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.

This is something I ran into when playing my Tau against an SM friend. I flew my Piranha flat out and parked it 1" away from the front of his land raider. Since he couldn't pivot without moving closer than 1" to my model, he couldn't pivot. If he tried to ram, It would only inflict a s5 hit, which i could ignore on a 3+(being a skimmer). If he shot at me, I would have the 4+ from flat out. No matter what, it seems like this literally stops a land raider in it's tracks.

The question: Did I miss something? Or was this correct according to the rules?

Ya your friend could have just backed up, or use the completely legal but sometimes looked down upon 'slide the tracked vehicle sideways' move.

Not always completely looked down upon, given its the basic rules

The infantry rules allow you to move in any direction, and apply to all movement unless overridden; while the vehicle section implies you should only move forwards / backwards and pivot, it does not make this mandatory.

Having just re-read the vehicle movement rules, they actually give no indication of how to move a vehicle. So I suppose you could slide sideways. Odd thing to leave out of the book lol.

No, they do tell you how to move - combining forwards / backwards and pivoting. Howeer this does not override the standard infantry rules

There's nothing stopping you from backing up 1 inch, piviting, then going around, is there? Sure, you limit the direction of the land raider, and cause more movement to get around, but it doesn't stop it.

...Right?

Well if land raider can fly, why cant they float sideways aswell. Skimmers never have such problems. If in his possision i would proberly shoot at him and if it fails, just get over it. hay, the lr gets cover too.

I guess pavane of slaanesh does work on vehicals...the
'cha cha slide' does at least

Ledabot - which landraiders can fly?

BA ones certainly cant, which is probably where that comment was aimed....

BA Landraiders don't fly! They fall, with style

I don't like to do it myself but there have been occasions where I moved my tankesque vehicles sideways. Its legal but flaky.

In this scenario, I would have just backed up and driven away. Take a little longer to get to my destination but not have to deal with the giant hovertank in front of me.

-cgmckenzie

Yes, there is a glaring ommision in the rules about how, exactly, to move a vehicle. I've come across two interpretations in my day: chess and hotwheels.

Chess movement is the abstract, where you measure how far a vehicle can move, pick it up from where it is and put it down within the range of movement. Of course, the path has to be clear of impassable terrain or models, but you get the idea.

Hotwheels movement would require moving only forward and back, and pivoting on the spot. This would result in a blocked Land Raider (if they couldn't back up as suggested). This is also the movement model that allows for extra distance to be gained by oblong vehicles, such as raiders (deploy sideways, pivot, then move. If you're not familiar, it can allow for first turn assaults where you usually wouldn't expect them).

While the RAW doesn't really specify which should be used, I think RAI leans toward "hotwheels," but I think "chess" is superior. Ultimately, the important thing is being consistent. If my opponent ever used the "pivot and move" trick to gain some inches for assault, I'd say they can't move sideways to get out of this block.

Ultimately, my response is: it depends on how you've been playing movement so far. Each movement "model" has its own consequences.

I hope that all made sense. I typed this out with less coffee than usual.

It made sense, but I don't agree that you have to stick to one 'school of thought' for movement as you describe. If I were to raise a stink about you doing one of those 2 methods, then I would be in the wrong to do it myself, but RAW I can move my vehicle any way I want(provided it follows all applicable rules).

-cgmckenzie

Surely with pivoting you can move mega-distances diagonally? You could move an inch, pivot, from the front (now turned so closer) move and so on.. each time gaining about 1 inch.

Essentially move, turn sideways, slide forward .01 inches, pivot,move an inch, pivot, slide .01 inches, pivot...

If you rotate from anywhere but the center you're cheating

Sentai_Sage wrote:BA Landraiders don't fly! They fall, with style

Sig...

I Love it !

Viper217 wrote:Ya your friend could have just backed up, or use the completely legal but sometimes looked down upon 'slide the tracked vehicle sideways' move.

That one. The last one. Oh my god, that is such a move.

cgmckenzie wrote:It made sense, but I don't agree that you have to stick to one 'school of thought' for movement as you describe. If I were to raise a stink about you doing one of those 2 methods, then I would be in the wrong to do it myself, but RAW I can move my vehicle any way I want(provided it follows all applicable rules).

-cgmckenzie

Oh, so there's apparently an "I do what I want" school of thought, too.

