Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I've heard that the distance a vehicle can move is now measured before you pivot on the spot. I don't own 7th yet, so maybe that was just a rumor or misinterpretation. If so, just ignore me
Anyways, this method seems a bit cumbersome, especially since no vehicles are a perfect square. Any amount of rotation reduces the amount of movement you ge, especially if you have a longer model like a Ghost Ark.
It seems like this change was implemented to stop vehicles deploying sideways and being a tiny bit closer by rotating then the deployment zone would allow. Was this really that big a deal?
If I switch over to 7th, this is most likely a change I would discuss with my opponent. It's less straightforward then the older method and negatively impact models based on shape alone. I'd be happy to follow it turn 1 as that was the only case where it was ever used to get an advantage. It seems a reasonable middle ground.
I am kind if curious how many people ignore the change and just keep moving their vehicles the same way they have for years.

 Fafnir13 wrote:
I've heard that the distance a vehicle can move is now measured before you pivot on the spot.

It's not.

Vehicle movement is unchanged from last edition.

Any amount of rotation reduces the amount of movement you ge, especially if you have a longer model like a Ghost Ark.

Ah... no. Exactly the opposite, actually. Depending on how you moved the vehicle and what you considered the "stopping point" (lots of people choose the rear bumper or edge of the hull), you can gain as much as the entire length of the vehicle. Most easily accomplished was half the length (measure from mid-point, rotate, drive, stop with the mid-point of the vehicle over the point measured to, viola, you have half the vehicle length forward of the stopping point.)

It seems like this change was implemented to stop vehicles deploying sideways and being a tiny bit closer by rotating then the deployment zone would allow. Was this really that big a deal?

And that is why rotating your model gains you travel-distance.

Actually, no part of the model can be further than the distance moved. So you should not gain movement from rotation if you are doing it correctly.

 ansacs wrote:
Actually, no part of the model can be further than the distance moved. So you should not gain movement from rotation if you are doing it correctly.

Yup, that is spelled out very clearly in this rule book. Pivot and THEN measure is now gone, and nothing of value was lost.

 ansacs wrote:
Actually, no part of the model can be further than the distance moved. So you should not gain movement from rotation if you are doing it correctly.

Could you cite the rule for this?

 Peregrine wrote:

 ansacs wrote:
Actually, no part of the model can be further than the distance moved. So you should not gain movement from rotation if you are doing it correctly.

Could you cite the rule for this?

Yeah, I heard this, and as a DE player it's going to impact me quite a bit. Unfortunately I can't seem to find it in the book.

 streamdragon wrote:

 ansacs wrote:
Actually, no part of the model can be further than the distance moved. So you should not gain movement from rotation if you are doing it correctly.

Yup, that is spelled out very clearly in this rule book. Pivot and THEN measure is now gone, and nothing of value was lost.

The new rules are worded slightly differently, but are functionally identical to how they have worked for the last 15 years.

'Gaining' movement by pivoting and then moving off in that direction is still very much possible.

I know I saw this rule when going through the book. Don't have the book in front of me right now.

It was worded something like: No part of the model may be further than the movement distance... I'll find it tomorrow.

In the first part of the movement phase section. The basic rules for moving all models is that no part of the model may be outside of 6" of it's starting position.

You are then given a variety of exceptions and add on content to this basic rule but no where in the book does it ever contradict the no part outside x' it just changes the distance.

 ansacs wrote:
In the first part of the movement phase section. The basic rules for moving all models is that no part of the model may be outside of 6" of it's starting position.

If you read the introduction to the movement section, it explains that those rules apply specifically to infantry.

Vehicles have their own movement rules, and do not refer back to that section at all.

Seriously, we have this exact same debate every single edition. Yes, it can seem a little dodgy that vehicles can 'gain' extra distance by pivoting before moving. They also 'gain' extra distance (for disembarking, or area effect gear) in exactly the same way by staying still and just pivoting... something expressly allowed by the rules.

Its not a big deal, and the vast majority of players (at least from my experience) just chalk it up as 'one of those things' and take it into account when vehicles are on the table.

 insaniak wrote:

 ansacs wrote:
In the first part of the movement phase section. The basic rules for moving all models is that no part of the model may be outside of 6" of it's starting position.

If you read the introduction to the movement section, it explains that those rules apply specifically to infantry.

Vehicles have their own movement rules, and do not refer back to that section at all.

Seriously, we have this exact same debate every single edition. Yes, it can seem a little dodgy that vehicles can 'gain' extra distance by pivoting before moving. They also 'gain' extra distance (for disembarking, or area effect gear) in exactly the same way by staying still and just pivoting... something expressly allowed by the rules.

Its not a big deal, and the vast majority of players (at least from my experience) just chalk it up as 'one of those things' and take it into account when vehicles are on the table.

Thanks, Insaniak!

The vehicle movement section of the 7th edition rulebook states that vehicles are pivoted around a point in the centre of the vehicle, so if you move your vehicle to gain distance before your measured movement you are technically breaking the rules

Maybe it is easier if you imagine this. So, at the start of any movement phase.

Situation 1
I start sideways, I pivot straight and move straight. Perceived distance increase?

Situation 2
I start straight, I move straight and at the end I pivot sideways. Perceived distance lost in this case?

In the end, it should all equal out unless you only pivot at game start and move straight all the timee.

Darkenwood wrote:
The vehicle movement section of the 7th edition rulebook states that vehicles are pivoted around a point in the centre of the vehicle, so if you move your vehicle to gain distance before your measured movement you are technically breaking the rules

How? your second point is in no way reliant on the first. And it's the very fact that vehicles pivot on their centre points that makes this an issue in the first place.

