It's in both the EA Compendium 2.0 (Hojyn) and the Epic Armageddon Handbook (Markconz).

It didn't even cross my mind that it might not be in the 'official' formats. It's one of the problems with a lack of a single defined rulebook (hoping to see that soon). An 'official' Rulebook, plus an 'official' FAQ, plus an 'official' Errata, is just too cumbersome. Especially when the Errata/FAQ are 30 pages in total. Even more so when the 'official' rules are only 50 pages (including pictures), army lists not included.

EDIT : It's in the 'official' FAQ, not the Errata.



The text is in blue, so if you have an older version of the FAQ, it might not be in there.

Morgan Vening

Yep, its in the FAQ.

I play that way.  Always have.

_________________
Necron Army Champion
"Do not come whining to me because you are weaker than your enemy." - Alexander Corvinus

That's news to me. Is "reserve formation" defined as any formation that doesn't set up on the table?

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

From 6.1.6 official rules.


While it doesn't explicitly state it, it's fairly comprehensive. With regards Eldar Webways, the FAQ says



Seems fairly straightforward that Webway is a reserve style.

Morgan Vening

Guess so.  Here is the problem... The original rules read like this:



The way the sentence structure is done, the formations set up on the board and the reserves are referred to as the "player's army".  At no point does it actually distinguish one from the other in the subsequent sentence which explains why so many people have played it as I described.  Apparently it wasn't so 'tidied up' if it didn't make the 2008 Errata.  But that's fine.  It will be a welcome change for anyone playing against Matt's Necrons.

And my Elysians.  Oh great.  

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

There probably should be a comma or something in there, though it's still probably grammatically correct.

I always read the underlined parts to refer to each other, with the "in reserve" a seperate thing, not an alternating thing.

_________________
"EPIC: Total War" Lead Developer

Now living in Boston... any EPIC players want to meet up?

I agree with you Mosc and MNB; I actually liked the idea of this form of meta-game because it meant that the off-table and on-table forces balanced out. Otherwise armies with a large off-table contingent could potentially be out-manoeuvered by a more numerous opponent. However, I got shouted down by Neal, Greg and Sotec. I might add that in reality it did not make much difference either way except to speed up the game a little where there is a large contingent of off-table forces.

The only part where you do need to follow the set procedure (in the UK) is where the Marines can opt to change their transport at the start of the game - within certain restrictions. Here the steps are something like:-
1) Identify the opposing army, Marines declare their formation transport options
2) Place objective markers
3) Space ships and contents are set aside
4) Set up garrisons alternately
5) Other reserve formations are set aside in their transports, webway or as Teleporters
6) Set up ground forces alternately

_________________
"Play up and play the game"

Vitai lampada
Sir Hemry Newbolt

I could see the argument for it.  Its just the language is very clear as written when they say "these formations" they are referring to formations in reserve and on board.  It doesn't matter though since it has since been changed, but really somebody should have thrown that into the 2008 Errata at some point.  That's a big one to miss.

Chroma, if I can be annoying (and I know I am) can you PLEASE make a note for the new rules write-up so it doesn't get missed again?  <--This isn't to infer YOU missed it, only that it was missed.

_________________
author of Syncing Forward and other stories...

It's a dog-eat-dog world, and I've got my Milkbone underwear on.

From the FAQ

I'm glad I'm not the only person that misread this rule. My AdMech army gleefully approves.  

_________________
"I don't believe in destiny or the guiding hand of fate." N. Peart

I've always played it per the FAQ; before deployment I state what's in the reserve and how it'll be able to enter play. Not only is it the rules, it follows the golden rule of always being fair to your opponent.

_________________
http://www.troublemakergames.co.uk/
Epic: Hive Development Thread

We've always done the same and I agree about the "Golden Rule" too   .

fair? what makes i go-you go.... you know how the entire game is played, so unfair?