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.

 Throt wrote:
Well I am done...just like choosing opponents there are times playing against someone s a waste of time and that is where this thread is now.
Niteware, Cammy..I agree with you and the majority of the gaming population.

I don't want to be insulting... but where are you getting that the majority of the gamin population believes this? It's rather presuming of you to state this, as I've seen you done in the thread previously. I didn't attack this comment before as I figured it was an exaggeration before. The poling I've done in my local community has them agreeing with myself, Nos, and Duke for the most part. While I'd never assume that I'm in the majority, it seems presumptuous that the majority of the community would be against us... Could you please provide any data that would indicate such a majority? Has there been polling on other WHFB sites that would support this? Are there rulings in GT (Or even just regular tournaments) showing that this is the case?

Even the discussion here seems pretty even between contributors....

He was extrapolating from the poll I think; 16 to 4 last I checked


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And using "as played" experience. Not scientific, but enough to make a potential stab at an opinion.

We've had some good threads that only opened up after a while. The rules are split all over across FAQs, army books, BRB, etc.

The poll? Was there a poll on this thread? I neither see the results or the options, but I am on my phone...

There is a poll further down.

Nite - up to 25% of your points limit. what is 25% of your points limit?

You are not comparing a percentage, but points. Your baseless (as in, you STILL cannto provide a RULE stating you convert your points on rares in a percentage) assertion otherwise has been proven wrong, over and over.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
There is a poll further down.

Nite - up to 25% of your points limit. what is 25% of your points limit?

You are not comparing a percentage, but points. Your baseless (as in, you STILL cannto provide a RULE stating you convert your points on rares in a percentage) assertion otherwise has been proven wrong, over and over.

Hahahahahaha, I love this. 25% of your points limit is an absolute value, which does not change from list to list. The rule which I am using is "You may spend up to 25% of your points on rares". How are you not getting this? This is written in the BRB. It is in bold. This means it is a rule. The words that constitute the rule say spend up to a percentage, which means you need to show what percentage you have spent.

Converting this rule into integers changes the rule, ergo it is not RAW.

What percentage of 1999 points is 500? (Hint: it is 25.0125%)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stoupe wrote:
The poll? Was there a poll on this thread? I neither see the results or the options, but I am on my phone...

The poll was started in a different thread, for reasons which are explained(ish) in that thread.

Yawn. And youre back to making up rules again

25% of your points limit absolutely does change, when your points limit changes. You realise a percentage is a ratio, right?

I will go ahead and spend up to 25% of 1999, as that is my points limit. 25% of 1999 is 500 points, so that is the result of performing the written algorithm as converted into maths, i.e. (1999/4), then rounded.

Your concession on lack of rules is accepted, and furhter posts of yours which ignore the rules will be ignored.

Ok, Divide to Conquer says to round up fractions. Is it Nite's point that you don't round THIS fraction because... the game hasn't started or something?

If page 1 instructs you to "round all fractions in this game" and then page 2 talks about how to build a list, wouldn't you assume that the list building is a part of the game? I mean, the rules on page 1 should apply to each subsequent page, right?

Also, is there anyone's concession that I can accept? There's an awful lot of concession accepting happening in this thread and I feel left out that no one has offered me one.

 Tangent wrote:
Ok, Divide to Conquer says to round up fractions. Is it Nite's point that you don't round THIS fraction because... the game hasn't started or something?

If page 1 instructs you to "round all fractions in this game" and then page 2 talks about how to build a list, wouldn't you assume that the list building is a part of the game? I mean, the rules on page 1 should apply to each subsequent page, right?

Also, is there anyone's concession that I can accept? There's an awful lot of concession accepting happening in this thread and I feel left out that no one has offered me one.

Around page 3 of this thread we covered how building the list falls into part of playing the game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's the useful part from page 3 of the thread.

