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.

Stephanius wrote:Measuring from a single point of the model and not moving the whole model past that point is close to RAW in most cases.
However, throw in a power-slide and you see quickly how this fails to yield RAW compatible results.

Right, you just measure from the point that will move the farthest, simple. You don't have to worry about "every atom", just the part you will swing the most. If you plan on a 180 degree turn with movement, you start with the part that is the opposite side of the direction you go and measure from there.

No need to complicate things.

Unit1126PLL wrote:Yes, because you look down the barrel for line of sight. The only exception is if the weapon can't physically turn (e.g. it was glued down).

But not limited to the Movement Phase. There is no limit to doing it in the Shooting Phase.

Moving an pivoting are entirely separate actions as far as I read it. As long as pivoting a model does not make any part of your hull breach the vehicals maxium movement I believe it is a legal pivot. So long as the vehicle can physically fit on the path you would have moved through to get to that location (skimmers ignore this bit.)

 Charistoph wrote:

Stephanius wrote:Measuring from a single point of the model and not moving the whole model past that point is close to RAW in most cases.
However, throw in a power-slide and you see quickly how this fails to yield RAW compatible results.

Right, you just measure from the point that will move the farthest, simple. You don't have to worry about "every atom", just the part you will swing the most. If you plan on a 180 degree turn with movement, you start with the part that is the opposite side of the direction you go and measure from there.

No need to complicate things.

Unit1126PLL wrote:Yes, because you look down the barrel for line of sight. The only exception is if the weapon can't physically turn (e.g. it was glued down).

But not limited to the Movement Phase. There is no limit to doing it in the Shooting Phase.

Well, what I am confused by is that models only have permission to move in the movement phase. There is no permission in the shooting phase, until after a target has been selected, for a vehicle to turn any of its guns. The shooting phase says a target selected must be in line of sight, however. The only solution I can find is if you take "Arc of Sight" to mean "Line of Sight" but then you could point your barrel in such a way as to shoot around cover (i.e. you look at LOS from the end of a Vanquisher tank's barrel poking out from behind an otherwise solid building).

If it is true that you can only move your turret in the movement phase, then traversing the turret would reduce your movement (if the FAQ answer is interpreted correctly by Kanluwen) because the gun barrel, which is part of the vehicle, can only ever move 6" during that phase (at least in the case of a Leman Russ. Other tanks it can go 12".)

Which brings up another question. If part of the vehicle (e.g. the gun barrel) moves 12" but other parts only move 4" or whatever, is the tank moving at cruising or combat speed?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Well, what I am confused by is that models only have permission to move in the movement phase. There is no permission in the shooting phase, until after a target has been selected, for a vehicle to turn any of its guns. The shooting phase says a target selected must be in line of sight, however. The only solution I can find is if you take "Arc of Sight" to mean "Line of Sight" but then you could point your barrel in such a way as to shoot around cover (i.e. you look at LOS from the end of a Vanquisher tank's barrel poking out from behind an otherwise solid building).

If it is true that you can only move your turret in the movement phase, then traversing the turret would reduce your movement (if the FAQ answer is interpreted correctly by Kanluwen) because the gun barrel, which is part of the vehicle, can only ever move 6" during that phase (at least in the case of a Leman Russ. Other tanks it can go 12".)

Which brings up another question. If part of the vehicle (e.g. the gun barrel) moves 12" but other parts only move 4" or whatever, is the tank moving at cruising or combat speed?

Where does turning the turret or sponson count as Movement? For a Hull-mounted weapon, this is true, of course, since it carries no inherent movement on its own. But sponsons and turrets are allowed a field of fire depending on how far they can turn.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Well, what I am confused by is that models only have permission to move in the movement phase. There is no permission in the shooting phase, until after a target has been selected, for a vehicle to turn any of its guns. The shooting phase says a target selected must be in line of sight, however. The only solution I can find is if you take "Arc of Sight" to mean "Line of Sight" but then you could point your barrel in such a way as to shoot around cover (i.e. you look at LOS from the end of a Vanquisher tank's barrel poking out from behind an otherwise solid building).

If it is true that you can only move your turret in the movement phase, then traversing the turret would reduce your movement (if the FAQ answer is interpreted correctly by Kanluwen) because the gun barrel, which is part of the vehicle, can only ever move 6" during that phase (at least in the case of a Leman Russ. Other tanks it can go 12".)

Which brings up another question. If part of the vehicle (e.g. the gun barrel) moves 12" but other parts only move 4" or whatever, is the tank moving at cruising or combat speed?

Where does turning the turret or sponson count as Movement? For a Hull-mounted weapon, this is true, of course, since it carries no inherent movement on its own. But sponsons and turrets are allowed a field of fire depending on how far they can turn.

