Unlike previous editions pivotting is now part of movement and not free.
Vehicles can turn any number of times as they move, just like any other model. Vehicles turn by pivoting on the spot about their centre-point, rather than wheeling round.
So we cannot pivot before moving or after mobing, but as moving - as the distance is part of how far they move.
If you moved 6" and then did something that made the model move past 6" did you go 6" or less?
Your move did not end until after the pivot, pivoting is the method vehicles turn by and they turn as they move.
In the case of vehicles that deviate from box or round in shape, ie same on all sides, this results in losing forward movement sometimes.
blaktoof wrote: this results in losing forward movement sometimes.
This results in losing all movement at all times. If you want to play this way then I hope your opponent makes you sit there and measure out from every spot on the Tank to make sure that it didn't move more than 6'. Because this is incredibly stupid and time consuming I don't think anyone actually plays it this way, though feel free to tell me otherwise.
blaktoof wrote: Unlike previous editions pivotting is now part of movement and not free.
Vehicles can turn any number of times as they move, just like any other model. Vehicles turn by pivoting on the spot about their centre-point, rather than wheeling round.
So we cannot pivot before moving or after mobing, but as moving - as the distance is part of how far they move.
If you moved 6" and then did something that made the model move past 6" did you go 6" or less?
Your move did not end until after the pivot, pivoting is the method vehicles turn by and they turn as they move.
In the case of vehicles that deviate from box or round in shape, ie same on all sides, this results in losing forward movement sometimes.
What you're missing is what it says in the remainder of the paragraph you quoted. Vehicles do not have to move to pivot, it's just that they can turn while they're moving any number of times.
Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving, so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as Stationary.
Further, since pivoting doesn't count as moving, pivoting 180 after doing a 6" move doesn't count as moving further than 6".
Pivoting is always done from the centre of a vehicle to prevent it from accidentally moving further than intended or allowed.
So if you move 6" and pivot 180, turning the vehicle around its center point and thus not moving beyond 6" from where you started, you still only count as having moved 6". Pivot as much as you want, you're not gaining ground if you do a 180 because the rear of the vehicle won't be further than the front of the vehicle was, if you're turning correctly since you pivot from the center.
If you move 6" and pivot your final distance from start to finish is the movement, not the 6" you did before the pivot.
the part you quote is stating that if you do not move you may pivot and still count as stationary, it in no way states that pivoting does not count as moving under any other circumstance.
Stating pivoting does not count as moving is not correct, it only does not count as moving if the vehicle remained stationary. ie had 0" moved that turn. Meaning you cannot go .1" and then pivot and say the pivot did not count as movement, because the vehicle did not remain stationary.
I do not disagree that the issue with vehicle movement is stupid.
However as you have to measure from their hull, but as you would for infantry, and you are not allowed to measure infantry movement from their front to back but have to do some from the same place to same place, this does RAW result in a situation where pivotting 180" as part of your move of a distance of any amount other than stationary can use all of your movement depending on how long a vehicle is.
kingbobbito wrote: So if you move 6" and pivot 180, turning the vehicle around its center point and thus not moving beyond 6" from where you started, you still only count as having moved 6". Pivot as much as you want, you're not gaining ground if you do a 180 because the rear of the vehicle won't be further than the front of the vehicle was, if you're turning correctly since you pivot from the center.
This is not quite right. A long narrow vehicle will gain ground pivoting as you describe. However the rule states that you cannot be more than 6" from the starting point which eliminates that.
kingbobbito wrote: So if you move 6" and pivot 180, turning the vehicle around its center point and thus not moving beyond 6" from where you started, you still only count as having moved 6". Pivot as much as you want, you're not gaining ground if you do a 180 because the rear of the vehicle won't be further than the front of the vehicle was, if you're turning correctly since you pivot from the center.
This is not quite right. A long narrow vehicle will gain ground pivoting as you describe. However the rule states that you cannot be more than 6" from the starting point which eliminates that.
Otherwise I agree.
I'm not sure how. If you flip the vehicle180 degrees, so the front bumper now occupies where the back bumper was, there should be no gaining of ground, since you're doing it from the center of the vehicle. Battle Wagons are a good example for a longish vehicle. If you have a diagram of how it doing a 180 suddenly makes it longer than it was when it was stationary. I'd like to see. Not being snarky, but serious here.
To measure the distance a vehicle has moved you need only concern yourself with the center of the vehicle. If the center point, the axis around which a vehicle pivots, did not move more then 6 inches from where it started then the vehicle has only moved combat speed.
DJGietzen wrote: To measure the distance a vehicle has moved you need only concern yourself with the center of the vehicle. If the center point, the axis around which a vehicle pivots, did not move more then 6 inches from where it started then the vehicle has only moved combat speed.
This has been pointed out in the thread already that no this is not how it is done anymore this edition
Vehicles can turn any number of times as they move, just like any other model. Vehicles turn by pivoting on the spot about their centre-point, rather then wheeling round. Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving, so a vehicle that only pivots in the movement phase count as stationary (however immobilised vehicles can't even pivot). Pivoting is always done from the centre of a vehicle to prevent it from accidentally moving further than intended or allowed.
Only way the I see a thread concluding anything different is by intentionally taking words and letters out of the book and rescrambling them to form new statements from scratch.
I have not seen anything in this thread to suggest the rules do not want, instruct or expect you to measure to and from the center of a vehicles hull as you would the center of an infantry model's base. In fact the line in the BRB "Pivoting is always done from the center of a vehicle to prevent it from accidentally moving further than intended or allowed." Implies exactly that method of measuring.
The book also states that you go from corner to corner on vehicles to determine facing being fired on. Since you go from corner to corner but my Nightscythe does not have corners does that make it all front? Implications are not rules nor should they be used to make judgements.
Well I was kinda using that reference because I was referring to the part where his 180 degree pivot doesn't increase his movement at all and if he only moved 6" before pivoting then he only moved combat speed not cruise speed.
Ok since this derailed into how vehicles and measuring distances are concerned then I will go to
page 72
As vehicles do not have bases, the normal rule of measuring to and from a base cannot be used. Instead for distances involving a vehicle, measure to and from their hull, ignore gun barrels, dozer blades, antennas, banners and other decorative elements.
The centre of the vehicle is only the reference point to use when turning the vehicle in a pivot. For distance traveled you use the hull.
It's not like this stuff in the rules is far away in different sections. It's all on the two pages facing each other. Only read bold parts? Don't read? Cherry Pick?
The center point on a vehicle can be debateable if it's a skimmer with a flying base. Most people would pivot on the flying base, but the base may not be plased exactly at what people might consider the "middle" of the vehicle, such as the case with wave serpents.
You still use the model hull edge as the measuring distance and the centre of the hull as the reference for pivoting. For flyers it's page 84 and for Skimmers it's page 89. The bases are ignored for each unless the Flyer is in close combat or embarking/disembarking units in hover. Skimmers the base is ignored unless they are being charged or rammed.
I'm not seeing the problem here. If you pivot around the center of the vehicle, no part of the vehicle should be further than if the vehicle had stayed in the same spot.
Here's a diagram of what happens if you spin a tank so that the center point doesn't move, ie pivoting around the center.
For Wave Serpents, that's 15" from where the back hatch was. Still no gain over the expected (6" from the front), but part of the vehicle did move 15" from where it started.
Unless they mean no part may end more than 6" away from where any part started. Which would allow what was shown in the diagram, but not any turning abuses.
The problem with the above, as we saw in 6th, is 90° turns. Let's imagine a vehicle that is 6"x3". It starts sideways. Moves up 6". Then rotates on center. The front end is now 9" forward instead of 6".
1. Simply put: No part of a vehicle's hull (or a model's base) can be more than X" away from where the vehicle started its movement.
