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.

 Rippy wrote:

 jeff white wrote:
I would not play anyone twice who turned tanks sideways after full movement to provide cover to troops behind them. Might not even finish the game. Just pack up and split. Better off painting at home listening to batreps.

Regardless, will probably still see it in tournaments a lot.

If Rhino-chassis vehicles were the right size it wouldn't be necessary. But they aren't, so it is.

the sideways rhinos make sure if somebody does it that they center to cent it because if you pivot from sideways, move up and place the rhino sideways again it is a way for people to get that extra couple inches of movement per turn.

Turning vehicles sideways to provide cover to unit X has always been a thing back since 2nd ed.
8ths no facings rules wont have any impact on it imo.
Its a legitimate way to get cover/block LOS for more vulnerable units.
Anyone remember the 3xMonolith wall tactic circa 3-4th ed?

Something that doesn't seem to have been picked up yet - it's also a huge nerf to Deepstriking and Outflanking (and to a more minor extent Scouting/Infiltrating) shooty units. Outflank and Deepstrike in particular allowed for side and rear armour shots quite easily from these units. In some cases like drop pods there was very little risk for the reward (if considering them a suicide unit) but in the majority of cases there was, and it was a very widely used strategy that promoted thinking ahead tactically. That is gone now.
It's an example of how oversimplification can take away skill aspects from the game.

Here's a good example of this latter point:
Imagine a Guard Vet unit with Auto cannon and 3 Grenade launchers (Yes I know no-one ever took these but just roll with it a minute) had used a Chimera to deploy forward into ruins in the centre of the board. Now in 7th their marine opponent would have to dislodge them before marching that Dread past and exposing it's squishy rear armour because av10 is very vulnerable to 2 st7 and 3 st6 bs4 shots. Now in 8th... The Dread doesn't give a damn and is happy as Larry to leave enemies in its rear.

Poly Ranger wrote:
Something that doesn't seem to have been picked up yet - it's also a huge nerf to Deepstriking and Outflanking (and to a more minor extent Scouting/Infiltrating) shooty units. Outflank and Deepstrike in particular allowed for side and rear armour shots quite easily from these units. In some cases like drop pods there was very little risk for the reward (if considering them a suicide unit) but in the majority of cases there was, and it was a very widely used strategy that promoted thinking ahead tactically. That is gone now.
It's an example of how oversimplification can take away skill aspects from the game.

That's not entirely true - look at the rule on meltas, for example. Outflank/Deep Strike still make it a lot easier to get close. Sure, you're not rewarded by making your to-wound roll easier - instead, your damage roll becomes more reliable, meaning more barbecued tanks/monsters per shot.

Oh, I have the soundtrack to this edition now!

jade_angel wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Something that doesn't seem to have been picked up yet - it's also a huge nerf to Deepstriking and Outflanking (and to a more minor extent Scouting/Infiltrating) shooty units. Outflank and Deepstrike in particular allowed for side and rear armour shots quite easily from these units. In some cases like drop pods there was very little risk for the reward (if considering them a suicide unit) but in the majority of cases there was, and it was a very widely used strategy that promoted thinking ahead tactically. That is gone now.
It's an example of how oversimplification can take away skill aspects from the game.

That's not entirely true - look at the rule on meltas, for example. Outflank/Deep Strike still make it a lot easier to get close. Sure, you're not rewarded by making your to-wound roll easier - instead, your damage roll becomes more reliable, meaning more barbecued tanks/monsters per shot.

Which works for meltas. What about outflanking Sentinels, outflanking Baals, hell - outflanking anything that's not Melta/rapid fire so doesn't care about half range? Same with DS.

Edit: also with Melta, against av10 you were guaranteed to at least glance, 35/36 times you would pen on ap1, which was a huge difference to hitting the front at av14. The tactical nature of the game in this respect has been heavily reduced.

