Pivoting

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.

**DaKKaLAnce**

So pivoting isnt considered a move,correct? So I was wondering... If im playing DE and I start my raider in a horizonal stance, move 12", then pivot in a vertical stance, could i still disembark from front and assualt?

**nosferatu1001**

Yes, pivoting isnt movement. However pivoting DOES count as movement for the unit inside

However, one thing youve missed about your raider - it is open topped, meaning you can assault even if it moves.

**DaKKaLAnce**

but what I want to kno is will the pivot count as a extra movement. since the raider is alot longer than it is wide, I would be gaining bout 2? maybe 3" to add to my assualt, if I measured from front.

**nosferatu1001**

Yes, this is called the "pivot trick", and applies to all vehicles that are significantly longer than wide.

Been legal since 3rd ed.

**FlingitNow**

Yeah SMs players do eth same with their LRs all the time and it is nearly 3" you gain from it which can be vital if you're trying to get a turn 1 assault off.

Though you have to pivot before you move you can't shuffle sideways on a vehicle movement is only forward or backward for a vehicle.

**DaKKaLAnce**

alright thx guys. Now one more question bout this topic. do i mesure from the nose of the raider or do i have to measure from the actual hull? Not sure if the nose is considered part of hull or not, it would give alot more than 3" if i disembarked 2" from the tip of the nose.

**Disjointed Entity**

I always measure from the middle of the vehicle, so from the flying stand, but all disembarking models appear from within 2", is that right?

**Galador**

DaKKaLAnce wrote:alright thx guys. Now one more question bout this topic. do i mesure from the nose of the raider or do i have to measure from the actual hull? Not sure if the nose is considered part of hull or not, it would give alot more than 3" if i disembarked 2" from the tip of the nose.

You measure from what you consider the hull, just make sure your opponent is clear on what you are counting as decoration and what you are counting as hull.

I know that I use the prow as part of the hull, and all of my opponents know it, and they also know that if they can reach the prow when attempting to shoot my Raider, that they can shoot it. IT works both ways, anything you consider hull for embarking/disembarking/you measuring shooing range for a unit inside from, counts when you opponent attempts to shoot and/or assault your vehicle.

As far as the moving sideways and then pivoting, you can only move forwards and backward by RAW. However, I have honestly never met anyone that has complained about it, but if they do, just remember, you still get your pivot distance if you turn first and then measure for movement!

**FlingitNow**

You measure from any part of the hull not the stand. And yes the tip of the vehicle is part of the hull and theback of your base has to be 2" from it meaning the front is nearly 3" from it.

**DaKKaLAnce**

K thx guys! this info wil be very useful

**Maelstrom808**

Galador wrote:
DaKKaLAnce wrote:alright thx guys. Now one more question bout this topic. do i mesure from the nose of the raider or do i have to measure from the actual hull? Not sure if the nose is considered part of hull or not, it would give alot more than 3" if i disembarked 2" from the tip of the nose.

You measure from what you consider the hull, just make sure your opponent is clear on what you are counting as decoration and what you are counting as hull.

I know that I use the prow as part of the hull, and all of my opponents know it, and they also know that if they can reach the prow when attempting to shoot my Raider, that they can shoot it. IT works both ways, anything you consider hull for embarking/disembarking/you measuring shooing range for a unit inside from, counts when you opponent attempts to shoot and/or assault your vehicle.

As far as the moving sideways and then pivoting, you can only move forwards and backward by RAW. However, I have honestly never met anyone that has complained about it, but if they do, just remember, you still get your pivot distance if you turn first and then measure for movement!

Not true. If you read it again, it never actually tells you that you have to move forwards and backwards. It IS heavily implied so that's how it's usually best to play it.

**Galador**

Ok, I looked through the BRB, through the BRB FAQ, and I am probably just missing it, but I saw nowhere that pivoting counted as movement for the unit inside's firing. I see that it counts if the unit is embarking or disembarking, but other than that, it doesn't affect firing, correct??? Once I am on board the vehicle doesn't count as moving if it pivots to face the fire points toward what I want to shoot at, correct???

(this is why I'm glad I play DE!!

)

**nosferatu1001**

Pivoting doesnt count as movement for the vehivcle, but it does for the unit inside - as it is still movement.

Also, RAW, the rules for vehicle movement never replace the base rules for Infantry, which can move in any direction. So you can move forwards, backwards AND in any direction.

**Jidmah**

I checked last night and only found a rule stating that units may not move after disembarking from a pivoted vehicle, nothing about shooting.

**nosferatu1001**

Did you find anything stating that pivoting doesnt count as moving for passengers?

There is a statement that it does not affect the *vehicle*, but nothing about the *passengers* - therefore it DOES stilla ffect passengers

Its why you cannot assault from a non-assault ramp, close topped vehicle that has pivoted - it is still movement for the passengers

**Jidmah**

"[...]a vehicle that only pivots during the Movement phase counts as stationary[...]" (pg. 57)
"[...](remeber that pivoting does not count as moving)[...]" pg. 58
"Models firing from a vehicle count as moving if the vehicle moves, [...]" (pg. 66)
"If a vehicle has already moved(including pivoting on the spot), the passengers may disembark, but not move any further in that movement phase." (pg. 67)

I'd rather tend to think that the parenthesis in the last quote are meant as an exception to the rule, rather than a clarification, as it would contradict the obvious clarification on page 58.

**nosferatu1001**

Then you go to the assault rules, or the shooting rules, and find that a moving vehicle of any kind has implications for the passengers.

You cannot pivot a falcon, disembark troops and then assault with them.

**Jidmah**

Because disembarking explicitly includes pivoting, no other rules concerning transports even mention pivoting, nor does any rule say that vehicles doing nothing but pivoting have moved.
Disembarking really seems to an exception to the rule.

