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.

Well, looks like tomorrow night is going to be an interesting evening with the other TO's :-)

ghpoobah wrote:
Well, looks like tomorrow night is going to be an interesting evening with the other TO's :-)

I think it should be simple... of you look at the AoC wording by itself, it could be a little murky for someone trying to cherry pick. However, the distinction made in the Desperate Allies section shows that the AoC allies would be scoring. As with most easter-egg hunting that happens on YMDC and morons like BoW, the seeming loophole only exists if you ignore the rules as a whole and instead play stupid grammar games with isolated sentences.

Reminds me so much of the wound overflow ignorance that we had a while ago... grammar nuisances of sentences in a vacuum =/= valid rules interpretation

They're not denial units for your own units.
...Units in your army treat AoC as enemy units...
Not you.
If you as a player would treat them as enemy units,
then you would not be able to play with them at all, since they would not be your units, but enemy units.

I think the langue is murky. 60/40 split in favor of not being a denial units to each other. But thats based soley on the wording of AoC and Denial Units. When you look at the rest of the rules RAI is 95% clear and when the initial issue is so murky RAI really is the only way to go.

This should be no problem for a half decent TO.