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.

Gwar! wrote:No, that's velocity. If you move in a Zigzag or round a corner say, you might end up only 3" away from your starting position, but have travelled 6". While it is true you cannot end up more than 6" away from your starting position without having travelled more than 6", I just wanted to correct the notion that it was somehow distance from starting position that determined if you can fire or not.

For example, you can move 3" Forward, Pivot 90 Degrees, then move forward 4". You'll end up only 5" from your starting Position, but have travelled 7", so you would count as moving at Cruising Speed, not Combat Speed.

What we are talking about are players that would argue that they only moved 5", basically "pivoting" in such a way as to gain free movement.

Pivoting to gain distance is legal, and always has been. Also, can I ask why would you do that? when Moving 5" and moving 6" has zero difference between them?

Doing the whole "Sideways deployment and getting 1.7" closer to the enemy" has always been legal.

Blackbone wrote:I'm not sure what anyone is referring to when you are talking about getting extra movement from 'turning' the Landraider. Movement is a little more simple that - measure your 12" from the Landraider from it's starting position. That is the farthest you can move, period. You can position your vehicle however you wish at the 12" mark. Therefore, you move 12", no more.

Firstly, you need to go and read the rules.

Page 57 states that vehicles can turn any number of times as they move... ...Turning does not reduce a vehicle's move.

Therefore the vehicle can start sideways, rotate to face fowards. As a result of that rotation the front of the vehicle will not be about 1.5 inches over the start line. This is a fact, its simple geometry.. if you don't believe me take a model tank off your wargaming shelf and see for yourself.

When you turn the vehicle like this it isn't covering any distance, it displaces 0" dispite the face that it's edges become bother nearer and further away from things... the way it has to be unless its circular.

toxic_wisdom wrote:Pivoting a vehicle on its center point prior to moving the model is perfectly legal, and does not affect the distance traveled by the vehicle ( page 57 ).

Nowhere does it say that on p.57. You are taking several other statements there out of context.

The only way I would not take offense to someone doing this is if they actually did only pivot and then did not move at all. And that is what the rules say, "pivoting on the spot alone does not count as movement." Taking the negative inferrence from this, pivoting on the spot and then moving would then count as part of the movement. {Emphasis added.}

Using a pivot in order to gain extra movement is exactly that...gaining extra movement.

if the terminators have fleet they can assult 30.5 inchs if not they can only go 24.5 inchs

The rule which the "You can't pivot and gain ground" group seems to be forgetting is the part "Turning does not reduce the vehicle's move" on page 57. A ninety degree turn followed by a move of 12" is a 12" movement no matter what the geometry of the vehicle.

There are two effects on vehicles as they turn, as per the RAW:

1. They pivot on the spot and this does not count as moving. But this only applies if they do not then also move.

2. They may turn as many times as they want as they move. If you are not merely pivoting, and are actually moving after the initial pivot, then the movement gained by the pivot also must be considered into the total movement of the model as a whole because the turning is made as the model moves.

So, if you are planning on pivoting and moving in the same movement phase, then the beginning perspective of the vehicle is the begining point for all movement. This is because if you are pivoting AND moving the inital pivot counts as part of the move.

When the rules refer to turning not reducing any movement, you have to think in terms of blocks of troops from WHFB, where those blocks of troops (in general) have to wheel from the farthest point of the frontage of a unit in order to make a turn. In 40K you measure from the closest point on point A to the closest point to point B and your tank can make as many donut spins as it wants while you move it from A to B. But your maximum move is still defined by point A to B. (I realise it can be more complex than this if moving around an obstacle, etc., but that just means you might measure A to B to C to D...) It doesn't mean that somehow a long tank gains bonus free movement merely by turning.

In WHFB, when the unit makes that turn, they might lose 3-4 inches of their movement just turning. There is no equivalent penalty in 40K and this is what the rules are referring to when they describe turning as not reducing a vehicles move. (IIRC, it was played similar to WHFB back in 2d ed.)

