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.

Note: Please vote for how you play, not necessarily the RAW. Feel free to discuss any relevant RAW within the thread.

A question came up about this recently with regards to Techmarine and whether or not they would be eligible to repair another vehicle from their own transport vehicle. The issue here is that the Techmarine requires base to base contact with a vehicle to be able to repair it.

I'm sure most people are familiar with the rule which allows transported models to still interact with other models via the hull of a transport vehicle, but here's a quick refresher:

BRB - Page 66 wrote:If the players need to measure a range involving the embarked unit (except for its shooting), this range is measured to or from the vehicle's hull.

However, base to base contact is never strictly defined by the rules, and as such there are often two views on the matter, one being that is simply an indicater that there must be 0" distance between two models, while the other is that models must literally touch their base against one another (or against the hull in the case of vehicles) to satisfy the term.

There are a number of instances where wargear or special rules require some form of base contact such as the Techmarine repairing a vehicle or the Dark Eldar Webway Portal being deployed, there are also potential problems such as being able to achieve base to base contact with a transported unit for assaulting.

So how do you play with regards to this matter.

Voted B.

I see "base to base" as meaning the actual bases of the models are touching. With that interpretation, there would be no need to measure any ranges so the "hull rule" from the BRB wouldn't come into effect and you would not be able to perform actions that require base-to-base contact while embarked.

I understand that may cause some weird game issues in certain circumstances but even so, I think I'd still probably play it that you have to get out of your transport in order to get the "base-to-base contact" the rule describes. I don't think it is really game-breaking either way, so if my opponent disagreed I'd be happy to roll off.

DoW

Voted A

To determine if a model is in base to base one could measure to determine the distance, thus a measurement can occur. Also, whenever talking about distance measurement comes into play to determine the distance to and from an object.

Thus if determined that being into base to base requires a measurement then it can be measured from a vehicle via the "hull rule". So, if the vehicles hull is touching another vehicles hull it's considered being into base to base as far as I see.

I see "base to base" as meaning the actual bases of the models are touching.

Vehicles don't even have bases, they have hulls, so how could you ever be in base to base with a vehicle?

Non Raw, I could see a tech marine fixing the side of a Rhino out the door of his transport to avoid enemy firepower. Also, a player could build a custom rhino with servo arms so that it's like the tech marine uses his own tank to fix the other tank.

B.

If models aren't in base-to-base contact, I don't count them as being. The only exceptions to this I allow is models which don't have a base (Defilers, and I suppose Hierophants); in which case I do as the rulebook suggests.

So no, a model inside a transport can't be in base contact with anything if you play how I do. If you want base-to-base contact, get out of the transport first.

I will say I can see why people would play the other way too though.

Neith wrote:If models aren't in base-to-base contact, I don't count them as being. The only exceptions to this I allow is models which don't have a base (Defilers, and I suppose Hierophants); in which case I do as the rulebook suggests.

Just to reiterate, the only transports that have bases are flying units. Not just Defilers and Hierophants, but Rhinos, Land Raiders, Chimeras, so on so forth. It's just assumed by RAI that base to base with a vehicle means hull to base.

Kreedos wrote:Vehicles don't even have bases, they have hulls, so how could you ever be in base to base with a vehicle?

You can't. You can move your model's base into contact with the vehicle (which is done when assaulting the vehicle, for example...) which accomplishes the same thing.




I'm going with B. While determining whether or not models are in base-to-base contact still requires a form of measurement (you don't actually break out a tape measure, but determining that the distance between them = '0' is taking a measurement, even if you're just eyeballing it) ...and so would seem to fit into the rule allowing you to measure to the vehicle's hull instead, it would seem to lead to potentially silly situations, like being able to assault the troops inside a land raider by moving into contact witht he tank's hull.

And, as mentioned in the other thread, the techmarine being able to fix a vehicle parked alongside the one that he's in.

So I'm going with base-to-base meaning just that, with no proxies allowed.

For a tansported model for most purposes measurements have to be taken from fire points, so if a transport vehicle can bring a fire point into contact with the hull of another vehicle then the base to base requirement might be able to be met. Hull to hull just isnt the same as base to base for transported model.


Sliggoth

I'll just go with:
RaW = No, so I play it as No.

While for the purposes measuring effects generated by a model inside a transport, you are supposed to measure from the model's hull, I do think base contact is a different thing from 'distance = 0"'.

Sliggoth wrote:For a tansported model for most purposes measurements have to be taken from fire points,

Not actually correct. For shooting the range is measured from the fire point. For any other measurement involving the unit inside the transport, you measure to the vehicle's hull (page 66: "Embarking").

I vote "No"

You wouldn't have your squad in a battlewagon assault a Land Raider without getting out first!

This is one of the problems which occurs when people become convinced that the rules provide a way to measure to embarked models instead of simply providing a way to measure to embarked models.

Even if a person holds to Insaniak's position that base-to-base is equivalent to measuring for 0", the rules do not allow for measuring to embarked models. Since all of the base-to-base statements require being in base contact with a model, then none of those can be satisfied for embarked units. That means that base contact rules, whether it be one of the techmarine rules, or the base contact for assaulting, do not apply.

What I wonder at is the explanations of the people who voted for allowing base contact to embarked models as far as why that base contact measurement doesn't apply to assaults.

solkan wrote:This is one of the problems which occurs when people become convinced that the rules provide a way to measure to embarked models instead of simply providing a way to measure to embarked models.

