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.

FOR THIS POLL, PLEASE ANSWER HOW YOU CHOOSE TO PLAY THE GAME, NOT NECESSARILY WHAT THE RULES AS WRITTEN (RAW) SAY.

Feel free to post how and why you voted, but please DO NOT ENGAGE OTHERS IN DISCUSSIONS/ARGUMENTS ABOUT WHAT YOU THINK THE RULES SAY. Please create a separate thread if you feel the urge to have this kind of discussion.



The rules for 'Movement Distance' say (rulebook, pg 11): "Infantry move up to six inches (6") in the Movement phase. This represents most creatures moving at a reasonable pace but stopping several times to scan the surrounding landscape for enemies, communicate with their commanders, etc."


The rules for 'Turning and Facing' say (rulebook, pg 11): "As you move the models in a unit, they can turn to face in any direction, without affecting the distance they are able to cover."


The rules for Moving Assaulting Models say (rulebook, pg 34): "All of the models in an assaulting unit make their assault move following the same rules as in the Movement phase, with the exception that they may be moved within 1" of enemy models."





QUESTION: Do you play that a (non-vehicle) model on a non-round base is allowed to pivot while moving to effectively allow them to 'gain' additional movement distance?


Example:

The Trygon above is just a bit beyond the 6" needed to assault the marines, however if he is able to pivot his base, this would easily allow him to be within 6" and instantly able to assault the marines. Please ignore any arguments about the model not being able to charge because he is out of range...that's the not the point of this poll, the point is whether or not you allow pivoting of non-round bases to gain additional movement distance regardless of context, the example is just there to illustrate that point, even if it is technically wrong.



OPTION A. I play that with (non-vehicle) models on oval bases, any movement they 'gain' by pivoting is included in their overall movement distance and therefore in the example above the Trygon would not be able to assault the marines.


OPTION B. I play that models can pivot freely, so therefore those mounted on oval bases are effectively able to gain extra movement distance with their freely allowed pivots, so therefore in the example above the Trygon would be able to assault the marines.


OPTION C. Something else entirely: reply exactly what it is below.

I allow it, as it is not true "movement" just a displacement effect.

In my group we play A.

The kicker is that we use B for vehicles. We have no real reason for doing this, beyond "it felt like the right way to do it".

At least you recognised the similarities

Its probably because vehicles have worked this way since 1998, and its only recently that we've had non-round bases - bikes can do this as well.

nosferatu1001 wrote:At least you recognised the similarities

Its probably because vehicles have worked this way since 1998, and its only recently that we've had non-round bases - bikes can do this as well.

Good call, changed the thread title and description a bit to be more general.

Guess I must be a good sport. Even with my "Lawn Dart" shaped Raiders I measure from the starting point as the model sits to the end point as my model will face. The move distance is no more than that allowed by the BRB. So if my Raiders are facing sideways I don't pivot to gain extra distance then move.

No, youre just following a different set of rules - the main rules allow you to gain displacement in one direction without it affecting the distance you have moved.

This is because of the simplified movement methods, but is entirely allowable, and is something the studio clearly dont see fit to change - its not as if they arent aware of it, from discussions with members of it over the years.

Boss GreenNutz wrote:Guess I must be a good sport. Even with my "Lawn Dart" shaped Raiders I measure from the starting point as the model sits to the end point as my model will face. The move distance is no more than that allowed by the BRB. So if my Raiders are facing sideways I don't pivot to gain extra distance then move.

Vehicles are a different poll, which you can find here:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/294492.page

Understand but I'd do it the same way with an MC on an oval base. Measure his movement from the way he sits to the end point. Guess it was a long way of saying I'd go with option "A"

Choose B mostly because it makes the game go smoother w/o the bitching. If I'm playing w/ a WAAC or a real stickler, I'd let him make the call.

