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.

When do you split units that are combat squading when they are deep striking. Do you role for the squad, then deep strike them in two differnt locations, or do you role for them seperate then deploy them seprate, or role for the unit, place them, then combat squad them.

Combat Squad makes them 2 squads for all purposes after that point. That happens before deployment, so they are seperate before the reserves stages.
So, it'll be seperate rolls.

But, as I've not tried it, wait for someone else to answer.

Skinnereal is right.

Skinnereal is wrong, and this thread is in the wrong section.

Combat Squadding is done during deployment. Placing them into reserves is not deploying them. There are two interpretations from here:

#1
When the unit arrives from reserves (rolled for as a single unit because it cannot have combat squadded yet) it 'deploys' whilst moving onto the board. Hence it can either walk onto the board as two seperate units, or Deep Strike in two seperate locations. The INAT supports this.

#2
The unit cannot combat squad if it has been placed in reserves - this is backed up by the GW FAQ.


I personally go with #2 because it requires a bit of rules fiddling to split up a unit whilst arriving from reserves - the rules tell you to enter the board in a certain way with no other options. For example, if a squad was outflanking and trying to split up on arrival, would the board edge be determined seperately for each? What about deep striking? I've moved onto the board as directed by the rules... when am I allowed to split up the unit?

A unit arriving via Drop Pod has exclusive rules that tell you how to combat squad in that situation and grants you clear permission to do so. They do not roll seperately for Reserves, nor enter the table seperately, so there's nothing that can be applied to any other fashion of arriving from reserves.

The major problem with RAW is that 'Deployment' itself is never defined in the rulebook. The same operative term is used for arriving from reserves, but clear instructions on how you perform this kind of deployment (the unit 'deploys', verbatim) actually are given.

#2 is NOT backed up by the GW FAQ. It says units in reserve cannot CS - which is fine. Once you roll your 4+ (or whatever) you are no longer IN reserve.

You roll as one unit, then, when you come to deploy, you can choose to deploy in 2 locations.

I like Nos' resolution. The GW FAQ's sloppy cut & paste-from-the-old-DA-FAQ answer to the question about splitting half a squad in a pod and half on the table is a PITA, unless you read it as Nos just put forward. Works for me!

nosferatu1001 wrote:#2 is NOT backed up by the GW FAQ. It says units in reserve cannot CS - which is fine. Once you roll your 4+ (or whatever) you are no longer IN reserve.

You roll as one unit, then, when you come to deploy, you can choose to deploy in 2 locations.

Oh, how I wish you were right.

It doesn't say: "units in reserve cannot CS", it says: "units placed in reserve cannot CS"

Have you placed the unit in reserve? If yes, then you cannot CS.

crap ruling considering it is far more wide-reaching than the question asked(which was about CS-ing, but only deploying half, which of course could not be done).

Kommisar Kel has it right...

Combat squads are declared when the unit is deployed and are from that point on treated as two completely independent units.

However, units place in reserves can not combat squad unless deploying from a Drop Pod.

If you deploy your terminators normally they can combat squad, if you deep strike them you cannot combat squad as they have been placed in reserves.

With the frequency of this topic's appearance, it's starting to seem like a troll.

It's almost as though everyone has their answers stored on a notepad ready to paste back in when it shows up.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Oh, how I wish you were right.

It doesn't say: "units in reserve cannot CS", it says: "units placed in reserve cannot CS"

Have you placed the unit in reserve? If yes, then you cannot CS.

Besides the fact that the FAQ does indeed look like a hack cut and paste job consider:

"A dog placed in a cage cannot run around" does not necessarily mean "said dog cannot run around after it is taken out of the cage."


So it is not as cut and dry as you are making it out to be.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Son 0f Dorn wrote:It's almost as though everyone has their answers stored on a notepad ready to paste back in when it shows up.

The question I have is, did you have the above sentence stored on a notepad? I had these three sentences stored on one. True story.

nvm

Stavkat wrote:Besides the fact that the FAQ does indeed look like a hack cut and paste job consider:

"A dog placed in a cage cannot run around" does not necessarily mean "said dog cannot run around after it is taken out of the cage."


So it is not as cut and dry as you are making it out to be.

It was cut and pasted, into every single Marine codex that Combat Squadding is available.

As for your Dog-cage analogy; it all depends it you are speaking of Capability or permission. A Dog in a Cage has no capability to run around; so your first sentence is true in either sense.

However if you are told, as a worker in a Kennel, that the dogs that have been placed in cages cannot run around; you are given a specific denial for there allowance to run around; even if they are subsequently removed from the cages. The fact that while the dog is in the cage said dog clearly cannot run around means that when removed from the cage would be the only time that permission would be specifically denied.

In the Case of permissions, "A dog placed in a cage cannot run around" does necessarily mean "said dog cannot run around after it is taken out of the cage."

Stavkat wrote:

Son 0f Dorn wrote:It's almost as though everyone has their answers stored on a notepad ready to paste back in when it shows up.

The question I have is, did you have the above sentence stored on a notepad? I had these three sentences stored on one. True story.

Unfortunately, I didn't. But I do now.

+1 internets to you, Sir.

Kommissar Kel wrote: It doesn't say: "units in reserve cannot CS", it says: "units placed in reserve cannot CS"

Have you placed the unit in reserve? If yes, then you cannot CS.

