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.

Interesting scenario was brought up while discussing Reavers with my brother today.

Let's say you Turbo Boost with a squad of Reavers. Let us say that you move them 36" in a parabola shape to crossover an enemy unit of Imperial Guardsmen. Now, if you drew a straight line from the start point to end point, the Guardsmen do not lie underneath that line. However, if you trace the actual line that the Reavers traversed, then the Guardsmen would fall under that line.

The problem we have is this: The Reavers special rule that lets them make hits on units that they Turbo Boost over states that you "mark the start and end points of the unit's move and trace an imaginary line between the two points." (p 29) This essentially allows certain... anomalies to occur in the game.

1) This allows you to Turbo Boost in a parabolic path and hit units that you did not even fly over!
2) This makes it where you cannot hit units that you VERY OBVIOUSLY flew over when you fly in a parabolic path.

The next thing we discussed was that perhaps Turbo Boosters state that you can only move in a straight line. But, we cannot find that rule anywhere. Anybody care to shed some light on this?

It doesn't say it has to be a straight line.

I think it's rather clear. While it does not clearly say a straight line, I think it strongly suggests that. Enough that when my friend used them for the first time, we agreed that it is a straight line from the start and end point. "Between" the two points is the key. It does not say "a line that connects the points" or "a line that can cover the whole table", but a line "between" the points.

Also note for turbo boosters, to get the cover save you have to end at least 18" away from where you started.

Why would you need to fly in a parabolic path? Why not just fly straight?

The Bladevanes rules are Clear, no matter how you chose to Place you models from Point a to point B the unit took the Straight Line to get there.

Measuring out the distance in a Parabolic and then Picking up your Reavers, and "flying" them through that parabolic is unnecessary. All available rules only care about the Straight line between your start and end points. This is mostly because as jet-bikes They go over everything between their start and end points along that straight line.

TheRedArmy wrote:I think it's rather clear. While it does not clearly say a straight line, I think it strongly suggests that. Enough that when my friend used them for the first time, we agreed that it is a straight line from the start and end point. "Between" the two points is the key. It does not say "a line that connects the points" or "a line that can cover the whole table", but a line "between" the points.

Also note for turbo boosters, to get the cover save you have to end at least 18" away from where you started.

+1 this. Ask a math teacher. A "line" is defined by the shortest distance between two points.

The rule: The Reavers special rule that lets them make hits on units that they Turbo Boost over states that you "mark the start and end points of the unit's move and trace an imaginary line between the two points." (p 29) ... not a curve, arch or to use your term, Kurce, a 'parabola'.

This isn't a Billy Keane 'line.'

Why would you need to fly in a parabolic path? Why not just fly straight?

Well, for starters, what if somebody is sitting on the edge of the board? How could I hit them? I suppose I could waste an entire turning moving to the board edge and then jet biking down the board edge, but what if he is in a corner?

The other reason why is because I planned on using one squad of Reavers to Turbo Boost over some guys and hit them while also making them where they don't move too far away (at least 18" to get the cover save). Then I would have another squad of Reavers just move the 12" up behind them and shoot their lances at targets. I also use the Eldar Jetbike assault 6" move thingy ma jigger to get the guys behind each other. This way, I get a squad with 3+ cover and a squad with 4+ cover.

But, you guys are basically saying that you can only Turbo Booster in a straight line, is that right? It doesn't matter what path you take, the distance moved is from point A to point B in a straight line?

I can definitely see some shady tactics developing out of this discussion. Definitely a jetbike has to end at least 18" from it's starting point to count as turbo boosting. On a semi related note skimmers can't fly in circles to count as moving flat-out. I can see a case for the jet bikes weaving to hit a squad, you'd just have to make sure you moved far enough away from your initial location. And yeah a line is considered to be straight.

Brothererekose wrote:Ask a math teacher. A "line" is defined by the shortest distance between two points.

Uh, a line continues infinitely in either direction.
Either brush up on your geometry, or find some better math teachers.

The thing you were talking about was...
*Drum Roll*
A 'Line Segment'!

yes it'd need to be under the line from A to B

yes it'd need to be under the line from A to B

So, Turbo Boosting with the Reavers actually does allow room for the anomalies that I listed earlier to occur?

Kurce wrote:1) This allows you to Turbo Boost in a parabolic path and hit units that you did not even fly over!

Technically, yes... but that makes no practical difference. If it's only the start and finish point that matters, there is no practical reason to travel in a parabolic arc in the first place.

2) This makes it where you cannot hit units that you VERY OBVIOUSLY flew over when you fly in a parabolic path.

That would appear to be the case, yes. Or, to look at it another way, it would mean that in order to use this particualr rule, you would effectively need to travel in a straight line, even though that restriction is not present in the Turbo Boosters rule.

