Switch Theme:

Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit  [RSS] 

Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/16 19:09:45


Post by: Maelstrom808


So this was brought up in another thread: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/30/462099.page

It basically boils down to if you take a dedicated transport that must start in reserves, how does the unit that purchased the transport interact with the rule that says you may only put half of your units in reserves.

Here are the relevant posts:

Yakface
Spoiler:
yakface wrote: Great report guys!


I do have to say that I disagree with the interpretation that allows you to start so many of the Necron units off the table.

If you look at the rules for Deep Strike on page 36 you will see that they are very specific that models embarked upon transports that must be deployed via Deep Strike are ignored for figuring out how many units must start on the table:

"When working out how many units can be placed in reserve, units that must be deployed by Deep Strike (along with any models embarked upon them) are ignored."

The basic reserve rules, on page 124 on the other hand, say:

"Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so. A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes."

In that second sentence, the 'these purposes' can only possibly be the same 'purposes' as the sentence above it, so in actuality the sentence says:

'A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for [the purposes of working out how many other units may do so].'


Therefore we basically have two rules:

1) Units that always must start in reserves (like Flyers) are ignored.
2) A unit and its dedicated transport count as a single unit.


So yes, the flyers are ignored, but the fact that the embarked unit and the transport count as only a single unit in no way passes on the 'ignore' rule to the embarked unit.

Therefore, IMHO the Necron force should have had to start half of its non-flyer units on the table.


jy2
Spoiler:
jy2 wrote:Yakface,

Good to hear you chime in. I hadn't really given this much thought because I though the rule was rather clear. Upon further examination, it appears that the rule isn't quite as crystal clear. However, I still see a case for the troops to be in reserves with their dedicated transport.

"Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so. A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes."

The preceding quote can be interpreted as what you say:

'A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for [the purposes of working out how many other units may do so].'

However, that is only partially true. It can also be intepreted as follows:

'A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for [the purposes of working out how many other units may do so with the condition that units that must start in reserves are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so.].'

Now that is the full rule for reserves.

Also, a unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes could mean 2 things:

1. If the transport does not have to start in reserves, then it counts as a single unit when calculating how many units start off on the board.

2. If the transport must start off in reserves, then it counts as a single unit that is ignored when calculating how many units must start off on the board (because the flyer itself, with or without passengers, is still a single unit that is ignored).


Personally, RAW may not necessarily be 100% clear but I believe it is clear enough so that the way we played is legal.


I do agree, however, that IC's count as a separate unit. So the way we played - 1 IC in reserves and 1 IC on the table - was correct as well.


Myself
Spoiler:
Maelstrom808 wrote:It's a two part problem. The first problem is that you are not working out how many units must start on the table, but how many may be placed in reserve. The end results are very different.

Overlord = 1
Overlord = 1
Night Scythe + Warriors = Ignored
Night Scythe + Warriors = Ignored
Night Scythe + Warriors = Ignored
Night Scythe + Warriors = Ignored
Night Scythe + Warriors = Ignored
Night Scythe + Warriors = Ignored
Doom Scythe = Ignored
Doom Scythe = Ignored
Doom Scythe = Ignored

Total = 2
Cut in half = 1

So one unit that does not have to be deployed in reserves, may do so. The second part of the problem is that the Warriors do not actually HAVE to deploy in reserves with the Night Scythes. They are simply counted as one unit (and subsequently ignored) along with the Night Scythes for determining the number of units that may start in reserves, but once you figure out the actual units that may start in reserves or on the table, it looks like this:

Overlord
Overlord
Warriors
Warriors
Warriors
Warriors
Warriors
Warriors

and due to our previous figures, only one of those may be put into reserves.


Edit: now it's arguable that once you place them inside of a transport that must start in reserves, then they also must start in reserves, since the transport doesn't have a choice.

I think it might also comes down to timing as when all this is checked.

I'll offer another list for an example of what I'm talking about:

Overlord = 1
Overlord on CCB = 2 (possibly 1 as ICs count as 1 regardless of if they join a unit or not, but buying/embarking on a dedicated transport is not joining a unit)
Immortals in Nightscythe = Ignored
Immortals in Nightscythe = Ignored
Immortals in Nightscythe = Ignored
Warrior Block = 1
Doomscythe = Ignored
Doomscythe = Ignored
Doomscythe = Ignored

Total = 4 (possibly 3)
Cut in half and rounded up = 2 units that may go into reserves

So eligible units that may go into reserves:

Overlord
Overlord
CCB
Immortals
Immortals
Immortals
Warrior block

So you could put two of the Immortals in Night Scythes, one empty Night Scythe, and three Doom Scythes in reserves. The Warrior block, lone Overlord, Overlord on CCB, and one immortals unit would have to deploy.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/16 19:51:02


Post by: DeathReaper


Anything embarked on a dedicated transport that must start is reserves does not count for the 50% reserves rule.

You can have 10 drop pods filled with dudes and not deploy a single unit.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/16 19:53:55


Post by: Maelstrom808


DeathReaper wrote:Anything embarked on a dedicated transport that must start is reserves does not count for the 50% reserves rule.

You can have 10 drop pods filled with dudes and not deploy a single unit.


Rules citation, please? Not disagreeing with you just yet (as I'd love for that to be the case), but I'd like to see that statement backed up.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/16 20:00:12


Post by: DeathReaper


Page 36. Left Column, 3rd Graph, 3rd sentence (Check the parentheses in that graph).


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/16 20:07:06


Post by: Dooley


I think YOU proved the rules needed for the Drop pods to work.

Captain*
Tac *POD
Tac POD
Tac POD
TacPOD
Dread POD
Dread POD

The Captain rides with the Tac squad in the DP, thus EVERYONE is in a Dedicated Transport that MUST Deep Strike (See aforementioned rules). THerefore you DEPLOY NOTHING then on YOUR turn 1 Drop Pod Assault your required units.

The Captain Joins the Squad Pre game (Researves rule)
All are in Deep Striking Transports (Deep Strike rulles)

The ALL FLYER TRANSPORT lists get bonned because they MUST have something on the board at the end of a game turn or else they Auto loose (PLAYING A GAME SECTION) And since Slfyers dont show up till turn two *POOF* Phase out lol (Note Phase out does NOT ACTUALLY OCCUR its a referance for emphasis )


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/16 20:10:39


Post by: Happyjew


Nid Spore lists are just as screwed as Flyer Transport lists. Of course as it stands, right now Nids are the only army that can make a list where everything is in reserves and cannot come in til Turn 2.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/16 20:13:53


Post by: Maelstrom808


DeathReaper wrote:Page 36. Left Column, 3rd Graph, 3rd sentence (Check the parentheses in that graph).
That works Deep Striking units, but if they are not Deep Striking and just coming in from normal reserves, it's worded differently (see Yak's post above).


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/16 22:20:49


Post by: WhoopieMonster


@Dooley, can you provide a PG for the auto loose if you've no models on the board at the end of a game turn. I can't seem to find any reference to it.

Edit: nvm. I found it, its in the Fighting a Battle section. There is actually a section called "Playing a game" misslead me completely.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/16 22:25:18


Post by: Maelstrom808


BRB pg 122, "Victory Conditions"


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 02:34:10


Post by: Red Corsair


I think yak has it right. The rules are permissive and drop pods and deep strikers are the only ones given permission for that scenario. Just because a flier HAS to start in reserve doesn't mean the unit embarked HAS to as well if you had to start the game embarked in dedicated transports I would agree but you don't. It only seems redundant in the case of the NS because it is the only dedicated flier, but the transport clause was meant for all transports.

Again, as Maelstrom808 already said, you exclude all fliers from the equation and halve the remainder to find how many re allowed to reserve.



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 03:50:27


Post by: jy2


Here is my logic.

A flyer is a single unit, right? Even though it doesn't count towards the number of units used to determine how many units can be deployed, it is still a single unit, is it not?

Now we have:

0. "A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes."

So we have a flyer, which is a single unit, but which does not count towards the total because it is ignored.


Then we have a flyer and its passengers, which is also a single unit. Question is, does it count towards the total?

I believe the answer lies in "for these purposes." What does that mean, for these purposes? I believe there are 2 interpretations:

As Yakface puts it:

'A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for [the purposes of working out how many other units may do so].'

However, as I've said before, this is only partially correct. Because that is only part of the rules for reserves.

This is my intepretation:

"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for [the purposes of working out how many other units may do so and that units that must start in reserves are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so.].'

This is the full rule for Reserves. It is a 2-part rule - 1) half of the units can be deployed in reserves and 2) units that must start off in reserves are ignored.

There is a transitive property here. And it's this:

Dedicated transport and passengers = 1 unit. Transport cannot be deployed because it is a flyer. Passengers deployed in the transport counts as 1 unit also, but because that unit is ignored for the purposes of how many to be deployed, then passengers are ignored as well.



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 05:29:46


Post by: Dannyevilguy


But if a game turn ends and you have no pieces on the board, you lose. So how would an all reserve list that doesn't come in until turn 2 even work?


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 05:41:18


Post by: rigeld2


Dannyevilguy wrote:But if a game turn ends and you have no pieces on the board, you lose. So how would an all reserve list that doesn't come in until turn 2 even work?

Hide a single model somewhere on the board.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 05:50:09


Post by: Maelstrom808


Dannyevilguy wrote:But if a game turn ends and you have no pieces on the board, you lose. So how would an all reserve list that doesn't come in until turn 2 even work?


Outside of pod or demon lists, there is no such thing as an all-reserve list anymore...only "mostly" reserve lists


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 06:02:10


Post by: Captain Antivas


Maelstrom808 wrote:
Dannyevilguy wrote:But if a game turn ends and you have no pieces on the board, you lose. So how would an all reserve list that doesn't come in until turn 2 even work?


Outside of pod or demon lists, there is no such thing as an all-reserve list anymore...only "mostly" reserve lists


Since half of the pods (and Daemons) come in on first turn there is no risk of losing by doing it.

Edit: I misread last post.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 06:05:51


Post by: Maelstrom808


Captain Antivas wrote:
Maelstrom808 wrote:
Dannyevilguy wrote:But if a game turn ends and you have no pieces on the board, you lose. So how would an all reserve list that doesn't come in until turn 2 even work?


Outside of pod or demon lists, there is no such thing as an all-reserve list anymore...only "mostly" reserve lists


Since half of the pods (and Daemons) come in on first turn there is no risk of losing by doing it.

Edit: I misread last post.


Yarp. Like I said, pod and demon lists have no need to worry. Any other list still needs to put something on the board to survive through turn 1.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 06:19:03


Post by: SabrX


"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes."

Not sure why you say one is explicitley ignored and the other is not. The term 'and' is a logical conjunction that can be true if and only if both operands are true. "A unit (Necron Warriors) and its Dedicated transport (Night Scythe) are acounted as a single unit for these purposes."

The sentence on page 124 in BRB under Reserves overides unit and their dedicated transport being considered seperate for the purposes of determining how many units are in reserves. Flyers must also begin the game in reserves.

The rule is clear as daylight. It provides an exception to the normal reserve rules. It's even in the same paragraph!


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 06:50:32


Post by: Maelstrom808


Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so. A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes


Unfortunately, the unit and it's purchased transport only count as a single unit (and are ignored) for working out how many other units may start the game in reserve. It has no bearing on which units may (or must) start in reserve. You are not given permission to ignore them for anything else.

Believe me, I want this to work the way you are implying. I've been planning a flyer list since last year, I finally have the money available to buy the birds, I'm set to send in my order to MM, and this thing pops up... but I just can't see any way around it.



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 06:56:22


Post by: Lobokai


Maelstrom808 wrote:
Dannyevilguy wrote:But if a game turn ends and you have no pieces on the board, you lose. So how would an all reserve list that doesn't come in until turn 2 even work?


Outside of pod or demon lists, there is no such thing as an all-reserve list anymore...only "mostly" reserve lists


Who believes any different? I agree, many other posts/threads have backed this up. Other than the occassional wanderer that comes in without havinge read/thought about the rules, no one is seriously saying anything different.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 07:08:53


Post by: DeathReaper


Maelstrom808 wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:Page 36. Left Column, 3rd Graph, 3rd sentence (Check the parentheses in that graph).
That works Deep Striking units, but if they are not Deep Striking and just coming in from normal reserves, it's worded differently (see Yak's post above).

Preparing reserves is what you are looking for then. P.124 Left Column, 6th graph, 2nd and 3rd sentences.

A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes.

For what purposes?
for the pulposes of working out how many other units may do so.

so they are counted as a single unit. Must that unit start in reserve?
A: Yes, as a part of the unit must, they all must for these purposes. (The embarked models do not have to start in reserve, but for these purposes we count them as needing to start in reserve, because the rules tell us to count the two units as one unit).

"Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the pulposes of working out how many other units may do so"

So the transport, and its contents are a single unit for figuring out how many units may reserve, and part of that unit must start in reserve and is ignored for the 50%, so the whole unit is ignored for the 50%.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 07:31:37


Post by: Maelstrom808


Again...you are given permission to count them as a single unit (and ignore them) for the purposes of working out how many units may start in reserve. You are never given permission to count them as a single unit for the purposes of determining which units must start in reserve.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 07:41:21


Post by: DeathReaper


Maelstrom808 wrote:Again...you are given permission to count them as a single unit (and ignore them) for the purposes of working out how many units may start in reserve. You are never given permission to count them as a single unit for the purposes of determining which units must start in reserve.

