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.

Sorry for double post, but I lost 1 in the eather and am paranoid.

Lone Dragoon wrote:
So if the infantry platoon is embarked on their transports, they are deployed as part of the "whole infantry platoon" on a single reserve roll. That means that some units that are not embarked, and more importantly, those that are embarked can be deployed on a single reserve roll for the "whole infantry platoon."

No change there then.

Lone Dragoon wrote: The wording shows that all the chimeras are actually a part of the platoon because we can arrive from reserve embarked upon them because we roll for the "whole infantry platoon" not the infantry platoon plus dedicated transport vehicles.

Nothing has changed.

foolishmortal wrote:sigh... I really wanted someone to find a convincing argument for this.

Welcome to the darkside, foolish one.

However, I don't want to poo on your epiphany parade, but "no" has been stating the difference between deployment in dow and reserves, since year dot.

Lone Dragoon wrote: By your logic in the statement they are the same unit because reserve rolls are made that allow both to come on in a single roll.

No! They are not one unit, they are rolled for and will arrive together.

Lone Dragoon wrote:The reserve rules don't dictate whether a transport is part of a unit, it's the wording of the rule that dictates if a transport is part of a unit.

The transport is never part of the unit that purchased it.

Lone Dragoon wrote:First, the Al'rahem thing (at least where I'm from) WAS always been played that if they want the units disembarked, the chimeras still outflank, but enter on separate rolls from the platoon.

Then you were playing it wrong.

As I said earlier, al's platoon must outflank. In order for a transport to outflank, it must be occupied by the unit that bought it.
This would mean, that if the chimeras are part of the platoon, the unit must be embarked.
If they are not, you have the freedom to arrive on foot.

Furthermore, if you played it as you have the choice, then subsequently allow empty chimeras to outflank, you would be playing as if chimeras were most definately not part of the platoon and yet were, which sums up this thread for me.

Lone Dragoon wrote:[1. The rules specifically state that all units not riding in their transports, are treated as separate units for reserve rolls. So, if a unit is NOT in its transport in reserves, they are treated as separate.

Not if its part of a platoon, its not and never has been.

nosferatu1001 wrote:To make DT not be part of the platoon you would have another "instead" condition listed, dealng with empty DT for the platoon. There isnt one, meaning the middle is not excluded - threre is no middle

No-one has to "make them" not part of the platoon, the rules in the book do that already.
Dt's are not mentioned, as they are already dealt with.

Tzarkahn wrote:I said yes, just because it makes sense.

The point of the Chimera is to transport the troops, they are part of the Platoon, as in any Military Hierarchy.

You said yes, because it makes sense, plainly not because that's how the rules work.
The point of an hq chimera, is to transport the hq.
In dow, it can't.

"In order for a transport to outflank, it must be occupied by the unit that bought it. "

That has no basis in the rules - or at least not such a general statement as you made.

A DT without scout / infiltrate can only outflank with the conferring unit inside, because thats how the rules work. But a DT that came with Outflank, like a Chimera in Al's platoon, can outflank just fine, with or without a unit on board.

Also - the rules in the book make them part of the platoon. Anything i buy from the Platoon page is part of the platoon, oddly enough.

nosferatu1001 wrote:"In order for a transport to outflank, it must be occupied by the unit that bought it. "

That has no basis in the rules - or at least not such a general statement as you made.

Well, as you know, that was in reponse to a quote about al rehems outflankers and even included his name, so ... shrug.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Also - the rules in the book make them part of the platoon. Anything i buy from the Platoon page is part of the platoon, oddly enough.

What book?

You are not paying attention to the rulebook, the source of rules for dedicated transports.
You are assuming that because the platoon consists of multiple units, that changes the way those units purchase their transports and that the rules for dedicated transports are, somehow suspended for them.

This seems to be on the grounds that units in platoons are "special" in regard to transports, as well as "special" in that there is more than 1 unit.

Its never written down anywhere, though.

You cannot show me any rules that make units that are part of platoons, either purchase their d-transports in anyway differently to the manner anything else does, or suspends the dedicated transport rules re reserves and deployment.

