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.

Dedicated Transports have to be part of the Platoon, if the unit that purchased it is also part of the Platoon.

A DT does not exist without the unit that purchased it. If the unit that purchased the DT is part of the Platoon, so must be the DT.

ToBeWilly wrote:Dedicated Transports have to be part of the Platoon, if the unit that purchased it is also part of the Platoon.

A DT does not exist without the unit that purchased it. If the unit that purchased the DT is part of the Platoon, so must be the DT.

So wait, if I destroy the unit that bought a DT, it is automatically stops existing? jk.

MULTIPLE UNIT CHOICES
Note that occasionally the Codexes allow the player to include several units in his army at the cost of a single force organisation slot (like dedicated transports, etc.). Apart from being bought as a single choice, these units operate and count as separate units in all respects.

Page 92, Warhammer 40,000 Rulebook

The Infantry Platoon entry on Page 96 of Codex: Imperial Guard is a 'Multiple Unit Choice'. The BRB gives a specific example of dedicated transports, but this rule equally applies to the Infantry Squad, Command Squad, and other Squads found under the Infantry Platoon entry.

The dedicated transports are purchased as part of a single choice: The Infantry Platoon. Hence, they are part of the Infantry Platoon.

The one compelling argument against this I've seen was that Page 96 of the IG Codex lists specific army list entries that make up the composition of the Infantry Platoon. I argue that the Multiple Unit Choice rule on Page 92 of the BRB still applies. The Infantry Squad when it takes a dedicated transport would be a Multiple Unit Choice, just like the Infantry Platoon is.

So really the Infantry Platoon entry is a Multiple Unit Choice containing Multiple Unit Choice selections.

The rule from multiple unit choices says "Apart from being bought as a single choice, these units operate and count as separate units in all respects."

The multiple unit choice rule ends the moment you buy the units. It was never meant to affect how units deploy in game.

edit: So for the platoon to contain the transports it should be in the platoon composition like all other units.

Good job the Platoon rules override this, by making even ENTIRELY separate units act as one unit for the purpose of deployment.

Remember specific > general? Think its been mentioned a couple of times...

part of the platoon.

"Dedicated transports
Dedicated transport vehicles sit outside the Force Organization structure, as they are attached to the unit they are bought for"

Hmmm, attached to the unit they are bought for? Sounds like if that unit is part of the platoon, then so are the DTs.

How are dedicated transports deployed for non-platoon units?*

Dedicated Chimeras should be handled in the same manner.

* he asked rhetorically

Yes. Yes they are.

So if chimeras are not part of the platoon, do they come in with no units inside of it?

You are saying that the infantry squads that have purchased (essentially as an upgrade) the chimera start the game on foot, without their transports even on the board (as an infantry platoon deploys together). Then the player must role seperatly for every chimera to arrive without the units the chimera was purchased for inside of it?

A chimera cannot be bought as anything other than a dedicated transport. So to say that they arrive seperately and act independently would be against that rule.

They have to be brought in with the platoon.

The IG platoon composition doesn't have a 0-X for commissars, so why do they need one for chimeras?

Those issues are covered by basic transport and reserve rules. No need for the chimera to be part of the platoon.

Especially if you are frightened to death by them .... We all know the real reason you won't stop with your campaign again this rule.
Once again, arguing for advantage is a cheap tactic, it's also a dishonest way to debate]

[quote=copper.talos from Warseer -.Anyway having 10 chimeras in the 24" line in DoW is a pretty OP thing. Just to think of the tank shocks, you having to deploy within 6" of the t-edge, the loss of maneuvering etc, being flooded with guardsman deep in your lines from the 1st round etc...

Just as I said in warseer, after a question on how this will affect playing DoW, I was pointing out how breaking the rules also means breaking the game.

The chimera has to be part of the platoon. It transports the squads it is bought for and deploys with them. The squad it is bought for deploys with the platoon, so the chimera deploys with the platoon

copper.talos wrote:Just as I said in warseer, after a question on how this will affect playing DoW, I was pointing out how breaking the rules also means breaking the game.