Poly Ranger wrote:

jade_angel wrote:

Poly Ranger wrote:
Something that doesn't seem to have been picked up yet - it's also a huge nerf to Deepstriking and Outflanking (and to a more minor extent Scouting/Infiltrating) shooty units. Outflank and Deepstrike in particular allowed for side and rear armour shots quite easily from these units. In some cases like drop pods there was very little risk for the reward (if considering them a suicide unit) but in the majority of cases there was, and it was a very widely used strategy that promoted thinking ahead tactically. That is gone now.
It's an example of how oversimplification can take away skill aspects from the game.

That's not entirely true - look at the rule on meltas, for example. Outflank/Deep Strike still make it a lot easier to get close. Sure, you're not rewarded by making your to-wound roll easier - instead, your damage roll becomes more reliable, meaning more barbecued tanks/monsters per shot.

Which works for meltas. What about outflanking Sentinels, outflanking Baals, hell - outflanking anything that's not Melta/rapid fire so doesn't care about half range? Same with DS.

Edit: also with Melta, against av10 you were guaranteed to at least glance, 35/36 times you would pen on ap1, which was a huge difference to hitting the front at av14. The tactical nature of the game in this respect has been heavily reduced.

you still might want to deep strike or outflank due to range, to get into an advantageous position splitting the opponents focus or taking an unattended objective or pulling something weak off to take it (think backfield Gretchen holding something , drop pod in shoot em off then it is yours) while sure the facing may lose one method of tactical movement and placement the not scattering certainly makes up for it in my mind. plus it always bugged be that somehow things like battle wagons and wave serpants had such low rear armor seemingly just so that they could be krak grenade at rear armor

I think most vehicles should have -1 armor save outside of their front arc. Just draw a line across the front of the vehicle and any attack coming from behind that hits the thinner armor. It would be much easier to figure out than the F/S/R system, which has never been satisfactorily defined over the past 20 years.

I don't think people will be using tanks to block LOS all that much, even if they don't have other armor arcs. I see it on occasion (and do it myself) with Rhinos and on rarer occasions with other tanks, but most tanks want to be facing at the enemy so they can use all of their guns.

 oldzoggy wrote:
Who knows perhaps all models gain faceings : )

Which they did have at one time, a time known as Warhammer 40,000 Rogue Trader. A time where turning around your infantry model cost fractional parts of inches from your Movement allowance for the turn, and carrying heavy weapons slowed you down if you didn't have the points to spare for suspensor units.



Of course, adding a little thought to this thread as well, I have seen all talk about (lack of) facing. But when a vehicle has no facing, what about its fire arcs? I would assume (I know, assumptions and them being the mother of all screwdriver-tightened hardware pointed upwards) fire arcs are still a thing. So let's see that Space Marines Vindicator do the sideways shuffle, always keeping its main weapon turned away from my deployment zone.

Get ready for the side slide! In the grimdark future you must tokyo drift to survive!

The sideways slide has ALWAYS been a thing already. In fact until 7ed you could move a vehicles sideways and this pivot forward to get an extra couple of inches

This isn't going to be anything new

 CrownAxe wrote:
The sideways slide has ALWAYS been a thing already. In fact until 7ed you could move a vehicles sideways and this pivot forward to get an extra couple of inches

This isn't going to be anything new

No part of the model was suposed to go beyond the movement value. Those "extra" inches were not legit.

 jeff white wrote:
I would not play anyone twice who turned tanks sideways after full movement to provide cover to troops behind them. Might not even finish the game. Just pack up and split. Better off painting at home listening to batreps.

Agreed but I think the best solution is the carrot approach. Give an anti vehicle bonus for shooting at close/ point blank range while allowing movement and accurate firing of the main gun. Make blitzkrieg style tank tactics work for the armor heavy armies. When three LR roll up at combat speed and pour their concentrated fire into your more expensive models that will be a real fight.

Pancakey wrote:

 CrownAxe wrote:
The sideways slide has ALWAYS been a thing already. In fact until 7ed you could move a vehicles sideways and this pivot forward to get an extra couple of inches

This isn't going to be anything new

No part of the model was suposed to go beyond the movement value. Those "extra" inches were not legit.

Was a rule that only existed in 7ed

I think a bigger thing than sideways rhino's is if the disembarking still works the same that you can only disembark from certain sides. This will lead to rhino's with assault units driving in reverse towards the enemy.

