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.

So then quote a rule that proves me wrong and takes precedence. I am not aware that I am ignoring anything.

panama, I am going to have to agree with Razerous and Hymirl here.

You need special permission to move more then 6 inches in the assault phase.

(I am at work so I can't quote now)

You could go through the other thread they linked too... this was hashed out pretty extensively

Here I pulled a piece that I thought makes sense
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tri wrote:
As much as i like Mr T's turtle pie, bring them up as part of the debate only weakens your argument

on page 51 we are asked to follow all the same rules as infantry ... when assaulting we follow the same rules as in the movement phase ...and this is where the rule brake and you can go ether way

A)Bikes can move 12" in the movement phase so they can also move 12" in the assault phase
or
B)Bikes can move 12" in the movement phase that only mean they can move 12" in the "movement phase" ... in the assault phase they fall back on the infantry rules and move 6" but are not slowed by difficult terrain

Next person wrote:
Almost. We're told to follow the same rules for movement, NOT the specific ( ie bikes in this case) UNITS rules for movement. The exception being--as it states-- that you can now go within 1" of an enemy model. The only other changes we have to follow are any listed under the Assault rules caveats of the bike rules. The only rule here is they ignore difficult terrain and treat this as dangerous terrain instead. Therefore bikes still follow the rest of the normal assault rules and only assault 6".

The only way you could choose to follow your point A) is by misreading what is written. Which cannot be defined as RAW then by any stretch of the imagination.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hope this qoute helps the discussion

PanamaG wrote:The rule allows them to move 12 in the movement phase.

The assault rules state" all of the models in the assaulting unit make their assault move following the same rules as in the movement phase."

Page 33 adds " The maximum distance MOST units can move during an assault is 6." Adds nothing but subtracts nothing.

So there you go. Going by what the book says right there, bikes assault 12". Anything else is reaching. Trust me, I agreed with you until I saw this thread. There is nothing easter egg about it, its right there in those three quotes. (actually just the first two)

Also as an aside a lot of people think they can rattle off rules in their own words (which twists the rule) and expect it to become fact. Such as Gwars gem:
Maximum assault is 6" unless explicitly stated otherwise (i.e. Beasts)

Totally reaching and no where in the rules.

"There's no easter egg. All you have to do is read three separate sections on three different pages and it's all spelled out."

Yeah... ok....

Wow... this thread hurts

Look at page 52, the grey box on the right side. It says everything up to that point has dealt with Infantry only. That should be a hint... (Infantry move/assault 6" - gasp!)

Is this what dakka has become.. If its not pro-cons of comp, its some old rule that been argued to the end of times thats beeing necromancied again.

In before lock..

Guys Im not trying to incite you or anything, that is really what I think and from my perspective, if you take the rules as they are written 100% literally you get bikers assaulting 12".

Add in a little RAI and a bit of reach and you get that they don't. That is just how I see it and we are going to have to agree to disagree. But either way I do agree it has already been done to death and the horse is now mush, so forget it.

It's not RAW that bikers get a 12" assault charge. The rules can simply be read in a fashion that supports that position. Of course, the rules can also be read in a fashion that supports the opposite position.

RAW doesn't answer this question.

To be fair.. the RAW on p53 does answer the question. If we are all falling back to base raw, go with that and be done with it. Follow the instructions and charge 12".. no wait, it doesnt tell you to do that. So dont lol

Gez, not this again, Razerous got this one nailed. Movement rules found in the movement section are detailed for infantry movement. Assault rules in the assault section are rules for infantry assaulting, hence in either of these sections there is absolutely no mention of anything or rules otherwise to discuss other unit types.

Rules from page 51 and on detail how the different unit types are either exceptions to the rules previously covered or allow slight modifications to the same rules as mentioned in the very first paragraph found on page 51.

RAW bikes assault 6", simple.

