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.

DeathReaper wrote:On is inclusive, if part of your base is off, then the model (read it says model, not partial model) is not on the table since we can clearly see a part of its base that is not on the table.

So what is it on then? Is it floating in mid air? If part of the base is on the table, then it is on the table.

If I set your arm on fire, I still set you on fire, even though I only set part of you on fire.

Gwar! wrote:The rule that says you must move on the table. It doesn't say fully on, so it doesn't mean fully on.

I gotta be honest - I was in the "destroyed" camp, but this is a compelling argument. If you read the text on pp94, it explicitly says you measure movement from the table's edge moving in, and that you don't place it on the edge and then move, as that is an overmove.

As such, by the rules, since vehicles cannot strafe sideways, it would never be possibly to deploy anything that is longer then 6", as it's not possible to move completely onto the table.

I think this probably is a question for the INAT, yes?

Gwar! wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:On is inclusive, if part of your base is off, then the model (read it says model, not partial model) is not on the table since we can clearly see a part of its base that is not on the table.

So what is it on then? Is it floating in mid air? If part of the base is on the table, then it is on the table.

If I set your arm on fire, I still set you on fire, even though I only set part of you on fire.

It is simultaneously on and off the table.

Since models have to be on the table as qualified by P.88 that means they can not be off the table.

Please direct me to the page where they are allowed, by the rules, to be off the table. (while being partially on the table)

if you can show me this I will agree that they can in fact be off the table and partially on the table.

its a Schrodinger's cat.

DeathReaper wrote:Please direct me to the page where they are allowed, by the rules, to be off the table. (while being partially on the table)

Ten seconds laterage 56, Vehicles and measuring distances. Measure to and from their hull.

Now, until you can get 100% of the vehicle's hull onto the table, you lose.
Mind you, it does NOT specify the BOTTOM of the hull--and even so I have yet to see a vehicle be able to touch 100% of even the bottom of its hull to the table. Most only touch tracks/wheels/base/etc/

There is more, but generally, it has been posted. Repeatedly.

kirsanth wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Please direct me to the page where they are allowed, by the rules, to be off the table. (while being partially on the table)

Page 56, Vehicles and measuring distances. Measure to and from their hull.

Now, until you can get 100% of the vehicle's hull onto the table, you lose.
Mind you, it does NOT specify the BOTTOM of the hull--and even so I have yet to see a vehicle be able to touch 100% of even the bottom of its hull to the table. Most only touch tracks/wheels/base/etc/

that does not specify about they being partially on the table, please give me a page that references where they can be (Partially) off the table.

DeathReaper wrote:

kirsanth wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Please direct me to the page where they are allowed, by the rules, to be off the table. (while being partially on the table)

Page 56, Vehicles and measuring distances. Measure to and from their hull.

Now, until you can get 100% of the vehicle's hull onto the table, you lose.
Mind you, it does NOT specify the BOTTOM of the hull--and even so I have yet to see a vehicle be able to touch 100% of even the bottom of its hull to the table. Most only touch tracks/wheels/base/etc/

that does not specify about they being partially on the table, please give me a page that references where they can be (Partially) off the table.

Give me a page reference that says fully on?

I gave you the page reference, it tells you to measure to the hull--you said the model has to be on the table, if I measure to the top of your vehicle and find it NOT on the table--how do you say that is not relevant?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

DeathReaper wrote:It is (simultaneously) on (and off) the table.

This is all that the rules ask to be true.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Being simultaneously on the table and not on the table does not change the fact that you are on the table.

DeathReaper wrote:It is simultaneously on and off the table.

its a Schrodinger's cat.

No, it isn't.

If any part of it is on, then it is on.

If I cut an orange in half, it isn't partially cut and partially not cut, it is just cut.

kirsanth wrote:"I am on fire."
Does not mean that every inch of me is on fire. Heck, I do not think it would take very much of myself in flames before I would find that a legitmate statement.

This is entirely unlike what occurs in the other version.

"I am not on fire."
This does NOT mean that only part of me may be on fire. In fact, it cannot mean that.

