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.

And that means the dataslate can't define it?
And how does that pertain at all to the fact that they're not a Troops choice?

 Nilok wrote:
Isn't the reason why formation detatchments have no predefined requirments/slots is because they are fluid and instead have to rely on the instructions within the dataslate.

You would have to ask the design team. What we actually know is that units that are in troop slots are scoring only on the dint of being in a troops slot and not being vehicles. Beyond that we'd need either something to say a unit counts as being in a troops slot, is scoring or that it exists on it's own detachment's FOC.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 Nilok wrote:
Isn't the reason why formation detatchments have no predefined requirments/slots is because they are fluid and instead have to rely on the instructions within the dataslate.

You would have to ask the design team. What we actually know is that units that are in troop slots are scoring only on the dint of being in a troops slot and not being vehicles. Beyond that we'd need either something to say a unit counts as being in a troops slot, is scoring or that it exists on it's own detachment's FOC.

So just to be clear. The Stormwing Detachment consists of 1 Stormraven and 2 Stormtalons (specified composition in the formation datasheet which is the equivalent to the detachment's FOC). Now the Dataslate lists the Stormraven with a battlefield role of "Heavy Support" and the Talons with a battlefield role of "Fast Attack." In a game of Scouring, do the Talons become scoring and give up an extra VP when killed? Why?

The reason I bring this up is that there is still no "fast attack" slot to cram them in to or select them from. However, they do have a specified battlefield role. If the battlefield role matters, then the same should be applicable for troops. A unit from a detachment given the specified role of troops should then score.

For reference
Fast Recon: Unlike other missions, in The Scouring, your fast attack units are scoring units, not just your troops units. In fact, in The Scouring, even your vehicles are scoring units, if they are also fast attack units and are not Immobilised.

PanzerLeader wrote:
So just to be clear. The Stormwing Detachment consists of 1 Stormraven and 2 Stormtalons (specified composition in the formation datasheet which is the equivalent to the detachment's FOC). Now the Dataslate lists the Stormraven with a battlefield role of "Heavy Support" and the Talons with a battlefield role of "Fast Attack." In a game of Scouring, do the Talons become scoring and give up an extra VP when killed? Why?

Please prove the underlined assertion. As far as I can tell you've invented it. The FOC is a very specific thing.
No, the Storm Talons wouldn't give up a VP nor would they score.

"The army list entries for each unit in the formation (the units' profile, point values, unit types, unit composition, special rules, or battlefield roles etc. ) can either be found in the codex corresponding to the faction on the datasheet or elsewhere in the dataslate itself."

If that is not clear that it forms its own detachment with its own special FOC then someone at GW will have to draw it for you.

The Stormwing detachment looks like this:

FA - 2 StormTalons
HVY - 1 StormRaven

If you feel they do not score then they do not give up first blood or count against units killed.

rigeld2 wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:
So just to be clear. The Stormwing Detachment consists of 1 Stormraven and 2 Stormtalons (specified composition in the formation datasheet which is the equivalent to the detachment's FOC). Now the Dataslate lists the Stormraven with a battlefield role of "Heavy Support" and the Talons with a battlefield role of "Fast Attack." In a game of Scouring, do the Talons become scoring and give up an extra VP when killed? Why?

Please prove the underlined assertion. As far as I can tell you've invented it. The FOC is a very specific thing.
No, the Storm Talons wouldn't give up a VP nor would they score.

The FOC is a chart showing you the restrictions on composition. It shows compulsory and optional selections on a per detachment basis. Each dataslate does the same thing in list format through a specified composition (i.e. Stormwing is 1 Raven, 2 Talons; Cypher Fallen Champions is Cypher and 1-3 units of Chosen; etc.). The specified composition is the functional equivalent of the FOC because it tells you compulsory and optional selections on a per detachment basis.

