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.
People understand where you’re coming from. But the whole “points spent” is an insertion into the rules entirely your own.
The rules refer to “full 1500 of the points limit”.
Not “full 1500 spent of the points limit”. I’m afraid you can’t just go around inserting words and then insisting that’s what the rule means.
Full 1500 points of the points limit is setting the maximum number available per integer - not spend.
Right. I’m off for now. Got some washing up to do and my next YouTube video to film when my buddy arrives.
A full gas tank does not tell one if the individual paid for the gas only that the tanks limit has been reached and it is full. It's a fair inference though given the subject is points that 1500 in fact, a full 1500 point force of a 1500 point limit is how many? 1500 points. We agree? Both examples reference armies and their point values, a 2000 point army, a 3000 point army, neither says point levels. It's a fair inference that its reference to 2000 point army in 2000 point game and 3000 point army in 3000 point game. I don't know how one gets past 0 points an army without spending points.
Can a 1497 point army/force fielded in a 1500 point limit game take a legate commander? No, it can't.
This message was edited 5 times. Last update was at 2024/01/23 18:20:02
I can’t speak for other countries, but when I fill up my little car? UK Petrol Pumps have an automatic shut-off. I’m not exactly up on how it exactly works, but it’s there to prevent spillage from overfilling. In short, there’s some kind of valve or pressure lock thing which triggers, stopping the pump dispensing more petrol.
Now, after the initial shut off, you can usually get a bit more out the pump with a squeeze or two. But eventually whatever that fail safe actually is just keeps kicking in.
That is to say, my gas tank is full.
But is my gas tank full? I honestly don’t know. I can look up the manufacturers specifications, and gain knowledge of how much fuel the tank should be able to hold. Which is fine.
Let’s call that information the Tank Limit. Which for this explanation is synonymous with the Points Limit.
But how much fuel am I actually carrying once I’ve filled the tank?
Like a Legions Imperialis army, it’s not necessarily the Maximum Capacity. It’s probably close (Because like building an army, there’s no sense in the automated fuel pump shut off being overly sensitive. The petrol station wants as much money off me as possible, just as I want to spend as many points as possible), within a few centilitres of the maximum capacity. But it’s by no means automatically the tank’s actual maximum capacity.
Do you see why that argument you’ve made a few times just isn’t doing what you think it’s doing?
Looking at my Car’s manufacturer data, my fuel tank, rather frustratingly, is either 42l or 45l.
But when I fill up, and as much as the pump will allow? 42l or 45l is the maximum I’m carrying. But due to the vagaries listed above, it’s likely around 41.8 or 44.8 litres or so, certainly I’m very, very unlikely to ever truly fill the tank.
Fed up of Scalpers? But still want your Exclusives? Why not join us?
I can’t speak for other countries, but when I fill up my little car? UK Petrol Pumps have an automatic shut-off. I’m not exactly up on how it exactly works, but it’s there to prevent spillage from overfilling. In short, there’s some kind of valve or pressure lock thing which triggers, stopping the pump dispensing more petrol.
Now, after the initial shut off, you can usually get a bit more out the pump with a squeeze or two. But eventually whatever that fail safe actually is just keeps kicking in.
That is to say, my gas tank is full.
But is my gas tank full? I honestly don’t know. I can look up the manufacturers specifications, and gain knowledge of how much fuel the tank should be able to hold. Which is fine.
Let’s call that information the Tank Limit. Which for this explanation is synonymous with the Points Limit.
But how much fuel am I actually carrying once I’ve filled the tank?
Like a Legions Imperialis army, it’s not necessarily the Maximum Capacity. It’s probably close (Because like building an army, there’s no sense in the automated fuel pump shut off being overly sensitive. The petrol station wants as much money off me as possible, just as I want to spend as many points as possible), within a few centilitres of the maximum capacity. But it’s by no means automatically the tank’s actual maximum capacity.
Do you see why that argument you’ve made a few times just isn’t doing what you think it’s doing?
Looking at my Car’s manufacturer data, my fuel tank, rather frustratingly, is either 42l or 45l.
But when I fill up, and as much as the pump will allow? 42l or 45l is the maximum I’m carrying. But due to the vagaries listed above, it’s likely around 41.8 or 44.8 litres or so, certainly I’m very, very unlikely to ever truly fill the tank.
