So I was looking at the rules for allies of convenience carefully and I noticed something that kind of scared me and I wondered what everyone else thought.

Those rules (pg 112) say:

"Units in your army treat Allies of Convenience as enemy units that cannot be charged, shot, targeted with psychic powers or have templates or blast markers placed over them."


At first I thought this might mean that AoC Troops units couldn't be scoring units for your side...if they're enemy units surely they can't score for you! But then I noticed that first bit in the quote above ("Units in your army..."). That bit of text means that only the units in your army treat them as enemy. You (as the player) still treat them as friendly models, so combined with the fact that the Desperate Ally rules actually specify that these units cannot score or deny, makes it pretty clear that AoC Troops units can score for you.


But the bigger question is: Are your own AoC units denial units against your own side? I've looked at all the rules and I think by the RAW they would be denial units against your own side, as much as that sucks.

Do you guys agree or disagree based on the rules, and how have you been playing this situation if you have already thought of this?

As you said only your units treat them as enemy units, you do not, so they do not deny your own units from capturing an objective.

This is because you only count enemy units that deny, not your units.

"You control an objective if there is at least one model from one of your scoring units, and no models from enemy denial units, within 3" of it." P. 123

You control the objective if the conditions are met, you only count enemy units as denial units based on context. Enemy denial units references your opponents units, and not the units your units consider enemy units.

My interpretation of the RAW is that AoC units are denial units against your main detachment units. I wouldn't play it that way, but thats how its written.




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also there was this discussion a while back on this matter

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/504549.page

This is painfully simple.

1) What are your scoring denial/units? Listed in that part of the rulebook. It lays out the scoring/denial units for each player. The relationship between individual units on the battlefield is irrelevant beyond Player A and Player B.

2) "Units in your army treat..."

3) Does this effect 1? No. Moving swiftly on.

Obvious case of someone thinking they've found a loophole when they haven't.




Automatically Appended Next Post:


"You control an objective if there is at least one model from one of your scoring units, and no models from enemy denial units, within 3."

The only thing determining your scoring and denial units is your army composition. Whether or not one unit treats another as an enemy unit within your army, has no effect on the above.

 DeathReaper wrote:
As you said only your units treat them as enemy units, you do not, so they do not deny your own units from capturing an objective.

This is because you only count enemy units that deny, not your units.

"You control an objective if there is at least one model from one of your scoring units, and no models from enemy denial units, within 3" of it." P. 123

You control the objective if the conditions are met, you only count enemy units as denial units based on context. Enemy denial units references your opponents units, and not the units your units consider enemy units.

Exactly this. You do not treat AoC as enemy denial units and therefore they do not deny.

What about in a Kill Points game?

If they are "enemy" units and they are killed, do both side gets the points?

From BRB
"At the end of the game, each player receives 1 Victory Point for each enemy unit that has been completely destroyed."

40k-noob wrote:
What about in a Kill Points game?

If they are "enemy" units and they are killed, do both side gets the points?

From BRB
"At the end of the game, each player receives 1 Victory Point for each enemy unit that has been completely destroyed."

Does the player treat the AoC as enemies, or do your units?

It's really not hard to follow the logic here - your units do not gain points, you do. Your units are the only things treating the AoC as enemies in certain circumstances.

rigeld2 wrote:

40k-noob wrote:
What about in a Kill Points game?

If they are "enemy" units and they are killed, do both side gets the points?

From BRB
"At the end of the game, each player receives 1 Victory Point for each enemy unit that has been completely destroyed."

Does the player treat the AoC as enemies, or do your units?

It's really not hard to follow the logic here - your units do not gain points, you do. Your units are the only things treating the AoC as enemies in certain circumstances.

Just asking a question.

 Flinty wrote:
My interpretation of the RAW is that AoC units are denial units against your main detachment units. I wouldn't play it that way, but thats how its written.

No, that is not how it is written.

The RAW is that the player counts victory points, therefore only your opponents units are denial units.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Flinty wrote:
My interpretation of the RAW is that AoC units are denial units against your main detachment units. I wouldn't play it that way, but thats how its written.

No, that is not how it is written.

The RAW is that the player counts victory points, therefore only your opponents units are denial units.

I can see the distinction you're making but I've read through the relevant sections and something doesn't sit quite right with me about your logic. I'm not particularly concerned either way really as I think the intent is clear enough.

Perhaps you could elaborate on why you think it's incorrect?

There's literally no other way to read it.

This has been debated at length.

The rule lawyers will litigate. It will come out that Allies of Convenience can score(FAQ'd at some point). For the time being, debate away.

Desperate allies specifically states "non scoring".

Really guys?

I had a reply written, then deleted it and posted this. Because there's no way this should have ever been asked. If anyone tried to lever this rule on you you should facepalm them. Because they didn't think for two seconds and do it themselves, and they rightly deserve it. While fascinating that the English language has once again failed GW and their 'three-year-old-hamfisitng-a-crayon' rules writing style,(as one forum member put it.), and props for finding it BTW, use common sense please. Most players should realize by now that you can't 100% go by Games-Workshop RAW. Sorry rules lawyers, no dice.

Allow me to emphasize: LMAO <---This is the reaction if someone brings this up again.

It'd be awesome if you'd read the thread before throwing your derision into it.

Nothing "failed" GW. Yakface had a question, it was answered. What's with the insults and patronizing?

KnuckleWolf wrote:
Really guys?

I had a reply written, then deleted it and posted this. Because there's no way this should have ever been asked. If anyone tried to lever this rule on you you should facepalm them. Because they didn't think for two seconds and do it themselves, and they rightly deserve it. While fascinating that the English language has once again failed GW and their 'three-year-old-hamfisitng-a-crayon' rules writing style,(as one forum member put it.), and props for finding it BTW, use common sense please. Most players should realize by now that you can't 100% go by Games-Workshop RAW. Sorry rules lawyers, no dice.

Allow me to emphasize: LMAO <---This is the reaction if someone brings this up again.

Angry much? Last I checked, this was still a discussion forum.

rigeld2 wrote:
Perhaps you could elaborate on why you think it's incorrect?

There's literally no other way to read it.

Yeah, sorry... baby related distraction. Changing nappies is nasty but it at least gives you time to think

I think there is an issue of consistency of preciseness. I agree the first paragraph on p123 says "your" scoring units but then just goes on to reference "enemy denial units". Not "your enemy denial units". If you then see what is defined as a denial unit the description again is more general by just saying those squads that can prevent "an enemy from controlling an objective". Applying the same level of preciseness in the language implies to me that an ally of convenience is still an "enemy denial unit" and therefore can affect your scoring units as described in the first paragraph of p123.

I'd like to see a poll for the general consensus here on YMDC. If GW should FAQ it they don't count as scoring then I'll play it that way but not until then.

 Flinty wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Perhaps you could elaborate on why you think it's incorrect?

There's literally no other way to read it.