Good job it is neither breaking the rules nor breaking the game then!

Akroma06 wrote:Just like I stated in the thread on this subject. Yes they are apart of the platoon. They are an upgrade (albeit with different rules being a vehicle) just like a commisar or a HWT.

If that's true, then a chimera would be an upgrade to a company command section and therefore a part of that.
Its demonstrably not because of the dedicated transport rules, that is rules, not assumptions.

nosferatu1001 wrote:YOUR argument is that, despite the option for a Chimera appering on the Platoon page, they are not part of the platoon.

Your logic is deeply flawed.

Excluding platoons, the option for a chimera, exists on pages 90, 2x p92, 2x p94, 95 and p98.
When a unit buys (note a unit, not a platoon) a transport, it becomes a muc as defined in the rulebook.
Like a platoon.

It makes no difference!

3 of these unit options are hq's.
NONE of them can deploy in their chimeras in dow. Despite that they are muc's and are attached to their transports.

It makes no difference!

1 is a non-platoon troops unit that could, but that would be that for the 3 units allowed.

The faq allows a platoon to deploy as a single unit.
The dow rules demand that transports are considered to be a unit of their own, for purposes of deployment.
No-where in the (actual) rules does it say that a dedicated transport, is somehow part of what purchased it.
There is no contradiction between the faq and the dow rules in this respect.

What the (actual) rules do say, is that only the purchasing unit gets to deploy/come in from reserves aboard it and that it is considered to be of the same foc type (ie troops).
That's it, no more.

Apologies, couldn't resist, the ammount of personal insults for someone arguing from a reasonable standpoint is rather annoying.

fuusa wrote:
The faq allows a platoon to deploy as a single unit.

The first part isn't quite true, it doesn't count as a single unit. The wording is, "Each Infantry Platoon is deployed in place of a single unit in missions that limit the number units." Nowhere does it say it's deployed as a single unit, an infantry platoon is deployed in place of a single unit." A small but vital difference. If the FAQ had said, "Each infantry platoon counts as a single unit for purposes of deployment" then there would be no argument, chimeras wouldn't be deployed because the wording does not contradict the DoW scenario's deployment. However because it says each infantry platoon is deployed IN PLACE OF, we now have a different meaning altogether from that wording. It means we have permission to deploy an infantry platoon, which includes vehicles, because we do it in place of a single unit. Now it may seem like a pretty big leap in logic that vehicles are allowed, but here's the reason behind it. Transports are vehicles that are purchased using the specific wording of(Pg 67 BRB under dedicated transports for this quote), "allowing a vehicle to be selected together with the unit." Dawn of War tells us that transports count as one of the units we deploy, however the ruling of the FAQ is, IN PLACE OF a single unit we may deploy a Platoon, and as chimeras are "selected together with the unit" we have permission to deploy them because if something is "selected together with" the platoon squad it is included unless you have a special rule that prevents it. In other words it is dawn of war that prevents the normal deployment of a unit with transport, but since the FAQ gives the platoon permission to deploy in place of a single unit.

fuusa wrote:
The dow rules demand that transports are considered to be a unit of their own, for purposes of deployment. No-where in the (actual) rules does it say that a dedicated transport, is somehow part of what purchased it.

See above where I quoted from page 67, if it is selected together with that means it is a part of though it may act independent of the squad.

Lone Dragoon wrote:Transports are vehicles that are purchased using the specific wording of(Pg 67 BRB under dedicated transports for this quote), "allowing a vehicle to be selected together with the unit." Dawn of War tells us that transports count as one of the units we deploy, however the ruling of the FAQ is, IN PLACE OF a single unit we may deploy a Platoon, and as chimeras are "selected together with the unit" we have permission to deploy them because if something is "selected together with" the platoon squad it is included unless you have a special rule that prevents it. In other words it is dawn of war that prevents the normal deployment of a unit with transport, but since the FAQ gives the platoon permission to deploy in place of a single unit.

