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.

Actually, this is illegal because if they are moving straight and then swing to the side so their side endge is where the front of the vehicle was they are not actualy pivoting they are swinging foward. you can prove it to them by piveting across the board.

When an tank pivets put your finger in the middle of the vehicle and rotate. your finger should not move. If you pivote corectly the side edge will be shorter than where the front egdge was, unless the vehicle is a squar or circle. Most players dont pivet the models this way and generaly an inch or so is not worth being finicky about, but if it's bothering you insist that they pivet through this procedure and the problem will be solved.

Pony_law wrote:Actually, this is illegal because if they are moving straight and then swing to the side so their side endge is where the front of the vehicle was they are not actualy pivoting they are swinging foward. you can prove it to them by piveting across the board.

When an tank pivets put your finger in the middle of the vehicle and rotate. your finger should not move. If you pivote corectly the side edge will be shorter than where the front egdge was, unless the vehicle is a squar or circle. Most players dont pivet the models this way and generaly an inch or so is not worth being finicky about, but if it's bothering you insist that they pivet through this procedure and the problem will be solved.

So... you're calling it illegal, then exactly describing how to do it legally.

Wat.

mandor's diagram is correct, the others show turning and moving at the same time, and they all end up measuring front to side.

the first pivot is fine

any subsequent pivoting whilst moving breaks the rules as you cannot measure front-to-side! (or turn and move at the same time!)

lukyboi wrote:any subsequent pivoting whilst moving breaks the rules as you cannot measure front-to-side! (or turn and move at the same time!)

Except the rules explicitly allow pivoting while moving. Page 57, 2nd paragraph after the bullet points.

rigeld2 wrote:

Pony_law wrote:Actually, this is illegal because if they are moving straight and then swing to the side so their side endge is where the front of the vehicle was they are not actualy pivoting they are swinging foward. you can prove it to them by piveting across the board.

When an tank pivets put your finger in the middle of the vehicle and rotate. your finger should not move. If you pivote corectly the side edge will be shorter than where the front egdge was, unless the vehicle is a squar or circle. Most players dont pivet the models this way and generaly an inch or so is not worth being finicky about, but if it's bothering you insist that they pivet through this procedure and the problem will be solved.

So... you're calling it illegal, then exactly describing how to do it legally.

Wat.

No i'm saying if the opponent is doing what original poster is describing (moving the side edge to where the from edge ended after max movement) he is not actually pivoting and thus is making illegal moves. Then I describe what legal pivoting looksl like which will not allow a player to gain more range/move closer

Nemesor Dave's image is the situation I was originally referring to, where the vehicle moves its limit and finishes its move "sideways", then pivots forward to complete its move, thus giving it extra inches of movement.

It seems that most people are opposed to this situation, but not to the initial pivot and then straightforward movement. I tend to agree that if GW saw a problem with these situations they would have FAQ'd it long time ago with a simple sentence, such as "the forward-most portion of the hull at the end of the vehicle's movement cannot exceed the distance allowed (12" for cruising speed, etc) from the forward -most portion of the hull when it began its movement" or some such wording.

Yeah, the above diagram is illegal and I have never once seen someone even attempt to do this. Anyone that does should just see what this move will look like with a 2" x 8" Ghost Ark: 20" movement!

Here is how to move your transport without being TFG:
Step 1: Measure from the forward-facing side 6"
Step 2: Move however the hell you like; 6" ahead is an invisible wall that cannot have its threshold broken.
Step 3: Rejoice in knowing that you are not treating 40k like fun is a zero-sum commodity.

EDIT: Spoiler tag

It's simple really, especially for skimmers on bases, just measure the distance from the base, pivoting wont change how far the base can (or has) move(d)

@ Nemesor Dave, you can't do what you have so beautifully illustrated, because as nosferatu has stated, you aren't measuring to the same point on the vehicle. This is a different manoeuver from starting sideways, moving sideways and then pivoting to face the front.

grrr

A vehicle is allowed to pivot after their movement, however that pivot cannot add to their total movement.

There was an article on Bell of Lost Souls a day or so ago that explains this in detail.

MasticatorDeelux wrote:A vehicle is allowed to pivot after their movement, however that pivot cannot add to their total movement.

There was an article on Bell of Lost Souls a day or so ago that explains this in detail.

Since that's only possible if you don't pivot around the centerpoint, you're correct... but it's easier to say "You must pivot around the center point."

Distance moved is measured from one point on a vehicle before you move it or pivot it, to the same point at the end of its movement.