Yeah, sorry... baby related distraction. Changing nappies is nasty but it at least gives you time to think

I think there is an issue of consistency of preciseness. I agree the first paragraph on p123 says "your" scoring units but then just goes on to reference "enemy denial units". Not "your enemy denial units". If you then see what is defined as a denial unit the description again is more general by just saying those squads that can prevent "an enemy from controlling an objective". Applying the same level of preciseness in the language implies to me that an ally of convenience is still an "enemy denial unit" and therefore can affect your scoring units as described in the first paragraph of p123.

Well that is fine, but it ignores context.

P. 123 talks of your scoring units, so in context "enemy denial units" are anything that is a enemy unit as far as the players are concerned.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Flinty wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
Perhaps you could elaborate on why you think it's incorrect?

There's literally no other way to read it.

Yeah, sorry... baby related distraction. Changing nappies is nasty but it at least gives you time to think

I think there is an issue of consistency of preciseness. I agree the first paragraph on p123 says "your" scoring units but then just goes on to reference "enemy denial units". Not "your enemy denial units". If you then see what is defined as a denial unit the description again is more general by just saying those squads that can prevent "an enemy from controlling an objective". Applying the same level of preciseness in the language implies to me that an ally of convenience is still an "enemy denial unit" and therefore can affect your scoring units as described in the first paragraph of p123.

Well that is fine, but it ignores context.

P. 123 talks of your scoring units, so in context "enemy denial units" are anything that is a enemy unit as far as the players are concerned.

Playing devil's advocate and all that, the text is so precise otherwise that I don't think we need to rely on context. The sentence says "You" and "your scoring unit" but doesn't say "your enemy's denial units" but rather just "enemy denial units". This doesn't specify by whom it needs to be considered an enemy.

Well considering you have scoring units, it follows that they are talking about the opposing players denial units.

The first Your sets the context for talking about the players, ans not the models on the field. Players have scoring and denial units units do not.

"You control an objective if there is at least one model from one of your scoring units, and no models from enemy denial units, within 3."

They could just have easily said ', and no models from your enemies denial units' but that language is not needed if you parse the sentence correctly.

I'm personally satisfied by the logic presented in this thread.

But I am curious as to if anyone has encountered other players, judges or T.O.s wanting to rule the opposite way (that AoC units do deny your own units from capturing and objective)?

Yeeeeah. Came back to apologize. That was uncool of me in the extreme. Just had a DnD rule fight before I posted, was tired as all get out, you know, the usual angry nerd conditions. So sorry. Disregard the earlier post, if you can. Though even with a far cooler head, still find it hard to believe this actually came up. I desperately want to know if this has ever come up in an official capacity like yakface said.

I read the rules top-down again. Won't bother complicating this argument with the logic, but will say I found no reason for the RAW to have allied units of any classification deny you an objective or not claim it for you themselves. Except in the most extreme grammatical context of explanations given that were intended for clarification of functional meanings.

Sorry again

The Beasts of War guys did something hilarious.

They multi-assaulted allies of convenience, because they count as enemies and a pile-in-move isn't a charge move, some of the other players units had to pile in against each other and hit each other (Thunder hammer is in base with only a Necron Warrior while the Orks are attacking both units, the thunder hammer hits the Necrons?)

So I wanted to add my own opinions on this as the way I'm reading it they would deny against your own side.

One of the big points here seems to be drawing a distinction between your units and how your units treat them. Saving that thats purely artificial (the rules don't say other players denial units, just enemy) simply by them saying "your units" that includes the unit itself as it is one of "your units" and thus it is an enemy (To itself). That means an AoC can score *but* when checking that objective will also find an enemy denial unit within 3" because all your units treat them as such and so will fail to claim the objective. They can still deny however as your opponent treats them as an enemy unit as well.

Now the addition of "Non Scoring/Non Denial" on desperate allies takes it a step further, now they cannot score for you but also cannot even be used as a denial unit to block enemy objective taking, definately worse even before the 1/6 chance to do nothing.

It's not an elegantly worded solution, hey this is GW after all, but it seems to be the way. It also fits the fluff, you may bring in some Ork Freebooters to serve as cannon fodder but you can't expect them to secure the objective for you and not wreck/steal it.

 Dunklezahn wrote:
So I wanted to add my own opinions on this as the way I'm reading it they would deny against your own side.

One of the big points here seems to be drawing a distinction between your units and how your units treat them. Saving that thats purely artificial (the rules don't say other players denial units, just enemy) simply by them saying "your units" that includes the unit itself as it is one of "your units" and thus it is an enemy (To itself). That means an AoC can score *but* when checking that objective will also find an enemy denial unit within 3" because all your units treat them as such and so will fail to claim the objective. They can still deny however as your opponent treats them as an enemy unit as well.

Now the addition of "Non Scoring/Non Denial" on desperate allies takes it a step further, now they cannot score for you but also cannot even be used as a denial unit to block enemy objective taking, definately worse even before the 1/6 chance to do nothing.

It's not an elegantly worded solution, hey this is GW after all, but it seems to be the way. It also fits the fluff, you may bring in some Ork Freebooters to serve as cannon fodder but you can't expect them to secure the objective for you and not wreck/steal it.

Yes you can have Allies of Convenience hold an objective.

Allies of Convenience are scoring units for your side and denial units for your opponent.

Players count scoring units and objective points, the units on the table do not . Therefore Allies of Convenience being enemy units to your units is not relevant to the scoring of the game.

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Dunklezahn wrote:
So I wanted to add my own opinions on this as the way I'm reading it they would deny against your own side.

One of the big points here seems to be drawing a distinction between your units and how your units treat them. Saving that thats purely artificial (the rules don't say other players denial units, just enemy) simply by them saying "your units" that includes the unit itself as it is one of "your units" and thus it is an enemy (To itself). That means an AoC can score *but* when checking that objective will also find an enemy denial unit within 3" because all your units treat them as such and so will fail to claim the objective. They can still deny however as your opponent treats them as an enemy unit as well.

Now the addition of "Non Scoring/Non Denial" on desperate allies takes it a step further, now they cannot score for you but also cannot even be used as a denial unit to block enemy objective taking, definately worse even before the 1/6 chance to do nothing.

It's not an elegantly worded solution, hey this is GW after all, but it seems to be the way. It also fits the fluff, you may bring in some Ork Freebooters to serve as cannon fodder but you can't expect them to secure the objective for you and not wreck/steal it.

Yes you can have Allies of Convenience hold an objective.

Allies of Convenience are scoring units for your side and denial units for your opponent.

Players count scoring units and objective points, the units on the table do not . Therefore Allies of Convenience being enemy units to your units is not relevant to the scoring of the game.

^^^
That's how I even understood it from the get-go...and really, it makes sense.

 whembly wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:

 Dunklezahn wrote:
So I wanted to add my own opinions on this as the way I'm reading it they would deny against your own side.