2. Yep, this can be annoying, but it is key for determining whether or not a vehicle (model) gets into range with a weapon and where the point of disembarkation is. Also, whether or not models are in range for a turn one charge.
3. It stops the following BS: a) Lining up your bikes sideways, then pivoting and moving forward 12, magically being 13.5" closer to your opponent, and now able to shoot things you shouldn't be able to, or charge things you shouldn't be able to. b) Moving your Wave Serpent 6" forward, then spinning it (rotating around the center) before disembarking, magically gaining a free 3" of movement. [Note: I did this for a long time, until I was politely, but firmly educated as to why it was both against the rules and a bit of D-Baggery.] c) Deploying your Lynx (a, what 13" long model?) sideways to the deployment line, then rotating it, gaining at least 6" of range on the Pulsar, and then moving 12", now able to get LoS on something you otherwise would not. [Note: A player recently tried this one on me, in a tournament. I politely referred him to the rules referenced above about measuring from the hull and no part moving more than X". He got it; I won the game.] d) Land Raider & Rhino Rotate and Rush! A free 4" and 2.5" or so respectively, yes?
Problems (often) arise when the pivoting is not accounted for in the movement, but rather is thought of as being done before moving or after completing a move. If you resolve it as a simultaneous translation and rotation, you shouldn't have issues.
For Wave Serpents, that's 15" from where the back hatch was. Still no gain over the expected (6" from the front), but part of the vehicle did move 15" from where it started.
Unless they mean no part may end more than 6" away from where any part started. Which would allow what was shown in the diagram, but not any turning abuses.
The problem with the above, as we saw in 6th, is 90° turns. Let's imagine a vehicle that is 6"x3". It starts sideways. Moves up 6". Then rotates on center. The front end is now 9" forward instead of 6".
I will say that I assumed they're talking no part ending more than 6" away, as this is how everything else in the game moves. No part of a unit can move outside of 6" doesn't prevent me from turning my bikes sideways, so long as they're within 6" of where the front of the bike started.
As for 90, if I'm understanding this scenario correctly, wouldn't I make my 90° pivot before I move the vehicle? And pivoting on the spot doesn't count as movement, if I'm going off the rule that just pivoting isn't movement, and it would happen before the movement begins. The tank technically shouldn't drive sideways, it has to do the initial pivot of 90, which isn't movement, and then drive 6" forward.... so not gaining any ground beyond where it was prior to movement but after the pivot.
Throw in then that if you make a 90 pivot after you do all your movement, unless you have a vehicle wider than than long, you're actually losing ground if you pivot around the center. Doing a 90° pivot after you've moved your vehicle, if you pivot correctly around the center, means that the vehicle actually won't be ending the full 6" away, and you aren't allowed to slide it sideways the extra inch or whatever.
Then again, I guess the rules don't say a vehicle has to drive forward or backwards, which makes logical sense, it's just how everyone I know plays it.
It doesn't move up sideways, it moves forward. All vehicles are provided a facing with it's own armour including a front. Move forward based on your front facing. If you are facing 90 degrees from the direction you are desiring to go then you have to pivot the vehicle to face the direction you wish to go then move based on the rules for measuring distance then if you want to face somewhere else you pivot again. Work it out step by step that way if it's too confusing. Most of us can place the vehicle it's desired distance and have it facing where we want in a simple move that already accounts for all the steps and it may seem confusing but breaking down how we moved is as written above.
DCannon4Life wrote: Moving your Wave Serpent 6" forward, then spinning it (rotating around the center) before disembarking, magically gaining a free 3" of movement.
Where are you getting these 3" by pivoting around the center? Did you see the diagram I posted about proper vehicle pivoting of 180s? If you pivot around the exact center of the vehicle (not around a flying base or anything like that), you end with your rear exactly where your front should have been. take a ruler, and spin it around the 6" mark. The ruler doesn't gain any ground, the 0" end will be exactly where the 12" end was, spinning something around its perfect center will never make a 180 gain ground.
ProwlerPC wrote: It doesn't move up sideways, it moves forward. All vehicles are provided a facing with it's own armour including a front. Move forward based on your front facing. If you are facing 90 degrees from the direction you are desiring to go then you have to pivot the vehicle to face the direction you wish to go then move based on the rules for measuring distance then if you want to face somewhere else you pivot again. Work it out step by step that way if it's too confusing. Most of us can place the vehicle it's desired distance and have it facing where we want in a simple move that already accounts for all the steps and it may seem confusing but breaking down how we moved is as written above.
Nothing you posted about vehicle movement actually exists in rules, however. Vehicles may freely move in any direction they wish, with no requirement to drive "forwards"
If you disagree, a page citation and quote is required
Yes this thread nails it. The point of the phrasing talking about pivoting from the center is to prevent pivoting corner to corner and "walking" your way up the board through free pivoting movement. It does not prevent, as an example because it's the best abuser of this mechanic: a Dark Eldar raider from lining up on the deployment line sideways, pivoting 90 degrees on its center, essentially gaining 3" of "free" movement, and then moving at either combat or cruising speed, because the pivoting is not moving.
What it does prevent is using something like the point of the shock prow as my pivot point, then using the rear of the vehicle as the pivot point and "walking" again, etc., still not technically moving.
Exactly. You can start an Eldar Raider in a "horizontal" standing, rotate it 90 degrees to 'gain' 3" and then move 6"... but you'd have to rotate it another 90 degrees, thus 'losing' 3" and ensuring that no part of the hull ends more than 6" from where the vehicle's hull started (or 12" or whatever you're moving).
Jambles wrote: So, how exactly does one determine accurately that any point on the hull isn't six inches from where it began? Especially when you factor in pivoting.
Did everyone remember to bring their protractors to the FLGS? I've got my TI-83 if anybody needs it.
Well, I use a ruler. It works pretty well. I suppose you could bring a protractor and a TI-83, but that seems like overkill. If you need that much computing power to measure 6 inches, you're doing it wrong.
For a real answer, I always know which direction I want to move and where I want to end up. I generally place the ruler next to the vehicle, measuring 6 inches from the hull. I place a die there. I then pivot and move, making sure not to exceed the distance marked by the die. That way, there is no need to remember the original location. You just need to never go past your 'marker'.
Lets re-frame the scenario a little bit. Lets take a model on an oblong base, such as an independent character on a bike. Can that model be lined up horizontally to the edge of the deployment zone, pivot to face forward then move 12 inches forward?
Jambles wrote: So, how exactly does one determine accurately that any point on the hull isn't six inches from where it began? Especially when you factor in pivoting.
Did everyone remember to bring their protractors to the FLGS? I've got my TI-83 if anybody needs it.
Well, I use a ruler. It works pretty well. I suppose you could bring a protractor and a TI-83, but that seems like overkill. If you need that much computing power to measure 6 inches, you're doing it wrong.
For a real answer, I always know which direction I want to move and where I want to end up. I generally place the ruler next to the vehicle, measuring 6 inches from the hull. I place a die there. I then pivot and move, making sure not to exceed the distance marked by the die. That way, there is no need to remember the original location. You just need to never go past your 'marker'.
That's only one part of the hull, though. Did you leave a reference framing the entire vehicle, and measure from every point on the vehicle to it's final position?
If you pivoted, you could easily end up with a part of the hull much further than 6", as has been described previously.
DJGietzen wrote: Lets re-frame the scenario a little bit. Lets take a model on an oblong base, such as an independent character on a bike. Can that model be lined up horizontally to the edge of the deployment zone, pivot to face forward then move 12 inches forward?
If you pivot as you move you can't end up with part of the hull further than 6" if you moved 6".