The context of that sentence tells us that we ignore the embarked unit for the calculation.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 07:58:08


Post by: Maelstrom808


For the calculation of the number of units that may start in reserve.

First, how many units may start in reserve:

Overlord = 1
Overlord = 1
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0 (They are counted as a single unit for being a unit and it's dedicated transport, and are ignored since the transport must start in reserves)
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0
Doom Scythe = 0 (Must start in reserves, so it is ignored)
Doom Scythe = 0
Doom Scythe = 0

Total = 2, cut in half and rounded up = 1.

We are done calculating how many units may start in reserve, our permission to count the Night Scyythe and Warriors as a single unit (and ignore them as a single unit) ends.

Now we can determine what actual units are going into reserves. Which units are not forced to start in reserves?

Overlord
Overlord
Warriors
Warriors
Warriors
Warriors

You may place one of these units in reserve. The Night Scythes and Doom Scythes must start in reserve, and you no longer have permission to count the warriors as a single unit with the Night Scythes, since that permission was only given for working out how many units may start in reserve.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 08:06:20


Post by: DeathReaper


Unless they are embarked, then they do not count, and you may keep them in reserve aboard their Dedicated Transport.

As I said "embarked unit" is ignores as it may start in reserve aboard its Dedicated Transport.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 08:21:16


Post by: Maelstrom808


DeathReaper wrote:Unless they are embarked, then they do not count, and you may keep them in reserve aboard their Dedicated Transport.

As I said "embarked unit" is ignores as it may start in reserve aboard its Dedicated Transport.


Being embarked or not is never mentioned in this. Please cite where being embarked gives you permission to ignore the embarking unit, or let it even count as one unit with the transport for anything other than reserve rolls.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 10:37:49


Post by: yakface


DeathReaper wrote:
So the transport, and its contents are a single unit for figuring out how many units may reserve, and part of that unit must start in reserve and is ignored for the 50%, so the whole unit is ignored for the 50%.


I'm right up with on your logic until you get to this point, which is where you make an unsupported leap (IMHO, of course).

Just because the unit and its transport is considered a single unit for determining how many units may start in reserve and just because the transport is ignored, there is no supported reason to assume this same proviso carries over onto the embarked unit.

In other words, the embarked unit, like all units in the army MUST be counted for determining how many units may be put into reserves unless it has a rule which specifically says that it is ignored.

The transport they are riding on has just such a special rule saying that it is ignored.

We have another rule which says both the transport and the embarked unit count as only a single unit for determining how many units may start on the table...

So basically what we have is one unit (the transport and its contents) which both is ignored for calculating these purposes AND must be counted for these purposes.

Traditionally speaking, it is improper to simply assume that because a transport has some sort of ability or rule that it automatically transfers over to the embarked unit as well.

Obviously in the past GW has rules precisely this way (granting the transport the ability to Deep Strike or Outflank even when the unit inside didn't have that ability), but those were situations that needed to be FAQ'd because logically speaking there is no reason to assume that the embarked unit somehow gains the ability that the transport has access to.

In this case we HAVE an example of a rule in the rulebook which shows the proper specificity needed to make this rule work as you're saying it should (the Deep Strike transport rules), but that same level of specificity is not found in the basic reserve rules.

jy2 wrote:
This is my intepretation:

"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for [the purposes of working out how many other units may do so and that units that must start in reserves are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so.].'

This is the full rule for Reserves. It is a 2-part rule - 1) half of the units can be deployed in reserves and 2) units that must start off in reserves are ignored.

There is a transitive property here. And it's this:

Dedicated transport and passengers = 1 unit. Transport cannot be deployed because it is a flyer. Passengers deployed in the transport counts as 1 unit also, but because that unit is ignored for the purposes of how many to be deployed, then passengers are ignored as well.



I'm confused by your interpretation of what 'these purposes' says in your expanded version of the rules quote. In an 'and' statement, both portions of it should essentially be able to be read separately, yet I cannot seem to possibly do that for the sentence you provided you above.

If I try to read the 2nd portion of the 'and' statement alone we get:

"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for [the purposes of that units that must start in reserves are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so.]."


I mean, I get what you're trying to say and obviously the nature of 'these purposes' means I can't really refute anything you claim but frankly 'these purposes' are pretty clear given the purpose being discussed is to determine how many units must start on the table.


Just to bring up what I posted in the other thread:

The whole entire point of this 50% rule can only possibly be to stop players from generally fielding armies that go completely in reserve and then deny their opponent 2 turns of gameplay, and we can see the restriction about having no models on the table in any game turn as further support of this mandate.

As I'm interpreting the rules I don't believe there are ANY army builds that can willingly put their entire army into reserve (or even close to it). Drop Pod marines & Loganwing come on the first turn. Deathwing armies come on the first turn. Daemons come on the first turn.

IMHO, at best this rule we're talking about has two interpretations (naturally I think my interpretation is the stronger), so at best you're talking about a dubious rule as a basis to clearly circumvent a rule in the game that is clearly trying to accomplish something.

If the point of the rule was really to allow players to try to get away with having one model on the table until their flyers arrive, then why not just put the restriction about the game ending if you have no models on the table at the end of the game turn and be done with it? Why bother putting the 50% reserves rule into the game at all, if you can simply circumvent it via flyer transports?

And then why bother to put a clearly defined version of the rule into the deep strike section and not include the same seven magic words that would clear this whole thing up into the basic reserves section?


Obviously it is entirely possible for GW to have screwed up not put the same explicit text into the basic Reserve rules that they did in Deep Strike because they thought it was clear. And of course if and when they FAQ this I know that I may be totally and completely wrong...but IMHO whenever there is a grey area like this, especially when you're talking about having an entire army play style dependent upon it, then players really should be sticking with the least advantageous interpretation until GW comes out and explicitly says: yeah, go for it with your all flyer army.




Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 11:00:21


Post by: Robbietobbie


The way I see it: units that must start in reserves are ignored for determining how many units may be in reserves.. The second sentence IMHO sees to units that you have deployed. For every Unit (a unit and it's dedicated transport counting as a single unit for this purpose) you may reserve a unit along with the units that must start in reserve anyway.. So if your list was: 2x overlord on CCB and 6x5 warriors in nightscythes you could deploy only one overlord on CCB and reserve the other overlord on CCB along with the nightscythes. I don't really see the problem


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 12:32:14


Post by: yakface


Robbietobbie wrote:The way I see it: units that must start in reserves are ignored for determining how many units may be in reserves.. The second sentence IMHO sees to units that you have deployed. For every Unit (a unit and it's dedicated transport counting as a single unit for this purpose) you may reserve a unit along with the units that must start in reserve anyway.. So if your list was: 2x overlord on CCB and 6x5 warriors in nightscythes you could deploy only one overlord on CCB and reserve the other overlord on CCB along with the nightscythes. I don't really see the problem


its obviously okay if you disagree, but the 'problem' is that the units embarked on the Night Scythes DON'T have to start the game in reserve and therefore need a rule that specifically says they are ignored to be ignored.

Currently, some are claiming that by them counting as a single unit along with the Night Scythe this somehow grants the embarked unit the same 'ignore' status, but the rules do not explicitly say this, and furthermore on page 36 for the Deep Strike transports, we see an actual version of the rule that DOES specifically show what it would be like to explicitly apply that rule to the embarked unit.

So in your example, you actually have 8 units that don't have to start in reserve (6 warrior units and 2 Lords, which includes their CCBs), which means 4 of those have to start on the table.



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 12:41:44


Post by: Robbietobbie


Ah now I see what the problem is. I'd recon though that the sentence 'a unit and it's dedicated transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes' might not only see to units you have deployed (and thus allowing you to reserve more units) but also to the situation at hand. If the warriors and their doomscythe count as a single unit that would mean that the rule forcing the night scythe to begin the game in reserves would also apply to the warriors inside it (since now the rule applies to a part of the unit and thus the whole unit).
Just my two cents though because I can really understand where you're coming from.. But especially in the case of the night scythes it would be very odd because now the warriors forced to deploy outside of their transport are effectively without a transport since they can not embark upon said transport.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 13:33:03


Post by: SpankHammer III


This is quite a mind bender. My gut would be to assume that the unit in the transpot gains the rule and is thus not counted. The obvious risk being that with only one model on the board if your units don't turn up quickly th war could easily be ended with one shot.

I'm basing this on other rules so I my logic is quite probably flawed. But Al'rahem and his platoon have to outflank, if you give all the squad chimeras they have to outflank as well they don't roll on from the board edge


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 14:18:36


Post by: Killjoy00


Maelstrom808's outline earlier really explained this for me.

Look at the rule again, all 3 sentence.

"When deploying their armies, players can choose not to deploy up to half of their units keeping them as Reserves to arrive later."

What we are checking is how many units we can keep as reserves. This is the "calculation."

"Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so."

For the calculation above, ignore units that must start in reserve.

"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes."

These purposes must mean the same thing as "the purposes" mentioned in the prior sentence. That purpose is for the calculation above.


So - you can ignore the Doom Scythe for the calculation. You can even ignore the Necron Warrior for the calculation.

But what is the calculation is for - it is to determine how many units you CAN put in reserve.

So -
you have overlord, overlord, and the rest fliers with necron warriors. Ignore the warriors for "these purposes" - that means the calculation. So you do the calculation and you get a total of 2 units (half of which is 1).


You now have permission to put ONE unit in reserve that doesn't have to start in there. Necron Warriors do not have to start in reserve. Therefore, out of all your warriors and overlords you only have permission to place ONE in reserve.

No other rule provides you permission to place the Necron Warriors in reserve.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 17:19:04


Post by: DeathReaper


yakface wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:
So the transport, and its contents are a single unit for figuring out how many units may reserve, and part of that unit must start in reserve and is ignored for the 50%, so the whole unit is ignored for the 50%.


I'm right up with on your logic until you get to this point, which is where you make an unsupported leap (IMHO, of course).

Just because the unit and its transport is considered a single unit for determining how many units may start in reserve and just because the transport is ignored, there is no supported reason to assume this same proviso carries over onto the embarked unit.

It is because they are considered one unit for this purpose, as stated on P.124 Left Column, 6th graph, 2nd and 3rd sentences.

yakface wrote:In other words, the embarked unit, like all units in the army MUST be counted for determining how many units may be put into reserves unless it has a rule which specifically says that it is ignored.


It does, P.124 Left Column, 6th graph, 2nd and 3rd sentences covers it for being ignored, since the unit and its DT are one unit in this case, and this combined unit must be held in reserve for the purposes of determining 50%.

We also get into the silly example of every unit that buys a DT now can not start the game embarked upon them, as some of them "must" be deployed?

The whole thing boils down to the issue of the warriors and their DT.

Basically the following quote is telling us implicitly, that the warriors must start the game in reserve because a unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes.

"Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so. A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes."

It says "A unit and its Dedicated Transport" What unit? "Units that must start the game in reserve"

So the real question is Must a Flyer DT with a unit embarked start the game in reserve?


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 19:43:51


Post by: Killjoy00


I have a question/comment.

From my understanding of the rules, the Necron Warriors that buy a Night Scythe don't have to start in the Night Scythe. They could choose to start on the board, or in normal reserve.

How would any other interpretation of the rule deal with that fact? Do you get the right to reserve them normally because they aren't part of the count? I don't see how the rules as written work any way unless detailed per the math above.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 19:44:47


Post by: Lobokai


Maelstrom808 wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:Unless they are embarked, then they do not count, and you may keep them in reserve aboard their Dedicated Transport.

As I said "embarked unit" is ignores as it may start in reserve aboard its Dedicated Transport.


Being embarked or not is never mentioned in this. Please cite where being embarked gives you permission to ignore the embarking unit, or let it even count as one unit with the transport for anything other than reserve rolls.


Just to clarify: You mean "count as one unit with the transport for anything other than PLACING in reserve and reserve rolls"?

Or do you think the transports go into reserve, but you must deploy the warriors?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Which would make me wonder what you think a dedicated transport is and why it is called what it is called


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 20:15:19


Post by: Maelstrom808


Lobukia wrote:
Maelstrom808 wrote:
DeathReaper wrote:Unless they are embarked, then they do not count, and you may keep them in reserve aboard their Dedicated Transport.

As I said "embarked unit" is ignores as it may start in reserve aboard its Dedicated Transport.


Being embarked or not is never mentioned in this. Please cite where being embarked gives you permission to ignore the embarking unit, or let it even count as one unit with the transport for anything other than reserve rolls.


Just to clarify: You mean "count as one unit with the transport for anything other than PLACING in reserve and reserve rolls"?


No I don't mean that. They don't count as one unit when placing them in reserves. Taken from later on in the reserves section, where it talks about actually putting your units in reserves:

"...the player must specify if any units in reserve are embarked on any transport vehicles in reserve, in which case they will arrive together."

They are handled as two seperate units even while in reserves, they simply will arrive together if you embark them.

Or do you think the transports go into reserve, but you must deploy the warriors?


If you have already maxed out the number of units you may place in reserves, then yes the transport goes in reserve and the warriors must deploy as normal. Buying a transport for a unit in no way shape or form forces that unit to embark upon it or even deploy in the same manner. As long as you have the reserve capacity to do so, you may even place both in reserves, not embark the unit on the transport, and have them arrive in the same manner (i.e. walk on the table, both deepstrike, etc. as long as it is legal for them to do so), but roll seperate reserve rolls.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Which would make me wonder what you think a dedicated transport is and why it is called what it is called


A dedicated transport is a means for a unit to take a transport vehicle outside of the normal limitations of the FOC, giving players the capability to fully mechanize without limiting their ability to put troops on the field. The trade off for this ability is only the unit that purchased the transport (plus any ICs that join that unit) may embark on it during deployment - hence the name dedicated transport.






Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 20:24:39


Post by: Happyjew


Just so I understand the position (not saying anyone is wrong or right, just clarification):
A group of Tactical Marines in a Drop Pod would count as 1 unit for determining the number of units that can start in reserves, as they do not have to start in the Drop Pod. Whereas a unit of Termagants in a Mycetic Spore, would not count towards the limit since they MUST start in the Spore.
Is this correct?


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/17 20:46:15


Post by: Maelstrom808


The Deep Striking rules are written differently and is really the hope I have that this is not intended to work the way it reads. The way it's worded (they specify "along with any units embarked on them", rather than "a unit and it's dedicated transport") leaves the impression that it functions differently than the normal reserves version functions. The problem right now is timing for everything is extremly vague as well as the use of the "how many units" indicating a numerical value rather than a specification of which actual units.

EDIT: I realize that does not answer your question. under the reserves version, it functions as you described, under deepstrike...probably but the use of the term "embarked" leaves a lot more room for doubt.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/18 02:47:41


Post by: SabrX


yakface wrote:
Obviously it is entirely possible for GW to have screwed up not put the same explicit text into the basic Reserve rules that they did in Deep Strike because they thought it was clear. And of course if and when they FAQ this I know that I may be totally and completely wrong...but IMHO whenever there is a grey area like this, especially when you're talking about having an entire army play style dependent upon it, then players really should be sticking with the least advantageous interpretation until GW comes out and explicitly says: yeah, go for it with your all flyer army.


Advantageous to Matt Ward who happens to be one of the three authors of 6th ed BRB and codex Necrons?

In any case, I hope this gets addressed in FAQ.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/18 17:54:22


Post by: FireBlade


I was reading this over earlier and here's my .02:

The debate here is being taken out of context and trying to put in a phase of reserves that simply doesn't exist. Nowhere in the rules does it say "Phase 1, calculate how many can start in reserves, and for this phase, we're going to count dedicated transports and their units as 1 combined entity. Phase 2, stop counting dedicated transports and their units as 1 combined entity and then work out which units are actually in reserves. Phase 3, deploy your units, and now they can count together again"

Just to point this out... This would go further than just the Necrons... It's just more pronounced with them. Example:

Space Marine HQ
Unit 1 of Marines - Rhino
Unit 2 of Marines - Rhino
Unit 3 of Marines - Rhino
Unit 4 of Marines - Rhino

Now... I don't think this argument would have even arrisen if the Space Marine player said, I have 4 units + 1 HQ I can stick 3 things in reserve (you round up) and so I'm sticking the HQ in with Unit 2, and reserving units 1-2 in their Rhino, and deploying units 3-4 in their Rhino. However... Applying the rules that are being proposed here... This Space Marine would then have "permission" to reserve 3 units, but then they would stop counting together, and he could only reserve 1 Rhino with the Marines in it and his HQ... OR, if he decided that he wanted to deploy his HQ, then 1 of the units of Marines would be forced to get out of their Rhino and not deploy together.

Now that I've pointed that out. Lets get the FULL rules into play here:

"When deploying their armies, players can choose not to deploy up to half of their units (rounding up) keeping them as Reserves to arrive later. Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so. A unit and it's Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes. Independent Characters are also counted as a single unit regardless of whether they have joined another unit or not. During deployment when declaring which units are kept as Reserves, the player must clearly explain the organisation of his Reserves to the opponent.

First he must specify to the opponent if any of his Independent Characters left in reserve are joining a unit, in which case they will arrive together. Similarly the player must specify if any units in reserve are embarked upon any Transport vehicles in reserve, in which case they will arrive together."

So: with the FULL quote we can see that it tells us that:
- When deploying their armies a player can choose not to deploy up to half of their units.
- Units that must start in reserve are ignored for working out how many other units may do so.
- A unit and it's Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes. (Both the ignoring them in they are in the NS which can't deploy, AND the actualy when deploying)
- It then goes on to specifically say that even if you stick an IC in a transport that one always counts.
- And lastly it gives us the order of how we should go about this.

As such: If I were to bring the following list:

Overlord
5 warriors - Nightscythe
5 warriors - Nightscythe
5 warriors - Nightscythe
Monolith

Now, walking through the decisions. A player can choose not to deploy half my units (8 total units, so 4). Units that must start in reserve are ignored for working out how many may do so (5 units then, so 3). A unit and it's dedicated transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes (2 units left so 1, but I want to start my overlord with one of the warrior units, so does he count? it's unclear). IC's in a transport always count (2 units left, so 1, how nice of them to clear up the previous ambiguity!). Now I have to tell my opponent what my plans are so he's clear (but... but... but... a good strategist NEVER reveals his plans! And you want me to reveal my plans to my ENEMEY!?!?!? )

That's it... There is no additional phase/rule where now that I've worked out that I can have 1 person in reserve that all of the above rules cease to function and all of a sudden I have to take my warriors back out of their dedicated transports.

Side funny note: yes it would be possible if I didn't take the Monolith to take 1 HQ, round up, and be allowed to stick him in reserve with no one on the table... I would then immediately lose the game.

Summary: "A unit and it's Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes." That sentence refers not only to the 1 sentence immediately before, which is what people are citing and where we get this thought process of "NS + Warriors are ignored for the overall count but then count again for the actual deployment part". It ALSO applies to the sentence before that, which details the actual deploying.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/18 20:45:16


Post by: yakface


FireBlade wrote:
- A unit and it's Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes. (Both the ignoring them in they are in the NS which can't deploy, AND the actualy when deploying)


And every single person who has argued this point gets to exactly right here and then makes the leap of logic that you have precisely here.

NOWHERE do the rules indicate that because an embarked unit and its transport count as a single choice that the embarked unit is now ignored. We all agree that the transport is ignored. We all agree that the transport and the embarked unit count as a single unit.

But there is just as much basis to say that the transport+embarked unit need to be counted as there is to say that they are now ignored, because there are two units that count as one, one of which is ignored and the other that isn't.

And yet again, the Deep Strike rules show the level of specificity that would be needed to make your argument logically valid. The rules need to SAY that an embarked unit on a transport is also ignored, because just saying that they count as a single unit does NOT remove the need to count the embarked unit against the number of units you need to deploy.



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/18 23:00:53


Post by: Amerikon


I think we're getting a bit in the weeds here. I'm going to try and simplify this argument. There are two interpretations of the rules here. One however results in the game being stupid, so I'm going to say that the non-stupid rule is the right one.

If I (or lets be honest here, my opponent) buys a flyer as a dedicated transport for his unit, those two units had damn well both be able to start in Reserve. If they can't, the game is stupid.

Maelstrom808 wrote:Overlord = 1
Overlord = 1
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0 (They are counted as a single unit for being a unit and it's dedicated transport, and are ignored since the transport must start in reserves)
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0
Doom Scythe = 0 (Must start in reserves, so it is ignored)
Doom Scythe = 0
Doom Scythe = 0

Total = 2, cut in half and rounded up = 1.

We are done calculating how many units may start in reserve, our permission to count the Night Scyythe and Warriors as a single unit (and ignore them as a single unit) ends.

Now we can determine what actual units are going into reserves. Which units are not forced to start in reserves?

Overlord
Overlord
Warriors
Warriors
Warriors
Warriors

You may place one of these units in reserve.
Even if this is the interpretation of the rules that is most consistent with the precise wording of the rules it results in a ruling that is stupid. The english language is inherently ambiguous. Can we just decide to go with the ruling that's not stupid?


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/18 23:08:31


Post by: Maelstrom808


I had 6 Scythes ship out to my house today, I would LOVE to!!! I promise that regardless of if it gets FAQ'd one way or another, if you and I play, that's the way we will play it. I will also gladly play it the non-stupid way with anybody that is willing. However, if someone does want to play strictly by the RAW, the way I showed it is how it needs to be played, imo.

If it makes anyone feel better, I think that if it does get a FAQ, it will be FAQ'd so that the transport and the unit count as one unit for the entire reserves thing...that's my hope anyhow.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/19 04:02:10


Post by: Killjoy00


For the people that think the Warriors simply "don't count" for the math at all -

In the list:

Overlord
Warriors - scythe
Warriors -scythe
Warriors -scythe
Monolith

Your math says you can place one unit into reserve and that would presumably be the overlord or the monolith, ignoring the warriors for this purpose.

Would you allow the Necron warriors to start in "normal reserve" (not embarked upon the flier?) If so, or if not, please provide rules support.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/19 05:49:41


Post by: Amerikon


I've wondered this same thing, but about Drop Pods. The intuitive response would be that when you take the Warriors from the Night Scythe they lose the "must start in reserves" exemption. If you assume that the troops are primary to their transport, then the Warriors would count as one unit and then the Scythe would be ignored (because it must start in reserve). That would be effectively the same thing as if the Warriors could start on the table w/ the Scythe. So in both cases the Scythe itself is effectively ignored as the rules suggest that it should be.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/19 13:33:46


Post by: Killjoy00


I agree that is intuitive, but that's simply not what the rules say. FireBlade is trying to argue there aren't "phases" where you walk through your decisions.

If you argue that the warriors are ignored for the count, they are ignored. You can't have it both ways.

And this is why the calculation walk through is currently the only way the rule makes any sense.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/19 15:19:36


Post by: Amerikon


I disagree. That's a pretty reasonable interpretation of the rules. Are the Warriors embarked in a Scythe? -> They must start in reserve -> they don't count against the number of units who can reserve.

Are the Warriors not embarked? -> They're not required to start in reserve -> They (along with their Scythe) count as 1 unit.

The only assumption this requires is that the Night Scythe doesn't transfer its "must start in reserves" to the Warriors under all circumstances, which I think is a pretty easy assumption to make.

It also works in that the logical implications of this interpretation don't make you do stupid things like not being able to start units in their purchased transport.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/19 16:09:59


Post by: Phazael


Yeah, troops that cannot ride in their own dedicated transports? I know you guys really want to nerf the Cron Air Force any way you can before it even exists, but thats pretty much reaching with semantics. Its pretty clear what the intent is and what involves less hassle. The no unit on table = autolose is the counterbalance.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/19 16:56:39


Post by: cowmonaut


I recently was sorting this stuff out for an Army List idea I have.

Reserve (page 124)
- When deploying their armies, players may choose not to deploy up to half of their units (rounding up) keeping them in Reserve to arrive later.
- Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so. A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes.
- Independent Characters count as separate units regardless if they have joined another unit or not.

Deep Strike (page 36)
- When working out how many units can be placed in reserve, units that must be deployed by Deep Strike (along with any models embarked upon them) are ignored.
In addition, a unit that must arrive by Deep Strike (such as a Drop Pod) must do so even if you are playing a special mission where the Reserves special rule is not being used.

Aerial Support (page 80)
- Flyers must begin the game as Reserves - it takes time for a Warlord to organise and coordinate air support.

Those were all the relevant entries to Reserves I could find in the rule book. So it comes down to what kind of Dedicated Transport is it?

Any Transport (Dedicated or not) that must enter play via Deep Strike is actually quite powerful. Any models embarked on it gets ignored when determining the total number of units you have to deploy on the table.

Any Dedicated Transport that is a Flyer also gets ignored, but the unit embarked on it is not.

A little confusing at first but simple enough once we take a hard look at it. Now I just need to find out if there is a consensus on Al'Rahem's Chimera's counting as part of the Platoon in 6th Edition... Its unfortunate that the "purposes" in the Reserves rule seems to refer to just working out how many units you can Reserve.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/19 22:09:37


Post by: FireBlade


While I will admit that they could word this better... Again I'm going back to saying look at the entire entry for the Reserves Rules... rather than looking at 1-2 sentences and how they interact.


Yakface wrote:

FireBlade wrote:

- A unit and it's Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes. (Both the ignoring them in they are in the NS which can't deploy, AND the actually when deploying)


And every single person who has argued this point gets to exactly right here and then makes the leap of logic that you have precisely here.

NOWHERE do the rules indicate that because an embarked unit and its transport count as a single choice that the embarked unit is now ignored. We all agree that the transport is ignored. We all agree that the transport and the embarked unit count as a single unit.

But there is just as much basis to say that the transport+embarked unit need to be counted as there is to say that they are now ignored, because there are two units that count as one, one of which is ignored and the other that isn't.

And yet again, the Deep Strike rules show the level of specificity that would be needed to make your argument logically valid. The rules need to SAY that an embarked unit on a transport is also ignored, because just saying that they count as a single unit does NOT remove the need to count the embarked unit against the number of units you need to deploy.



The thing is it's not a "leap of logic". I'm trying to figure out how to put this without sounding like an asshat... it may not work... but just know that it's NOT my intention. Because there's so much rules lawyering, a lot of these rules are written in a manner that reminds me of some of the contracts that I have to review for work. One thing to keep in mind is that a sentence applies to all previous sentences in the same paragraph. Hence, when it says "for these purposes" it applies to both things, because
1) if they meant that it only applied to 1 of the two preceding sentences then they would have said "for this purpose".
And
2) because when it says "for these purposes" it is after those two sentences. This is the same reason that we know that an IC is ALWAYS counted, regardless of if they are / aren't in the NS, because that is mentioned at the end.

