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.

questionawn of War; dedicated transports counted as 2nd troop choice.
Some gamers at the FLGS attended a 'Ard boys turny. At that turny the subject of troops and transports came up. They were ruling that the unit and their transport is 2 Troop choices.

The decicated transport is purchased, with the unit .The vehicle doesn't take any other troop choice slots. I can't list a rhino for a RP by himself. A rhino can't be bought by its self. It only comes with some units as dedicated transport. Is this a special rule for the t'Ard boys turny?

No... if you read the "Dawn of War" wording it says you can have two Troops UNITS on the table. The transport is a separate unit even if it doesn't take up a Force Org slot.

No it is the rule in the BRB. Read the example that covers Dawn of War. It uses a unit with a Dedicated transport as it's example.

jbunny wrote:No it is the rule in the BRB. Read the example that covers Dawn of War. It uses a unit with a Dedicated transport as it's example.

For some reason people are always shocked by this. Even if you didn't read the example how could you think that the rhino is part of the unit of marines? Yes you must purchase the marines to get the rhino but you must also buy a captain to get honour guard and they are most defiantly not the same unit. (i hope that's the right unit, i'm not a marine player.)

There are actually lots of examples of multiple separate units that are purchased in a single FoC slot. Don't make the mistake in assuming that a SM squad and it's Rhino are a single unit; if they were, then the Rhino & Squad would have to stay in coherency, shoot the same target, would be limited in speed to that of the slowest model, etc.

Indeed, well stated all around.

But as a nod to the op:

Dawn of War is an irritating set up. My group doesn't like it either, and while I agree with the separate unit rules listed here 100%, I can't help but think in my "down to earth non tourney mindset" that the whole thing was probably an oversight that people are now playing literally.


....

But then, Imagine an IG army that put down 6 squads from 2 FOC troops slots in that mission. Maybe not.

Augustus - it really isnt an oversight, given they use the squad + DT as the example....

Sure, good point.

Well then I have to say I just hate it too.

I think it would be worth noting that the Transport and the Squad that it was purchased for aren't forced to deploy together. I'm pretty sure that's the case anyway, they count as the same FoC slot, they are two seperate deployments and two seperate kill points. But as long as the transport isn't used to carry another squad then it can be deployed later.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, I don't own Battle Missions and have only glanced at it once or twice.

I don't understand. Are you saying they take a unit of SM + their transport, and that is all? Since the scenario says it fulfills two troop choices? Because that just sounds wrong. You're supposed to fill the compulsory boxes in the FOC, and DT sit outside the FOC.

Ironhide wrote:I don't understand. Are you saying they take a unit of SM + their transport, and that is all? Since the scenario says it fulfills two troop choices? Because that just sounds wrong. You're supposed to fill the compulsory boxes in the FOC, and DT sit outside the FOC.

You are misunderstanding.

A SM Unit and Rhino are Two Units, but One Choice.

Big Difference.

And that was my understanding, GWAR. So what is the problem? How is this being used to break the rules, per se?

Ironhide wrote:And that was my understanding, GWAR. So what is the problem? How is this being used to break the rules, per se?

What it means is, in Dawn of War, you can only Deploy a SM Squad and Their Rhino, (and an HQ) as these are two Troops units, despite being one Troop choice. The same reasoning applies to combat Squads. A SM Unit that's broken into Combat Squads is now Two units, so you cannot deploy the 2nd tactical squad in DoW once you deploy the first two Combat Squads, nor can you deploy the Combat Squaded Tactical Squad's Rhino.

However, to have a Legal FoC, a Tac Squad and Rhino won't cut it, as it is only one Troops Choice, despite being two units, so you need a 2nd choice.

Ah! Now I see. Someone tried to put down more than was allowed in the deployment phase.

don't know about rule lawyer. So, I put a Rhino on the game table and the troops {that purchased the dedicated transport, Rhino} along side of it? Can I put 2 empty Rhinos on the table and the squads later?
Do we place 2 infantry units on the table then later have their transport pick them up like a Taxi?
Can a unit be deployed with out it's Transport? A Rhino and the troops are the same unit until the squad disembarks from the transport. Maybe to capture an objective. The rhino is Now a seperate unit and can shoot at other enemy targets.
A while ago there was something called "the spirit of the game", ment to close loop holes.