Because your move has not ended until you are done with all of it, including pivotting. Pivoting isn't a free action you can do before moving or after moving.
Pivoting, then measuring a 6 inch move after is wrong.
Moving 6", stopping and pivoting is moving after you moved.
Measuring from the hull, pivoting, and them measuring to final point being 6" is a 6" move. This however gets weird when pivoting greater than 90" At this point technically you have to measure the starting hull point to the opposite hull point to see how far the model has moved on the table, because if you measure from the Front to the back and the vehicle turned 180 degrees during the move you can end up moving the vehicle much further than the 6" it went.
I miss the turning wheel they had in 2nd edition.
other side rant- pivoting is how they describe turning, you are turning the vehicle not pivoting it when you move. Pivoting just tells you how you turn it.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
DJGietzen wrote: Lets re-frame the scenario a little bit. Lets take a model on an oblong base, such as an independent character on a bike. Can that model be lined up horizontally to the edge of the deployment zone, pivot to face forward then move 12 inches forward?
Pivoting is done as you move, not before or after. So the pivot counts as part of the movement, you would measure from where the model started before you did anything to move it (the pivot) and then the final spot to see how it went, in this case you would move it back an inch or so because you went more than 12".
Pivoting is only said to not count as moving if the vehicle remained stationary. Which is kind of a silly sentence since something turning isn't stationary...
Nothing you posted about vehicle movement actually exists in rules, however. Vehicles may freely move in any direction they wish, with no requirement to drive "forwards"
If you disagree, a page citation and quote is required
You are correct. After rereading all rules from movement phase to when it goes into the section describing terrain the only places I found where it specifies the vehicle having to turn and move straight forward is when a Tank does a Ram/Tank shock, when a flyer is in Zoom mode and when a flying creature is in swoop mode. Which on a different note makes me wonder if there are people out there who try to ram another vehicle while moving sideways with an Ork BW and having that broadside provide the largest area possible to tank shock all infantry inbetween and still take advantage of the line that says the rammer always uses the front armour for calculating ram strength. But yeah aside from those exceptions I don't see any line anywhere else saying forwards.
easysauce wrote: movement rules section states no part of the base may end up more then 6" away from a start point
vehicle rules tell us to use hull instead of base,
ergo, no point of the hull may be more then 6" away by RAW
vehicle rules specifically also state to pivot the vehicle "so it doesn't gain extra movement"
so no, you cannot pivot a vehicle to gain extra movement.
Which movement rules section states this 6" rule? Are you referring to pg 18? I hope not, because that is a specific example of infantry models. If this is not the correct page for your rule citation, can you hook me up with the page number?
So i spent some time to get this explained in a picture.
To Nem, but all can try this:
"No part of the vehicle can be further than 6" or you have moved more than you allotted distance"
Now please set up a "long" vehicle, such as a Dark Eldar Raider or Necron Ghost Ark on your Table.
Now assume you move at maximum 6" for 3 turns of the game
All the Red lines on the diagram MUST be 6" (or less)
After these 3 quite simple turns of play, measure the distance (Green lines) from the centre point of the vehicle (or any other part of the Hull you wish to pick)
I can guarantee that your vehicle is now MUCH further than 18" away from its starting position.
Feel free to add a 4th Turn just to make sure the vehicle is facing the same way again, and measure.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Kriswall wrote: For a real answer, I always know which direction I want to move and where I want to end up. I generally place the ruler next to the vehicle, measuring 6 inches from the hull. I place a die there. I then pivot and move, making sure not to exceed the distance marked by the die. That way, there is no need to remember the original location. You just need to never go past your 'marker'.
Not the correct way of measuring travel for vehicles though, but a good simple method to get on with the game without measuring every 0.1 inch (Also my HIWPI)
For the RaW, follow the link given previously or feel free to ask as i was the main advocate last time =P
DCannon4Life wrote: Moving your Wave Serpent 6" forward, then spinning it (rotating around the center) before disembarking, magically gaining a free 3" of movement.
Where are you getting these 3" by pivoting around the center? Did you see the diagram I posted about proper vehicle pivoting of 180s? If you pivot around the exact center of the vehicle (not around a flying base or anything like that), you end with your rear exactly where your front should have been. take a ruler, and spin it around the 6" mark. The ruler doesn't gain any ground, the 0" end will be exactly where the 12" end was, spinning something around its perfect center will never make a 180 gain ground.
Say I had a Wave Serpent full of fire dragons, I move the wave serpent forward 6", pivot it 180, and then disembark my fire dragons, rather than needing to use the disembark move to move them to the front of he wave serpent, I can now use their disembark move to move 6" closer to you. That's where the extra 3" of comes, not from the Wave Serpent, but from the Unit embarked.
My view, pivot it all you want, so long as you don't pivot after you've completed your move and started disembarking
As far as I care yeah, the way I see that example is that is no different to pivoting 180 and then reversing 6", and I haven't seen a rule that says you must move vehicles straight forward
statu wrote: As far as I care yeah, the way I see that example is that is no different to pivoting 180 and then reversing 6", and I haven't seen a rule that says you must move vehicles straight forward
Which is correct. As far as RaW in concerned, as long as you measure the travel from the same point on the vehicle, and pivot around the centre, you can spin-top your way across the board In the end, you win some, you loose some, and there is no "distance cheat", both methods have vehicles that can take advantage of the situation.
Start perpendicular, move 6" up measured from center, then pivot? You've just gained about 3".
So, in trying to prevent people from getting an extra 1-2" when moving in the direction they are facing, they instead get about 3" when moving sideways?
Bharring wrote: What about the reverse of the Ghost Ark picture?
Start perpendicular, move 6" up measured from center, then pivot? You've just gained about 3".
So, in trying to prevent people from getting an extra 1-2" when moving in the direction they are facing, they instead get about 3" when moving sideways?
Yes, you would gain 3".
What about this: "Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving, so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as Stationary."
So you deploy your Ghost ark "perpendicular", and then ONLY Pivot. Your range is 3" closer to the enemy. But RaW it is 100% allowed.
By the way, deploying all of your "long Vehicles" perpendicular and then pivoting before moving is completely legal
Bharring wrote: But that rule doesn't apply, because the Ark moved 6".
If it did, you could move a Predator 12", then, as long as you pivoted, fire all weapons at full BS...
You didn't understand my argument then. I am not saying that the above applies when you move.
I am saying that your "complaint" that "You've just gained about 3" " is not valid. As it happens even if you do not move.
I have explained in the previous thread how vehicles move. It is quite simple, and pivoting is not included in any distance travelled.
Some help, possibly
Spoiler:
BlackTalos wrote: Because there is no distance gained from the pivot, it's in the rules:
Pivoting is always done from the centre of a vehicle to prevent it from accidentally moving further than intended or allowed.
That line is irrelevant if you count the pivots as movement (each one of them).
If we follow the method by Nem, we get this:
I believe the green line is your travel, which is maxed at 12". If you ignore this, you can place your Rhino "in the bubble" at 12" away (Blue line), with significant movement gain...
Naw wrote: "Pivoting is always done from the centre of a vehicle to prevent it from accidentally moving further than intended or allowed."
I do believe that this rule was to stop this:
Whereas this is fully within RaW:
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ventiscogreen wrote: Also, the rules state to measure from the vehicles hull, which means I could choose to measure from the CENTER of the vehicle and therefore render the entire argument pointless since my vehicle will not have traveled from that point of reference any more than I desire no matter how many times I spin in a circle making tornado noises into the mic, irritating my Shas'O.
