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.

Quick question; I know some vehicles become scoring in two of the missions, but don't become denial.
What if they're both holding the same objective?
Do both players get it?
Neither?
The first player on it?

You control an objective if you have a scoring unit within X" and there are no denial units within X".

If you both have a vehicle within X", then you both control the objective.

Madness!

"Alright guys, we'll split it!"
*rumbling engine*

Both players get the points and can use it if it's one of the mysterious objectives like Sykfire Nexus.

 PrinceRaven wrote:
Both players get the points and can use it if it's one of the mysterious objectives like Sykfire Nexus.

Actually, Mysterious Objectives go to whichever unit is closer (randomized if both equally close) - page 125, above the D6 table.
However, that seems to only be in reference to the D6 table effect and not victory points.

Ah, ok. I never use Mysterious Objectives so I just assumed it went to whoever controlled it.

 Happyjew wrote:
You control an objective if you have a scoring unit within X" and there are no denial units within X".

If you both have a vehicle within X", then you both control the objective.

How does this overcome the sentence in Denial Units that "In the Eternal War missions, all units (including troops) are denial units"? Because the vehicles in those two scenarios are only scoring without specific permission to override the vehicle restriction of being a denial unit?

RAW, thats probably correct. RAI, I think the fact all units (assuming they don't fall into the exceptions) are denial units and the BRB specifically gives the normally scoring units denial status, I'd say the intent is for scoring Heavy Support and Fast Attack choices to also be considered a denial unit and that the objective would be contested and controlled by neither side.

If they wanted scoring units to always be denial units why not say "scoring units are always denial units"?

PanzerLeader wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
You control an objective if you have a scoring unit within X" and there are no denial units within X".

If you both have a vehicle within X", then you both control the objective.

How does this overcome the sentence in Denial Units that "In the Eternal War missions, all units (including troops) are denial units"? Because the vehicles in those two scenarios are only scoring without specific permission to override the vehicle restriction of being a denial unit?

RAW, thats probably correct. RAI, I think the fact all units (assuming they don't fall into the exceptions) are denial units and the BRB specifically gives the normally scoring units denial status, I'd say the intent is for scoring Heavy Support and Fast Attack choices to also be considered a denial unit and that the objective would be contested and controlled by neither side.

Finish your sentences when quoting rules. there is a comma after units, then it says: "save for a few exceptions given below:" Then what is the first bullet point?

Oh, look vehicle are not denial units.

The vehicles are scoring, but not specifically denial, and there is no caveat that scoring units are automatically denial units.

In these cases the vehicles can claim the objectives, but cannot prevent each other from claiming the objective

 PrinceRaven wrote:
If they wanted scoring units to always be denial units why not say "scoring units are always denial units"?

Excellent question. It appears that RAI, scoring units are denial units, despite RAW telling us some units can score yet not deny, while others can deny yet not score. I'd chock this one up to bad writing.

SJ

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
If they wanted scoring units to always be denial units why not say "scoring units are always denial units"?

Excellent question. It appears that RAI, scoring units are denial units, despite RAW telling us some units can score yet not deny, while others can deny yet not score. I'd chock this one up to bad writing.

SJ

Maybe they assumed Heavy support units would support from backfield, and never drive up the board to claim objectives together?

Also, if two Heavy support claim an objective together, you've usually done something wrong =P

The only thing that ever matters when playing a game with writen rules is RAW not RAI unless you wrotye the rulebook yourself (which you didn't)

RAW: all scoring units are denial units with the exceptions they listed below which included VEHICLES so 2 vehicles and score the same objective at the end of the game.

And if i remember rightly both vehicles can also use the objective as they both control it. Though i may be wrong the book is currently packed away as I'm about to move

 BlackTalos wrote:

 jeffersonian000 wrote:

 PrinceRaven wrote:
If they wanted scoring units to always be denial units why not say "scoring units are always denial units"?

Excellent question. It appears that RAI, scoring units are denial units, despite RAW telling us some units can score yet not deny, while others can deny yet not score. I'd chock this one up to bad writing.

SJ

Maybe they assumed Heavy support units would support from backfield, and never drive up the board to claim objectives together?