From an earlier discussion, my interpretation of how to draw for them.

I agree the rule is clear. Start and endpoints must draw a straight line threw the targeted squad. Essentially you must move in a straight line to hit them that is at least 18 inches from starting point to starting point (max 30 or 36 i don't have the dex in front of me.)

Clearly a smart opponent will place his units in such a way that you wont be able to Bladevane him on the first turn. So you are going to have to make a flanking move to effectively use them in most games.

Also another thing to point out is that no voluntary action can be taken after turbo boosting - exp. your 6 inch free move in the assault phase.
-This is stated in the turbo-boosters section in the rulebook.

ChrisCP wrote:

Brothererekose wrote:Ask a math teacher. A "line" is defined by the shortest distance between two points.

Uh, a line continues infinitely in either direction.

Thank you, that *so* clarifies the meaning of my contribution to the discussion. Are you 'on call' for this sort of thing like Gwar is?

ChrisCP wrote:Either brush up on your geometry, or find some better math teachers.

Absolutely. I'll be sure to look up something like this in the future.

ChrisCP wrote:The thing you were talking about was...
*Drum Roll*
A 'Line Segment'!

You forgot the cymbal crash. It helps with punchlines.

Clearly a smart opponent will place his units in such a way that you wont be able to Bladevane him on the first turn. So you are going to have to make a flanking move to effectively use them in most games.

So, what you are telling me is that these guys aren't nearly as good as I thought they were?

Brothererekose wrote:

ChrisCP wrote:

Brothererekose wrote:Ask a math teacher. A "line" is defined by the shortest distance between two points.

Uh, a line continues infinitely in either direction.

Thank you, that *so* clarifies the meaning of my contribution to the discussion. Are you 'on call' for this sort of thing like Gwar is?

ChrisCP wrote:Either brush up on your geometry, or find some better math teachers.

Absolutely. I'll be sure to look up something like this in the future.

ChrisCP wrote:The thing you were talking about was...
*Drum Roll*
A 'Line Segment'!

You forgot the cymbal crash. It helps with punchlines.

Nah, but I find correction major points of error in numeracy in literacy helps to prevent the decline of intelligance noticable since "parenting" replaced 'child rearing' or 'raising a child'.

As for the second point; cheers, I've found this helps when making blanket statments to avoid showing glaring ignorance of a subject.

Ah! Something like this? http://instantrimshot.com/ Nah, you see, it was a revelation! Not a joke, and, I couldn't be bothered to rustle up the accompanying trumpet fan-fare.

SO how about we all stop sniping at each other and stick to the actual topic, hmm?

BloodThirSTAR wrote:It doesn't say it has to be a straight line.

Really, so when you draw a line between start and end points, what shape does it have to be?

If it isn't a straight line then there is absolutely nothing to tell us what shape it ought to be.

We already covered that.

There is nothing in the Bladevanes rule that suggests that the line from your starting location to your end location has to be a straight line. It states that you "trace an imaginery line between the two points". A line can be curved, wavy, straight, virtually any shape you care to imagine, the only restriction being that the end must be 18" away from the start to satisfy the rule for turboboosting.

Scal wrote:There is nothing in the Bladevanes rule that suggests that the line from your starting location to your end location has to be a straight line. It states that you "trace an imaginery line between the two points". A line can be curved, wavy, straight, virtually any shape you care to imagine, the only restriction being that the end must be 18" away from the start to satisfy the rule for turboboosting.

This exact argument has already been brought up and refuted... using the power of Math.

A Line(or in this case a Line segment) is straight. or at least is straight via these rules.

You are told to draw a line between the start and end point. That is all. By definition that Line segment is a straight line segment.

Were you told to draw a line between the start and end points along the path the Reavers traveled, you would be correct.

Welcome to dakka; but please read a thread before contributing, this will avoid situations where you make the same argument that another poster already did, and was refuted.

Scal wrote:There is nothing in the Bladevanes rule that suggests that the line from your starting location to your end location has to be a straight line. It states that you "trace an imaginery line between the two points". A line can be curved, wavy, straight, virtually any shape you care to imagine, the only restriction being that the end must be 18" away from the start to satisfy the rule for turboboosting.

A line is straight. A curve is 'curvy' or 'wavy' to use the technical terms. not to mention, using that definition I can cover the entire board with my 'curve' and get bladevane hits on every unit. that would be pretty good in Apoc...

A line is straight. A curve is 'curvy' or 'wavy' to use the technical terms. not to mention, using that definition I can cover the entire board with my 'curve' and get bladevane hits on every unit. that would be pretty good in Apoc

Except that you only have 36" of "wavy" line to draw and the Bladevanes rule states that only one unit can be hit. But, meh. I think I have heard enough to know that it needs to be in a straight line. In essence, if the corner of the board or close to a board edge, it is nearly impossible to Bladevane them.