That is exactly what the RaW tell you to do, and if you play that way it is completely right and breaks no rules. Some disagree
BlackTalos wrote: As i posted above, the pivoting reference is simply against the picture with the Rhino, and how pivoting on a corner would gain distance, even if you were "only pivots in the Movement phase counts as stationary". Someone posted it before: If you deploy your Ghost Ark sideways along the deployment line and "Simply Pivot" are you not considered Stationary? Do you simply "disregard" this version of "gaining movement"?
Or simply follow the Vehicle rules because they are not Infantry. A Vehicle moves by measuring it's travel distance. Simple enough, as most players play it that way. This has not changed from 6th. Measuring from A to B 12" and placing you vehicle on the end is indeed something you can do with skimmers, but not "ground" vehicles.
Well, the problem is that most people tend to move their models the way they would in real life. (i.e. they drive them forward, turn, etc.) However, there is absolutely nothing in the rules to support this. So, when I move my models I simply do the following:
I measure from where the model is to where I want it to end up, noting how far that distance is. (I measure from a point on the hull which is closest to where I want to go)
I then move it to its new location, facing in the direction I choose. When doing so, I take care to insure that no part of the model is "past" the point I measured to.
Please note that doing it this way essentially combines the movement and pivot portions of the move. This sometimes results in "crazy" situations where my tanks drive sideways. While it does not seem to fit what we think should happen, it satisfies the rules for the game.
Green is Best! wrote: While it does not seem to fit what we think should happen, it satisfies the rules for the game.
Thing is, measuring "from A to B" does not, actually, satisfy the rules of the game. You are saying that you measure the blue line, but both RaW and HIWPI, i'd force you to measure only per the green line:
So when exactly is it okay to use your "just measure max distance" method? Any time you're doing anything other than moving in a straight line somewhere, such as maneuvering around any sort of terrain or other models, you need to make sure that your vehicle clears it without going through it. Which means you can almost never do a move the way you described it. Sure, you can slide a tank sideways.... you can't, however, slide your tank sideways an extra inch because you did a mid-movement pivot.
As Talos showed earlier, if you just measure from a point to a point, without incorporating movement gained or lost by pivots, you're not going to end up in the right spot. If you're facing forward, drive 6", and then do a pivot, you're going to lose distance if you're long. If you pivot sideways first, and drive sideways 6", then you're going to end in the same spot as if you pivoted after moving, because the spot you measured from is where you lost that extra distance. What you cannot do is pivot while moving, saying that as long as you're ending within 6" you're fine. You'd have to split the movement into pieces, where you move forward 3", pivot (and gain lose that bit of ground depending on your facing), then do another 3" move measuring from your new facing, not using the original measurement. This picture was the one that showed what I'm talking about.
I used to agree that measuring center point to center point was the best method. However, the new rule pretty much says you cannot have any part of the model further away than max distance allowed to move.
When going around terrain, I just do the best I can to measure distance. If it calls for it, I do segmented movements to best figure it out. (i.e. move 3", set down remeasure, etc.).
However, I think the bigger concern was the pivot to gain distance that used to be prevalent (i.e. start with landraiders sideways on the deployment edge, pivot 90" to start movement, then move 12")
kingbobbito wrote: You'd have to split the movement into pieces, where you move forward 3", pivot (and gain lose that bit of ground depending on your facing), then do another 3" move measuring from your new facing, not using the original measurement.
This is indeed how the current rules for movement of vehicles require you to measure. Full explanation is in the linked thread.
Green is Best! wrote: However, I think the bigger concern was the pivot to gain distance that used to be prevalent (i.e. start with landraiders sideways on the deployment edge, pivot 90" to start movement, then move 12")
Which is still completely allowed, even in the new 7th Ed Rule set.
If we follow the interpretation of the "you cannot have any part of the model further away than max distance allowed to move", then please try this, and report your findings, i an curious:
So i spent some time to get this explained in a picture.
To Nem, but all can try this:
"No part of the vehicle can be further than 6" or you have moved more than you allotted distance"
Now please set up a "long" vehicle, such as a Dark Eldar Raider or Necron Ghost Ark on your Table.
Now assume you move at maximum 6" for 3 turns of the game
All the Red lines on the diagram MUST be 6" (or less)
After these 3 quite simple turns of play, measure the distance (Green lines) from the centre point of the vehicle (or any other part of the Hull you wish to pick)
I can guarantee that your vehicle is now MUCH further than 18" away from its starting position.
Feel free to add a 4th Turn just to make sure the vehicle is facing the same way again, and measure.
Don't get me wrong, I fully support moving from center point to center point and pivot all you want. It is the easiest way to keep things honest. There are times when you pivot an oblong vehicle that will cause you to "gain" movement. However, there are also times where pivoting can cause you to lose movement. The main thing is that pivoting be done at the center of the vehicle, not off a corner to "swing" the vehicle around.
I thought there was a passage in the new rules that states a model cannot have any part of it further than x inches away. (I believe it was referring to oblong shaped bases in this case). However, my recollection of rules is far from perfect these days. I will have to double check when I get home.
If you move six up, six up, six over, over the course of 3 turns, the point that moved has only moved about 13". So, 3 turns of diagonal movement should put you about 5" further, along the same vector.
Not sure what the implications of that are, though.
So i spent some time to get this explained in a picture.
To Nem, but all can try this:
"No part of the vehicle can be further than 6" or you have moved more than you allotted distance"
Now please set up a "long" vehicle, such as a Dark Eldar Raider or Necron Ghost Ark on your Table.
Now assume you move at maximum 6" for 3 turns of the game
All the Red lines on the diagram MUST be 6" (or less)
After these 3 quite simple turns of play, measure the distance (Green lines) from the centre point of the vehicle (or any other part of the Hull you wish to pick)
I can guarantee that your vehicle is now MUCH further than 18" away from its starting position.
Feel free to add a 4th Turn just to make sure the vehicle is facing the same way again, and measure.
well i can tell the first movement is further that 6 inches , measure form the back corners to the new position , its way further then 6 inches , unless i'm missing something
Bharring wrote: If you move six up, six up, six over, over the course of 3 turns, the point that moved has only moved about 13". So, 3 turns of diagonal movement should put you about 5" further, along the same vector.
Not sure what the implications of that are, though.
By that logic, the cars haven't moved anywhere at the end of the Daytona 500 because they end where they started. It's about actual distance traveled, not overall change in position. What implication would this have on the game, other than showing that driving in circles means you don't end the same place as driving in a straight line?
So i spent some time to get this explained in a picture.
To Nem, but all can try this:
"No part of the vehicle can be further than 6" or you have moved more than you allotted distance"
Now please set up a "long" vehicle, such as a Dark Eldar Raider or Necron Ghost Ark on your Table.
Now assume you move at maximum 6" for 3 turns of the game
All the Red lines on the diagram MUST be 6" (or less)
After these 3 quite simple turns of play, measure the distance (Green lines) from the centre point of the vehicle (or any other part of the Hull you wish to pick)
I can guarantee that your vehicle is now MUCH further than 18" away from its starting position.
Feel free to add a 4th Turn just to make sure the vehicle is facing the same way again, and measure.
well i can tell the first movement is further that 6 inches , measure form the back corners to the new position , its way further then 6 inches , unless i'm missing something
That's what I was referring to in my first post, and that post with the ghost ark the front may still be within 12 inches of where it started but the rear is well over 12 inches away from where it started. So when you pivot one corner rotates backwards and the other rotates forward and if you only move six the corner that rotated forwards will be 6 inches from where it started before the any other corner would which results in less movement on any vehicle any time you want to pivot.
I agree with the "pivot, move your allowed distance, pivot" people in this debate. It's how the rules read for me and for every perceived advantage it gives there's an equivalent advantage gained in the much more cumbersome system other people are suggesting.