As to the talons, please refer to the Scouring mission rules referenced. The Scouring references fast attack units. The Talon's battlefield role is fast attack. The Force Organisation rules tell us "As detailed in each army's codex, all the forces you can use are categorised to tell you something about the role they are meant to play in the army. These roles are: HQ, troops, elites, fast attack, and heavy support." Each unit in a legal army must have an assigned role and the data slate assigns a role to every unit. Some units are assigned as "troops."

That the units can be found in a codex under the heading troops is still not proving that they occupy a troops slot in some nebulous FOC that you have yet to show exists.

They do count as units because the formation calls them units and unit is how the game works. They give up first blood for the same reason.

What you've also not seeing is that you are trading off the slots(because you aren't told they occupy them) for the formation units to get different rules and benefits. You can just stick a storm raven and 2 talons in your army, you don't need to take a formation. If you want the formation bonus rules then you pay for it by no longer occupying the usual slots on the FOC.


Can you show a rule that states that battlefield role is equal to slot you occupy? Or maybe a definition of battlefield role? Until you can, battlefield role is whatever the unit usually does, snipers snipe, heavy weapons shoot things, skirmishers fight in close, crap troops take wounds and die etc etc. If the formation was the functional equivalent of a FOC then it would function as one and say that the units count as taking up the same slots as if they had been chosen on a blank FOC. You are just asserting that listing units equates with them taking up specific slots in a foc and that such a foc exists.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
That the units can be found in a codex under the heading troops is still not proving that they occupy a troops slot in some nebulous FOC that you have yet to show exists.

They do count as units because the formation calls them units and unit is how the game works. They give up first blood for the same reason.

What you've also not seeing is that you are trading off the slots(because you aren't told they occupy them) for the formation units to get different rules and benefits. You can just stick a storm raven and 2 talons in your army, you don't need to take a formation. If you want the formation bonus rules then you pay for it by no longer occupying the usual slots on the FOC.

I really don't see the hang up here. Lets take the Fallen Champions formation. It must consist of Cypher and 1-3 units of chosen. Cypher is labelled as an "HQ" and the chosen are labeled as "Elites" in the data slate. Ergo, the formation consists of 1 HQ unit and 1-3 elite units. The only thing GW didn't do was draw a simple line and block chart for every formation.

Is a tervigon in a formation with termagants HQ or troops? This must be easy to answer then as you know the rules through some magical mental connection to the design team.

I'm not missing your point, I'm refusing to see it as valid. The lack of that simple line and block chart defeats the idea that you are holding units in that line and block chart. When normally chosen outside a formation Cypher takes up a HQ slot or would if his rules didn't augment that and chosen take up elite slots, that is fine. What we're saying is that a formation isn't choosing units normally because they don't go into slots on a FOC as you've admitted.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
That the units can be found in a codex under the heading troops is still not proving that they occupy a troops slot in some nebulous FOC that you have yet to show exists.

They do count as units because the formation calls them units and unit is how the game works. They give up first blood for the same reason.

What you've also not seeing is that you are trading off the slots(because you aren't told they occupy them) for the formation units to get different rules and benefits. You can just stick a storm raven and 2 talons in your army, you don't need to take a formation. If you want the formation bonus rules then you pay for it by no longer occupying the usual slots on the FOC.


Can you show a rule that states that battlefield role is equal to slot you occupy? Or maybe a definition of battlefield role? Until you can, battlefield role is whatever the unit usually does, snipers snipe, heavy weapons shoot things, skirmishers fight in close, crap troops take wounds and die etc etc. If the formation was the functional equivalent of a FOC then it would function as one and say that the units count as taking up the same slots as if they had been chosen on a blank FOC. You are just asserting that listing units equates with them taking up specific slots in a foc and that such a foc exists.

Liturgies,

So with your assumption, any units in the formations would not give up First Blood, or count as a VP for Purge the Alien. This is incorrect.

-theJughead

 Happyjew wrote:
Hivefleet Oblivion, is a Tervigon an HQ or Troops?

How do you know?