Each of those intepretations has consequences that are at odds with the other. 40k has a permissive ruleset, telling you what you can do, rather than what you can't. "It doesn't say I can't" isn't good enough for a rules argument. Since the rules are crap (thanks GW), you basically have to choose which way you interpret them and stick with it. Otherwise you're on a slippery slope to TFG territory, changing your stance on the rules when it benefits you.

It's not changing the stance on the rules. If I want to move my land raider sidewise, I don't have to move it exclusively sideways for the rest of the game.

It's not breaking any rules or bending them either. Both are perfectly legal moves, one being frowned upon by the community but legal nonetheless.

If I follow ass rules for movement(distance, not passing through models, terrain tests, etc) I can do the land raider shuffle all if I so care.

Again, if I said you couldn't do that but did it myself, I would be in the wrong for being a flaming hypocrite, not because it broke any rules.

-cgmckenzie

your friend could have just backed up the LR.


and vehicles are allowed to do the Cha Cha slide to move sideways. its a hole in the rules.



really all a Piranha in the face does is force the Landraider to waste a few inches of movement to go around you. it does slow it down, but not much.

The idea with the piranha is that you block the movement of their transports to prevent them delivering their loads by parking them between bits of impassable terrain. On shuffling through cliffs guys!

@ Grounded dudes, I was joking about the flying land raider. Did you really think i was serious?

Vehicle movement Rules imply that forward and backward movement are the only movements available, and that is what they seem to be trying to say, unfortunately that is not what the rules actually say: Sideways movement is technically legal.

The same goes for infantry(Which also implies although even less explicitly, that infantry should also only move directly forward; turning and facing on page 11 is the slight implication for only forward movement).

There are, unfortunately, no hard rules that specify you must only move in any particular facing with any models.

Kommissar Kel wrote:Vehicle movement Rules imply that forward and backward movement are the only movements available, and that is what they seem to be trying to say, unfortunately that is not what the rules actually say: Sideways movement is technically legal.

The same goes for infantry(Which also implies although even less explicitly, that infantry should also only move directly forward; turning and facing on page 11 is the slight implication for only forward movement).

There are, unfortunately, no hard rules that specify you must only move in any particular facing with any models.

However, as we all know, this is a permissive ruleset. Sideways movement can't be "technically legal" just because it's not prohibited. We have to be told how to move. However, you're right that the movement rules are unfortunate and incomplete.

The permissive ruleset is why I say you have to have a specific interpretation and stick with it. Take what it tells you about moving vehicles, and fill in the gaps (because we have to, either way) with consistent rules, and go from there. Simply doing what it doesn't tell you not to isn't enough.

When you move a vehicle, and your opponent asks you *why* you moved that way, you should have a reason to support it, and we all (should) know "because it doesn't tell me I can't" isn't good enough. Therefore, you need a defined interpretation, one that you can stick to. Ultimately, what your LR-driving opponent can do depends on how your FLGS (or you and your opponent) has been dealing with movement. Maybe you've got a reading of the vehicle rules that's different than the ones I mentioned earlier, but at the very least it should be consistent.

El Cheezus - they are technically legal because the Infantry rules let you move sideways, and then specifies that this is the base movement rules - so, you have permission to do it, and theat permission is not removed by the vehicle rules, so you cannot.

It also doesn't explicitly tell you to move it by rolling forward, so is that not allowed?

The game is an abstraction, not unlike chess(to draw back to an earlier simile). How models look really has little bearing on how they operate, eg my sentinels look like they should skitter really fast across the board and be a beast in CC, but they aren't capable of either.

Facing only comes into play when interacting with other models for shooting/assaulting/not getting too close etc. It has nothing to do with movement.

-cgmckenzie

Except it does for vehicles, as you pivot from the centre meaning, for a non-round vehicle, facing is important.

But facing is important for the reasons I mentioned above. I can move it my 6 inches and then pivot as long as the orientation I move it in fits through all the gaps along my path.

Shuffling across an open field then pivoting bears the same results as driving across an open field and then pivoting. Orientation on the move only matters when you are trying to not scrape the paint on other models, but there is nowehere to indicate that it has to move analogous to a real vehicle from today.

-cgmckenzie

I didnt say it does. However facing (initial or end) DOES matter for how far the vehicle has displaced, which is NOT the same as how far the vehicle has moved.

I find that making engines noises, "brrrrrrrrrrr," helps with vehicle movements.

Not just moving, you have to make ALL the noises in order for you models to work