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.

It is simple to me, if an individual said this was how the rule worked and disallowed my fleet move I would politely shake his/her hand and say good game and pack up my figs and refuse to play such a person again. No hurt feelings and no harm done.

bigyounk wrote:No hurt feelings and no harm done.

...other than the wasted time getting the game up to that point.

You don't think it would be more productive to discuss the issue? Which, incidentally, is the point of this thread. Stating that you would just walk away if someone disagrees with your take on the rules is not really a rules argument...

nosferatu1001 wrote:Exceot it isnt. See page 67

Okay.

Pg 67.
They can also disembark separately by either the unit or the characters disembarking while the others remain onboard


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And, before someone attempts to say that the following part of that sentence applies to that, it doesn't.

It says, "or even disembarking at the same time using different access points (but they must end their move more than 2" away from each other)".

The brackets applies to this half of the or statement, not the other half, both grammatically (no comma to end the "or" statement) , because if it did apply it would make it literally impossible to "disembark separately" while leaving the unit or IC in the transport due to the requirement that you disembark within 2" of the hull.

Inside/outside is out of coherency.

Again (for nos) - the rules for coherency are clear that it is a model-by-model basis. In the OP, you can't measure 2" to the Haemonculus* as that model is nowhere to be found on the board.

*The rule for measuring to the vehicle's hull for the purposes of measuring a range to a unit applies only to units. If you claim that the Haemonculus is a unit, then he must be separate. If you claim that he isn't separate, then the unit isn't embarked in the vehicle - a case could only be made that it is partially embarked, which is impossible.

It seems to me that the opponent was entrenched in his view of the rules. (which I believe he is completely wrong in his interpretation) So rather than continue playing against such an individual with a real bad taste and more than likely a less than fun game after that, I would most definitely walk away. Better that than reach over the table and slap him for being a jerk, lol. I am sure it was to the opponents complete and 100% best interest to ensure that under no circumstances that the Wyches be allowed to fleet and then assault and this is the BS he came up with. I wasn't there so I am making an assumption on that but I bet that it is a pretty good one. I wonder how many rules he has conveniently overlooked when it is to his benefit.

I'm not sure you get the point of this section. All rules discussions can end, "I walk away", but that's not why it's brought up in YMDC.