WHy this question? Isn't it OT, and I wonder what is your point? The Tervigon is listed within the HQ section of the codex, and listed again as a troops choice within a special rule, under the Termagant Brood entry as part of the troops section.

rigeld2 wrote:
[
And that has no relevance to scoring troops whatsoever. And they don't exist outside the FOC - they just don't count against the limit.

Again, repetition of an argument that's been proven incorrect multiple times. Formations don't exist outside the FOC, they are a subset of Detachments, listed within the FOC.

Your latest argument seems to be that they are not listed within a troops slot in the FOC.

However, the intro of the 'slates define an army list entry thus: "an Army List Entry provides all the relevant information to field a unit... including its battlefield role." (p3). and the genestealer, for instance, are clearly listed as "Troops" on page 30.

The intro to the dataslate also states that that the army list entry can be found "in the codex.... or in the dataslate" (p3), further underlining that the fact it's a Troop within a dataslate is no diferent from troops within the main codex - just as with Allied Detachments, subject to the Levels of Alliance"

Again, if you're arguing these Genestealers don't score, then you'd have to accept that allies don't score. There's no difference between them in terms of their battlefield role. If you insist there is, please cite the page of the Dataslate. It's really worth reading.

Jughead, can you read my posts? I mean honestly, I never said that.

Units count as units, what you have to show is where they are taking up troops slots. Units that come from a portal glyph are still units, units that are spawned are still units. Do you see the theme of this paragraph? If it's called a unit, it is a unit.

What you have to show is that a unit must occupy a slot or that a formation has a FOC similar to primary detachments etc.

Allied troops score because the rules tell me so. Why do units that are not in troops slots score? Do my plague marines always score because they could possibly be taken in a troops slot?

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Jughead, can you read my posts? I mean honestly, I never said that.

Units count as units, what you have to show is where they are taking up troops slots. Units that come from a portal glyph are still units, units that are spawned are still units. Do you see the theme of this paragraph? If it's called a unit, it is a unit.

What you have to show is that a unit must occupy a slot or that a formation has a FOC similar to primary detachments etc.

I read your posts. I never said you said that, I mearly pointed out that by your logic that these units are outside the FOC then the normal rules for the mission do not apply to them.

For what its worth, my group treats them as I believe they should be and allows them to score, etc. I'm sure that once they are allowed in tournaments this will be the majority rule.

So Cypher because he doesn't take a up a HQ slot and is a free extra HQ choice isn't a unit? That's what you have asserted.

Being outside the FOC doesn't mean that units are not units in the army. By the very definition units that are spawned are beyond the FOC, however a spawned Daemon prince is still a unit and can contest. The tervigon rules don't say that those termagants are units and they aslo count as troops. It just says they count as if they had taken up a troops slot. I think your strawman is very weak.

Now can you show anywhere that a unit that doesn't take up a FOC slot, without any additional rules, counts as taking up the FOC slot it is listed under on the army list.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Is a tervigon in a formation with termagants HQ or troops? This must be easy to answer then as you know the rules through some magical mental connection to the design team.

I'm not missing your point, I'm refusing to see it as valid. The lack of that simple line and block chart defeats the idea that you are holding units in that line and block chart. When normally chosen outside a formation Cypher takes up a HQ slot or would if his rules didn't augment that and chosen take up elite slots, that is fine. What we're saying is that a formation isn't choosing units normally because they don't go into slots on a FOC as you've admitted.

Care to link the Tervigon in a formation?

Liturgies,

The arguing is pointless. We are now going in circles. You refuse to make the connection that several other posters have aleady illustrated.

The only important thing is my group sees it that way and soon most tournaments will see it that way.

- theJughead

You want a link to why I want to know if a unit is in a troops slot or not? The reason is that for it to be in one you need a specific unit in a troops slot. Without that specific slot being filled it cannot, so you actually need to show some rules to back up your sides arguments with some definitions of a battlefield role and how that relates to being in a troops slot.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Is a tervigon in a formation with termagants HQ or troops? This must be easy to answer then as you know the rules through some magical mental connection to the design team.