EDIT: The line "...following the same rules as in the Movement phase" is literally telling the reader to follow all the rules for infantry moving because the Movement phase rules are infantry rules...try to find any rule about vehicles, walkers, monstrous creatures, or bikes in the movement section if you don't believe me. For example the rules for moving through difficult terrain are all how infantry move through it, you will not find any information what-so-ever on how difficult terrain affects any other unit type except infantry.

yea thats garbage. 6 in.

Excellent argumentation.

You will go far here, son.

Steelmage, perhjaps instead of personal attacks against me and the Angry Commisar (a violation of the dakka rules i might add) why not attempt to put up a valid argument?

Gwar! wrote:

s.j.mccartney wrote:I only assault my bikes 6 inches max. If you need to cheat to play a game then you've got more issues than another 6 inches assault move can sort out!

Well said. All this Talk about wanting an extra 6" so they can charge the rear armour to penetrate it with their Swords and fists.... makes me nervous.

*Disclaimer: YES I KNOW NO-ONES ACTUALLY SAID IT GROW A SENSE OF HUMOUR!

But, you don't have to hit rear armor to attack a vehicles rear armor value anymore. Do you even play the game?

*Disclaimer: Yes I read your disclaimer, but you should have picked a different example.

Cut some slack Jayden, maybe he meant the extra 6 inches is to reach the vehicle (and then violate it from behind). No need to jump straight to personal attacks that add nothing to the discussion.

Didn't someone suggest discussing this with your opponent? Would anybody actually try to argue this straight faced? Anybody play it 12 inches?

P. 53 also has a small but pertinent snippet on Eldar Jetbikes. "All Eldar Jetbikes (even Dark Eldar Ones) are allowed to move 6" in the assault phase, even if they don't assault."

This limits Eldar Jetbikes to 6" in the assault phase. Bear with me a moment and this will make sense.

Also from 53- "Jetbikes are the same as bikes, with the following exceptions".

"In the assault phase, jetbikes are treated like normal bikes when assaulting"

Therefore, if an Eldar Jetbike is limited to a 6" move in the assault phase, then a jetbike is also limited to 6". Since that jetbike is treated as a normal bike in the assault phase, a normal bike must only be able to move 6".

Hey, look. Your arguing rules (you, me, anybody... generic your). Your arguing specific rules and then use a game mechanic that is wrong. You blow some of your credibility as someone who actually has had to deal with this.

Just saying. Think before you post. It wasn't a personal attack, or if you consider that a personal attack, your (again you, me, anybody) need to lighten up just a bit.

Jayden63 wrote:

Gwar! wrote:

s.j.mccartney wrote:I only assault my bikes 6 inches max. If you need to cheat to play a game then you've got more issues than another 6 inches assault move can sort out!

Well said. All this Talk about wanting an extra 6" so they can charge the rear armour to penetrate it with their Swords and fists.... makes me nervous.

*Disclaimer: YES I KNOW NO-ONES ACTUALLY SAID IT GROW A SENSE OF HUMOUR!

But, you don't have to hit rear armor to attack a vehicles rear armor value anymore. Do you even play the game?

*Disclaimer: Yes I read your disclaimer, but you should have picked a different example.

Erm...think somebody missed the joke there.

jmurph wrote:Didn't someone suggest discussing this with your opponent? Would anybody actually try to argue this straight faced? Anybody play it 12 inches?

Yes, I suggested that, and no I don't think anyone could make the argument straight faced. But it is the generic GW "We don't care,do whatever you want!" answer.
Or maybe it's just their way of saying "SHUT UP SHUT UP SHUT UP!!" as politely as possible.

I have never seen anyone play this way...and if someone, especially with a nob biker list, tried to pull that on me I would probably just pick up my stuff and walk away.

It's pretty easy to pick apart rules and take them way out of context isnt it? Oh and start a flame war too. Fun times.

*twitch*

This argument has been discussed rather thoroughly in a previous thread (please do a search before posting a new thread) and this current version adds nothing to the conversation except a whole lot of personal attacks.

As such, it is being locked.