Also, for people who are comparing this rule with the Deep Strike rule and saying that "it can't work this way, because that one is more specific". Keep in mind that the DS rule is not designed to apply to all reserves, and as such it can be worded differently because the "...(along with any models embarked upon them) are ignored" only applies to 1 single sentence, which is the only sentence it NEEDS to apply to in that case. Hence, the reason that it was worded that the unit and their DT are counted as 1 unit "for these purposes" (not for 1 of the previous 2 purposes listed).

However, the DS rule states that "When working out how many units can be placed in reserve, units that must be deployed by Deep Strike (along with any models embarked upon them) are ignored." If we break this down into the proposed "first you calculate how many units CAN be placed into reserve, then we separately work out how many units actually MUST be placed into reserve. When we're working out how many CAN be placed into reserve we ignore (like it tells us), but when we're working out how many we actually MUST reserve we stop ignoring it (like it never says). Then we actually get the same problem. Hence, most drop pods would be showing up empty...

Further more... Beyond even the more pronounced examples of Drop Pods / Fliers. The rules that are being proposed by Yakface, Killjoy00, or Maelstrom808 would have implications on a basic army of:
1HQ
5 Troops + Dedicated Transports

Because by your explanations, you are saying 5 troops, + 1HQ = 6 total so 3 allowed in reserve. So out of that entire army, 1 Rhino, 1 troop, and the HQ can be placed into reserve. The rest have to deploy. OR, if you wanted to deploy your HQ, then 1 of your Rhinos would have to deploy empty.

I just want to make sure that if you are going to rule it this way, and nothing is going to change your mind to this, that you are at least being consistent for your own armies (or rather the rest of the armies) , not just the Necron Fliers.

Now... All this being said though. I think though that at the end of the day Amerikon made the best point here... it's just silly that there would be any rule that makes it so you can take a dedicated transport BUT... not ride in it. Especially since you can't get into a Nightscythe once you get out... Why make them a transport at all if they actually can't carry anything???


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/19 22:55:40


Post by: Maelstrom808


I've pretty much said what I've got to say on it, and have not seen any compelling arguments that I think hold enough water (no offense intended) to change my mind. At this point I'm sitting back and seeing what happens with it.

I do want to add one last thing though. To those that are either hinting at or blatently accusing me of being biased on this in an attempt to nerf Necron fliers, read my my posts in this thread, take a look at my sig, maybe take a look at the type of armies I've been building over the last 8 months or so:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/455908.page
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/423855/3831395.page#3831395
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/preList/420902/3751846.page#3751846
http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/416581.page

...then come back and tell me with a straight face that I'm doing this just so I can get Necron fliers nerfed.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/19 23:06:17


Post by: FireBlade


@ Maelstrom808

Please don't think that was something I was intending to imply. I did read that you have 6 of the bad boys on the way (which IMHO... regardless of how you decide to play... THEY LOOK WICKED!). I named you as I was merely posing a question to the 3 of you that are the prime proponents of the "no deploying in your NS ruling" that if you follow that logic it expands to so much more than just the NS... That's something that everyone skipped over on my original post and I was trying to draw attention to that.



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/19 23:30:55


Post by: Maelstrom808


It's all good, your post wasn't the one that particularly got under my skin. I also am well aware of the further implications of this beyond just flyers and "must start in reserve" units and actually was discussing it with a buddy earlier today. The thing is, as I see it, there is no "fair" way to rule it. If you rule it as I suggest, you unfairly punish reserve lists that utilize dedicated transports en masse. If you it the opposite way, these lists have an unfair advantage against the 50% limitation to reserve units. (EDIT: Sorry, really just the lists with dedicated transports that must start in reserves gain the advantage. Normal dedicated transports work in the spirit of the rule imo) There really is no middle ground imo.

I don't care how it turns out either way as I've built lists to account for either ruling using the same number of flyers. I just want to know what to expect so I know what list I should get used to playing.

and UPS just showed up about 15 minutes ago





Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 01:33:44


Post by: yakface


Maelstrom808 wrote:It's all good, your post wasn't the one that particularly got under my skin. I also am well aware of the further implications of this beyond just flyers and "must start in reserve" units and actually was discussing it with a buddy earlier today. The thing is, as I see it, there is no "fair" way to rule it. If you rule it as I suggest, you unfairly punish reserve lists that utilize dedicated transports en masse. If you it the opposite way, these lists have an unfair advantage against the 50% limitation to reserve units. (EDIT: Sorry, really just the lists with dedicated transports that must start in reserves gain the advantage. Normal dedicated transports work in the spirit of the rule imo) There really is no middle ground imo.

I don't care how it turns out either way as I've built lists to account for either ruling using the same number of flyers. I just want to know what to expect so I know what list I should get used to playing.

and UPS just showed up about 15 minutes ago





Hoo-boy that's ballsy, IMHO! I would be so afraid of creating an army based on flyers at this point. Not just because of this ruling...but also because the entire thing hinges upon how much Skyfire GW puts into new codexes, which is something we have no idea about right now, but we no that they've got at the very least, flakk missiles ready to go.

So all it takes is for GW to start letting just a few really cool skyfire enabled units here and there into codexes and all of a sudden the entire army concept goes down in a blaze of glory.

But until then, I suppose you will have a field day!



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 01:47:30


Post by: Mannahnin


I'm with Fireblade.

Yak, this is one of those rare ones on which I completely disagree with you.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 02:09:33


Post by: yakface


Mannahnin wrote:I'm with Fireblade.

Yak, this is one of those rare ones on which I completely disagree with you.


Hey, we know it happens.

Has 6th edition changed your opinion on Dreadnoughts pivoting before checking LOS, BTW?

FireBlade wrote:
Now... All this being said though. I think though that at the end of the day Amerikon made the best point here... it's just silly that there would be any rule that makes it so you can take a dedicated transport BUT... not ride in it. Especially since you can't get into a Nightscythe once you get out... Why make them a transport at all if they actually can't carry anything???


Yeah, I look at it kind of like there are some dedicated transports you can take that units can't ride in because their squad size is too large...SoB squads taking Immolators, for example.

But more to point, I see the whole point of the Reserve rule meaning that all Reserve armies are basically not allowed except for extreme cases, with that being the all Deep Striking army because they went out of their way to do so, knowing that in ALL those cases those armies have special rules that force them into play on the 1st turn.

Flyer armies do not have that proviso, so yes I think they designed the rule specifically to allow you to take such an army (all flyers), but the penalty will be that you still have to start several units on the table at the start of the game. Because taking the all flyer army, besides all the benefits you get from being protected by being a flyer, you're also able to deny your opponent two turns of shooting at you if you're going 2nd and are able to hide a single model behind a piece of terrain.




Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 02:19:34


Post by: Mannahnin


I think that seems antithetical to what GW has publicly expressed as the philosophy behind this edition. Fireblade's seems more in keeping with verisimilitude/"associative" (as Jervis called them) mechanics. Yours seems less associative but possibly more balanced, mechanically.

yakface wrote:
Mannahnin wrote:I'm with Fireblade.

Yak, this is one of those rare ones on which I completely disagree with you.

Hey, we know it happens.

Has 6th edition changed your opinion on Dreadnoughts pivoting before checking LOS, BTW?


Good question! I just looked at it, and I haven't done a line by line comparison with the 5th ed rules, but on my initial read it appears to me that the rules are identical or near-identical. If there's any change (there's the bold text, at least) it may be even more clear that pivoting comes after determining LOS and after target declaration.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 02:21:33


Post by: Maelstrom808


yakface wrote:
Maelstrom808 wrote:It's all good, your post wasn't the one that particularly got under my skin. I also am well aware of the further implications of this beyond just flyers and "must start in reserve" units and actually was discussing it with a buddy earlier today. The thing is, as I see it, there is no "fair" way to rule it. If you rule it as I suggest, you unfairly punish reserve lists that utilize dedicated transports en masse. If you it the opposite way, these lists have an unfair advantage against the 50% limitation to reserve units. (EDIT: Sorry, really just the lists with dedicated transports that must start in reserves gain the advantage. Normal dedicated transports work in the spirit of the rule imo) There really is no middle ground imo.

I don't care how it turns out either way as I've built lists to account for either ruling using the same number of flyers. I just want to know what to expect so I know what list I should get used to playing.

and UPS just showed up about 15 minutes ago

Spoiler:



Hoo-boy that's ballsy, IMHO! I would be so afraid of creating an army based on flyers at this point. Not just because of this ruling...but also because the entire thing hinges upon how much Skyfire GW puts into new codexes, which is something we have no idea about right now, but we no that they've got at the very least, flakk missiles ready to go.

So all it takes is for GW to start letting just a few really cool skyfire enabled units here and there into codexes and all of a sudden the entire army concept goes down in a blaze of glory.

But until then, I suppose you will have a field day!



Not really I was entirely comfortable with the concept of everything shooting at them at full BS in 5th, so it really doesn't matter how many units they add with skyfire. The units that scare me are the ones with skyfire AND interceptor. Also, for the issues we've been discussing here, I've got ways around it in my standard lists that don't hurt the overall effectiveness of the list much, while at the same time giving me the same number of flyers.

If everything goes south, and the worse possible combination of rulings + units go against me, I've already got a fairly large non-flyer army that I can mix and match to simply create a more balanced force and save the extra flyers for the occasional 4k games we play. That said, I'm sure if that happens, you'll still hear me gripe about it on here

The biggest thing I'm dreading right now? All the freaking painting I've got to do. I hate hardlining, but it's how I did my monolith, so I need the rest of the vehicles in the force to match, and on top of the flyers, I've still got 3 1/2 barges to finish, a full unit of Lychguard, 9 crypteks, a unit of Immortals to paint, and about 7-8 destroyers that I need to repair...and that's just my crons :(


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 02:30:29


Post by: Grey Templar


Happyjew wrote:Nid Spore lists are just as screwed as Flyer Transport lists. Of course as it stands, right now Nids are the only army that can make a list where everything is in reserves and cannot come in til Turn 2.


Not correct, Necrons can take an all Flyer list(Night Scythes and Doom Scythes)


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 02:47:37


Post by: yakface


Grey Templar wrote:
Happyjew wrote:Nid Spore lists are just as screwed as Flyer Transport lists. Of course as it stands, right now Nids are the only army that can make a list where everything is in reserves and cannot come in til Turn 2.


Not correct, Necrons can take an all Flyer list(Night Scythes and Doom Scythes)


How can Tyranids start fully in Reserve?

They don't have any HQ which can go into a pod, do they and therefore at the very least they have to start 1/2 of those on the table.





Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 02:52:35


Post by: Kiredor


You round up.

Keep the HQ in reserve (1/2 of 1 rounded up is 1).



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 04:16:44


Post by: Captain Antivas


yakface wrote:NOWHERE do the rules indicate that because an embarked unit and its transport count as a single choice that the embarked unit is now ignored. We all agree that the transport is ignored. We all agree that the transport and the embarked unit count as a single unit.


Sure it does. Like you said, we all agree that the unit and its transport are counted as one unit so that premise is assumed. Now lets break down the sentence into pieces to establish other premises. Units that must start in reserves (the transport in question) are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so. (Do what? Start in reserve.) A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes. [i](What purposes? For the purposes of working out how many [b]other units may start in reserves.)

Now, we re-write the sentence using the premises we just established. A transport that must start in reserves is ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may start in reserve, and a unit embarked on that transport counts as the same unit as the transport when working out how many other units may start in reserve.

So, as you can see the use of the word other is important because it suggests that units that cannot deploy are not considered, and if the unit and its DT are counted as one unit, and then that unit is ignored, you get the right conclusion that both are ignored. If you have 2 Nightscythes with a unit of Warriors in each and 2 units of Warriors not in a transport you can hold one of them in reserve. How did I get to this conclusion? I'll show you.

6 total units (4 Warriors 2 Nightscythes)
A unit and its DT count as 1 unit, so that reduces it to 4 units. (2 Nightscythes with Warriors, 2 Warriors)
Units that must start in Reserves are ignored, reduces it to 2. (The 2 Warriors. The DT Nightscythe and the Warriors they are carrying count as 1 unit, and that unit is ignored.)

Now point out, in specific rule based terms, where the logic went wrong.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 05:26:45


Post by: Killjoy00


Because you are ignoring WHY you are ignoring them. You ignore them for the calculation.

The calculation determines how many units you may start in reserve.

So you ignore them for the calculation. The calculation then tells you how many units you can start in reserve.

In your example, that would be 1.


You still have no permission to start the unit that could embark on a dedicated transport in reserve (unlike with deep strike dedicated transports, which do give you this permission)... in your example, only the 2 night scythes have permission to start in reserve. Your calculation means only one of the warriors can also start in reserve.

Explain where in the rules you have permission to place another of the warriors in reserve? You don't. You have permission to ignore them for the calculation... the calculation that tells you how many you can put in reserve.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 05:47:47


Post by: Captain Antivas


"Similarly, the player must specify if any units in reserve are embarked upon any Transport vehicles in reserve, in which case they will arrive together." Its the next paragraph down. If they arrive together, doesn't that give me permission to start the unit that could embark on a dedicated transport in reserve?

I had another thought. Notice how the paragraph in question has 2 topics, starting in Reserves and calculating how many other units can do the same. Then look at the sentence we all agree on, that dedicated transports an their unit count as 1 unit, and notice that it says they are one unit for these purposes. Plural, not singular. That sentence can't possibly apply to only the calculation or it would use the singular "for this purpose".