I'm not missing your point, I'm refusing to see it as valid. The lack of that simple line and block chart defeats the idea that you are holding units in that line and block chart. When normally chosen outside a formation Cypher takes up a HQ slot or would if his rules didn't augment that and chosen take up elite slots, that is fine. What we're saying is that a formation isn't choosing units normally because they don't go into slots on a FOC as you've admitted.

Whether a Tervigon is a troop choice or not depends on the formation. Not suprisingly, the dataslate entry for the Tervigon is the same as the codex entry. Hence, the Tervigon's defined battlefield role is HQ unless the same formation also allows you to take a unit of 30 termagants to define its role as a troops choice.

thejughead wrote:"The army list entries for each unit in the formation (the units' profile, point values, unit types, unit composition, special rules, or battlefield roles etc. ) can either be found in the codex corresponding to the faction on the datasheet or elsewhere in the dataslate itself."

If that is not clear that it forms its own detachment with its own special FOC then someone at GW will have to draw it for you.

I'm sorry - where in that rule does it mention a FOC? Since a FOC is a specific thing, for something to be "its own special FOC" you have to have a statement equating the two.
As far as I can tell you're inventing the equality.

If you feel they do not score then they do not give up first blood or count against units killed.

Absolutely false.

PanzerLeader wrote:The FOC is a chart showing you the restrictions on composition. It shows compulsory and optional selections on a per detachment basis. Each dataslate does the same thing in list format through a specified composition (i.e. Stormwing is 1 Raven, 2 Talons; Cypher Fallen Champions is Cypher and 1-3 units of Chosen; etc.). The specified composition is the functional equivalent of the FOC because it tells you compulsory and optional selections on a per detachment basis.

Functionally equivalent is not the same as actually equivalent.
A Fleshborer and a Bolt Pistol are Functionally Equivalent. They're not the same thing though.

As to the talons, please refer to the Scouring mission rules referenced. The Scouring references fast attack units. The Talon's battlefield role is fast attack. The Force Organisation rules tell us "As detailed in each army's codex, all the forces you can use are categorised to tell you something about the role they are meant to play in the army. These roles are: HQ, troops, elites, fast attack, and heavy support." Each unit in a legal army must have an assigned role and the data slate assigns a role to every unit. Some units are assigned as "troops."

I've underlined an assumption you made.
You are attempting to use the rules from the Force Organization Chart without permission - while the Formation Detachment is part of the Force Org., it is not in-and-of-itself a FOC. Unless you have a rule proving otherwise - an actual rule, and not an assumption please.

Hivefleet Oblivion wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
Hivefleet Oblivion, is a Tervigon an HQ or Troops?

How do you know?

WHy this question? Isn't it OT, and I wonder what is your point? The Tervigon is listed within the HQ section of the codex, and listed again as a troops choice within a special rule, under the Termagant Brood entry as part of the troops section.

False. It is not "listed again as a troops choice". Maybe in your codex - in which case I'd like some evidence, because it certainly isn't in mine.

The Scuttling Swarm: For every Termagant Brood of 30 models included in your army, you can include one Tervigon as a troops choice instead of an HQ choice.

Is the only mention of the Tervigon under the Termagant Brood.

rigeld2 wrote:
And that has no relevance to scoring troops whatsoever. And they don't exist outside the FOC - they just don't count against the limit.

Again, repetition of an argument that's been proven incorrect multiple times. Formations don't exist outside the FOC, they are a subset of Detachments, listed within the FOC.

I didn't say they do exist outside the FOC. I even underlined that fact. Perhaps you missed it?

Your latest argument seems to be that they are not listed within a troops slot in the FOC.

No, that's always been my argument. Well, I would say "purchased" to account for slot-shifting, but your statement is close enough.