If movement was that complex, they'd have included more picture diagrams of it in the vehicle section.
blaktoof wrote: Except that is not turning as you move, that is turning before and after you move and is explicitly not what you are told to do.
I think I get your argument, being that the vehicle needs to literally be moving in order to use the "pivot on the spot" rule. Once the vehicle has moved to its final location, it is no longer moving and cannot pivot on the spot.
My counterpoint to that is that all the player has to do is pivot something silly like 1/100 of a second before it stops, thus still gaining all the extra movement while still technically "moving", allowing for the pivot.
Someone could do that, but their movement is the measure of their start position and end position, so if the turn(pivot) took them past 6" they are no longer moving 6" or less.
in the current edition we cannot move and measure the move and then pivot, the move is measured when it is done moving- and if turning is done as moving you aren't done moving.
blaktoof wrote: Someone could do that, but their movement is the measure of their start position and end position, so if the turn(pivot) took them past 6" they are no longer moving 6" or less.
in the current edition we cannot move and measure the move and then pivot, the move is measured when it is done moving- and if turning is done as moving you aren't done moving.
Where in the vehicles section does it say that you aren't allowed to gain ground by pivoting, and that the entirety of the vehicle has to end within the move distance? You measure where the center of the tank is, because pivoting doesn't count as movement, as a 90 turn that makes my gun closer to my target doesn't count as movement. If pivoting doesn't count as moving, how can you say that it subtracts from the distance you're allowed to move?
kingbobbito wrote: Where in the vehicles section does it say that you aren't allowed to gain ground by pivoting, and that the entirety of the vehicle has to end within the move distance?
easysauce wrote: movement rules section states no part of the base may end up more then 6" away from a start point
vehicle rules tell us to use hull instead of base,
ergo, no point of the hull may be more then 6" away by RAW vehicle rules specifically also state to pivot the vehicle "so it doesn't gain extra movement"
so no, you cannot pivot a vehicle to gain extra movement.
kingbobbito wrote: because pivoting doesn't count as movement, as a 90 turn that makes my gun closer to my target doesn't count as movement. If pivoting doesn't count as moving, how can you say that it subtracts from the distance you're allowed to move?
So i spent some time to get this explained in a picture.
To Nem, but all can try this: "No part of the vehicle can be further than 6" or you have moved more than you allotted distance"
Now please set up a "long" vehicle, such as a Dark Eldar Raider or Necron Ghost Ark on your Table. Now assume you move at maximum 6" for 3 turns of the game All the Red lines on the diagram MUST be 6" (or less)
After these 3 quite simple turns of play, measure the distance (Green lines) from the centre point of the vehicle (or any other part of the Hull you wish to pick)
I can guarantee that your vehicle is now MUCH further than 18" away from its starting position.
Feel free to add a 4th Turn just to make sure the vehicle is facing the same way again, and measure.
well i can tell the first movement is further that 6 inches , measure form the back corners to the new position , its way further then 6 inches , unless i'm missing something
Kaela_Mensha_Khaine wrote: That's what I was referring to in my first post, and that post with the ghost ark the front may still be within 12 inches of where it started but the rear is well over 12 inches away from where it started. So when you pivot one corner rotates backwards and the other rotates forward and if you only move six the corner that rotated forwards will be 6 inches from where it started before the any other corner would which results in less movement on any vehicle any time you want to pivot.
Because most of the people arguing "against" in the old thread agreed that the rules said "any part of the vehicle" had to be within 6" of the original position. Not that "any part" could only be at 6" from where that specific part started (so the back left corner can only 6" away from where the back left corner was) I believe these were relevant at the time:
Would that mean that a razorback that move forward 6", and does a 180 to unload cargo can no longer unload? The rear access has ended it's move ~10" from the starting location (while the front has ended only 2"). If this counts as more than 6" of movement, it pretty much kills most transports.
-Matt
Gravmyr wrote: I think the biggest problem people have is the belief that transports should be turned around and deposit you a handful of inches away from your target. They should be there to get you across most of the way not doorstep to doorstep. Why would you ever logically present the rear of your vehicle with open access to the interior to the enemy?
Looking at the current rules and what Nem has put fourth, most of the time, unless there is bunch of strange things going on, you should be able to simply measure out 6" from the furthest point and put your rear there, if going for the prob me here look. It's simple, straight forward, and prevents any of the pivot shenanigans from happening.
The GA for the Crons is open topped so no it doesn't affect them and they would be the one that would be able to take advantage of the pivot crud the most.
Would that mean that a razorback that move forward 6", and does a 180 to unload cargo can no longer unload? The rear access has ended it's move ~10" from the starting location (while the front has ended only 2"). If this counts as more than 6" of movement, it pretty much kills most transports.
-Matt
This is pretty much the best example "against". All comments in favor of "no part of the vehicle can be more than 6inches from where it started" would move their transport 1" before rotating to unload. Feel free to play it that way...
I think that whatever your starting position is, as long as the center point has not moved more than 6", you are fully within RaW, even if you prow was facing left, and is now facing forward..
some bloke wrote: so here's the thing - if no part of the hull can move more than 6", does that mean that if a monolith (6" square and can only move 6") that turns 180 degrees cannot move any further?
Dracos wrote: "from where it started" : is the word "it" here referring to "part of its base" or the point you measured from?
There are some practical problem if we have to measure all parts of the hull to make sure that no part moved more than permitted...
Not really, just measure from the point that will move the furthest.
So if you're going to drive forwards and do a 180 degree turn, measure from the back because no bit of the vehicle can possibly end further than that.
In regard to the ghost ark, it is again common sense that if the vehicle ends perpendicular to its initial position and the front of the vehicle has moved its maximum of 12" then the rear must have moved more than 12". Pretty basic Trigonometry to be honest
Assuming you know the end position you want when you start moving...
For me its VERY simple. Measuring movement distance from the center of the model to the center of the model when moving is the only way pivoting around the center of the model can prevent moving too far accidentally. To me this is clearly the RAI but its not RAW.Movement rules, when put under close inspection have serious problems RAW and they all stem from 1 line in the rules. That line is that if a model pivots while moving no part of its base can end more then 6 inches from where it started.
Problem 1) In my experience most people play allowing a model on a round base, such as a space marine to pivot on its base as it moved with out affecting movement distance. However, if you go by strict RAW a space marine model that will rotate 180 degrees on its base while moving only has a movement of about 5 inches. In fact any amount of rotation or pivot will reduce the models moment to below 6 inches, but that is not the way it has even been played by any one I have ever met. This is because models with a perfectly round base have almost no change with how they interact with all of the other rules base on the direction they are facing.
Problem 2) Any model with a movement speed greater then 6" can only move at that speed if it does not pivot while it moves. When a model pivots when it moves no part of its base may end more then 6 inches from where it started. So if My space marine biker moves 9 inches and while doing so pivots 4 degrees to the right then every part of his base will be more then 6 inches from where it started. No part of the bike movement rules gives us an override to the pivot while move 6 inch max distance. Again no body every plays it this way.
Problem 3) If we use this rule with vehicles, as many have said we should, replace references to the mode'ls base with the vehicle's hull we get some more comical errors. A land raider could never pivot 180 degrees, even if it traveled no distance. Thats because a land raider is over 6 inches long . Now some might say that a land raider that pivots on the spot did not move and that's actually wrong. You can only pivot while moving, if a model only pivots while moving it is treated as having remained stationary but still needs to follow the movement rules as it pivots because it is still technically moving.
kingbobbito wrote: Where in the vehicles section does it say that you aren't allowed to gain ground by pivoting, and that the entirety of the vehicle has to end within the move distance?
easysauce wrote: movement rules section states no part of the base may end up more then 6" away from a start point
vehicle rules tell us to use hull instead of base,
ergo, no point of the hull may be more then 6" away by RAW vehicle rules specifically also state to pivot the vehicle "so it doesn't gain extra movement"
so no, you cannot pivot a vehicle to gain extra movement.
