New Tournament Rules and new map update. Nelvaanian is Out, Anchorhead Cantina is in. Biggest change is now you score by figure cost NOT by deployment cards. Lose one trooper, opponent gets three points.

https://images-cdn.fantasyflightgames.com/filer_public/98/3d/983d702c-65c6-49b4-aecd-1e3b718a400d/swi_tournament_regulations_v20_text_version.pdf

Also, big rules update for a lot of games:

https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/news/2017/1/11/op-rules-update/

Does that mean that Reinforcements can potentially cost you 3 VP a pop?

[edit] no, doesn't look like it, the opponent just loses those 3 VP if the reinforcement lives to the end of the round.

Not a huge fan of this hitting in the middle of the regional season.

Does that mean that Reinforcements can potentially cost you 3 VP a pop?

[edit] no, doesn't look like it, the opponent just loses those 3 VP if the reinforcement lives to the end of the round.

What it appears to mean is that if a group reinforces and then that figure is cleared, you still get 3 points. An Elite Storm group that reinforced once becomes worth 12 points. Twice becomes worth 15. But an Elite Snow group that is completely cleared is only worth 9 points, assuming none are reinforced.

This is awesome.

So now if you kill a full group of elite snowtroopers, you only get 9 points instead of 10?

Elite saboteurs are worth 4 each, so 8 points total?

Does reinforcements "undestroy" a figure? If so, your opponent would lose points when you reinforce. Victory points are the total of all destroyed figures, but if you reinforce, is that figure still destroyed?

You would think they would answer this as it is a pretty obvious question.

So now if you kill a full group of elite snowtroopers, you only get 9 points instead of 10?

Elite saboteurs are worth 4 each, so 8 points total?

Does reinforcements "undestroy" a figure? If so, your opponent would lose points when you reinforce. Victory points are the total of all destroyed figures, but if you reinforce, is that figure still destroyed?

You would think they would answer this as it is a pretty obvious question.

As far as the first bit, about snowies only coming out to 9 points, but others coming out higher (like sabs or jets) I think that's probably how it's going to be.

But the reinforcement thing is a bigger question that I hope they address soon.

Interesting, is this to combat trooper lists?

Interesting, is this to combat trooper lists?

I assume so.

It was really frustrating to kill 2 stormtroopers and have the third run away and deny you those 9 points. Or to then have one reinforce.

Getting 9 points of out a card of troopers was a challenge and having one run away to deny those points happened a lot. It was a bit frustrating.

This should alleviate that strategy.

Interesting, is this to combat trooper lists?

I assume so.

It was really frustrating to kill 2 stormtroopers and have the third run away and deny you those 9 points. Or to then have one reinforce.

Getting 9 points of out a card of troopers was a challenge and having one run away to deny those points happened a lot. It was a bit frustrating.

This should alleviate that strategy.

Yup, I would always try to split up some deployment groups, when running a trooper list. This totally makes sense, though.

Reinforcement does not undefeat a figure, it reinforces a new figure. No VP changes hand when you reinforce, just more points to be taken by your opponent by defeating more figures.

(Well, the wording of Reinforcements uses place, but I don't see it make sense otherwise.)

Ya it makes sense and definitely makes Trooper lists less powerful. Now instead of potentially denying or at least delaying your opponent points you are adding more potential points to the pot for your own gain of having a trooper back on the board.

This is great news for the skirmish scene.

Reinforcement does not undefeat a figure, it reinforces a new figure. No VP changes hand when you reinforce, just more points to be taken by your opponent.

are you sure though?

They make a point to say, put your defeated figures on their corresponding card to keep track of who's defeated.

If the figure is back on the game, that little way of tracking goes out the window.

For the record I hate trooper point denial, and I hate reinforcements, but in the League I'm running starting this weekend, I'll be ruling that if you play reinforcements, that figure is no longer defeated (he's running around fighting after all) and those points go away until he's killed again. At least that'll be my call until an official explanation is given. I can see it both ways, but the alternative seems almost too punishing on trooper lists.

I think the best way to think of this is Points-For-Kills .

You kill something in a group, you get the figure cost of that figure in VP. If a Trooper was reinforced you can get more points than the group was worth originally.

Also: think of groups with group cost / # of figures that divides down to something like 3.5 as having a kill tax if they have a higher figure cost (for eSabs and eJets where they're 4 points per figure) and a kill discount if they have a lower figure cost (like eTusken Raiders where they're 3 points per figure). eSnowtroopers have a similar kill discount at 10 to deploy and 9 when killed. It's a small way for FFG to tune the values of each figure (which was, of course, the point for Campaign since the beginning, it just applies to Skirmish now too).

Reinforcement does not undefeat a figure, it reinforces a new figure. No VP changes hand when you reinforce, just more points to be taken by your opponent.

are you sure though?

No, but the next FAQ will tell us in due time.

All I'm going to say is the document is poorly worded in at least two or three sections that refer to victory points and figures. FFG really needs to clarify this in an article and clean up the wording in this document. Specifically spelling out awarding vps in the defeated figure section if that is the intent would go a long way towards that. And clarifying why defeated figures are counted up in tie breakers if you've already scored victory points for them now? (Which was never the case before obviously).

Am I against vp for each unit killed? Not at all. But it is not well articulated in this update and neither are the inevitable questions which should be addressed if this is their game changing intent. I'd argue it needs a clarification article from the developers similar to when the pass rule was implemented and when the erratas dropped. We need to know what their goal is in this and then how it plays out in real situations - I.e. Figures that cost more than their deployment group, reinforcements, etc.

