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.

Augustus wrote:I have Gwar on ignore, I'll never see his diagrams.

While I can't dispute your decision, it might be worth your time to hit "show post" on the one timestamped 2010/05/28 18:30:44

All the pivots in mine are on the center. I'm not sure what you mean?

They're clearly not. Only the first one is. You pivot the model around its own center. You measure the movement from front to front. This is exactly what the rulebook and its diagrams tell us, and what A is talking about. Mathematicaly and physically you can, once per turn, functionally gain distance by pivoting and moving in a direction incongruent to the starting direction of vehicle's long axis.

What your diagram shows is a Raider starting sideways, pivoting forward legally, then a red arrow showing where it's FRONT point moves to, and a black & white image of the CENTER of the Raider positioned sideways, centered on a point just behind the FRONT point of the red arrow. You've moved the black & white image laterally when it's just supposed to be pivoting on its center.

Yup, Augustus wrong. Bad geometry...

THINK ABOUT THIS PEOPLE

If a vehicle is deployed sideways on the deployment line.

Turn 1 Movement

Vehicle pivots, it is now a couple inches beyond the deployment zone yet has not moved. The vheicle now moves 12''. This is legal, done in the reverse order of what so many of you are argueing. Its not actually getting extra movement out of the vehicles, Its getting extra deployment range at the risk of the enemy stealing initiative and shooting your side armor. is it kinda shady? some may think so... is it tactically smart? yes, do i personally care? not really because if i seize im laughing.

"What is your vehicle maximum movement speed?"

"Uh, twelve inches, duh."

"So how far has your vehicle moved in total?"

"... fourteen inches? DOH."

This is how I picture the conversation going on the tourney table. I am unswayed by the diagrams and banter of geometry but very interested in the "when pivoting on the spot alone" portion of the pivot rules. When you move afterwards have you pivoted alone? Not in a social sense of course, pivoting on the spot alone in person is a sign of madness, something no one here could possibly be afflicted with.

Slackermagee wrote:"What is your vehicle maximum movement speed?"

"Uh, twelve inches, duh."

"So how far has your vehicle moved in total?"

"... fourteen inches? DOH."

This is how I picture the conversation going on the tourney table. I am unswayed by the diagrams and banter of geometry but very interested in the "when pivoting on the spot alone" portion of the pivot rules. When you move afterwards have you pivoted alone? Not in a social sense of course, pivoting on the spot alone in person is a sign of madness, something no one here could possibly be afflicted with.

Actually it goes like this:

"What is your vehicle maximum movement speed?"

"Uh, Cruising Speed."

"And how fast is Cruising Speed?"

"Twelve Inches."

"So how far has your vehicle moved in total?"

"Twelve inches, as detailed in the rules for moving vehicles, where I Pivot, then measure the distance from the front of the tank to the front of the tank as per the diagram on page 12."

"By Jove you are correct! I hereby concede the game to go learn the rules!"

Gwar! wrote:

Slackermagee wrote:"What is your vehicle maximum movement speed?"

"Uh, twelve inches, duh."

"So how far has your vehicle moved in total?"

"... fourteen inches? DOH."

This is how I picture the conversation going on the tourney table. I am unswayed by the diagrams and banter of geometry but very interested in the "when pivoting on the spot alone" portion of the pivot rules. When you move afterwards have you pivoted alone? Not in a social sense of course, pivoting on the spot alone in person is a sign of madness, something no one here could possibly be afflicted with.

Actually it goes like this:

"What is your vehicle maximum movement speed?"

"Uh, Cruising Speed."

"And how fast is Cruising Speed?"

"Twelve Inches."

"So how far has your vehicle moved in total?"

"Twelve inches, as detailed in the rules for moving vehicles, where I Pivot, then measure the distance from the front of the tank to the front of the tank as per the diagram on page 12."

"By Jove you are correct! I hereby concede the game to go learn the rules!"

I don't have that diagram handy right now, but I will pose this question to you:

While moving, where is the front of the tank? Is it the front armor of the tank? The facing of the tank pointed in the direction of movement (end point wise, not a circuitous route)?

I really don't like the argument of 'I moved 12 inches but my hull has actually moved 14'. Your movement speed is 12", to have moved (in total distance) any more than that at the end of the movement phase is... wrong?

I love how the no pivot crowd has only falsified diagrams and gut feels to say why it's bad while there is Gwar! with diagrams that can be tested and proved correct as well as diagrams from the main book and rules citations on the other side.

Slackermagee wrote:Is it the front armor of the tank?

No, it's the rear Armour. Haven't you been paying attention at all?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slackermagee wrote:I really don't like the argument of 'I moved 12 inches but my hull has actually moved 14'. Your movement speed is 12", to have moved (in total distance) any more than that at the end of the movement phase is... wrong?

You don't have to "like" it. The rules are clear as... something that is very clear, or something.

The rules say that you pivot, then move in that direction however many inches you want, and that Pivoting does not use up any of the move.

