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.

Which is displacement. But as far as 40k is concerned it hasnt ended up further than 12" away.

Also parts of the vehicle have displaced less than 12", but this is hardly ever focussed on...

Tomb King wrote:vehicles cant move sideways.

This is not actually true, that I have read.

kirsanth wrote:

Tomb King wrote:vehicles cant move sideways.

This is not actually true, that I have read.

It's debatable. The rules for infantry movement allow models to move sideways. Vehicle movement says that they move like infantry with exceptions. Blocking sideways movement is not explicitly stated as being prohibited. But, the vehicle movement rules do say "forwards and backwards". So, there's an indication that the intent is for vehicles only to go forwards and backwards.


Personally, I've always played where it depends on the type of vehicle. If your vehicle has treads or wheels, you can only go backwards and forwards. If your vehicle has other propulsion, it can move in any direction.

For the OP, if you play against Orks and they field both embarked Orks and Ghazkhull, this is probably the tactic you're going to see. Since Ghaz's Waaagh gives an auto-6 and waaagh gives fleet, the vehicle-move, disembark, run 6, assault 6 makes for a great distance-closer.

rigeld2 wrote:

Tomb King wrote:lol, i love playing the cards here.

Your right and wrong.

Once said vehicle pivots its front point is where the front of the vehicle is, it can then move 12". What people do is move it 12" and then place it sideways. An illegal move because it would have to go past 12" to pivot on its center and end up 12" away at the conclusion of its movement. You have to look at the rules and see what it says about this. Once the vehicle is in place it is less then 12" from its start point. Its the means of getting to that point that comes into question because vehicles cant move sideways.

I'm not sure why you say I'm wrong. If you start sideways on/before a line, pivoting and moving forward will have you across a line 12" away. Turning sideways after moving is counter-productive, because you will be behind the 12" line. It's only the first move that gains displacement. (just for you nos)

As I've said, repeatedly, it's within the rules. I dislike the rule - a lot, especially because it's applied hypocritically in cases I've seen (It's fine for vehicles, but absolutely impossible for something like a Trygon to pull off according to some people - not on the boards, in person).

The problem is that you place the line at the wrong point of time.

The line only determines the distance once you consider which way the vehicle faces. You pivot, THEN you would draw the line, THEN you move 12 inches.

The whole concept of "the line" is also wrong in and off itself. You don't have to measure from the front of the vehicle, or the side, or the back. As long as you measure from the same point at all times, then you can use that point for your measurements. The best way to explain the legality of this move is to use the actual pivot point of the vehicle as your point of reference.

I uploaded a quick picture to help me explain. The top example is the "Deploy your nose along the deployment line, then move 12 inches forward". Your nose is now 12 inches from the deployment line.

The bottom example is "Deploy your side along the deployment line, then pivot and move 12 inches." Your pivot point is now 12 inches from where it started, but your hull has moved further which is perfectly legal.

d-usa wrote:

rigeld2 wrote:

Tomb King wrote:lol, i love playing the cards here.

Your right and wrong.

Once said vehicle pivots its front point is where the front of the vehicle is, it can then move 12". What people do is move it 12" and then place it sideways. An illegal move because it would have to go past 12" to pivot on its center and end up 12" away at the conclusion of its movement. You have to look at the rules and see what it says about this. Once the vehicle is in place it is less then 12" from its start point. Its the means of getting to that point that comes into question because vehicles cant move sideways.

I'm not sure why you say I'm wrong. If you start sideways on/before a line, pivoting and moving forward will have you across a line 12" away. Turning sideways after moving is counter-productive, because you will be behind the 12" line. It's only the first move that gains displacement. (just for you nos)

As I've said, repeatedly, it's within the rules. I dislike the rule - a lot, especially because it's applied hypocritically in cases I've seen (It's fine for vehicles, but absolutely impossible for something like a Trygon to pull off according to some people - not on the boards, in person).

The problem is that you place the line at the wrong point of time.

The line only determines the distance once you consider which way the vehicle faces. You pivot, THEN you would draw the line, THEN you move 12 inches.

Deployment rules would disagree with you. There is an absolute line you must deploy behind, you can't arbitrarily draw it later.

