
you must set aside some of your points in order to use
these units. The points you set aside are called your
reinforcement points, and need to be recorded on your
army roster (see below)."

This is the perfect case of replacing a dead unit, and there is nothing in the AM book that would stop this matched play rule.

Yeah, its not a psychic power or ability, its a stratagem you pay 2 CP for.. so no reinforcement points

From New Warhammer 40 000 : Stratagems :

Quote :

As the game plays on, you can use these Command Points to activate a variety of Stratagems. Many of these will be specific to certain missions or factions, but there are three that every army can use :

...

As you can see, these abilities are nothing to scoff at. That Tactical Re-roll can be used to ensure a critical high-damage attack wounds a key enemy unit. But at the same time, your opponent could just as easily use theirs to re-roll that critical armour save. Or maybe you want to keep ahold of them to make sure you make that vital charge next turn?

The word they are using to define Stratagems (in an article who's purpose is to define them) is the word ABILITY.

Quote :

Yeah, its not a psychic power or ability, its a stratagem

So this makes no sense. A stratagem IS an ability.

Quote :

you pay 2 CP for.. so no reinforcement points

As said earlier in this thread, the rule might ask for your kidney and the blood of your unborn child, you'd still pay reinforcement points. Unless the rule of the Stratagem states the opposite. Which it doesn't.

Mppqlmd wrote:

From New Warhammer 40 000 : Stratagems :

Quote :

As the game plays on, you can use these Command Points to activate a variety of Stratagems. Many of these will be specific to certain missions or factions, but there are three that every army can use :

...

As you can see, these abilities are nothing to scoff at. That Tactical Re-roll can be used to ensure a critical high-damage attack wounds a key enemy unit. But at the same time, your opponent could just as easily use theirs to re-roll that critical armour save. Or maybe you want to keep ahold of them to make sure you make that vital charge next turn?

The word they are using to define Stratagems (in an article who's purpose is to define them) is the word ABILITY.

Quote :

Yeah, its not a psychic power or ability, its a stratagem

So this makes no sense. A stratagem IS an ability.

Quote :

you pay 2 CP for.. so no reinforcement points

As said earlier in this thread, the rule might ask for your kidney and the blood of your unborn child, you'd still pay reinforcement points. Unless the rule of the Stratagem states the opposite. Which it doesn't.

an ability is a special rule listed in a data slate.. a stratagem has a tax of Command points.

an ability such as summoning has no tax, as such, it needs reinforcement points

BlastaRasta wrote:

an ability is a special rule listed in a data slate

Do you have a rulebook reference for that?

Quote :

an ability is a special rule listed in a data slate..

Feel free to check my reference. Games Workshop is referencing "Stratagems " as a sub-category of "Abilities".

Quote :

an ability such as summoning has no tax

No ? Looks to me like you're paying points for your psycher, and thus by your logic : "I'm paying points for the Sorcerer, i don't have to pay points for the summoning". Well bad luck, you still have to.
There is no limit to the number of taxes you have to pay for a rule/ability. If they rules state that you have to, then you have to. And in this case, they do.

I can see this is a quite sensitive subject here, so I suspect this will be my final post on the matter for now.

The point I was making earlier is that you pay your tax for the unit (points in your army) then you pay 2 CP later on to bring back the same unit. you have essentially paid twice for the same unit. Summoning (or getting something for free) is considered susceptible to the reinforcement rule.

See below FAQ on reinforcement points:

REINFORCEMENTS

Q: If a rule creates a new unit during the battle in a matched play game and adds them to my army, must I pay for the unit with my reinforcement points?
A: Yes (unless the rule itself says otherwise). If you don’t have enough reinforcement points, you cannot add that unit to your army.


Q: What about rules that transform one model into another model – such as turning an enemy Character into a Chaos Spawn; do I still need to pay reinforcement points to add the Chaos Spawn to my army?
A: Again, yes (unless the rule itself says otherwise).


Q: What about rules that add models to existing units; do I need to pay reinforcement points for those models?
A: No (unless the rule itself says otherwise)


clearly you can see that if the unit is "new to your army, you must pay reinforcement points" as per the first question.

Question 2 shows a player looking to add a spawn to his army he never before had, and as such has to pay the points.

Question 3, you can see a player adding models to a unit he has already paid points for and as such does not pay.

Furthermore to the above, please see Death Guard FAQ to which it refers to Poxwalkers ability (data slate rule) not being subject to reinforcement points:

Q: Can Poxwalkers use the Curse of the Walking Pox ability to increase the unit above its starting strength?
A: Yes.


Q: If the Poxwalkers’ Curse of the Walking Pox ability increases the unit above its starting strength, does this cost reinforcement points?
A: No.

Another example of when a units tax has been paid (in points) it being able to reinforce for free.

In response to the comments about abilities being the same as stratagems - they are not.

see below from DG errata where not once to they refer to a stratagem as an "ability":

Is it possible to use a Stratagem from Codex: Chaos Space Marines to target a unit from Codex: Death Guard? For example, can I use the Tide of Traitors Stratagem on a unit of Cultists from a Death Guard Detachment if I have an Alpha Legion Detachment and a Death Guard Detachment in a single Battle-forged army?
A: Yes – if you have access to a Stratagem because you have an appropriate Detachment, it can be used on any permitted target: they do not need to be from that Detachment. In your example, the Alpha Legion Detachment gives access to the Chaos Space Marine Stratagems, and Tide of Traitors can be used on any Chaos Cultists – this would include any Chaos Cultists from the Death Guard Detachment.