HawaiiMatt wrote:

Warpsolution wrote:

The questions, then, are:
1. Do you build your list while you're playing a game?
p.x Setting Up The Battle Once you and your opponent have your armies...ready for battle, the first step to playing a game of Warhammer is setting up the battlefield.
p.2 Overview of the Game...1. Muster Your Forces ...use the system of points values and army lists...on p.132

p.132 Size of GameTo play a game of Warhammer, you and your opponent will need to decide...the total points values of your armies.
p.140 Fighting A Warhammer BattleSo you've read the rules [and] assembled your...army...it's time to set up and play a Warhammer battle[/quote
"The Rules" start on un-numbered cover page of 1; and go into detail on page 2. Page i, ii, IV, V and so on, are before "The Rules".
You're sequence is off.
P2 says
A) Muster forces (as per page 132)
B) Choose a Pitched Battle, (which is where you get the reference to play a battle, all the missions are labeled as "battles")
C) Set up battle field
D) Deploy Armies
E) Fight
F) Determine the Winner

Interestingly, under fighting a battle, you're told on page 141 to refer back to page 132 for The Armies.
If page 140 is the start of "the Game" then page 141 makes page 132 part of the game.
Here's the quote:

Each pitched battle contains the information you need to get set up and playing, broken down into the following categories: The Armies (this will normally be two armies of equal points value, chosen using the system on page 132), The Battle Field, Deployment, First Turn, Game Length, Victory Conditions and Scenario Special Rules.

2. When are you called upon to divide?
I'm not sure, but I believe that the La of Equality states that x/4 =.25x; that they have the same value, or represent the same mathematical object.
But even if this is true, the act of dividing still differs from that of multiplying.

We are told 25% and 50%, but not given the exact method. Since x/4 = .25x; you can multiple and have 499.75 points in rares. I'll divide and have 500.

-Matt

Yep, which was why Throts attempts to bring it back up again, having clearly not bothered to read page 3, was quite tedious.

Nite is stating, for some reason, that instead of doing what it tells you to do - spend up to 25% of 1999, which is telloing you to spend up to 499.75 rounded up to 500, you instead work out your percentage spent and then compare that to the 25% figure

Not only completely counter intuitive, given units are valued in points, and it tells you to find a points value by performing a calculation on a points value, but it also involves "selectively" changing the wording to mean something else entirely - namely "compare the percentage of rare points you have spent to 25%; you may spend up to 25%"

The other "useful" contributions, like Sigvatr, seem to have halted, leaving us with a ce3ry clear RAW position, that some are apparently still confused about.

@Matt - Why is it that multiplying (to find a percentage) gives a value that you can NOT round up, but dividing (to find a percentage) gives a value that you CAN round up? Is it because of the wording of Divide to Conquer?

At least, I'm assuming that's what you're saying.

Firstly, a ratio does not change based on the figuees used. That is the whole concept of a ratio.

Secondly, my point is that the rules tell you to perform a percentage based check; that is what "up to" means.

Thirdly, even using your flawed method of working this out, nothing forces you to spend your full allocation on rares. Unless forced to break a rule (where two rules disagree) you must stick to all of them. This means that you have no permission to break the "up to" part of the rule. 500 is undeniably more than 25% of 1999, so 499 is the limit.

So even using your dodgy parsing, 500 is illegal.

 Tangent wrote:
@Matt - Why is it that multiplying (to find a percentage) gives a value that you can NOT round up, but dividing (to find a percentage) gives a value that you CAN round up? Is it because of the wording of Divide to Conquer?

At least, I'm assuming that's what you're saying.

I'm saying that the only remaining dispute is that some how finding a 25% rare limit can be done without Dividing, or doing something Mathematically the same as dividing.
I'll see if I can dig up the wordage to algebra word problem post.

I think if we pull out the repetitive posts, this thread is something like half a page.

-Matt

Three questions Matt:
1) Do general rules ever let you break specific rules?
2) What does "up to" mean?
3) What is 500 ÷ 1999?

So, Nite, are you saying (when you speak of general and specific rules) that Divide to Conquer is less specific than The Rules on Point Limits?

And, so, The Rules on Point Limits (which don't mention rounding up with fractions) override the more general rule that calls for you to round up?

And because you don't round up, you must essentially round down to 499?

 Tangent wrote:
And because you don't round up, you must essentially round down to 499?

No need to round. There are units with fractional costs even.

Niteware wrote:
Three questions Matt:
1) Do general rules ever let you break specific rules?
2) What does "up to" mean?
3) What is 500 ÷ 1999?

1) Yes. General Principles do break specific rules.
You can move units "Up to its Movement Value" (page 13.)
Page 26 shows how DtC allows a unit to exceed an "Up To" Limit.
Elf with 5" move can move up to 5".
Movement Sideways "Counts the distance moved as being double what it actually is". (page 26)
For example, a unit of Elves (Move 5) would be able to move 5" forward or 3" (2.5" rounded up) backwards or to the side.
3", the distance moved, doubled as per the directions, is 6". 6 is more than 5.
6 inches is not "up to" 5 inches.
It's a direct rulebook example telling you that Divide Then Conquer crushes "up to".