**Galador**

NOS, this was the same thing I had found, because when you said that, I was wondering too, because the only place I had seen that it counts is for the embarking and disembarking section. I still haven't seen it either. Do you happen to know where you saw it in the BRB with maybe a page number??? I know that it can hurt my DE a bit, but that happens, and I wanna play it right so that I am prepared when I get back next year to head to tournaments.

**nosferatu1001**

Note it says "counts as" stationary - it isnt actually stationary, it has still moved.

Which is why page 67 reminds you that pivoting is STILL moving, even if the vehicle itself doesnt consider it to be movemebt, meaning that:passengers count as having moved, with implications for passengers shooting (heavy is a nono, generally) and of course disembarking and assaulting.

The parenthesis are a reminder that the vehicle HAS moved via pivot alone, even if it itself doesnt consider it movement.

**Galador**

But pg 58, where it talks about vehicle shooting states that vehicles that haven't moved may fire everything, and then in parentheses it says to remember that pivoting on the spot does NOT count as moving.

**kirsanth**

Galador wrote:But pg 58, where it talks about vehicle shooting states that vehicles that haven't moved may fire everything, and then in parentheses it says to remember that pivoting on the spot does NOT count as moving.

But what about embarked units?

**nosferatu1001**

Vehicle shooting /= Passenger shootiung

Nowhere in passenger shooting do you get told that the vehicle doesnt count as moving for their purposes. It only doesnt count as movement for its OWN shooting.

**Galador**

nosferatu1001 wrote:Vehicle shooting /= Passenger shootiung

Nowhere in passenger shooting do you get told that the vehicle doesnt count as moving for their purposes. It only doesnt count as movement for its OWN shooting.

It also states nowhere in the fire points rule that if a vehicle pivots it counts as moving for the people inside. It states that the passengers count as moving if the vehicle moves. So in that case we need to look under vehicle movement to determine the answer, not under embarking and disembarking of passengers. This is direct from the fire points section under transports, on pg. 66 of the BRB

So seeing as we have to determine what movement of a vehicle is to see if pivoting is movement, we have to go back to the movement sections.
PG 57, under vehicle movement states that pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving.

The first place you see anything about pivoting counting as moving is on pg 66, under Embarking. Which is after the section on fire points, which covers the basic shooting of troops inside of a vehicle, and after vehicle movement, which defines what moving is for a vehicle. In embarking, the only thing it counts pivoting for is that it cannot pivot on the spot if it has moved before the troops become embarked. The you got to the diesmbarking on pg 67, and it states that you only count as moving for firing while disembarking if the vehicle has already moved, and then in parentheses it includes pivoting on the spot, which is added because under vehicle movement, pivoting on the spot is not movement, it is only counted as movement in this particular spot.

So I still fail to see where passengers firing from a vehicle that count as moving if the vehicle pivots on the spot unless they are embarking or disembarking from the vehicle in that turn. If I missed something, please point it out to me, but going by the logical route of reading the pages in numerical order, I don't see how pivoting effects them until after their fire points section, and the only time it effects them is if they are getting on or off the vehicle.

**Jidmah**

Why is the "counts as" restricted to the vehicle's shooting? The passengers check if their vehicle has moved, and find it counting as stationary by general vehicle rules.
There is no restriction given on pg. 57, so it does count as stationary for all purposes, not just shooting its own weapons.

**time wizard**

nosferatu1001 wrote:Note it says "counts as" stationary - it isnt actually stationary, it has still moved.

Which is why page 67 reminds you that pivoting is STILL moving, even if the vehicle itself doesnt consider it to be movemebt, meaning that:passengers count as having moved, with implications for passengers shooting (heavy is a nono, generally) and of course disembarking and assaulting.

The parenthesis are a reminder that the vehicle HAS moved via pivot alone, even if it itself doesnt consider it movement.

I disagree. The parenthesis put an addition restriction that is specific to the rule for embarking and disembarking. That is why the rules says that if the vehicle moves, etc. which would not normally include pivoting since when a vehicle only pivots it counts as stationary. But in the case of embarking and disembarking, the vehicle can't move any further if it moved, and there is an additional restriction on pivoting. This keeps you from disembarking troops out the back of a rhino and pivoting it around to face the front armor towards the target.

There are no such restrictions listed, in parentheses or otherwise, in the shooting section. It simply says that models count as moving if the vehicle moves.

Since a vehicle that pivots counts as stationary for everything outside of the specific rules concerning embarking and disembarking, the passengers in a transport that pivoted would also count as being stationary.

Just because the vehicle was physically repositioned does not mean it actually moved, according to the rules.

Similar to the rule regarding difficult terrain tests. If you roll the die for a test, you count as moving, whether the unit actually moves or not.

**nosferatu1001**

A parenthesis cannot alter the sentence, or add restrictions, it can only remind or explain.

**Galador**

nosferatu1001 wrote:A parenthesis cannot alter the sentence, or add restrictions, it can only remind or explain.

at which point you have to look at the movement of the vehicle, and pivoting on the spot is not movement for the vehicle. That part is not in Parentheses under vehicle movement. It is its own sentence in the paragraph as a matter of fact.

Also, where does it state in the BRB or in English (I am actually asking about the English part, cause I don't know this myself) that a parenthesis can't alter a sentence or add restrictions??

And as far as that goes, you are defeating yourself. If it can't add restrictions, you once again go back to movement, and vehicles don't count as moving for pivoting on the spot if that is all they do. So I can actually ignore the restrictions that the parenthesis brings in the rules because of what you said??? Sweet, so I don't count as having moved for embarking or disembarking if the vehicle pivots on the spot!!

**Jidmah**

GW has been very strict on the correct usage of that kind of things(actually they have not).