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 15:20:41


Post by: FireBlade


Perhaps a different angle will help people see this more clearly.

Please show me where in the reserves rules below it says the following:
A) That there is a calculation phase which is different from how it would be deployed.
B) That you ignore / count the units together for the calculation phase but NOT for the deployment.
C) Why the "for these purposes" only counts for 1 sentence, but not the other.
D) Why people are ignoring the very first 4 words that explain that these paragraphs cover "When deploying their armies"... Not "When calculating how many can be placed in reserves only"

You cannot simply look at 2-3 sentences, and in some cases part of the sentences, in a vacuum and then draw conclusions that cause you to:
1) Invent a new phase structure
2) Ignore some rules in some cases but not in others (i.e. the ignoring units / counting together)


"When deploying their armies, players can choose not to deploy up to half of their units (rounding up) keeping them as Reserves to arrive later. Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so. A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes. Independent Characters are also counted as a single unit regardless of whether they have joined another unit or not. During deployment when declaring which units are kept as Reserves, the player must clearly explain the organization of his Reserves to the opponent.

First he must specify to the opponent if any of his Independent Characters left in reserve are joining a unit, in which case they will arrive together. Similarly the player must specify if any units in reserve are embarked upon any Transport vehicles in reserve, in which case they will arrive together."


"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes"
Which purposes?
"Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so."
AND
"When deploying their armies, players can choose not to deploy up to half of their units (rounding up) keeping them as Reserves to arrive later."

If it was ONLY that they are ignored for working out how many other units are allowed to... then it wouldn't say "these purposes" and be after 2 sentences that are relevant it would say "this purpose" or be a () inside that sentence. It really is that simple.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 15:45:07


Post by: Captain Antivas


Exactly.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 15:58:37


Post by: Killjoy00


Captain Antivas wrote:I had another thought. Notice how the paragraph in question has 2 topics, starting in Reserves and calculating how many other units can do the same. Then look at the sentence we all agree on, that dedicated transports an their unit count as 1 unit, and notice that it says they are one unit for these purposes. Plural, not singular. That sentence can't possibly apply to only the calculation or it would use the singular "for this purpose".


Except you are ignoring the actual text of the rules.

BRB wrote:Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so


The rule itself refers to the calculation as "purposes." It clearly could have said "the purpose" of working out.. but it didn't. So the next sentence matches perfectly.

These purposes = the calculation.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 19:53:30


Post by: Captain Antivas


Purposes is plural, meaning more than one purpose. If it had said this purpose it would have a completely different meaning. The rule refers to more than one purpose, meaning not just calculations.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 20:07:01


Post by: Gloomfang


OK lets take this from anouther angle. (These are from nowhere but me trying to explain the rules, but they are accurate.)

10 tac. marines buy a Razorback as a dedicated transport. Only 5 can fit in it. The tac marines and the Razorback count as one unit.

1) If I put 5 marines in the Razorback and hold it in researve and place the other 5 marines on the table is the unit on the table or in reserve?
A: It counts as 1 unit in reserve.

2) I put the Razorback on the table empty and the 10 marines in reserve. How does it count?
A: It counts as one unit in reserves.

3) I combat squad my marines and place them on the table and place the Razorback on the table empty. How does it count?
A: It counts as 1 unit on the board.


And a diffrent type of example

4) I have a drop pod with a unit of marines. I need to have one more unit on the table to be able to put my terminators in a non dedicated Landraider in reserves. If I deepstrike the pod empty and put the marines on the board can I then put my terminators into reserve?
A: No because the drop pod and marines do not count as being either on the table or in reserves as the drop pod MUST be in reserves.

To me a lot of people here think that you should be able to put the terminators into reserve if the marines who are with the dedicated pod are deployed on the table.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 20:58:29


Post by: yakface


FireBlade wrote:
"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes"
Which purposes?
"Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so."
AND
"When deploying their armies, players can choose not to deploy up to half of their units (rounding up) keeping them as Reserves to arrive later."

If it was ONLY that they are ignored for working out how many other units are allowed to... then it wouldn't say "these purposes" and be after 2 sentences that are relevant it would say "this purpose" or be a () inside that sentence. It really is that simple.


'These purposes' is a shorter way of saying the same thing as the sentence above it. The first sentence says 'for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so'. The second sentence simply shortens this to 'these purposes'. It would have been even more confusing for them to have changed the second sentence phrasing to 'this purpose' if the first sentence refers to the exact same criteria as 'these purposes'.


But getting back to the point:

Again, we all agree that both the embarked unit and the transport count as a single unit for the purposes of figuring out how many other units may be put into reserves.

The core dissent here lies with the fact that you're assuming that because the embarked unit and the transport count as a single unit for determining how many units may be put into reserves that somehow means that the embarked unit gets the benefit of being ignored along with the transport.

To put this into similar context, its like saying the transport has a special rule (ignored for calculating number of reserves) and the unit does not (and therefore must be counted). The rules say that both count as only a single unit for determining how many units must be deployed and somehow you're taking that to mean the transport's 'special rule' is applied to the embarked unit instead of assuming that the embarked unit's 'must be counted' rule takes precedence.



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/20 22:05:34


Post by: Captain Antivas


The first usage of purposes is singular as indicated.by the singular article, the. "the purposes" is singular. The next usage is plural as indicated by the plural "these". "these purposes" is plural. Same word with different contexts meaning different things.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/21 06:14:32


Post by: FireBlade


I'd like to point out that you stated that the DS rules were "different" and more clear... but if you are arguing that there are 2 phases, a calculation where you ignore it, and then a deployment where you don't... that the DS rules state:

"When working out how many units can be placed in reserve units that must be deployed by Deep Strike (along with any models embarked on them) are ignored."

That very clearly says that "When working out how many units CAN BE placed in reserve" that the unit, and anything on them, are ignored. That would be the "Calculation". Hence Drop Pods would be following your same exact rule.

So then following your exact logic an army of Marines in drop pods would deploy as such:

HQ
Troop - Drop Pod
Troop - Drop Pod
Troop - Drop Pod
Troop - Drop Pod
Dread - Drop Pod
Dread - Drop Pod

6 units in 6 drop pods - all are ignored for purposes of determining "how many can be placed in reserve"... So 1 unit may begin in reserve. We ignore the drop pods for the deployment because they MUST be placed in reserve... But the Marines don't HAVE to start inside of them... So 1 unit of either Marines, or Dread can start in their drop pods. The rest must begin on the board and drop empty pods.

The funny part is... how would this apply to Tyranids... because they aren't allowed to drop empty pods... So do Tyranids then become the only army allowed to actually deploy in their own dedicated transports?

Sorry... no...

We've pointed out that the wording of it is actually quite clear. We've pointed out that it says "These purposes" and the previous sentences says "the purposes" (the singular version of this). And it doesn't seem to matter as people seem dead set against allowing a flier list... (but they're OK with drop pods... because we're used to those in 5th...)


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/21 07:58:24


Post by: yakface


FireBlade wrote:I'd like to point out that you stated that the DS rules were "different" and more clear... but if you are arguing that there are 2 phases, a calculation where you ignore it, and then a deployment where you don't... that the DS rules state:

"When working out how many units can be placed in reserve units that must be deployed by Deep Strike (along with any models embarked on them) are ignored."

That very clearly says that "When working out how many units CAN BE placed in reserve" that the unit, and anything on them, are ignored. That would be the "Calculation". Hence Drop Pods would be following your same exact rule.

So then following your exact logic an army of Marines in drop pods would deploy as such:

HQ
Troop - Drop Pod
Troop - Drop Pod
Troop - Drop Pod
Troop - Drop Pod
Dread - Drop Pod
Dread - Drop Pod

6 units in 6 drop pods - all are ignored for purposes of determining "how many can be placed in reserve"... So 1 unit may begin in reserve. We ignore the drop pods for the deployment because they MUST be placed in reserve... But the Marines don't HAVE to start inside of them... So 1 unit of either Marines, or Dread can start in their drop pods. The rest must begin on the board and drop empty pods.

The funny part is... how would this apply to Tyranids... because they aren't allowed to drop empty pods... So do Tyranids then become the only army allowed to actually deploy in their own dedicated transports?

Sorry... no...

We've pointed out that the wording of it is actually quite clear. We've pointed out that it says "These purposes" and the previous sentences says "the purposes" (the singular version of this). And it doesn't seem to matter as people seem dead set against allowing a flier list... (but they're OK with drop pods... because we're used to those in 5th...)



The Marines can start in their pods because doing so specifically means they are ignored.

Embarked units in flyers do not have that exemption, so attempting to start all the units in your flyers violates the 1/2 units have to start on the table rule.


And seriously about the 'these purposes', that is the way the wrote the sentences. The whole thing is clearly written about calculating how many units are able to start in reserves, but the first sentence (about the units that must start in reserve) says 'for the purposes'. They *could* have written 'for the purpose', as they're only talking about one thing, but they didn't. They referred to it as a plural, so again in the next sentence they again refer to these same 'purposes'.

I get the distinction you're trying to push, but at best its complete inference on a minor (at best) grammatical difference. I understand that either way we argue this we can't ever know for sure exactly what 'these purposes' meant to the author, so there really is little point in going on and on and on because that bit will never be agreed upon by us.

My basic point still remains that this is at beast a nebulous issue, so it should not be utilized until GW comes out and says that it is what they intended.



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/21 14:08:37


Post by: FireBlade



yakface wrote:
The Marines can start in their pods because doing so specifically means they are ignored.



Why? Please show me where it states that they are ignored both for the "calcuation" and for the actual placing people into reserves. Or, please show me where it states that a Marine and his drop pod MUST deploy together.

"When working out how many units can be placed in reserve units that must be deployed by Deep Strike (along with any models embarked on them) are ignored."

That sentence specifically says that when working out how many units CAN be placed in reserve they, along with models embarked on them, are ignored. If working out how many units CAN start in reserve is different from how many units MUST and DO start in reserve (as you argue for the flier) then there is absolutely NO difference between a drop pod, and a flier. Also ignoring even fliers... the whole premise of how many troops can start in reserve if you count them together sometimes but not together other times breaks down. See my previous example about Rhino's in my first post. If you count the troop and the unit together for "the calculation" but then you don't for the rest of it.... Then basic Rhino deployment breaks down.

Regardless of if we get a ruling by GW on it any time soon or not... this just doesn't seem like a consistent, or fun way to play / rule it.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/21 14:52:49


Post by: Captain Antivas


yakface wrote:
And seriously about the 'these purposes', that is the way the wrote the sentences. The whole thing is clearly written about calculating how many units are able to start in reserves, but the first sentence (about the units that must start in reserve) says 'for the purposes'. They *could* have written 'for the purpose', as they're only talking about one thing, but they didn't. They referred to it as a plural, so again in the next sentence they again refer to these same 'purposes'.

I get the distinction you're trying to push, but at best its complete inference on a minor (at best) grammatical difference. I understand that either way we argue this we can't ever know for sure exactly what 'these purposes' meant to the author, so there really is little point in going on and on and on because that bit will never be agreed upon by us.

My basic point still remains that this is at beast a nebulous issue, so it should not be utilized until GW comes out and says that it is what they intended.

Just because they could have written it differently doesn't mean that you are right in interpreting this the way you want to. I thought this forum was all about rules as written, and the way it is written is not how you are reading it. My wife, who is an English teacher, pointed out that "for the purposes of" is not only grammaticaly incorrect (which is irrelevant because there is no dispute that the phrase refers only to the calculation there only) but a prepositional phrase, as well as "for these purposes". Since both phrases have plurals they are both plural. "these purposes" cannot be singular in any correct interpretation of English writing. These purposes is plural. Badly written rules doesn't mean you get to creatively misinterpret them.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/21 15:19:43


Post by: AgeOfEgos


yakface wrote:
And seriously about the 'these purposes', that is the way the wrote the sentences. The whole thing is clearly written about calculating how many units are able to start in reserves, but the first sentence (about the units that must start in reserve) says 'for the purposes'. They *could* have written 'for the purpose', as they're only talking about one thing, but they didn't. They referred to it as a plural, so again in the next sentence they again refer to these same 'purposes'.

I get the distinction you're trying to push, but at best its complete inference on a minor (at best) grammatical difference. I understand that either way we argue this we can't ever know for sure exactly what 'these purposes' meant to the author, so there really is little point in going on and on and on because that bit will never be agreed upon by us.

My basic point still remains that this is at beast a nebulous issue, so it should not be utilized until GW comes out and says that it is what they intended.




While I understand your point, I did not read the section (and therefore probably disagree with the entire thread) that a Unit and its Dedicated Transport count as one for the purpose of half reserve. I read the sentence;

"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes."---and see that it directly follows the caveat that units that must start in reserve are ignored. To me, it essentially answers the inward questioning a player would have as he read the rule.

"Units that start in reserve are ignored..."
What about the guys buying transports that are ignored?
"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes"

But its poorly written so we'll just have to wait for a FAQ. However, given reds report (Yeah I know, not official but does lend credence to intent) from the Open Day (Where they stated units embarked on dedicated transports do not count against the limit)--and the fact they want to sell flyers--and the fact it would be a very non-cinematic translation (which they specifically stated they are avoiding)---I'm guessing we will see them completely ignored when/if they address it in a FAQ.



And after all that, I think it will be a moot point---because as someone that plays Necrons and has tried several variants of the FlyingWing â„¢---it's not that deadly and makes for boring games.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/21 16:37:17


Post by: Red Corsair


nvm


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Amerikon wrote:I think we're getting a bit in the weeds here. I'm going to try and simplify this argument. There are two interpretations of the rules here. One however results in the game being stupid, so I'm going to say that the non-stupid rule is the right one.