Thanks all for the responses.

Kommissar Kel wrote:

Scal wrote:There is nothing in the Bladevanes rule that suggests that the line from your starting location to your end location has to be a straight line. It states that you "trace an imaginery line between the two points". A line can be curved, wavy, straight, virtually any shape you care to imagine, the only restriction being that the end must be 18" away from the start to satisfy the rule for turboboosting.

This exact argument has already been brought up and refuted... using the power of Math.

A Line(or in this case a Line segment) is straight. or at least is straight via these rules.

You are told to draw a line between the start and end point. That is all. By definition that Line segment is a straight line segment.

Were you told to draw a line between the start and end points along the path the Reavers traveled, you would be correct.

Welcome to dakka; but please read a thread before contributing, this will avoid situations where you make the same argument that another poster already did, and was refuted.

And here lies the problem, you're trying to use math to resolve a question that relates purely to the interpretation of language.

A "line" is not straight, a straight line is straight, but the rules make no mention of "straight line" or "line segment". The rules state "an imaginery line". Can you imagine a line that isn't straight? if you can't then maybe this is where the problem lies.

As for reading the previous posts I can assure you that I did, thoroughly, but at no point did I believe that this arguement was convincingly refuted purely because some people believe that a line has to be straight!

Thanks for the welcome

Scal wrote:There is nothing in the Bladevanes rule that suggests that the line from your starting location to your end location has to be a straight line. It states that you "trace an imaginery line between the two points". A line can be curved, wavy, straight, virtually any shape you care to imagine, the only restriction being that the end must be 18" away from the start to satisfy the rule for turboboosting.

For what it's worth, wherever GW have FAQ'd similar issues in the past, they've consistently gone with the 'straight line' approach. There's nothing in the current batch of FAQ's to use as a guide, but I would stick with that interpretation for simplicity, personally.

When you are given a term that is not defined in game terms; you must then go to real life terms to find that definition. In the case of a line between to points you must go to math.

There is no qualifier for that line; therefore we must go by the most restrictive definition of that line. Mainly because, as was already pointed out, looser definitions allow for a non-linear Line to encompass the entirety of the board, allowing for a bladevane strike on any unit on the board.

They can still be very useful and aren't a complete waste in assault vs most units because they attack first most of the time with 6 int. Give them some heat lances and they are very effective vs any armor because lance melta is very nice. Just forget about alpha bladevane - I imagine they could force people to not infiltrate units in the middle of the board and really ruin someones day if your opponent needs to take ground against you.

Kommissar Kel wrote:When you are given a term that is not defined in game terms; you must then go to real life terms to find that definition. In the case of a line between to points you must go to math.

There is no qualifier for that line; therefore we must go by the most restrictive definition of that line. Mainly because, as was already pointed out, looser definitions allow for a non-linear Line to encompass the entirety of the board, allowing for a bladevane strike on any unit on the board.

ok, I'll go along with your math for a while. My reaver travels 36" and ends up 18" away from it's start point, your math would dictate that the line cannot be straight; point proven

Are reavers for some reason restricted to travelling in a straight line?

What if the reavers, while travelling from A to B are forced to go around an obstacle and in doing so pass over an enemy unit, are you saying that I cannot direct my attacks against them because you want to draw a straight line that in no way reflects my movement?

In terms of fluff, why would GW take the fastest, most agile piece of wargear and restrict it to straight line attack only?

The attacks are caused by the bikes, surely logic dictates that the attacks occur on the actual route taken by the bikes?

Why did they use the phrase "trace an imaginery line" and not "trace a straight line" or "trace an imaginery straight line", why did they even use the word "trace" which suggests following a boundary, route or outline rather than "draw" which would be more applicable if the intention was that the line were straight.

As for attacking any unit on the board, no, just any unit within the 36" movement range.

Scal wrote:There is nothing in the Bladevanes rule that suggests that the line from your starting location to your end location has to be a straight line. It states that you "trace an imaginery line between the two points". A line can be curved, wavy, straight, virtually any shape you care to imagine, the only restriction being that the end must be 18" away from the start to satisfy the rule for turboboosting.

The rule doesn't tell you how long the line can be, either. Does that mean you can draw the line in any shape around any part of the board? Why bother drawing a line, then, when it would be easier just to tell the player to pick any enemy unit and make the attacks, regardless of where it is on the table in relation to the Reavers.

FWIW, Dictionary.com defines a mathematical line as either being straight or curved. But when you draw a line between two points, it's usually accepted that it's going to be a straight line.