However, the intro of the 'slates define an army list entry thus: "an Army List Entry provides all the relevant information to field a unit... including its battlefield role." (p3). and the genestealer, for instance, are clearly listed as "Troops" on page 30.

So you're arguing that the Army List is the definitive answer?

The intro to the dataslate also states that that the army list entry can be found "in the codex.... or in the dataslate" (p3), further underlining that the fact it's a Troop within a dataslate is no diferent from troops within the main codex - just as with Allied Detachments, subject to the Levels of Alliance"

Well - it means that the stats for the unit are identical. And again - are you saying that the Army List is definitive?

Again, if you're arguing these Genestealers don't score, then you'd have to accept that allies don't score. There's no difference between them in terms of their battlefield role. If you insist there is, please cite the page of the Dataslate. It's really worth reading.

Please stop with the "battlefield role". It's a meaningless statement. Unless you have a rule (actual rule please - no more assumptions) that says battlefield role == Troops == scoring.
I'll save you some time - the words "battlefield role" do not exist together in the BRB. The closest thing you have to support your statement is on page 108:

As detailed in each army's codex, all the forces you can use are categorised to tell you something about the role they are meant to play in the army. These roles are: HQ, troops, elites, fast attack and heavy support.

You'll note that while it uses the word "role" it doesn't say "battlefield role" or "role on the battlefield" or anything like that.

p122 wrote:An army's scoring units are normally all the units that come from the troops selection of the Force Organisation chart - the main exceptions are in the Big Guns Never Tire mission (see page 128)
and the The Scouring mission (see page 129).

Show me the Troops selection of the Force Organization chart for a Formation Detachment, or another rule saying "These units score."

So far you've handwaved those requirements away - even though I've shown they're entirely relevant. Stop assuming, start proving.

Then I have another question for you. Since according to you the FoC shows all the units allowed in any detachment and we can not use the formation's interal designators, do formations only contain one unit?

The updated FoC only lists different formation and not any of their contents, while an Imperial Knight allied detachment shows all the knights within.

Why dose your argument allow for them to be different units as per the formation, but not use the different types (troops)?

 Nilok wrote:
Then I have another question for you. Since according to you the FoC shows all the units allowed in any detachment and we can not use the formation's interal designators, do formations only contain one unit?

No.

Why dose your argument allow for them to be different units as per the formation, but not use the different types (troops)?

Because the Formation dictates how the Formation is used. To use the formation, you're required to have X different units.
When you do that, you satisfy permission to fill the Formation Detachment box on the FOC.

Also, you've equated Army List designation with some form of internal designator - I'd encourage you to stop that. We know that it means nothing of the sort - Wolf Guard, Crypteks, any IC in the game... all of them are one slot and unit and can cease being a unit when deployed - but they're still from their original FOC slot.

PanzerLeader wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Is a tervigon in a formation with termagants HQ or troops? This must be easy to answer then as you know the rules through some magical mental connection to the design team.

I'm not missing your point, I'm refusing to see it as valid. The lack of that simple line and block chart defeats the idea that you are holding units in that line and block chart. When normally chosen outside a formation Cypher takes up a HQ slot or would if his rules didn't augment that and chosen take up elite slots, that is fine. What we're saying is that a formation isn't choosing units normally because they don't go into slots on a FOC as you've admitted.

Whether a Tervigon is a troop choice or not depends on the formation. Not suprisingly, the dataslate entry for the Tervigon is the same as the codex entry. Hence, the Tervigon's defined battlefield role is HQ unless the same formation also allows you to take a unit of 30 termagants to define its role as a troops choice.

Well looking at the actual formation with a tervigon doesn't say it is a troops or HQ nor does it use the words battlefield roll to talk about it there and in the section lifted from other sources.. I am wondering where did the battlefield role get defined? Can you please show this as you have not done so yet?

If you feel they do not score then they do not give up first blood or count against units killed.


Absolutely false.

Please cite with rules or reasoning.