The whole concept of "the line" is also wrong in and off itself. You don't have to measure from the front of the vehicle, or the side, or the back. As long as you measure from the same point at all times, then you can use that point for your measurements. The best way to explain the legality of this move is to use the actual pivot point of the vehicle as your point of reference.

See the BRB - when moving, you measure from the front of the vehicle.

I uploaded a quick picture to help me explain. The top example is the "Deploy your nose along the deployment line, then move 12 inches forward". Your nose is now 12 inches from the deployment line.

The bottom example is "Deploy your side along the deployment line, then pivot and move 12 inches." Your pivot point is now 12 inches from where it started, but your hull has moved further which is perfectly legal.

Can you quote where I said it was illegal? Please?

Seriously - I can think a rule is stupid and know that it's legal, all at the same time. The reason I have a problem with this rule is that it gives open-topped transports an (large sometimes) advantage, and in fact sometimes a first turn charge.

rigeld2 wrote:
Deployment rules would disagree with you. There is an absolute line you must deploy behind, you can't arbitrarily draw it later.

But once your turn starts, the deployment line becomes irrelevant. You can pivot, then draw a line from the edge of the vehicle, then move 12 inches.

rigeld2 wrote:
See the BRB - when moving, you measure from the front of the vehicle.

Just checked the BRB, page 56 actually, and it states "measure from the hull" (page 56). So the same rule as measuring from a base applies. You can measure form the front, or from the back, as long as you measure consistently from the same spot. Which spot does not matter. The next page also reinforces that the vehicle "pivots on the spot about their centre-point" which I demonstrated in the picture. And it also states again that this pivot also does not count as movement.

rigeld2 wrote:

Tomb King wrote:lol, i love playing the cards here.

Your right and wrong.

Once said vehicle pivots its front point is where the front of the vehicle is, it can then move 12". What people do is move it 12" and then place it sideways. An illegal move because it would have to go past 12" to pivot on its center and end up 12" away at the conclusion of its movement. You have to look at the rules and see what it says about this. Once the vehicle is in place it is less then 12" from its start point. Its the means of getting to that point that comes into question because vehicles cant move sideways.

I'm not sure why you say I'm wrong. If you start sideways on/before a line, pivoting and moving forward will have you across a line 12" away. Turning sideways after moving is counter-productive, because you will be behind the 12" line. It's only the first move that gains displacement. (just for you nos)

As I've said, repeatedly, it's within the rules. I dislike the rule - a lot, especially because it's applied hypocritically in cases I've seen (It's fine for vehicles, but absolutely impossible for something like a Trygon to pull off according to some people - not on the boards, in person).

You failed to read my previous post. We are talking different issues within the same issue. lol

d-usa wrote:Honestly, if you are that worried about "rule abuse" and fear a 1st turn charge, then don't deploy your troops right against your own deployment line. The best way to make this tactic useless is to deploy your guys 6 inches further back. Problem solved.

Well, no, you've limited your deployment options pretty massively, so even if he doesn't try for a first turn assault he's done for free what some armies take outflankers and infiltrators for.

And yes - I was mistaken about where to measure (because the pictures imply the front of the hull). Regardless, you're trying to "educate" me about the difference between movement and displacement. It's not necessary I promise.

But whatever - you're not understanding why I think the rule is stupid and that's fine. In my opinion, while pivoting should be free, it should not give free displacement.

rigeld2 wrote:

d-usa wrote:Honestly, if you are that worried about "rule abuse" and fear a 1st turn charge, then don't deploy your troops right against your own deployment line. The best way to make this tactic useless is to deploy your guys 6 inches further back. Problem solved.

Well, no, you've limited your deployment options pretty massively, so even if he doesn't try for a first turn assault he's done for free what some armies take outflankers and infiltrators for.

And yes - I was mistaken about where to measure (because the pictures imply the front of the hull). Regardless, you're trying to "educate" me about the difference between movement and displacement. It's not necessary I promise.

But whatever - you're not understanding why I think the rule is stupid and that's fine. In my opinion, while pivoting should be free, it should not give free displacement.

