Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Nurglitch wrote:So, as you can see by the corrected summary of the argument against Devilfish being a Troops choice (argumentation tip #1: people don't argument, avoid attributing them!) that we can indeed say that the transport label is relevant while the troops badge is not relevant.

And then your quote from the Gretchen thread: "Some of the rules stated in the rulebooks are encoded with charts, diagrams, formatting, and layout." (Highlight is mine)

Layout includes the 'badge' symbol you reference here...

How does your argument justify the first quote in light of the second quote?

With all the points made against your argument, it seems that you are cherry picking things to suit your argument. I'm not being sarcastic (for a change- I know... ), I really want to hear your justification for these two quotes. Thanks.

Meep357:

For no good reason you seem to need to make this personal. That's okay, because I find your condescending manner and style of posting deeply offensive (as I do skyth's, Ihavenoavatar's, Beast's, and MagickalMemories 's), and yet I swallow it and participate. It is quite true that my academic qualifications are entirely irrelevant (as I've pointed out), and since "smart" is an entirely meaningless term it's probably irrelevant as well. What you may imagine I am insinuating, connoting, or otherwise not explicitly stating is likewise irrelevant.

The words on uses are irrelevant, and given the accessibility of dictionaries it seems entirely fair for people to use whichever English terms their style prefers. It is preferable to using nasty little in-group Internet acronyms, netspeak, because at least people can look these words up. But then the meaning of words depends on the meaning of sentences in which they are used, and sentences have a grammar as well as words. I am quite confident that everyone on this forum is sufficiently equipped to understand me, should they care to give me the same care I should afford to them.

So how about we stop talking about each other, and give very thorough and careful treatment to the arguments in question, shall we?

Your summary was not essentially correct. Detail is very important and your was not merely lacking in it, but what it had was the wrong ones. Continually misrepresenting the argument makes communication particularly difficult. By continually making unsupported denials about the presence of rules, arguments that have been made, and facts that have been demonstrated you seem more interested in misleading readers than in solving the disagreement.

All of the attempts to point out inconsistencies in the arguments put forth to the effect that Devilfish Troop Carriers are not Troops have been shown to be inconsistencies in name only. Likewise all of the counter-arguments have been refuted and the constructive criticism has been pointed out to be either irrelevant or non-constructive. But since after I demonstrates these things, you go right back to asserting them, so no wonder we can't move on from them.

For example: People ask for the additional rule that allows Land Raiders to be taken as either dedicated transports or independent units, and I provide it. Then people demand it be provided again, and I do, and you deny it without any justification or reasoning. Simple denial.

The rule says that Land Raiders may be dedicated transport. Since they may be dedicated transports, they may also not be, and since they are most definitely Heavy Support choices this rule allows them to also be selected as dedicated transports. It is different from the rule on P.62 not only in form, but in references.

"Land Raiders may be selected by some units as dedicated transports (P.35, Codex: Space Marines)."

"Sometimes a unit entry in a Codex book will include a transport option, allowing a vehicle to be selected along with the unit. These transport vehicles are directly assigned to that particular unit and are known as dedicated transports. Other transport vehicles are chosen separately and occupy a Force Organization chart slot (for example, Eldar Falcons), (P.81, Rulebook)."

The label "Transport", as I have shown above, does in fact indicate that whatsoever vehicle has its army list entry labeled that is a dedicated transport. That's what it does. This label should not be confused with the passenger capacity of a vehicle, which is also labeled transport.

However, that's not why the Devilfish is a dedicated transport.

The Devilfish is a dedicated transport because it is selected as part of either the Firewarrior Team unit entry, or a Pathfinder Team unit entry. Being a transport option for these units is what makes the Devilfish Troop Carrier a dedicated transport. The labels just making it clear and unambiguous.

The rules on P.62 of the rulebook, which I've explicated ad nauseum, tells us that transport vehicles are vehicles with a passenger capacity. Sometimes those transport vehicles are dedicated transports, when they are selected as part of another unit, and sometimes those transport vehicles are independent units, and these are exclusive.

The rule on P.35 of Codex: Space Marines, which I've explained in this post yet again, tells us that Land Raiders are transport vehicles that can be taken, inclusively, as either dedicated transports, or as independent units.

Beast:

Nurglitch wrote:One argument is that, according to the rules stated on P.62 of the rulebook, transport vehicles that can be selected as part of another entry in an army list are dedicated transport vehicles and may not be selected independently. Given this vital information this argument argues that because the Devilfish Trooper Carrier entry is labeled "Transport" in two different ways, and is a transport option for two other units (Firewarrior Teams and Pathfinder Teams), it is a dedicated transport and may not be selected independently in a Troops slot in the Force Organization Chart. An ancillary argument shows that the Troops badge beside the entry is irrelevant because other dedicated transports have similar badges because like the Devilfish entry they are located in the section of the army list devoted to Troops entries. Another ancillary argument shows that the Devilfish as no additional rules, like the Land Raider and the Battlewagon do in their respective codicies, that allow it to be taken as either a dedicated transport or as its own slot in the Force Organization Chart. The primary argument makes the case that the Devilfish cannot be selected as a Troops slot in a Tau Empire army, while the ancillary arguments assert that the conclusion of the main argument is clear and correct.

Nurglitch wrote:Meep357:

For no good reason you seem to need to make this personal. That's okay, because I find your condescending manner and style of posting deeply offensive (as I do skyth's, Ihavenoavatar's, Beast's, and MagickalMemories 's), and yet I swallow it and participate. It is quite true that my academic qualifications are entirely irrelevant (as I've pointed out), and since "smart" is an entirely meaningless term it's probably irrelevant as well. What you may imagine I am insinuating, connoting, or otherwise not explicitly stating is likewise irrelevant.

I guess it isn't just me that thinks you are a total dick. The report button is in the top right corner of the post if you feel anyone pointing out your condescending attitude is flaming you.

snooggums:

Don't worry, the feeling is mutual.

Nurglitch wrote: An ancillary argument shows that the Troops badge beside the entry is irrelevant because other dedicated transports have similar badges because like the Devilfish entry they are located in the section of the army list devoted to Troops entries.

You didn't answer my previous question (other than to provide a quote we had all painstakingly read before which was your opinion, not RAW)....

Some other codeci do not have badges, labels or anything even remotely resembling them next to their unit choices. Does that make them not available as anything in the game? Yet other codeci have sections labelled 'Dedicated Transport Vehicles' like in Codex:Orks. The Tau codex has no such 'Dedicated Transport' label anywhere within its covers. Just because the DF entry is located in the Troops section doesn't make it a Dedicated Transport. It makes it a transport vehicle that offers the choice of deployment methods (Troops choice or Dedicated Transport) as has been explained 'by numerous people, numerous times in numerous ways'.

Yes, and I've explained that reading it as such is wrong.

So you are still not going to answer my previous question about your two quotes in any real or meaningful way... Ok, I understand.