I read BRB p67. I think your interpretation is a bit of a stretch. I clearly see two rules in the Dedicated Transports text box. A) "These 'dedicated transports' do not use up a slot on the force organisation chart," and B) "The only limitation of a dedicated transport is that when it is deployed it can only carry the unit it was selected with (plus any independent characters)" I don't see a clear rule here or in the new FAQ for changing the well established principle of DTs as separate units from the squad they are dedicated to.

Even if the phrase you want to see appears on the page as part of a different rule, you have to be careful not to twist their meaning beyond their context. As an over the top example, I might say that "The only limitation of a dedicated transport is that when it is deployed it can only carry the unit it was selected with (plus any independent characters)" indicates that the Chimera can now move an unlimited distance, because this specific rule cancels the general rule of vehicles moving 6" combat speed or 12" cruising speed. Context is important.

Lone Dragoon wrote:

fuusa wrote:
The dow rules demand that transports are considered to be a unit of their own, for purposes of deployment. No-where in the (actual) rules does it say that a dedicated transport, is somehow part of what purchased it.

See above where I quoted from page 67, if it is selected together with that means it is a part of though it may act independent of the squad.

I disagree sir. I have yet to see a smoking gun (conclusive proof) that a DT chimera for an Infantry Squad's in an Infantry Platoon is also part of the Infantry Platoon. I do not think the use of the phrase 'selected together' on p67 is any more convincing than 'attached to the unit they were bought for' was on p87. I think both phrases refer to list building / force org requirements and pre-game embarking limitations, not limited unit deployments such as Dawn of War. The PIS is clearly linked to the IP. The PIS is clearly linked to DT. The link between the IP and the DT has yet to be clarified.

The new language in the FAQ is already a clear change and boost to what the Infantry Platoon can do in DoW deployment. IMO, the closest thing there is right now to a IP / DT link is the 3rd sentence in the new FAQ entry. However citing this would be only one possible interpretation of an ambiguous inference. It makes more sense to me that this sentence is GW's fix for the abuse of IP squads embarking in Valkyries/Vendettas and rolling once to come in from reserves in one huge mob.

copper.talos wrote:The rule from multiple unit choices says "Apart from being bought as a single choice, these units operate and count as separate units in all respects."

The multiple unit choice rule ends the moment you buy the units. It was never meant to affect how units deploy in game.

edit: So for the platoon to contain the transports it should be in the platoon composition like all other units.

You have accurately described how the IG platoon rules (and all other multiple-unit choices) have worked with Dawn of War deployment for the past several years, since the day 5th edition came out.

This state has now changed for IG platoons, as they've just received a new FAQ giving them an exception. The exception allows the entire platoon to deploy in place of a single unit.

By my read, the Platoon entry in the codex includes transports, just as much as it does the command section and the infantry squads. I'm not enthused about it, but it seems clear to me.

OK lets take the faq sentence by sentence:
"Each Infantry Platoon is deployed in place of a single unit in missions that limit the number units that can be deployed."
This sentence does not change what units make a platoon, so you can deploy all the units referred to the platoon composition as one unit but not their transports. They still are separate units and as so count towards the DoW limit.

Next:
"In addition when making a reserve or outflanking roll, roll once for the whole Infantry Platoon. Any units in reserve that are embarked upon a non-dedicated transport are instead rolled for separately.”

So any units of the platoon that are embarked upon a non-dedicated transport rolls separately. This is to prevent valkyrie squadron and vendetta reserve tricks. If this wasn't clarified you could argue that having 3 Infantry squads of a platoon embarked in valkyries, each belonging to a different squadron of 3, you can deploy all 9 valkyries with 1 reserve roll.

Now the instead part. This instead concerns "Any units in reserve that are embarked upon a non-dedicated transport". So it's instead of "any units in reserve that are embarked upon a dedicated transport". Reserve rules for dedicated transports, allow them and their unit to come using one reserve roll. No need for them to be part of a platoon for this. So all the units of a platoon, on foot or embarked in dedicated transports, are allowed to come from reserves with one reserve roll instead of those units that are embarked in the non-dedicated transports that have to roll separately. To conclude, this part of the FAQ doesn't imply or hint that the dedicated transports became one with the platoon, as you are able to follow the faq using just the transport rules.

copper making rules up wrote:This sentence does not change what units make a platoon, so you can deploy all the units referred to the platoon composition as one unit but not their transports. They still are separate units and as so count towards the DoW limit.