One of the big points here seems to be drawing a distinction between your units and how your units treat them. Saving that thats purely artificial (the rules don't say other players denial units, just enemy) simply by them saying "your units" that includes the unit itself as it is one of "your units" and thus it is an enemy (To itself). That means an AoC can score *but* when checking that objective will also find an enemy denial unit within 3" because all your units treat them as such and so will fail to claim the objective. They can still deny however as your opponent treats them as an enemy unit as well.

Now the addition of "Non Scoring/Non Denial" on desperate allies takes it a step further, now they cannot score for you but also cannot even be used as a denial unit to block enemy objective taking, definately worse even before the 1/6 chance to do nothing.

It's not an elegantly worded solution, hey this is GW after all, but it seems to be the way. It also fits the fluff, you may bring in some Ork Freebooters to serve as cannon fodder but you can't expect them to secure the objective for you and not wreck/steal it.

Yes you can have Allies of Convenience hold an objective.

Allies of Convenience are scoring units for your side and denial units for your opponent.

Players count scoring units and objective points, the units on the table do not . Therefore Allies of Convenience being enemy units to your units is not relevant to the scoring of the game.

^^^
That's how I even understood it from the get-go...and really, it makes sense.

I think most did. Just a RAW thing. There is room for debate. Not one that sticks. OP was just throwing it up there.

 DeathReaper wrote:

Players count scoring units and objective points, the units on the table do not . Therefore Allies of Convenience being enemy units to your units is not relevant to the scoring of the game.

The problem lies in pointing out where this is written in the rules, because it's not to the best of my knowledge. What you are suggesting is that you the player can win, because your AoC troops are on the relic/objective but your army would lose, because to them an enemy is on the Relic/objective...
It's an artificial disconnect that doesn't make sense.

It very clearly states your units (not your primary detachment either but all units) treat them as enemy units and having an enemy denial unit within 3" means you cannot capture. The units capture points, not the player, and to your units they are the enemy and sat on the objective. The player is essenitally an omnipotent godlike force and has no bearing on the battlefield objectives.

It makes more narrative sense which is GW's big thing, those IG are not gonna celebrate that the Orks are running off with the relic...

You're the one creating any artificial disconnect. Your army doesn't win or lose a match - you do.

Not really, all the rules relate to the models, their LoS, their position, not the players. You are trying to defend that the rule doesn't apply to you the player despite the fact they are to *all* your units as is clearly written in the rules.

AoC Models are the enemy to my units and thus to me.
AoC Models are the enemy to my troops but not to me the player.

One of these statements has created an artificial line between player and unit, the other has not. As such you have to have a reason why this is different.

Point me to a place in the rulebook where it says something to support that line and i'll happily agree with you. As it stands you cannot say a rule applies to your units but not the player and ignore it as a result. There has to be a actual rules based reason why it doesn't apply to you, otherwise we must assume it does.

 Dunklezahn wrote:
Not really, all the rules relate to the models, their LoS, their position, not the players. You are trying to defend that the rule doesn't apply to you the player despite the fact they are to *all* your units as is clearly written in the rules.

AoC Models are the enemy to my units and thus to me.
AoC Models are the enemy to my troops but not to me the player.

One of these statements has created an artificial line between player and unit, the other has not. As such you have to have a reason why this is different.

Point me to a place in the rulebook where it says something to support that line and i'll happily agree with you. As it stands you cannot say a rule applies to your units but not the player and ignore it as a result. There has to be a actual rules based reason why it doesn't apply to you, otherwise we must assume it does.

Who counts the Victory Points at the end of a match - your units, or the player?

rigeld2 wrote:

Who counts the Victory Points at the end of a match - your units, or the player?

Well since you mention it....

"To determine the number of victory points an army has earned, we use mission objectives." Pg 122

Army, not player. As I say, the player has nothing to do with it, it's all about the army and the units.

It is a ruleset designed to simulate futuristic sci-fi battles, you as player have no presence in it, who wins and loses is taken from the army and it's units perspectives.

 Dunklezahn wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Who counts the Victory Points at the end of a match - your units, or the player?

Well since you mention it....

"To determine the number of victory points an army has earned, we use mission objectives." Pg 122

Army, not player. As I say, the player has nothing to do with it, it's all about the army and the units.

That didn't answer my question at all.
The army earns them - absolutely. Who counts them? The question I actually asked, not the question you want to answer.

page 123 wrote:You control an objective if there is at least one model from one of your scoring units, and no models from enemy denial units, within 3"of it.

Since you control the objective and you do not treat your AoC as enemies, they do not deny.

It is a ruleset designed to simulate futuristic sci-fi battles, you as player have no presence in it, who wins and loses is taken from the army and it's units perspectives.

So wrong I'm not sure where to start.

I obviously started this thread out asking the question, but I have been convinced of the answer.

If you look at the rules of AoC on page 112 you will see it clearly says:

"Units in your army treat Allies of Convenience as enemy units that cannot be charged, shot, targeted with psychic powers..."


Now clearly there has been a distinction made here. They did not just say that AoC 'count as enemy units'. There are many likely reasons why, but the big one naturally is that if they said that then there would be the argument that the opposing player actually gets to move, shoot, etc, with them.

But let's get back to the rules for objectives, remembering that only units in your army treat AoC as being enemy units...in all other ways AoC are still friendly units (you move them, you shoot them, etc).

Page 123, under 'Controlling Objectives' (emphasis mine):

"YOU control an objective if there is at least one model from one of YOUR scoring units and no models from enemy denial units, within 3 inches".


So again, what you see here is the rules asking the players themselves whether one of THEIR personal units is within 3". Unfortunately they do mix the terms in this same paragraph using both 'your' and 'enemy' when they really should have stuck with consistent terminology of 'you'/'opposing' or 'friendly'/'enemy' to make it completely clear.

But still, the point is absolutely clear. The player himself is looking to see if any of his units are within 3" and enemy units from the perspective of the players are those on the opposing sides, as only the units in your army treat AoC as being enemies, not the players themselves.

Glad to have helped.

rigeld2 wrote:
That didn't answer my question at all.
The army earns them - absolutely. Who counts them? The question I actually asked, not the question you want to answer.

page 123 wrote:You control an objective if there is at least one model from one of your scoring units, and no models from enemy denial units, within 3"of it.

Since you control the objective and you do not treat your AoC as enemies, they do not deny.

Thats because the question is irrelevant but it does reveal the truely important question, the act of quantification has nothing to do with the scoring of points. GW plastic kits are incapable of counting. The answer is also variable, my opponent, my kid sister, the 3rd party GM of the scenario, all valid answers. If my opponent counts my army's score first does he score them? Who counts doesn't matter, who scores points is the army. I'm glad you agree but if the army is scoring the points not you why doesn't their perspective on who the enemy is count?

Now Yak's point

 yakface wrote:

But let's get back to the rules for objectives, remembering that only units in your army treat AoC as being enemy units...in all other ways AoC are still friendly units (you move them, you shoot them, etc).

