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.

harkequin wrote:
Cool , so where is this satisfy the minimum thing?

Dude face it, you are like the black knight in monty python, no legs to stand on , but still trying to win.

I'm going to leave it at this and request a mod lock.
You've argued very dishonestly as i've shown, any time you've been refuted, you've moved the goal posts, or come up with new "rules", I point out why they don't work, and you selectively apply them so that my scenario doesn't count, just because . You lied about not using RAI for 6 pages I'm done.

Here, no need to reply, just mull it over and see if you can justify to yourself why you don't have to apply rules equally, only as you see fit.

If we apply rules Equally we get this
"1 captain in terminator armour" -> "use captain ALE" -> make sure we get as close to "1 captain in terminator armour" as possible - > "1 captain, with the terminator armour upgrade"

we also get,

"1 venerable dreadnaught" -> "use venerable dreadnaughts ALE" -> make sure we get as close to "1 venerable dreadnaught" as possible - > "1 venerable dreadnaught" or "1 venerable dreadnaughts choice consisting of 1 venerable dreadnaught"

Have a pleasant day.

Looks like you are simply conceding and abandoning the argument now that you realize you cannot work around the rules on the ALE.



That rule dismantles your argument.

Don't mistake conceding for not being a masochist. You are unreasonable, there is no reasoning.

You are not the only person on the entire forum who correct, the reason everyone else in this thread disagreed is because you are wrong. We tried to show you, but you refuse to listen or discuss honestly.

This isn't a forum for convincing people you are right, it's for finding the answer and making a call.If you don't discuss honestly, it's pointless.

I proved you wrong several times, just because you go "NONONONONO" with your fingers in your ears doesn't make you right, it makes you unreasonable and stubborn.

I'm sick of banging my head against a brick wall. So is everyone else, that's why they left.

Why do you think everyone disagreed with you?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and as a last sentence to prove you wrong in 16 words

Saying that "1 venerable dreadnaught" does not mean "1 venerable dreadnaught" is delusional. They are identical.

Have a good one mate.

harkequin wrote:
Don't mistake conceding for not being a masochist. You are unreasonable, there is no reasoning.

You are not the only person on the entire forum who correct, the reason everyone else in this thread disagreed is because you are wrong. We tried to show you, but you refuse to listen or discuss honestly.

This isn't a forum for convincing people you are right, it's for finding the answer and making a call.If you don't discuss honestly, it's pointless.

I proved you wrong several times, just because you go "NONONONONO" with your fingers in your ears doesn't make you right, it makes you unreasonable and stubborn.

I'm sick of banging my head against a brick wall. So is everyone else, that's why they left.

Why do you think everyone disagreed with you?




Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and as a last sentence to prove you wrong in 16 words

Saying that "1 venerable dreadnaught" does not mean "1 venerable dreadnaught" is delusional. They are identical.

Have a good one mate.

The ALE simply has a rule which allows me to add 2 additional Venerable Dreadnoughts to the minimal 1 Venerable Dreadnought that I need for the Formation. I can add them just as easily as I can add a Ghost Ark unit (that is not listed on the Formation) to a unit of Warriors in a Reclamation Legion.



You have utterly failed to show a restriction that takes away that plain permission. Your failure in this regard is what you have been banging your head on this whole time.

This has gone on for too long. If you want RAW all you have to do is look at the battle demi-company and Strike Force Ultra listings. Pg. 174 of the SM Codex gives the description of 0-1 unit of dreads, Ironclads, or Ven Dreads. Pg. 177 gives a listing of a single Ven Dread. This is as clear cut as it can be. The listing says what it means, and means what it says. To read it any other way is HIWPI.

RAW you have to take army list entries that don't verbatim match up.

RAI we can figure out what units to take and use the written words as required, I.e. terminator armor and 1.

RAI there's just no logical justification for taking 2 or 3 ven dreads when it says 1. Yes it's not listed as a restriction, but it is listed as what you take, and a number other than 1 is not one. If they intended it to not be 1 they would have not put a 1 there.

blaktoof wrote:
RAW you have to take army list entries that don't verbatim match up.

RAI we can figure out what units to take and use the written words as required, I.e. terminator armor and 1.

RAI there's just no logical justification for taking 2 or 3 ven dreads when it says 1. Yes it's not listed as a restriction, but it is listed as what you take, and a number other than 1 is not one. If they intended it to not be 1 they would have not put a 1 there.

Nobody is saying that you do not take 1 Venerable Dreadnought to minimally satisfy the Formation. There is just absolutely no listing of a restriction.

There is a rule that allows you to purchase more Venerable Dreadnoughts on top of the 1 Venerable Dreadnaught that satisfies the Formation.



Formations allow you to take options. If the writer of the Formation had intended for the formation to be restricted to 1 then he would have written a rule in the Formations Restrictions such as "may only take 1 Venerable Dreadnaught". That is what the Formation Restrictions section is for on Formations.

Otherwise you are only wildly guessing that the listing "1 Venerable Dreadnought" is actually stating a restriction. Your wild guess cannot overcome the plain permission to add additional Dreadnoughts granted on the ALE.

Just as easily as I can take a Ghost Ark unit for each unit of warriors in the Reclamation Legion, even though Ghost Ark is no where on that listing, I can take additional Venerable Dreadnoughts. Similarly if the Venerable Dreadnoughts had the option for adding Grot Oiler models to the unit I could add those despite not being listed on the Formation.

Basically the options of the ALE fully apply unless explicitly taken away.

This seems to have gone about as far as it is likely to.

Moving on.