Also, if two Heavy support claim an objective together, you've usually done something wrong =P

Except for the missions that make heavy units scoring, or the special rules that make vehicles scoring.

To Wargamer1985: please read the comment you are replying to, before you make a post on it.

SJ

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
You control an objective if you have a scoring unit within X" and there are no denial units within X".

If you both have a vehicle within X", then you both control the objective.

How does this overcome the sentence in Denial Units that "In the Eternal War missions, all units (including troops) are denial units"? Because the vehicles in those two scenarios are only scoring without specific permission to override the vehicle restriction of being a denial unit?

RAW, thats probably correct. RAI, I think the fact all units (assuming they don't fall into the exceptions) are denial units and the BRB specifically gives the normally scoring units denial status, I'd say the intent is for scoring Heavy Support and Fast Attack choices to also be considered a denial unit and that the objective would be contested and controlled by neither side.

Finish your sentences when quoting rules. there is a comma after units, then it says: "save for a few exceptions given below:" Then what is the first bullet point?

Oh, look vehicle are not denial units.

The vehicles are scoring, but not specifically denial, and there is no caveat that scoring units are automatically denial units.

In these cases the vehicles can claim the objectives, but cannot prevent each other from claiming the objective

Hey Kel, read my whole post. I EXPLICITLY acknowledged those exceptions later on by writing "all units (assuming they don't fall into the exceptions)." So how about you actually exercise reading comprehension before making an ass of a post?

The situation itself is a weird situation. You have two scoring vehicles given permission to score by Big Guns/Scouring. My whole point was that the RAW apparently create a situation where both players could score the same objective. I think that RAI, given the explicit notation that all units are denial unless where excepted, the assumption should be that rules that make a unit scoring also make it a denial unit (i.e. permission for a vehicle to score also gives it permission to deny). If you make that the assumption, you regain the consistency between rules for claiming objectives in that two players cannot claim the same objective but can deny it to each other.

PanzerLeader wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
You control an objective if you have a scoring unit within X" and there are no denial units within X".

If you both have a vehicle within X", then you both control the objective.

How does this overcome the sentence in Denial Units that "In the Eternal War missions, all units (including troops) are denial units"? Because the vehicles in those two scenarios are only scoring without specific permission to override the vehicle restriction of being a denial unit?

RAW, thats probably correct. RAI, I think the fact all units (assuming they don't fall into the exceptions) are denial units and the BRB specifically gives the normally scoring units denial status, I'd say the intent is for scoring Heavy Support and Fast Attack choices to also be considered a denial unit and that the objective would be contested and controlled by neither side.

Finish your sentences when quoting rules. there is a comma after units, then it says: "save for a few exceptions given below:" Then what is the first bullet point?

Oh, look vehicle are not denial units.

The vehicles are scoring, but not specifically denial, and there is no caveat that scoring units are automatically denial units.

In these cases the vehicles can claim the objectives, but cannot prevent each other from claiming the objective

Hey Kel, read my whole post. I EXPLICITLY acknowledged those exceptions later on by writing "all units (assuming they don't fall into the exceptions)." So how about you actually exercise reading comprehension before making an ass of a post?

The situation itself is a weird situation. You have two scoring vehicles given permission to score by Big Guns/Scouring. My whole point was that the RAW apparently create a situation where both players could score the same objective. I think that RAI, given the explicit notation that all units are denial unless where excepted, the assumption should be that rules that make a unit scoring also make it a denial unit (i.e. permission for a vehicle to score also gives it permission to deny). If you make that the assumption, you regain the consistency between rules for claiming objectives in that two players cannot claim the same objective but can deny it to each other.

So you wish to ignore one part of the rule because of another?

"Well i choose to ignore your insta death rules then because i feel like it" is essentially what you are saying. (vast extrapolation as this is obviously not the case)

@Kommissar Kel: good for you you obviously chse to read only parts of my comment as the whole thing was related to the original post, so please in future take the time to read peoples posts fully and then reply

wargamer1985 wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:

PanzerLeader wrote:

 Happyjew wrote:
You control an objective if you have a scoring unit within X" and there are no denial units within X".

If you both have a vehicle within X", then you both control the objective.