Thats not mentioned anywhere, they are part of your army so you move them, any language making them "friendly units" is entirely inserted by you. To your units they are enemy denial units who happen to be shooting the same guys as them and who for some reason they aren't allowed to shoot yet. The rules give a list of ways they are different from regular enemy models and says nothing about objectives. Being an enemy model doesn't let your opponent move them, they are not part of his army so they can be as enemy as you like to your army and that won't change. Don't confuse "enemy" and "opponents models"

 yakface wrote:

Page 123, under 'Controlling Objectives' (emphasis mine):

"YOU control an objective if there is at least one model from one of YOUR scoring units and no models from enemy denial units, within 3 inches".

But still, the point is absolutely clear. The player himself is looking to see if any of his units are within 3" and enemy units from the perspective of the players are those on the opposing sides, as only the units in your army treat AoC as being enemies, not the players themselves.

I added what i see as the most important bolded point to me there that you didn't emphasise.

We already know from pg122 that the army scores not the player so we need to look at the 3 relevant points bolded in your quoted line to see if they pass all 3.

1. At least one of your models within 3"
They are in your army, being moved by you so barring you borrowing them from a friend (and thus not technically yours) we're gonna let that language go and call that a pass.

2. One of your scoring units.
Assuming they are troops and meet all the requirements they are going to pass here too.

3. and no models from enemy denial units, within 3 inches
pg.112 is very clear how your army feels about these guys, they're enemy models. Looking at the criteria for denial units they must meet them if they are scoring. This means there is an enemy denial unit within 3" of the objective. Your opponent wont score it as they are also an enemy denial unit to his army, but neither do you. It's not a denial unit from an opposing army, not the denial unit of another player it is simply an enemy denial unit, which they are thanks to pg. 112.

edit: Made a hash of my quote boxes, and bolding script apparantely.

Dryunklezahn is correct on his point 3 considering RAW. The unit taking an objective has to satisfy the criteria of having no enemy models within the given range of the objective. YOUR own unit, AoC or otherwise, treats all AoC units as enemies. Thus, the criteria is not met. This is regardless of who counts the VP's/objectives.

This does appear to be a loophole. I personnally believe that it is NOT RAI but its pure speculation on my part. Both RAW and RAI on this issue have sparked debate in our group.

Yak, This is why we need the INAT for Adepticon. Please bring it back.

There are no models from enemy denial units; there are only models from YOUR army that parts of YOUR army treat as an enemy.

YOU do not treat them as an enemy. Possesion is key there; RAW they are NOT denial units to your army.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
There are no models from enemy denial units; there are only models from YOUR army that parts of YOUR army treat as an enemy.

YOU do not treat them as an enemy. Possesion is key there; RAW they are NOT denial units to your army.

Nos,

Before I start this, I want to note that I have great respect for your opinions on RAW. However, there are models for enemy denial units. This is where I do not currently see your point. The question becomes are your AoC units enemy units and are they denial units?

Here is why I claim possesion doesn't metter in this discussion:

From Yakface:
"YOU control an objective if there is at least one model from one of YOUR scoring units and no models from enemy denial units, within 3 inches".

This quote does not reference possesion for denial units. It only notes possesion as a criteria for scoring units. I do not follow your logic on how you inserted possesion into the denial part.

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:
The question becomes are your AoC units enemy units and are they denial units?

When determining Victory Points, who must treat AoC as enemy units?

The Context of "YOU control an objective if there is at least one model from one of YOUR scoring units and no models from enemy denial units, within 3 inches". tells us that we are dealing with your "scoring units" and your opponents "enemy denial units".

rigeld2 wrote:

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:
The question becomes are your AoC units enemy units and are they denial units?

When determining Victory Points, who must treat AoC as enemy units?

Your units.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The Context of "YOU control an objective if there is at least one model from one of YOUR scoring units and no models from enemy denial units, within 3 inches". tells us that we are dealing with your "scoring units" and your opponents "enemy denial units".

You are inserting that portion and thats not Rules as Written. The context does not infer that.

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:
The question becomes are your AoC units enemy units and are they denial units?

When determining Victory Points, who must treat AoC as enemy units?

Your units.

And who determines if an objective is held by you or not - you or your units?

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:
The question becomes are your AoC units enemy units and are they denial units?

When determining Victory Points, who must treat AoC as enemy units?

Your units.

That is correct.

Who counts the victory points? (You do, as your units can not count).

The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:

 DeathReaper wrote:
The Context of "YOU control an objective if there is at least one model from one of YOUR scoring units and no models from enemy denial units, within 3 inches". tells us that we are dealing with your "scoring units" and your opponents "enemy denial units".

You are inserting that portion and thats not Rules as Written. The context does not infer that.

It does if you parse the sentence correctly.

Basically this quote says it all:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
There are no models from enemy denial units; there are only models from YOUR army that parts of YOUR army treat as an enemy.

YOU do not treat them as an enemy. Possession is key there; RAW they are NOT denial units to your army.

I blame Beasts of War for bringing this up, RAI the AoC are there to help you like a business partner ie Dogbert; AoD are like Catbert and will try to betray you at the drop of a hat or catnip. Also if the inquisition told the imperial guard to hold the line on a objective I believe that they would listen or yah know be mind wiped and enslaved.

rigeld2 wrote:

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:
The question becomes are your AoC units enemy units and are they denial units?

When determining Victory Points, who must treat AoC as enemy units?

Your units.

And who determines if an objective is held by you or not - you or your units?

You and YOU count them (YOUR units) as scoring if and only if they are no enemy denial units in range. In the case we are describing, they (being "enemy denial units") are in range.

Criteria not met. YOU do not count them.

Except enemy denial units are not in range, as you only have units from primary and allied detachments near the objective.

Even if you have an allied detachment that is near an objective with no other units close to them, they score because they are not enemy units to you, but your units treat them as such, you do not.

Criteria met, as enemy denial units, taken in context, means any units from your opponents roster.

Simple: If its in YOUR Force Org on YOUR Army List, then it is NOT an enemy unit.
So your Ork Ally does not deny you scoring, but your opponents Ork Ally does.

The rules GW put out are trying to say that any Allies you take have to be treated as if they were your regular units as far as assaults, shooting ect. So if you try to drop a pie plate on an enemy unit, and a section of the template touches a model in an ally unit, you cant place the blast their (your targetting one of your own models). The same way you can't assault your last remaining Allied Grot, kill it, then use your consolidation move to springboard onto an objective.

Regardless of the Army type taken as an ally, it is still YOUR Army.

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:
The question becomes are your AoC units enemy units and are they denial units?

When determining Victory Points, who must treat AoC as enemy units?

Your units.

And who determines if an objective is held by you or not - you or your units?

You and YOU count them (YOUR units) as scoring if and only if they are no enemy denial units in range. In the case we are describing, they (being "enemy denial units") are in range.

Criteria not met. YOU do not count them.

Why am I counting my own units as enemy denial units?

The_Rogue_Engineer wrote:

You and YOU count them (YOUR units) as scoring if and only if they are no enemy denial units in range. In the case we are describing, they (being "enemy denial units") are in range.

