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.

 BlackTalos wrote:
There is a Rule that says you have to "Say" what is in the transports:

"When the unit embarks, remove it from the table and place it aside, making a note that the unit is being transported."

By the rules, you MUST make a Note of which Unit is embarked in which transport.

But Flingit, the above does not mention it is compulsory for your opponent to know which Unit is embarked (for you to show him your "Notes")

If we really want to go into the semantics, he would at least know which transports are empty: They are the ones you did not "make a Note" for. But the ones "with Notes" have no way of differentiating the Units embarked.

but I'll know which unit it is because it is either the unit being deployed in there or it will be the unit you are removing from the table. So either way I am aware of what unit it is.

 FlingitNow wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
There is a Rule that says you have to "Say" what is in the transports:

"When the unit embarks, remove it from the table and place it aside, making a note that the unit is being transported."

By the rules, you MUST make a Note of which Unit is embarked in which transport.

But Flingit, the above does not mention it is compulsory for your opponent to know which Unit is embarked (for you to show him your "Notes")

If we really want to go into the semantics, he would at least know which transports are empty: They are the ones you did not "make a Note" for. But the ones "with Notes" have no way of differentiating the Units embarked.

but I'll know which unit it is because it is either the unit being deployed in there or it will be the unit you are removing from the table. So either way I am aware of what unit it is.

I see what you mean, but deployment is simultaneous. Even if you embark them individually, you could say:
"I am embarking Unit A on its Rhino" *Make Note*
"I am embarking Unit B on its Rhino" *Make Note*
"I am embarking Unit C on its Rhino" *Make Note*

And then place the Notes next to the appropriate Rhinos, and begin the Game. (this does not have to be done as "Note A" then "Note B" then "Note C", as the Raw only covers making the Note, not telling your opponent or doing it in order)

Also, i would point out that "making a Note" and placing it next to the Rhino is a suggestion.

By RaW, you could "make a Note" of all your Transports on an A4 sheet (Which the enemy does not have to see).
But that's all semantics on the "making a Note" part, as it is vague.

Upon deployment, you could place a model from each squad, one by one, in the three separate Rhinos, and make a not at the end. Unless there is RaW against that?
(Having to deploy a Unit entirely before the next Unit can start deploying?)

The Rhino has to be deployed first then you deploy the unit in to it. So I'll still know which Rhino is which.

Way back when you deployed by force org slots my 9 yr old son played a guy with SWs who had everyone in Rhinos that looked like they were painted with an airbrush and stencil. He conveniently deployed Rhinos in pairs right beside each other. Turn one he destroys the Rhino placed when HQ units were going down and out pops a TAC squad. Everyone thought this odd but my son said nothing and then destroys the Rhino beside it. Out magically pops another tac squad. The only time I ever recall having to get involved in a game a child was playing against an adult and one reason I always made it a point to make sure my opponent knew what was in each of my transports and I knew what was were on the other side of the table.

I don't think its a "rule" in the sense that its codified and etched in stone. Its more like the "rule" where you don't cut in lines. Sure, you could not tell anyone where anything is, but as noted earlier, you will immediately become "That Guy". And nobody wants to be him, especially in a community where there is so much storytelling and sharing of experiences.

As was pointed out, deployment of troops inside a vehicle is sequential to deploying the vehicle, meaning you will have the opportunity to see who is where.

AS you also get to agree the models everyone is playing with, there is no possbiilty of playing a shell game.

 FlingitNow wrote:
The Rhino has to be deployed first then you deploy the unit in to it. So I'll still know which Rhino is which.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
As was pointed out, deployment of troops inside a vehicle is sequential to deploying the vehicle, meaning you will have the opportunity to see who is where.

You both seem to agree on a sequencing of Deployment, but i cannot see it in the rules? Could you point out the passage to me?

As i see it, there if no restriction on deploying Rhino A, then Rhino B, then a Squad into Rhino B and then a Squad into Rhino A (making a "secret" note of both) unless you can find one? How would you know if I deployed Squad A or Squad B first?

You havea requirement to state your deployment clearly

You state you are deploying Unit A, and where it is deploying. Into "a vehicle" is insufficient to comply with this requirement.

Additionally if they are dedicated transports, then you must have a way of noting which transport is which to ensure you comply with the dedicated transport rules.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You have requirement to state your deployment clearly

You state you are deploying Unit A, and where it is deploying. Into "a vehicle" is insufficient to comply with this requirement.

Additionally if they are dedicated transports, then you must have a way of noting which transport is which to ensure you comply with the dedicated transport rules.

You must make note of which transport Unit A is embarking upon, of course, but you may also hide that Note-making from the opponent. But i still can't find the "You have requirement to state your deployment clearly" rule?

All i've got is:

We’ve included rules for the most common method used to deploy here. This is often referred to as the ‘Standard Deployment Method’

The side deploying first must set up all the units in their army.

And then per mission:

Players must deploy using the Standard Deployment Method.