If I (or lets be honest here, my opponent) buys a flyer as a dedicated transport for his unit, those two units had damn well both be able to start in Reserve. If they can't, the game is stupid.

Maelstrom808 wrote:Overlord = 1
Overlord = 1
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0 (They are counted as a single unit for being a unit and it's dedicated transport, and are ignored since the transport must start in reserves)
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0
Warriors + Night Scythe = 0
Doom Scythe = 0 (Must start in reserves, so it is ignored)
Doom Scythe = 0
Doom Scythe = 0

Total = 2, cut in half and rounded up = 1.

We are done calculating how many units may start in reserve, our permission to count the Night Scyythe and Warriors as a single unit (and ignore them as a single unit) ends.

Now we can determine what actual units are going into reserves. Which units are not forced to start in reserves?

Overlord
Overlord
Warriors
Warriors
Warriors
Warriors

You may place one of these units in reserve.
Even if this is the interpretation of the rules that is most consistent with the precise wording of the rules it results in a ruling that is stupid. The english language is inherently ambiguous. Can we just decide to go with the ruling that's not stupid?



This is silly, I play guard and maybe I think it is stupid that I can buy 9 vendettas and fit all my infantry in them but can't due to the new 6th reserve rules in either interpretation. This is why I think claiming RAI for support is wrong. RAW I think Maelstrom and yak have it correct.

I think there is an easy solution anyway. Buy 3 dooms and 4 NS and simply start 2 units with two overlords on the table. You would think this would be better any way.

I also play wolves and my guard will always have a Rpreist anyway. I'll jaws your one lord every time and win turn one if that's how you really want to play.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/22 07:35:29


Post by: cowmonaut


So Yak, you are saying for example that any Chimeras for Al'rahem's Infantry Platoon would count? I will admit to having a desire for this to not be the case but I am trying not to let that sway my judgment.

To me, it sounds like if a unit has to be held in Reserve, its Dedicated Transport does not count either. The flip side is that if a Dedicated Transport has to be held in Reserve, nothing says the bit that bought it does not count.

Make sense? Or am I off my rocker?


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/22 14:33:36


Post by: Captain Antivas


cowmonaut wrote:So Yak, you are saying for example that any Chimeras for Al'rahem's Infantry Platoon would count? I will admit to having a desire for this to not be the case but I am trying not to let that sway my judgment.

To me, it sounds like if a unit has to be held in Reserve, its Dedicated Transport does not count either. The flip side is that if a Dedicated Transport has to be held in Reserve, nothing says the bit that bought it does not count.

Make sense? Or am I off my rocker?


You are off your rocker. Read the rules as written. Sometimes you have to parse a sentence to make sense of it. Upon parsing you are wrong, end of story.

I am also onboard with Red Corsair's idea. Not being able to enter play with a transport you purchased makes the game stupid. I will not play a stupid game.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/23 00:58:41


Post by: yakface


cowmonaut wrote:So Yak, you are saying for example that any Chimeras for Al'rahem's Infantry Platoon would count? I will admit to having a desire for this to not be the case but I am trying not to let that sway my judgment.

To me, it sounds like if a unit has to be held in Reserve, its Dedicated Transport does not count either. The flip side is that if a Dedicated Transport has to be held in Reserve, nothing says the bit that bought it does not count.

Make sense? Or am I off my rocker?


No, all of A'lRahem's platoon must outflank, that includes any dedicated transports that are purchased as part of the platoon. Therefore, all of these units must start the game in reserve and are therefore ignored for determining how many unit may be put into Reserve.

Captain Antivas wrote:
I am also onboard with Red Corsair's idea. Not being able to enter play with a transport you purchased makes the game stupid. I will not play a stupid game.


So, what about the several difference instances of units not being able to ride in their purchased transports, including basic SoB squads and Immolators, Space Marine units that don't break into combat squads and Razorbacks, etc (and there are more).

You keep approaching this rule as if its suddenly sneaking up on you and preventing you from deploying your units in their transport. If you know this rule exists (assuming my interpretation turns out to be correct) then it is YOUR CHOICE how to build your army. If you want to go ahead and build the entire army in Night Scythes, then you know doing so that some of your units are going to have to start on the table.

And that's the thing, the whole POINT of this rule along with the 'no models on the table at the end of a game turn=auto-lose' rule is clearly designed to remove nearly all-Reserve armies from the game. That is clearly the entire point of the rule! Now, obviously there are some exceptions in the form of armies that must deep strike (drop pods & daemons mainly), but for everything else the rule is there to FORCE YOU to keep 1/2 of your units on the table to start.

So if you think that not being able to start your units in their dedicated transports is stupid, then you just don't take an army configuration that would force you to do that.




Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/23 01:26:48


Post by: Captain Antivas


I like how you ignore the part where I refute your argument. I would treat the rule exactly as you recommend if the rule said that. But, since it doesn't I will continue to play according to the rules. I don't know enough about SoB to talk, but in those situations where your codex says you can't start in your transport you find another way to play it. But I should not have to resign myself to playing differently than my rules and my codex allow me to play.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/23 01:44:39


Post by: yakface


Captain Antivas wrote:I like how you ignore the part where I refute your argument. I would treat the rule exactly as you recommend if the rule said that. But, since it doesn't I will continue to play according to the rules. I don't know enough about SoB to talk, but in those situations where your codex says you can't start in your transport you find another way to play it. But I should not have to resign myself to playing differently than my rules and my codex allow me to play.


Where did you refute my argument? The post where you said that I was creatively interpreting rules based on improper grammar? If that's the one, then I didn't respond because there was nothing to respond to. Nobody can ever definitely prove what the author intended by the second 'these purposes' but safe to say I feel it is *you* who is creatively interpreting that phrase while you believe the same is true of me.

As for the SoB, they are a minimum 10 man squad, yet they can take an Immolator which only holds six models. Or Space Marine squads that don't combat squad and their Razorbacks. Or IG platoons that blob up and have Chimeras.

My whole point is that its not like you're not getting play with your units or they die instantly or something. But if you're choosing to take all Night Scythes then you know with that rule you're going to have to start some of your units out of the transports. So its not as though your army is illegal to play with, you just know taking it ahead of time you're not going to get to play with it as effectively as you'd like, the same way anyone using an army that isn't all auto-deep strike knows they're going to have to start 1/2 of the army on the table even though maybe they'd like to start the whole thing in reserves.

GW has made a concerted effort to remove the 'all reserve' army from the game, and I personally feel the rules are quite clear and that it takes creative interpretation to ignore what is being said in those rules. Hopefully GW will come out and FAQ this and if I'm in the wrong, then that's all cool (Its happened before and will happen again), but until that point I personally think as is with any vague rule that the best bet is to go with the least advantageous interpretation.




Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/23 03:35:47


Post by: Captain Antivas


I still don't understand how you can look at a plural noun and claim it is singular. The rule of this forum is rules as written not rules interpreted as safely as possible.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/23 04:41:31


Post by: FireBlade


Yakface - you stated again that an all drop pod army is ok. Why? Please see my earlier post on that nature. You seem to be stating that the drop pod rules say something that is remarkably different from what the standard reserves rules do. And they simply don't. They say, just like the rest of it, that for the purposes of working out how many units CAN start in reserve that they are ignored. And since that's the foundation of your entire argument on the Nightscythes, that there are 2 phases (the first phase where you find out how many CAN, start in reserve, and then the second one where people who can / must are split up, counted seperately, and then actually reserved), then it would mean you would have to treat them the same.

Doing otherwise is not consistent with even your own rules.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/23 11:44:35


Post by: cowmonaut


FireBlade wrote:Yakface - you stated again that an all drop pod army is ok. Why?


The Deep Strike rules on Page 36 is why. Any models embarked on a transport that must enter play via Deep Strike get ignored. Also, for all Space Marines other than Black Templar, half your Drop Pods come in automatically on Turn 1. So you won't auto-lose from not having any models on the table at the end of Game Turn 1.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/23 12:23:57


Post by: yakface


Captain Antivas wrote:I still don't understand how you can look at a plural noun and claim it is singular. The rule of this forum is rules as written not rules interpreted as safely as possible.


As I pointed out before *both* sentences refer to the word 'purposes' in the plural, when without a doubt at least we can all agree that the first sentence is only talking about one purpose (determining how many units can be put into reserve).

So whatever the 'purposes' the first sentence is referring to is IMHO the same thing the 'purposes' in the second sentence is referring to. You've accused me of creatively interpreting things, but to me trying to base an entire argument on incorrect plurality instead of just looking at the most simple explanation is what I perceive to be creative interpretation.

That entire section of the rules only has one purpose: To determine how many units are allowed to start in reserve.

And yes, the first sentence could and should dramatically have been written singularly as such:

'Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purpose of working out how many other units may do so.'

That is dramatically correct and more fitting given that they're actually only talking about a single purpose.

FireBlade wrote:Yakface - you stated again that an all drop pod army is ok. Why? Please see my earlier post on that nature. You seem to be stating that the drop pod rules say something that is remarkably different from what the standard reserves rules do. And they simply don't. They say, just like the rest of it, that for the purposes of working out how many units CAN start in reserve that they are ignored. And since that's the foundation of your entire argument on the Nightscythes, that there are 2 phases (the first phase where you find out how many CAN, start in reserve, and then the second one where people who can / must are split up, counted seperately, and then actually reserved), then it would mean you would have to treat them the same.

Doing otherwise is not consistent with even your own rules.


I do not see any sort of 'phases' in the least!

I'm just basically looking at the rules of what is or isn't allowed, and if you put too many things into reserve, then you've broken the rule and are not allowed to do that.

So if you put an all Drop Pod army into reserve, this is not an issue because the rules tell us that the units embarked on the transports are ignored as well as their transports.

But if you want to put everything in your army into a flyer and then put it into reserves you have an issue because now you've not been given permission to ignore the embarked units on your flyers, so therefore putting them all into reserve would be breaking the rule requiring you to deploy half the army.

Simple as that.


And here's a question for those of you arguing that you're allowed to ignore units embarked on flyers:

The rules state that an IC counts as a single unit regardless of whether they have joined another unit or not. It seems like most people are taking this to mean that if you have two ICs in your army, then even with an all flyer army you'd have to start one IC on the table.

But with an all Drop Pod army, this would clearly not be the case as any embarked models on the drop pod are ignored along with the drop pod.

So if you believe that flyers are 'ignored' and this status somehow passes onto their embarked units, why are people assuming this doesn't apply to an IC joined to a unit that is embarked on the flyer?

Because here is the crux of where I think the argument falls down. People have argued that the reserve rules for flyers & their passengers are effectively the same as the Deep Strike & their passenger rules, yet there is clearly a difference here.

ICs starting on a Deep Strike only transport are most definitely ignored. Are ICs starting on a 'must start in reserve' (flyer) ignored?

Because your whole argument hinges on transient properties of the transport and the embarked unit only counting as a single unit and therefore the 'ignore' property of the flyer somehow being passed onto the embarked unit. But if the IC says that he is always counted as a separate unit, then obviously even that transient property cannot be applied.





Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/23 13:32:55


Post by: FireBlade


Actually for an IC that's very simple. IC's are specifically stated that they ALWAYS count as a seperate unit for reserves. However, since you are stating that there aren't phases. I'd like to know why you are counting the units at one point, and then not at a later point.

You are saying, 3 troops, 3 dedicated transports = 3 (or if in a NS 0) for how many CAN be held in reserve... and then you are counting them seperately and saying 3 troops, 3 dedicated transports = 6 (or 3 in the case of a NS), for how many units MUST deploy in reserve, Then seperately saying since only this number MUST deploy, and you only CAN reserve this amount. Then this is how it's counted. If you are counting how many CAN go into reserve seperately from how many actually DO start in reserve. Then please show me the rule on the Drop Pods that states that the troops inside MUST start in their drop pod. I think that's only fair as that has been asked of people arguing pro NS deployment.

If you could please also show me where it later states that you stop counting the troops and their Dedicated Transports as one unit that would be great.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/23 23:12:16


Post by: yakface


FireBlade wrote:Actually for an IC that's very simple. IC's are specifically stated that they ALWAYS count as a seperate unit for reserves. However, since you are stating that there aren't phases. I'd like to know why you are counting the units at one point, and then not at a later point.

You are saying, 3 troops, 3 dedicated transports = 3 (or if in a NS 0) for how many CAN be held in reserve... and then you are counting them seperately and saying 3 troops, 3 dedicated transports = 6 (or 3 in the case of a NS), for how many units MUST deploy in reserve, Then seperately saying since only this number MUST deploy, and you only CAN reserve this amount. Then this is how it's counted. If you are counting how many CAN go into reserve seperately from how many actually DO start in reserve. Then please show me the rule on the Drop Pods that states that the troops inside MUST start in their drop pod. I think that's only fair as that has been asked of people arguing pro NS deployment.

If you could please also show me where it later states that you stop counting the troops and their Dedicated Transports as one unit that would be great.


Again, I'm not looking at their being any point in time where you do your count and then you're done with it. I see it written as an overall restriction of what you are allowed to put into reserves. Either it is legal (follows the rules) or is illegal (doesn't follow the rules).

So with a Drop Pod force (or any transport that must arrive via deep strike) once you declare that you're starting units embarked on that transport they are ignored and therefore are not counted against the number of units you need to start on the table.