This set up is a" unprepaired battle." The 2 infantry units and the HQ stumble into a battle. There are No heavy support on the table. The Longfangs/Devistator squads can't be set up in a good location. They have to run a turn or so to get into postion to get a place with LOS and maybe cover.

I Had to format this to make it readable and able to answer your confusion.

resinmann wrote: don't know about rule lawyer. So,

1. I put a Rhino on the game table and the troops {that purchased the dedicated transport, Rhino} along side of it?

2. Can I put 2 empty Rhinos on the table and the squads later?

3. Do we place 2 infantry units on the table then later have their transport pick them up like a Taxi?

4. Can a unit be deployed with out it's Transport?

5. A Rhino and the troops are the same unit until the squad disembarks from the transport. Maybe to capture an objective. The rhino is Now a seperate unit and can shoot at other enemy targets.
A while ago there was something called "the spirit of the game", ment to close loop holes.

.

1. Yes you could.
2. Yes you may, as units do not have to deploy inside of their dedicated transports, the caveat is that ONLY the unit that purchased the dedicated transport may start the game inside of it.
3.That is an option available to you
4. yes
5. A dedicated transport and the unit embarked within are NEVER the same unit, they are always separate units. Furthermore you seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that a dedicated transport purchased by a troop unit would be able to capture objectives. This is false, while it is a "troop unit" there is a rule in the book that explicitly states nothing with an armor value may ever hold an objective, it may contest all it likes, but never hold. (roommate grabbed rulebook so i cant give page #s, but someone else can)

There is no breaking in the spirit of the game here, except you trying to illegally deploy more in dawn of war than you are allowed to.

resinmann wrote:
don't know about rule lawyer.
A while ago there was something called "the spirit of the game", ment to close loop holes.

resinmann wrote:
This set up is a" unprepaired battle." The 2 infantry units and the HQ stumble into a battle. There are No heavy support on the table. The Longfangs/Devistator squads can't be set up in a good location. They have to run a turn or so to get into postion to get a place with LOS and maybe cover.

That is exactly the point, if you were more experienced, you would see why there is a need for such a deployment type.

Sorry poor communications: [" explicitly states nothing with an armor value may hold objectives"]
No! I did not say a Vehicle could hold a objectives.
The Scoring models Inside, exit the transport and they hold the objective. The transport goes and fights as a seperate unit. Shooting with it's SB and/or shields, blocking enemy LOS.

OK. the set up is 3 unit/models : 1 HQ, 1 rhino and 1 unit. Or combinations.
I understand the basic reson of the rule. It's a unprepaired battle. It puts a spin the normal game. In a turnament , I using all the exact rules but not for agreed house rules.

A rules Lawyer: a person who finds exceptions and loop holes in the rules and exploits. The BRB and Codex become Legal doccuments for dicecting. Some people are real good(lawyers) I have know of gamers who have so much debate skill They can turn a clear rule aginst itself.
The main Point I want to make is: Turnaments follow the rules to the exact letter.
I see the desire to go and kick butt in a turny. Prove you have a powerful list and know the Rules real well. But there could be House Rules where the game is played for FUN.
What about a LR (from heavy support) Do people start the game with passangers inside ?
Do you deploy the LR and the troops that you want to transport outside. On turn 1 load them into the LR.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
edit,It should read : [in a turnament , I can see using all the exact rules ]
[That is exactly the point, if you were more experienced, you would see why there is a need for such a deployment type. ] - What part of YES don't you understand?

Yes, you may start a unit inside a non-dedicatedc transport.

Often didnt happen in 4th as they were normally death traps, but it was legal then as well.

resinmann wrote:
A rules Lawyer: a person who finds exceptions and loop holes in the rules and exploits. The BRB and Codex become Legal doccuments for dicecting. Some people are real good(lawyers) I have know of gamers who have so much debate skill They can turn a clear rule aginst itself.
Te. On turn 1 load them into the LR.

Calling someone a rules lawyer because you cant understand the rules in the rulebook is bad form.

The vehicle being the second troop unit deployed is not rules lawyering, theres even a dumbed down picture for people with no reading comprehension that specifically states along the lines of, "already embarked into their dedicated transport (which is his second unit of troops)".

Please reread the relevant sections of the rules before trolling and flaming people, because you don't understand how the mission works.

resinmann wrote:
What part of YES don't you understand?