2) Up To, gives you a limit that can be met and not exceeded. Of course, if another rule changes that limit, you aren't breaking that rule.
You can have up to 2 of each rare. But I can take 4 pump wagons.

3) No body is debating basic math.
Is 3" doubled more than 5"? Yes.
Is the Up To limit 5"? Yes.
Does the rule book tell you can move the elf 3"? Yes.

Can you find any rule book example to support your position?
The rulebook is chalked full of examples that outline application of the rules, yet I can't find one to support your stance.

Hello everyone,
This argument is circular but I think it ends with the result of 499 because of the process involved

Can I write my list with these totals in my 1999 point army?
Rare 500pts
Core 500pts
Heroes/Lords 500pts
Special 500pts
Totaling 2000pts
I have followed the rule that I can spend 500 because I have not exceeded the 25% using Dividing to Conquer rounded up...so where do I have to remove my points from??



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Still circular isn't it ? 499 stops the cycle.

HawaiiMatt wrote:

Niteware wrote:
Three questions Matt:
1) Do general rules ever let you break specific rules?
2) What does "up to" mean?
3) What is 500 ÷ 1999?

1) Yes. General Principles do break specific rules.
You can move units "Up to its Movement Value" (page 13.)
Page 26 shows how DtC allows a unit to exceed an "Up To" Limit.
Elf with 5" move can move up to 5".
Movement Sideways "Counts the distance moved as being double what it actually is". (page 26)
For example, a unit of Elves (Move 5) would be able to move 5" forward or 3" (2.5" rounded up) backwards or to the side.
3", the distance moved, doubled as per the directions, is 6". 6 is more than 5.
6 inches is not "up to" 5 inches.
It's a direct rulebook example telling you that Divide Then Conquer crushes "up to".

Interesting example, although the fact that characteristics are directly covered in DTC weakens it a lot. It does use "up to", but only when talking about the higher number. When talking about moving backwards or sideways, it says they move "at half rate", which is clearly a division - hence DTC. It does not say they move "up to half their rate", which would be very different linguistically and mathematically.

2) Up To, gives you a limit that can be met and not exceeded. Of course, if another rule changes that limit, you aren't breaking that rule.
You can have up to 2 of each rare. But I can take 4 pump wagons.

This actually backs up my point - the more specific rule outweighs the more general. Normal rare limit is 2, specific limit is 4. Usually you would find a number and round it up, you can't because of "up to". Incidentally, nothing says that that limit is changed - it doesn't suddenly stop applying once you get past that stage.

If you have 12 dice in your magic pool, you can;t tick off that rule as fulfilled and then channel for more - you have a limit that holds the entire way through. Same for rares - never more than 25%.

3) No body is debating basic math.
Is 3" doubled more than 5"? Yes.
Is the Up To limit 5"? Yes.
Does the rule book tell you can move the elf 3"? Yes.

Can you find any rule book example to support your position?
The rulebook is chalked full of examples that outline application of the rules, yet I can't find one to support your stance.

As I've said above, there is no "up to" in relation to the 3" move. There are many, many things that the rulebook does not have examples for. It does often use clear language, however. Up to 25% seems quite clear; you can't have more than 25%. You say that nobody is debating basic maths, but 500 is clearly more than 25%. So either you ARE debating basic maths, or you are disagreeing with yourself

2) Up To, gives you a limit that can be met and not exceeded.

Peasant wrote:
Can I write my list with these totals in my 1999 point army?
Rare 500pts
Core 500pts
Heroes/Lords 500pts
Special 500pts
Totaling 2000pts
I have followed the rule that I can spend 500 because I have not exceeded the 25% using Dividing to Conquer rounded up...so where do I have to remove my points from??

But you broke the very first thing you and your opponent agreed upon: army point totals. That comes before the section on specific limits. The description of point total says you much reach that value or less. There is no division or multiplication involved in that.

 kirsanth wrote:

 Tangent wrote:
And because you don't round up, you must essentially round down to 499?

No need to round. There are units with fractional costs even.

OOh, so close, but missing the actual rule that states you MUST round up if you have divided. A unit with a fractional points cost hasnt gotten there through division, so you dont round up.

