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.

 skchsan wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
as it doesnt have any special rules that allow you to do so.

Except it DOES. The core rules allow you to do so. I even posted the relevant rules with fancy yellow highlighting to show that this is the case.

Transport rule permits you put units inside of it. It does not permit you to carry over any rules upon its content unless it is specifically permitted to do so.

Various units that grant deepstriking to units that otherwise coudlnt specifically permits you to do so via special rule it has: drop pod assault (drop pod), transport spore (tyranocyte), subterrainean assault (trygon). Simply being a transport does not allow you to change 'on battlefield, inside transport' locale to 'in reserve, inside transport' unless it is specifically permitted (i.e. cloudstrike)

Exactly.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't see why your assessment prevents units in transports to be set up in those transports while the transports are set up in Ambush?

I agree with everything you've said, and yet think you can have ogryns in an ambushing transport.

Why?

Because they're not in Ambush. They're in a transport. They were never selected for the stratagem, and need not be, because nothing says they do.

Because the ogryns inside ambushing transports are units inside a transport. The said units are ineligible recipients of the stratagem as they cannot have TALLARN keyword.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't see why your assessment prevents units in transports to be set up in those transports while the transports are set up in Ambush?

I agree with everything you've said, and yet think you can have ogryns in an ambushing transport.

Why?

Because they're not in Ambush. They're in a transport. They were never selected for the stratagem, and need not be, because nothing says they do.

How are Ogryns allowed to deploy?

- Does their Datasheet provide any way for them to be set up as tactical reserves? No. So they can't be off board.
- They're not Tallarn, so the Ambush Stratagem doesn't give them permission either.

If these imaginary Ogryns have no legal way to be deployed off board, and can't be selected for the Ambush Stratagem then you can't deploy them anywhere other than on the board, or in a Transport that begins deployed on the board.

Three Tallarn units. It's super simple.

 skchsan wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't see why your assessment prevents units in transports to be set up in those transports while the transports are set up in Ambush?

I agree with everything you've said, and yet think you can have ogryns in an ambushing transport.

Why?

Because they're not in Ambush. They're in a transport. They were never selected for the stratagem, and need not be, because nothing says they do.

Because the ogryns inside ambushing transports are units inside a transport. The said units are ineligible recipients of the stratagem as they cannot have TALLARN keyword.

Your first sentence is right, yes.

Your second sentence is also right.

However, they are also not being recipients of the stratagem, so that doesn't stop them from being deployed in a transport while the transport is in Ambush. The stratagem is never once checked against the Ogryns.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I don't see why your assessment prevents units in transports to be set up in those transports while the transports are set up in Ambush?

I agree with everything you've said, and yet think you can have ogryns in an ambushing transport.

Why?

Because they're not in Ambush. They're in a transport. They were never selected for the stratagem, and need not be, because nothing says they do.

How are Ogryns allowed to deploy?

- Does their Datasheet provide any way for them to be set up as tactical reserves? No. So they can't be off board.
- They're not Tallarn, so the Ambush Stratagem doesn't give them permission either.

If these imaginary Ogryns have no legal way to be deployed off board, and can't be selected for the Ambush Stratagem then you can't deploy them anywhere other than on the board, or in a Transport that begins deployed on the board.

Three Tallarn units. It's super simple.

The Ogryns are in a transport, which they are allowed to be. They're not deployed "off the board." They're deployed in a transport.

The fact that the transport is off the board is comparatively irrelevant.

It really isn't.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
It really isn't.

[Citation Needed]

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
It really isn't.

[Citation Needed]

Many, many citations given and ignored.

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
It really isn't.

[Citation Needed]

Many, many citations given and ignored.

I haven't seen one, really, that another poster didn't already refute. If there was one that went ignored, perhaps it's due to my own inelegance; care to re-hash for me so I can either address it or admit that I am incorrect?

The transport and the ogryns are two separate units deployed as one drop. For all purposes of stratagem, it affects the individual units, not the drop consisting of transport and ogryns.

 skchsan wrote:
The transport and the ogryns are two separate units deployed as one drop. For all purposes of stratagem, it affects the individual units, not the drop consisting of transport and ogryns.

Right, but it isn't affecting the Ogryns. At all. They're in a transport, that's how they were deployed and is totally legal.

Let's use an example:

I am deploying my units. I declare that I have 6 Ogryns in a Banehammer.

Then, I use the Tallarn stratagem and select 3 units.

I choose the Banehammer, an Infantry Squad, and a Company Commander.

I then proceed with my deployment.

Tell me where I have not followed the rules?

Transports:
"... when you set up a transport, units can start the battle embarked within it instead of being set up separately..."

