arkangl said:

On page 16 of the coregame rulebook it states that:
"During the first round, the units must enter the gameboard. Their first action on the battlefield is always a one square move ([arrow image]), symbolizing the fact that the unit "enters" the gameboard. Once a unit has entered the game, it acts straight away! All options are not available (since the unit already moved once), but if you have a target in range, you may attack it immediately. You may also choose to perform a double movement, etc."

This means that in any official mission a unit that is put onto the board counts as having moved 1 square (1 action) and can make one more action that turn. That second action can then be used to move again (double movement) to create an entry space for the next unit.

arkangl said:

So you expect FFG to solve a problem that has originated from a houserule?

Easy fix for that one would be that it you can't deploy a unit it has to wait till the next round to deploy but you are never allowed to keep units back if you have got the space to deploy them.

OMG, you are not getting it. When it says under deployment if it says "Deploy" they don't move on to the table they are already there that means its before the game starts. If it says "enter" like described on page 16 like you are saying they can run and move onto the bored. Those are 2 different ways of setting up on the board. One starts on the table and one starts off of the table b/c for example how am I entering the table on the Descent mission if I start in the middle of the board there is no way to "enter" the table. My question is what happens if I play a mission like that and do not have enough room to fit all my guys and these are not house rules they are just using different version to the terrain and rules already made in a different configuration.

arkangl said:

fine , dont believe him ,  straight from one of the designers : 

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/571969/enter-vs-deploy

You both are not getting this. this is the FAQ forum so I want it in the FAQ so that they can explain it not that I don't believe it on there I am just saying I want it in the FAQ. And Oliver still didnt answer the person above him's questions about Descent and Patrol of how do they enter if they can be placed in the middle of the board.

arkangl said:

youre not phrasing it in that manner , you are phrasing it as though you are argueing the point that they ARE different , which as one of the creators has made clear (though on another site forum reply ) , they are not . while i understand you r point about user accounts , his is not a new account , and his participation has been in line to prove or lend creadance to his identity .

Sorry about that let me start over. I would like to see a FAQ on the deploy/enter ruling and explain what happens for missions like "descent" where you start in the middle of a board.

Also a thing I found should be in the FAQ what happens for missions like Descent also where it says place cover anywhere outside of the objective but the place cover rule states it can only be placed in the middle tiles of the map. Which one supercedes? Reason I say this is because of the Defenders deployment is all the way around the map and the Attackers are in the middle there is no specific center tiles. This is the only current mission I know of with this problem.

Every mission clearly states how terrain is placed and if it states that terrain is placed according to the normal rules then the "zones of cover" are marked on the map. I really don't see how this can cause problems.

There are no missions that have static deployment. For all missions you count as having taken one move action to get onto the board regardless of coming on from an edge or from the centre of the board. Again I don't see how this can cause problems. It is explained on page 16 of the rulebook as I already pointed out.

Dude do you know what FAQ stands for besides frenqently asked questions it means if they screw up on something in the rule book they announce what they screwed up OFFICIALLY not on the forums. One thing says one thing and the other says the other. IF THEY WANTED IT TO BE STATED THAT ALL MISSIONS GET ENTER THEN THEY SHOULDNT HAVE SCREWED UP TYPING. Unless its official I dont play it that way. It says deploy and in every other game deploy means it starts on the table b4 the game I dont care what it says on page 16. It needs to be put in a FAQ thats what they are for not you telling me what it is. Dont like my address of it deal with it.I am saying it needs to be in the FAQ not that its wrong.

No point posting here Ark anyway, no official reads or responds to these forums.

But as to your deploying in center question, scenario 2 Ambush scenario has different wording on deploying.  The defender starts deployed and like in most scenario's the attacker moves onto the table, sorry don't have scenario book with me to get exact quote.  I don't know the Descent scenario, is the deployment described differently in that to?  If not then it will follow the normal 'come on table' deployment rules, guessing by the scenario title these troops are air-dropped?  If so then normal deployment rules make sense.