This all sounds very 'gamey' to me.

Think of real world psychics. A tank wants to go in a direction 90° to the right.
The tank turns to the right 90° and goes forward.
It then wants to shoot a target 90° to the left so it turns that way.

It should be that simple.
Turn 90°, measure from front of tank 6" and place front of tank at 6", turn 90° again. Done.

Are we really going to quibble about minute distance gained?

If however said vehicle is wheeled round instead of pivoting then there is an issue.

Can we just move on and enjoy the game as opposed to being really anal about tiny things like this.
(I think this accounts for all the rules to an extent)

That is something of a pondering, to the people wanting the pivoting of the Vehicle to add to the movement:
If the Vehicle moves straight with the intention of Pivoting, can it move past the maximum distance allowed on the grounds that the pivot will subtract distance?

Since vehicles pivot around their center point, I always found to best to simply measure from this point. You could have perceived increases in movement form rectangular vehicles, but this seemed the most consistent way.

pg. 73 Vehicles can turn any number of times as they move, just like any other model. Vehicles turn by pivoting on the spot about there 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 immoblised vehicles cannot pivot on the spot. Pivoting is always done from the centre of the vehicle to prevent it form accidentally moving further than intended or allowed. Just like other units, vehicles cannot move over friendly models.

So you can still do the whole sideways deployment just measure your movement from the centre of the hull as you lose or gain no distance then

Darkenwood wrote:
The vehicle movement section of the 7th edition rulebook states that vehicles are pivoted around a point in the centre of the vehicle, so if you move your vehicle to gain distance before your measured movement you are technically breaking the rules

The first part of that sentence is correct, but the second part is the exact opposite of what the first part says.

The vehicle movement rules have not changed since 3rd edition.

Vehicles are pivoted around their center. You measure movement distance from any point on the model to the same point. If the vehicle isn't exactly round and turns, many parts of it will move different distances and some parts will definitely move more than 6" (or however far you're moving it).

You'd be breaking the rules not doing it this way.

So say my Rhino is sideways, I pivot 90 degrees then move straight, according to BRB I measure distance from the hull, doesnt specify which part so I can use the front, move the model 6" forward, then pivot again to get back to my original start direction, visualize it and you'll notice that any extra gain is a matter of mm or smaller

Zodiark wrote:
So say my Rhino is sideways, I pivot 90 degrees then move straight, according to BRB I measure distance from the hull, doesnt specify which part so I can use the front, move the model 6" forward, then pivot again to get back to my original start direction, visualize it and you'll notice that any extra gain is a matter of mm or smaller

In which case, why pivot? The Rhino can move sideways.
Mainly, it is used on long thin models (Ork Trukk, for example) that deploy sideways, pivot turn one and can gain 1-2"

You'd gain nothing on that, Zodiark, discounting measure error.

The problem some people have is that if you only were to do the first pivot, the rhino is now 1/2 the difference between the lengths of the long side and the short side further than if you never pivoted. It's a very tiny issue.

 MasterSlowPoke wrote:
You'd gain nothing on that, Zodiark, discounting measure error.

The problem some people have is that if you only were to do the first pivot, the rhino is now 1/2 the difference between the lengths of the long side and the short side further than if you never pivoted. It's a very tiny issue.

Ahhh I see.

In a game where a win or loss can be a 1/4 inch I say quibbling about gaming a system is something that should be discussed.

Unfortunately I have played people who have used this lowsey measuring shenanigans and have won the game. I equate it to cheeting. However those who differ on that use it and we'll there ya have it.

I myself measure from the hull and if I need to turn I do it after the established distance has been measured. No extra inches for me.

Lungpickle wrote:
In a game where a win or loss can be a 1/4 inch I say quibbling about gaming a system is something that should be discussed.

Unfortunately I have played people who have used this lowsey measuring shenanigans and have won the game. I equate it to cheeting. However those who differ on that use it and we'll there ya have it.

I myself measure from the hull and if I need to turn I do it after the established distance has been measured. No extra inches for me.

If that had happened to me, I'd probably feel more sorry for the person who would cheat just so he can win a game of toy soldiers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But yes I understand what you mean. There are also those players who move 7-8 inches by mass moving a unit, over measuring etc. it's not a vague rule that causes them to do that. It's something that should make you feel sorry for them.

It's not a cheat, because it's perfectly allowed by the rules as stated and quoted in this thread.

Again, if I have a rectangular vehicle that is, let's say, eight inches long and four inches wide, and measure from the center point of the vehicle to move, let's say, 10", I can be parked "lengthwise" in my deployment zone, measure the distance, pivot 90 degrees, and then drive forward so that the center point I measured from is exactly over the point I measured to.

However, as I have a vehicle that is 8" long, I have 4" of vehicle length ahead of the point I, fully legally and IAW the rules, measured to. That potentially adds a couple inches of range to any weapons mounted on the front half of that vehicle (compared to where they would be had I stopped the front bumper at the point I measured to).

People who measure from the hull (the majority of people, in my XP) "gain" even more distance, because you also get roughly half the width of the vehicle as well as half its length.

 Psienesis wrote:
It's not a cheat, because it's perfectly allowed by the rules as stated and quoted in this thread.

It's not just allowed by the rules, it is the only way the rules allow vehicles to move.

It's been this way for 15 years now. Nothing has changed.

My apologies, I think I wasn't clear about it. I do think that there is nothing wrong with pivoting and moving.

What I meant to do was replying about 1/4 of an inch can decide a game. And shenanigans (this movement thing excluded) was what I was referring to.

do the rules state to measure after pivoting or before ? ( i don't have the new book )