They are units jughead. That is what makes them count as units in the game. Please stop this reduction ad absurdum line of argumentation that nobody is arguing but yourself. You also have failed to connect the dots on that argument.

I would like to point out that the same paragraph for defining scoring units reads, "There are a few exceptions, however, when a unit of troops does not count as scoring: ..."

The is no listing for units outside of the FOC. Also, these rules are limited to the "Eternal War Missions". So if you are playing out of the book you can have this argument. If you are playing most missions provided by a Tournament they do not follow Eternal War guielines then its up to the TO.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
They are units jughead. That is what makes them count as units in the game. Please stop this reduction ad absurdum line of argumentation that nobody is arguing but yourself. You also have failed to connect the dots on that argument.

One of the rules of the forum is politeness. I've taken every care to do so. I wish you would adhere to the same.

 thejughead wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
They are units jughead. That is what makes them count as units in the game. Please stop this reduction ad absurdum line of argumentation that nobody is arguing but yourself. You also have failed to connect the dots on that argument.

One of the rules of the forum is politeness. I've taken every care to do so. I wish you would adhere to the same.

And one of the tenets of the sub-forum is don't make statements without backing it up.

The side that says that troop units from formations are non-scoring have backed their arguments up. The other side has not.

@HappyJew, I have backed up my statements with quotes from the BRB and Dataslate. Please read my posts.

 thejughead wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

thejughead wrote:If you feel they do not score then they do not give up first blood or count against units killed.

Absolutely false.

Please cite with rules or reasoning.

Fixed your quote-fail there.

As said, the only requirement for them to count for First Blood or units killed in Purge the Alien is for them to be units.

p122 wrote:The first unit, of any kind, to be removed as a casualty during the game is worth 1 Victory Point to the opposing player at the end of the game.

p127 wrote:At the end of the game, each player receives 1 Victory Point for each enemy unit that has been completely destroyed.

Since I've never disputed that the units in a Formation Detachment are in fact units, it's entirely consistent with my argument.
So please drop this strawman.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

thejughead wrote:@HappyJew, I have backed up my statements with quotes from the BRB and Dataslate. Please read my posts.

Really? Let's look.

thejughead wrote:"The army list entries for each unit in the formation (the units' profile, point values, unit types, unit composition, special rules, or battlefield roles etc. ) can either be found in the codex corresponding to the faction on the datasheet or elsewhere in the dataslate itself."

If that is not clear that it forms its own detachment with its own special FOC then someone at GW will have to draw it for you.

Considering the rule you quoted says nothing about being its own special FOC, you invented it. So no, this is not a statement backed up by a rules quote.

If you feel they do not score then they do not give up first blood or count against units killed.

No rules backup, proven an incorrect assumption with actual rules.

thejughead wrote:I read your posts. I never said you said that, I mearly pointed out that by your logic that these units are outside the FOC then the normal rules for the mission do not apply to them.

Another statement without rules backing. And as shown already, completely incorrect and based on a misreading of the argument.

About being polite - it's a two way street. Strawman arguments and talking to posters as if they're simple or irrelevant isn't polite.

 Happyjew wrote:

 thejughead wrote:

 liturgies of blood wrote:
They are units jughead. That is what makes them count as units in the game. Please stop this reduction ad absurdum line of argumentation that nobody is arguing but yourself. You also have failed to connect the dots on that argument.

One of the rules of the forum is politeness. I've taken every care to do so. I wish you would adhere to the same.

And one of the tenets of the sub-forum is don't make statements without backing it up.

The side that says that troop units from formations are non-scoring have backed their arguments up. The other side has not.

One side has not proven that Troops are not Troops. That side ignores that units in formation are listed as Troops. The claim that those Troops are not "Troops", even though the Formation is in the FOC chart as a detachment is absurd. A unit of Termagants comes from the Troop section of the FOC regardless of whether its in a formation or not.

No one has said that units in a Formation are not Troops (HQ, Elites, etc), unless I missed it. What we have stated is that they are not a Troops choice in the FOC.