Nite - you are never asked to find 500/1999, so the result isnt relevant. You are asked to find 25% of 1999, and then find out if you have spent up to that amount.
Yup, still 500 points allowed.

DukeRustfield wrote:

Peasant wrote:
Can I write my list with these totals in my 1999 point army?
Rare 500pts
Core 500pts
Heroes/Lords 500pts
Special 500pts
Totaling 2000pts
I have followed the rule that I can spend 500 because I have not exceeded the 25% using Dividing to Conquer rounded up...so where do I have to remove my points from??

But you broke the very first thing you and your opponent agreed upon: army point totals. That comes before the section on specific limits. The description of point total says you much reach that value or less. There is no division or multiplication involved in that.

That is my point. I followed the rule that states that 25% is 500 points. So if I spend 25% each time shouldn't I be at 100% of my points?
What other way do I use to find out how many points I have spent and can spend? Where is the error?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
People are saying I have 500 points to spend in a 1999 so why can't I spent it?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 kirsanth wrote:

 Tangent wrote:
And because you don't round up, you must essentially round down to 499?

No need to round. There are units with fractional costs even.

OOh, so close, but missing the actual rule that states you MUST round up if you have divided. A unit with a fractional points cost hasnt gotten there through division, so you dont round up.

Nite - you are never asked to find 500/1999, so the result isnt relevant. You are asked to find 25% of 1999, and then find out if you have spent up to that amount.
Yup, still 500 points allowed.

Same question from my other post. I'm allowed 500 points. But when I spend 500 in each section I'm at 2000pts which is over..so I am not actually allowed 500 points. Which one am I not allowed 500points in?

Exactly, Peasant.
You can determine you are breaking rules without dividing - since you are not called upon to do so, there is not a need to prove that the math allows it to be done as an alternate method of determination.

Proving there is a method of determining relative ratios without division is all that is required.
That has been done.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

OOh, so close, but missing the actual rule that states you MUST round up if you have divided.

No. I am not.

Still.

So wait. You disagree with me, nosferatu1001?
Have you explained why?

Peasant wrote:
That is my point. I followed the rule that states that 25% is 500 points. So if I spend 25% each time shouldn't I be at 100% of my points?

That's nonsense. Whatever % you use it still can't break the first rule which is your points. If someone takes 2 wounds from an attack and then 2 more wounds and then 2 more wounds you can't keep taking it if the model only has 3 wounds on their profile. Yes, it can take a 2W hit but not 3 of them. The first rule in that case is a model can only take a total # of wounds as they possess--and the divide and conquer would work the same way if it took 2.5 hits it would take 3 and be dead. By your logic you could have 1999 Lords 1999 Heroes 1999 Core, etc. Divide and Conquer has nothing to do with it. It's irrelevant whether they are 25% or 50% those are rules that come later. The first rule you agree on is your total points which you have to be equal to or below. If you rounded up 3 times that's totally cool, you still have to be below your total points, which is the first rule. Rounding up or down has no effect on that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually let me amend that. By your logic, if you ROUND DOWN, you could have
499 Lord
499 Hero
499 Core [or being silly, 4999999999999 Core]
999 Special
499 Rare

Because you're totally ignoring the first rule and only looking at the individual rules that comes later. All of the above matches the second rules on later pages via rounding down. They just don't match the first in that your total, using addition, has to be < your agreed upon points.

Ignoring the first rule to round up when needing anything for the game means you need to round 1/2 to 1 before applying it - as you need to figure out what one divided by two is.

Note that 1/2 is math for one divided by two.

The first rule is points. There is no math. You speak a number and say yes or no.

If the value list was .5, I may be more inclined to not bring it up.
If only for semantics.
As listed it is a statistic asking for you to divide (you would be "called upon" even).

I have yet to see anyone assert that 1/2 is not one divided by two.

Note that this is simply being pedantic, as I am "trying" to convince people that something more than twenty five percent does not fit within a twenty five percent allowance.

DukeRustfield wrote:

Peasant wrote:
That is my point. I followed the rule that states that 25% is 500 points. So if I spend 25% each time shouldn't I be at 100% of my points?

