Even though the WD sample armies ar copies from the rulebook there's also a Rivendell guard sample army at GW's website supporting the same trend. You pay both values for the first army. It's getting hard to claim typo's all over the place, so I have to accept GW's interpretation/ruling. This conclusion will make some legendary formations very expensive and we'll see less named heroes on the battlefields, but that's the way it seems to be.

_________________
LotR and WotR army builder

It will also mean having a quick check of your opponents roster to make sure that they have done the math properly too...

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

Strange people think you have to pay two costs for the command company. I would just say the command company is the X and the rest of your formation is Y times the number of other companies.
My reason is that the heroes in legendary formations ain't that strong and won't be worth that much.

What? I'm confused by this. You pay twice? For the entire formation? Is this just Legendaries?

There's just too many GW-related examples of having to pay both X and Y for the first Command company. I have yet too find any examples that supports paying the first price only. Even the authors of the book paid both X and Y and that alone convinces me.

Personally I think Legendary formations should be expensive. Remember that the cost not only includes a named Hero but upgrades like banners and such as well. Each formation too has one or more special rules, both common and unique. Add these all up and in most cases the cost is justified. And there is at least one gem: I was originally planning to field 4 companies of Warriors of the Dead with Captain and banner. I realized later that 4 co's of the Court of the Dead King was actually 60 points cheaper and included the Dead King, banner and a cool special rule. In this case the legendary formation was the real bargoon.

_________________
"...No other mortal men could have endured it, none but the Dunedain of the North."

Sign me up for the X+Y Legendary Companies. They would be way too much of a bargain if they only cost X.

to Erunion: true enough, that is how Apocalypse works, yet I can counter that quite easily by arguing from the Dogs of War standpoint, which is worded closer to the way in WotR.

Until the issue is solved by GW, I think that the best answer is upon whatever your opponent/tournie organizer agrees.

_________________
Never hit a man with glasses. Hit him with a baseball bat.

First, I don't think Dogs of War even exists anymore, correct? Second, of the two, Apocalypse and the datafaxes are the newer precedence, and this format is supported by many (although not all) printed examples. Finally, if there is a question as to how a ruling goes, I generally try to play it in the way that is best for my opponent, so that I am not accused of trying to manipulate the rules in my favor if I am found to be wrong. Thus, I will be paying the more expensive cost unless told otherwise by GW.

_________________
Respectfully,
Jonathan

Do what is right, love mercy, and walk humbly

Battle Companies

Ok, to try and put this issue to bed.

The best example I can find that advocates the X+(Y*C) formula would be the Clansmen of Lamedon and Axemen of Lossarnach.

You pay the listed cost for the first company, and then, if you choose, may pay the additional points cost to include Angbor/Forlong, thus turning your company into a Legendary Formation.

With the standard Legendary Formations, there is no 'may,' you pay the listed cost for each company in the formation, then add the first printed value to arrive at the total unit cost.

For example, Osgiliath Veterans will cost between 155 - 330 points, not between 120 - 295.

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

That is how I read it, John.

_________________
Respectfully,
Jonathan

Do what is right, love mercy, and walk humbly

Battle Companies

I asked a member of the design studio who was involved in the playtesting and the answer is that the command company is X+Y.

I hate to bring up an old topic, and I dearly hope that someone around here has the "Thread Necromancer" Magic Card graphic as I love seeing it.

How does this make any of the Legendary Formations remotely worth it? Especially with the Rohan ones, compared to their Epic Heroes?

4 Companies of Riders of Rohan with a banner led by Erkenbrand: 230pts

4 Companies of Erkenbrand's Riders: 275pts

The first selection, with Erkenbrand the Epic Hero gains Epic Charge and makes Erky more durable in duels at the loss of 1 Strength. For 45 points LESS.

How is that efficient?

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

Lord Hurin , some are a better deal than others.

Take Gondor for example:

Osgiliath Vets: 120 pts gets you a 3 might hero, banner and immunity to terror. Not too shabby really (Hero + banner should be approx 110 pts alone)

Or Grey Company: 75 pts gets you a 3 might Hero with a minor special ability. Actually a bit of a bargain.

