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.

I would still adhere to step by step resolution giving them a bit more of an edge:

-Grand Strategy (Unyielding Anvil) picks 3 units: A B & C.
-Army contains 1 single C.A.Detachment
-Troops from said CAD get ObSec
-units A B &C now "claim objectives as if they were Troops" (which troops? - The CAD troops)
-"Claim" does not exist: they "control objectives as if they were Troops"
-units A B & C: "controls objectives even if an enemy scoring unit is within range of the objective marker, unless the enemy unit also has this special rule"

If they're on an objective with an enemy Elite, they control "even if an enemy scoring unit is within range".
If they're on an objective with an enemy Troop (CAD), they "unless the enemy unit also has this special rule" and the enemy troops control "even if an enemy scoring unit is within range" because your Unit does not have the ObSec rule.

Point out which rule i am breaking?

What happens when 2 opposing AU units are within 3" of an objective?

 Happyjew wrote:

Fragile wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Examples of Troops not claiming via ObSec?

Certainly. Any Troops that does not come from a Detachment with the Command Benefit "Objective Secured".

This would include things like the various Tyranid formations from Rising Leviathan, or more recently an Ork Warband from C: Orks.

So despite the fact we are talking about a cad, your giving examples outside that cad.

Why does the detachment matter? The rule makes no mention of detachments, armies, or special rules. The burden is on you to prove that they get ObSec.

My troops claim objectives with ObSec. Other units in my detachment do not.

My DK now "claims objectives like Troops." If he does not gain OS then he is not claiming them like Troops.

Fragile wrote:
My troops claim objectives with ObSec. Other units in my detachment do not.

My DK now "claims objectives like Troops." If he does not gain OS then he is not claiming them like Troops.

Why not? Does the rule say they "claim objectives like your Troops", or does it say they "claim objectives like Troops"?

 FlingitNow wrote:
What happens when 2 opposing AU units are within 3" of an objective?

"unless the enemy unit also has this special rule" applies to both. Just like 2 ObSec units meeting.

(Because they are using the same rule: AU)

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
What happens when 2 opposing AU units are within 3" of an objective?

"unless the enemy unit also has this special rule" applies to both. Just like 2 ObSec units meeting.

(Because they are using the same rule: AU)

So now they are allowed to use ObSec to deny as well? That is not what you were saying before.

 FlingitNow wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

 FlingitNow wrote:
What happens when 2 opposing AU units are within 3" of an objective?

"unless the enemy unit also has this special rule" applies to both. Just like 2 ObSec units meeting.

(Because they are using the same rule: AU)

So now they are allowed to use ObSec to deny as well? That is not what you were saying before.

No they are not using ObSec to deny (plus you do not deny with ObSec, it's simply a rule for when you control?)

They are using AU to stop each other from controlling?
I already said that they never have ObSec in the first place?