So your preferred option that incorporates free pivot without free displacement would be to not pivot around the center of the vehicle? So determine which direction you want to move, determine what point of the vehicle is closest to the direction you want to move (ie: Right track is closest to the enemy), pivot the vehicle and place it so that the front is now closest to the enemy (front of tank is now in the exact spot that the right track was previously), and then proceed with the actual movement?

I get where you are coming from there, but I think that this would feel worse than the current process to me. The current process of pivoting in place just feels more natural IMO. A real-life tank pivoting in place would end up with the hull closer to you than before the pivot even though it didn't actually move closer to you. Of course comparing 40K with real life is a whole separate can of worms.

The most "true" scenario would probably be a turning template that adds the distance of the wheel to the movement. Didn't 2nd Ed. have some sort of rule that read "45 degree cost 1 inch, 90 degree 2 inches"? There are other options out there, but I think that the "Pivot from center and move" is the simplest one, even if it is not the most common sense one.

rigeld2 wrote:

d-usa wrote:Honestly, if you are that worried about "rule abuse" and fear a 1st turn charge, then don't deploy your troops right against your own deployment line. The best way to make this tactic useless is to deploy your guys 6 inches further back. Problem solved.

Well, no, you've limited your deployment options pretty massively, so even if he doesn't try for a first turn assault he's done for free what some armies take outflankers and infiltrators for.

And yes - I was mistaken about where to measure (because the pictures imply the front of the hull). Regardless, you're trying to "educate" me about the difference between movement and displacement. It's not necessary I promise.

But whatever - you're not understanding why I think the rule is stupid and that's fine. In my opinion, while pivoting should be free, it should not give free displacement.

Not trying to start any S*** here, read in a calm voice:

1) Infiltrators can't assault on turn 1 anyway, unless they're fleet.

2) Turn 1 assaults are a huge part of the world-gone-shooty that is 40k, imo.

3) It's not that we don't understand why you think the rule is stupid, it's just that we don't think the rule is stupid. It's called disagreeing, and imo a "complete disagreement" is when the very reasons you have for option A are the same ones we have for option B. You think it's stupid because of X and Y, and we think X and Y are just dandy.

4) If your opponent puts a fully embarked, open-topped transport sideways on a deployment line, he's basically saying "you know EXACTLY what I'm going to do with this, so deploy accordingly".

5) "No battle-plan survives contact with the enemy." - Patton. This doesn't mean that Ol' Blood and Guts went into every battle without a plan, just that it was subject to change.

6) A lot of 40k players rely almost completely on their army lists and their one battle-plan. If you can deploy to deny them their 1st turn assault, and leave a CC unit in the middle of a kill zone and their vehicle a sitting duck right in front of your deployment line - sounds good to me.

7) Who says your opponent is automatically going to go first? Any miscalculations or surprises when you deploy can be corrected on turn 1, so shuffle your guys around and make yourself a very unappetizing target.

8) He's not "doing something for free for which other armies have to take infiltrators and outflankers" - he's paying the points and slots for transport vehicles and limiting himself to units that are good in CC, and probably good on the charge too. If he can't get the charge he's at a disadvantage. If he can't get CC, most likely he's got a ranged-weak enemy in your kill zone.

9) Sideways-deployed vehicle = juicy target.

10) I play Orks, and I use at least a partial BW charge in every game. I love it. I would NEVER deploy my vehicles sideways. Why would I want A12 instead of A14 facing an opponent. Now, for LR's it's all good, but damn, there's not a lot of vehicles who aren't flirting with disaster by showing you their juicy flank right out the gate.

Anyway, that's just my 38 cents.

Warboss Fugnutz wrote:1) Infiltrators can't assault on turn 1 anyway, unless they're fleet.

For clarification, any bikes or cavalry that can infiltrate can assault turn one. If they are out of LoS for bikes, or either out or in LoS for cavalry.

Whoops edited,

Agreed DR

It looks like the 7th edition rulebook restricts a Raider's movement to 6" if the passengers wish to disembark?

axisofentropy wrote:
It looks like the 7th edition rulebook restricts a Raider's movement to 6" if the passengers wish to disembark?

This thread was from 2011, aka 5th (Or maybe 6th) Edition, it has no bearing on the 7th ed ruleset....