Note the word "stratagem" used several times not "ability". Whilst I note your point, I cannot refer you to a page in the rule book that gives the definition of an "ability", but I suspect I am right.

I imagine within the next week this whole discussion will be moot as I am sure the FAQ will clarify.

It's not about "having already payed points" or not.
It's about whether the unit is already on the table or not. If the unit is on the table (such as with the Cultist reinforcement with CSM), you pay no Reinforcement Points. If the unit isn't on the table (even if it once was), you have to pay RP.

Quote :

Q: If the Poxwalkers’ Curse of the Walking Pox ability increases the unit above its starting strength, does this cost reinforcement points?
A: No.

Q: What about rules that add models to existing units; do I need to pay reinforcement points for those models?
A: No (unless the rule itself says otherwise)

This is off topic. Bringing back/creating a model has nothing to do with bringing back/creating a unit. The following rules are very clear about creating/bringing back UNITS :

Quote :

"REINFORCEMENT POINTS
Sometimes a psychic power or ability will allow you
to add units to your army, or replace units that have
been destroyed. One of the most common examples of
such an ability might allow you to summon a unit of
DAEMONS to the battlefield. In a matched play game,
you must set aside some of your points in order to use
these units. The points you set aside are called your
reinforcement points, and need to be recorded on your
army roster (see below)."

Let's also note that everything you quoted that was about bringing new units to the table was answered with "yes". The only "no's" you quoted concern bringing new models, which has nothing to do with the stratagem we're discussing.


As i said many times in this thread, my 2 cents are on the fact that GW intended it to be RP-free. But the rules, as written, are very clear : you have to pay for reinforcement points. If GW didn't intend it, then they screwed up writing it.

[quote="Mppqlmd"]It's not about "having already payed points" or not.
It's about whether the unit is already on the table or not. If the unit is on the table (such as with the Cultist reinforcement with CSM), you pay no Reinforcement Points. If the unit isn't on the table (even if it once was), you have to pay RP.

Quote :

Q: If the Poxwalkers’ Curse of the Walking Pox ability increases the unit above its starting strength, does this cost reinforcement points?
A: No.

This is off topic. Bringing back/creating a model has nothing to do with bringing back/creating a unit. The following rules are very clear about creating/bringing back UNITS :


OK, we will see next week whom is correct

Myself wrote:

As i said many times in this thread, my 2 cents are on the fact that GW intended it to be RP-free. But the rules, as written, are very clear : you have to pay for reinforcement points. If GW didn't intend it, then they screwed up writing it.

Quote :

OK, we will see next week whom is correct

I'm sorry to ask this question, but do you even bother reading what you are answering to ? I explicitly stated that i expect the rules to be FAQed to correspond with the intended rules.

Whether the rule gets FAQed or not will settle the debate for what GW intended. But it will not alter the conclusions of this thread, which aimed to determine the RULE AS WRITTEN.


And if you are so keen to wait for the FAQ to settle it all... why resurrect this thread a week after everyone stopped debating ?

The Shredder wrote:

BlastaRasta wrote:

an ability is a special rule listed in a data slate

Do you have a rulebook reference for that?

page 5 of any index - it will list "abilities" and states "many units have special abilities that are not covered by the core rule; these will be described here"

Stratagems are not abilities. They are stratagems.

BlastaRasta wrote:

The Shredder wrote:

BlastaRasta wrote:

an ability is a special rule listed in a data slate

Do you have a rulebook reference for that?

page 5 of any index - it will list "abilities" and states "many units have special abilities that are not covered by the core rule; these will be described here"

Stratagems are not abilities. They are stratagems.

The issue here is that 'abilities' (in the Reinforcement Points rule) is not capitalised - and this is not necessarily a keyword.

The Shredder wrote:

BlastaRasta wrote:

The Shredder wrote:

BlastaRasta wrote:

an ability is a special rule listed in a data slate

Do you have a rulebook reference for that?

page 5 of any index - it will list "abilities" and states "many units have special abilities that are not covered by the core rule; these will be described here"

Stratagems are not abilities. They are stratagems.

The issue here is that 'abilities' (in the Reinforcement Points rule) is not capitalised - and this is not necessarily a keyword.

But in the definition of the reinforcement points, "abilities" is not capitalised. So, I don't think it reffer to a keyword.

Isn't that what I just said?

The Shredder wrote:

Isn't that what I just said?

I read too fast. I thought you said it was written in the stratagem definition.

Precisely. Ability is not an in-game notion, it's a broad term they are using to describe "something that allows you to do something". Stratagems are abilities. Doctrines are abilities.

The problem is then : "Why do they say Abilities OR psychic powers ?".

And then you remember GW is the company that wrote "A Raider may embark up to 10 Drukhari Infantry or Incubi", and you realize all this is vain and makes no sense whatsoever.