I find it very hard to understand pretty much everything you've written in this topic. When you put YES in that context, I don't understand it at all

resinmann wrote:I see the desire to go and kick butt in a turny. Prove you have a powerful list and know the Rules real well. But there could be House Rules where the game is played for FUN

Most tournie-players play for fun too. And most experienced players find the game more fun when you play by the rules. As I tried to say, there are many reasons for the existance of DoW deployment. All those downsides with the deployment are meant to happen. I won't bother trying to explain why this deployment is needed. Of course you are free to house rule however you wish, but don't go about calling people rules-lawyers if they understand the rules and want to play by them, it is you that want to make up your own rules - you are the one that must get approval from the other player, not the otherway around

I am not calling anyone bad names. I am not calling people a rule lawyer. I did not want to dicet the rules. I felt the rule was wrong. If correct, do people still play that way at non-turnaments. House rules.

I did not know it was so easy to ruffle feathers. I am very sorry. Turnaments are on a higher level. I allowed my opponents a chance to correct a mistake.
Last game my opponent forgot to run a squad. During my turn, I let him correct that. Are there Do-Overs in turnaments? At home yes, a turnament, No. It is part of the game.
Turnament players are not all power players. And it not just for bragging rights.
You get to face armies that you would not normaly be able to. See army lists on the GW website in action.

My smart ass- "what part of yes don't you understand" was not ment to insult anyone.
Yes, the rule rhino and 1 troop is correct. I am wrong and that was a smart ass way to say you guys are right. I am sorry.
I hope I am not being a troll. That is not my intent.

Yes, I have a learning disability. Yes, I am on many medications. That is still no real excuse for me.

I misunderstood the posting sequence, As if only talking to 1 person.
I thought the rule was wrong. There are good arguments on both sides.
I am wrong. I accept that fact.

Thanks for being open to admitting error! We all make mistakes; most of us could stand to admit it more often.

You're absolutely right that house rules and letting people take stuff back are very common and appropriate in friendly games, but most gamers tend to be stricter in tournaments, and it's important to play as much by the rules as possible particularly when playing a stranger. Because what "makes sense" for a house rule varies a lot from place to place, we mostly focus on the strict letter of the rules here, and label it as such when we're talking about house rules.

I appreciate the effort you're making, as well, to make your posts clearer. Writing clearly helps a lot when you're writing to people who don't already know you well. That said, it helps for folks to be polite with their criticism as well.

To be honest you will find tournaments can be quite easy going as well - especially if you both talk and are friendly, most players will let you correct an obvious mistake if you are nice about it, and are willing to reciprocate.

Most players seem to realise it is stilla game of toy soldiers even at a tournament, and that being pleasent to play against makes for a MUCH more enjoyable game, all round, than when you are a grim (dark) faced kill joy.

I just thought there were more rules, FAQ,Errata that cover this. After all this effects 1/3 of the games.

"When a transport moves, the unit inside counts as moving also. I thought the dawn raid set up worked something like that."

This rule effects the targeting/shooting rules as played at my FLGS.

I will try to be as clear in my postings as possiable.
To keep it simple: When I read a paragraph, I don't see the samething as most of you.

It is nice to hear about friendly turnaments.

So, in a Dawn of War scenario, you can deploy at the start one HQ unit and 2 troop units. So if I'm playing SM, I could deploy:

1. A HQ Unit, 1x 10-man Tac Squad not embarked, and their dedicated transport

2. A HQ Unit, 1x 10-man Tac Squad embarked in DT, 1x 10-man Tac Squad.

3. A HQ Unit and 1x 10-man Tac Squad split into 5-man Combat Squads.

4. A HQ Unit, 2x 10-man Tac Squads embarked in DT.

These look right? Any other combinations? Can you deploy 2x 10-man Tac Squads and then split them into 4x 5-man combat squads?

#2: That's three troop units, so no, you can't.

#4: That's a total of four troop units, so no, you can't.

And as for your last question, no, again that's four troop units. You're allowed two.

I thought a troops embarked in a dedicated transport counted as one unit.

Ironhide wrote:I thought a troops embarked in a dedicated transport counted as one unit.

Quite clearly two units.

Ironhide wrote:I thought a troops embarked in a dedicated transport counted as one unit.

They're two separate units.

As mentioned at the very start of the thread, this is even used as the example in the DoW rules.