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.

He was not pre-measuring though, he was measuring, and it encompassed your threat range. If at any other point during the turn he had done that, it would have been illegal. Look at the battle report, at first I was on your side, then after some deliberating, I came to this conclusion.

Not to be the voice of reason here, but if someone uses a perfectly legal rule (please quote me where the rulebook says you can't take advantage of a rule for your benefit) in a way that gives them an arguably unfair advantage try using that to your advantage instead of lamenting the situation. If someone uses the movement measuring rules to figure out how far you are from charging them then you now know exactly how far away from them you are. This information can only help you.

Measuring will give data that is usable for more than one situation.

That is intentional, unavoidable, and in the rules.

Catachan_Devil wrote:it is legal to pre measure a units maximum movement from its base in any direction and decide to move how ever he wishes - if he uses that information obtained to protect himself it is completely legal (information is power in battle)

So the rules that say it's not legal to pre-measure my movement are to be ignored? Are they going to put this in the INAT? I wonder how many rules I can break because there is another rule in the book?

That's what you are all asking to happen here.


Rule 1- You are allowed to pre-measure your own stuff.
Rule 2- You are NOT allowed to pre-measure your opponents stuff.


Oh, disregard rule number 2, because rule number 1 exists? Really?


Clay

Primarch wrote:

Instead of quoting my post, how about add in the context. The part where GWAR assumes a bunch of things about the situation, and since you and he talk, sure i also assumed you had either talked to him, or he hadn't read the actual thread. One of which was true. Also, you backed it down? After every point had been conceded to you? Sure you did, there wasn't anything else to argue about that would matter.


Clay

If my posts seem outdated in relation to the thread it is because I haven't been following it. I made my original post, and have not been on Dakka following its progression. So as I spent the last 30 minutes reading through 4 pages of it, I've been responding as I read, although issues that I'm responding to may have been pages ago.

-----------

Something I do want to note though is that you keep mentioning that you made every concession to me. Lets talk about that for a minute.

During every 40k game, we define terrain, and I basically pointed around the board asking if flat stuff is flat. I remember reading that flat hilltops don't count as difficult terrain to move on top of unless you go down the side or something, meaning you can fly onto them without any issue. So I pointed to flat building tops and said, "Is that flat?" You telling me "Yes" isn't a concession. I didn't care one way or the other, I just needed to know what was on the board where to plan my movements and warrior deployment. I landed my raiders on the stuff that wasn't flat and took dangerous terrain tests all the same - that raider attempting to block your battlewagons wasn't on a flat surface just like your battlewagon wasn't 3 stories above the battlefield.

The 24" thing we're discussing here.....I've said it several times now; it was a new idea and a new discussion. I hadn't previously considered the ramifications of doing so, whether it might be considered against the spirit of the rules or not. I didn't measure YOUR charge range, or YOUR movement; by definition that would be putting my tape measure to your model and measuring 13" to see where YOU can get. I measured my movement, and in doing so garnered the information I was looking for - how far away from me you were. I did so openly because I didn't see any problem with it.

When you told me you thought it was nigh cheating....we talked about it, you told me you thought it violated the spirit of the rules....I turned to the spectators looking for an answer, no one wanted to engage, I apologized and didn't do it again. Like I said; I go with the flow.

I wouldn't do it again in a game against you because you don't like it. Its obviously legal, although enough people think it breaks the spirit of the rules that I wouldn't do it again because I don't want to be TFG; I work too hard to have fun during my games....which is why I expressed my alarm that you were like, "Alright, its going to be WAAC RAW, I can dig it" and I was like, "Wait wait wait....chill man....."

There is no rule saying you cannot measure range to a unit that is in your movement radius. A better example would be this:

My Hrud are fighting your Chaos Tyranids. I have a unit called a Stranglewraith who can move 12". He is armed with a Shadowhip, which has a minimum range of 6". My model is near your Khornegaunts. I measure my 12" movement towards the Khornegaunts, and find that they are currently exactly 4" away, so I switch gears and move the Stranglewraith 3" back, allowing me to utilize my Shadowhip. Is this legal?

Also, the word is "measuring". "Pre-measuring" would entail measuring before it should be allowed, as opposed to measuring something you do not agree with.

He measured from his vehicle, and thus was measuring his own movement. It is legal for him to measure from his vehicle in any direction he likes for whatever reason he likes at that point in time. If he can use information gained by measuring from his vehicle, so much the better for him.

Besides all this, it sets a really terrible precedent to declare that intent is what matters in whether or not a rule is broken, because intent is often unmeasurable.

Primarch wrote:

Catachan_Devil wrote:it is legal to pre measure a units maximum movement from its base in any direction and decide to move how ever he wishes - if he uses that information obtained to protect himself it is completely legal (information is power in battle)

So the rules that say it's not legal to pre-measure my movement are to be ignored? Are they going to put this in the INAT? I wonder how many rules I can break because there is another rule in the book?

That's what you are all asking to happen here.


Rule 1- You are allowed to pre-measure your own stuff.
Rule 2- You are NOT allowed to pre-measure your opponents stuff.


Oh, disregard rule number 2, because rule number 1 exists? Really?


Clay

if he measured from the hull of his vehicle it is fine

he measured from his vehicle how far your unit was and then used that information to determine how far/fast and which direction to travel in to gain a tactical advantage

if measured from your unit/vehicle - it is a different matter

Our general rule in my local gaming group is that for anything requiring measuring, you may measure up to the maximum range of whatever it is that you are measuring. In other words, if its a fast skimmer, you can (in essence) measure a 24" bubble around the skimmer and then decide where to go.

For shooting, same deal. You can't use a bolter to measure 48" range since its obviously out of range and we're not usually TFG. On the other hand, if I'm unsure whether one squad of Heavy Weapons is in 48" range, we are fine with firing another 48" (or similar range) weapon to "rangefind" for the other squad. That, to us, is just tactics.

Honestly, its not really TFG to measure further than you intend to move (within the vehicle's max range, obviously). There's a lot worse stuff out there I think. But I guess there's people who don't like the tactic... whatver floats your boat I suppose.

Xca|iber wrote:You can't use a bolter to measure 48" range since its obviously out of range and we're not usually TFG.

I don't have my rulebook handy, but I thought that this was RAW?

edit: that is, that you can only measure to the range of the weapons being fired when measuring range.

Legal, but shady. I don't like it.

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:Besides all this, it sets a really terrible precedent to declare that intent is what matters in whether or not a rule is broken, because intent is often unmeasurable.

Intent is what differentiates between cheating or an honest mistake. It's not setting a terrible precedent to ask players to police their own behaviour... quite the opposite in fact.

Dashofpepper wrote:

Primarch wrote:

Instead of quoting my post, how about add in the context. The part where GWAR assumes a bunch of things about the situation, and since you and he talk, sure i also assumed you had either talked to him, or he hadn't read the actual thread. One of which was true. Also, you backed it down? After every point had been conceded to you? Sure you did, there wasn't anything else to argue about that would matter.


Clay

If my posts seem outdated in relation to the thread it is because I haven't been following it. I made my original post, and have not been on Dakka following its progression. So as I spent the last 30 minutes reading through 4 pages of it, I've been responding as I read, although issues that I'm responding to may have been pages ago.

-----------

Something I do want to note though is that you keep mentioning that you made every concession to me. Lets talk about that for a minute.

During every 40k game, we define terrain, and I basically pointed around the board asking if flat stuff is flat. I remember reading that flat hilltops don't count as difficult terrain to move on top of unless you go down the side or something, meaning you can fly onto them without any issue. So I pointed to flat building tops and said, "Is that flat?" You telling me "Yes" isn't a concession. I didn't care one way or the other, I just needed to know what was on the board where to plan my movements and warrior deployment. I landed my raiders on the stuff that wasn't flat and took dangerous terrain tests all the same - that raider attempting to block your battlewagons wasn't on a flat surface just like your battlewagon wasn't 3 stories above the battlefield.

The 24" thing we're discussing here.....I've said it several times now; it was a new idea and a new discussion. I hadn't previously considered the ramifications of doing so, whether it might be considered against the spirit of the rules or not. I didn't measure YOUR charge range, or YOUR movement; by definition that would be putting my tape measure to your model and measuring 13" to see where YOU can get. I measured my movement, and in doing so garnered the information I was looking for - how far away from me you were. I did so openly because I didn't see any problem with it.

When you told me you thought it was nigh cheating....we talked about it, you told me you thought it violated the spirit of the rules....I turned to the spectators looking for an answer, no one wanted to engage, I apologized and didn't do it again. Like I said; I go with the flow.