The act of embarking does not "meld" the transport and the embarked together. The unit inside a transport is and always a unit for all rules purposes unless stated otherwise.

 skchsan wrote:
Transports:
"... when you set up a transport, units can start the battle embarked within it instead of being set up separately..."

The act of embarking does not "meld" the transport and the embarked together. The unit inside a transport is and always a unit for all rules purposes unless stated otherwise.

I agree completely.

I don't know why that's relevant. The rule you quoted, in fact, suggests that units are allowed to embark in transports while remaining separate units.

So
1) I have permission to embark on the transport during deployment
2) I have permission to do other stuff with the transport.

"I choose the Banehammer, an Infantry Squad, and a Company Commander." would legally be considered as:

"I choose the Banehammer, the ogryns inside the Banehammer, an infantry squad, and a company commander"

 skchsan wrote:
"I choose the Banehammer, an Infantry Squad, and a Company Commander." would legally be considered as:

"I choose the Banehammer, the ogryns inside the Banehammer, an infantry squad, and a company commander"

Why? You said yourself the units aren't melded, and are in fact very separate.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
It really isn't.

[Citation Needed]

Many, many citations given and ignored.

I haven't seen one, really, that another poster didn't already refute. If there was one that went ignored, perhaps it's due to my own inelegance; care to re-hash for me so I can either address it or admit that I am incorrect?

Dude, I've explained this so many times now I'm not typing it out again. Plenty of pages of circular nonsense for you to re-read if you feel like it. I'm done as people are just trying to make it personal now. I'm entirely calm and unphased by it, do note, but if people are deploying fallacious comparisons, baiting posts etc. it's time to be done with a thread.

When your Ogryns have the permission to have the TALLARN Keyword let's chat. Until then, I maintain the Stratagem does what it says on the tin, allows three Tallarn units to Ambush.
It doesn't mean "Three Tallarn units plus as many others as I can squeeze into the Tallarn transport". Because quite simply, if it meant that it would say it.

YMMV, roll on the next FAQ iteration when this will no doubt be cleared up like "Is stationary less than half movement?"

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
It really isn't.

[Citation Needed]

Many, many citations given and ignored.

I haven't seen one, really, that another poster didn't already refute. If there was one that went ignored, perhaps it's due to my own inelegance; care to re-hash for me so I can either address it or admit that I am incorrect?

Dude, I've explained this so many times now I'm not typing it out again. Plenty of pages of circular nonsense for you to re-read if you feel like it0. I'm done as people are just trying to make it personal now. I'm entirely calm and unphased by it, do note, but if people are deploying fallacious comparisons, baiting posts etc. it's time to be done with a thread.

When your Ogryns have the permission to have the TALLARN Keyword let's chat. Until then, I maintain the Stratagem does what it says on the tin, allows three Tallarn units to Ambush.
It doesn't mean "Three Tallarn units plus as many otehrs as you can squeeze into the Tallarn transport". Because qute simply, if it meant that it would say it.

YMMV, roll on the next FAQ iteration when this will no doubt be cleared up like "Is stationary less than half movement?"

Yes, I agree on the next FAQ it will presumably be cleared up.

As for the rest of your post - the Ogryns don't need the tallarn keyword as I am explaining now, though the fact that you still think it does means you haven't even read my argument.

That's intellectually dishonest, to argue against someone without understanding them.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
It really isn't.

[Citation Needed]

Many, many citations given and ignored.

I haven't seen one, really, that another poster didn't already refute. If there was one that went ignored, perhaps it's due to my own inelegance; care to re-hash for me so I can either address it or admit that I am incorrect?

Dude, I've explained this so many times now I'm not typing it out again. Plenty of pages of circular nonsense for you to re-read if you feel like it0. I'm done as people are just trying to make it personal now. I'm entirely calm and unphased by it, do note, but if people are deploying fallacious comparisons, baiting posts etc. it's time to be done with a thread.

When your Ogryns have the permission to have the TALLARN Keyword let's chat. Until then, I maintain the Stratagem does what it says on the tin, allows three Tallarn units to Ambush.
It doesn't mean "Three Tallarn units plus as many otehrs as you can squeeze into the Tallarn transport". Because qute simply, if it meant that it would say it.

YMMV, roll on the next FAQ iteration when this will no doubt be cleared up like "Is stationary less than half movement?"

Yes, I agree on the next FAQ it will presumably be cleared up.

As for the rest of your post - the Ogryns don't need the tallarn keyword as I am explaining now, though the fact that you still think it does means you haven't even read my argument.

That's intellectually dishonest, to argue against someone without understanding them.

I've read every post in the thread, thanks. I understand what you're saying and have explained why I disagree. Drop the ad hominems, please.