Not according to the Platoon rules theyre not. Transports are part of the platoon. You can keep repeating that they are not, but you lack significant rules ssupporting your view.

copper not understanding English sentence construction, or simply lying to try to achieve a point wrote:This instead concerns "Any units in reserve that are embarked upon a non-dedicated transport". So it's instead of "any units in reserve that are embarked upon a dedicated transport".

WRONG. This 'instead" is "instead of rolling once for the entire platoon, any units...upon a non-dedicated transport are rolled for separately"

Making dedicated transports part of the platoon

Again.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

copper making rules up wrote:This sentence does not change what units make a platoon, so you can deploy all the units referred to the platoon composition as one unit but not their transports. They still are separate units and as so count towards the DoW limit.

Not according to the Platoon rules theyre not. Transports are part of the platoon. You can keep repeating that they are not, but you lack significant rules supporting your view.

I disagree sir. Given the clear precedent of DTs not deploying freely with their units in DoW or any other FOC limited initial deployment and the general nature of 40k's permissive rules set, it is the PRO position that must provide "significant rules supporting your view." Right now, your strongest arguement seems to be that the word chimera appears in the Infantry Platoon entries of PIS and PCS. I do not find this persuasive given the precedent of DTs being "attached" and "associated" with the unit they are bought for, but NOT part of that unit.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

copper not understanding English sentence construction, or simply lying to try to achieve a point wrote:This instead concerns "Any units in reserve that are embarked upon a non-dedicated transport". So it's instead of "any units in reserve that are embarked upon a dedicated transport".

I realize you and copper have passed beyond the point of debate and are now well into an argument. I invite you to pause that argument as best you can and continue your debate with me or other individuals here. I cannot guarantee we will make any progress, but I can almost guarantee that a shouting match on a rules forum will achieve less.

nosferatu1001 wrote:WRONG. This 'instead" is "instead of rolling once for the entire platoon, any units...upon a non-dedicated transport are rolled for separately"

Making dedicated transports part of the platoon

Again.

Again sir, I disagree with you. As I stated in some of my above posts, I do think that the 3rd sentence in the new IG FAQ is potentially strongly in favor of the PRO position. It is potentially very strong since it is language not in the BRB or IG Codex, but in the "Official Update" to the IG codex. As Errata, it would "corrects any mistakes in the codex," thus any contradictions with BRB or original IG Codex might be explained away as corrections, not inconsistencies. My main problem with it is its ambiguous nature and positioning. As I said "The new language in the FAQ is already a clear change and boost to what the Infantry Platoon can do in DoW deployment. IMO, the closest thing there is right now to a IP / DT link is the 3rd sentence in the new FAQ entry. However citing this would be only one possible interpretation of an ambiguous inference. It makes more sense to me that this sentence is GW's fix for the abuse of IP squads embarking in Valkyries/Vendettas and rolling once to come in from reserves in one huge mob." Given two possible interpretations, I choose to interpret it as the least sweeping, but still effective rules change in keeping with GW precedent.

If this was a murder trial and I was a judge, I would see some evidence of guilt. I would find the defendant not guilty because the evidence was not conclusive.

If I were a vigilante, I would not kill the defendant in retribution. I might suspect he did it, but I don't know.

If I was a family member of the murder victim, I would no longer invite the defendant over for thanksgiving dinner or send them a christmas card.

The question isn't whether the Chimera is part of the same unit. It clearly is not.

The question is whether it is part of the platoon, which (per the new FAQ) is deployed entire, "in place of" deploying a single unit.

When I read the platoon entry, any transports taken seem to be just as much a part of the platoon as do the infantry squads.

