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.

Reasons why bikes assault 6":

Page 52 says that if the rules say nothing different, you assault 6". (A clear RaW argument)

The turbo-boost rule says that when you move 24" you need all of your concentration to stay on the bike and cannot assault. (A clear RaI argument)

In the Jet Bikes section, it says that all Eldar jetbikes are allowed to move 6" in the asault phase even if they don't assault. (A clear argument by extension back to regular bikes that they all move 6", by he statement that "Jetbikes are the same as bikes with the following exceptions:"

You can say "even if" is not the same as "whether or not", but the precedent of moving only 6" in the assault phase is clear. 12" in movement does not automatically lead to 12" in assault.)

You'd have to be a dick to try and claim a 12" bike charge, even though there is an admittedly very strong RaW argument that it is 12"

EDIT: Damnit, thought I was the first to notice the jetbike thing. Natch.

Augustus wrote:

Rymafyr wrote:
The rules for 'Bikes' starting on page 53 are an addendum to the stated rules for Infantry from the aforementioned sections. Here, the bikes movement is modified from 6" to 12". You do not re-apply the rule from page 34, as the Assault rules for bikes make no new provision to allow such a change.

Ok, if it is true that all infantry move only 6 unless specified otherwise (which isn't in the rules for the record) then why does it explicitly specify jump infantry assault 6 instead of 12? That's completely redundant and meaningless if you are right. Answer that.

Infantry moving up to 6" is in the rules (for the record), unless specified otherwise with their own special rule or unit rule, just as your Jump Pack example shows. Looking at the case for Jump Infantry assaulting, the whole paragraph is redundant as nothing is changed in their assault phase from a normal infantry unit assaulting. How this example changes the fact that the rules for 'bikes assaulting' still makes no allowance for a 12" assault is beyond me. This in no way cites some hidden precedence or intent.

Augustus wrote:

focusedfire wrote:...There would be no reason for the turbo-Boosters rule if the bikes could 24" combined every turn.

Really?

How about if they wanted to move move 24 with no charge target in range?

How about if they wanted to turboboost to get invulnerable saves?

What if they wanted to move away from fast assaulter units?

What if they needed to get behind intervening cover that was greater than 12 away but not 24?

What if they needed to reach an objective?

Get to a unit that was routing to be in 6 inches in the enemy turn?

Block a transports exit point...

Think any of these are good reasons?

OK, I concede that there would be a few usful things for turbo in this instance. But the rule would have been written very differently. When dealing with a lawyer how you win is by precedent. Precedent says 6"

What if they want to turbo-boost and shoot. Move over 18" in a single turn your turbo-boosting and at that speed you can't assault. Turbo rule is fairly clear on the intent that you move 24" in a turn you sacrifice something in return.

This is an attempt to insert a rule without it being written. For every excuse that it MAY exist there is an equal counter.

Not trying to be offensive but, your coming across as the guy thats the reason we have to have a diclaimer on everything. If I leave the door to my house open, with money on the counter, do you need a sign that says if you come in uninvited and take that money without permission its stealing?

Using this thought process seems to violate the first rule. It'd be different if you were asking for a faq. But thats not what your doing. Your trying to insert a new rule in place of an old one without having it clearly in writing, which is your argument. There no rule saying such so 6" doesn't exist but, theres no rule saying such so 12" does exist. Your own logic kills your argument.



edited for clarity

Nurgleboy77 wrote:
Odd that we haven't seen the Yak in here. Maybe it's too stupid to justify with a ruling?

While that probably is the case, Yak hasn't been spotted for a while, has he? Probably still on Holiday for the Holidays...

It would be nice to see his take though.

this is what give dakkites a bad name, looking for every loophole to abuse in their favor. grats again. my opinion on generally most dakkites has been solidified to pure sh*t. but whatever really.:] i've never had any gaming experience with a bike assaulting 12". and can someone here tell me if they ever had an opponent assault 12" with bikes? yeah, no one you abusive dakkites.

an opponent that isnt a fellow abuser that is.

Augustus wrote:Ghaz, are you claiming that moving 12 in the movement phase is not a rule for bikes in the movement phase then?

And yet again, they clearly tell you what 'follow the same rules as in the Movement phase' means. You're flat out ignoring the defintion that they give you. Once again, this is exactly what 'follow the same rules as in the Movement phase' means per the rules:

This means that assaulting models may still not move through friendly or enemy models, may not pass through gaps narrower than their base, and may not move into base contact with enemy models from a unit they are not assaulting.