Because if we take Kriswall's interpretation of the FAQ (""If a model moves, no part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model's move distance away from where it [the part of the model in question] started the Movement phase.") at face value, then the gun barrels count as 'part of the model' and traversing them moves the end of the gun barrel, which is also part of the model, and which may very well end up farther from its starting point than other parts of the tank.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Because if we take Kriswall's interpretation of the FAQ (""If a model moves, no part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model's move distance away from where it [the part of the model in question] started the Movement phase.") at face value, then the gun barrels count as 'part of the model' and traversing them moves the end of the gun barrel, which is also part of the model, and which may very well end up farther from its starting point than other parts of the tank.

And ignore this paragraph?

On some models, it will actually be impossible to move the gun and point it towards the target because of the way the model is assembled. In this case, players should assume that the guns on a vehicle are free to rotate or swivel on their mountings. In the rare cases when it matters, assume that guns can swivel vertically up to 45º, even if the barrel on the model itself cannot physically do that! Additionally, assume all hull-mounted weapons can swivel horizontally up to 45º.

I know the FAQ ignores plenty of the rulebook as it is, but the FAQ only addresses the Movement Phase, not the Shooting Phase, while the above is part of the Vehicles and Line of Sight for Shooting.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
Because if we take Kriswall's interpretation of the FAQ (""If a model moves, no part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model's move distance away from where it [the part of the model in question] started the Movement phase.") at face value, then the gun barrels count as 'part of the model' and traversing them moves the end of the gun barrel, which is also part of the model, and which may very well end up farther from its starting point than other parts of the tank.

And ignore this paragraph?

On some models, it will actually be impossible to move the gun and point it towards the target because of the way the model is assembled. In this case, players should assume that the guns on a vehicle are free to rotate or swivel on their mountings. In the rare cases when it matters, assume that guns can swivel vertically up to 45º, even if the barrel on the model itself cannot physically do that! Additionally, assume all hull-mounted weapons can swivel horizontally up to 45º.

I know the FAQ ignores plenty of the rulebook as it is, but the FAQ only addresses the Movement Phase, not the Shooting Phase, while the above is part of the Vehicles and Line of Sight for Shooting.

That says if it is impossible to move the gun and covers what to do then. If you -can- move the gun, then that sentence does not apply. What makes you think it applies in any case where it -is- possible to move the guns?

But does it say anywhere that swiveling the gun is part of the movement phase? (I honestly don't know, I'm at work without a rulebook).

I really think people are overcomplicating this. If you're rotating the vehicle during movement, you get less movement because part of the movement is the rotation. If you just measure from the front and place the rear 6" from the front measuring spot, then the rear has moved more than 6". Then, as has been demonstrated, you get extra movement out of it for any disembarkations or other things that may depend on facing.

As has been said, the FAQ could *maybe* be ambiguous, but I don't feel it is.

As far as only pivoting, I thought it was a case of "counts as" stationary for the purposes of firing weapons. That doesn't make it free movement when the vehicle is traveling, that makes it "count as" not having moved, even though it did.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

That says if it is impossible to move the gun and covers what to do then. If you -can- move the gun, then that sentence does not apply. What makes you think it applies in any case where it -is- possible to move the guns?

Beside the point. This is still regarding determining LoS, which is only for shooting. If it is free to move when glued tight, it is equally free to move when loose.

Don't forget to check what happens if you also decide to open the vehicle's doors during the movement phase...

There is no provision for moving turrets in the movement phase, but this is irrelevant, since you are free to move them in the shooting phase or just imagine their rotation as desired if glued. That us to say: turrets are also irrelevant in this move/pivot vehicle thread.

Nobody expects us to bring calipers and precisely measure movement to eliminate the last 1/32" error introduced by a non-linear movement. Yet, the FAQ confirms the RAW people have been reading over in the 7th Ed BRB. 6" move plus powerslide is not permitted.

That isn't so bad for the Rhinos, but really bad for Eldar transports, since those are longer, wider and have only one acess point in the rear.

So even dropping the turret question (though I think it is relevant, but I won't press the point), how do you measure for tanks that can change their configuration such as the Ordinatus?

Do I really have to measure the back and front movement separately, and like, make a dice outline or something where I want it to end? Or can I slide sideways (without pivoting) 12" and then pivot the front end to aim the hull mounted gun, thusly moving the front treads an extra few bits) since that's just turning the weapon?

Conversely can I move and then turn the rear half an extra few bits?

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
So even dropping the turret question (though I think it is relevant, but I won't press the point), how do you measure for tanks that can change their configuration such as the Ordinatus?

Do I really have to measure the back and front movement separately, and like, make a dice outline or something where I want it to end? Or can I slide sideways (without pivoting) 12" and then pivot the front end to aim the hull mounted gun, thusly moving the front treads an extra few bits) since that's just turning the weapon?