My guess is that they'll say you must always move your tank forward or backward, and pivoting is only allowed if you can move forward 1 inch after doing so.

Or just embrace the stupidity that is the Fast and the Furious 40k Drift

 koooaei wrote:
So, from what we know, vehicles seem to have gained wounds and an armor save. And they seem to have no facing. My concern is that we'll see even more vehicles moving around the battlefield sideways to provide cover for what's behind them.

Rhiinos already do this. Since they changed the way vehicles moved in 7th just sliding things sidways is a lot easier to measure than all the turning.

Wow 2 pages and nobody brought up the Initial D drifting meme

I honestly don't expect too much sideways driving.. as weapon facing will likely still be a thing..

Sideways facings have existed in this game for several editions with multiple armies utilizing it. Space Marines, IG, Chaos Space Marines, and Dark Eldar are the ones I remember throughout multiple editions utilizing this exact thing. 8th Edition and the loss of armor value/facings will not see the beginning of the 'powerslide' as it's been around for @ 15 years.

 jeff white wrote:
I would not play anyone twice who turned tanks sideways after full movement to provide cover to troops behind them. Might not even finish the game. Just pack up and split. Better off painting at home listening to batreps.

Ah so you disagree with the way GW wants 40k being played.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grand.Master.Raziel wrote:
Games are always going to have some interactions that come about to exploit the rules of the game that wouldn't necessarily happen in real life. This is because games are inherently an abstraction. We accept this because we want to play games that don't require advanced degrees to understand the rules, and can be played in a reasonable amount of time.

Doesn't mean they need to increase just for fun of it though.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Saber wrote:
but most tanks want to be facing at the enemy so they can use all of their guns.

That was true in 7th ed.

With 8th ed tanks and monsters sharing rules you expect tanks to work differently to monsters here? Everything else works same yet shooting works differently?

Has it been confirmed that tanks can pivot once they stop?

 Rippy wrote:
Has it been confirmed that tanks can pivot once they stop?

Of course "cannot pivot after stop" wouldn't be much of a prevention?

Move forward 5.9", pivot, move forward(or back) 0.1". Done.

tneva82 wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
Has it been confirmed that tanks can pivot once they stop?

Of course "cannot pivot after stop" wouldn't be much of a prevention?

Move forward 5.9", pivot, move forward(or back) 0.1". Done.

There would be rules that could stop that, or at least deter it, "cannot pivot more than 45 degrees once started moving, have to move 2 inches before pivoting again, can not end on a pivot".

 Rippy wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
Has it been confirmed that tanks can pivot once they stop?

Of course "cannot pivot after stop" wouldn't be much of a prevention?

Move forward 5.9", pivot, move forward(or back) 0.1". Done.

There would be rules that could stop that, or at least deter it, "cannot pivot more than 45 degrees once started moving, have to move 2 inches before pivoting again, can not end on a pivot".

Now you are starting to add more rules to a game that looks to be removing rules. All those rules to make up for rule they removed...Yep makes sense...Not.

Not to mention it will just reignite monster vs vehicle complains when vehicles are worse again!

Pivot first, move in straight line

Wouldn't be the worst thing

tneva82 wrote:

 Rippy wrote:

tneva82 wrote:

 Rippy wrote:
Has it been confirmed that tanks can pivot once they stop?

Of course "cannot pivot after stop" wouldn't be much of a prevention?

Move forward 5.9", pivot, move forward(or back) 0.1". Done.

There would be rules that could stop that, or at least deter it, "cannot pivot more than 45 degrees once started moving, have to move 2 inches before pivoting again, can not end on a pivot".

Now you are starting to add more rules to a game that looks to be removing rules. All those rules to make up for rule they removed...Yep makes sense...Not.

Not to mention it will just reignite monster vs vehicle complains when vehicles are worse again!

Or they just stick with the whole "no part of the model may move more than it is allowed". Not a perfect situation, but would limit pivoting for most Vehicles.

Did somebody order moving cover?

at least drifting rhinos and chimeras are not as dumb as tidewall.