Is a full1500 point army of a possible 1500 point limit still a full1500 point army of possible 1500 point limit in the uk? Cool.
1497point army of a possible 1500 point limit isn't a full 1500 point army.
No legate for you.
This message was edited 4 times. Last update was at 2024/01/23 17:49:45
At no point does it mention the player having to spend the full 1,500 points. Because it’s defined by the agreed points limit.
Someone is always free to go a bit bonkers and bring well under the agreed points limit if they wish, and it’s still ultimately a 1,500, 2,000, 3,000 or what have you Points Game.
And the rule, as stated and as written, defines entitlement to a Legate by the Points Limit, not the points actually spent.
g178 paragraph 2 "A Solar Auxillia force can include a maximum of 1 legate commander per FULL 1500 POINTS of the points limit (e.g., a 2000 point army can include a single legate commander, a 3000 point army can include 2 legate commander, ect.)
I've quoted the rules, your turn.
Lemme just
FULL 1500 POINTS of the points limit
FTFY.
I assume Canadian English works the same way as American English and the Kings, and that when you read "full 1500 points" you understand that to be a modifying quantifier that modifies the subject of the clause, which is "the points limit", yes?
You would be correct if the sentence ended after "points". But it doesn't - it continues to "of the points limit". You can't ignore that, thats giving you the context of what is being quantified. It's like if it said "per full 1500 points of charonite ogryns" - you wouldn't try to argue that you could take a legate commander if you spent 1500 pts on malcadors in that context, so why are you arguing that it's 1500 pts spent when it's clearly determined by the agreed upon points limit instead per the sentence as its written?
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2024/01/23 17:53:28
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
And if a solar aux force doesn't comprise1500 points of that limit it can't field one, a full 1500 points of the 1500 point limit. What is the points limit? 1500. Does a 1497 point list fielded in a 1500 point limit game comprise 1500 points? No. You can't field a legate. A 2997 point solar aux force in a 3000 point limit game can only field 1 legate commander.
Thats not how the english language works. Unless you can show me the clause that specifies that you must have spent those points, the determining factor is the points limit of the game you agreed to play, and nothing else.
A 1499 pt limit game allows you 0 legate commanders.
A 1500 pt limit game allows you 1 legate commander, even if you only build an army of 1499 points.
Because that is what the rule actually says, and how it is actually written. Period, end of.
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
A 1500 pt limit game allows you 1 legate commander, even if you only build an army of 1499 points.
You solar auxillia force would then not comprise of a full 1500 points of that 1500 point limit you agreed to, and thus you wouldn't be able to field one.
A Solar Auxillia force can include a maximum of 1 legate commander per FULL 1500 POINTS of the points limit (e.g., a 2000 point army can include a single legate commander, a 3000 point army can include 2 legate commander, ect.)
Both examples literally says 2000 point army, 3000 point army, not game, not point level, army. I don't know how anyone's army gets past 0 points without spending. And one can field a 2000 point army in a 3000 point game if one is so inclined, in both instances its refencing the points an army costs. We can get into semantics on them not saying force but army if you want.
So very simply, agreeing to a 1500 or 3000 point games and fielding 1500 or 3000 points on the nose are indeed not the same thing, however, in order for a solar aux force to include 1 legate commander, it may only do so per full 1500 points of the 1500 point limit, if the solar aux force/army doesn't reach that limit, 1500 points in full, like in the case of 1497 point force, it cannot include a legate commander.
This message was edited 6 times. Last update was at 2024/01/23 18:21:36
SHOW THE DAMN RULE THAT SAYS LEGATE IS 1 PER 1500 OF SPENT POINT LIMIT!
It says 1 per 1500 POINT LIMIT.
The point limit is agreed before allegiance is even decided. At that point your spent point limit is 0...
Aren't you embarrassed to have worse grasp of language than a 6 year old kid? I know I would be...
'
You can't change words at will.
It's 1500 POINT LIMIT. Not 1500 SPENT POINTS.
A Solar Auxilia force can include a maximum of 1 Legate
Commander per full 1,500 points of the points limit
(e.g., a 2,000 point Army can include a single Legate
Commander, a 3,000 point Army can include 2 Legate
Commanders, etc.).