Mannahnin wrote:The question is whether it is part of the platoon, which (per the new FAQ) is deployed entire, "in place of" deploying a single unit.

When I read the platoon entry, any transports taken seem to be just as much a part of the platoon as do the infantry squads.

Why? I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm just saying you have not yet shown us your rule or reasoning.

If the IP were an Apocalypse formation, I believe I could make a strong case for the chimeras to be part of the formation. This is persuasive, but not conclusive, and in the end, not terribly helpful. I know of no rule defining an IP as an Apocalypse formation, and Apocalypse is an optional expansion. I would be interested, however, in hearing from anyone with knowledge and specifically a rules reference from Apocalypse showing that DTs are part of a formation. It may contain helpful language.

It may feel like it should include the transports but there are no rules to back it up.

In pg 89 under unit composition "Where applicable, this section will show the number and type of models that make up the basic unit, before upgrades are taken."

In pg 89 under options: This sections lists all the upgrades you may add to the unit".

There is no mention of chimeras in the platoon's unit composition, of options and they are also not part of the squads that the platoon is composed of. Also the FAQ doesn't provide a concrete ruling to add chimeras as part of the platoon.

I get why someone would think a "platoon" should include transports, but real life military units don't have to be the same as those in the game.

I do not believe there is anything called a "platoon unit." We need to be careful with our language here. I agree with the principle you are citing, but because IPs are not units (they are MUCs from p92 BRB), it is not a conclusive NO, thus leaving the door open for an argument to be made for the PRO position. But again, I am still waiting to here a clear and compelling statement of that argument.

I play guard often. I would LOVE to drop 12 chimeras before turn 1 in DoW and giggle as my opponent wet himself. But when he asks me "why, how, why?" I need to have a very good reason. "The FAQ is ambiguous and might allow it" and "a DT is very much like an upgrade and upgrades are included in the unit and a IP is chosen in the place of a unit" are not going to fly. I would be ashamed present those arguments.

Remember, it is very likely IMO that we on this forum take the rules waaaaaay more seriously that the folks at GW ever intended. In a way, arguing the rules can be its own sort of game. Fun and satisfying if done right, but like all games, there needs to be sportsmanship to help balance a competitive spirit.

Mannahnin wrote:When I read the platoon entry, any transports taken seem to be just as much a part of the platoon as do the infantry squads.

How?

What wording that deals with transports for platoon squads, in anyway differs from the wording for any other unit in the ig codex???

I voted yes, because when rolling for reserves it would be silly to get:

1x PCS, 5x PIS, 3x HWS

and

1 Chimera.

Unless they were all embarked, in which case, I still say yes because you pass your reserve roll and get:

6x Chimera, 3x HWS

This tells me that they're part of the platoon.

I just can't accept "it would be silly" as a compelling counter agreement from anyone other than GW.

I think it is silly that a Necron Harbinger of Despair can use it's Veil when coming in from reserve BEFORE it ever gets on the board. Nevertheless, it is GW's right to be silly with their rules. They are own them.

I created a games workshop account and e-mailed their customer service. It will likely be some time before I get a response, but I will post it here when I do. I am off to kill some orks with my necrons.

Why is it silly that you can use wargear to help you mvoe onto the board? People use jump packs to do that all the time.

There is no evidence that chimera are not part of the platoon. There is a large amount of evidence that they are. I'm going with the majority opinion on this.

Unit1126PLL wrote:I voted yes, because when rolling for reserves it would be silly to get:

1x PCS, 5x PIS, 3x HWS

and

1 Chimera.

Unless they were all embarked, in which case, I still say yes because you pass your reserve roll and get:

6x Chimera, 3x HWS

This tells me that they're part of the platoon.

This kind of emphasises why democracy in next to useless.

Please understand the difference between a transported unit arriving from reserve and the same troops or hq unit deploying in dow.

They are worlds apart.

nosferatu1001 wrote:There is no evidence that chimera are not part of the platoon. There is a large amount of evidence that they are. I'm going with the majority opinion on this.

What evidence, there is none???