It cannot really be both.

Objection, Irrelevant.

Gwar! wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:It is simultaneously on and off the table.

its a Schrodinger's cat.

No, it isn't.

If any part of it is on, then it is on.

If I cut an orange in half, it isn't partially cut and partially not cut, it is just cut.

By that logic

If any part of it is off, it is off.

You can not be off the table and be in play.

kirsanth wrote:
Give me a page reference that says fully on?

I gave you the page reference, it tells you to measure to the hull--you said the model has to be on the table, if I measure to the top of your vehicle and find it NOT on the table--how do you say that is not relevant?

P.88 says on.

if you are partially on you are not on the table, you are on and off the table.

On is inclusive and does not allow you to be off the table with any part of your base, since 'a model is considered to occupy the area of its base' (P.3) to follow this P.88 '...to be played on a 6' by 4'...' therefore if any part of a model is off the table it can not satisfy this requirement and is an illegal move.

"I am on fire."
Does not mean that every inch of me is on fire. Heck, I do not think it would take very much of myself in flames before I would find that a legitmate statement.

This is entirely unlike what occurs in the other version.

"I am not on fire."
This does NOT mean that only part of me may be on fire. In fact, it cannot mean that.

It cannot really be both.

DeathReaper wrote:Objection, Irrelevant.

So basically your argument boils down to "I am ignoring the other sides objections."

Classy.

Partially On is still On. How hard is that to understand?

Deathreaper how is it that you're in all honesty trying to claim with a straight face;

That being on the table does not satisfy the condition of being on the table?

ChrisCP wrote:Deathreaper how is it that you're in all honesty trying to claim with a straight face;

That being on the table does not satisfy the condition of being on the table?

On is inclusive and does not allow you to be off the table with any part of your base, since 'a model is considered to occupy the area of its base' (P.3) to follow this P.88 '...to be played on a 6' by 4'...' therefore if any part of a model is off the table it can not satisfy this requirement and is an illegal move.

its all right there.

Gwar! wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Objection, Irrelevant.

So basically your argument boils down to "I am ignoring the other sides objections."

Classy.

Partially On is still On. How hard is that to understand?

no not ignoring your objections, but being on fire has no bearing on the discussion.

you have to be on the table This everyone will agree on yes?

However since I can point to an area of the base that is not on the table, then you can not move there. since your base is not on the table. and thus an illegal move.

DeathReaper wrote:However since I can point to an area of the base that is not on the table, then you can not move there. since your base is not on the table. and thus an illegal move.

And I can also point to such an area... the top of the base.

Therefore, you are claiming that every single model placed on the table is destroyed, even though the rules do not say as such.

Actually by definition 'area' is a 2D space. 'Base' implies the very bottom. 'Surface area' or 'volume' would support your point, Gwar!, but simply 'area of the base' does not.

I'm going to be extremely mean to DeathReaper right now, and point out that pg 88 says that the game is played 'on' a 6x4 board. So, following the 'partially on' is 'on' argument, you can legally be partially on even by the reference to page 88. There is no comment made ever in the rules with respect to being off the table other than in the case of deepstriking and restricting you from moving off.

A base is not a 2d object, it is a 3d object. The rules do not say that a models base is only the bottom area...

DeathReaper wrote:
you have to be on the table This everyone will agree on yes?

However since I can point to an area of the base that is not on the table, then you can not move there. since your base is not on the table. and thus an illegal move.

As I said for vehicles, the hull is used instead. One can always point to part of the hull and claim it is not on the table. Vehicles are destroyed every time the movement phase occurs.

How about this translation for the sake of those who cannot refuse to get it:

"I am on the table."
Does not mean that every inch of me is on the table. I do not think it would take very much of myself to be on the table before I would find that a legitmate statement (For example at a doctor visit I often dangle my legs when asked to get on an examination table and it has never been an issue).

This is entirely unlike what occurs in the other version.

"I am not on the table."
This does NOT mean that only part of me may be on the table. In fact, it cannot mean that.

