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.

I'd like to smack the GW writers for being so poor at their examples and explanations of the technical items. I guess I'll get in line.

Anyway.

If I write an army list using the Craftworld Warhost rules, will troops be ObSec?

YMDC: Yes or No, and could you cite the page, like C:E 94 & 95, but specifically, which paragraph (column, first, second, etc.)?

I've read and reread the stupid thing and can't get Brain to cooperate and make sense of it.

Is it listed as one of the Command Benefits of the Detachment? If not, why would you expect to have Objective Secured?

Objective Secured is a Command Benefit granted to certain detachments. In particular, the Combined Arms Detachment from the BRB (sorry no page number, not on me atm). If the Craftworld Warhost does not have Objective Secured listed in it's command benefits (it doesn't) then it does not get Objective Secured units.

 Brothererekose wrote:
I'd like to smack the GW writers for being so poor at their examples and explanations of the technical items. I guess I'll get in line.

Anyway.

If I write an army list using the Craftworld Warhost rules, will troops be ObSec?

YMDC: Yes or No, and could you cite the page, like C:E 94 & 95, but specifically, which paragraph (column, first, second, etc.)?

I've read and reread the stupid thing and can't get Brain to cooperate and make sense of it.

Easy answer. Does the Craftworld Warhost list Objective Secured as one of its Command Benefits? Hint... no, it does not.

So, since the only thing listed in the Command Benefit box, C:E page 95, is the Matchless Agility 6" Run, that's it?



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kriswall wrote:
Easy answer. Does the Craftworld Warhost list Objective Secured as one of its Command Benefits? Hint... no, it does not.

And no tie-in to the RB's Command Benefit in the RB, huh?

I think the thing that causes so much confusion around this is that people think Objective Secured is a benefit of a Battle-Forged army. It is not. Objective Secured is just a benefit that specific detachments get, such as a Combined Arms detachment, an Allied detachment, a few Blood Angels formations, the Tyranid Skyblight Swarm formation, etc. If you don't have any of these detachments in your army, then none of your units gain Objective Secured. If you DO have some of these detachments in your army, then only the specified units in those detachments gain Objective Secured.

As has been mentioned by everyone above, The Craftworld Warhost and the formations it contains do not list Objective Secured as a benefit, so no. You would not have any Obsec units.

No tie in. You must take a Combined Arms Detachment, for instance, to get the Combined Arms Detachment command benefit (Objective Secured).

 Brothererekose wrote:
So, since the only thing listed in the Command Benefit box, C:E page 95, is the Matchless Agility 6" Run, that's it?

Yes, that's it

 Brothererekose wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:
Easy answer. Does the Craftworld Warhost list Objective Secured as one of its Command Benefits? Hint... no, it does not.

And no tie-in to the RB's Command Benefit in the RB, huh?

The Command Benefits of one Detachment have no bearing on the Command Benefits of another Detachment. A Combined Arms Detachment doesn't get 'Matchless Agility' so why would a Craftworld Warhost get 'Objective Secured'? They're separate Detachments each with their own Command Benefits.

The Daniel example on page 95 finally makes sense.

Thanks, guys.