I suspect that one of those 'models' is supposed to be 'unit'...

Even if a person holds to Insaniak's position that base-to-base is equivalent to measuring for 0"

'Even if'...?

What else can you call determining the distance between the models if not measurement...?

, the rules do not allow for measuring to embarked models.

Sorry, but this is meaningless. Measuring the distance to a unit involves measuring to a model within the unit. Your distinction would only mean anything if units had a defined perimeter, rather than being made of of a group of individual models.

Measuring a distance to a specific model in a unit is measuring a distance involving the unit, because the model is a part of the unit.



That being said, I still voted 'no'.

solkan wrote:What I wonder at is the explanations of the people who voted for allowing base contact to embarked models as far as why that base contact measurement doesn't apply to assaults.

Because vehicle models cannot make assault moves?

But no, you are correct - by the same logic that a Techmarine in a Rhino could go into base to base with another Rhino to repair it by touching hulls then my mob of boyz assaulting the Landraider can choose to swing on the transported passengers since I'm in base to base contact with them.

Yes, the option A seems to open a can of worms, and is in my opinion pretty cheesy.

Though for the record I'd love to have my Boyz swing at the Techmarine and Tac squad in a Rhino while my Nob smashes it with his Klaw. Probably after we pop it they have to stay in b2b with us too, since we started that way. I dunno, if someone wants to say it works this way to me in a tourney I'd be game to let them - Waaagh!

f74 wrote:I vote "No"

You wouldn't have your squad in a battlewagon assault a Land Raider without getting out first!

Unless they have boarding planks.

I voted no btw. I can't see how a model inside a transport can be counted as base to base with anything. It would be an immeasurable RAI stretch to try to argue that a techy can make repairs to one vehicle while hanging out a hatch of another vehicle.

This fails on RAI and RAW imo.

augustus5 wrote:

f74 wrote:I vote "No"

You wouldn't have your squad in a battlewagon assault a Land Raider without getting out first!

Unless they have boarding planks.

Of course!

Voted no, Base to base is not a range, it is a location.

I voted "no" as well.

I mean, if you allowed this position, then the models on board could also be considered to assault another vehicle after their transport rammed it.

I voted 'No' as well, I believe the 'from the hull' rules are for things like measuring for Psychic powers and the like.

I also feel that Base to Base isn't 0". Factually yes, but not for game terms.

Why do things have to be harder than they should be?

Embarked units are within confines of a vehicle. Nothing can be done from inside, except firing from fire points or using the Ork boarding plank rule.

insaniak wrote:

, the rules do not allow for measuring to embarked models.

Sorry, but this is meaningless. Measuring the distance to a unit involves measuring to a model within the unit. Your distinction would only mean anything if units had a defined perimeter, rather than being made of of a group of individual models.

Measuring a distance to a specific model in a unit is measuring a distance involving the unit, because the model is a part of the unit.

Measuring the distance to a model a typical part of determining the distance to a unit, but there's no way to determine the distance to the models in a unit given the distance to the unit.

There's a simple example. Place three models, A, B and C, in a ruin in a line, and call that unit 1. Place another model D somewhere else on the board. If I tell you that the distance from model D to unit 1 is 10 inches, where are models A, B, and C and what are the distances from those models to model D? There are any number of possible answers, none of which can be proven to be correct without more information.

That's the situation the transport rule places the players in because the rule for embarked units doesn't specify where the positions of the embarked models. The rulebook gives a distance to the unit, and no meaningful information about the distances to the models in that unit. Or, in other words, there's no way of measuring to the embarked models.

Voted B... and would have to agree with others that if you're going to play it the other way then it works both ways: an assaulting unit can make contact with a transport but attack the passengers in side.

Old Man Ultramarine wrote:Why do things have to be harder than they should be?

Embarked units are within confines of a vehicle. Nothing can be done from inside, except firing from fire points or using the Ork boarding plank rule.

because pg. 66 says otherwise.


While　I dont know about fixing your own vehicle, im hard pressed to see why a friendly vehicle carrying a techy in base to base contact with another friendly vehicle cannot fix it.

Prerequisite 1 - Tech needs to be in base to base contact with the unit.
(models without a base are measured from the vehicle hull as the rule states)

Problem - Techy is inside a vehicle which means we cant measure base to base of the techy.

However,

Pg66 allows us to measure from the hull.

Not trying to be argumentative, but can someone show me where my thinking is going wrong?

Is it simply the argument that you cant "measure" the distance "base to base" ??

Exactly. “Base contact” is a state/status, not a distance.

If you try to apply the rule on page 66 to equate “base contact” and a distance of 0”, you wind up with all kinds of potentially ridiculous and broken situations, like a unit assaulting a vehicle and counting as being in base contact with the passengers.

I think the whole "base contact" =/= 0" is a bad arguement against this case.

Also, a unit inside a transport cannot attack through it because in order for a model to be in base contact with an opponents models it must have some sort of exemption from the 1" rule.

the assault move allows you to get closer than 1"
being in a vehicle does not mean you can just break this rule at any time, when you tank shock, for example, enemy models are palced 1" away from your hull.

HIWPI the tech marine cannot repair another vehicle while embarked. The arguements against doing so have been fairly weak, and I do not have a RAW explanation as to why I will be playing it that way.