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Where is the permission / restriction that says i cannot deploy a model from Unit A, then a model from Unit B, then a model from Unit B, then a model from Unit C, then a model from Unit A, then a model from Unit A, then a model from Unit B, then a model from Unit C, etc?

The end result: "must set up all the units in their army" is achieved?
Where is the method of reaching that result?

Most Transports are Dedicated Transports which can only have the unit that bought it embarked during deployment

So you could just ask which DT was bought by unit X during deployment and that should give you your answer

 Frozocrone wrote:
Most Transports are Dedicated Transports which can only have the unit that bought it embarked during deployment

So you could just ask which DT was bought by unit X during deployment and that should give you your answer

Yeah, i suppose that would narrow things down, as you have to reveal the details of the Units on the board, although, do we even have a rule for that? It seems obvious, but i am taking a "Question all knowledge" approach at this point, as we are discussing RaW (we agreed on the HIWPI a long time ago )

So you're deploying Unit A. If a transport is not on the board you have 2 legal choices place unit A in your deployment zone, in place it in reserve. Saying it is going into a transport that is not yet deployed is not deploying unit A (for if deployment ended then unit A would not be deployed). So if it is going in a transport you need that transport deployed or you are deploying unit A.

 FlingitNow wrote:
So you're deploying Unit A. If a transport is not on the board you have 2 legal choices place unit A in your deployment zone, in place it in reserve. Saying it is going into a transport that is not yet deployed is not deploying unit A (for if deployment ended then unit A would not be deployed). So if it is going in a transport you need that transport deployed or you are deploying unit A.

Agreed. So if I deploy 3 Rhinos on the board, then deploy 5 Rhinos in reserves. I then deploy Unit A in a Rhino (which i make a Note of, hiding under the Table). How would you know which Rhino that Unit is embarking into?

As Frozocrone says, if Unit A has a Dedicated Transport, then (If we can find those rules) I would have to tell you which of the Rhinos on the board is Dedicated Transport Rhino A. You could then easily assume that Unit A is in that Rhino.

Although, again, I could deploy it in a Fast attack Rhino D (and the Dedicated Transport Rhino A would turn out to be empty). It seems rather plausible, but if i am missing some RaW, please point it out because i've been searching....

Agreed. So if I deploy 3 Rhinos on the board, then deploy 5 Rhinos in reserves. I then deploy Unit A in a Rhino (which i make a Note of, hiding under the Table). How would you know which Rhino that Unit is embarking into? 

A Rhino is not a valid deployment you have to deploy it in a specific Rhino.

 FlingitNow wrote:

Agreed. So if I deploy 3 Rhinos on the board, then deploy 5 Rhinos in reserves. I then deploy Unit A in a Rhino (which i make a Note of, hiding under the Table). How would you know which Rhino that Unit is embarking into? 

A Rhino is not a valid deployment you have to deploy it in a specific Rhino.

Indeed, deploy in a specific Rhino and make a note of it. But how does that selection make it to the opponent? You don't have to place models or mark it in any way? (other than the Note - which can be secret)

Regardless, shell games will be frowned upon in nearly every location, unless with prior agreement.

WHile youre right that the note does not state it must be public, you have no permission to keep it secret. After all, I cannot verify your compliance with the rule if you do not show me your note.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
Regardless, shell games will be frowned upon in nearly every location, unless with prior agreement.

WHile youre right that the note does not state it must be public, you have no permission to keep it secret. After all, I cannot verify your compliance with the rule if you do not show me your note.

Ah i see, not even upon say: Put all the Notes under the Rhinos and reveal during the game? Compliance can be verified as long as the Notes are not tampered with and revealed upon disembarking / wrecks ?

You could even hand all the notes over to the opponent who would verify upon disembarking / wrecks? (or look at them there and then before the game starts)

I already agreed that it is not the "gaming standard" but i do not see any issue with it RaW or when playing it that way. Of course, prior agreement is necessary.

You could do so, but again, you are required to make a note, and there is nothing allowing you to make that nomination in secret - so you have no ability to deny your opponent the ability to verify your compliance with the rule, at any time.

Note when they explicitly require secrecy, they do so - the maelstrom mission where objectives are kept secret, for example.

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You could do so, but again, you are required to make a note, and there is nothing allowing you to make that nomination in secret - so you have no ability to deny your opponent the ability to verify your compliance with the rule, at any time.

Note when they explicitly require secrecy, they do so - the maelstrom mission where objectives are kept secret, for example.

Indeed, with pre-measuring and most rules with "declare", there is almost 0 secrecy in the game, so it would be strange to implement it only for transports+ passengers.

But i'd still agree by RaW that there is no restriction of showing the Note to your opponent. Frowned upon, most definitely. (I'd also point out i've never seen this in a game, so the idea is unused, at best)

You're making a note of which unit is going into a particular Rhino so you still HAVE to be saying what Rhino you just don't have to tell me which unit. However as you do have to tell me which unit you are deploying or moving I will know which unit... either way I know what is in each transport.