Norade wrote:I love how the no pivot crowd has only falsified diagrams and gut feels to say why it's bad while there is Gwar! with diagrams that can be tested and proved correct as well as diagrams from the main book and rules citations on the other side.

Gut feelings of, "you shouldn't really be able to move more than your allotted distance given the long and storied tradition of war gaming".

Slackermagee wrote:

Norade wrote:I love how the no pivot crowd has only falsified diagrams and gut feels to say why it's bad while there is Gwar! with diagrams that can be tested and proved correct as well as diagrams from the main book and rules citations on the other side.

Gut feelings of, "you shouldn't really be able to move more than your allotted distance given the long and storied tradition of war gaming".

How about "The gut feeling that you should follow the rules that have been the same for over 9000 twelve years"?

Seriously, the rules have been the same for moving vehicles since 1998, when 3rd ed came out. If GW didn't want you doing this, they have had 12 years and 2 edition changes to do it.

Post removed

Alrighty, so p57 details moving with the sentence lending credence to the Choice A camp being, "Turning does not reduce the vehicles move".

Unfortunately the sentence before states that "Vehicles can turn any number of times AS they move." Not before you measure for movement, not before you begin moving, as you move.

So here it is:
>You pick the vehicle in question to move
>You measure to where you want it to go
>You make any turns (pivots) you like on the way there
>You end your move with no part of the tank being beyond that point

Voila, the rationale for Choice B.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh, and the thing on page 12 makes mention of moving from front to front expressly to avoid adding extra inches of total distance moved to the movement allocated, something left out in previous discussion I think.

Slackermagee wrote:Oh, and the thing on page 12 makes mention of moving from front to front expressly to avoid adding extra inches of total distance moved to the movement allocated, something left out in previous discussion I think.

I agree, it's to stop you getting extra inches.

The thing is, the distance "gained" from the pivot "trick" is NOT "extra" distance. Extra distance implies that it could not normally get it. However, the Rules make it clear that this is how vehicles move, so any distance "gained" is entirely subjective.

The thing is Gwar!, you have to pivot as you move. You don't get to pivot and then measure distance moved from the hull, you have to measure distance from the hull and then pivot. I don't think there's any extra distance to be gained.

Slackermagee wrote:The thing is Gwar!, you have to pivot as you move. You don't get to pivot and then measure distance moved from the hull, you have to measure distance from the hull and then pivot. I don't think there's any extra distance to be gained.

Except as shown on page 12, that is EXACTLY how you do it. You pivot. It doesn't use up any of your move, then you move 12" forward, measuring as per the diagram on page 12.

You are right in saying there is no "extra" distance to be gained, because that is how far the vehicle is permitted to move.

Gwar! wrote:

Slackermagee wrote:The thing is Gwar!, you have to pivot as you move. You don't get to pivot and then measure distance moved from the hull, you have to measure distance from the hull and then pivot. I don't think there's any extra distance to be gained.

Except as shown on page 12, that is EXACTLY how you do it. You pivot. It doesn't use up any of your move, then you move 12" forward, measuring as per the diagram on page 12.

You are right in saying there is no "extra" distance to be gained, because that is how far the vehicle is permitted to move.

But the diagram on page twelve doesn't mention pivoting at all, its mentioned on pg 57 as something you do during movement and not before nor afterwards!

In fact, the diagram only depicts the appropriate way to move in a straight line pointing out rather specifically that this is done to avoid tacking on extra distance via differences in a vehicles width v. length.

Slackermagee wrote:In fact, the diagram only depicts the appropriate way to move in a straight line pointing out rather specifically that this is done to avoid tacking on extra distance via differences in a vehicles width v. length.

Hold on there bub, it's nothing to do with Width vs Length. It's entirely to do with length. Nothing about width.

And yes, it tells you how to move it in a straight line.

Once you pivot, which does not use up any of the vehicles move, you then move in a straight line, up to your maximum move, measuring the distance from the front of the hull to the front of the hull as per page 12. This is how far the vehicle is permitted to move. Any notions of "extra" movement are entirely subjective.

Gwar! wrote:

Slackermagee wrote:In fact, the diagram only depicts the appropriate way to move in a straight line pointing out rather specifically that this is done to avoid tacking on extra distance via differences in a vehicles width v. length.

Hold on there bub, it's nothing to do with Width vs Length. It's entirely to do with length. Nothing about width.

And yes, it tells you how to move it in a straight line.

Once you pivot, which does not use up any of the vehicles move, you then move in a straight line, up to your maximum move, measuring the distance from the front of the hull to the front of the hull as per page 12. This is how far the vehicle is permitted to move. Any notions of "extra" movement are entirely subjective.

Ah, but you must begin measuring before the pivot, as pivoting must take place as you move and not before or after! So you will measure the distance to be traveled from the front of the hull (I'll forsake my fruitless "which way is up arguement"), pivot, then finish the move. Pivoting before hand would violate the 'as' part on page 57.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I'm just a radical leftists; loving the moments when years old establishments are picked and prodded at!