That's nonsense. Whatever % you use it still can't break the first rule which is your points. If someone takes 2 wounds from an attack and then 2 more wounds and then 2 more wounds you can't keep taking it if the model only has 3 wounds on their profile. Yes, it can take a 2W hit but not 3 of them. The first rule in that case is a model can only take a total # of wounds as they possess--and the divide and conquer would work the same way if it took 2.5 hits it would take 3 and be dead. By your logic you could have 1999 Lords 1999 Heroes 1999 Core, etc. Divide and Conquer has nothing to do with it. It's irrelevant whether they are 25% or 50% those are rules that come later. The first rule you agree on is your total points which you have to be equal to or below. If you rounded up 3 times that's totally cool, you still have to be below your total points, which is the first rule. Rounding up or down has no effect on that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually let me amend that. By your logic, if you ROUND DOWN, you could have
499 Lord
499 Hero
499 Core [or being silly, 4999999999999 Core]
999 Special
499 Rare

Because you're totally ignoring the first rule and only looking at the individual rules that comes later. All of the above matches the second rules on later pages via rounding down. They just don't match the first in that your total, using addition, has to be < your agreed upon points.

Hahahaha...no need to be rude..I see my error in the post..
Your wound example is poor though because even though I can't 'take'the wound I still get credit for overkill so in a sense I do take the wound.
I'm confused...
Now you just said I have to be equal to or below my points.
Why don't I have to be equal to or below my percentage?
My points break that rule?
edit....i want to add that in all the example for dividing to conquer it is not acceptable to do less than...so you cannot take out less than 10% of 51..so I round up..which makes sense
But I can take less than 25% of my heroes..why should I be allowed to take more than 25%?.
I'm confused...

I'm having a REALLY hard time figuring out what everyone is actually saying. Let me try.

kirsanth

"Anything that would put you over the maximum limit is not allowed. The limit is determined by dividing, which results in a fraction. There is no problem with this. You don't round up regardless of what Divide to Conquer says because rounding up would put you over the limit. This limit trumps Divide to Conquer."

Question - why does the limit trump Divide to Conquer? Is it because it's more specific? Or some other reason?

Nite

"Point limits are more specific than Divide to Conquer, and so they trump DtC."

Nite

"Point limits are more specific than Divide to Conquer, and so they trump DtC."

There are several arguements that prove the 500 camp wrong. The first is thqt you are asked to compare to a percentage, not to an integer. Up to 25% is a mathematical function which compares percentages, so they are doint the calculation the wroong way round.

Even after they have done thia, no rule tells them that they HAVE TO break the 25% limit, so they have no right to; you have to comply with all rules. In the case of a conflict, the more specific rule wins. Which is the army points rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

 kirsanth wrote:

 Tangent wrote:
And because you don't round up, you must essentially round down to 499?

No need to round. There are units with fractional costs even.

OOh, so close, but missing the actual rule that states you MUST round up if you have divided. A unit with a fractional points cost hasnt gotten there through division, so you dont round up.

Nite - you are never asked to find 500/1999, so the result isnt relevant. You are asked to find 25% of 1999, and then find out if you have spent up to that amount.
Yup, still 500 points allowed.

Nosferatu, specific rules beat general rules. If you can only comply with one then more specific wins - you CANNOT break the limit because of a general principle.

Amalgamating from the other thread as instructed:

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Niteware wrote:
So, Nosferatu, where does it say you must spend as much as 25% on rares? Even using your flawed logic, thee is nothing that forces you to spend your maximum allocation. This means that you still have no right to break the UP TO part of the rule.
I suppose that your interpretation may allow for spending 499.5 on core, but it certainly doesn't force you to choose between two rules. Up to wins.

I can move "up to" half my movement allowance. An elf moving half their movement allowance can move up to...what value now?

Oh, look, your argument still fails. You have specific permission to alter the value you are allowed to go "up to", due to the rule on page 7 stating what happens when you have fractions from division.

Look, the RAW is still 500. Who'd a thought.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Peasant - not circular. You are also constrained on spending no more than your maximum points allowance

For example I could spend 25% on lords - 500, 25% on heroes - 500, 50% on core - 1000, 50% on special - 1000, and 25% on rare - 500. Total of 3500 in a 1999 point game. Oh, wait, I cannot, because then I have spent more than my points allowance (and look - there it is again, eveything comes back to actual points, NOT percentages!) which is ALSO a constraining factor.

There you go, adding words again; you are never told that you can move "up to" half your movement. You are told that you move at half your rate. Half a characteristic, if only that was explicitly covered in DTC. Wait! It is!