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.

MrMerlin wrote:Mo I mean, star engines are meant to used for that, if not, for what ele?

Yjey're meant for additional movement in the shooting phase. That's all they're meant for.

Night's Blood wrote:You're right, moving normally is never defined.

But i can guarantee you tank shocking in the shooting phase is absolutely not "moving normally".

BTW, the "we both have valid points so we can't convince each other" is hogwash. Someone is right, someone is wrong.
INAT agrees with me, not you.

Try to play more than one game with someone pulling this

INAT is just as much hogwash as can be produced by an arbitrary number of posters on this forum. It's not official in any way shape or form and is merely a few players' attempt at patching together rules for competitive play. It's sort of a TO's easy way out, though, since it covers a lot of the ambiguities, so it's commonly used.

Fact remains, the rules do not cover this properly. In fact, while I agree with you that you shouldn't be able to tank shock in the shooting phase - or rather that the tank shock / ram should count for it's own movement - that's quite frankly my own opinion and has no bearing in the matter at hand. As the rules are read, it gives permission to tank shock in the shooting phase using this vehicle upgrade, with just about the only thing possibly being denied being ramming - but that has to do with speed settings rather than time used.

Let's face it, though, it's a fourth edition codex that wasn't written close enough to fifth edition, so some things are going to break or malfunction. In fact, due to the fact it IS a fourth edition codex, I'd recommend interpreting the rules as favourably to that codex as possible. Same goes for old Witch Hunters, Necrons and Tau.

Mahtamori wrote:

Night's Blood wrote:You're right, moving normally is never defined.

But i can guarantee you tank shocking in the shooting phase is absolutely not "moving normally".

BTW, the "we both have valid points so we can't convince each other" is hogwash. Someone is right, someone is wrong.
INAT agrees with me, not you.

Try to play more than one game with someone pulling this

INAT is just as much hogwash as can be produced by an arbitrary number of posters on this forum. It's not official in any way shape or form and is merely a few players' attempt at patching together rules for competitive play. It's sort of a TO's easy way out, though, since it covers a lot of the ambiguities, so it's commonly used.

Fact remains, the rules do not cover this properly. In fact, while I agree with you that you shouldn't be able to tank shock in the shooting phase - or rather that the tank shock / ram should count for it's own movement - that's quite frankly my own opinion and has no bearing in the matter at hand. As the rules are read, it gives permission to tank shock in the shooting phase using this vehicle upgrade, with just about the only thing possibly being denied being ramming - but that has to do with speed settings rather than time used.

Let's face it, though, it's a fourth edition codex that wasn't written close enough to fifth edition, so some things are going to break or malfunction. In fact, due to the fact it IS a fourth edition codex, I'd recommend interpreting the rules as favourably to that codex as possible. Same goes for old Witch Hunters, Necrons and Tau.

But ramming is a special type of tankshock. They follow the same rule mechanic to initiate. Read the tank shock/ramming rage again and you will see what i mean.

I agree that INAT isn't perfect, as their latest Shattershard ruling shows, but i think we can agree that this is one case where you believe in RAW or RAI, the text supports both.