 FlingitNow wrote:
You're making a note of which unit is going into a particular Rhino so you still HAVE to be saying what Rhino you just don't have to tell me which unit. However as you do have to tell me which unit you are deploying or moving I will know which unit... either way I know what is in each transport.

And that's why transports generally don't work at the moment, since you can simply shoot the flamer/melta rhino of the board on turn one.

 BlackTalos wrote:

nosferatu1001 wrote:
You could do so, but again, you are required to make a note, and there is nothing allowing you to make that nomination in secret - so you have no ability to deny your opponent the ability to verify your compliance with the rule, at any time.

Note when they explicitly require secrecy, they do so - the maelstrom mission where objectives are kept secret, for example.

Indeed, with pre-measuring and most rules with "declare", there is almost 0 secrecy in the game, so it would be strange to implement it only for transports+ passengers.

But i'd still agree by RaW that there is no restriction of showing the Note to your opponent. Frowned upon, most definitely. (I'd also point out i've never seen this in a game, so the idea is unused, at best)

No, indeed any rule WITH Secrecy is explicitly denoted as such.

I am disagreeing. RAW there is nothing allowing you to stop me looking at your note any time I like, as I am ensuring you are complying with the absolute rule of the game.

You have to note A) that a unit "X" is deploying and B) you have to note where it is deployed-embarked. I Know A explicitly, and I Know B when I look at your note

Deny me the ability to do B, with rules please.

I'd say instead that you would need permission for the ability to do B, with rules. As none exist (to either permit or deny "B") we are in HYWPI territory.

Also "A" might not be explicit as you think, per the example i gave. I have permission to "set up all the units in (their) army", why does this have to be on a Unit by Unit basis?

 BlackTalos wrote:
I'd say instead that you would need permission for the ability to do B, with rules. As none exist (to either permit or deny "B") we are in HYWPI territory.

Who verifies you made a note at deployment and not later in the game when it becomes relevant?

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
I'd say instead that you would need permission for the ability to do B, with rules. As none exist (to either permit or deny "B") we are in HYWPI territory.

Who verifies you made a note at deployment and not later in the game when it becomes relevant?

The opponent.

ED:Or the TO actually, any 3rd party involved in the Ruling of the game.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
I'd say instead that you would need permission for the ability to do B, with rules. As none exist (to either permit or deny "B") we are in HYWPI territory.

Who verifies you made a note at deployment and not later in the game when it becomes relevant?

The opponent.

... so you show your opponent? So what's your objection?

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
I'd say instead that you would need permission for the ability to do B, with rules. As none exist (to either permit or deny "B") we are in HYWPI territory.

Who verifies you made a note at deployment and not later in the game when it becomes relevant?

The opponent.

... so you show your opponent? So what's your objection?

I had an objection?

You can show your opponent the Note when the Unit disembarks or the transport is destroyed. As long as the opponent can verify the Note was made at deployment, i see no issue with a Shell game by RaW.

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
I'd say instead that you would need permission for the ability to do B, with rules. As none exist (to either permit or deny "B") we are in HYWPI territory.

Who verifies you made a note at deployment and not later in the game when it becomes relevant?

The opponent.

... so you show your opponent? So what's your objection?

I had an objection?

You can show your opponent the Note when the Unit disembarks or the transport is destroyed. As long as the opponent can verify the Note was made at deployment, i see no issue with a Shell game by RaW.

Your opponent shows you a unit name, with another unit name crossed out above it.
How do you verify that was written at deployment and not later?

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:
I'd say instead that you would need permission for the ability to do B, with rules. As none exist (to either permit or deny "B") we are in HYWPI territory.

Who verifies you made a note at deployment and not later in the game when it becomes relevant?

The opponent.

... so you show your opponent? So what's your objection?

I had an objection?

You can show your opponent the Note when the Unit disembarks or the transport is destroyed. As long as the opponent can verify the Note was made at deployment, i see no issue with a Shell game by RaW.

Your opponent shows you a unit name, with another unit name crossed out above it.
How do you verify that was written at deployment and not later?

Because the Notes are made once, and then sealed until revealed. Which is why i was suggesting "placing them under the Vehicle", or "handing them over to the enemy before the game starts".
There are no rules about resolution, but 2 simple facts:
- A Note must be made upon embarking.
- This note cannot be modified once it has been made.

There are multiple ways of you and your opponent ensuring that the two above Facts are being enforced. Many of which can be done without revealing the contents until needed (disembarking / wrecks).

As such, i will repeat my conclusions by RaW:
A Shell game is within the rules of the game, but very commonly frowned upon and in need of agreement or at least notification before a game is played. The rules that exist also enforce that Units do not "transport swap", from the passage i quoted. If you play a shell game as with the suggestions above, your are not in breach of RaW.

Cool hand me the note I'll read it. Put the note on the vehicle I'll pick it up and read it. Regardless you still haven't explained how you deploy the unit into a specific transport without me knowing...