My friend brought up a very good point about archers in an army. The rules say that you can have a maximum of 33% archers. Everyone acepts this as 1/3 of an army, but that is not correct.

In a 30 model army with ten archers, the archers are 33.333% percent of the force (10/30=0.33333=33.333%), .333% higher than the rules state. Technically, you would need one more model to fall with in the limit. 10/31=0.32258=32.258%

I was waiting for 3 years for someone to notice that
have a coin

_________________
It's not about our past.
It's about our future.

Thank you for the coin.

If this rule ever became strictly enforced, it would dramatically change the game. Fiedling anoher 7-8pt model would become very difficult in low point games. I should have wrote this as an article. Maybe i still should.

I don't think I'll sleep tonight!

_________________
Painting again...

The rules text actually does say 1/3 though

lome is a bit strange about it: in the table(page 6) is written: 33%, but in the next line " You always have a Bow Limt of one third of the Warrior models in your army."

so which one is right?(and does it matter?)

Well there goes the whole point of this post.

GW will have to pick which system to go on if people complain and since everyone goes by 1/3, I can't really see them going to 33%. However, if this change benifited Space Marines they sure would change the rule.

The rule would matter BaruKhazad becuse if you always wanted exactly 1/3 archers in your army you would always have to fit in another model in your army if you went by 33% and becasue you are limited on points it would force you to drop extra wargear or take less elite troops. Which in return, would change the way your army played.

It's a third unless you really want them to write 33.333333333333333333etc %, cummon a bit of comonsense people.

I'd have to agree with Hithero. The difference between 33% and 1/3 does make a significant difference, and GW should have put 1/3 instead of 33% in the table. But it's easy to see that GW meant 1/3. The example armies stick to that limit (except for a mistake cleared up in the official FAQ), and the text lists the limit as 1/3. The box sets are also sold with 1/3 bow-armed warriors; this is the way they were intended to be fielded. Any other conclusion is simply stuck in the fine print.

Still, GW needs to put this in the FAQ.

No no, we can still be semantic and nit-picky. I could've sworn the point of this post was to circumvent common sense, anyway



I think it'd be a cold day in hell before an Orc bow could hurt a Space Marine...

_________________
Gondor: 2339pts
Rohan: 1318pts
Dwarves: 2482pts
Elves: 1091pts
Mordor: 2305pts
Isengard: 1762pts
Moria: 1463pts
Evil Men: 381pts

Why does it need putting in an FAQ? I've been to several GT's and have been playing for 7 years against players from all over Europe without the need for an FAQ so far, besides its not a Frequently Asked Question - first time I've seen it. Has anybody here actually designed armies before using 33% instead of a 1/3?

I think we should just go down both routes, and rather than working on a 1/3 or 33.333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333% basis, agree that 33.34% is most suitable.

_________________
Studio gaarew; Gaming armies, by gamers, for gamers.

I have never built an army based on 33.34%. I can't recall where I have ever built an army with exactly 1/3 archers (except the Easterling Army I posted a few days ago).




Now getting nit-picky the rules do say two differnt things. If you were in a game with a person following 33% and you were following 1/3, your opponent could claim that your army is not legal because you have too many archers, but at the same time you can claim you are following the rules. This puts the other person at a disadvantage becuse he or she is following a different set of rules, therefor making the game unfair.


Now as for my Space Marine comment. Maybe its just me and my friends, but we seem to feel that GW makes all rule changes in 40K to benifit Space Marines.

I'd like to see one example of how the difference between 1/3 and 33% makes the game unfair. I think we're arguing a moot point. How often would someone say "oh, ONE THIRD of my Warriors can have bows?!" and completely change their army list?

_________________
Gondor: 2339pts
Rohan: 1318pts
Dwarves: 2482pts
Elves: 1091pts
Mordor: 2305pts
Isengard: 1762pts
Moria: 1463pts
Evil Men: 381pts

That scenario would require a very small point game 400 or less.I have never seen it happen and probably never will. I was jsut getting nit-picky.

My take is that it should be A THIRD of your force.

Since its tricky to get the fraction "1/3" written "nicely" because you have to bugger about with superscripts or subscripts or whatever font tweaks your software requires... its easier to type 33% and assume it means the same thing.
I think someone mentioned earlier; "common sense, people".

_________________
www.scottswargaming.blogspot.com