If you have a vehicle sideways and pivot it about its center, you have moved some distance already because that point has moved.

You don't get to change the place you measure from the vehicle on. No rule in the book says you can start moving from any point on a vehicle and then finish moving and the distance moved is any combination of points you make up.

blaktoof wrote:Distance moved is measured from one point on a vehicle before you move it or pivot it, to the same point at the end of its movement.

If you have a vehicle sideways and pivot it about its center, you have moved some distance already because that point has moved.

False.
Pivots explicitly do not cost movement.

It's legal, but as

Makes me rage when I see it, and everyone I play does it, except me.

"Why don't you place you tanks horizontal along the boundary? Hurdurrrrrrrr"

BECAUSE YOU'RE A CHEATING BUTT HAT!

"Distance moved is measured from one point on a vehicle before you move it or pivot, to the same point at the end of its movement."



This concept simply doesnt work.

The simplest way is to start with a rhino on the table. Pivot the rhino 180 degrees and move it forward 6". Now at this point most people would say that the rhino has moved 6", However, if we use the above system we find that the rhino may have moved as far as 12" (if we used the front middle of the rhino at start and finish as the measuring point) or it may have moved 0" (if we use the rear middle of the rhino as the measuring point). This is based upon a rhino 6" in length.

Pivots dont add to the distance moved. Pivoting doesnt cost movement. Pivots occur during the movement phase but arent movement. Use any or all of these if they help you consider the situation anew.



Sliggoth

MasticatorDeelux wrote:A vehicle is allowed to pivot after their movement, however that pivot cannot add to their total movement.

Uhm......care to give a page number for this?

There was an article on Bell of Lost Souls a day or so ago that explains this in detail.

You're trusting BoLS? That's actually worse than using the INAT. Fail....

Blaktoof - except that isnt how the rules work. Pivoting doesnt cost any movement.

You are getting confused between displacement and movement.

Pivoting doesnt cost movement but you cannot gain movement by it either.

the max distance a vehicle can move is its movement value measured from one point to one point on the vehicle.

if you pick the front tip of a raider as the start point. then pivot it 90 degrees then move it forward 12" you have moved more than 12". Because the mistake was made that you measure the distance moved after the pivot as opposed to where the vehicle was before you began moving it.

Pivots do not cost extra movement, but they count as movement and pivoting before you move it still movement it just doesnt cost extra to pivot. However as pivoting is still movement the distance you measure from a point on a vehicle initial state to final state can change and net movement.

Just because you pivot from the center of the vehicle does not mean you measure movement from the center of the vehicle. The only rule showing where you measure movement from a model is a diagram in the movement section which clearly depicts movement from the front facing of the model before movement to the front facing of the model at the end of movement. There is no rule giving permission to measure from the center of the model for movement.

This effect is not seen when you include pivoting as part of distance traveled only when you do not move the center of the vehicle and pivot does this become an issue.

displacement does not exist in the BRB in any form.

blaktoof wrote:Pivots. . .count as movement

Nope.

"Pivots do not cost extra movement, but they count as movement "

No. Wrong. Incredibly wrong.

kirsanth wrote:

Nungunz wrote:

AlmightyWalrus wrote:It isn't at all.

Page 57, second paragraph after the bullet points.

Being allowed to turn as many times as you like does not prevent you from moving sideways.

Vehicles are never given any permission to move sideways, is the thing. They can move forwards, they can move backwards, and they can pivot, but the rulebook never says they can move sideways. Since 40k is a permissive ruleset, that means they can't.

This is the reason that you can never turn a vehicle that starts flush with the table edge; it can move forwards and backwards fine, but if it wants to move in any other direction it has to pivot, and that would take it off the table.

You aren't allowed to move a vehicle sideways; you can pivot as many times as you want during your move, but that changes your direction of travel. That being so, you can only ever gain any displacement from the 'pivot trick' on your first move, by deploying flush with the deployment line and then pivoting forward at the start of your first move.

BeRzErKeR wrote:
Vehicles are never given any permission to move sideways, is the thing. They can move forwards, they can move backwards, and they can pivot, but the rulebook never says they can move sideways.

No, it says they can move.

It never states that the facing has any value other than for being shot at.

kirsanth wrote:

BeRzErKeR wrote:
Vehicles are never given any permission to move sideways, is the thing. They can move forwards, they can move backwards, and they can pivot, but the rulebook never says they can move sideways.

No, it says they can move.

It never states that the facing has any value other than for being shot at.