I wouldn't do it again in a game against you because you don't like it. Its obviously legal, although enough people think it breaks the spirit of the rules that I wouldn't do it again because I don't want to be TFG; I work too hard to have fun during my games....which is why I expressed my alarm that you were like, "Alright, its going to be WAAC RAW, I can dig it" and I was like, "Wait wait wait....chill man....."

Sigh, I am beginning to see the point of a few others when it comes to you, and I really didn't want to. I don't mind discussing rules until we come to a conclusion. What I mind, is you making it sound like you were the innocent victim at times here. I don't think I am blameless though to be honest. I wasn't comforatable letting you pick all those flat spots in all those ruins and declare them flat, but in the friendly nature of the game, I said yes and accepted it. My decision, something I came to later regret. Especially when you did the measurement thing(by the way, not legal, or at least not fully explored as legal), and then again when you wouldn't allow me to place a model on the ledge of a building, something clearly defined as legal in the rules. Again, I accepted your compromise.

At the time, I thought the measuring was against the spirit, now I think it is cheating. Clearly I agree that if it was the first time you tried it, then you wouldn't know that probably. I concede that you werent doing what I am now calling "cheating" on purpose if it does turn out to be so. In hindsight, I should have said no on the flat "ruins", I should have argued about the ledge till we looked it up and I was proven right, and quite possibly, I should have deducted a point or 2 of sportsmanship for the measurement thing(debatable, and I didnt feel right doing that, so I didnt ding you at all.) Would any of that have changed the game? Not in the slightest. You had a better army suited to that mission, you won the roll to go first, and you beat me. Ive been beat before, it certainly won't be the last time.

I am not complaining because I lost, in fact I was far over it, and would never have brought any of it up until you did. You should have let it all go if you wanted to maintain the status quo between us, clearly you did not. So noted.


Either way, grats on winning, and when next we play, be prepared to RAW it all the way out, since that is apparently the style you like to play.



Clay

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

Xca|iber wrote:You can't use a bolter to measure 48" range since its obviously out of range and we're not usually TFG.

I don't have my rulebook handy, but I thought that this was RAW?

edit: that is, that you can only measure to the range of the weapons being fired when measuring range.

This is not the case.

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

Xca|iber wrote:You can't use a bolter to measure 48" range since its obviously out of range and we're not usually TFG.

I don't have my rulebook handy, but I thought that this was RAW?

edit: that is, that you can only measure to the range of the weapons being fired when measuring range.

That's not true. You measure the range from the closest model in your unit to the closest model in the target unit and then look to see if you're in range. If you're not, you miss. It has nothing to do with the range of the weapon when measuring.

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

Xca|iber wrote:You can't use a bolter to measure 48" range since its obviously out of range and we're not usually TFG.

I don't have my rulebook handy, but I thought that this was RAW?

edit: that is, that you can only measure to the range of the weapons being fired when measuring range.

Meh, yeah, though you are supposed to measure straight to the unit you declare to shoot at I believe. (unlike movement)

***Ninja'd, twice, this thread is popular***

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:I don't have my rulebook handy, but I thought that this was RAW?

edit: that is, that you can only measure to the range of the weapons being fired when measuring range.

Nope. The rules just tell us to measure from the firer to the target. They don't say to stop when you get to the weapon's max range... although from my experience a lot of players do it that way.

Fine but shady.

Measuring movement is one thing, measuring for exact distances between your units and your opponents' units is stretching the rules.

Meanwhile, how about we stick to the actual topic, and leave the soap opera out of it?

Hmm. Would everyone cry foul at my using this to "pre-measure" for frag missiles with a squad of Grey Hunters?

insaniak wrote:

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:Besides all this, it sets a really terrible precedent to declare that intent is what matters in whether or not a rule is broken, because intent is often unmeasurable.

Intent is what differentiates between cheating or an honest mistake. It's not setting a terrible precedent to ask players to police their own behaviour... quite the opposite in fact.

That doesn't quite address what I wrote. If you get a judge involved in a situation like this, where no rule has been broken by actions, as Dash was allowed to measure from his unit, where the judge cannot judge intent quite so clearly as here, what to do?

insaniak wrote:

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:I don't have my rulebook handy, but I thought that this was RAW?

edit: that is, that you can only measure to the range of the weapons being fired when measuring range.

Nope. The rules just tell us to measure from the firer to the target. They don't say to stop when you get to the weapon's max range... although from my experience a lot of players do it that way.

Which is what makes it legal to measure from your bolters in the back of the field to your opponent's devastators 52" away and use it to pre-measure everything else in the game.

Legal? Yep. Shady? Yep.

"Soldier! Fire on those Devastators!"

"I only have a boltgun, Sarge! There's no way I can hit them!"

"It's okay! I want to see how far I need to order those Land Raiders forward!"

". . huh?"

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:Hmm. Would everyone cry foul at my using this to "pre-measure" for frag missiles with a squad of Grey Hunters?

What do you mean?

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:That doesn't quite address what I wrote. If you get a judge involved in a situation like this, where no rule has been broken by actions, as Dash was allowed to measure from his unit, where the judge cannot judge intent quite so clearly as here, what to do?

I would expect the judge to make a judgement call based on both player's explanation of the situation. But that's not the point. Intent isn't something that can be policed by anyone other than the player himself... but that doesn't mean that it doesn't matter. Not cheating is more than just not letting your opponent know that you're cheating.

Primarch wrote:I must be missing something.


Are 22 people voting that it is perfectly legal to pre-measure your opponents charge range, during your own movement phase? That's what the poll looks like.....




Clay

People are much more biased with something like this.

I honestly thought while the majority would vote for it being legal, that a few more would vote towards it being illegal.

insaniak wrote:

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:That doesn't quite address what I wrote. If you get a judge involved in a situation like this, where no rule has been broken by actions, as Dash was allowed to measure from his unit, where the judge cannot judge intent quite so clearly as here, what to do?

I would expect the judge to make a judgement call based on both player's explanation of the situation. But that's not the point. Intent isn't something that can be policed by anyone other than the player himself... but that doesn't mean that it doesn't matter. Not cheating is more than just not letting your opponent know that you're cheating.

And in this case specifically, the intent was to measure from the opponent's unit, not to measure movement and happen to stumble upon this extra information.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:Hmm. Would everyone cry foul at my using this to "pre-measure" for frag missiles with a squad of Grey Hunters?

What do you mean?

If I know how far it is between my long fangs and my grey hunters, and I know how far it is between my grey hunters and an enemy unit, I then don't have to guess when firing my long fangs in frag mode at that enemy unit.

Wait, are frag missiles not treated as guess range weapons this edition? feth, I really need to get some gaming in.

If they're not guess range, substitute some other guess range weapon for them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:That doesn't quite address what I wrote. If you get a judge involved in a situation like this, where no rule has been broken by actions, as Dash was allowed to measure from his unit, where the judge cannot judge intent quite so clearly as here, what to do?

I would expect the judge to make a judgement call based on both player's explanation of the situation. But that's not the point. Intent isn't something that can be policed by anyone other than the player himself... but that doesn't mean that it doesn't matter. Not cheating is more than just not letting your opponent know that you're cheating.

However, if we're declaring something illegal, then it has to be something that can be judged by an outsider. To do otherwise is completely pointless.

Guess range weapons don't exist anymore. They're even disappearing from Fantasy. Good riddance I say.

Ah.

Well then: would you cry foul at my "pre-measuring" charge distance across the board with that unit of grey hunters in the shooting phase?

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:

MasterSlowPoke wrote:

WARBOSS TZOO wrote:Hmm. Would everyone cry foul at my using this to "pre-measure" for frag missiles with a squad of Grey Hunters?

What do you mean?

If I know how far it is between my long fangs and my grey hunters, and I know how far it is between my grey hunters and an enemy unit, I then don't have to guess when firing my long fangs in frag mode at that enemy unit.

Wait, are frag missiles not treated as guess range weapons this edition? feth, I really need to get some gaming in.

If they're not guess range, substitute some other guess range weapon for them.

Legally, yes you can do what you're trying to say. Is it frowned upon? I can't speak for everyone, but I know some folks around here would have some major problems with it.

You have a Infantry Platoon right next to your Leman Russ Executioner. Your opponent's unit looks a bit out of range for the Executioner, but there are other choice targets. Well, let's see if that Executioner is out of range. I fire my Infantry Platoon's lasguns at your enemy unit (knowing full well that it is well beyond 12" away). I extend my tape measure and find that your unit is 34" away from my unit. Perfect. I line up my Executioner because I know that I am in range now, whereas I didn't before.