How does this overcome the sentence in Denial Units that "In the Eternal War missions, all units (including troops) are denial units"? Because the vehicles in those two scenarios are only scoring without specific permission to override the vehicle restriction of being a denial unit?

RAW, thats probably correct. RAI, I think the fact all units (assuming they don't fall into the exceptions) are denial units and the BRB specifically gives the normally scoring units denial status, I'd say the intent is for scoring Heavy Support and Fast Attack choices to also be considered a denial unit and that the objective would be contested and controlled by neither side.

Finish your sentences when quoting rules. there is a comma after units, then it says: "save for a few exceptions given below:" Then what is the first bullet point?

Oh, look vehicle are not denial units.

The vehicles are scoring, but not specifically denial, and there is no caveat that scoring units are automatically denial units.

In these cases the vehicles can claim the objectives, but cannot prevent each other from claiming the objective

Hey Kel, read my whole post. I EXPLICITLY acknowledged those exceptions later on by writing "all units (assuming they don't fall into the exceptions)." So how about you actually exercise reading comprehension before making an ass of a post?

The situation itself is a weird situation. You have two scoring vehicles given permission to score by Big Guns/Scouring. My whole point was that the RAW apparently create a situation where both players could score the same objective. I think that RAI, given the explicit notation that all units are denial unless where excepted, the assumption should be that rules that make a unit scoring also make it a denial unit (i.e. permission for a vehicle to score also gives it permission to deny). If you make that the assumption, you regain the consistency between rules for claiming objectives in that two players cannot claim the same objective but can deny it to each other.

So you wish to ignore one part of the rule because of another?

"Well i choose to ignore your insta death rules then because i feel like it" is essentially what you are saying. (vast extrapolation as this is obviously not the case)

@Kommissar Kel: good for you you obviously chse to read only parts of my comment as the whole thing was related to the original post, so please in future take the time to read peoples posts fully and then reply

I'm not ignoring the rule or any part of it. From a RAW perspective, I'm in complete agreement with you.

From an RAI perspective, I think there is an unintended situation in which two players can score the same objective. The rules for claiming objectives mention that enemy denial units must be out of range and the BRB then lays out that for eternal war missions, all units are denial units minus certain exceptions. These rules combined form an intent that only one player can hold an objective at a given time-if eligible units from both sides are present, it is held by neither.

Big Guns/Scouring then create a unique situation where vehicles can become scoring but not denial and thus allow both players to control the same objective. I think this was not intended because it is a situation inconsistent with how the rules for claiming objectives work in most cases. In order to maintain consistency, from an RAI/HIWPI perspective I'd make the assumption that vehicles given permission to score are also given permission to deny.

Two heavy units simply cancel each other out. They both score so are irrelevant to the final outcome. The real issue comes when you have a heavy and a troop trying to score. The troop is a denial unit so it can score and deny the heavy.

Fragile wrote:
Two heavy units simply cancel each other out. They both score so are irrelevant to the final outcome. The real issue comes when you have a heavy and a troop trying to score. The troop is a denial unit so it can score and deny the heavy.

two heavy units cancel out if they are both vehicles, If one was a devastator squad and the other a landraider, then the devastator would deny the landradier from capturing so no points but the landraider wouldn't deny the devastator from capturing so they get points. Same with the troops.

There don't seem to be any rules saying that two units cannot both "capture" an objective. If the game ends with a scoring unit within 3" and there are no denial units, then you gain the point value for that objective. As such, if two scoring, but no denial, units are both on an objective, they would both get the points for it.

I cite a bit of rules about first blood to support this: "If two or more units from opposing forces are removed simultaneously (for example, at the same Initiative step in an Assault phase) then both players get 1 Victory Point (in addition to any Victory Points from the mission)."

As seen here, two armies both getting points from a shared objective is acceptable.

As far as this happening tactically, a space marine army could have a Master of the Forge allowing Heavy Support ironclad dreadnoughts plopped all over your side via drop pods, potentially resulting in a basilisk and an ironclad sharing an objective (lucky basilisk to survive that long, though).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, one of the common tournament types around here has three rounds. You keep track of how many victory points you got each game (regardless of winning or losing that round) and the player with the highest total from all three games is the tournament winner.