Units in dedicated transports - secrecy or not?

[ebolus]

Under ”A note on secrecy” on page 92 in the BBB it says “… always make clear to your opponent which squads are embarked in which transport vehicle.”

In our gaming group a friendly player says the rule (if it is a rule) states that this is optional. He wants to keep this a secret, which is fine for me – because the runes on his transports all clearly indicate which unit is inside. (My problem is remembering the difference…)

Personally I believe GWs intention is that players must (not should) always reveal the “contents” of each transport vehicle, unless both players agree on mutual secrecy (as the last sentence in the paragraph says).

What do you think?

This is the full text under A note on secrecy:
"To keep things fair, you should always allow your opponent to read your force roster after a game. In the same spirit, always make clear to your opponent which squads are embarked in which transport vehicle. However, before starting to deploy their armies, it is a good idea for players to agree whether or not they can read the opponent's force roster before and during the game. Some players prefer full disclosure (which is the norm in tournaments, for example), as they want to concentrate on outmanoeuvring the enemy rather than springing a secret trump card on them. Others prefer to leave a feel of secrecy around their lists, as bluffing can make a game really entertaining. The choice is yours!"

[Joey Boor]

Read the last sentence: "The choice is yours." I prefer full disclosure but you just need to talk to him about it.

[ebolus]

Read the last sentence: "The choice is yours." I prefer full disclosure but you just need to talk to him about it.

I see that one. The confusing thing is of course what GW actually wants us to do by saying "always make clear..." first, then "The choice is yours!". What is the intention? I prefer full disclosure myself, but I have no problem with secrecy. I just find the paragraph strange.

[Lord Inquisitor]

If you want to be a douche I guess you could do that. But I always choose to make it clear who is in what.

[Blight]

Secrecy could be interesting I think... but only in a friendly game where both players agree upon it before hand... but I guess that goes for just about anything. I'd get annoyed however, if someone tried to force it upon me (I'm sure there's a better way of putting that).

[butcherbolivar]

I wouldnt want unscrupulous players swithching which squad is in which rhino. No those are plague marines in that red one the zerks are in the green one.

[J_Kingslien]

depending on how well you know the person your gaming with, i think its ok to keep it a secret. i play nids so it doesnt come into play for me :D

[Valdore]

If you are playing with them as secret (which I never would after a few bad experiences) I would suggest using some method of keeping track, maybe a slip of paper upside down under a track or the base of the vehicle with the unit noted on it at the start. That way you forestall any issues of switching units around in transport whilst keeping the element of surprise. Just be careful of how you word a proposition like this to your opponent, it could quite easily be taken the wrong way as if you suspect them of cheating.

If however it is someone you know well, then you can go by the old trust rule and play it as you would normally, though I would recommend it only if you do know the person well enough that they would be honest about things like that :)

[Pariah Stevo]

i only do secrecy for fun. i just prefer to keep it open because play orks and all my vehicles are open-topped and i would feel like a complete duch by saying " i know you should be able to see the orks in the back, but the rules so i dont have to tell you whats in my transport with no exceptions to open topped and since your not telling me whats in your rhinos im not telling you what's in my trukks" It's just better to let people know. i prefer to win with good tatics not underhanded secrecy

[Lerra]

Most tournaments are using the Adepticon FAQ now, which clearly states that all units in transports must be declared.

If it doesn't fly in a tournament, it probably shouldn't fly in a casual game either, unless both players agree to it beforehand.

[crazyredpraetorian]

It should be declared in IMHO.

[Gotthammer]

In a friendly I'd be fine with it if agreed to beforehand, and the transports were marked to be clear which is which.

In a tourney I'd be against it, as the pace is so much different and there's already so much going on I don't want to be playing the shell game with transports.

[BuFFo]

As per the rules, you do not have to tell your opponent what is in a transport when you are deploying.

If the OP is going to quote a rule, make sure you quote everything.

Read the first sentence. It helps. Then read the last two sentences. They help as well. A Note On Secrecy is an optional rule which must be agreed upon by both players.

Only if you and your opponent agree do you show your army list and disclose what is in each transport.

As for cheating, there are easy ways to avoid doing so.

[CrusherJoe]

Yes, it is an optional rule, one which you both must agree to, but there's the rub right there: If you don't want to deal with the secrecy (and the possible cheating that could come with it) then you can insist on "no secrecy". If your opponent doesn't agree to it, that's fine -- there's nothing forcing him to -- but there's nothing forcing you into a situation/game you're not comfortable with, either.

[ebolus]

As per the rules, you do not have to tell your opponent what is in a transport when you are deploying.
That's my opinion as well, and seems to be the overall opinion in here. I just feel that GWs intention is full disclosure, but if you agree upon secrecy, then go ahead!

Should is the essence that leaves the players with the choice of full disclosure - or not (as the last sentence says).


If the OP is going to quote a rule, make sure you quote everything.
Probably should have. And done that - editetd the opening post. ;)

QUOTE]As for cheating, there are easy ways to avoid doing so.[/QUOTE]
Marking the transport vehicles is one way. Anyway, in our condensed gaming group of men in their 30s and 40s cheating has never been an issue. :)

[bob]

I'm another vote for full disclosure .

Mainly to avoid the cheating bit, which unfortunately is an issue for some gaming groups

[Dingus]

I field a fully mechanised IG army. Thats 6 Chimeras and 3 Valkyries.
Now the Chimeras contain 1 full Platoon and the Valks have 2 command HQ's and 1 vet squad with demolitions.
I cannot stand playing full disclosure. Why should I have to tell my opponent which Valkyrie has Creed in it, which Chimera has my Platoon Commander in it and which Valkyrie has a big demo charge squad in it.