I saw a quote one time where someone said if you are looking for Easter eggs in the rules then you are probably not playing correctly. And that is what this whole pivot and then move 12" thereby gaining the "free" movement of the pivot is...an Easter egg.

Eldanar wrote:2. They may turn as many times as they want as they move. If you are not merely pivoting, and are actually moving after the initial pivot, then the movement gained by the pivot also must be considered into the total movement of the model as a whole because the turning is made as the model moves.

Hmm, how do I say this nicely.. No. This is wrong and wrong and Wrong thrice over.

Rule for pivoting:
Page 57: Vehicles turn by pivoting on the spot about their centre-point, rather than 'wheeling' round. Turning does not reduce the vehicle's move.

Emphasis mine. So, there you have it, you cannot claim that distance gained by pivoting counts as movement, because it doesn't. Plain and Simple. And as shown by that wonderful diagram, you measure the distance moved from the front of the vehicle.

Your attempt to try and bring in WHFB rules are confusing and idiotic, please do not do it again (this thread is about 40k in case you were wondering.).

Eldanar wrote:

toxic_wisdom wrote:Pivoting a vehicle on its center point prior to moving the model is perfectly legal, and does not affect the distance traveled by the vehicle ( page 57 ).

Nowhere does it say that on p.57. You are taking several other statements there out of context.

The only way I would not take offense to someone doing this is if they actually did only pivot and then did not move at all. And that is what the rules say, "pivoting on the spot alone does not count as movement." Taking the negative inferrence from this, pivoting on the spot and then moving would then count as part of the movement. {Emphasis added.}

Using a pivot in order to gain extra movement is exactly that...gaining extra movement.

If you pivot the center of your vehicle does not move at all and the front and side are just swapping positions. What you are saying is the same as saying that if I rotate a gun it should count as moving because I gain extra range when I shoot. It's like saying that if i turn sideways then I moved from my center point even though it's in the same spot.




-Orkishly

This question set in my mind:
If a vehicle travels via road (which gives 6" extra movement) can the passengers disembark ( 3.5" with bases included) run 1-6" and assault 6"? It would give them whopping 33,5" assault range!
I think that the rulebook says something against that but my rulebook is not...readable now. Man I sometimes hate my cats.
Top rule number one: Don't leave your rulebook on floor if you have cats or dogs.

Page 57 wrote:Vehicles, with the exception of walkers and skimmers, that move at Cruising Speed following a road for their entire Movement phase may move up to an extra 6".

70 wrote:Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Of is going to move) flat out in that Movement phase.

So yes, a open topped vehicle/Land Raider that moves on a road 18" can have the passengers disembark and assault.

Gwar! wrote:

Page 57 wrote:Vehicles, with the exception of walkers and skimmers, that move at Cruising Speed following a road for their entire Movement phase may move up to an extra 6".

70 wrote:Passengers may not embark onto or disembark from a fast vehicle if it has moved (Of is going to move) flat out in that Movement phase.

So yes, a open topped vehicle/Land Raider that moves on a road 18" can have the passengers disembark and assault.

I guess it's too bad I've never seen a road playing 40k for over a decade Although one time I did agree with a friend that an avenue created by an arrangements of buildings on the table counted as a road, neither of us used it.

Gwar! wrote:

Eldanar wrote:2. They may turn as many times as they want as they move. If you are not merely pivoting, and are actually moving after the initial pivot, then the movement gained by the pivot also must be considered into the total movement of the model as a whole because the turning is made as the model moves.

Hmm, how do I say this nicely.. No. This is wrong and wrong and Wrong thrice over.

Rule for pivoting:
Page 57: Vehicles turn by pivoting on the spot about their centre-point, rather than 'wheeling' round. Turning does not reduce the vehicle's move.

Emphasis mine. So, there you have it, you cannot claim that distance gained by pivoting counts as movement, because it doesn't. Plain and Simple. And as shown by that wonderful diagram, you measure the distance moved from the front of the vehicle.

Your attempt to try and bring in WHFB rules are confusing and idiotic, please do not do it again (this thread is about 40k in case you were wondering.).

makes perfect sense, shot down so bad.