From above. Highlight where it says "spent".
Go on. That's direct quote from rulebook. If you are right there's word "spent" somewhere there. So either you are flat out lying or cheating or there's word spent there.
'
Which of the 3 it is? Only 3 options available.
'
You can choose whatever you wish. Show where's word spent or declare do you want to be known publicly as liar or cheater. Your pick. I don't care which of the two it is if you can't show where in quote is word "spent"
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/01/23 18:38:54
How does one get past 0 without spending? Why are 2000 and 3000 point armies referenced and not point limits? How does one get to 2000 or 3000 without spending points?
Okay! And we are more than done here, we have strayed from the path and this has been a rollercoaster for sure, haven't seen this many reports generated by a single topic in a long time now. Back on topic, no more of this pedantic derailing.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/01/23 19:49:15
anyway, moving on. a 2k game tonight, stated as a 2k game, with models to or less than 2k.
then we added a warhound each on top of that, just to pour petrol into the water
then light it
anyway..
left the Vanquishers of Doom in the box, kept the pioneer company, boosted to have all 8 sentinels as they are cute, and this time the mad axe lunatics actually got into combat, making a predator detachment wish they had stayed at home before retreating the following turn to a building
where some marines then murdered then with frag missiles, probably for the best really
also had a marine pioneer company, two lots of tarantula, four of each, the laser ones splatted a Kratos, then got splatted but distracted them enough my Kratos finished them, good work. the air defence ones never fired, and never fired at but kept the enemy air force out of range so a good job
had an armoured force for the marines, I haven't been impressed with the Sicaran, too short ranged and fragile, however two blocks of six did some work
won, indeed game called end of turn two as my opponent had little left.. even the Vanquishers of Doom (tm) didn't end a game that fast - though my opponents dice were terrible, I mean really terrible.. as in four AP0 hits on some Kratos killed one and wounded the other, which they ran away terrible.
Those little Thudd Gun Rapiers do some work though, infantry in the open gets shredded, not exactly cheap but good, especially the indirect fire ability.
in a twist of fate both Warhounds survived, never shot at each other, or even came into range to do so, neither taking a single hit from anything, but equally neither contributing much to the overall result
I think they are a liability to be honest, Reaver upwards may be different but the warhound is fragile
also face two thunderhawks again, nice, air dropping assault marines got hurty, thankfully only a unit of six and as we are both learning, they cannot clear buildings unless they outnumber whatever is in there
thunderhawks I also think are a liability, too many points for the save and wounds, especially when facing three flights of interceptors.. expensive but pulling their weight so far
good game, still no idea how a bomber is meant to work, no enemy unit got close enough to my board edge for a bombing attack
White Dwarf issue 493 has the death guard player taking a Legate in an auxiliary force allied to the death guard of 331 points in a army size force of less than 3000. He took it he's one of the games developers so taking it for a force less than 1500 is correct as long as full list is over 1500.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Sorry didn't read as far down as post from MOD before I found the white dwarf article. I'll shut up now.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/01/23 21:48:31
Jaxmeister wrote: White Dwarf issue 493 has the death guard player taking a Legate in an auxiliary force allied to the death guard of 331 points in a army size force of less than 3000. He took it he's one of the games developers.
The game developers that made the rule for quake, the rule that doesn't currently prevent anything from moving as it can only be fired after everything has moved, those game developers?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote: Well, dunno about anyone else but I’ve been off filming for my YouTubes channel. And it was fun.
To get us back on discussion track?
Which slot which presently has no commercially available models are you most looking forward to adding to your existing force?
I think I mostly want Light Armour for my Demi-Company. Mostly because I don’t think we’ve had anything that might fall into said slot previewed.
Interesting tidbit from the Mustering an Army section of the core rules...
Spoiler:
A player's Army points value (i.e., the total points cost of all its Detachments) can be equal to or less than the agreed points limit, but can never exceed it.
An army's points value is how much is spent. An army's points limit is how much was agreed to play. A certain rule is clearly and definitively based on a points limit, not on a points value.
Anyways,
Yeah, looking forward to the Sabre.
is this something that has been rumored/previewed? That's my favorite vehicle from the big game.