In the area I'm from, we tend it play it using Option A, mainly because of several parts that Yak quoted which I'll highlight.

yakface wrote:
The rules for 'Turning and Facing' say (rulebook, pg 11): "As you move the models in a unit, they can turn to face in any direction, without affecting the distance they are able to cover."

Now the first part to an assault, is that you measure the distance before you ever touch the model. Because it is before the move is made, you cannot make the turn of the monstrous creature in the assault phase, because you are not moving it yet. If in the movement phase you had turned it towards the squad at the end of the move, no problems. But to turn BEFORE you move isn't allowed. You turn AS you move, not as you measure before making an assault move. If you are out of range at the point you measure you cannot assault, and no amount of turning before your move is legal.

Moving sideways and then turning results in the exact same thing as turning and then moving forward.

Jidmah wrote:Moving sideways and then turning results in the exact same thing as turning and then moving forward.

Agreed, however if the model is determined to be out of range to charge because of how the model was left from the movement phase then it cannot turn as it moves since it is out of range. Give it a turn at the end of the movement phase and it's fine, but you have to measure the distance to the target unit with how the model is currently positioned. You don't have permission to turn before you measure, only As you move the models. As moving in the assault phase is done after determining IF they can assault, if you are more than 6" from the target unit you cannot turn then remeasure.

A mix of option A and B, but usually B (so that's what I voted).

If you lay down your tape to measure without pivoting the model and find out you're out of charge range, tough luck. If you pivot first then lay down the tape to measure, no problem.

This is an interesting question, because it is absolutely not allowed for assaults since you have to measure for distance from the models base before moving, so you would not be able to pivot to make it into assault...

However in the movement phase there is no restriction on having to move a set distance to a target for your move to succeed so it has this silly grey area. Obviously your way of moving models for assault and movement should be the same but in weird situations they could potentially not be the same, like this.

usually the way I and my friends play it is you measure from a models base to where you want to move and put the front facing of a model in that direction, the effect is as per the BRB with no extra distance gained and pivoting/facing changes being done in effect during the move and not at the very start or end. I am fairly certain that models unlike vehicles do not get the "may pivot as much as you want during their move blah blah blah" rules lawyering nonsense.

A.

It is the assault rules that make it so, not movement rules.

The order is thus: You declare assaults, then measure distance, and finally you move your models into assault.
This means that there is no pivot/movement in which you can gain distance, prior to measuring. Once you measure and are out of range, you are out of luck.

Now, had the Nid player pivoted his model during his movement phase, rather than waiting until the assault phase, thus gaining his extra distance, he would have been in range. However, since no movement in the assault phase can occur until after both the distance is measured and the model is deemed close enough to assault, the Nid is stuck.

"As you move the models in a unit, they can turn to face in any direction, without affecting the distance they are able to cover."


if you take this rule literally then you cannot pivot at the beginning or ending of a models movement as the model is not moving. Pivoting has to be done as you move the model, not before the model has moved or at the end of the models movement

just saying

blaktoof wrote:"As you move the models in a unit, they can turn to face in any direction, without affecting the distance they are able to cover."


if you take this rule literally then you cannot pivot at the begining of ending of a models movement as the model is not moving. Pivoting has to be done as you move the model, not before the model has moved or at the end of the models movement"

just saying

Good point. I have edited my previous post to make it clearer

Personally I play option A with my Trygons because it feels like gamesmanship to grub out a bit of extra movement by the shape of the base.

That is because to an old time Historicals player, I am used to the rule that no matter how many evolutions a formation does during the movement phase, no part of it can end farther away from that part's start point than the maximum move of the unit.

Option A.

When you measure the distance to attempt to assault, you're not allowed to rotate or move the model to do so. If the assault "fails" then you are not moving, and so may not rotate your model in order to "succeed" in your Assault move.

However:

If you are playing intelligently, it is perfectly fine to rotate your model at the END of your MOVEMENT phase or SHOOTING phase (if running) so that you will be able to successfully assault in the Assault phase.

