Just posted! Will provide link.

FAQ

Tournament rules

Summary:

Kari's Surge ability ignores line of sight.

Ardus can take advantage of Combat Ingenuity on a friendly unit when he is using their surge ability.

The maximum value of a unit's cost is equal to its setup cost, i.e. adding trays doesn't increase the value of the unit.

Woohoo! I was right about not being able to assign damage to figure upgrades in the middle tray of a 3x1 unit!

2 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

Woohoo! I was right about not being able to assign damage to figure upgrades in the middle tray of a 3x1 unit!

Hah you think so? I think it means I CAN target a figure upgrade, so long as it doesn't split the unit when it dies.

If assigning damage to a figure upgrade that is in the middle tray in the front rank of a unit would cause that unit to be split into two separate groups of trays, must that damage be assigned to another eligible figure?

A: Yes. Example: A Spearmen unit equipped with Front Line Rune Golem has only its front rank remaining. The Rune Golem figure is in the middle tray of the unit’s front rank. That figure upgrade cannot be assigned damage that would cause the unit to be split into two groups.

Another important ruling: units included in a different faction can only equip neutral upgrades.

Just now, Budgernaut said:

Another important ruling: units included in a different faction can only equip neutral upgrades.

That was the one I was most curious about, glad they went the safe route

3 minutes ago, Glucose98 said:

Hah you think so? I think it means I CAN target a figure upgrade, so long as it doesn't split the unit when it dies.

If assigning damage to a figure upgrade that is in the middle tray in the front rank of a unit would cause that unit to be split into two separate groups of trays, must that damage be assigned to another eligible figure?

A: Yes. Example: A Spearmen unit equipped with Front Line Rune Golem has only its front rank remaining. The Rune Golem figure is in the middle tray of the unit’s front rank. That figure upgrade cannot be assigned damage that would cause the unit to be split into two groups.

Okay, there is still some abiguity. I've heard some people argue that if there is a Rune Golem in the middle, then you can still target it because you will just replace it from a tray in the back row. Since the whole front row is also the back row, you would just shift trays from the left or right to fill in where the Rune Golem was. I disagreed with that and the FAQ justifies my line of thinking.

However, you are correct that it seems you can target figures in the middle as long as there is still a figure remaining in the middle if the targeted figure were to be removed. This is contrary to how I interpreted the rules.

2 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

Another important ruling: units included in a different faction can only equip neutral upgrades.

That is a fairly big nerf to the amount of upgrades most units can take. Makes Kari / Ankaur's ability's significantly worse.

8 minutes ago, Budgernaut said:

Woohoo! I was right about not being able to assign damage to figure upgrades in the middle tray of a 3x1 unit!

I read that as I could assign damage as long as it doesn't cause the split with that damage. So I feel they did not clarify anything on that one (everything else was oddly well written for FFG). Per that I could assign the first wound, but not the second to the golem if it split it.

1 minute ago, Budgernaut said:

Okay, there is still some abiguity. I've heard some people argue that if there is a Rune Golem in the middle, then you can still target it because you will just replace it from a tray in the back row. Since the whole front row is also the back row, you would just shift trays from the left or right to fill in where the Rune Golem was. I disagreed with that and the FAQ justifies my line of thinking.

However, you are correct that it seems you can target figures in the middle as long as there is still a figure remaining in the middle if the targeted figure were to be removed. This is contrary to how I interpreted the rules.

So do you agree that you can simplify the rule to state:

You can kill a figure upgrade in a center tray so long as it is NOT the last remaining unit in that tray? (And you're always allowed to assign a wound to a figure upgrade in the center if it doesn't kill it)

1 minute ago, Darthain said:

I read that as I could assign damage as long as it doesn't cause the split with that damage. So I feel they did not clarify anything on that one (everything else was oddly well written for FFG). Per that I could assign the first wound, but not the second to the golem if it split it.

Good point. Back to square one with this discussion.

Okay, just to clarify that ruling on targeting figures in the middle. I am targeting my opponent's Spearman, which has 3 trays let, all in the front rank (which is also the back rank). The middle tray has a Rune Golem figure upgrade. I roll and get 4 damage, a mortal strike, and (cause I'm lucky) 2 accuracy results. I can use my first accuracy to target the Golem, and deal a mortal strike. Then, when I go to deal the 4 damage to the Rune Golem with the second accuracy result, my opponent says, "Uh-uh. That would split the unit into two groups, so you have to deal those 4 damage elsewhere. But good job dealing a wound, that was cool." Do I have that right?

Oh I see, it's still controversial. Blast it!

2 minutes ago, Parakitor said:

Okay, just to clarify that ruling on targeting figures in the middle. I am targeting my opponent's Spearman, which has 3 trays let, all in the front rank (which is also the back rank). The middle tray has a Rune Golem figure upgrade. I roll and get 4 damage, a mortal strike, and (cause I'm lucky) 2 accuracy results. I can use my first accuracy to target the Golem, and deal a mortal strike. Then, when I go to deal the 4 damage to the Rune Golem with the second accuracy result, my opponent says, "Uh-uh. That would split the unit into two groups, so you have to deal those 4 damage elsewhere. But good job dealing a wound, that was cool." Do I have that right?

Oh I see, it's still controversial. Blast it!

I think you're correct in this. I think the FAQ sentence has more information to parse, and it seems to follow the spirit of -- You cannot split a unit. Does this damage assignment split the unit? No? You're fine.