Conversely can I move and then turn the rear half an extra few bits?

No, just measure from the point that will move the farthest. It really is that simple. If you know you are going to make a skid turn, measure the corner that is on the outside of the turn and leading that turn.

 Charistoph wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
So even dropping the turret question (though I think it is relevant, but I won't press the point), how do you measure for tanks that can change their configuration such as the Ordinatus?

Do I really have to measure the back and front movement separately, and like, make a dice outline or something where I want it to end? Or can I slide sideways (without pivoting) 12" and then pivot the front end to aim the hull mounted gun, thusly moving the front treads an extra few bits) since that's just turning the weapon?

Conversely can I move and then turn the rear half an extra few bits?

No, just measure from the point that will move the farthest. It really is that simple. If you know you are going to make a skid turn, measure the corner that is on the outside of the turn and leading that turn.

So tanks greater than 12" long just became only slightly more maneuverable than aircraft. Alright.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:

So tanks greater than 12" long just became only slightly more maneuverable than aircraft. Alright.

I'm not saying it isn't stupid, because it rather is to a point, but that doesn't mean it isn't simple.

I think the things like Elder being supposedly nerfed by this faq are only problematic because I don't think that access points are taken into account for points.

Devilfish and Falcon having disembarking differences from rhinos might have been intentional, one being harder than the other as a transport. Different transports may have certain roles in mind other than assault, some may be meant as a mere ferry.

I believe the most clean, sensible and accurate interpretation is pick a point and make sure that the point stays within move distance. Free pivoting being a reference to shooting restrictions. Yes for a rhino, it means that they have to move less to allow a 180, but it makes sense. I don't see big rigs popping 180s without having to take a long time and a more tedious maneuver.

Aircraft and vehicles having a problem maneuvering on 6x4 boards? Get a bigger one and add more game turns, but that adds time to an already long game. The alternative is to allow rotation to be free but restrict it to 90 degrees for non skimmers. However I know tank treads allow good 180s. The rules are so complicated but don't have the complications for things like this.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
So even dropping the turret question (though I think it is relevant, but I won't press the point), how do you measure for tanks that can change their configuration such as the Ordinatus?

Regardless of how the model is designed, you have no permission to change the model's configuration during the game, other than to point weapons at their targets.


It's the same argument that prevents players from opening and closing their drop pod doors at will to block or open lines of sight.

 insaniak wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
So even dropping the turret question (though I think it is relevant, but I won't press the point), how do you measure for tanks that can change their configuration such as the Ordinatus?

Regardless of how the model is designed, you have no permission to change the model's configuration during the game, other than to point weapons at their targets.


It's the same argument that prevents players from opening and closing their drop pod doors at will to block or open lines of sight.

The Ordinatus Ulator aims by pointing its hull at its target. (The Sonic Wave comes form any point on the front of the vehicle, not from the gun). So... 'point weapons at their targets' qualifies.

 Da Kommizzar wrote:
I think the things like Elder being supposedly nerfed by this faq are only problematic because I don't think that access points are taken into account for points.

Devilfish and Falcon having disembarking differences from rhinos might have been intentional, one being harder than the other as a transport. Different transports may have certain roles in mind other than assault, some may be meant as a mere ferry.

I believe the most clean, sensible and accurate interpretation is pick a point and make sure that the point stays within move distance. Free pivoting being a reference to shooting restrictions. Yes for a rhino, it means that they have to move less to allow a 180, but it makes sense. I don't see big rigs popping 180s without having to take a long time and a more tedious maneuver.

Aircraft and vehicles having a problem maneuvering on 6x4 boards? Get a bigger one and add more game turns, but that adds time to an already long game. The alternative is to allow rotation to be free but restrict it to 90 degrees for non skimmers. However I know tank treads allow good 180s. The rules are so complicated but don't have the complications for things like this.

I don't know - if this FAQ becomes rule eldar now have the best transports...they will be the only vehicals that can do the 180 powerslide (vectored engines). Also with a ruling like this I see no reason not to drive my rhinos up the field sideways.

You are kidding, righr? Even with vectored engines at the cost of three Rhinos (I don't mean 3x free), a turn in the shooting phase only works to hide the unshielded rear, but doesn't do anything unless you start your Serpents ass-first if you happen to have first turn and know for sure your opponent won't seize the initiative. That are quite some conditionals.

I think that the simplest solution would be to day that movement is measured from the center point of a vehicle. The center point can not end beyond the vehicles movement allotment. Then pivoting does not matter.

Maj.Lee Scrude wrote:
I think that the simplest solution would be to day that movement is measured from the center point of a vehicle. The center point can not end beyond the vehicles movement allotment. Then pivoting does not matter.