Reading and understanding are different things.

Ypure applying the Ambush stratagem on a deployment choice of banehammer and ogryns inside

 skchsan wrote:
Ypure applying the Ambush stratagem on a deployment choice of banehammer and ogryns inside

No, I am applying it to the unit "Banehammer," regardless of what is inside. It could be air, 25 genestealer cultists, a single particularly aggressive Commissar, or 6 Ogryns.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Ypure applying the Ambush stratagem on a deployment choice of banehammer and ogryns inside

No, I am applying it to the unit "Banehammer," regardless of what is inside. It could be air, 25 genestealer cultists, a single particularly aggressive Commissar, or 6 Ogryns.

Except, you can't single out the banehammer only once you've declared it as a deployment choice consisting of multiple units.

 skchsan wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Ypure applying the Ambush stratagem on a deployment choice of banehammer and ogryns inside

No, I am applying it to the unit "Banehammer," regardless of what is inside. It could be air, 25 genestealer cultists, a single particularly aggressive Commissar, or 6 Ogryns.

Except, you can't single out the banehammer only once you've declared it as a deployment choice consisting of multiple units.

Why not?

Can you not select the Banehammer to shoot with, without selecting the unit inside? Could you not select the Banehammer as a target, if it has units inside?

The Banehammer is a unit, and therefore eligible to be treated like a unit by itself, regardless of the contents of its passenger hold.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Ypure applying the Ambush stratagem on a deployment choice of banehammer and ogryns inside

No, I am applying it to the unit "Banehammer," regardless of what is inside. It could be air, 25 genestealer cultists, a single particularly aggressive Commissar, or 6 Ogryns.

Except, you can't single out the banehammer only once you've declared it as a deployment choice consisting of multiple units.

Why not?

Can you not select the Banehammer to shoot with, without selecting the unit inside? Could you not select the Banehammer as a target, if it has units inside?

The Banehammer is a unit, and therefore eligible to be treated like a unit by itself, regardless of the contents of its passenger hold.

Because you've elected to deploy them as one.

 skchsan wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 skchsan wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Ypure applying the Ambush stratagem on a deployment choice of banehammer and ogryns inside

No, I am applying it to the unit "Banehammer," regardless of what is inside. It could be air, 25 genestealer cultists, a single particularly aggressive Commissar, or 6 Ogryns.

Except, you can't single out the banehammer only once you've declared it as a deployment choice consisting of multiple units.

Why not?

Can you not select the Banehammer to shoot with, without selecting the unit inside? Could you not select the Banehammer as a target, if it has units inside?

The Banehammer is a unit, and therefore eligible to be treated like a unit by itself, regardless of the contents of its passenger hold.

Because you've elected to deploy them as one.

Right, but "deployment choice" and "unit" are different things, as you've rightly pointed out.

The Banehammer is a "unit", and together with the Ogryns they are a "Deployment choice".

The Tallarn stratagem, though, asks us to pick units, not deployment choices, and the Banehammer is an eligible unit regardless of what it carries.

The Tallarn stratagem permits you to pick units, not deployment choices.

Deployment choice consists of multiple units.

Units embarked in a transport count as units.

If you have a banehammer, ogryns inside the banehammer, infantry squad, and a commisar this would count as 4 units.

You can't discount a unit because it is inside a transport.

Why are you counting the unit at all?

It's not eligible for the stratagem, and no one is trying to choose it with the stratagem. It's literally never even considered when choosing units for the purposes of the stratagem.

Why do you think it should be?

Why shouldn't the units inside a transport not counted for the stratagem? Where does it permit this?

 skchsan wrote:
Why shouldn't the units inside a transport not counted for the stratagem? Where does it permit this?

It doesn't have to "permit" it, because the units aren't even considered.

The units shouldn't be counted because they're not even being called out or considered? And aren't even eligible?

The stratagem would have to say "counting units in transports" or "transports must be empty" or something of that nature; as it is written, it doesn't matter what's inside the transport at all. It's completely irrelevant; the word Transport is never even found in the stratagem.

Something would have to tell you to check for passengers, otherwise there is no reason to presume that it's relevant to the stratagem at all.

The transport has merely given the ability to go into reserves. It has not received the ability to carry the units into reserve as I have pointed out with certain units' special rules.

 skchsan wrote:
The transport has merely given the ability to go into reserves. It has not received the ability to carry the units into reserve as I have pointed out with certain units' special rules.

It doesn't need to be "Given" the ability. Other special rules may include the wording for clarity, but the fact of the matter is that transports already have permission to carry units, and so while the clarification might be omitted (and that omission is the reason this thread exists), it is not necessary to include.

Transports have the ability to carry units by default, regardless of where they are.