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.

"Counts as" replaces the natural state of a unit or situation.

Draigo makes paladins "count as" troops meaning it doesn't matter that they appear in the codex as elites. They can now be deployed in DoW, score objectives, and meet the 2 troop minimum in army building.

Tremor staves make a unit "count as" in difficult terrain. Writhing worldscape makes difficult terrain "count as" dangerous. The combination of both makes a unit take dangerous terrain tests even while moving in the open. The game no longer cares that they're in the open because "counts as" effects have replaced the natural state.

If RPJ says you can move 13" and it "counts as" 12", then this is all that matters. You moved 12" in all aspects that the game cares about. You did not move far enough to gain a cover save and can fire all weapons thanks to arial assault.

Just like a unit standing in the open counts as in difficult terrain when hit with a tremor stave, and dangerous terrain when hit with the tremor stave with writhing worldscape in play. The fact that they are standing in the open matters not as "counts as" effects have replaced reality. The fact that you loved 13" matters not because you have replaced that and "count as" moving 12".

That is an example of the rule - you count as moving 12" *as far as the penalties go*, because that is what the ACTUAL rule states.

Stop mixing up a limited example and conflating it out as if it were the whole rule. Fallacious argument is fallacious

What would happen to a jet with RPJ if it is immobilized? Will it count as wrecked?

That would be a negative effect, i'd think..

Personally i play that it just gives you an extra inch of movement, but doesn't change your movement category. It causes less headaches/arguments that way

RAW-wrangling you'd still count as moving 12'', and so wouldn't crash and burn, despite benefitting from the cover save of Flat Out, but it seems a bit beardy to try to argue this, to me

Where did all of these arguments about having to declare your movement come up? You move it a distance and that is its speed you don't have to declare your movement speed. Knowledge of this would pacify half of the stupid comments on this thread thus far.

hyv3mynd wrote:"Counts as" replaces the natural state of a unit or situation.

Draigo makes paladins "count as" troops meaning it doesn't matter that they appear in the codex as elites. They can now be deployed in DoW, score objectives, and meet the 2 troop minimum in army building.

Tremor staves make a unit "count as" in difficult terrain. Writhing worldscape makes difficult terrain "count as" dangerous. The combination of both makes a unit take dangerous terrain tests even while moving in the open. The game no longer cares that they're in the open because "counts as" effects have replaced the natural state.

If RPJ says you can move 13" and it "counts as" 12", then this is all that matters. You moved 12" in all aspects that the game cares about. You did not move far enough to gain a cover save and can fire all weapons thanks to arial assault.

Just like a unit standing in the open counts as in difficult terrain when hit with a tremor stave, and dangerous terrain when hit with the tremor stave with writhing worldscape in play. The fact that they are standing in the open matters not as "counts as" effects have replaced reality. The fact that you loved 13" matters not because you have replaced that and "count as" moving 12".

Irrelevant, as a Red Vehicle merely has the ability to "count as" under certain circumstances (suffering a penalty), rather than permanently counting as moving 1" less.

This is indicated by the word "could", which every single person following that string of argumentation is conveniently ignoring.

Jidmah wrote:
A fast vehicle going flat out moves more than 12" and up to 18" (BRB pg. 70)

Perhaps I'd agree with the overall premise that RPJ allows you to fire all weapons at 13" and get a cover save if this rule said:

If a vehicle moves 12" and up to 18", it is going flat out.

Alas, it does not. This rule does not use displacement to define flat out, just describes what flat out allows a vehicle to do.

jms40k wrote:

Jidmah wrote:
A fast vehicle going flat out moves more than 12" and up to 18" (BRB pg. 70)

Perhaps I'd agree with the overall premise that RPJ allows you to fire all weapons at 13" and get a cover save if this rule said:

If a vehicle moves 12" and up to 18", it is going flat out.

Alas, it does not. This rule does not use displacement to define flat out, just describes what flat out allows a vehicle to do.

There is no difference in meaning between your two quotes.

Is a vehicles moving 12"-18"? If yes, it is moving flat out. If no, it is not.
Is 12.5" between 12" and 18"? Yes, so the dakka yet has moved flat out. Counts as having move 11.5"? A vehicle moving flat out can not move 12" or less, so that's not moving flat out. If a vehicle moves 6"-12", it is moving at cruising speed.

It is literally impossible to move flat out while going 12" or less.

Besides:

In his turn, a player may move any of his units [...] up to their maximum movement distance. (BRB pg. 11)

The distance a vehicle moves influences the amount of weapons it may fire and how easy a target the vehicle will be if assaulted, as described later. (BRB pg. 57)

No further rules for vehicle movement exist, so you can never, ever determine a speed before you have finished moving a vehicle.
If you claim that flat out is not determined by displacement, no vehicle can ever move flat out.