Criteria not met. YOU do not count them.

Except YOU, who totals the points, do not see any Enemy denial units in range. Your units may see them there, but YOU, the person COUNTING the VPs, does not.

Nothing you state will alter this simple fact

In addition, if they were denial units to your own side they'd never score for you either. Which would mean that the entry under the Desperate Allies about scoring is irrelevant.

Since "Units in your army" include your allies and all.

Tangent: There does not appear to be any RaW that makes your own AoC treat your main detachment as enemies at all. So, while your primary units can't get within 1" of your allies, your allies are under no such compunctions and can cozy right up.

Pyrian wrote:
Tangent: There does not appear to be any RaW that makes your own AoC treat your main detachment as enemies at all. So, while your primary units can't get within 1" of your allies, your allies are under no such compunctions and can cozy right up.

Been lurking, saw this,
a million bricks in a row and built myself a house with 'em. Exalted! (if that even does anything lol!)

Thats a good point, they couldn't cozy up to other AoC's but they could your primary detachment.

I'm seeing a bunch of people arguing they the player are seperate for counting. Sadly this is irrelevant as you can count 0 all you like. You count objectives scored and the army scores VP's right there clear as day in the text. This means for you to have anything to count "your army" must score and "your army" is treating them as enemy denial units.

Taking this to the most extreme and absurd example to make the point:

I move my units within 1" of the enemy, my opponent calls me and says i can't. I point out that those models are my army's enemy but that i'm actually a friend of orks and they aren't the enemy of me the player so it's fine for me to do, nor do they count as denying me the objective. After all, those rules apply to the models perspectives, I can ignore that if I the player feel differently right?

"Simple: If its in YOUR Force Org on YOUR Army List, then it is NOT an enemy unit."
Except it's clear as day in the rules you do. It's in your army so you control it but it is a slightly less dangerous enemy, two different concepts there.

"Also if the inquisition told the imperial guard to hold the line on a objective I believe that they would listen or yah know be mind wiped and enslaved"
Doesn't work for that example, but what about the dozens where it does, Orks and IG (or pretty much anyone) for example. Obviously the IG can't be trusted to get the job done by the Inquisition or they would be Battle Brothers. After all, what if a rival inquisitor is pulling their strings, what if their Colonel is falling to Chaos?

Outside of Battle Brothers allies are tools to be used, but not trusted to bring relics/top secret documents/whatever you decide your objective is back to your primary HQ...




So, boiling this back down to basics as it's getting away from us a bit, if the people who still think they score can answer this simple question, not through opinion or RAI but from rules cited references:

Why since your army scores VP (cited), and since your Army treats AoC as enemy units (cited) why they *don't* deny you the objective by fulfilling the criteria of there being an *enemy models* within 3"

Edit, my preview isn't working and i keep screwing up quote displays.

That question has already been asked and answered.

You, the owner of the army, does not treat them as enemy units. So when you determine if there are any enemy units within 3", YOU do not see any at all.

Explaining it this way may enlighten you.

 yakface wrote:
But I am curious as to if anyone has encountered other players, judges or T.O.s wanting to rule the opposite way (that AoC units do deny your own units from capturing and objective)?

When we check for who/what controls an objective, we check for the presence of enemy denial units, not enemy units, as has been stated above. The AoC units are denial units as long as they follow the criteria listed. There is no check for friendly denial units when checking to see who controls an objective. So by the RAW, I would agree that they don't deny objectives to units from the primary detachment.

This a different take on it, just food for thought.
(This is how our group plays it, since it's unclear if enemy units are denial units which is why this is even a discussion in the first place.)

We treat AoC units as scoring as long as they follow all all the normal restrictions. They aren't treated as denial units to the player who brings them, only to his units on the board and, as mentioned already, they aren't specifically listed as 'Non-scoring'. We do have a line that they are treated as enemy units, but all of the listed references are in regards to how the AoC units act in regards to each other. Both Primary Detachment, and AoC units are denial units to the enemy, just clarifying here. It COULD be the RAI that they do deny to Primary units, and there are players out there who feel this way. Especially after watching the video by the BoW guys.

Since a possible conclusion is that PD unit and AoC units could be denial units to each other, we sat and took a look at the game itself, which is partly why this whole discussion is borderline silly in the first place. When would you have both a PD unit and an AoC unit on the same objective in a game?

Multiple units can control an objective, but the only reason to do that is to gain the benefit of a Mysterious Objective. You only score VPs for each objective you control, not for each unit controlling an objective. I only mention this, because if we treat the AoC units as denial units then neither unit would get the benefit. Other than this reason, we can't think of ANY reason why you would want multiple units holding the same objective at the end of the game, you still score the same VP's.

So we've all just learned simply not keep PD units on the same objective as AoC units and vice versa. This satisfies both the RAW, and the possible RAI. Our group hears this discussion, and think it's going to be pretty rare that you would have both PD/AoC units within 3" of the same objective. Just don't do it, and if it does happen, then add up the VP's as if they were scoring and see if it makes a difference. This is something that we feel will be even more rare than having both controlling an objective. How often Is having a PD and AoC unit on the same objective at the end of the game going to get you that tie breaking VP? How often is it going to happen that you NEED both units on one objective to prevent your opponent from shooting the one controlling the objective, to get that tie-breaking VP? Even with 2 units on an objective PD/AoC or not, all the enemy has to do is get a denial unit withing 3" to deny both, so how often is that a reason to keep 2 units from your list on a single objective anyways.

Edit: NONE OF THIS IS RAW, so thanks to all for taking the time to read it. I only posted this here because I felt that this is in the spirit of what Yakface was asking.

Allies of convenience are treated as enemy units by the primary detatchment of your army. This means they aren't actually enemy units, so they can't deny you your own objective. p123 says "enemy denial units" which they are not.

grrr

 Akar wrote:
Other than this reason, we can't think of ANY reason why you would want multiple units holding the same objective at the end of the game, you still score the same VP's.

Redundancy could be a reason. If you moved first then your opponent will get to attack you before the game ends, and having two units there might make it either more difficult or literally impossible (if they don't have enough units in range to attack both your units) to dislodge you.

On the topic of whether it's the player or the unit, does the rulebook actually regularly make the distinction between whether what counts is the unit's perspective or the player's perspective? From a quick look at other sections I don't see that it really ever makes the distinction. Additionally, the paragraph after this oft-quoted sentence about when you control an objective talks about "a unit" controlling objectives, which I feel muddies the water a little. It does not say, "each unit may only count towards the control of one objective at a time", it talks about the unit controlling an objective, which implies its point of view may be relevant.

That said, I think it's nonsensical for the allied detachment to count as scoring while also being denial units to your own army. If the presence of the allies denies you an objective then the allies being on an objective alone should not count as you holding it. It's even more nonsensical if a desperate alliance would result in the objective not being denied to you due to them explicitly being non-denial units.