A simple house rule, but contrary to the rules as written. It also allows vehicles to move farther than they should be able to. This is particularly bad for long vehicles that are open topped... free rotate and your passengers get +2-3" on their disembarkation.

 Galef wrote:

 Stephanius wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Exactly. "No part of your hull...." section of the rule doesn't mean that you 'keep track' of each part of the model. Simply that no part of the hull can pass the distance desired. Pivoting would not matter. Before touching the model, measure 6". No part of the model can pass that point, but turning is free.

In Stephanius' example, he implies that you measure the rear to the rear, the front to the front, etc, but I don't think the BRB implies this.
6" move + 180 turn is still only 6" that the WHOLE model moved. The BRB does not say that you measure each individual section of the model as that would be ridiculous.

You are not permitted to move any part of the vehicles hull more than 6".
When a move results with the rear hatch 11" away from its starting position, obviously that move violates said rule.

Yes, you are permitted to pivot as much as you want.
However, if you pivot AND move, you need to follow movement rules, which do specify that no part of your hull can move further than permitted by your movement distance.

Measuring from a single point of the model and not moving the whole model past that point is close to RAW in most cases.
However, throw in a power-slide and you see quickly how this fails to yield RAW compatible results.

I understand how this interpretation occurs, I really do.
However, I have always read it as no part of the model as a whole can pass the intended point that you measured to. NOT that you measure each part of the model separately

-

This is incorrect. The rule states:

No part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model’s move distance away from where it started

"it" in the above quote is "part of the model", not "model", due to pronoun/antecedent agreement.

Each molecule in the model needs to be measured separately, according to RAW.

 JimOnMars wrote:

 Galef wrote:

I understand how this interpretation occurs, I really do.
However, I have always read it as no part of the model as a whole can pass the intended point that you measured to. NOT that you measure each part of the model separately

-

This is incorrect. The rule states:

No part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model’s move distance away from where it started

"it" in the above quote is "part of the model", not "model", due to pronoun/antecedent agreement.

Each molecule in the model needs to be measured separately, according to RAW.

**stupid comment edited out**

nevertheless the FAQ is pretty clear... you shall not gain a micron of extra movement even if it renders half the vehicles in this game useless


an 6 inch bubble (i.e. for combat speed) around your hull (in which you could freely place your vehicle) would have been a much more elegant and practical solution... just sayin...

The quote was the FAQ.

 JimOnMars wrote:
The quote was the FAQ.

thanks fixed my comment
and that proves: its always a dumb idea to comment on stuff while beeing severly sleep deprived, in that sense... good night!

If you are in the practice of lining up sideways with everything here's the faq solution. Before you pivot or even touch the vehicle including bikes. Measure from its base and how it's sitting to where you want to move it. If your going to make it face forward then use the front corner. Hold your finger there , pick up the model rotating it 10000 times in you hand and put the front of the model on your imaginary finger dot. Done!

It has not moved further than 6 inches. You gained nothing and lost nothing.

Lungpickle wrote:
If you are in the practice of lining up sideways with everything here's the faq solution. Before you pivot or even touch the vehicle including bikes. Measure from its base and how it's sitting to where you want to move it. If your going to make it face forward then use the front corner. Hold your finger there , pick up the model rotating it 10000 times in you hand and put the front of the model on your imaginary finger dot. Done!

It has not moved further than 6 inches. You gained nothing and lost nothing.

The FAQ says no point can move further than 6 inches. If it displaces 6 inches and turns 180 degrees, many points move further than 6 inches.

There's also the fact that the 'just pick it up and put it down x" away' approach goes completely against how the rulebook actually tells us to move vehicles, with them pivoting on their centre point as they move.

We're clearly supposed to be essentially 'driving' the vehicle along the actual pay it is taking (as in: the way everyone's been doing it for 20 years now)... The only change from the FAQ is that you now have to factor in the extra distance that parts of the vehicle move as a result of pivoting on the move.

 insaniak wrote:
The only change from the FAQ is that you now have to factor in the extra distance that parts of the vehicle move as a result of pivoting on the move.

which is a pretty big deal
try to do a 90° turn with a landraider/DEraider/waveserpent/Necronbarge/battlewagon and check out how far you can actually move the vehicle forward... 2" maybe 3" ?

RedNoak wrote:

 insaniak wrote:
The only change from the FAQ is that you now have to factor in the extra distance that parts of the vehicle move as a result of pivoting on the move.

which is a pretty big deal
try to do a 90° turn with a landraider/DEraider/waveserpent/Necronbarge/battlewagon and check out how far you can actually move the vehicle forward... 2" maybe 3" ?

Yep, unless you then turn it back. A change in orientation is very significant in the game, and there is no reason not to have a cost associated with it. The idea of "pivoting freely" is pretty silly if you think about it, so I'm happy that this has been effectively eliminated with this FAQ.