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 noticed this mentioned in another thread, and I didn't want to derail the original post.

Now, as far as I understand it, the pivot trick is performed by deploying a model like a land raider sideways, and then at the beginning of your movement rotating it then moving (gaining a few inches on that first move).

Now, I don't really understand how people thing this is a legal manoeuvre. Yes, I understand that you can freely pivot your vehicle, but the distances it can move are quite clearly laid out. I interpret that in such a way that you can end your move sideways or even have twirled it like a top the whole way, but at the end, no part will be farther forward than the previous most forward part as per the movement chart (6" combat speed, etc.)

How are others justifying this? I would like to hear some counter-points (or is there some different pivot trick? Someone showed it to me once, and I made the same points above to their demonstration).

It is entirely legal, and has been since at least 3rd ed.

This is because pivoting is a "free" action, which does not count as using up any movement, and therefore you measure displacement after the initial pivot.

no part will be farther forward than the previous most forward part as per the movement chart

No such rules exists essentially you just have to measure consistently so one part of the vehcile is used as the start and end points on the movement. I think you are confusing this with the measure 6" from eth front of the models base and place the back of eth modle 6" away. If you pivot you are then free to measure 6" or 12" (or however far you can and wnat to legally move) from the front of the model as long as the front of the model is then used for the end point (and you can again pivot here if you wish).

I'd never use it to grab the extra inches from the deployment zone, but I believe the essential position is that a pivot is done on the center axis. Since vehicles are not square (except for the monolith) that means that pointing the short edge towards someone will close the range if they began facing the long edge. At most, this might be a difference of 4 or 5 inches for a Deffrolla equipped battlewagon. They're quite narrow, but very long.

Now in a game I will certainly pivot my vehicles to face my opponents before ramming and I won't pull the front back to meet where the side facing my opponent began. Doing that can cause other issues. Namely, if you happen to cross other models, or come within an inch of the enemy.

An advantage to the opponent of this approach is that vehicles which can take advantage of a pivot, like a battlewagon, need a great deal of space to execute one. If I'm unwilling to move my model backward to preserve the range to you, I'm also unwilling to shift my model back and forth to pivot around other units.

I definitely think it is unsportsmanlike at the beginning of a match- but I think it has a place in the course of the game. Another term you've probably run across is 'hockey stop' where a rhino will move forward its maximum distance then pivot 90 or 180 degrees so that its cargo can jump out a half rhino or full rhino length closer to the enemy. Usually any of these approaches increases the vulnerability of the vehicle executing it. Side armor is rarely as tough as front armor.

Hrm, reread p 57 out loud, I guess I see that.

Fearspect wrote:It doesn't actually say that though, nosferatu1001.

At one point it says (p 57), "Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving, so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as stationary"
-Meaning that a pivot does not count as a move when you are deciding if you are stationary.

Before that it says, "Turning does not reduce the vehicle's move. This means that a vehicle may combine forward and reverse movement in the same turn providing it does not exceed its maximum move"
-meaning you have a maximum move

So it seems clear as day that I can pivot, but not exceed a total move of 12" on a non-fast tank. Is this another case of more rules on another page? I find I have to flip around a lot trying to get good answers in the book most of the time.

Yes, and as you said, pivoting does not count toward the total move of 12", because pivoting is not movement.

Yeah, for some reason I was reading the second part in there about forward and reverse movement as referring to pivots. It seems completely unnecessary in restrospect, why tell people that you can move back and forth?

Fearspect wrote:Yeah, for some reason I was reading the second part in there about forward and reverse movement as referring to pivots. It seems completely unnecessary in restrospect, why tell people that you can move back and forth?

If you happen to be a Landraider Redeemer 3" from an Ork horde, you could move 6" back, then 6" forward to return to the same position. You can still flame the Orks, but now they need a 6 to hit you in CC because you moved 12". It doesn't come up often, but it is nice to have that clarified.

Gitzbitah wrote:

Fearspect wrote:Yeah, for some reason I was reading the second part in there about forward and reverse movement as referring to pivots. It seems completely unnecessary in restrospect, why tell people that you can move back and forth?

If you happen to be a Landraider Redeemer 3" from an Ork horde, you could move 6" back, then 6" forward to return to the same position. You can still flame the Orks, but now they need a 6 to hit you in CC because you moved 12". It doesn't come up often, but it is nice to have that clarified.

Sorry, completely wrong. Read the rules for Assaults and Vehicles. You measure the distance covered from Point A to Point B. Moving Forwards and Backwards or moving in Circles doesn't help.

Blast! And here I thought I was being helpful. Oh well, Gwar is definitely right.

Gitzbitah wrote:Blast! And here I thought I was being helpful. Oh well, Gwar is definitely right.

Glad to help as always.

To adress the OP: Nos1001 is correct as usual, it's been legal for many, many years. The downside is, of course, you expose you rear armour for T1, especialy now that there is Seize The Initative.

The downside is, of course, you expose you rear armour for T1, especialy now that there is Seize The Initative.

Which is why everyone does it with landriaders... (and it's side armour you're mainly exposing though it could be rear dependant on deployment and infiltrators.)