With non-Deep Strike transports that still must start in reserve, such as flyers, since there is no actual rule which says the embarked units are ignored along with the transport that means starting the entire force breaks the basic rule as you don't have 1/2 of the total number of units starting on the table...so therefore this is something you are not allowed to do.

So there is no phase, there's no point where you say 'oh I'm screwed because I've already declared to put my models in the transport and now I can't get them back out'. This is just a basic rule that tells you how many units you need to start on the table, so if your starting deployment adheres to the restrictions, then you're fine, but if it doesn't then it isn't allowed.


Therefore in your example, if the entire army is made up of an IC, 3 Troops and 3 Night Scythes, then you have 4 units that are counted whether they are embarked or not, and therefore two of them need to start on the table, which in the case of this particular army means two of the units have to start out of their transports.

Whereas if these were Drop Pods instead of Night Scythes, embarking the units would clearly mean they are ignored for the purpose of determining how many units need to start on the table, so starting the units embarked would mean the entire army can start in reserve.





Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/24 01:56:29


Post by: FireBlade



yakface wrote:

FireBlade wrote:
Actually for an IC that's very simple. IC's are specifically stated that they ALWAYS count as a seperate unit for reserves. However, since you are stating that there aren't phases. I'd like to know why you are counting the units at one point, and then not at a later point.

You are saying, 3 troops, 3 dedicated transports = 3 (or if in a NS 0) for how many CAN be held in reserve... and then you are counting them seperately and saying 3 troops, 3 dedicated transports = 6 (or 3 in the case of a NS), for how many units MUST deploy in reserve, Then seperately saying since only this number MUST deploy, and you only CAN reserve this amount. Then this is how it's counted. If you are counting how many CAN go into reserve seperately from how many actually DO start in reserve. Then please show me the rule on the Drop Pods that states that the troops inside MUST start in their drop pod. I think that's only fair as that has been asked of people arguing pro NS deployment.

If you could please also show me where it later states that you stop counting the troops and their Dedicated Transports as one unit that would be great.


Again, I'm not looking at their being any point in time where you do your count and then you're done with it. I see it written as an overall restriction of what you are allowed to put into reserves. Either it is legal (follows the rules) or is illegal (doesn't follow the rules).

So with a Drop Pod force (or any transport that must arrive via deep strike) once you declare that you're starting units embarked on that transport they are ignored and therefore are not counted against the number of units you need to start on the table.

With non-Deep Strike transports that still must start in reserve, such as flyers, since there is no actual rule which says the embarked units are ignored along with the transport that means starting the entire force breaks the basic rule as you don't have 1/2 of the total number of units starting on the table...so therefore this is something you are not allowed to do.

So there is no phase, there's no point where you say 'oh I'm screwed because I've already declared to put my models in the transport and now I can't get them back out'. This is just a basic rule that tells you how many units you need to start on the table, so if your starting deployment adheres to the restrictions, then you're fine, but if it doesn't then it isn't allowed.


Therefore in your example, if the entire army is made up of an IC, 3 Troops and 3 Night Scythes, then you have 4 units that are counted whether they are embarked or not, and therefore two of them need to start on the table, which in the case of this particular army means two of the units have to start out of their transports.

Whereas if these were Drop Pods instead of Night Scythes, embarking the units would clearly mean they are ignored for the purpose of determining how many units need to start on the table, so starting the units embarked would mean the entire army can start in reserve.


Sorry for my misunderstanding on why you were stating this. Those examples of the "calculation phase" etc. have been put forward by some of the other people who are stating what you are. Ok.

Below is the rule. Please show me why it makes more sense to interpret:

"A unit and it's Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes." as meaning a single purpose (even though it very clearly says THESE)

and also why it makes more sense for that sentence to apply to the initial first sentence, instead of the one immediately preceding it.


"When deploying their armies, players can choose not to deploy up to half of their units (rounding up) keeping them as Reserves to arrive later. Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so. A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes. Independent Characters are also counted as a single unit regardless of whether they have joined another unit or not. During deployment when declaring which units are kept as Reserves, the player must clearly explain the organisation of his Reserves to the opponent."

In fact, going based off of what you said here:

Again, I'm not looking at their being any point in time where you do your count and then you're done with it. I see it written as an overall restriction of what you are allowed to put into reserves. Either it is legal (follows the rules) or is illegal (doesn't follow the rules).

So with a Drop Pod force (or any transport that must arrive via deep strike) once you declare that you're starting units embarked on that transport they are ignored and therefore are not counted against the number of units you need to start on the table.

With non-Deep Strike transports that still must start in reserve, such as flyers, since there is no actual rule which says the embarked units are ignored along with the transport that means starting the entire force breaks the basic rule as you don't have 1/2 of the total number of units starting on the table...so therefore this is something you are not allowed to do.


That actually makes fliers less restrictive than Drop Pods. Since it doesn't even say that the unit must start embarked in their transport to be counted together. It simply says that:
"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes"
What purpose? Well even if it's only 1 purpose... that would be the immediately preceding sentence:
"Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so."

So a flier and itss warriors count as a single unit. The flier must start in reserve. That unit isn't counted.

The only other alternative interpretation is:
A flier and its warriors count as a single unit. The flier is unable to bestow its special quality of "must start in reserver" upon the warriors. Therefore the flier must start in reserve, and we must count the flier and the dedicated transport seperately. Now this may be a little complex to see the logical issue here so translation =
A = B
A = X
B = Y
Therefore A =/= B

You can't do that. A = B is a given. You can't change that rule.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/24 02:35:50


Post by: yakface


FireBlade wrote:[
That actually makes fliers less restrictive than Drop Pods. Since it doesn't even say that the unit must start embarked in their transport to be counted together. It simply says that:
"A unit and its Dedicated Transport are counted as a single unit for these purposes"
What purpose? Well even if it's only 1 purpose... that would be the immediately preceding sentence:
"Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so."

So a flier and itss warriors count as a single unit. The flier must start in reserve. That unit isn't counted.



But 'these' purposes in the second sentence cannot simply refer to the sentence before it because those two rules are necessarily separate for 'standard' units that must start in reserve (such as flyers without any transport capacity) and also 'standard' transports and their passengers (such as Rhinos and their passengers), respectively.

So as I've stated from the very beginning the way I read those two sentences, and the interpretation I think makes the most sense when you get out of the mindset of trying to exclusively apply this to flyers is as follows:

"When deploying their armies, players can choose not to deploy up to half of their units (rounding up) keeping them as Reserves to arrive later."

This statement is what 'these purposes' later on IMHO is referring to. So continuing with the 'first' sentence:

"Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purposes of working out how many other units may do so."

This covers all units that must start in reserve, such as regular flyers that don't transport other units. And then the second sentence:

"A unit and its dedicated transport are counted as a single unit for [the purposes of working out how many units may start the game in reserve]."


So that's my interpretation. 'These purposes' is referring to the purposes of determining how many units can start in reserve. And that second sentence is telling you that if you have a Rhino and its unit, they count as only a single unit.

I see absolutely no clear evidence that if the transport also happens to be a unit that starts in reserve this means the 'ignore' status of the transport applies to the embarked unit...it would still count as 1 unit towards determining how many units must start on the table and therefore you would be compelled to start some of your units on the table in order to satisfy the requirement to start 1/2 of your units on the table.

If you don't agree with my interpretation (which obviously you don't) then that's fine, but since the whole thing essentially boils down to what is implied by 'these purposes', I think we can safely say that I'm never going to be able to definitively convince you and vice-versa.



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/24 02:49:48


Post by: FireBlade


I simply can't agree with your logic behind cherry picking sentence 3, applying it to sentence 1, and then leaving sentence 2 to operate as if sentence 3 wasn't there. It just simply doens't make any sense.

You're saying "count them as one unit" unless 1 of them has some special rule... then count them seperately. Which the rules just don't say.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/24 03:12:47


Post by: Captain Antivas


yakface wrote:
Captain Antivas wrote:I still don't understand how you can look at a plural noun and claim it is singular. The rule of this forum is rules as written not rules interpreted as safely as possible.


As I pointed out before *both* sentences refer to the word 'purposes' in the plural, when without a doubt at least we can all agree that the first sentence is only talking about one purpose (determining how many units can be put into reserve).

So whatever the 'purposes' the first sentence is referring to is IMHO the same thing the 'purposes' in the second sentence is referring to. You've accused me of creatively interpreting things, but to me trying to base an entire argument on incorrect plurality instead of just looking at the most simple explanation is what I perceive to be creative interpretation.

That entire section of the rules only has one purpose: To determine how many units are allowed to start in reserve.

And yes, the first sentence could and should dramatically have been written singularly as such:

'Units that must start the game in reserve are ignored for the purpose of working out how many other units may do so.'

That is dramatically correct and more fitting given that they're actually only talking about a single purpose.

I dont think any of us are in a position to say how anything should be written. We dont know what they were thinking and as such can only go by what is written. Now I am not sure what language you are speaking but where I come from when a noun ends in an s it is plural. Now you could argue that the first usage of purposes is singular because the article is singular as well as the rest of the sentence making it clear. So in that case despite the plural purposes is clearly singular. However, the next sentence has nothing tacked onto the end to provide such clarity, and the article is plural as well as the noun. You can say it is an accident but until faq'd by your forum rules (i say your rules because as an admin I assume you had a hand in making and enforcing them) it is as written, plural. Many purposes. Well, only two. Deployment of the army not in reserves and counting how many units can stay in reserves.

By your logic the phrase "cut down those trees" is telling me to cut down a single tree.

Because your whole argument hinges on transient properties of the transport and the embarked unit only counting as a single unit and therefore the 'ignore' property of the flyer somehow being passed onto the embarked unit. But if the IC says that he is always counted as a separate unit, then obviously even that transient property cannot be applied.

Except the IC rule is specifically stated as such. You don't get to say that because an IC is treated differently everyone is treated differently.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/24 03:18:42


Post by: yakface


FireBlade wrote:I simply can't agree with your logic behind cherry picking sentence 3, applying it to sentence 1, and then leaving sentence 2 to operate as if sentence 3 wasn't there. It just simply doens't make any sense.

You're saying "count them as one unit" unless 1 of them has some special rule... then count them seperately. Which the rules just don't say.


No, I'm saying that you count them as one unit for the purposes of determining how many units need to start in Reserves. So basically we're only talking about counting the number of units. There is no indication that because you count these units as one for numerical purposes that you pass any other rules one or the other unit may have onto each other.

So all I'm doing for these purposes is counting them as a single unit, but although the transport is ignored for these purposes, the unit inside is not so that means in order to fulfill the rule to start 1/2 your units on the table you will have to choose not to deploy some of your units inside their transport in this case.

You seem to be implying that a transport and its embarked unit count as the SAME unit, which the rules do not say. They only say they count as a SINGLE unit for the purposes of determining how many units must start on the table.

That really seems to be the hitching point between what is being said. You seem to think that because they're counted as only one unit together that means they're essentially the same unit, whereas I'm approaching these rules strictly from a numerical standpoint. I see the rule referring to a 'single unit' as simply a number...that a transport and its unit which is normally considered two units for the purpose of caculating the number of units that must start in reserve is now considered only one. But in no way do I see this as meaning they are the SAME unit, so if one part of that unit is ignored and the other part isn't then you're still stuck counting the embarked unit as one unit.



Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/24 06:50:11


Post by: Captain Antivas


We understand what you are saying, why you say what you say, the road you took to get there, and how many times you stopped to tinkle. We get it. But you can hold your breath all day long, the rules still don't say what you want them to say.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/24 12:44:41


Post by: yakface


Captain Antivas wrote:We understand what you are saying, why you say what you say, the road you took to get there, and how many times you stopped to tinkle. We get it. But you can hold your breath all day long, the rules still don't say what you want them to say.


And you can be as dismissive as you'd like to be about my argument but I happen to feel that no matter how many times you reiterate how correct you think you are and how foolish I am for explaining myself that I do not agree with your assessment and I believe that you are the one stretching the rules to say something they do not say (that embarked units are ignored because they count as only a single unit along with their transport which IS ignored).

However, I fully recognize that the argument hinges upon defining a phrase that isn't explicitly explained in the rules, so I can understand your point of view and empathize with how you came to that conclusion. If you don't feel the same, then oh well. I've put forth my position as best I can and there are plenty of people as evidenced throughout this thread that clearly read the rule the same way that I did.





Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/24 13:52:26


Post by: Maelstrom808


yakface wrote:
Captain Antivas wrote:We understand what you are saying, why you say what you say, the road you took to get there, and how many times you stopped to tinkle. We get it. But you can hold your breath all day long, the rules still don't say what you want them to say.


And you can be as dismissive as you'd like to be about my argument but I happen to feel that no matter how many times you reiterate how correct you think you are and how foolish I am for explaining myself that I do not agree with your assessment and I believe that you are the one stretching the rules to say something they do not say (that embarked units are ignored because they count as only a single unit along with their transport which IS ignored).

However, I fully recognize that the argument hinges upon defining a phrase that isn't explicitly explained in the rules, so I can understand your point of view and empathize with how you came to that conclusion. If you don't feel the same, then oh well. I've put forth my position as best I can and there are plenty of people as evidenced throughout this thread that clearly read the rule the same way that I did.