Major Mishap said:

again , its not different :

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/571969/enter-vs-deploy

i would like to point out that the people who created the game DONT speak english as their first language , so there were bound to be some issues in translation .

FFG has not said or posted any changes to the rules that DG (Dust Games) came up with when they made this game . there for i choose to accept the word of one of the game crreators as opposed to just argueing a point that they have already clarified .

as you said MM , FFG hasnt answered any questions or participated , over on BGG , from time to time the game creators DO , and in this case did . they dont work for FFG , the contracts seem to spell out what is what for who , so DG has no reason to come on here and reply .

AA's comment that profiles mean nothing , that some one can come on a site and make a profile that says what ever is a double edged sword . the same thing could be said if some one came on HERE and made a profile saying they work for FFG , granted , it would eventually be killed when it was found out that they were not legit , but zamfiriscues profile is over a year old , and his participation in the last year has earned him the recognition that his profile IS legit .

FlorisH said:

I completely understand about the translation issue and can see both your point and Arkangel's, but I think it might be a good idea to include this clarification in the FAQ for those of us who don't frequent board game geek.

I have to be honest and say that while I was totally confused by the use of the word 'deploy' (being a big Incursion player) my group opted to use the normal rules for entering the board during patrol and found that it simulated patrolling units coming into view of the ambushers in drips and drabs.

I have played in tournaments for a long time now and this will require some kind of official ruling to prevent bloodshed of some description at events. Sadly, the majority of wargame tournament players have to put up with the occasional bum-hole who will argue semantics at the cost of having a fun game. I think that's what Arkangel wants to avoid at Dust tournaments.

The whole issue makes a lot of sense when you consider that the designers' first language is something other than English, but it could have been worse. I refer - in particular - to an incident where I told a Parisian waiter that I wanted a drill with cream for desert, (Une fraise = strawberries, or dentist's drill).

I won't tell you what I called his mother while I was trying to thank him... 

I take it that the guy on BGG is a writer of the rules then?  If so, he's a bit of a numpty for changing the set up description anyway, why would anybody do that regardless of language barriers?   So yes, it needs to be on an official errata as deploy on and arrive on are two different things.

Major Mishap said:

oliver zamfirescu , top of page 2 of the rule book as " cammander in chief " .

its not necessarily that they changed it , but when you write a rule set for another language , its not always apparent that there is a problem that was lost in translation when you consider that some words have similar meanings , and multiple meanings . nowhere in the rules does it EVER say that one player sets up ALL his forces before another , though from the word deploy , you could confer that idea based on other games out there atht do things that way , how ever it could also be confered based on other sections of the rules that only one unit "deploys" at a time , which is how it works normaly in line with the rules , OR that deployment zones are simply whaer you can choose to set up .

and from my own experience , writing house rules like the airplane rules and such , even if you read it 10 times , you may miss an issue of wordage because when YOU read it , you ALREADY understood what you were talking about . its a bit more af a challange to make it so EVRY  reader knows what you are thinking . then add in doing it in another language .

i dont deny that it should be in the official erratta , but as that BGG thread shows , this qusetion was already being asked in OCTOBER of last year along with other threads with rules questions that got answered over there , in some cases by players who knew where something was in the rules , and in a few cases by DG staff. the lack of response by FFG , or any official FAQ or errata means we are all we have here on this site .

unfortunatly , FFG  and DG dont seem that close , so its kinda like dealing with divorced parents when you have a question .

I've had a read of the scenarios and have played some with the 'deploy here' set up and will continue to play as written in the book and deploy any force that the rules tell you to.  Playing it any other way just doesn't make sense, how can a unit enter the board thats not on a table edge, its just not right.   

For example the second scenario Ambush, does it not make sense as its an ambush, thats what you do to the defender?  If you play with the defender moving on its just another kill all battle.  Has anybody contacted and received a reply at all?