No, this is a quote from someone else on the forum. Find me a quote in the vehicle section that says no point of the hull can move more than 6 inches. Otherwise what you're saying is that a vehicle that does a 180 pivot can't move any further than just that., even something small like a rhino is only allowed to move what, 2" if it does a 180? Land raiders can't move an inch if they pivot 180, or they count as having moved 6"?
EDIT: This is what the rules give us:
Pivoting is always done from the centre of a vehicle to prevent it from accidentally moving further than intended or allowed.
Note that pivoting is done from the center "to prevent...moving further than intended".... meaning that pivoting is done in a way that the vehicle won't move any further. If pivoting is done so that you don't move any further, how can you say that pivoting somehow counts as moving further? It doesn't say "the vehicle may not pivot if this will cause it to move further".
@kingbobbito. Not direct quotes but...When a model pivots while moving no part of its base may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started. This is in the movement phase section of the rule book. Since vehicles do not have a base, instead measure to and from the vehicles hull. This is in the vehicles section of the rule book. The logical extension of these statements taken together would mean that when a model that is a vehicle pivots while moving no part of its hull may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started.
DJGietzen wrote: @kingbobbito. Not direct quotes but...When a model pivots while moving no part of its base may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started. This is in the movement phase section of the rule book. Since vehicles do not have a base, instead measure to and from the vehicles hull. This is in the vehicles section of the rule book. The logical extension of these statements taken together would mean that when a model that is a vehicle pivots while moving no part of its hull may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started.
But then we run into the issue I said about.... a pivoting before moving land raider that moves an inch will count as moving more than 6, while just pivoting doesn't count as moving at all? And as you said, no one would try to argue that if I pivot a marine he loses an inch of movement, as that's just absurd. With infantry it's always played that they can do a pirouette as it moves, and it's still going to move 6". Unless gaming is totally different outside of the stores I've been to?
And there's this:
As vehicle models do not usually have bases, the normal rule of measuring distances to or from a base cannot be used.
DJGietzen wrote: @kingbobbito. Not direct quotes but...When a model pivots while moving no part of its base may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started. This is in the movement phase section of the rule book. Since vehicles do not have a base, instead measure to and from the vehicles hull. This is in the vehicles section of the rule book. The logical extension of these statements taken together would mean that when a model that is a vehicle pivots while moving no part of its hull may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started.
No need to make a logical extension based on those statements taken together. You seem to have missed reading the very first paragraph of the Movement Phase section. In the first paragraph it states: "For the time being, we'll just explain how squads of infantry move. Vehicles, Jump units, Bikes and certain other units move in different ways to represent their greater mobility, and these will be discussed in full detail later."
Then when you go to the vehicles it is pretty clear how to move. It appears that whatever advantage or disadvantage pivoting from the center and measuring from the hull entails it's considered negligible. Probably for expediency, maybe to spare themselves 30-40 pages of hand walking customers through highly detailed intricate and micro measured rules that account for even factors found within Einstein's theory of general relativity.
kingbobbito wrote: Where in the vehicles section does it say that you aren't allowed to gain ground by pivoting, and that the entirety of the vehicle has to end within the move distance?
easysauce wrote: movement rules section states no part of the base may end up more then 6" away from a start point
vehicle rules tell us to use hull instead of base,
ergo, no point of the hull may be more then 6" away by RAW vehicle rules specifically also state to pivot the vehicle "so it doesn't gain extra movement"
so no, you cannot pivot a vehicle to gain extra movement.
kingbobbito wrote: because pivoting doesn't count as movement, as a 90 turn that makes my gun closer to my target doesn't count as movement. If pivoting doesn't count as moving, how can you say that it subtracts from the distance you're allowed to move?
Pivoting ALONE doesn't count as movement
WRONG!!!
Any form of pivoting "DOES NOT COUNT AS MOVING". There's a comma after that statement. After the comma all the author is doing is giving one example, a popular one at that.
So essentially, any pivot done by a vehicle never counts as official movement for ANYTHING, except when you're immobile. The moving 6" only applies to bona fide MOVEMENT. Pivoting does not qualify whatsoever.
So much made up gak and misunderstood rules in this thread.
The rules are simple and easily abused.
I will go point by point
1)pivoting is done on the center point. This establishes how vehicles pivot.
2) pivoting alone keeps your vehicle stationary for rules purposes (# of weapons you can fire and your assumed ws if you have none)
3) bases are generally round, and the "any part of your base" bit is more about having your base exist beyond 6" from where the "front" of your model was to begin with. This topic bears more discussion, so i will go there. When moving a space marine there is no problem with moving him straight in one direction 6" while simultaneously spinning the model 180 degrees, in the end the model has only made forward progress of 6". Vehicles are the same, so long as you move a total of 6" from your starting point with your model you are moving at combat speed. Also there is no definition as to which way you can move, so technically you can move sideways with a tank. Adding the oblong bases the regular movement and the core rules of "no part of the base further; we get a net result of pivoting the oblong sideways, then moving that 6" "forward" results in a movement of further than 6" in that direction, the sa n e applies to vehicles thus negating the "raider power slide" tactic. If you deploy sideways on your line, then pivot 90 you can still only end with your front 6" from your line(as otherwise a point if your hull is further than 6" from your starting point in that direction). A 180 degree turn will not at all put any point of your vehicle more than 6" from the vehicles starting point.
Kommissar Kel wrote: When moving a space marine there is no problem with moving him straight in one direction 6" while simultaneously spinning the model 180 degrees, in the end the model has only made forward progress of 6".
Is this a RAW/RAI/HIWPI statement? If its RAW how do you justify it when the rulebook states "As you move the models in a unit, they can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more then 6" away from where it started in the Movement phase."
....and as I write this it occurs to me I've been misreading that statement. Lets remove the pronouns. "As you move the models in a unit, the models in a unit can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of a model's base can finish the move more then 6" away from where the model started in the Movement phase." Because you measure to the model's base by measuring to the closest point on the model's base relative to the direction it will be moving (diagram on how to properly measure distance) you only need to measure to the farthest point on the models base in its final position and if the model has a round base that point will always be the same distance of travel.
The logical extension to using the outer edge of the hull would make this rule become "As you move the models in a vehicle unit, the models in a vehicle unit can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of a model's hull can finish the move more then 6" away from where the model started in the Movement phase."
So from the starting point of your dz you cannot end your movement across the table with any point on your vehicle more than 6" from your dz and still be considered moving combat speed(thus negating the raider power slide)
So does this mean certain vehicles are actually unable to pivot and move 6"? If they are 6" long/wide then any pivot and move would mean parts are further than 6" away from where they started
Unless they are over 12" long by less than an inch wide.
Its hard to explain the specifics without diagrams(and i am on a phone so can't do that) or some complicated geometry.
Basically in order for a vehicle to not be able to move after pivoting(while only trying to move at combat speed) it has to have a length radius that is 6" greater than its width radius.
DJGietzen wrote: Movement rules, when put under close inspection have serious problems RAW and they all stem from 1 line in the rules. That line is that if a model pivots while moving no part of its base can end more then 6 inches from where it started.
Gravmyr wrote: My problem with saying you always measure to the center in movement means you you have set precedent to measure there for all measurements to the hull. Do you require charges to reach that same point?
No, i made quite a big point earlier that "Distances" is not the same as "movement".
Distances: Measuring from Unit A to Unit B (charge distances, etc)
Movement: Measuring from a model "in a direction", "up to a distance"
The BRB explains very well how we measure distances. It also describes movement for Based models pretty well. Vehicle, as per this thread, is slightly less clear, but I think there is enough wording to make sense of it.