So we choose 4 terrain when we build an army (max 6 occupancy) , each round of the tournament has a deployment and objective, and we play to them. Can't say I like it overall (prefer objective control, but such is life. It makes bidding less important.

Deployment advantage also doesn't exist, more deployments means dropping several units until you are even.

1 minute ago, Darthain said:

So we choose 4 terrain when we build an army (max 6 occupancy) , each round of the tournament has a deployment and objective, and we play to them. Can't say I like it overall (prefer objective control, but such is life. It makes bidding less important.

Yeah, that limit on the total occupancy of all terrain on your 4 terrain cards to 6 completely took me by surprise. So if I bring that Elevated terrain with capacity 6, then no terrain on any of my other 3 terrain cards can have any occupancy for trays. Interesting.

Yeah, disappointed that we don't bring our own objective cards, but it should make setup quicker and have a more even playing field across the tournament to evaluate players.

I wonder if organizer-based objective / deployment is just to keep a little bit of consistency in the rounds, reduce some downtime picking, and diminish some really powerful potential list / objective / deployment combos ?

1 minute ago, Glucose98 said:

I wonder if organizer-based objective / deployment is just to keep a little bit of consistency in the rounds, reduce some downtime picking, and diminish some really powerful potential list / objective / deployment combos ?

I read that as 'remove all the fun'

Just now, Darthain said:

I read that as 'remove all the fun'

Yeah I agree to some extent, but a tournament should have a bit more structure at the cost of fun

This is super interesting --

Starting July 19th, 2017, the legal deployments for the season are: Battle Lines, Careful Approach, and Hammer and Anvil. Also starting on July 19th, 2017, the legal objectives for the season are: Bounty, Break Their Defenses, and Supply Raid.

For the following season—starting in October, 2017– the following deployments will be legal: Careful Approach, Hammer and Anvil, and Standoff. Starting at the same time, the following objectives will be legal: Bounty, Supply Raid, and Demoralize Their Forces.

WHAT!? (Sorry, I'm posting as I find new things as I read). Looks like, in an effort to diminish the historically powerful tactic of Multiple Small Units (MSU), the tournament rules state that the player with more units deploys until he has the same number of units remaining as his opponent. Then the first player places a unit, and it alternates as usual. Very interesting. Very weird and unexpected, in my opinion.

I guess my biggest problem with this is that we have standard rules, but now whenever you play a pickup game, it's always going to be tournament rules, so this will always be the way setup happens. Which, if MSU is really a problem, then I guess it's a good thing.

Glad to see we also got the "Aggressive Musician" clarification.

The Premeasuring rule is interesting as well. Does that mean I can't just use the '5' end to measure out to nothing in particular to see where I'll move to? That's what I got out of it.

11 minutes ago, Parakitor said:

WHAT!? (Sorry, I'm posting as I find new things as I read). Looks like, in an effort to diminish the historically powerful tactic of Multiple Small Units (MSU), the tournament rules state that the player with more units deploys until he has the same number of units remaining as his opponent. Then the first player places a unit, and it alternates as usual. Very interesting. Very weird and unexpected, in my opinion.

I guess my biggest problem with this is that we have standard rules, but now whenever you play a pickup game, it's always going to be tournament rules, so this will always be the way setup happens. Which, if MSU is really a problem, then I guess it's a good thing.

This was the most interesting ruling in my opinion. I've never played this way before so I can't say if it's good or bad. I just know that it's opposite from any other game I've played.

49 minutes ago, Glucose98 said:

So do you agree that you can simplify the rule to state:

You can kill a figure upgrade in a center tray so long as it is NOT the last remaining unit figure in that tray? (And you're always allowed to assign a wound to a figure upgrade in the center if it doesn't kill it)

With the simple edit I made above, yes. I think that is an accurate simplification of how FFG is ruling this situation.

26 minutes ago, Parakitor said:

WHAT!? (Sorry, I'm posting as I find new things as I read). Looks like, in an effort to diminish the historically powerful tactic of Multiple Small Units (MSU), the tournament rules state that the player with more units deploys until he has the same number of units remaining as his opponent. Then the first player places a unit, and it alternates as usual. Very interesting. Very weird and unexpected, in my opinion.

I guess my biggest problem with this is that we have standard rules, but now whenever you play a pickup game, it's always going to be tournament rules, so this will always be the way setup happens. Which, if MSU is really a problem, then I guess it's a good thing.

I think I like this change, even as a potential future MSU player with the Bloodrage Swarm. Having MSU should inherently give you a different, viable path to victory with the units themselves. Having activation advantage is really just taking advantage of a game's limited system. The simultaneous action planning and the variable initiative means that this game already separates itself from many others by not giving an activation advantage to MSU armies. This ruling just ensures that there is no gimmicky advantage during deployment either. If that is the kind of advantage someone is expecting to gain from MSU, then I think they're choosing that army for the wrong reasons.

I have to laugh at this part of the tournament rules:

"While the organizer can mark the required play area on a table with tape or another simple method, providing playmats or a similar material in 3’ by 6’ dimensions to create friction and prevent figures from sliding out of place is strongly recommended."

I wouldn't consider FFG playmats as providing enough friction to make a difference compared to a plastic table. Most plastic tables would prevent slipping even more than an FFG playmat.