The rulebook describes how vehicles move. My rulebook isn't available at the moment, but I am quite confident that sideways movement is never mentioned. Permissive ruleset, remember; if the book doesn't say a vehicle CAN move in a certain way, it can't.

Consider that the case of a vehicle deployed flush with a table edge has come up repeatedly in one thread or another; that vehicle can't pivot. Why? Because it can't move sideways. If it could, it could simply move (sideways) away from the table edge,then pivot freely. The whole reason such a vehicle ends up stuck along that table edge is that sideways movement is not possible for vehicles.

A permissive rules set that allows movement does not disallow sideways movement.

Editing to add the obvious:
Without stating such.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BeRzErKeR wrote:Consider that the case of a vehicle deployed flush with a table edge has come up repeatedly in one thread or another; that vehicle can't pivot. Why? Because it can't move sideways.

This is patently false. It cannot pivot because that would move it off the table (note that this occurs without moving). It CAN just slide sideways.

I don't have access to my rulebook right now, so I can't quote you chapter and verse at the moment. However, I don't believe the sentence "Vehicles may move." or a near-identical variant exists anywhere, which would give the blanket permission you are asserting. I've certainly never played with anyone who claimed it did; as a matter of practically I've seen plenty of people move vehicles without turning them, but that has always represented pivoting, moving, and then pivoting back to the original orientation, not actually "moving" sideways. As I said before, this is why a vehicle that starts flush with a board edge can never get away from that board edge, which is a situation I've seen happen several times, including once or twice to me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kirsanth wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

BeRzErKeR wrote:Consider that the case of a vehicle deployed flush with a table edge has come up repeatedly in one thread or another; that vehicle can't pivot. Why? Because it can't move sideways.

This is patently false. It cannot pivot because that would move it off the table (note that this occurs without moving). It CAN just slide sideways.

You didn't finish reading the post.

BeRzErKeR wrote:You didn't read the post.

I did. You said you were right because you were right. (It cannot move sideways because of a[n incorrect] ruling about why it cannot move sideways) I am saying were you are wrong in your assumption.

The pivot issue is a problem when the vehicle just wants to pivot.

If it wants to move, it can.

nosferatu1001 wrote:"Pivots do not cost extra movement, but they count as movement "

No. Wrong. Incredibly wrong.

false. just false.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kirsanth wrote:

blaktoof wrote:Pivots. . .count as movement

Nope.

pivoting freely during movement and pivoting not costing movement are not the same statement.

keeping a vehicle stationary and pivoting is movement, as the facing you measure from your vehicle wherever that may be has changed and has a net physical distance.

try it.

blaktoof wrote:pivoting is movement

Literally true, but the rules do not count it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

kirsanth wrote:In simple states, it is perfectly acceptable to deploy sideways, then turn and fire. That will have bonus range without moving.
Nothing can possibly say otherwise, but modeling.

Do that after moving. Or before. I forget, but it really doesn't matter.

Editing silly words.

Careful re-reading indicates that I was wrong; vehicles can, in fact, move sideways. My bad, kirsanth, you're right.

But that still doesn't allow you to gain distance twice by pivoting; if you start facing sideways, then turn forwards and move in a straight line, pivoting back and forth at any other point just won't change anything. You can only pivot around your centerpoint, and you must measure to and from the same point on the model; that is, you can't place one end of your 12" measuring tape on the front of your model and pivot it on the way so that the side ends up flush with the 12" mark.

Why not? Because you're moving and not accounting for it when you do that; and not just by pivoting, either. Gaining length by pivoting is legal; however, in order to gain any benefit a second time, you have to literally scoot the model forwards and then claim you didn't move, which isn't true. Simple way to tell; just count the inches you've moved out loud every time you move the model in any way except by pivoting around the center point (without the center point itself moving at all). It's pretty obvious when the vehicle moves and when it doesn't.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

blaktoof wrote:

pivoting freely during movement and pivoting not costing movement are not the same statement.

keeping a vehicle stationary and pivoting is movement, as the facing you measure from your vehicle wherever that may be has changed and has a net physical distance.

try it.

Except that the rules EXPLICITLY say that isn't the case. You've been given the quote a couple of times. You're wrong; what you're saying is flatly contradicted, in very plain language, by the rule book. Pivoting is NOT moving; if you pivot but do not move, the vehicle is stationary. That's what it says.

BeRzErKeR wrote:But that still doesn't allow you to gain distance twice by pivoting

Agreed.

This is the thing that people thinks this silliness implies.

It doesn't.