There is nothing saying exactly where you measure movement from, only that the Travel of what you measure does not exceed a distance. I would suggest taking it from the centre-point, only because the centre-point "does not move" when you Pivot (around the centre point).
Kommissar Kel wrote: Vehicles are the same, so long as you move a total of 6" from your starting point with your model you are moving at combat speed. Also there is no definition as to which way you can move, so technically you can move sideways with a tank. Adding the oblong bases the regular movement and the core rules of "no part of the base further; we get a net result of pivoting the oblong sideways, then moving that 6" "forward" results in a movement of further than 6" in that direction, the sa n e applies to vehicles thus negating the "raider power slide" tactic. If you deploy sideways on your line, then pivot 90 you can still only end with your front 6" from your line(as otherwise a point if your hull is further than 6" from your starting point in that direction). A 180 degree turn will not at all put any point of your vehicle more than 6" from the vehicles starting point.
BlackTalos wrote: I still disagree with the "bubble method". As Insaniak posted a long time ago, you would move just like Infantry: Place your "bubble" and line yourself up to it, regardless of pivots or anything that happens along the way.
Vehicle rules are clear that you measure "Travel", a word i hope i do not need to define. ALL other rules will say "move". Vehicles movement is the only rule that uses the word "Travel", and i personally believe that this is not accidental.
And the post by insaniak showing a problem with the "bubble" method:
Ventiscogreen wrote: Pivoting is not only used to abuse transports. I've set up some dense cities that required a lot of pivots to get around a corner.
The thing is, if the interpretation being presented here is correct, there is absolutely no need to pivot the tank as it moves. If all that matters is how far the front edge of the tank has travelled from where it started, you would just measure your movement distance from the tank's starting position, pick it up, and put it down facing the appropriate direction against the measured point.
You would need to make sure that there is a wide enough path for it to travel from start to finish, but there would be no need to push it along the table, pivot it around the corner, and then push it along some more. How it gets around the corner becomes completely irrelevant... specifically, the rule that says that you pivot on the centre point instead of wheeling around a side edge would be redundant, because it would never actually come into play.
Unless they are over 12" long by less than an inch wide.
Its hard to explain the specifics without diagrams(and i am on a phone so can't do that) or some complicated geometry.
Basically in order for a vehicle to not be able to move after pivoting(while only trying to move at combat speed) it has to have a length radius that is 6" greater than its width radius.
I think this is what a vehicles maximum movement looks like.
No part of the vehicle can end outside the line which is 6" away from each part of the hull if you want to remain at combat speed.
Or point out what you disagree with from this method ( pivot as much as you want, as long as no part of your vehicle is 6" away from the "footprint" it had at the start of the phase)
To which Insaniak's post is very relevant
Automatically Appended Next Post:
DJGietzen wrote: The logical extension to using the outer edge of the hull would make this rule become "As you move the models in a vehicle unit, the models in a vehicle unit can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of a model's hull can finish the move more then 6" away from where the model started in the Movement phase."
And no, i do not personally think that this rule applies to vehicles. It clearly says "Base", and the Vehicle rules are also completely self contained:
• Combat Speed. A vehicle that travels up to 6" is said to be moving at Combat Speed. This represents the vehicle advancing slowly to keep firing, albeit with reduced firepower.
Vehicles can turn any number of times as they move, just like any other model. Vehicles turn by pivoting on the spot about their centre-point, rather than wheeling round. Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving,(...etc)
Yes bubble, for final position, in straight line movement.
For pivoting with movement where actual maneuvering is necessary; you are not often going to have to pivot more than 45 degrees at first, square shapes make pivot and move just fine with a 45.
If you are moving to a cross-roads you can still use the bubble for that 90 degree turn: move forward, measure from side hull to desired distance, pivot to see if that was even allowed, move your vehicle to measured point, add measured distance to initial straight line distance and you have final distance move
For pivoting with movement where actual maneuvering is necessary; you are not often going to have to pivot more than 45 degrees at first, square shapes make pivot and move just fine with a 45.
If you are moving to a cross-roads you can still use the bubble for that 90 degree turn: move forward, measure from side hull to desired distance, pivot to see if that was even allowed, move your vehicle to measured point, add measured distance to initial straight line distance and you have final distance move
And i shall provide with 2 examples of how your "Bubble technique" would create 2 "wrong" scenarios:
1) The blue line is clearly the "bubble" you refer to. Which rules say that you have to measure the green line? ("Travel")
BlackTalos wrote: You are saying that you measure the blue line, but both RaW and HIWPI, i'd force you to measure only per the green line:
2)Feel free to share results of this experiment if you have a long and thin Vehicle
So i spent some time to get this explained in a picture.
To Nem, but all can try this:
"No part of the vehicle can be further than 6" or you have moved more than you allotted distance"
Now please set up a "long" vehicle, such as a Dark Eldar Raider or Necron Ghost Ark on your Table.
Now assume you move at maximum 6" for 3 turns of the game
All the Red lines on the diagram MUST be 6" (or less)
After these 3 quite simple turns of play, measure the distance (Green lines) from the centre point of the vehicle (or any other part of the Hull you wish to pick)
I can guarantee that your vehicle is now MUCH further than 18" away from its starting position.
Feel free to add a 4th Turn just to make sure the vehicle is facing the same way again, and measure.
In example 1, why is the vehicle's grey position different for the blue line? Is that supposed to reflect a different potential stopping point? If so what are the dimensions of the vehicle? Its actually important to the math. In your example it looks to be about a 7:4 in terms of length to width. So for the vehicle to have "bubbled' 12 inches to that new position it needs to be about 1.17 inches wide and 2 inches long. and that's assuming the space between the two is .3 inches. That means, if I read your example right, the vehicle would have bubbled 12 but traveled 14.3 inches. Essentially gaining that 2.3 inches of movement.
Now, if we assume the vehicle is 4.5:3 like a rhino and it bubbles 12 inches then it traveled 16.4 inches, gaining 4.4 inches of movement And all of that is moot. I din't believe any one is suggesting that the bubble replaces the travel measurment, but rather then both are required and neither allows for a maximum beyond the movement speed.
Using the Rhino, and having it travel 3 inches forward,pivot 90 degrees right, travel another 6 inches, pivot 90 degrees left before traveling another 3 inches (a total of 12 inches of travel) in will only have bubbled 6.71 inches and therefore no part of its hull will be more then 12 inches from where the vehicle started so its A-OK.
DJGietzen wrote: In example 1, why is the vehicle's grey position different for the blue line? Is that supposed to reflect a different potential stopping point? If so what are the dimensions of the vehicle? Its actually important to the math. In your example it looks to be about a 7:4 in terms of length to width. So for the vehicle to have "bubbled' 12 inches to that new position it needs to be about 1.17 inches wide and 2 inches long. and that's assuming the space between the two is .3 inches. That means, if I read your example right, the vehicle would have bubbled 12 but traveled 14.3 inches. Essentially gaining that 2.3 inches of movement.
Now, if we assume the vehicle is 4.5:3 like a rhino and it bubbles 12 inches then it traveled 16.4 inches, gaining 4.4 inches of movement And all of that is moot. I din't believe any one is suggesting that the bubble replaces the travel measurment, but rather then both are required and neither allows for a maximum beyond the movement speed.
Using the Rhino, and having it travel 3 inches forward,pivot 90 degrees right, travel another 6 inches, pivot 90 degrees left before traveling another 3 inches (a total of 12 inches of travel) in will only have bubbled 6.71 inches and therefore no part of its hull will be more then 12 inches from where the vehicle started so its A-OK.
I beleive that you have that image in reverse.