Some of the others I'd never take, nor would I take some of the other basic formations for their costs. GW just can't cost consistently.

But hey, if you want me to get a 40pt Company for free when I take the Grey Company.....

This whole discussion surprises me, particularly since so many are using GW's examples in battle reports and the like because they are renowned for inaccuracies as are the books (in many sourcebooks, you'll find the costs of the pictured armies are wrong for example), but what surprises me more is that the designers have ruled against what the book says:



If they are included in the BASE cost (X in this case), then why do you have to buy an additional company's worth of points as an ADDITIONAL cost (Y in the given examples)?

I will always check with my opponents, but they are generally friends, so we will either come up with a house rule based on how this rule has been written in all of the entries with no rules in the book stating contrary or play the "house rule" that the designers have randomly decided they intended it to be.

Regardless, GW generally likes to promote their named characters over "the unnamed heroes of Middle-Earth" and, let's face it, they'd make more money from selling named characters and are going to want them to look a better option and not all are Epic Heroes, so they will want to sell them as Legendary Formations, which mean you also have to buy the other models necessary. From a business standpoint (which is usually included in their rules as well as the models), it makes more sense.

Regardless, the official ruling from GW seems to be 100% contrary to the opposite of the book's specific wording stating that they are the command company and included in the cost. I think tis should be brought to the aforementioned designer's attention and sent in as an FAQ because, frankly, when they rule against what the book says, they're being stupid.

I think it is the X+Y option. In the battle report at the start of the rulebook (Rohan v Isengard) there are three Legendary Formations: Sharku's Hunters, Erkenbrand's Riders and Ugluk's Raiders.

Sharku's Hunters (3 comps. bows) cost 165pts. This is 75 + 90 (30 per company).

Erkenbrand's Riders (6 comps.) cost 355pts. This is 115 + 240 (40 per company).

Ugluk's Raiders (3 comps.) cost 205. This is 115 + 90 (30 per company).

Also, the profiles say (115) points + (30) per company. In this example, if I want 4 companies, I pay 120 for that and 115 for the command models and special rules. That's how I take it to be.

I can understand you saying that because it is in the examples, that's why, I can also agree with doing it because the designer said so. What I can't agree with is when the rules say "Buy this, with everything included in the cost" and people say it means "Buy the command as an 'upgrade' to the first company that must be bought separately".

The command models and special rules are stated as being in the command company, the first company bought, included in the base cost. This states specifically that you needn't buy another company, unless you want to increase the formation size.

I still can't understand why the designer disagreed with the rule that they obviously helped to write.

I can tell you in all honesty, that when I saw the formation entries for the first time I saw two types of entry:

"25pts per company" and "75pts + 45pts per company".

I did not find that in the least confusing or ambiguous. In the former case I was supposed to pay 25 pts per company and in the later I was supposed to pay 75pts + 45pts per company. It might have been confusing had it said "+45pts per additional company" or somesuch.

I think you are being a little unfair to the rules designers to claim they are going against what they have written. I get that many people read it another way, hence the threads, but what they are saying is perfectly consistent with what they have written.

Yes, the X+Y is the correct way to go. I guess I just underestimate the usefulness of some abilities, especially ones that are "free" in the SBG.

The fact that some Formations are costed in such a way that it would be absolutely stupid to take them bothers me to no end. King's Guard and Dunedain, I'm looking at you!

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

and in this way all Rohan legendary formations are absolutely useless

_________________
OFTENTIME,THE SHADOWS SERVE NOT ONLY TO CONCEAL THOSE WHO WISH TO DO EVIL,BUT ALSO PROTECT THOSE WHO SEEK TO DO GOOD

The clarity of them going against what they have said is actually in the profile, where it says that they are the command company and included in the base cost. It states that they are part of the first company and you don't pay anything extra.

I will agree that if it said "per additional company" it would remove the ambiguation from THAT part of the ruling, but if you continue to read, it is clarified.

It's been asked and responded with you have to pay for a company as well, so that must be the official ruling, but I still would like to point out to that designer that they have stated, specifically, that you don't have to.