Sorry for the original post regarding fire for being so confusing as to entirely baffle everyone's sensibilities.

DeathReaper wrote:
However since I can point to an area of the base that is on the table, then you can move there. Since your base is on the table and thus a legal move.

Fixed your grammar too =\

Ail-Shan wrote:Actually by definition 'area' is a 2D space. 'Base' implies the very bottom. 'Surface area' or 'volume' would support your point, Gwar!, but simply 'area of the base' does not.

I'm going to be extremely mean to DeathReaper right now, and point out that pg 88 says that the game is played 'on' a 6x4 board. So, following the 'partially on' is 'on' argument, you can legally be partially on even by the reference to page 88. There is no comment made ever in the rules with respect to being off the table other than in the case of deepstriking and restricting you from moving off.

Actually it states that you have a playing area. Only things that are within this playing area count as being in play. If you have half a model not in a designated playing area that model is not a legal target, or particpant in the game. So your assumption of partially on is incorrect, as there is a limited area of play. Furthermore, how come when anyone who disagree's with you guys and says that you are ignoring the other side of the coin, you ignore that post? In other words when you say partially on is on, and we say partially off is off.

ChrisCP wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:
However since I can point to an area of the base that is not on the table, then you can not move there. since your base is not on the table. and thus an illegal move..

Fixed your grammar too =\

I fixed your fixing of my grammar.

Units that fall back and touch the table edge are destroyed, this must mean the edge is out of play for units.

ergo if any part of the base is off the table = out of play.

DeathReaper wrote:Units that fall back and touch the table edge are destroyed, this must mean the edge is out of play for units.

...

Seriously?

Units that are falling back and hit the edge are removed BECAUSE THE RULES FOR FALLING BACK SAY SO.

You have just gone and committed the "Tiger Repelling Rock" or the "I have Legs, a Tiger has Legs, therefore I am a Tiger" logical fallacy.

Just because units falling back have a special interaction with the table edge doesn't mean all units do.

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:
Actually it states that you have a playing area. Only things that are within this playing area count as being in play. If you have half a model not in a designated playing area that model is not a legal target, or particpant in the game. So your assumption of partially on is incorrect, as there is a limited area of play. Furthermore, how come when anyone who disagree's with you guys and says that you are ignoring the other side of the coin, you ignore that post? In other words when you say partially on is on, and we say partially off is off.

^ +1

Gwar! wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:Units that fall back and touch the table edge are destroyed, this must mean the edge is out of play for units.

...

Seriously?

Units that are falling back and hit the edge are removed BECAUSE THE RULES FOR FALLING BACK SAY SO.

You have just gone and committed the "Tiger Repelling Rock" or the "I have Legs, a Tiger has Legs, therefore I am a Tiger" logical fallacy.

Just because units falling back have a special interaction with the table edge doesn't mean all units do.

Let me start by saying that I get that partially on the table is on the table, but it is also off the table.

Where does it talk about units touching the table edge? (because falling back is the only place i could find it)

baring that, ON MEANS FULLY ON, BECAUSE IF YOU ARE NOT FULLY ON, YOU ARE OFF AS WELL, AND THE GAME IS MEANT TO BE PLAYED ON THE SURFACE, NOT OFF THE SURFACE. (see i can type in unnecessary capital letters as well)

if you can not see this I can not help you.

Ok, so if a model is not fully on, by your logic it is an illegal placement.

When placed on it's tracks, a Land Raiders roof is not on the table. Therefore, by your logic, it is illegally placed.

And that is why your argument is completely wrong.

Gwar! wrote:Ok, so if a model is not fully on, by your logic it is an illegal placement.

When placed on it's tracks, a Land Raiders roof is not on the table. Therefore, by your logic, it is illegally placed.

And that is why your argument is completely wrong.

That is not what i said at all. to think that way is completely wrong.

Ail-Shan wrote: 'Surface area' or 'volume' would support your point, Gwar!, but simply 'area of the base' does not.

I was speaking of bases/parts that touch the table, since by default, vehicles do not have a base.