Not such a great tactic with monoliths though.

Wow i've never heard of this before. ill try it next time I play

As said above, this is a very commonly used tactic. Sometimes I like to spin my Monoliths in place incessantly just because I can (and because they make wicked tops).

That said, if you think there's a possibility your opponent is squeezing a 12" move into a 14" move by pivoting, just ask them kindly to measure movement from the center of the vehicle instead of the front armor.

Alamoth wrote:That said, if you think there's a possibility your opponent is squeezing a 12" move into a 14" move by pivoting, just ask them kindly to measure movement from the center of the vehicle instead of the front armor.

And I would kindly ask you to let me play by the rules.

Alamoth wrote:That said, if you think there's a possibility your opponent is squeezing a 12" move into a 14" move by pivoting, just ask them kindly to measure movement from the center of the vehicle instead of the front armor.

If they measure from the center of the vehicle instead of the front, they will still go the extra inches as soon as they pivot on the spot, once stopping their move. It took me a second to realize this, but if you think about it you'll see it

It is, as mentioned, perfectly legal...

Alamoth - as Gwar! said, unles you had come to a houserule agreement *before* the game, I would expect to be able to play by the rules.

Gwar! wrote:

Alamoth wrote:That said, if you think there's a possibility your opponent is squeezing a 12" move into a 14" move by pivoting, just ask them kindly to measure movement from the center of the vehicle instead of the front armor.

And I would kindly ask you to let me play by the rules.

If any part of your vehicle ends up more than it's allotted movement distance from where it started, I believe I have a very valid claim that you in fact broke the rules.

Alamoth wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Alamoth wrote:That said, if you think there's a possibility your opponent is squeezing a 12" move into a 14" move by pivoting, just ask them kindly to measure movement from the center of the vehicle instead of the front armor.

And I would kindly ask you to let me play by the rules.

If any part of your vehicle ends up more than it's allotted movement distance from where it started, I believe I have a very valid claim that you in fact broke the rules.

Please. make your case. Why, having followed all the movement rules, have I broken the rules...

Alamoth just have them measure from the centre at all times and you'll notice they still get the extra movement by pivoting. However if you are claiming that including pivoting no part of the model can move more than the alotted movement a vehcile that turns a full 180 will have already used up 6" move despite the rulebook saying they haven't moved.

This is an entirely legal move by both RaW and RaI (as they've not changed it in 3 editions and is a fundamental result of their turning system). It is sneaky and not really in the spirit of the rules but it is entirely legal and outlawing it is impossible without fundamentally changing how the vehicle turning system works.

Alamoth wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

Alamoth wrote:That said, if you think there's a possibility your opponent is squeezing a 12" move into a 14" move by pivoting, just ask them kindly to measure movement from the center of the vehicle instead of the front armor.

And I would kindly ask you to let me play by the rules.

If any part of your vehicle ends up more than it's allotted movement distance from where it started, I believe I have a very valid claim that you in fact broke the rules.

Except pivoting does nto count as moving, therefore any "movement" gained by this does not count towards your allotted distance.

Please, review the arguments above your statement to see where the rules are being broken. You will find they arent, and this has been around since 3rd ed with no change!

Good discussion, I never thought about this with my vehicles. FlingitNow is entirely correct about measuring from the center, even if I do that I can still pivot at the end of my movement and be in the same spot as if I pivoted at the beginning. Only thing is that I'm now pointing the wrong direction. As has been stated it's entirely legal, but I can't see people "abusing" it, since you'd never be pointing in the right direction, and in the case of my preds exposing weak armour.

Now, what it stopping me from constantly pivoting the model, switching anchorpoints for the pivot, and basically wiggling it across the table in a single turn?

Fearspect wrote:Now, what it stopping me from constantly pivoting the model, switching anchorpoints for the pivot, and basically wiggling it across the table in a single turn?

How about the rule that says a vehicle always pivots on its center?

the anchor point of the pivot is the center.

As people have pointed out repeatedly, this is the way the rule works, and it works best with things like land raiders or ork trukks which have the same armor all around.

There is a flip side to this that people don't always notice...just as the turn can "add" to your movement due to the shape of the vehicle, it can also take away from it. Often you'll see someone try to move their land raider by measuring 12 inches from the front, and then place it sideways at the end of its move, basically measuring front->side instead of front->front and then a pivot.

Anyone who is shocked by this I have to imagine hasn't played very many people. I picked this up a couple of months after playing and have never thought it was unfair.

Well, it does seem absolutely correct and easier worded that movement is always done from the centre of the model, if that is where pivots are done from.

Fearspect wrote:Well, it does seem absolutely correct and easier worded that movement is always done from the centre of the model, if that is where pivots are done from.

ANd even if it is done from the centre, you still can do the trick.

lambadomy wrote:Often you'll see someone try to move their land raider by measuring 12 inches from the front, and then place it sideways at the end of its move, basically measuring front-side instead of front-front and then a pivot.

Is there anything wrong with this?

It's perfectly legal, but in friendly games I don't do it.

In tournaments though? Every game, baby!