First of all it is an approximation, i could attempt a collage with real pictures of Rhinos and buildings, but it would take me too long for what it's worth.
In the example above, the Blue line is exactly 12" in length. As the Rhino has rotated 90 degrees right, and then 90 degrees left, it would be, in relation to where it started, identical.
As such, any part of the vehicle, such as the front Right corner, will be 12" away from where the front Right corner was.
To which i disagree: You must measure the travel of the vehicle: You measure 3" forward, pivot 90 degrees, measure forward 6", pivot 90 degrees, measure another 3".
By simple pythagoras, i can tell you that the rhino will "only" be 8.485 inches from where it started, but it has traveled 12".
But the conclusion to the above drawing was that even though the "bubble method" (Blue line) is an argued interpretation, it creates a situation as that demonstrated here, and underlines what Insaniak explained quite well:
Ventiscogreen wrote: Pivoting is not only used to abuse transports. I've set up some dense cities that required a lot of pivots to get around a corner.
The thing is, if the interpretation being presented here is correct, there is absolutely no need to pivot the tank as it moves. If all that matters is how far the front edge of the tank has travelled from where it started, you would just measure your movement distance from the tank's starting position, pick it up, and put it down facing the appropriate direction against the measured point.
You would need to make sure that there is a wide enough path for it to travel from start to finish, but there would be no need to push it along the table, pivot it around the corner, and then push it along some more. How it gets around the corner becomes completely irrelevant... specifically, the rule that says that you pivot on the centre point instead of wheeling around a side edge would be redundant, because it would never actually come into play.
You can pivot as you move just like any other model, and you measure movement before moving the model. Measuring tells you where your hull may move up to, including any pivots.
Nem wrote: You can pivot during movement, and you measure movement before doing the move. Measuring tells you where your hull may move up to, including any pivots.
Which was proven flawed in the previous discussion.... The two example given above show exactly why.
If you measure your "bubble" before you move, then the rule that says that you pivot on the centre point instead of wheeling around a side edge would be redundant. Because you could wheel around and drive in zig-zags between any terrain, Unit or other, and "finish" your move as normal infantry might do....
Automatically Appended Next Post: As a quick re-cap, this is my current view on the RaW:
BlackTalos wrote: Indeed, the movement rules talk about bases, which vehicles do not have.
To move a vehicle, you have to use these rules:
VEHICLES IN THE MOVEMENT PHASE The distance a vehicle moves influences how accurately it can fire its weapons, as described later.
• Stationary. A vehicle that remains Stationary will be able to bring its full firepower to bear on the enemy.
• Combat Speed. A vehicle that travels up to 6" is said to be moving at Combat Speed. This represents the vehicle advancing slowly to keep firing, albeit with reduced firepower.
• Cruising Speed. A vehicle that travels more than 6" and up to 12" is said to be moving at Cruising Speed. This represents the vehicle concentrating on moving as fast as possible – all of its firepower will be wildly inaccurate.
Vehicles can turn any number of times as they move, just like any other model. Vehicles turn by pivoting on the spot about their centre-point, rather than wheeling round. Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving, so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as Stationary (however, Immobilised vehicles cannot even pivot on the spot). Pivoting is always done from the centre of a vehicle to prevent it from accidentally moving further than intended or allowed. Just like other units, vehicles cannot move over friendly models.
You simply measure the travel of the vehicle. Where you measure is not mentioned, and all parts of the vehicle will travel the exact same distance, so it does not make a difference.
You are never told to measure vehicle movement from the Hull only. That is an assumption.
Nem wrote: You can pivot during movement, and you measure movement before doing the move. Measuring tells you where your hull may move up to, including any pivots.
Which was proven flawed in the previous discussion.... The two example given above show exactly why.
If you measure your "bubble" before you move, then the rule that says that you pivot on the centre point instead of wheeling around a side edge would be redundant. Because you could wheel around and drive in zig-zags between any terrain, Unit or other, and "finish" your move as normal infantry might do....
There's no need to measure a bubble, you measure from the side of the vehicle you want to move, and move the model there. If there is a corner, you measure say, 3 and 3 then move, or stick your tape around the corner.
I don't think there's a model you can really pierce this distance with when you are measuring the full distance before you move on the correct facing. I did quite extensive testing with a DE raider - at some points you could if you measured from the side with a wider area and moved it up to the part with a thinner area but in general, if you measure from the same point and move it up to that point including the pivots as you go I found it didn't breach (other than bad MM measurement).
Just measure the distance on the correct facing, and then move it up to that point, do as many pirouette as you want on the way but the traveled distance can not exceed as you have already determined the end point with the tape measure, which has to be the same point as per the rules for measuring distances.
Nem wrote: You can pivot during movement, and you measure movement before doing the move. Measuring tells you where your hull may move up to, including any pivots.
Which was proven flawed in the previous discussion.... The two example given above show exactly why.
If you measure your "bubble" before you move, then the rule that says that you pivot on the centre point instead of wheeling around a side edge would be redundant. Because you could wheel around and drive in zig-zags between any terrain, Unit or other, and "finish" your move as normal infantry might do....
There's no need to measure a bubble, you measure from the side of the vehicle you want to move, and move the model there. If there is a corner, you measure say, 3 and 3 then move, or stick your tape around the corner.
I don't think there's a model you can really pierce this distance with when you are measuring the full distance before you move on the correct facing. I did quite extensive testing with a DE raider - at some points you could if you measured from the side with a wider area and moved it up to the part with a thinner area but in general, if you measure from the same point and move it up to that point including the pivots as you go I found it didn't breach (other than bad MM measurement).
And that "measure 3 and 3 then move" combined with "if you measure from the same point and move it up to that point including the pivots as you go" is indeed exactly how i read the RaW:
With "the same point" being the spot about their centre-point. Then the rules work fine:
You measure 3", pivot, measure some more, pivot ect.
Nothing stops you either from pivoting first, and then moving 6" or 12" in a certain direction. "Which direction" does not matter because it is equidistant from the centre point (whichever way you were facing, or end up facing)
Well it works fine if your doing it from a point on the side of the hull, so why do we have to make up things like the center? I feel like were making up things to fix problem that don't exist.
Just measure the full distance then move. Or measure a facing to 3, then a different facing for the last 3 - the same side should be measured or your just doing the same thing as jumping the tape measure like in the movement distance first example, we measure from a ''side'' of a model if you like for a reason, so we don't add distance. I don't think this should not apply to vehicles.
If people have a problem knowing how to place a tape measure from the side of the hull, count to 6 on it, then move the same facing up to that point we have bigger problems.
Nem wrote: Well it works fine if your doing it from a point on the side of the hull, so why do we have to make up things like the center? I feel like were making up things to fix problem that don't exist.
Just measure the full distance then move. Or measure a facing to 3, then a different facing for the last 3 - the same side should be measured or your just doing the same thing as jumping the tape measure like in the movement distance first example, we measure from a ''side'' of a model if you like for a reason, so we don't add distance. I don't think this should not apply to vehicles.
If people have a problem knowing how to place a tape measure from the side of the hull, count to 6 on it, then move the same facing up to that point we have bigger problems.
Well i don't think there is an issue then: If you are allowing measurement from the side of a DE Raider, move 6", and then pivot, pointing the prow towards that side then we are in agreement.
Same as how i was describing measuring from the centre point: 1- a DE Raider deployed pointing forward has "the spot about their centre-point" about 3" from the deployment line (as no part of the Hull can go over). 2- a DE Raider deployed sideways has "the spot about their centre-point" about 0.5" from the deployment line.
So at the end of Turn 1, whichever way any of the 2 Raider are facing, if they both moved 6" towards the enemy, one is definitely closer.