Indeed. There are only so many times you can go back and forth, calling each other wrong and repeating the same arguments before you have to come to the conclusion that you are simply not going to change the other guy's mind. Discuss it with your opponent, roll off if need be, and wait for the FAQ is all I can suggest at this point.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/24 14:03:07


Post by: FireBlade



Yakface wrote:

FireBlade wrote:
I simply can't agree with your logic behind cherry picking sentence 3, applying it to sentence 1, and then leaving sentence 2 to operate as if sentence 3 wasn't there. It just simply doens't make any sense.

You're saying "count them as one unit" unless 1 of them has some special rule... then count them seperately. Which the rules just don't say.


No, I'm saying that you count them as one unit for the purposes of determining how many units need to start in Reserves. So basically we're only talking about counting the number of units. There is no indication that because you count these units as one for numerical purposes that you pass any other rules one or the other unit may have onto each other.


If you really are counting them as one unit, which you must do according to the rules, then why are you splitting them up?
Warriors + NS = Ignore whole unit = counting together.
Warriors + NS = Warriors 1 + Ignore NS = not so much counting together. You counted them seperately and then added them together. That's not the same thing. By that logic I count my entire army together since I add it all up.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/24 14:26:07


Post by: Captain Antivas


yakface wrote:
Captain Antivas wrote:We understand what you are saying, why you say what you say, the road you took to get there, and how many times you stopped to tinkle. We get it. But you can hold your breath all day long, the rules still don't say what you want them to say.


And you can be as dismissive as you'd like to be about my argument but I happen to feel that no matter how many times you reiterate how correct you think you are and how foolish I am for explaining myself that I do not agree with your assessment and I believe that you are the one stretching the rules to say something they do not say (that embarked units are ignored because they count as only a single unit along with their transport which IS ignored).

However, I fully recognize that the argument hinges upon defining a phrase that isn't explicitly explained in the rules, so I can understand your point of view and empathize with how you came to that conclusion. If you don't feel the same, then oh well. I've put forth my position as best I can and there are plenty of people as evidenced throughout this thread that clearly read the rule the same way that I did.

I understand what you are saying and how you can think that way. I don't agree, but I see. It is unclear for sure. I am trying to figure out why you think that way. As evidenced by other posts where we have clashed I am more than willing to change my position if proven wrong. To be proven wrong I have to understand why you think that way. And what I am getting caught up on is how a plural can be read as singular.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 02:17:54


Post by: lazarian


The rule does not have every exception covered so there is that gap. I know on this forum it would be a mistake to say this however the spirit of the rule would seem to overwhelmingly indicate that If drop pods get to whisk away marines then fliers get the same treatment. As has been stated the penalty for being 'phased out' as it were by having your board clear would seem to be the powerful deterrent to this tactic.

I also empathize that GW is trying to remove null deployment tactic , given that it is an asymmetrically powerful tool in the right hands. So who knows, there will be a FAQ soon or a mess in tournaments trying to adjudicate it.

Given the almost certainty of flak missiles/flier defense in the new books plus shifting meta I do not feel this tactic is insurmountable, just really strong for the first few tournaments were going to see here in 6th.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 02:56:58


Post by: Captain Antivas


lazarian wrote:The rule does not have every exception covered so there is that gap. I know on this forum it would be a mistake to say this however the spirit of the rule would seem to overwhelmingly indicate that If drop pods get to whisk away marines then fliers get the same treatment. As has been stated the penalty for being 'phased out' as it were by having your board clear would seem to be the powerful deterrent to this tactic.

I also empathize that GW is trying to remove null deployment tactic , given that it is an asymmetrically powerful tool in the right hands. So who knows, there will be a FAQ soon or a mess in tournaments trying to adjudicate it.

Given the almost certainty of flak missiles/flier defense in the new books plus shifting meta I do not feel this tactic is insurmountable, just really strong for the first few tournaments were going to see here in 6th.

I agree that the spirit is clear, but it is also supported by the actual wording. Now Yakface is right that your IC always counts as their own unit so you will always end up starting something on the board, so be smart with it. But it has its risks as well. But we can't say that the rules clearly say you can't take that risk.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 03:07:33


Post by: lazarian


Captain Antivas wrote:
lazarian wrote:The rule does not have every exception covered so there is that gap. I know on this forum it would be a mistake to say this however the spirit of the rule would seem to overwhelmingly indicate that If drop pods get to whisk away marines then fliers get the same treatment. As has been stated the penalty for being 'phased out' as it were by having your board clear would seem to be the powerful deterrent to this tactic.

I also empathize that GW is trying to remove null deployment tactic , given that it is an asymmetrically powerful tool in the right hands. So who knows, there will be a FAQ soon or a mess in tournaments trying to adjudicate it.

Given the almost certainty of flak missiles/flier defense in the new books plus shifting meta I do not feel this tactic is insurmountable, just really strong for the first few tournaments were going to see here in 6th.

I agree that the spirit is clear, but it is also supported by the actual wording. Now Yakface is right that your IC always counts as their own unit so you will always end up starting something on the board, so be smart with it. But it has its risks as well. But we can't say that the rules clearly say you can't take that risk.


I plan on playing it how I view the spirit of the rule. Its just always unfortunate that these things crop up.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 14:37:00


Post by: cowmonaut


Captain Antivas wrote:I agree that the spirit is clear, but it is also supported by the actual wording. Now Yakface is right that your IC always counts as their own unit so you will always end up starting something on the board, so be smart with it. But it has its risks as well. But we can't say that the rules clearly say you can't take that risk.


Well, in 99% of cases you always start with something in the board. Always remember the rules for Deep Strike. Transports that must enter play with Deep Strike (Mysetic Spores and Drop Pods are the only ones I know of) let you ignore the models embarked on it. So if you attach your IC to a squad in a Drop Pod, you get to ignore the IC.

There are two ways I know of so far that allow null deployment, and thanks to Drop Pods coming in largely on Turn 1 they are doable.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 14:43:38


Post by: Barksdale


cowmonaut wrote:Always remember the rules for Deep Strike. Transports that must enter play with Deep Strike (Mysetic Spores and Drop Pods are the only ones I know of) let you ignore the models embarked on it. So if you attach your IC to a squad in a Drop Pod, you get to ignore the IC.


You can only attach an IC to a squad in reserve (ie drop pod) if the IC is already in reserve. See preparing reserves, page 124, second paragraph.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 14:59:08


Post by: Captain Antivas


This is true. An all DP army is viable, but if you don't have a vehicle that must DS then you are limited in that respect. Like CSM. No transports that must DS or even must start in reserves. So they are limited.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 15:00:26


Post by: cowmonaut


Since when are specific (advanced rules) not going to override a basic rule? An exception is made in the rules for Deep Strike. Once you are holding the IC in reserve, its embarked on a Drop Pod and no longer counts towards your total percent of reserved units. I still don't see a problem with this.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 15:05:00


Post by: Barksdale


cowmonaut wrote:Since when are specific (advanced rules) not going to override a basic rule? An exception is made in the rules for Deep Strike. Once you are holding the IC in reserve, its embarked on a Drop Pod and no longer counts towards your total percent of reserved units. I still don't see a problem with this.


There is no problem with it. Just noting the rule. So if you have reserved your IC, you have already counted it for determining which units are eligible for reserves, per preparing reserves, first paragraph, page 124.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 15:14:57


Post by: cowmonaut


Barksdale wrote:There is no problem with it. Just noting the rule. So if you have reserved your IC, you have already counted it for determining which units are eligible for reserves, per preparing reserves, first paragraph, page 124.

Here's the biggest flaw in your reasoning: By the same argument, you would have to count the unit that purchased the Drop Pod regardless if it was embarked on the transport or not. In that same paragraph, you don't state that any units are embarked on transports until after you declare which units Independent Characters have joined.

That means the advanced rules for Deep Strike that specifically call out transports that must Deep Strike do nothing. That's clearly not the case.

Edit: To clarify there is absolutely no rule that states you have to be embarked on a Dedicated Transport when you are held in reserve. Legally, you can walk on the board alongside your transport. This is also what allows "empty" Drop Pods.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 15:20:03


Post by: Barksdale


cowmonaut wrote:
Barksdale wrote:There is no problem with it. Just noting the rule. So if you have reserved your IC, you have already counted it for determining which units are eligible for reserves, per preparing reserves, first paragraph, page 124.

Here's the biggest flaw in your reasoning: By the same argument, you would have to count the unit that purchased the Drop Pod regardless if it was embarked on the transport or not. In that same paragraph, you don't state that any units are embarked on transports until after you declare which units Independent Characters have joined.



The difference is that it is a dedicated transport for the squad.

It is very possible that I missing this bit. Can I get a reference please on that last bit: you don't state that any units are embarked on transports until after you declare which units Independent Characters have joined."


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 15:22:29


Post by: Captain Antivas


Reserves is general and deep strike is specific. The DS rule states "when placing the unit in reserve you must tell your opponent that it will be arriving by Deep Strike (sometimes referred to as Deep Strike Reserves)". In order to start a game with a unit the IC has to start in reserves in the unit, just let your opponent know what unit it is joining. So you put your tactical squad in a drop pod, add the Captain, and advise your opponent that the Captain will be deep striking with the tactical squad in the drop pod. Both rules satisfied and the IC is not counted.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Barksdale wrote:
cowmonaut wrote:
Barksdale wrote:There is no problem with it. Just noting the rule. So if you have reserved your IC, you have already counted it for determining which units are eligible for reserves, per preparing reserves, first paragraph, page 124.

Here's the biggest flaw in your reasoning: By the same argument, you would have to count the unit that purchased the Drop Pod regardless if it was embarked on the transport or not. In that same paragraph, you don't state that any units are embarked on transports until after you declare which units Independent Characters have joined.



The difference is that it is a dedicated transport for the squad.

It is very possible that I missing this bit. Can I get a reference please on that last bit: you don't state that any units are embarked on transports until after you declare which units Independent Characters have joined."


Dedicated Transports have no bearing on Deep Striking. Dedicated Transports are only relevant to Reserves not Deep Striking.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 15:27:02


Post by: cowmonaut


Barksdale wrote:It is very possible that I missing this bit. Can I get a reference please on that last bit: you don't state that any units are embarked on transports until after you declare which units Independent Characters have joined."


You have the page number, but so be it. Here is what paragraph 2 says (in order):

1. ...specify to the opponent if any of his Independent Characters left in reserve are joining a unit...
2. ...specify if any units in reserve are embarked upon any Transport vehicles in reserve...

Again, that is the actual order of the paragraph. You don't embark on a transport until after you decide where your ICs go. So your logic is broken. As a RAW example, you can null deploy as Space Wolves with 4 HQ choices if they all have a Drop Pod they can squeeze aboard and all other units are on Drop Pods.

Edit: And the rules for Deep Strike are for transports that must Deep Strike. They don't have to be Dedicated.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 15:28:35


Post by: Barksdale


Captain Antivas wrote:

Reserves is general and deep strike is specific.


Agreed.

Captain Antivas wrote:
The DS rule states "when placing the unit in reserve you must tell your opponent that it will be arriving by Deep Strike (sometimes referred to as Deep Strike Reserves)". In order to start a game with a unit the IC has to start in reserves in the unit, just let your opponent know what unit it is joining.


Here is the bit that I am having trouble with. So if the IC is in reserves, than you have already counted it.

Captain Antivas wrote:So you put your tactical squad in a drop pod, add the Captain, and advise your opponent that the Captain will be deep striking with the tactical squad in the drop pod. Both rules satisfied and the IC is not counted.


As above, you have already counted the IC as eligible for reserves. It must be done to satisfy the reserves rule on page 124.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
cowmonaut wrote:
Barksdale wrote:It is very possible that I missing this bit. Can I get a reference please on that last bit: you don't state that any units are embarked on transports until after you declare which units Independent Characters have joined."


You have the page number, but so be it. Here is what paragraph 2 says (in order):

1. ...specify to the opponent if any of his Independent Characters left in reserve are joining a unit...
2. ...specify if any units in reserve are embarked upon any Transport vehicles in reserve...

Again, that is the actual order of the paragraph. You don't embark on a transport until after you decide where your ICs go. So your logic is broken. As a RAW example, you can null deploy as Space Wolves with 4 HQ choices if they all have a Drop Pod they can squeeze aboard and all other units are on Drop Pods.

Edit: And the rules for Deep Strike are for transports that must Deep Strike. They don't have to be Dedicated.


This is very clear. Don't know how I missed that.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 15:39:18


Post by: Captain Antivas


Barksdale wrote:
Captain Antivas wrote:
The DS rule states "when placing the unit in reserve you must tell your opponent that it will be arriving by Deep Strike (sometimes referred to as Deep Strike Reserves)". In order to start a game with a unit the IC has to start in reserves in the unit, just let your opponent know what unit it is joining.


Here is the bit that I am having trouble with. So if the IC is in reserves, than you have already counted it.


The flaw is that you don't do the final calculation until you deploy. The Reserve rules say that you can not deploly 50% of your army and leave the rest in reserve. When calculating how many units may do so units embarked on a transport that must deep strike are ignored. Even if you counted the IC first he is ignored in the final count of how many units must start on the board because he has been placed in reserves with a unit on a transport that must deep strike.


Units in dedicated transports that must start in reserves. @ 2012/07/25 15:57:20


Post by: Barksdale


Captain Antivas wrote: Even if you counted the IC first he is ignored in the final count of how many units must start on the board because he has been placed in reserves with a unit on a transport that must deep strike.


Right, this is the key point. Even if first you count the IC, but once it deploys with the squad in the drop pod, the subsequent count ignores it.

I see it now thanks guys.