You do need to declare your speed before moving. For example, if you are going into dangerous terrain, your speed declared matters if you get immoblized after moving only 2 inches. You dont move 2 inches into terrain, planning on going flat out, get immoblized and then retroactively declare your speed as only 2 inches.

Also, if you measure 24 inches you can not claim you only moved at crusing after 6 inches. Your max movement, as measured, was 24 inches, and you simply did not move your max distance.

You also can't embark on a transport yo are planning to move flat out IIRC. You have declared it's move before moving in that situation.

Well I'll ask my TO about this one tomorrow at our teams tournament, but my thoughts are this about it.

Orks never had to call this into question because everything with RPJ could not gain a cover save. now the RAW for the new codex where flyers are designed may have the rules written to accomidate them better.

I believe the concept was for 5pts you got to move one inch. people think its stupid, but I've fell an inch short of an assult before and it was the difference between wins and losses. RPJ works for me. YMMV.

I've read the entry several times and I see the point folks are trying to make, but I'm sorry it would bog down my tournament play too much and make me look like a giant jerk for even arguing the point. too much having my cake and eating it too.

I think the dakka jet is a bit broken.

take 3

run near battle wagon with KFF

call waaaaaaaaaaag = 16 blasts? maybe more?

thats nuts

Dakkajet doesn't have blasts

It has shorter ranged, stronger Big Shootas.

With 3, on a non- waagh turn, with all upgrades, you'd get 27 twin linked BS 3 shots.

about 21 will hit,approx, and S6, AP 4 isn't too bad.

Double that for a waagh turn to 52 twin-linked BS 3, 42 hits approx (from three units). Trust me, there are units out there that can put out far more hits at bs 3 or better than the Dakkajet

Its about as much as a loota squad rolling a little above average (but at lower S) , not exactly gamebreaking.

Its also on an AV 10 huge, visible airframe. KFF might keep it alive a while, if you can roll 4+ consistently. I usually fail KFF rolls 2 out of 3

Even a shaken result feths up its ability to shoot, and it's not hard to shake an AV 10 vehicle.

DevianID wrote:You do need to declare your speed before moving. For example, if you are going into dangerous terrain, your speed declared matters if you get immoblized after moving only 2 inches. You dont move 2 inches into terrain, planning on going flat out, get immoblized and then retroactively declare your speed as only 2 inches.

Also, if you measure 24 inches you can not claim you only moved at crusing after 6 inches. Your max movement, as measured, was 24 inches, and you simply did not move your max distance.

This is not true at all.

Speed is actual distance moved.

Actually move 6 inches, combat speed.

Actually move 2 inches, combat speed.

Actually move 10 inches, cruising speed.

as for "Also, if you measure 24 inches you can not claim you only moved at crusing after 6 inches.Your max movement, as measured, was 24 inches" Yes you can. the rules specifically allow measuring then moving less or not at all.

Max movement for a fast skimmer is usually 24 inches...

The Waaagh plane rule only works on the planes Assault weapons, also, and missiles and Bombs are Heavy, and One-shot (they wouldn't double).

it says in the rule that you can move 13'' and still count as moving 12'' so you can fire all your weapons but you dont get a cover save
Also you could trubo boost 37'' in one turn

In the leaked edition, RPJ just add +1 to the mouvement base.
If the 6th edition has similar rules to the leaked edition, then no, RPJ won't give benefit of goinf flat-out while moving at cruise speed ;(

DevianID wrote:You do need to declare your speed before moving. For example, if you are going into dangerous terrain, your speed declared matters if you get immoblized after moving only 2 inches. You dont move 2 inches into terrain, planning on going flat out, get immoblized and then retroactively declare your speed as only 2 inches.

Also, if you measure 24 inches you can not claim you only moved at crusing after 6 inches. Your max movement, as measured, was 24 inches, and you simply did not move your max distance.

That is not a rule. Imaginary rules have no bearing on red paint job.

Ascalam wrote:You also can't embark on a transport yo are planning to move flat out IIRC. You have declared it's move before moving in that situation.

You simply lose the ability to go flat out if anything disembarks from the vehicle. The rule simply worded a bit strange. If you took it literal, you would have to declare how fare your transport moves before disembarking, which is nonsense either way.

'Passengers may not embark onto or deisembark from fast a fast vehicle is it has moved (or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase'

Seems pretty cut and dry to me. If you are planning on going flat out you may not embark or disembark from the vehicle, decided before you actually move it.

Ascalam wrote:'Passengers may not embark onto or deisembark from fast a fast vehicle is it has moved (or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase'

Seems pretty cut and dry to me. If you are planning on going flat out you may not embark or disembark from the vehicle, decided before you actually move it.