That is what it means, nothing more. Stop trying to add your own qualifications to a term that they've already clearly defined.

I agree Ghaz 1000%!!!

G

Ghaz wrote:

Augustus wrote:Ghaz, are you claiming that moving 12 in the movement phase is not a rule for bikes in the movement phase then?

And yet again, they clearly tell you what 'follow the same rules as in the Movement phase' means. You're flat out ignoring the defintion that they give you. Once again, this is exactly what 'follow the same rules as in the Movement phase' means per the rules:

This means that assaulting models may still not move through friendly or enemy models, may not pass through gaps narrower than their base, and may not move into base contact with enemy models from a unit they are not assaulting.

That is what it means, nothing more. Stop trying to add your own qualifications to a term that they've already clearly defined.

QFT

thank you Ghaz, This is not even a RAW vs. RAI discussion. This is pure RAW. Every other interpretation I have seen is reading between the lines and jumping to conclusions.

In agreement that the maximum distance of 6" for assault on pg. 33 is something that must be explicitly overwritten, which it is not in the case of bikes (but is for cavalry).

models move 6" in the assault phase
assault moves follow the rules of the movement phase

This gives us two rules for how we handle assault movement: it will be 6" unless specified otherwise, and it will follow the rules of the movement phase.

I am happy to see Dakka coming to it's senses.

G

So far the RAW seems to favor the 12" assault. Until a good reason has come up for it not to. I run the ravenwing and in a million years I would NEVER even attempt this one. I would kick my own butt for thinking about it. I think it is against the spirit of the game and would make bikes STUPID powerful. It just feels super wrong as I am sure it was an over site or we just haven't found the rule stating it is just plain wrong.

Nice catch however.

Why not say 18" charge and ask the audience to read 30+ pages of rules to totally smoke them? Obviously cheating wins games. Who cares if you get called later?

G

Sha1emade wrote:So far the RAW seems to favor the 12" assault.

No, the RAW does not favor a 12" charge due to the passage I've quoted above.

OK Nice Big reread of BGB ... from the start

Movement Phase
>Infantry move up to 6" in movement phase (pg11) [Movement Distance]
>Except for the rules detailed in this section for each unit type these units follow the same rules as infantry (pg51)
>Bikes move up to 12" (pg53) [Bikes-Movement]

Assault Phase
>All models in an assaulting unit make their assault move following the same rules as in the moment phase (pg34)
>Infantry move up to 6" in movement phase (pg11) [Movement Distance]
>Except for the rules detailed in this section for each unit type these units follow the same rules as infantry (pg51)
>Bike ignore difficult terrain (pg53) [Bikes-Assault]

which is how it works ... haven't reread the BGB in a while ... you just get in to a habit of doing a then b then c and then wonder if you're doing it right when some one questions it ... GW could have just add 6" but didn't ... any way my other post still stand it would be nice to FAQ this as it has come up before.

I was posting as you were posting so I missed it. I knew it was wrong but didn't dive headlong into the rule book to prove it for myself. Calm down there big guy no need to be rude.

Uh, I posted that yesterday, not 'while you were posting'.

No it doesn't need to be faq'd. It clearly says that Eldar jetbikes can move 6 inches if they assault or not. Clearly this states that bikes assault 6 inches.

You have to be really hard headed to believe RAW tells you they can assault 12 inches.

By your RAW arguement bikes can assault 24 inches. It doesn't say you can't turbo boost in the assault phase. Just that you can't assault after turbo boosting in the movement phase. See I can say dumb things.

MauleedlovesYakeface wrote:No it doesn't need to be faq'd. It clearly says that Eldar jetbikes can move 6 inches if they assault or not. Clearly this states that bikes assault 6 inches.

Sorry but you are wrong. The eldar jetbike rules says that they can still move 6" in the assault phase even if they don't assault (normally you can't move in the assault phase if you don't make an assault move). It doesn't say anything about how far an eldar jetbike can move if assaulting.

@ webb, The key word here is "still"

Ghaz wrote:

Augustus wrote:Ghaz, are you claiming that moving 12 in the movement phase is not a rule for bikes in the movement phase then?