Except I have, and we've been through this

The GENERAL DT rules are superceded by the FAQ and the IG codex, due to the unique Platoon concept only found in the IG codex

ANYTHING I buy from the Platoon page is part of the platoon. To argue the contrary you are now having to prove that anything you buy, from commisars to autocannon, are part of the platoon.

Yet there are crystal clear rules* that allow any upgrades such as the comisar and the autocannon to be part of the platoon. The chimeras don't have any such rules at all

*IG codex pg 89 unit composition allows any upgrades to be part of theplatoon and options state that all the upgrades in a unit are listed under options. Under options one can find the comisar, autocannon etc. Not a chimera.

nosferatu1001 wrote:The GENERAL DT rules are superceded by the FAQ and the IG codex, due to the unique Platoon concept only found in the IG codex

There you go, like I said, you believe the platoon is special so it can.

The ig codex has had platoons deploying as a single choice on the foc all along.
The book trumps this, in dow, by demanding units be placed = "unique" platoon defeated by book.
Dow explicitly requires d-transports to be treated exactly in the manner that d-transports are supposed to be treated, ie seperate but "temporarily coexisting" as it were with its unit.

The faq allows the platoon to deploy in place of 1 unit.

Neither the codex, nor the faq deliver any special way for a platoon unit, to purchase a transport.
There is no difference in the mechanism of doing this, than there would be for vets, for eg.
The platoon cannot purchase a transport, only a unit can. The platoon does not exist, as far as the dedicated transport rules are concerned, they only treat the purchasing unit as relevant.

Neither the codex, nor the faq state that the platoon has any special rules at all in regard to transports. The platoon is an irrelevance.

So we get to I have a pcs, 2x infantry squads and a chimera.
Can I deploy any of my platoon units in the chimera?

If the platoon can take Chimeras as dedicated transports then they deploy with the platoon even in DoW. It is as simple as that. I fail to see or understand this argument as the grammar is....

The platoon can't take chimeras as dedicated transports, that's part of the point.

fuusa wrote:The platoon can't take chimeras as dedicated transports, that's part of the point.

Wat? Yes they can, it's under Options on all the relevant platoon pages.

Isn't there already a thread to debate this?

Oh yea, the thread this started from.

Keep repeating that they are seperate units in that thread, at least it sort of pretends to be relavent there.

And, yet again - anything I buy from the Platoon page is a part of the platoon.

Your entire argument is that you dont believe a DT bought as part of a platoon is actually part of the platoon

Now, given as apparently you dont believe the IG dex on this, there really isnt a lot further we can go here, is there?

Please, spam the other thread with the same circular argument, this poll thread has done its job nicely in showing that RAP and RAW are in happy coincidence, for a change

I see the disagreement here mostly as problems with semantics and assumptions. We all agree that the IG infantry platoon is a special MUC. The critical question seems to be, "In what way are they special?"

I believe they are special in exactly the ways described in the rules and rulings.

A) They are Multiple Unit Choice. The composition of those 'multiple' units is out p96 IGC and the nature of MUCs in general is described on p92 BRB.
B) Some of the units in the MUC (PISs and PCS) grant the player choice of purchasing additional units for their army, at no cost in FoC slots. The rules for such are detailed under dedicated transports BRB p67 + p87. The rules for the deployment of said DTs with or without the units they were purchased for are detailed on BRB p94
C) Thus, there are rules for how the IP is interacts with the PISs. There are rules for how the PIS interact with its DT. I have not yet seen a rule or ruling for the inclusion of DTs as part of an IP. The 3rd sentence of the new IG faq language tells us one circumstance under which a part of an IP might be excluded from the collective roll.

I agree that IPs are special. But lacking a rule or ruling on the inclusion/relationship of DTs in IPs, I must simply go by the rules I have. There is only need to interpolate more if the current rules fails to address some play situation. That has not happened here (yet).

I am relatively new here and a relatively new 40k player in general. I like to think of myself as fairly intelligent and fair minded. If presented with a logical, coherent argument for why something that is not explicitly allowed should be allowed, especially if it follows the spirit of previous rules and rulings.

I know there are many TOs and/or longtime players here. Surely you have in your extensive resources a reference to a rule or ruling on
A) empty DT chimeras rolling for reserves collectively with the IP or seperately
and/or
B) empty DT chimeras in Al'rahem's platoon outflanking or coming in from the player's edge.