Was going to write my first impressions of the game but will leave it a while to see that the fire has died down... Jesus wept guys, went away for a few hours and it turned into royal rumble
Am popping into a couple of local stores today; my quest, either some marine tanks or a Thunderhawk. I fear it may end in failure.
Pacific wrote: Was going to write my first impressions of the game but will leave it a while to see that the fire has died down... Jesus wept guys, went away for a few hours and it turned into royal rumble
Am popping into a couple of local stores today; my quest, either some marine tanks or a Thunderhawk. I fear it may end in failure.
Thunderhawks are lovely models, no two ways about that, would be nice to get the transport one at some point too
think they need fighters, which can come on first, then when the thunderhawk arrives and the enemy decides to drop an interceptor, they can overwatch to try and defend their charge. given overwatch is all weapons (on a 6) v interceptors one weapon with a -2 (so a 6) this should work
I'm hoping my semi regular opponent doesn't work this bit out, though I can drop a lightning out of range of his Xiphon, he could stick them further forwards to end in range if I want to fire upon the juicy target
The Thunderhawk is indeed lovely. I'm looking forward to paint up one in Night Lord colours.
Rather than the Xiphon mini I'm probably going to use this one from Vanguard which is a bit more evil-looking, rather than the Battlestar Galactica-style official one.
Put in spoilers for the sake of people viewing on their phones
thunderhawks I also think are a liability, too many points for the save and wounds, especially when facing three flights of interceptors.. expensive but pulling their weight so far
My experience is the opposite. Too few points for the brutal firepower. And it is like a flying Kratos regarding W and Armour!
If you check the points per wounds and save all units in the game are crap actually.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/01/24 10:28:43
will agree the thunderhawk has some nasty damage output potential, however to actually use it requires not lurking in a corner and being aggressive, which has its own problems.
it does have the "tiger terror" element to it however.
have faced a pair in two games, to date neither has managed much other than dropping off a six man assault marine unit (which to be fair was effective), both dropping dead to my interceptors reasonably fast and both corner hugging to limit overwatch fire against them
I suspect used more aggressively, maybe from T2 onwards when other stuff is also in my face they would do a lot better
Automatically Appended Next Post: incidentally what all these experiences prove, which is I think quite good, its not just the model but the way a player uses it that matters, don't seem to be any "I have this so I win" units
every game though has seen about a third to a half of the models die on the first turn, then a proper furball over one objective and the survivors battered and trying to hold on
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2024/01/24 10:34:14
tneva82 wrote: One can mitigate interceptors by overwatch. Even better if own xiphons move to cover. Take hit on 5+ rerolling overwatching shots 1st.
Plus then they have already delivered cargo.
it all varies a bit, given the 30" range on the lightnings missiles the things only need move to 30" from the thunderhawks, this may well be outside of the range of anything to overwatch them - hence my comment on their escorts coming on first, well ahead of the thunderhawks planned location, specifically to make their own overwatch weapons (4+ to hit base, 6 for overwatch - though yes with a re-roll on four shots per Xiphon) be within range, or the interceptor have to be out of range of the T'hawk
and the T'hawk comes on in one activation, the bods dismount on the next activation so a single interceptor flight can come in and take a shot, though its a single weapon system so for me usually two dice of skystrike missiles, hitting on a 6 with a re-roll.. and the T'hak ends up saving on a 3+ so its got a pretty good chance to live
but it does benefit significantly from escorts being in place first, they lose their "intercept" shot, but can fire full overwatch, however any interceptors that do survive will later be firing at full effect
though as you correctly note, by then the cargo, which is likely more dangerous, has dropped.
incidentally, have found thudd guns are remarkably good at dealing with assault bods arriving this way if within suitable overwatch range, just from the volume of shots
so far everything seems to have a counter, which in turn can be countered, and player actions count for quite a bit - which is a good thing
the bigger expensive beasties seem to depend far more on tactics to get the best out of them, which is no bad thing
I need two more T-Hawks for my Raven Guard. Only thing missing from my first go at an air wing/aerial assault detachment (4 Storm Eagles, 2 Fire Raptors, 3 Xiphons, and a T-Hawk so far).
CoALabaer wrote: Wargamers hate two things: the state of the game and change.