Even if you measure before you pivot, Pivoting does not reduce a vehicles move. So I can pivot all I want, and I have not moved a single inch. I can now move 12" forward, and have only moved 12", as pivoting does not reduce my move.

Here's my AHA moment:

I'm figuring that you measure total movement from the get go. You're measuring total movement as you move. I honestly don't know which one is more correct, pg 12 points to measuring once while pg 57 points to a segmented business... but neither one directly and conclusively.

And since I am now on beer number two, I will sit back and hope that someone else takes up the revolutionary banner. Forward leftists!

Well if you measure from the get go, why include turning at all? it doesn't make sense.

MasterSlowPoke wrote:This is kind of a weird poll; I've never played it that way personally, or have had an opponent pull this. It's clearly allowed through the rules but I'm still not quite sure how to vote.

I agree with this. I don't use vehicles much being a Nid player, and most of the time my opponent's tanks never move. I cannot particularly vote for either, but I find myself leaning towards Option B.

hes saying if your vehicle is placed sideways and you intend to move forward...you measure from the hull of the vehicle where it CURRENTLY is, which would be the side of the vheicle...you can hold the tap thre, pivot the vheicle, and move to the max desired location PREVIOUSLY measured before pivoting, since pivoting is part of the move..

Yes but from what Im reading on all this is, people are laying the tanks sideways at the closest line of deployment to the enemy. Then on their turn pivoting the vehicle(so now the front of the tank is BEYOND the deployment line, and measuring from the front of the vehicle out to the 12 inch move(or whatever your movement is)

Now if thats what your all getting at, that is so wrong. Im sorry but cheating is cheating. Im curious if this is so obvious that people are over looking it. Your gaining what, 2 inches or so just from that pivot? I dont care HOW the rules are wrote in the book, if you do something that breaks rules your cheating, weather or not the rules suggest you can or not.

Hmm, I am going to go look at the rule book, though with moving it, are you supposed to do A or B?:

A)Measure distance, then pivot, then move.

B)Pivot, then measure distance, then move.

Gwar! wrote:Any notions of "extra" movement are entirely subjective.

Let me ask you a question here: Why are you turning your vehicle sideways to move? Why not go with the tactical decision to present the best armor facing to the enemy?

Option A for me.

Inquisitor_Syphonious wrote:Hmm, I am going to go look at the rule book, though with moving it, are you supposed to do A or B?:

A)Measure distance, then pivot, then move.

B)Pivot, then measure distance, then move.

The player who is moving the model gets to choose. So he can pivot his model, then move it and theoretically gain an extra inch. It's perfectly legal according to the rules. If you want to make a house rule about it that's fine, but don't expect that to fly in a tournament.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Pvt. Jet wrote:

Gwar! wrote:Any notions of "extra" movement are entirely subjective.

Let me ask you a question here: Why are you turning your vehicle sideways to move? Why not go with the tactical decision to present the best armor facing to the enemy?

People only do this when they have a vehicle with the same side and front armor. That's why you never see people doing this with Battlewagons; it's usually Land Raiders.

KingCracker wrote: I dont care HOW the rules are wrote in the book, if you do something that breaks rules your cheating, weather or not the rules suggest you can or not.

LOL. You know cheating when you see it even if the rules clearly permit this so-called cheat?

Ok, the side armor is the same as the front armor. Fine, all right. For the sake of the argument, Front armor is 1 higher than the side armor. It's a fictional armored raider loaded for bear with wyches. Why would you present your side rather than your front? Why are you moving your vehicle in such a way?

See, here's my logic. Draw a line across the field. Say it's your deployment zone. You want to move straight away from it. Now, logically, if your vehicle was on the line at the beginning of the turn, after cruising speed the farthest any part of your vehicle should be away from the line is 12" yes? That is the max any vehicle can move (that's not fast, etc.) in a movement phase. Now if we do the raider-turn, if you measured from starting line to farthest forward point of the raider, you are MORE than 12" off the line. Tell me how that's legal. Please.

Oh, and TopC makes a fine, fine point. You measure your distance BEFORE your move. Pivoting is part of your move. You don't measure, pivot, measure again, and move. It's all one continuous move from your initial measurement from whatever point on the hull you'd like.

Please though, answer me the question, somebody. Why are you moving like this? Your answers are necessary for the debate.

And arschbombe? Please refrain from the personal attacks and such. Mature people are trying to have a debate.

KingCracker wrote:Yes but from what Im reading on all this is, people are laying the tanks sideways at the closest line of deployment to the enemy. Then on their turn pivoting the vehicle(so now the front of the tank is BEYOND the deployment line, and measuring from the front of the vehicle out to the 12 inch move(or whatever your movement is)

Now if thats what your all getting at, that is so wrong. Im sorry but cheating is cheating. Im curious if this is so obvious that people are over looking it. Your gaining what, 2 inches or so just from that pivot? I dont care HOW the rules are wrote in the book, if you do something that breaks rules your cheating, weather or not the rules suggest you can or not.

Wait! You're claiming that you can cheat by following the rules?!? Please show me how that works?