And sorry for double post, but where is this in the FAQ? I mean, if they're changing the scoring for skirmish, but only for tournaments, can you really tell me that makes any sense?

It is possible the new FAQ isn't loading for me (I can only find the one from July it looks like) but I did clear my cookies for FFG and it's still showing me the same FAQ that doesn't talk about a change in VP scoring for figures instead of deployment cards. This has to be in the FAQ for it to be the way it's supposed to be, right?

All I'm going to say is the document is poorly worded in at least two or three sections that refer to victory points and figures. FFG really needs to clarify this in an article and clean up the wording in this document. Specifically spelling out awarding vps in the defeated figure section if that is the intent would go a long way towards that. And clarifying why defeated figures are counted up in tie breakers if you've already scored victory points for them now? (Which was never the case before obviously).

Am I against vp for each unit killed? Not at all. But it is not well articulated in this update and neither are the inevitable questions which should be addressed if this is their game changing intent. I'd argue it needs a clarification article from the developers similar to when the pass rule was implemented and when the erratas dropped. We need to know what their goal is in this and then how it plays out in real situations - I.e. Figures that cost more than their deployment group, reinforcements, etc.

100% agree as a UX designer and writer, there are a lot of confusing statements and conflicting messages in this latest doc.

Interesting, is this to combat trooper lists?

No, this, along with the increasing numbers of AOE damage introduced into the game, the Jabba additonal VP gain, and the ISB HQ mission punishing large figure counts, doesn't combat trooper lists.

It makes them obsolete.

By extension, it makes Empire as a faction largely obsolete, because unlike Mercs and Rebs, Imps don't really have any terribly efficient pieces that aren't three-figure trooper groups.

I honestly don't know what to think of it yet. I appreciate the breath of fresh air into the competitive scene, I was getting tired of playing with and against the same stuff all the time. But this... this is just huge. It might actually have a bigger impact on skirmish play than the RG/Off/Sab errata.

And sorry for double post, but where is this in the FAQ? It is possible the new FAQ isn't loading for me

The new FAQ is not out yet. It seems the tournement rules needed to be updated in concert with the other games (for the organized play division) and there wasn't time to get the FAQ polished yet.

This isn't the only thing that we're waiting changes in the faq for.

Here's my 2 cents.

I read this rule as... you count has having points equal to to cost of figures on your opponent's deployment cards.... not how many you've killed.

So, If you kill 2 troopers, I put 2 on my deployment card. You now have 6 points.

If I reinforce a trooper and he comes back on. I now have 2 troopers on the board, and one on my deployment card. Which means you have 3 points.

If you kill that trooper again, you're back to 6 points and I now have 2 dead troopers.

So like "undestroying" a trooper.

Reinforcements says " Use at the start of a round. Choose 1 of your defeated Troopers that has a reinforcement cost of 3 or less. Place that figure adjacent to any other figure of its group."

You specifically choose a defeated trooper and put it back. Not a new copy. One that already died.

The question is, doe you gain points and never lose them or is the point state fluid and dependent on what is in your "dead pile"?

Points gained from mission rules, or stuff like Jabba's Nefarious Gains ability will remain (unless something spends them like Jabba's Order Hit ability.)

I assume you also only gain the extra point from attachments like Cross Training, when the whole group dies.

That's how I understand it. Not sure if I like it yet though. It's certainly a big change and seems to be trying to combat the "run away with your last guy to deny points" technique.

On one hand, it's an important and viable tactic. On the other hand, it can be quite annoying. Certainly interesting to see how it affects 3 figure groups. The fact you had to kill all 3 of them was a big part of their strength and survivability.

This is how I am reading it as well but I would love some clarification and an article explaining the change, examples and why.

I asked FFGOP on twitter for some clarification. They did say it is correct that we score VP's on figure cost. Now what that means with regards to specific instances, I've put the question out there and hopefully they will respond. And now, as a1bert said too, hopefully they will update their FAQ asap with as many specifics on this as possible.

It's just confusing that they would reveal something this game changing in this manner and this muddy I'm glad that most people have kept their heads instead of getting into arguments (though I have seen some that got heated sadly).

So the way I read it, there's 2 parts to it:

1. "get VP equal to deployment cost when entire card is destroyed" becomes "get VP equal to reinforcement cost when a figure is destroyed"

2. "get VP later when entire card is destroyed" becomes "get VP now"

For example, if I kill 1/3 eStorm (so now 2/3 left) , I get 3VP right away, 4VP if I got Jabba (and may spend it)

You reinforce back to 3/3 eStorm? Sure thing I'll kill one again and get another 3VP right away

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong though

Interesting, is this to combat trooper lists?

No, this, along with the increasing numbers of AOE damage introduced into the game, the Jabba additonal VP gain, and the ISB HQ mission punishing large figure counts, doesn't combat trooper lists.

It makes them obsolete.

By extension, it makes Empire as a faction largely obsolete, because unlike Mercs and Rebs, Imps don't really have any terribly efficient pieces that aren't three-figure trooper groups.

I honestly don't know what to think of it yet. I appreciate the breath of fresh air into the competitive scene, I was getting tired of playing with and against the same stuff all the time. But this... this is just huge. It might actually have a bigger impact on skirmish play than the RG/Off/Sab errata.

It will have an impact but it won't weaken trooper lists as much as it seems. Keep in mind that your list is still 40 points total and you still need the 40 points to win. Troopers will still be prominent. It may just reduce the prevalence of lists that are all or mostly troopers and encourage the use of other more durable figures alongside them. A trooper swarm will still have the statistical advantage over a list with a small number of expensive figures, this doesn't change that a bit.