The only results that make sense to me are one of the following:

- Ally of Convenience units are not scoring (p.123 says scoring units are "all the units that come from the troops selection of the Force Organisation chart", which doesn't make a lot of sense as there are two Troops sections on the FoC, not one, and troops are selected from the army list, not the FoC. Given they used the singular it's possible that only includes the primary detachment, though as noted in the OP that would make the Desperate Alliance note odd as it implies Allies of Convenience are scoring/denial) and deny you objectives
- Ally of Convenience units are scoring (as it seems like p.123 probably means "from the troops section of the army list" and Desperate Allies implies Allies of Convenience can score) and are not denial units to your side

I think the second one makes the most sense. It would just be silly for allies alone on an objective to count as scoring but not for your army + an allied unit to do the same, though this is a bit RAI as I'm not sure there is a good answer RAW.

So, a couple of replies and still no cited rule, seriously, cite your rules, at the moment them scoring is pure houserule because nothing in the *rulebook* support it.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
That question has already been asked and answered.

You, the owner of the army, does not treat them as enemy units. So when you determine if there are any enemy units within 3", YOU do not see any at all.

Explaining it this way may enlighten you.

But as we've already had cited, the army scores not you, it doesn't matter how you the player treat them, only how your army does. You have no citable evidence that supports your claim that the players viewpoint overrides that. Everything that says they deny is cited in the rules, your's is merely opinion. If i put the rulebook between me and the enemy unit i can't see them either, it's irrelevant. Cite the rules.

Akar wrote:we check for the presence of enemy denial units, not enemy units.

Sadly this doesn't work either, that logic suggests and enemy unit that qualifies for denial status and has no rules excluding denial is not an enemy denial unit. By that logic no enemy unit is a denial unit as that is how you determine it's denial status.

grrrfranky wrote:Allies of convenience are treated as enemy units by the primary detatchment of your army. This means they aren't actually enemy units, so they can't deny you your own objective. p123 says "enemy denial units" which they are not.

Actually they are treated as enemy units by your units, not primary detachment. You are trying to argue a unit the rules say to be treated as an enemy denial unit shouldn't be treated as an enemy denial unit...

Hivefleetplastic wrote:I think the second one makes the most sense. It would just be silly for allies alone on an objective to count as scoring but not for your army + an allied unit to do the same, though this is a bit RAI as I'm not sure there is a good answer RAW.

See I disagree, everything that says they would be enemy denial units is there in plain text. The only way this isn't the case is if we introduce this bizarre player/army seperation that has no cited precident.


I'll reiterate the boiled down version to address recent comments:

If you ask the player there are no enemy denial units within 3"
If you could ask the army there is an enemy denial unit within 3"

Who actually scores the points and thus gets a vote?
The Army, it's even in the rules under the objectives section.

Dunkle - actually the rules were cited. YOU determine the score for your army. The units themselves do not determine if they have scored, that is your determination

You can houserule that they deny, but it is a houserule.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Dunkle - actually the rules were cited. YOU determine the score for your army. The units themselves do not determine if they have scored, that is your determination

The problem I have with this line of argument is you make all other determinations regarding whether a unit is a friend or an enemy, too. The rules don't ever seem to specify perspective. Additionally, the section on controlling objectives talks about units controlling objectives, which means it would make sense for you to use their point of view there.

 Dunklezahn wrote:
See I disagree, everything that says they would be enemy denial units is there in plain text. The only way this isn't the case is if we introduce this bizarre player/army seperation that has no cited precident.

Do you agree that the Allies of Convenience are scoring units?

Actually they do make a distinction - only you *units* find AoC to be enemies.

Yes, I know that rule makes the distinction, but none of the verbiage anywhere else in the book does. It doesn't constantly flip between specifying whether something is in your perspective or in a unit's perspective. You are demanding that this section be read as asking you to ignore your units' perspective (despite the fact that it speaks to your units' perspectives, eg. "A unit can only control one objective at a time", who is controlling the objective? A unit).

As I said earlier, I find the idea of allied units being scoring for you while denying objectives to you incoherent, but I do not think your RAW argument is on solid ground for the above reason.

Yes, the unit controls the objective. However you are the "thing" that determines the overall score and who has won or lost.

Your units do not know that information. RAW is clear on this, when not read in a convoluted manner

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Actually they do make a distinction - only you *units* find AoC to be enemies.

Exactly and only my units score. I count them but they fulfill the scoring requirement.

I would see your point if the reference in that sentence for enemy units was to YOU, but the reference of enemy units is to YOUR units. I am not within 3" of the objeective, I am not a scoring unit and I am not the enemy of a plastic model.

Nos, you don't know me but i read YMDC frequently. I think this is the first time I disagree with you about RAW.

Respectfully submitted.

rigeld2 wrote:
In addition, if they were denial units to your own side they'd never score for you either. Which would mean that the entry under the Desperate Allies about scoring is irrelevant.

Since "Units in your army" include your allies and all.

I feel like this got ignored.

Using the idea that AoC are denial units, they could never - ever - score. Because they are both a scoring unit and an enemy denial unit. This would make the Desperate Allies rule of never scoring irrelevant, in addition to other issues.
Your units score. You are the one that counts points. How do you count points? Oh, you count points for your army based on if a scoring unit is within range of an objective, etc.

rigeld2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
In addition, if they were denial units to your own side they'd never score for you either. Which would mean that the entry under the Desperate Allies about scoring is irrelevant.

Since "Units in your army" include your allies and all.

I feel like this got ignored.

Using the idea that AoC are denial units, they could never - ever - score. Because they are both a scoring unit and an enemy denial unit. This would make the Desperate Allies rule of never scoring irrelevant, in addition to other issues.
Your units score. You are the one that counts points. How do you count points? Oh, you count points for your army based on if a scoring unit is within range of an objective, etc.

They're only an enemy denial unit from the perspective of the "allied detachment", which p.112 uses to describe both the allied detachment from the perspective of the primary detachment and the primary detachment from the perspective of the allied detachment. Your scoring allied detachment unit would be able to score unless you moved a denial unit from the primary detachment near it.

HiveFleetPlastic wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
In addition, if they were denial units to your own side they'd never score for you either. Which would mean that the entry under the Desperate Allies about scoring is irrelevant.

Since "Units in your army" include your allies and all.

I feel like this got ignored.

Using the idea that AoC are denial units, they could never - ever - score. Because they are both a scoring unit and an enemy denial unit. This would make the Desperate Allies rule of never scoring irrelevant, in addition to other issues.
Your units score. You are the one that counts points. How do you count points? Oh, you count points for your army based on if a scoring unit is within range of an objective, etc.

They're only an enemy denial unit from the perspective of the "allied detachment", which p.112 uses to describe both the allied detachment from the perspective of the primary detachment and the primary detachment from the perspective of the allied detachment. Your scoring allied detachment unit would be able to score unless you moved a denial unit from the primary detachment near it.