Except that you do not have to declare it, you simply make up your mind to not have them embark, then you move flat out.

You do not have to tell your opponent your intention.

Ascalam wrote:'Passengers may not embark onto or deisembark from fast a fast vehicle is it has moved (or is going to move) flat out in that movement phase'

Seems pretty cut and dry to me. If you are planning on going flat out you may not embark or disembark from the vehicle, decided before you actually move it.

You can't follow that rule though, because moving doesn't work that way. You can only move the vehicle or the unit inside, not both at once. If you move the unit and disembark, the transport can no longer move flat out. If you move the unit inside and do nothing (barring some psychic powers or special rules which are usable in your movement phase only), you can move flat out. If you move the transport first, move it any distance up to it's maximum movement distance. If that's more than 12", the unit inside can no longer disembark.

As DR explained, you don't have to declare anything to anybody.

Well my local TO agreed by written wording it does get a cover save, however after dealing with some rules arguments over some of the more simple rules of the game even this late in the edition(in today's tournament alone), I wouldn't even attempt to push this one out there.

at the same time my TO was pretty confident that the rule wouldnt be around for very long to matter much. Either the new RPJ rule would fix this, or an FAQ would be in the works soon enough to correct the issue.

TBH its 5pts and you move an inch. thats about correct. trying to gain a 4+ cover that normally costs us MUCH more than that is a rediculous notion.

Considering the vast amount of cover a 50 point upgrade (the KFF) gives to orks, that isn't too ridiculous. Besides, warkoptas could do this for years now.

I'm not buying it.

For all I know, the "penalty" incurred for moving over 12" is being called Moving Flat Out. RPJ is a horribly worded rule, because it doesn't define what a penalty is, and we're expected to fill that in.

In my mind, until GW tells us that we can both move 13" and fire all guns and have a cover save, we cannot. It's poor sportsmanship to seek advantage caused by ambiguous rules, and it's unreasonable to think that you can get a 4+ cover save for a mere 5 points.

How is moving faster than usual a penalty? How is getting a cover save a penalty?

Flat out is not a penalty.

Jidmah wrote:How is moving faster than usual a penalty? How is getting a cover save a penalty?

Flat out is not a penalty.

How do you know? Is this defined anywhere? It's ambiguous what "penalty" refers to. As such, it's poor sportsmanship to interpret an ambiguous rule to your advantage.

The penalty that is ignored by rpj is the inability to shoot, the 13" would give it the flat out save as worded in the brb..."A fast vehicle going flat out moves more than 12" and up to 18"".

rpj gives you an additional 1" movement, without any negative affects of going faster...seeing as the cover save is a positive effect, it happens, but the shooting...a negative affect...does not.

LazzurusMan wrote:The penalty that is ignored by rpj is the inability to shoot,

Can you prove this? Can you show me text from a GW book that says that the penalty is the inability to shoot, rather than being classified as moving flat out? No, you cannot.

I still say it's ambiguous.

Redbeard wrote:How do you know? Is this defined anywhere? It's ambiguous what "penalty" refers to. As such, it's poor sportsmanship to interpret an ambiguous rule to your advantage.

I'll show you a definition of penalty as soon as you show me a definition of "ork".

Ork is not defined anywhere, as such it's poor sportsmanship to interpret the Waaagh! as affecting any models of your army or giving any boyz models a rokkit launcher or big shoota.

Seriously. A penalty is a sanction, a punishment, a disadvantage and always something negative. Just look at sports, racing, or competitive tabletop games. In no game penalties are ever giving you any advantage. Thus something that consists of both benefits and disadvantages can impossibly be a penalty. The punishment for going too fast is not being able to shoot. You are told that the vehicle doesn't suffer from that punishment. It's only ambiguous if you really want it to be.
It's even less of an issue for me, as both the German Codex and White Dwarf actually say "ignore any disadvantages or limitations for moving that extra inch".

Redbeard wrote:I'm not buying it.

For all I know, the "penalty" incurred for moving over 12" is being called Moving Flat Out. RPJ is a horribly worded rule, because it doesn't define what a penalty is, and we're expected to fill that in.

In my mind, until GW tells us that we can both move 13" and fire all guns and have a cover save, we cannot. It's poor sportsmanship to seek advantage caused by ambiguous rules, and it's unreasonable to think that you can get a 4+ cover save for a mere 5 points.

This x10

While the definition of penalty is obvious, in this specific context it's ambiguous. What constitutes as a penalty? Sure, it has a negative connotation (not being able to fire any weapons) but it can also mean moving flat out. Sure, it's generally not considered a penalty, but it can be seen as such.