More AoA errata

In the grim darkness of the past?

More AoA errata

Postby RichN » Wed Mar 28, 2012 3:47 pm

Additional Errata and FAQ for the AoA lists. Check your army entry, multiple units have changes.
http://wabforum.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=120&t=10941

Please read - this errata changes previous rulings on Allies.

USE OF ALLIES AND MERCENARIES
A number of discussions have arisen around the inclusion of Allies and Mercenaries. The following additional guidelines apply to their use:
1. The host list determines the number of points available for allies and mercenaries, and may specify which troop types can be used. Other than this, the composition rules of the host list do not apply to the allied or mercenary contingent-so, for example, allied cavalry might be used with a host list that does not have a cavalry percentage in its composition parameters.
2. Any compulsory units in the list used to provide the allied/mercenary contingent must be taken first, though if there are not enough points for all the compulsories (unlikely) the player may choose which to leave out.
3. Any restrictions in the allied/mercenary list construction, such as “upgrade every second unit” or “must be 2 of x to every 1 of y” apply to the allied/mercenary contingent.
4. The global restriction on the use of war machines means that players may not take any war machines as part of an allied/mercenary contingent.
5. Other than the above the allied/mercenary list composition percentages do not apply to the allied/mercenary contingent selected.

The Allies and Mercenaries (Unreliable) rule applies to all troops taken from another list and using points from an Allies or Allies and Mercenaries percentage in the list composition parameters. It also applies to any units in the main body of the list that are marked as being subject to the Allies and Mercenaries (Unreliable) rule. Being titled “Mercenary X” does not automatically make units subject to the rule.
Terrain, Modeling and More... Chicago Terrain Factory
User avatar
RichN
 
Posts: 675
Joined: Tue Mar 27, 2007 7:41 am
Location: Darien IL

Re: More AoA errata

Postby socalwarhammer » Thu Mar 29, 2012 3:23 am

Good, at least it limits cherry-picking. I feel it was a pretty good ruling by Martin and will help with game balance. See you all in 3 weeks.
Only the dead have seen the end of war....Plato

Check out my blogs at http://nwhistoricalwargames.wordpress.com/ & http://gigharbor40k.wordpress.com/
User avatar
socalwarhammer
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:14 am
Location: Southern California

Re: More AoA errata

Postby mikebutcher » Thu Mar 29, 2012 10:38 am

Well it is a bit less confusing...
User avatar
mikebutcher
 
Posts: 79
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 9:59 pm
Location: Stevens Point

Re: More AoA errata

Postby Nostromo » Sat Apr 14, 2012 9:14 pm

I don't think it changes much, as this was pretty much our interpretation anyway.
No war machines is limiting, but I never seem to fit them in 2000/2800 anyway.

I think the main clarification is 1) the compulsory choices must be taken- but it seems few lists have these, and 2) every other unit type limitations apply, which we always thought they did- so still no 1 unit of Andalusian Jinetes with bow.
User avatar
Nostromo
 
Posts: 242
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2009 10:24 am
Location: Spooner, WI


Return to Warhammer Ancients Battles

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron