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.

movement rules section states no part of the base may end up more then 6" away from a start point


vehicle rules tell us to use hull instead of base,


ergo, no point of the hull may be more then 6" away by RAW

vehicle rules specifically also state to pivot the vehicle "so it doesn't gain extra movement"


so no, you cannot pivot a vehicle to gain extra movement.

Exactly. You can start an Eldar Raider in a "horizontal" standing, rotate it 90 degrees to 'gain' 3" and then move 6"... but you'd have to rotate it another 90 degrees, thus 'losing' 3" and ensuring that no part of the hull ends more than 6" from where the vehicle's hull started (or 12" or whatever you're moving).

So, how exactly does one determine accurately that any point on the hull isn't six inches from where it began? Especially when you factor in pivoting.

Did everyone remember to bring their protractors to the FLGS? I've got my TI-83 if anybody needs it.

 Jambles wrote:
So, how exactly does one determine accurately that any point on the hull isn't six inches from where it began? Especially when you factor in pivoting.

Did everyone remember to bring their protractors to the FLGS? I've got my TI-83 if anybody needs it.

Well, I use a ruler. It works pretty well. I suppose you could bring a protractor and a TI-83, but that seems like overkill. If you need that much computing power to measure 6 inches, you're doing it wrong.

For a real answer, I always know which direction I want to move and where I want to end up. I generally place the ruler next to the vehicle, measuring 6 inches from the hull. I place a die there. I then pivot and move, making sure not to exceed the distance marked by the die. That way, there is no need to remember the original location. You just need to never go past your 'marker'.

Lets re-frame the scenario a little bit. Lets take a model on an oblong base, such as an independent character on a bike. Can that model be lined up horizontally to the edge of the deployment zone, pivot to face forward then move 12 inches forward?

 Kriswall wrote:

 Jambles wrote:
So, how exactly does one determine accurately that any point on the hull isn't six inches from where it began? Especially when you factor in pivoting.

Did everyone remember to bring their protractors to the FLGS? I've got my TI-83 if anybody needs it.

Well, I use a ruler. It works pretty well. I suppose you could bring a protractor and a TI-83, but that seems like overkill. If you need that much computing power to measure 6 inches, you're doing it wrong.

For a real answer, I always know which direction I want to move and where I want to end up. I generally place the ruler next to the vehicle, measuring 6 inches from the hull. I place a die there. I then pivot and move, making sure not to exceed the distance marked by the die. That way, there is no need to remember the original location. You just need to never go past your 'marker'.

That's only one part of the hull, though. Did you leave a reference framing the entire vehicle, and measure from every point on the vehicle to it's final position?

If you pivoted, you could easily end up with a part of the hull much further than 6", as has been described previously.

 DJGietzen wrote:
Lets re-frame the scenario a little bit. Lets take a model on an oblong base, such as an independent character on a bike. Can that model be lined up horizontally to the edge of the deployment zone, pivot to face forward then move 12 inches forward?

No.

If you pivot as you move you can't end up with part of the hull further than 6" if you moved 6".

Because your move has not ended until you are done with all of it, including pivotting. Pivoting isn't a free action you can do before moving or after moving.

Pivoting, then measuring a 6 inch move after is wrong.

Moving 6", stopping and pivoting is moving after you moved.

Measuring from the hull, pivoting, and them measuring to final point being 6" is a 6" move. This however gets weird when pivoting greater than 90" At this point technically you have to measure the starting hull point to the opposite hull point to see how far the model has moved on the table, because if you measure from the Front to the back and the vehicle turned 180 degrees during the move you can end up moving the vehicle much further than the 6" it went.

I miss the turning wheel they had in 2nd edition.

other side rant- pivoting is how they describe turning, you are turning the vehicle not pivoting it when you move. Pivoting just tells you how you turn it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DJGietzen wrote:
Lets re-frame the scenario a little bit. Lets take a model on an oblong base, such as an independent character on a bike. Can that model be lined up horizontally to the edge of the deployment zone, pivot to face forward then move 12 inches forward?

Pivoting is done as you move, not before or after. So the pivot counts as part of the movement, you would measure from where the model started before you did anything to move it (the pivot) and then the final spot to see how it went, in this case you would move it back an inch or so because you went more than 12".

Pivoting is only said to not count as moving if the vehicle remained stationary. Which is kind of a silly sentence since something turning isn't stationary...

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Nothing you posted about vehicle movement actually exists in rules, however. Vehicles may freely move in any direction they wish, with no requirement to drive "forwards"

If you disagree, a page citation and quote is required

You are correct. After rereading all rules from movement phase to when it goes into the section describing terrain the only places I found where it specifies the vehicle having to turn and move straight forward is when a Tank does a Ram/Tank shock, when a flyer is in Zoom mode and when a flying creature is in swoop mode. Which on a different note makes me wonder if there are people out there who try to ram another vehicle while moving sideways with an Ork BW and having that broadside provide the largest area possible to tank shock all infantry inbetween and still take advantage of the line that says the rammer always uses the front armour for calculating ram strength. But yeah aside from those exceptions I don't see any line anywhere else saying forwards.

Its ok - its a common misconception, but hasnt been true since 2nd ed, I believe. When you had vehicle arcs and all other kinds of horror...

deepstriking mc and vehicles aren't allowed to turn, as they are placed still a thing?

 easysauce wrote:
movement rules section states no part of the base may end up more then 6" away from a start point


vehicle rules tell us to use hull instead of base,


ergo, no point of the hull may be more then 6" away by RAW

vehicle rules specifically also state to pivot the vehicle "so it doesn't gain extra movement"


so no, you cannot pivot a vehicle to gain extra movement.

Which movement rules section states this 6" rule? Are you referring to pg 18? I hope not, because that is a specific example of infantry models. If this is not the correct page for your rule citation, can you hook me up with the page number?

Yeah, refer to the old thread.

A bit of a long read but should explain the whole thing. You measure travel of the vehicle, from any point you wish, but centre point makes it easier.

Pivoting on the spot does not count as movement. For those that are saying "Max move 6" from any part of the Hull", You are making Ghost arcs OP:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Nem, here is Milkboy's example:


For our position: It has moved forward 12", then Pivoted on the Green dot "central axis".

If we were to follow your argument, the Red line shows that no part of the Hull is 12" away from the original position of the Hull.

Would you not say that the Positioning of the second Ark (following the Rules as you've interpreted them) is closer in Range to the enemy?

Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, try this if you can:

 BlackTalos wrote:

So i spent some time to get this explained in a picture.

To Nem, but all can try this:
"No part of the vehicle can be further than 6" or you have moved more than you allotted distance"

Now please set up a "long" vehicle, such as a Dark Eldar Raider or Necron Ghost Ark on your Table.
Now assume you move at maximum 6" for 3 turns of the game
All the Red lines on the diagram MUST be 6" (or less)

After these 3 quite simple turns of play, measure the distance (Green lines) from the centre point of the vehicle (or any other part of the Hull you wish to pick)

I can guarantee that your vehicle is now MUCH further than 18" away from its starting position.

Feel free to add a 4th Turn just to make sure the vehicle is facing the same way again, and measure.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kriswall wrote:
For a real answer, I always know which direction I want to move and where I want to end up. I generally place the ruler next to the vehicle, measuring 6 inches from the hull. I place a die there. I then pivot and move, making sure not to exceed the distance marked by the die. That way, there is no need to remember the original location. You just need to never go past your 'marker'.

Not the correct way of measuring travel for vehicles though, but a good simple method to get on with the game without measuring every 0.1 inch
(Also my HIWPI)
For the RaW, follow the link given previously or feel free to ask as i was the main advocate last time =P

 kingbobbito wrote:

DCannon4Life wrote:
Moving your Wave Serpent 6" forward, then spinning it (rotating around the center) before disembarking, magically gaining a free 3" of movement.

Where are you getting these 3" by pivoting around the center? Did you see the diagram I posted about proper vehicle pivoting of 180s? If you pivot around the exact center of the vehicle (not around a flying base or anything like that), you end with your rear exactly where your front should have been. take a ruler, and spin it around the 6" mark. The ruler doesn't gain any ground, the 0" end will be exactly where the 12" end was, spinning something around its perfect center will never make a 180 gain ground.

Say I had a Wave Serpent full of fire dragons, I move the wave serpent forward 6", pivot it 180, and then disembark my fire dragons, rather than needing to use the disembark move to move them to the front of he wave serpent, I can now use their disembark move to move 6" closer to you. That's where the extra 3" of comes, not from the Wave Serpent, but from the Unit embarked.

My view, pivot it all you want, so long as you don't pivot after you've completed your move and started disembarking

 statu wrote:
My view, pivot it all you want, so long as you don't pivot after you've completed your move and started disembarking

So.... move 3" forward, pivot 180, and reverse another 3" is absolutely fine?

As far as I care yeah, the way I see that example is that is no different to pivoting 180 and then reversing 6", and I haven't seen a rule that says you must move vehicles straight forward

 statu wrote:
As far as I care yeah, the way I see that example is that is no different to pivoting 180 and then reversing 6", and I haven't seen a rule that says you must move vehicles straight forward

Which is correct. As far as RaW in concerned, as long as you measure the travel from the same point on the vehicle, and pivot around the centre, you can spin-top your way across the board
In the end, you win some, you loose some, and there is no "distance cheat", both methods have vehicles that can take advantage of the situation.

What about the reverse of the Ghost Ark picture?

Start perpendicular, move 6" up measured from center, then pivot? You've just gained about 3".

So, in trying to prevent people from getting an extra 1-2" when moving in the direction they are facing, they instead get about 3" when moving sideways?

Bharring wrote:
What about the reverse of the Ghost Ark picture?

Start perpendicular, move 6" up measured from center, then pivot? You've just gained about 3".

So, in trying to prevent people from getting an extra 1-2" when moving in the direction they are facing, they instead get about 3" when moving sideways?

Yes, you would gain 3".

What about this:
"Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving, so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as Stationary."

So you deploy your Ghost ark "perpendicular", and then ONLY Pivot. Your range is 3" closer to the enemy. But RaW it is 100% allowed.

By the way, deploying all of your "long Vehicles" perpendicular and then pivoting before moving is completely legal

But that rule doesn't apply, because the Ark moved 6".

If it did, you could move a Predator 12", then, as long as you pivoted, fire all weapons at full BS...

Bharring wrote:
But that rule doesn't apply, because the Ark moved 6".

If it did, you could move a Predator 12", then, as long as you pivoted, fire all weapons at full BS...

You didn't understand my argument then. I am not saying that the above applies when you move.

I am saying that your "complaint" that "You've just gained about 3" " is not valid. As it happens even if you do not move.

I have explained in the previous thread how vehicles move. It is quite simple, and pivoting is not included in any distance travelled.

Some help, possibly

Well, the problem is that most people tend to move their models the way they would in real life. (i.e. they drive them forward, turn, etc.) However, there is absolutely nothing in the rules to support this. So, when I move my models I simply do the following:

I measure from where the model is to where I want it to end up, noting how far that distance is. (I measure from a point on the hull which is closest to where I want to go)
I then move it to its new location, facing in the direction I choose. When doing so, I take care to insure that no part of the model is "past" the point I measured to.

Please note that doing it this way essentially combines the movement and pivot portions of the move. This sometimes results in "crazy" situations where my tanks drive sideways. While it does not seem to fit what we think should happen, it satisfies the rules for the game.

 Green is Best! wrote:
While it does not seem to fit what we think should happen, it satisfies the rules for the game.

Thing is, measuring "from A to B" does not, actually, satisfy the rules of the game.
You are saying that you measure the blue line, but both RaW and HIWPI, i'd force you to measure only per the green line:

I would absolutely use the green line in this case.

 Green is Best! wrote:
I would absolutely use the green line in this case.

So when exactly is it okay to use your "just measure max distance" method? Any time you're doing anything other than moving in a straight line somewhere, such as maneuvering around any sort of terrain or other models, you need to make sure that your vehicle clears it without going through it. Which means you can almost never do a move the way you described it. Sure, you can slide a tank sideways.... you can't, however, slide your tank sideways an extra inch because you did a mid-movement pivot.

As Talos showed earlier, if you just measure from a point to a point, without incorporating movement gained or lost by pivots, you're not going to end up in the right spot. If you're facing forward, drive 6", and then do a pivot, you're going to lose distance if you're long. If you pivot sideways first, and drive sideways 6", then you're going to end in the same spot as if you pivoted after moving, because the spot you measured from is where you lost that extra distance. What you cannot do is pivot while moving, saying that as long as you're ending within 6" you're fine. You'd have to split the movement into pieces, where you move forward 3", pivot (and gain lose that bit of ground depending on your facing), then do another 3" move measuring from your new facing, not using the original measurement. This picture was the one that showed what I'm talking about.

I used to agree that measuring center point to center point was the best method. However, the new rule pretty much says you cannot have any part of the model further away than max distance allowed to move.

When going around terrain, I just do the best I can to measure distance. If it calls for it, I do segmented movements to best figure it out. (i.e. move 3", set down remeasure, etc.).

However, I think the bigger concern was the pivot to gain distance that used to be prevalent (i.e. start with landraiders sideways on the deployment edge, pivot 90" to start movement, then move 12")

 kingbobbito wrote:
You'd have to split the movement into pieces, where you move forward 3", pivot (and gain lose that bit of ground depending on your facing), then do another 3" move measuring from your new facing, not using the original measurement.

This is indeed how the current rules for movement of vehicles require you to measure. Full explanation is in the linked thread.

 Green is Best! wrote:
However, I think the bigger concern was the pivot to gain distance that used to be prevalent (i.e. start with landraiders sideways on the deployment edge, pivot 90" to start movement, then move 12")

Which is still completely allowed, even in the new 7th Ed Rule set.

If we follow the interpretation of the "you cannot have any part of the model further away than max distance allowed to move", then please try this, and report your findings, i an curious:

Don't get me wrong, I fully support moving from center point to center point and pivot all you want. It is the easiest way to keep things honest. There are times when you pivot an oblong vehicle that will cause you to "gain" movement. However, there are also times where pivoting can cause you to lose movement. The main thing is that pivoting be done at the center of the vehicle, not off a corner to "swing" the vehicle around.

I thought there was a passage in the new rules that states a model cannot have any part of it further than x inches away. (I believe it was referring to oblong shaped bases in this case). However, my recollection of rules is far from perfect these days. I will have to double check when I get home.

If you move six up, six up, six over, over the course of 3 turns, the point that moved has only moved about 13". So, 3 turns of diagonal movement should put you about 5" further, along the same vector.

Not sure what the implications of that are, though.

[quote=BlackTalos 646545 7798714 2d7c08edf1c554ec733c144cb9cf8788.jpg