There are 2 sides to the situation. In the army above if I play full disclosure the 3 transports listed above are focus fired upon to severly cripple my army.
In a non disclosure game my opponent must take a gamble on what vehicle to pop. Thats half the fun.
Now all my vehicles are numbered by company, squadron and unit number. I write down which vehicle has what unit in it before deployment and even make an effort to tell a trusted 3rd party what unit is in each transport so nobody can argue. I have never had any problems playing this way at my FLGS.

Non disclosure opens up a whole lot more (provided it is done properly - not cheating transport teleporting units) tactics of feint rushes with empty transports, and makes for a more enjoyable and thinking game.

[CrusherJoe]

Well Dingus I can certainly see your point -- and if there's people that enjoy playing with you that way more power to you! :)

I guess I can't remember a game when the pre-game ritual didn't include the "army list inspection" (we do like to keep things open and honest). I also can't remember a game where my opponent and I didn't say what unit was embarked in each transport as they were placed on the table during deployment (or held in reserves). That's just "the way we do things" at the FLGS where most of us in Austin play and it's one of those things that has become tradition.

Hey, whatever works, right?

[Dingus]

Hey, whatever works, right?

And at the end of the day that is what counts. It is only a game after all :)

[CrusherJoe]

Yes indeedy! :)

[N-Bomb]

We almost always use tell people what's inside (or simply put a model from that vehicle on top, but we have tried secrecy a few times for fun, but we also agreed open top vehicles cannot hide contents (if I can see the lootas hiding in the building across the board, seeing the yelling orks in the back of a trukk should be no problem.
Oddly the first time we tried secrecy, my friend was trying out orks and I was trying out Dark Eldar so it was a total wash for hiding anyway.

[BuFFo]

Oddly the first time we tried secrecy, my friend was trying out orks and I was trying out Dark Eldar so it was a total wash for hiding anyway.

Why?

[Jipin]

N-Bomb said that he was playing that open-topped vehicles can't hide contents... Dark Eldar transports all being open-topped and the vast majority of Ork ones are also unless you buy the upgrade to close them.

We play that you have to have one model from the unit on the top of the vehicle, and as many as can fit on/in an open-topped.

I once spent three turns trying to to destroy an open topped trukk just for it to have no one inside anyway... not overly happy about that! (Not only for it taking so long, but for there to be no-one inside)

[Bluephoenix]

the way I always do it is use secrecy, (as reserves are my main tactical advantage) but I have a list of what is where beforehand, so that if there is a question I can point to the list and resolve the issue.


never had any complaints so far, and have been told by numerous opponents it makes the game more exciting. :cool:

[StrikerFox]

personally i try to stick by the "do unto others.."

i atleast put the sgt or squad leader on the transport (save drop pods).

if your opponent really wants to be a douche and do squad switching, its up to them.. but maybe next time ask, or call him/her on it. otherwise, as long as you are being honest.. :D its a game after all.. XD

[BuFFo]

N-Bomb said that he was playing that open-topped vehicles can't hide contents... Dark Eldar transports all being open-topped and the vast majority of Ork ones are also unless you buy the upgrade to close them.

We play that you have to have one model from the unit on the top of the vehicle, and as many as can fit on/in an open-topped.

I once spent three turns trying to to destroy an open topped trukk just for it to have no one inside anyway... not overly happy about that! (Not only for it taking so long, but for there to be no-one inside)

Ah okay.

If you guys have a house rule that forces players with open topped vehicles to play with a disadvantage thats great for you guys.

As far as the rules go, there is no difference between a transport and an open topped transports as far as embarked models go.

I just write on paper what unit is in what transport. Easy and fair.

[Squee]

I have found that in a long running campaign, against a group of trusted players, the secret squad embarkation of squads gets interesting. (Load the same squad in that MI rhino for 2 or 3 games, then suprise them with a new one.) However, I will agree, a note written before the game as to who is embarked where is the only way to be fair. It gives the feeling of "You kinda know who I bring, but can you guess where they are?"

Open topped vehicles should never be secret though.
I mean, dude, I can see you. Lol

[Vince]

As tournaments all make you declare that is the way my gaming group plays it. I think this is also the more competitive way to play so I am happy with it.

[Culven]

The majority of my games use secrecy, but the players also have a verifiable means of indicating which unit is in which Transport. I typically use squad markings on my Dedicated Transports and names on non-dedicated (for which I will note on my roster which squad is using which Transport). Sometimes I will just set the squad leader on the transport, but I don't typically inform my opponent of all weapons and equipment carried by that squad. I just feel that doing so is about like telling them which units they should target. I prefer to let them figure it out themselves.

[DarkLink]

In non-tournament settings (which will probably give you their own ruling on this), it comes down to what you and your opponent agree on, just like the rule says. If you can't agree with you opponent, and they're being... not nice about it, then that's probably a good indicator that you should find someone more agreeable to play with.

Note that the rule isn't an optional rule per se, it simply says that you can agree on the level of disclosure.

[mercer]

I always let folks know, kind of annoys me when I go after a transport and I don't know whats in it. Though, folks don't always let me know unless I ask and sometimes people like the empty transport tactic.

Doesn't say you have to at the end of the day.

[Ming]

In my games, I clearly let the opponent know what squad is in what transport. I often (for Rhinos) put two member of the squad on the roof. 1. It helps me remember to fire them; 2. It creates a threat that a empty transport does not; 3. it show I have nothing to hide. After all, I'm winning based on my strategy and tacics, not by skullduggery, loaded dice, or practised rolling.

Courage and Honor! Of course I play 3rd Co Ultras - see my blog at Bolter and Chainsword. :D