BRB page 112 wrote:Units in your army treat Allies of Convenience as enemy units that cannot be charged, shot, targeted with psychic powers or have templates or blast markers placed over them.

Really? I'm pretty sure that says "Units in your army" and not "Units in your allied detachment".

I'm actually beginning to go the other way on this discussion,

it actually balances out the advantage you get for being able to cherry pick cool stuff to make up for shortfalls in your actual list.

Also, just because your Grey Knights and Eldar have chosen to stand together against Chaos, I'm pretty sure that both of your "factions" are going to want the "uber daemon sword of stealing lunch money" that caused them to band together in the first place....

 Dunklezahn wrote:

Sadly this doesn't work either, that logic suggests and enemy unit that qualifies for denial status and has no rules excluding denial is not an enemy denial unit. By that logic no enemy unit is a denial unit as that is how you determine it's denial status.

Valid point.

It's an interpretation of

'no models from enemy denial units'

1) 'Any denial units belonging to YOUR enemy, ie. your opponent.' This seems to be the common thought from what I've read here, and what I think the rule actually is. What grants a unit scoring or non scoring isn't conditional upon them being an enemy. All units are scoring, and all units are denial units, as outlined on p.123.

2)'Any denial units that are AN enemy.' A slight twist and one that doesn't change anything until we look at AoC. This follows the logic that all of an enemies units are denial units -> Therefore any unit that is an 'enemy', remains a denial unit to an army regardless of whose side it's on -> Conclusion, it remains a denial unit to any objective for either player. Im not discounting that this could be the case, since we know that AoC units are enemy units, that your units can't shoot, charge, join, target, etc. Im not even going to begin to argue that they somehow cease to be a denial unit, even within the presence of a unit from the Main Army.

3)'Anything classified as enemy, can't score for you'. Maybe I overlooked this because I've never seen it this way, but are people trying to say the never count as a scoring unit for the controlling player because they are an 'enemy'? I guess I've never seen this supported anywhere, but if this is what people are trying to do then this could be a serious issue. In order for this stick, they'd have not count as being in your army. If you follow this path, then they are denial units to themselves, and could never hold an objective for you no matter what. Since the AoC doesn't remove them being a scoring unit, then this can't be true.

Im not sure if you're saying that I said that a denial unit is conditional upon belonging to an enemy unit, or if you're stating that we as players play it that way. If I wasn't clear, then let me state my stand right now. All units are denial units, even your own units, as long as they aren't exempted on p.123. However, since they aren't a unit belonging to the enemy, then we don't apply the denial part. It's a bit over-the-top-technical, but they don't cease to be denial units just because you own them.

So when we check to see if they deny an objective, we check for models belonging to belonging to the enemy. We aren't checking for denial units that are treated as an enemy. We sure as hell don't check to see if there are any denial units around at all. To exclude AoC units as part of your army when checking to see if they are scoring, and then check to see if remain a denial unit, when your enemy doesn't control them, is the weaker of the two sides. It rests solely on the interpretation that any enemy unit is a denial unit. It falls under it's own weight since it's still a scoring unit. Again, not discounting this as a possibility but until we get a FAQ stating that they ARE treated as a denial unit to the controlling player, the RAW stands otherwise.

They aren't non-scoring, non-denial units, like they would be if taken as AoD. It doesn't follow any consistent train of thought to have the weakest ally NOT deny a scoring unit in the controlling players army if within 3"of an objective, when a scoring unit from an AoC does?

rigeld2 wrote:

HiveFleetPlastic wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
In addition, if they were denial units to your own side they'd never score for you either. Which would mean that the entry under the Desperate Allies about scoring is irrelevant.

Since "Units in your army" include your allies and all.

I feel like this got ignored.

Using the idea that AoC are denial units, they could never - ever - score. Because they are both a scoring unit and an enemy denial unit. This would make the Desperate Allies rule of never scoring irrelevant, in addition to other issues.
Your units score. You are the one that counts points. How do you count points? Oh, you count points for your army based on if a scoring unit is within range of an objective, etc.

They're only an enemy denial unit from the perspective of the "allied detachment", which p.112 uses to describe both the allied detachment from the perspective of the primary detachment and the primary detachment from the perspective of the allied detachment. Your scoring allied detachment unit would be able to score unless you moved a denial unit from the primary detachment near it.

BRB page 112 wrote:Units in your army treat Allies of Convenience as enemy units that cannot be charged, shot, targeted with psychic powers or have templates or blast markers placed over them.

Really? I'm pretty sure that says "Units in your army" and not "Units in your allied detachment".

The allied detachment is part of your army. p109, "If you wish, your army can include one allied detachment..." Not "your army can fight alongside one allied army", but "can include", ie. the allied detachment is part of the army, though of course they promptly muddy this by referring to "combinations of armies and allies", but whatever. In addition, p.112 talks about them "benefiting from the - of an allied character", ie. the primary detachment are considered allies of the allied detachment as well as the reverse. On top of this, if you don't consider the relationship commutative then your allied detachment should be able to e.g. cast psychic powers on your primary detachment because they don't consider them enemies.

On top of all that, scoring units are explicitly part of the army anyway (p.123) so if you don't think they're part of the army then they can't score and your point is moot regardless.

... I said they're part of the army. That's my point.
Your army treats your AoC as enemy units. Therefore your allied detachment treats themselves as enemy units since we've established your allies are in your army.

Since a scoring unit would also be an enemy denial unit, your AoC could never score.

rigeld2 wrote:
... I said they're part of the army. That's my point.
Your army treats your AoC as enemy units. Therefore your allied detachment treats themselves as enemy units since we've established your allies are in your army.

Since a scoring unit would also be an enemy denial unit, your AoC could never score.

Your allies are in your army, but they're not allied with themselves. They're allied with your primary detachment. That's why they can have their independent characters join their squads, why they can target each other with psychic powers, etc. Your primary detachment are Allies of Convenience to your allied detachment.

For clarity: the rules don't say "your" Allies of Convenience, they say Allies of Convenience. "Units in your army treat Allies of Convenience as enemy units..." It's a two-way relationship.

HiveFleetPlastic wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
... I said they're part of the army. That's my point.
Your army treats your AoC as enemy units. Therefore your allied detachment treats themselves as enemy units since we've established your allies are in your army.

Since a scoring unit would also be an enemy denial unit, your AoC could never score.

Your allies are in your army, but they're not allied with themselves. They're allied with your primary detachment. That's why they can have their independent characters join their squads, why they can target each other with psychic powers, etc. Your primary detachment are Allies of Convenience to your allied detachment.

That's irrelevant.
Does your army treat your AoC as enemy units?
Are your AoC in your army?

rigeld2 wrote:

HiveFleetPlastic wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:
... I said they're part of the army. That's my point.
Your army treats your AoC as enemy units. Therefore your allied detachment treats themselves as enemy units since we've established your allies are in your army.

Since a scoring unit would also be an enemy denial unit, your AoC could never score.

