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.

nosferatu1001 wrote:fox40 - the problem with the realism arugment is that, well, the entire movmenet rules are not "realistic"

If you want realistic go back to 2nd, with wheelng templates.

slackermages - the supporting raw has been provided plenty of times. I can measure from the centre of my base, which is entirely legal, and as the final element of the move I can then pivot such that my total displacement is greater than my movement as defined by the tape measure.

It has also been the same in 3rd. As pointed out - movement has been this way for 12 years.

It's not been provided recently. Going back to quote page 12 again, "... it's a common mistake to measure the distance and then place the model on the far side of the tape. This is incorrect as it adds the entire length of the model's base to the distance moved." What are you doing when you measure from the center to allow yourself the extra pivot distance? You're placing parts of the model on the far side of the tape. The diagram might be a clarification, the text beside it is a directive. If you measure correctly, gaining distance with a pivot is never possible in the movement phase. I cannot see one line in the permissive rule set that lets you measure however you please. I do see one line (quoted above) and an explanatory diagram that DO give you a movement method. Perhaps give is the wrong verbage, 'direct to' would be more appropriate.

And as I pointed out before, it could have been the same since Rogue Trader. If we can point to RAW to resolve it now, then its over until 6th.

Mahtamori - does your rulebook not have the the first sentence of the pivot paragraph on page 57? I'll quote here, "Vehicles can turn any number of times as they move." Not before, not after, as you measure. Pivoting does not cost you movement as in 2nd edition with wheeling. Pivoting may result in movement in a particular direction. The key exception to this is clearly noted on pg 57, "Pivoting on the spot alone does not as moving, so a vehicle that only pivots in the movement phase counts as stationary..."

Slackermagee: "can" express possibility not necessity. The diagram on page 12 is an example of a legal measurement, not the definite measurement.

Tell me, how do you move a vehicle that needs to go around a rock?

Mahtamori wrote:Slackermagee: "can" express possibility not necessity. The diagram on page 12 is an example of a legal measurement, not the definite measurement.

Tell me, how do you move a vehicle that needs to go around a rock?

Uh... okay. I don't think we're on the same page here. "Can" refers to the vehicles ability to do any sort of turn as movement progresses. The word has no impact on 'as you move'. It is not a choice to turn only as you move and ne'er another time, it is simply raw.

As for moving around a rock: I'm getting really tired of this coming up as the, "But look! Your method gets difficult in this one scenario!" Put the tape measure down, measure around (bending the ruler... oh noes!) the base of the rock, then place the tank down behind the end of the tape measure in whatever orientation you desire. The raw puts an additional stipulation on this movement though: you must always have enough room to move the tank. This is when you could/should physically move the tank around the rock to be sure that none of the hull corners is catching on something. DO NOT mistake this physical movement for actual measurement. Doing so leads you to one of two places: pivoting before/after moves (illegal by raw) or running what amounts to an integration of infinitely small measurements as you move and pivot about the rock from 0-x inches (which is completely legal... but would take more time than you have in the store before closing time).

I dont get the problem...

In assault moves you have to move your first model by the shortest possible route into base contact with the enemy. That means you HAVE to pivot on the spot to face your enemy model in order to use the shortest route. And apart from the "turning and facing" paragraph we have no other reference to this stuff. This is, because the rules were written without the knowledge of an oval base.

Now the RB encourages a vehicle player to gain distances with pivoting their vehicles during movement. It does permit pivoting infantry models during movement. I simply do not get, where the problem with oval MC should be...

Part of the problem is reading "pivoting on the spot alone" as "pivoting". The statement that only pivoting gives allowment for the turn to count as movement without penalty confuses people.

It does not circumvent the issue, but it helps narrow the problem. for folks that think it is carte blanche.

Trygons can move twist, run twist, shoot twist, assault twist--allaowing a 6+6+6=24" charge, apparently.
(Onslaught = win)

But it is only a problem if you mention it--not if you move it.

Slackermagee wrote:It's not been provided recently. Going back to quote page 12 again, "... it's a common mistake to measure the distance and then place the model on the far side of the tape. This is incorrect as it adds the entire length of the model's base to the distance moved." What are you doing when you measure from the center to allow yourself the extra pivot distance? You're placing parts of the model on the far side of the tape.

Incorrect. It is showing AN example of how to measure, and stating IF you measure in this way you cannot do X. The rules for measuring only require you to be consistent. IF you measure from the "front" of the base it is a common mistake to place the model on the far side of the tape. It is talking about a specific method of measuring. Not the only one.

If I measure from the centre (allowed by the rules, which requires me to measure from the base) I can place the model whereever i like, orientation wise, and I will not be altering the distance moved. I will alter the displacement of the partso f the model, but that is irrelevant.

Slackermagee wrote:The diagram might be a clarification, the text beside it is a directive. If you measure correctly, gaining distance with a pivot is never possible in the movement phase. I cannot see one line in the permissive rule set that lets you measure however you please. I do see one line (quoted above) and an explanatory diagram that DO give you a movement method. Perhaps give is the wrong verbage, 'direct to' would be more appropriate.

Incorrect, as given above. You are told to measure from the base. Done.

Slackermagee wrote:And as I pointed out before, it could have been the same since Rogue Trader. If we can point to RAW to resolve it now, then its over until 6th.

RAW proven above. Sorry, you are simply wrong on this matter, no matter how much you cliaim otherwise. Same for vehicles. The line "pivoting does not reduce movement" means that, in your method, this like is proven invalid as pivoting *does* reduce movement using your method. When shown that your method breaks a rule, that invalidates your method.

If you want the diagrammatic proof, please search for the MASSIVE thread on this. Your argument has been debunked in every way possible there.

Rather interesting how when something in the written rules contradicts what you want to do, it becomes elective.

To pick apart your method of measuring from the center of the base, everyone do these three things:

>Place the base on a piece of paper
>Make a light pencil mark where you think the center is
>Repeat down the page

Notice how there's always a small variation in the location of the pencil mark, not unusual since you're running off of eye work alone.

Now go back and repeat those same three steps while marking the edge of the base with your pencil. Oh, look at that. You found the edge to within six significant figures (i.e. micrometers) every time and it was the same every time.

Now I wonder which method leads to the most consistent game... and I really wonder why anyone would want to possibly use the first metho- OH RIGHT. Because they want to continue using a trick that the rulebook 'suggests' they cannot use.

With regards to pivoting not reducing movement, you've twisted the meaning of that line to apply to everything a pivot could result in. It does not cost movement to perform a pivot, though if you place the model down in a new orientation (imagining that it pivoted on its path to the edge of tape) parts of the model may not have gone the full distance. Parts. Other parts may have gone a little farther. All together though, it has not been placed farther away from its starting position than allowed. To physically pivot the tank then move is to violate the 'as you move' line which is crystal clear RAW. Start measuring, then play with the model as you'd please.

As a matter of RAW principle: it actually NEVER says that you can measure from where you please on the base. Anywhere. All you have to go on are the 'suggestion' texts and diagram at the top of pg12.

So I ask again, quote me the RAW.

For vehicles: PLEASE see the other thread. Oddly enough your argument was debunked there. Over, and over, and over. And over.

Once you have done that please come back and continue.

Lol. "I Don't have an argument so I am going to try and strawman you to death with arguments about pencils and paper."

At least I don't feel depressed anymore. Thanks for the laugh slakermage!

That's enough, I think. Getting circular in here.