Unfortunately, your quote is just one small part of the FAQ and can easily be taken out of context. The full FAQ is:

Q: Can you take a Drop Pod with a 10-man squad and
then put a combat squad in it, deploying the other combat
squad on the table, or leave it in reserve but not in the
Drop Pod? (p69)
A: No, because squads that are placed in reserve may not
break down into combat squads.

So yes, squads that are placed in reserve cannot break down into combat squads, in fact, they never could.
Squads can only be broken down into combat squads when they deploy (Codex Space Marines page 51) and placing a unit, any unit, into reserves is done instead of deploying it.
Once you roll for a squad to arrive, it can then be split into combat squads.

What the FAQ says is quite simple. You can't take a pod (a dedicated transport that you need 10 models to select (vanilla SM)) and split the squad that selected it into combat squads before it lands. That was stated in the codex.
The FAQ is merely re-affirming the fact that you cannot combat squad a unit and put half in reserve.

Think of it as similar to taking a razorback with a ten man squad.
You can only put 6 max in the razorback. So the options are:
Deploy razorback empty and squad separate (either full 10 man or 2 five man combat squads)
Deploy razorback with a 5 man combat squad and deploy the other 5 man combat squad separately
Deploy razorback empty and leave 10 man squad in reserve
Deploy 10 man squad (either full 10 man or 2 five man combat squads) and leave razorback in reserve empty
Place razorback and 10 man squad in reserve as separate units, they will be rolled for and will arrive separately

The FAQ just prevents you from splitting a squad into combat squads and placing one or the other in reserve.
The Space Marine Codex is what gives permission to split a squad into combat squads when they are deployed.
And that includes either at the start of the game or when deploying from reserve.

Kommissar Kel wrote:

Stavkat wrote:Besides the fact that the FAQ does indeed look like a hack cut and paste job consider:

"A dog placed in a cage cannot run around" does not necessarily mean "said dog cannot run around after it is taken out of the cage."


So it is not as cut and dry as you are making it out to be.

It was cut and pasted, into every single Marine codex that Combat Squadding is available.

As for your Dog-cage analogy; it all depends it you are speaking of Capability or permission. A Dog in a Cage has no capability to run around; so your first sentence is true in either sense.

However if you are told, as a worker in a Kennel, that the dogs that have been placed in cages cannot run around; you are given a specific denial for there allowance to run around; even if they are subsequently removed from the cages. The fact that while the dog is in the cage said dog clearly cannot run around means that when removed from the cage would be the only time that permission would be specifically denied.

In the Case of permissions, "A dog placed in a cage cannot run around" does necessarily mean "said dog cannot run around after it is taken out of the cage."

My point is, the word "placed" is ambiguous. "Placed in" doesn't let you solve the problem on its own. Which you appear to agree with:

However if you are told,

Since what you are doing here is ADDING information to the hypothetical that allows you to resolve the ambiguity. As written in the FAQ there is no further information. You have to add your own information / make assumptions, what have you, in order to come up with a solution.

Adding information to the hypothetical that relates to the conditions presented does not change the hypothetical specifically to get the answer one wants.

The Hypothetical did not have enough information to warrant an answer in either direction: it was open-ended.

A similar Question would have been: "If I have three apples, and gave you 2 of them; what is the distance to the moon?"

What i added to your hypothetical was the permission, the same permission that is denied via Reserves per the FAQ.

Time Wizard: I agre that the FAQ was horribly written, especially since it answers a question that was never asked. I did not take anything out of cpontext, the Answer did. The Context had to do with Deploying half a Combat squad on table while keeping the other half in reserve. the Answer was that once you reserve a unit, you cannot Combat squad it.

the Answer was basically, going back to my previous example: "Q:If I have three apples and Give you 2 of them, how many Apples will I have Left? A: the moon has an average distance of 3,026,795,904 apples from earth."

*facepalm*

Adding information, that relates to the conditions, is STILL. ADDING. INFORMATION. You, by adding information are leading yourself to your answer. Which ignores my point that it IS open ended. It is not a hard point to understand. The way the sentence in the FAQ is written can be interpreted more than one way.

the Answer was that once you reserve a unit, you cannot Combat squad it.

*facepalm part deux* No, that is *not* the answer, that is your interpretation of the answer, which as I demonstrated in my dog example hinges on the meaning of "placed" which again, can go either way.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

"A dog placed in a cage cannot run around" does not necessarily mean "said dog cannot run around after it is taken out of the cage."

In the above bolded sentence and in the FAQ, it is unclear whether the restriction is limited to when the thing is placed in X, or whether the restriction is ongoing past placement in X. This really isn't hard to wrap one's head around. Claiming this common sense point is akin to asking an unrelated question about the moon exhibits at best, an extreme lack of understanding of my point, and at worst, dishonesty. I hope this most recent post will be enough to get you to realize what I have been saying. If not, ask questions, instead of getting dangerously close to a poisoning the well type fallacy...


PS - Saying a dog can't run around in a cage anyways totally and utterly misses my point. Don't get hung up on the dog or the cage, pay attention to the sentence structure and how the word "placed" interacts with the restriction. There are 1000s of examples of this type of sentence. You can create dozens of them if you wish. The noun and the kind of restriction are there as examples and need not be analyzed themselves. "Children placed in a pool cannot pee" is exactly the same type of open-ended rule as in the dog example.

I'm with Time Wizard.

We know the RAI. And his interpretation of the RAW is perfectly functional and legitimate.