Your allies are in your army, but they're not allied with themselves. They're allied with your primary detachment. That's why they can have their independent characters join their squads, why they can target each other with psychic powers, etc. Your primary detachment are Allies of Convenience to your allied detachment.

That's irrelevant.
Does your army treat your AoC as enemy units?
Are your AoC in your army?

Please see my edit above. They're not "your" AoC. They are AoC. AoC is a relative condition. It is two-way. Your entire primary detachment are Allies of Convenience from the perspective of the allied detachment.

The rule actually takes some care to point out that AoC are treated as enemy models in a specific context. Taking that rule out of its specific context doesn't merely make them denial, it makes them literally unusable. You can never move, shoot, charge, or do anything else with them that you couldn't do to enemy models. The argument being presented that it should not be read in-context is not only not RaW, it makes the ally rules not work at all.

rigeld2 wrote:
Therefore your allied detachment treats themselves as enemy units...

You do realize that creates enormous problems for them? Like, they can never move, deploy, or even deep-strike, as they will always end up within 1" of an enemy model?

HiveFleetPlastic wrote:

Please see my edit above. They're not "your" AoC. They are AoC. AoC is a relative condition. It is two-way. Your entire primary detachment are Allies of Convenience from the perspective of the allied detachment.

I see what you're saying now - thanks, and you're right.

Let me rethink things.

"YOU control an objective if there is at least one model from one of YOUR scoring units and no models from enemy denial units, within 3 inches" (123)

Parsing that sentence correctly tells us that they are talking about you and your opponent's perspective, not the units on the field's perspective.

rigeld2 wrote:

HiveFleetPlastic wrote:

Please see my edit above. They're not "your" AoC. They are AoC. AoC is a relative condition. It is two-way. Your entire primary detachment are Allies of Convenience from the perspective of the allied detachment.

I see what you're saying now - thanks, and you're right.

Let me rethink things.

Thanks! I'm glad we could agree on that. Honestly, that whole section is pretty airy-fairy - the best I could find as evidence that the relationship was two-way was... sort of general verbiage and the examples given in the section. Obviously people play it that way, but... I don't know where to find solid evidence that it's how you're meant to play it.

 DeathReaper wrote:
"YOU control an objective if there is at least one model from one of YOUR scoring units and no models from enemy denial units, within 3 inches" (123)

Parsing that sentence correctly tells us that they are talking about you and your opponent's perspective, not the units on the field's perspective.

On the other hand, the next paragraph talks about objectives being controlled by a unit, which suggests that the unit's perspective should apply.

HiveFleetPlastic wrote:
On the other hand, the next paragraph talks about objectives being controlled by a unit, which suggests that the unit's perspective should apply.

In cases like that, the rule itself should be the guide.

It is, there must be no enemy units within 3", and there are. The big problem is a bunch of people are confusing enemy unit and opponents units, they are not the same thing.
Thos AoC are enemy of your units *and* your opponent/s but they are still part of your army. That is why you can move them.

Also Death, stop trying to pass the sentance off with parsing, it's an *AND* Boolian logical statement. The enemy units part is a seperate criteria that must be met using the same language as presented in the AoC section. AoC's pass the first 2 parts but fail the third. They could have easily added YOUR enemy denial units but you'll notice that word is completely absent, It was written by someone who knew AoC's were Enemy units under your control it seems.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Dunkle - actually the rules were cited. YOU determine the score for your army. The units themselves do not determine if they have scored, that is your determination

You can houserule that they deny, but it is a houserule.

I'll quote it again:

"To determine the number of victory points an *army* has earned, we use mission objectives." Pg 122

Emphasis mine, notice the complete absence or "your" "you" "player" "general" or any other term you could try and attribute to the player. The players viewpoint is irrelevant, if i have to let someone finish a game for me it doesn't become turn 1 because from his perspective it is. Seriously, cite the actual text not how you remember/interpret it, i'm taking the time to look them up, you can do the same.

 Dunklezahn wrote:
It is, there must be no enemy units within 3", and there are. The big problem is a bunch of people are confusing enemy unit and opponents units, they are not the same thing.
Thos AoC are enemy of your units *and* your opponent/s but they are still part of your army. That is why you can move them.

The bolded is still not correct. There are units that are treated as enemies by your units, which is not the same as them actually being enemies, the necessary condition for them to deny the objective.

grrr

That sentence does not state anything like what you have claimed

The number of victory points is earned by the army [which is what your quote says], but actually determined by the owning player [which your quote is silent on]

For example please show where "First Blood" is calculated by an individual unit, as you are claiming is possible. One unit, without reference to the controlling players knowledge of the game at all

So, are we any closer to a consensus on this?

I have a meeting to discuss a Tournament on Wednesday.....

Yes - the consensus is that they are not denial units to your own army, as it is not your army that determines Victory Poiints but you, the player - and you, the player, does not see them as denial units.

Edit: to make it clear - there is SOME disagreement, but that disagreement lacks any rules backing

Ok, Nosferatu1001, thanks for that.

So just to clarify,

They can't claim objectives, but they don't self deny?

ghpoobah wrote:
Ok, Nosferatu1001, thanks for that.

So just to clarify,

They can't claim objectives, but they don't self deny?

They can claim objectives, but they don't deny your army.

Allied AoC can score AND deny, but are NOT denial units from the perspective of your army

(From same Army - AoC scoring unit + Primary Scoring unit both on objective means you still score that objective)

Not sure I agree with that, but, if thats what everyone thinks.....

ghpoobah wrote:
Not sure I agree with that, but, if thats what everyone thinks.....

Well as NoS said:

(The underlined is the most important bit).

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Yes - the consensus is that they are not denial units to your own army, as it is not your army that determines Victory Poiints but you, the player - and you, the player, does not see them as denial units.

Edit: to make it clear - there is SOME disagreement, but that disagreement lacks any rules backing

Well, looks like tomorrow night is going to be an interesting evening with the other TO's :-)

ghpoobah wrote:
Well, looks like tomorrow night is going to be an interesting evening with the other TO's :-)

I think it should be simple... of you look at the AoC wording by itself, it could be a little murky for someone trying to cherry pick. However, the distinction made in the Desperate Allies section shows that the AoC allies would be scoring. As with most easter-egg hunting that happens on YMDC and morons like BoW, the seeming loophole only exists if you ignore the rules as a whole and instead play stupid grammar games with isolated sentences.

Reminds me so much of the wound overflow ignorance that we had a while ago... grammar nuisances of sentences in a vacuum =/= valid rules interpretation

They're not denial units for your own units.
...Units in your army treat AoC as enemy units...
Not you.
If you as a player would treat them as enemy units,
then you would not be able to play with them at all, since they would not be your units, but enemy units.

I think the langue is murky. 60/40 split in favor of not being a denial units to each other. But thats based soley on the wording of AoC and Denial Units. When you look at the rest of the rules RAI is 95% clear and when the initial issue is so murky RAI really is the only way to go.

This should be no problem for a half decent TO.