For models with bases they have to be fully on the table.

For models without bases the parts that touch the table have to be fully on the table.

Thus your argument is completely wrong.

DeathReaper wrote:That is not what i said at all. to think that way is completely wrong.

So why is that part of the model less important than another part of the model?

You are claiming the model must be fully on the table. If so, why doesn't THAT bit have to be on the table but THIS bit does?

Gwar on page 56 in the BRB it states that for vehicles you are to measure from the hull of the vehicle, not the top of the vehicle. The hull of the vehicle. Not one part of the vehicle that can be taken out of context and used to prove a false point. Addtionally the hull is placed somewhere within the gaming surface the way they are meant to be.(in other words they are designed that way) So find a way in the rules that says that is not the case for yourself and throw down, otherwise stop throwing it out there. It does not add anything to this debate.

DeathReaper wrote:
That is not what i said at all. to think that way is completely wrong.

You've been proven wrong logically. You've been proven wrong linguistically. You've been handed multiple examples of how absurd and unplayable your argument makes the game. You've given vague responses that don't specifically support you to requests for solid rule evidence. All about 10 times.
I'm really not sure why the thread is still going at this point, we all really should just move on.

The sequence of events that leads the vehicle to be partially on is perfectly legal, and the position of being partially on is in this case perfectly legal. No rules say otherwise. The end.

Kapitalist-Pig wrote:Gwar on page 56 in the BRB it states that for vehicles you are to measure from the hull of the vehicle, not the top of the vehicle. The hull of the vehicle. Not one part of the vehicle that can be taken out of context and used to prove a false point. Addtionally the hull is placed somewhere within the gaming surface the way they are meant to be.(in other words they are designed that way) So find a way in the rules that says that is not the case for yourself and throw down, otherwise stop throwing it out there. It does not add anything to this debate.

What?

Page 56 deals with measuring range and distances. What has that got to do with ANYTHING in this thread?

And for the record, the top IS the hull of the vehicle. If it wasn't, blast markers would be useless against vehicles, since "When firing a blast weapon against a vehicle, place the marker with the hole over any part of the vehicle's hull and then roll for scatter as normal." If the top isn't hull, they can never be hit by blasts.

In other words your assertion for the top of the vehicle that is not touching the playing surface is niether here nor there. As vehicles are designed with no bases and thier rules for being in play are different.

Gwar! wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:That is not what i said at all. to think that way is completely wrong.

So why is that part of the model less important than another part of the model?

You are claiming the model must be fully on the table. If so, why doesn't THAT bit have to be on the table but THIS bit does?

All parts of the base are equally important, than is why they all must be on the gaming surface.

Gorkamorka wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:

That is not what i said at all. to think that way is completely wrong.

You've been proven wrong logically. You've been proven wrong linguistically. You've been handed multiple examples of how absurd and unplayable your argument makes the game. You've given vague responses that don't specifically support you to requests for solid rule evidence. All about 10 times.
I'm really not sure why the thread is still going at this point, we all really should just move on.

Thanks for adding nothing to the discussion.

I have proven the other side wrong logically and linguistically. You've been handed multiple examples of how your argument lies outside the rules requirements.

There is a clearly defined playing area. Only things that are within this playing area count as being in play. If you have half a model not in a designated playing area that model is not a legal target, or particpant in the game.

Partially on is partially off. therefore the whole base must be within the playing area.

Thus it is wrong to move off or partially on the board edge.

I can see your side of it. but i do not agree with it. if you can not see my side then i have nothing more to prove.

DeathReaper wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:

DeathReaper wrote:
However since I can point to an area of the base that is not on the table, then you can not move there. since your base is not on the table. and thus an illegal move..

Fixed your grammar too =\

I fixed your fixing of my grammar.

Units that fall back and touch the table edge are destroyed, this must mean the edge is out of play for units.

ergo if any part of the base is off the table = out of play.

That's nice, your display of complete disregard for English and its conventions has made it abhorrently apparent that no you're not stupid, you're just trolling.
Good day to you sir.