And yet again, they clearly tell you what 'follow the same rules as in the Movement phase' means. You're flat out ignoring the defintion that they give you. Once again, this is exactly what 'follow the same rules as in the Movement phase' means per the rules:

This means that assaulting models may still not move through friendly or enemy models, may not pass through gaps narrower than their base, and may not move into base contact with enemy models from a unit they are not assaulting.

That is what it means, nothing more. Stop trying to add your own qualifications to a term that they've already clearly defined.

Do you really mean this?

How long can then normal infantry move?
I can't find anywhere where the rules tells you how far infantry can assault if they don't move as far as they do in the movement phase.

It also would mean you can't pivot models while assaulting, that the whole unit is no longer forced to move at the speed of the slowest model and other ridiculous stuff.
I think it's only meant as a clarification that you still may not do those things.

Yes, I really mean this. Show us where 'pivoting' is a separate part of the assault phase. You pivot them as you move them their 6". It's not a 'clarification', it's telling you exactly what they mean. If they wanted it to be a 'clarification', then they would have used the word 'clarification', wouldn't they?

focusedfire wrote:@ webb, The key word here is "still"

I didn't quote.
The quote is:

RB page 53, Eldar Jetbikes section in the box wrote:All Eldar jetbikes (including Dark Eldar ones) are
allowed to move 6" in the Assault phase, even if
they don’t assault.

It only tells us that instead of the normal assault move they can move 6" without assaulting.

Let me exchange a few words and maybe you get me:
All Eldar infantry are allowed to move 3" in the Assault phase, even if they don’t assault.

Ghaz wrote:Yes, I really mean this. Show us where 'pivoting' is a separate part of the assault phase. You pivot them as you move them their 6". It's not a 'clarification', it's telling you exactly what they mean. If they wanted it to be a 'clarification', then they would have used the word 'clarification', wouldn't they?

My car is blue. This means it's not red.

So by saying that I'm just saying that my car is not red? The car could in fact be green?

So? You're still trying to read something into a phrase that they clearly tell you what it means. So you want us to believe that when they mean one thing, that they really mean something else? I think that's stretching it a might bit.

I don't think Enlish is the first language of some of these people. The statement means bikes can only assault 6 inches. Eldar bikes can move 6 inches even if they don't assault.

RB, page 34 wrote:MOVING ASSAULTING MODELS
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.

This is super clear to me. Follow the same rules as in the movement phase. The rest is clarification, just as I just told you my car is not red.

And I ask again. Where does the rulebook tells us how far normal infantry can assault by your ruling?

We shouldn't even be discussing this. I would love to rapid fire bolters 24". We all know that inherently you just cannot do it.

G

And again, if it was a 'clarification' then it would say that. It's what they mean. Just because you keep saying it's a 'clarification' does not make it so. When they say that it's what they mean, then it's what they mean. You're so called 'example' does not change that.

Webbe wrote:

focusedfire wrote:@ webb, The key word here is "still"

I didn't quote.
The quote is:

RB page 53, Eldar Jetbikes section in the box wrote:All Eldar jetbikes (including Dark Eldar ones) are
allowed to move 6" in the Assault phase, even if
they don’t assault.

It only tells us that instead of the normal assault move they can move 6" without assaulting.

Let me exchange a few words and maybe you get me:
All Eldar infantry are allowed to move 3" in the Assault phase, even if they don’t assault.

Webb, that bit of condenscention is gonna cost ya. You "must" be the kid that has to be told not to dive head first into the empty swimming pool. You get condescending when you CHOSE to use poor wording then actually think the actual quote supports your position.

Using basic english skills to examine the sentence structure. It "only tells us" that the eldar jetbikes assault 6" in the assault phase. Then *comma* even if they don't assault. Operative word here is now "even". Eldar jetbikes assault 6". There is no other way to read this sentence.

edited for spelling and politeness

I just read through the rules and here is what I see:

Infantry moves and assaults 6" because as stated: "Assaults movement follows all the same movement as standard, except they are allowed to move within 1" of an enemy."

Bikes are NOT infantry. They have their own rules.
They may move up to 12" in the movement phase.

Very simple. No argument.

Assault Movement follows all the same rules except the move within 1" rule.

With the way that it is written, bikes should assault 12". Using the argument the infantry only assaults 6" supports the bike argument because everyone is following their own rules. Since bikes are bikes, and not infantry, they should have the ability to assault 12".

Cheesy yes, but the way it is written says they should assault 12".