If it's the Assault phase though and you're half an inch short and forgot to rotate your model... out of luck. You don't get to start moving unless you're within 6"... and you can't rotate if you haven't started moving.

BRB Pg 33:

Delcare Assaults:
The maximum distance most units can move during an assault is 6". As you cannot measure the distance to the enemy before declaring the assault, if you misjudge the distance and the unit is unable to reach ist target, then the unit does not move and that assault is ignored.


In order to rotate, the Trygon would have to move. If it's not within 6" though, the Assault fails and it can't move.

Murrdox wrote:Option A.

When you measure the distance to attempt to assault, you're not allowed to rotate or move the model to do so. If the assault "fails" then you are not moving, and so may not rotate your model in order to "succeed" in your Assault move.

However:

If you are playing intelligently, it is perfectly fine to rotate your model at the END of your MOVEMENT phase or SHOOTING phase (if running) so that you will be able to successfully assault in the Assault phase.

If it's the Assault phase though and you're half an inch short and forgot to rotate your model... out of luck. You don't get to start moving unless you're within 6"... and you can't rotate if you haven't started moving.

BRB Pg 33:

Delcare Assaults:
The maximum distance most units can move during an assault is 6". As you cannot measure the distance to the enemy before declaring the assault, if you misjudge the distance and the unit is unable to reach ist target, then the unit does not move and that assault is ignored.


In order to rotate, the Trygon would have to move. If it's not within 6" though, the Assault fails and it can't move.

The point of the poll is about whether or not you allow pivoting of non-round bases in order to gain additional movement distance. I agree in hindsight that using an assault-based scenario was not the best choice, but frankly it was a much easier way to get the point across then just trying to ask whether you thought a model moving in the movement phase could gain extra range by pivoting.

Anyway, I've clarified the example to hopefully refocus people on the 'point' of the poll (as opposed to the exact scenario presented in the example), however I'm wondering if the poor example choice has spoiled any chance of getting a good poll result?

I think the results are muddied. It seems there are a number of people who would allow the pivot during movement but who feel if you're out of range to assault you don't get to move so you don't get to pivot.

We play B currently, but I think that it's cheesy as I have failed assaults because of that before. It essentially makes the whole 'can my mini have a bigger base than supplied?' argument again - by being side on your base is smaller, pivot and you gain an extra half and inch or so...

After reading this, I would have to agree for the assault phase, you simply measure and you are either in or out of assault range (i.e. no pivoting first).

However, I really could care less about pivoting to gain that extra distance. It is part of the game and how ovals and vehicles work. Sometimes it helps me, sometimes it helps my opponent. Bottom line is the center of the model's movement never increases, regardless of how much you pivot.

I agree with the sentiments of option A, because, AFAIK, the following logic is applied in the assault phase

Check to see if in range THEN move models.

If Option B is the correct stance, then the follow sequence of events takes place:
Check to see if in range, FAIL -> Pivot (move) model,Check to see if in range, PASS -> move models

This would work out as a case of unallowed movement, as you are not allowed to move assaulting models UNLESS they are in assault range, in the trygon example, you are moving a model, before checking assault range, which is disallowed.

Leigen_Zero wrote:I agree with the sentiments of option A, because, AFAIK, the following logic is applied in the assault phase

Check to see if in range THEN move models.

If Option B is the correct stance, then the follow sequence of events takes place:
Check to see if in range, FAIL -> Pivot (move) model,Check to see if in range, PASS -> move models

This would work out as a case of unallowed movement, as you are not allowed to move assaulting models UNLESS they are in assault range, in the trygon example, you are moving a model, before checking assault range, which is disallowed.

Sigh. Did you even read the example text?

The question is not about whether you are allowed to move in this situation, but rather whether you allow pivoting to gain extra distance regardless of what phase it is in...it just so happens that the example uses the assault phase, but that's not the question.

I will lock this thread until I can make up a better example so people don't get side-tracked on pointless semantics.

Sorry about that!