We can argue semantics or we can find the answer.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Your entire argument is that you dont believe a DT bought as part of a platoon is actually part of the platoon

You accuse me of using circular aerguments and come out with that???

nosferatu1001 wrote:Now, given as apparently you dont believe the IG dex on this, there really isnt a lot further we can go here, is there?

I believe what IS written in the ig dex, paying little heed to the assumptions of people like you, who seem to see what they want and very little of the rulebook.

So, I will re-ask my question in the other thread.

foolishmortal wrote:We all agree that the IG infantry platoon is a special MUC. The critical question seems to be, "In what way are they special?"

I believe they are special in exactly the ways described in the rules and rulings.

Couldn't agree more.
Exactly as described and not imagined.

And, still - a vast proportion of people dont agree with you.

RAW and RAP apparently matching for a change.

Edit: yes, your argument is circular. It is based on the assumption that, just because you buy something for a platoon, it isnt a member of the platoon. ANd still, WRONG THREAD

I e-mailed the following to GW CS.

I am having some trouble understanding an entry in the new Imperial
Guard Codex Update (FAQ)

"Page 96 – Infantry Platoon, second sentence
Change to “Each Infantry Platoon is deployed in place
of a single unit in missions that limit the number units
that can be deployed. 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.”

Does the 3rd sentence imply that DT Chimeras are part of the Infantry
Platoon for limited unit deployments like Dawn of War? Specifically,
in Dawn of War, can I drop 2 Infantry Platoons and 12 Chimeras as my 2
troops choices before turn 1?

I received the following answer...

Hello xxxxxxx,

Currently with this new change I believe that you are correct. Now if you're playing in tournament or some special event that you will need to speak with the organizer to see how they plan to rule that specific question. Should you have any other questions give us a call at 1-800-394-4263 and we will work to get them answered.

Thanks!

xxxxxx xxxxxx
Games Workshop Customer Service

Please do not delete previous email threads as this will help us serve you better!

Games Workshop
Customer Service
6211 East Holmes Road
Memphis, TN 38141
Games Workshop Customer Service is open:
Monday through Friday 9:30 AM to 6:00 PM CST
Contact info:
1-800-394-4263
custserv@games-workshop.com

I then called the 1-800 number and spoke with a different customer service rep. I received the same answer.

I asked about Al'rahem outflanking with empty transports.
I was told they outflank also, empty, because they are part of the platoon which must outflank.

I asked about an IG IP in reserve with empty chimeras.
I was told its all one roll for when they come in because the empty chimeras are part of the IP

The person I spoke with claims to have played 40k at GW for 10 years as well as playing IG personally.
While a phone call or email to customer service is not an official ruling, this is good enough for me.

I will now yield the NO position (some other person might pick it up, don't get burned)

I will now begin contemplating how to best use this new-found tactic. BWAhahaHAhaha

foolishmortal wrote:I then called the 1-800 number and spoke with a different customer service rep. I received the same answer.

I was initially reading the post but hearing the teacher's voice from Peanuts, then I read this bit and laughed.

Trustful cynicism at its finest.

For me this ultimately boils down into a giant "makes no difference to me.
I usually have 1 plattoon: 1 PCS with Chimera, 2 PIS, 1 HWT.
So I deploy the PIS and HWT as normal, then deploy the PCS (as part of the Platoon deployment) in their Chimera; the Chimera being the 2nd troop choice.

Now, for the guys that go FootGuard and have Plattoons of 5 squads each with a Chimera...this can be huge.

foolishmortal wrote:The person I spoke with claims to have played 40k at GW for 10 years as well as playing IG personally.
While a phone call or email to customer service is not an official ruling, this is good enough for me.

I would have to say that is as close to an official ruling that you can get without speaking directly to the codex/FAQ/rule creators as you can get. It's better than anything I've heard from any of these arguements so far.

GW rules can be interpreted in a number of ways, and sometimes these differences cause arguements (case in point, this thread). But to hear what the original intention is then it sets everything clear.

Thanks for that.

Thank you

Now can we lock it?