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.

Bharring wrote:
If you move six up, six up, six over, over the course of 3 turns, the point that moved has only moved about 13". So, 3 turns of diagonal movement should put you about 5" further, along the same vector.

Not sure what the implications of that are, though.

By that logic, the cars haven't moved anywhere at the end of the Daytona 500 because they end where they started. It's about actual distance traveled, not overall change in position. What implication would this have on the game, other than showing that driving in circles means you don't end the same place as driving in a straight line?

kambien wrote:
[quote=BlackTalos 646545 7798714 2d7c08edf1c554ec733c144cb9cf8788.jpg

Spoiler:

 BlackTalos wrote:

So i spent some time to get this explained in a picture.

To Nem, but all can try this:
"No part of the vehicle can be further than 6" or you have moved more than you allotted distance"

Now please set up a "long" vehicle, such as a Dark Eldar Raider or Necron Ghost Ark on your Table.
Now assume you move at maximum 6" for 3 turns of the game
All the Red lines on the diagram MUST be 6" (or less)

After these 3 quite simple turns of play, measure the distance (Green lines) from the centre point of the vehicle (or any other part of the Hull you wish to pick)

I can guarantee that your vehicle is now MUCH further than 18" away from its starting position.

Feel free to add a 4th Turn just to make sure the vehicle is facing the same way again, and measure.

well i can tell the first movement is further that 6 inches , measure form the back corners to the new position , its way further then 6 inches , unless i'm missing something

I agree with the "pivot, move your allowed distance, pivot" people in this debate. It's how the rules read for me and for every perceived advantage it gives there's an equivalent advantage gained in the much more cumbersome system other people are suggesting.

If movement was that complex, they'd have included more picture diagrams of it in the vehicle section.

Except that is not turning as you move, that is turning before and after you move and is explicitly not what you are told to do.

blaktoof wrote:
Except that is not turning as you move, that is turning before and after you move and is explicitly not what you are told to do.

I think I get your argument, being that the vehicle needs to literally be moving in order to use the "pivot on the spot" rule. Once the vehicle has moved to its final location, it is no longer moving and cannot pivot on the spot.

My counterpoint to that is that all the player has to do is pivot something silly like 1/100 of a second before it stops, thus still gaining all the extra movement while still technically "moving", allowing for the pivot.

Someone could do that, but their movement is the measure of their start position and end position, so if the turn(pivot) took them past 6" they are no longer moving 6" or less.

in the current edition we cannot move and measure the move and then pivot, the move is measured when it is done moving- and if turning is done as moving you aren't done moving.

Movement doesn't end until I tell my opponent I'm done with it. The pivot at the end is part of the movement I'm doing.

blaktoof wrote:
Someone could do that, but their movement is the measure of their start position and end position, so if the turn(pivot) took them past 6" they are no longer moving 6" or less.

in the current edition we cannot move and measure the move and then pivot, the move is measured when it is done moving- and if turning is done as moving you aren't done moving.

Where in the vehicles section does it say that you aren't allowed to gain ground by pivoting, and that the entirety of the vehicle has to end within the move distance? You measure where the center of the tank is, because pivoting doesn't count as movement, as a 90 turn that makes my gun closer to my target doesn't count as movement. If pivoting doesn't count as moving, how can you say that it subtracts from the distance you're allowed to move?

 kingbobbito wrote:
Where in the vehicles section does it say that you aren't allowed to gain ground by pivoting, and that the entirety of the vehicle has to end within the move distance?

 easysauce wrote:
movement rules section states no part of the base may end up more then 6" away from a start point
vehicle rules tell us to use hull instead of base,
ergo, no point of the hull may be more then 6" away by RAW
vehicle rules specifically also state to pivot the vehicle "so it doesn't gain extra movement"
so no, you cannot pivot a vehicle to gain extra movement.

 kingbobbito wrote:
You measure where the center of the tank is

No you measure from the hull

 kingbobbito wrote:
because pivoting doesn't count as movement, as a 90 turn that makes my gun closer to my target doesn't count as movement. If pivoting doesn't count as moving, how can you say that it subtracts from the distance you're allowed to move?

Pivoting ALONE doesn't count as movement

kambien wrote:

 BlackTalos wrote:

Spoiler:

 BlackTalos wrote:

So i spent some time to get this explained in a picture.

To Nem, but all can try this:
"No part of the vehicle can be further than 6" or you have moved more than you allotted distance"

Now please set up a "long" vehicle, such as a Dark Eldar Raider or Necron Ghost Ark on your Table.
Now assume you move at maximum 6" for 3 turns of the game
All the Red lines on the diagram MUST be 6" (or less)

After these 3 quite simple turns of play, measure the distance (Green lines) from the centre point of the vehicle (or any other part of the Hull you wish to pick)

I can guarantee that your vehicle is now MUCH further than 18" away from its starting position.

Feel free to add a 4th Turn just to make sure the vehicle is facing the same way again, and measure.

well i can tell the first movement is further that 6 inches , measure form the back corners to the new position , its way further then 6 inches , unless i'm missing something

Kaela_Mensha_Khaine wrote:
That's what I was referring to in my first post, and that post with the ghost ark the front may still be within 12 inches of where it started but the rear is well over 12 inches away from where it started. So when you pivot one corner rotates backwards and the other rotates forward and if you only move six the corner that rotated forwards will be 6 inches from where it started before the any other corner would which results in less movement on any vehicle any time you want to pivot.

Because most of the people arguing "against" in the old thread agreed that the rules said "any part of the vehicle" had to be within 6" of the original position. Not that "any part" could only be at 6" from where that specific part started (so the back left corner can only 6" away from where the back left corner was)
I believe these were relevant at the time:

 HawaiiMatt wrote:
Interesting.

Would that mean that a razorback that move forward 6", and does a 180 to unload cargo can no longer unload?
The rear access has ended it's move ~10" from the starting location (while the front has ended only 2"). If this counts as more than 6" of movement, it pretty much kills most transports.

-Matt

Gravmyr wrote:
I think the biggest problem people have is the belief that transports should be turned around and deposit you a handful of inches away from your target. They should be there to get you across most of the way not doorstep to doorstep. Why would you ever logically present the rear of your vehicle with open access to the interior to the enemy?

Looking at the current rules and what Nem has put fourth, most of the time, unless there is bunch of strange things going on, you should be able to simply measure out 6" from the furthest point and put your rear there, if going for the prob me here look. It's simple, straight forward, and prevents any of the pivot shenanigans from happening.

The GA for the Crons is open topped so no it doesn't affect them and they would be the one that would be able to take advantage of the pivot crud the most.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 HawaiiMatt wrote:
Interesting.

Would that mean that a razorback that move forward 6", and does a 180 to unload cargo can no longer unload?
The rear access has ended it's move ~10" from the starting location (while the front has ended only 2"). If this counts as more than 6" of movement, it pretty much kills most transports.

-Matt

This is pretty much the best example "against". All comments in favor of "no part of the vehicle can be more than 6inches from where it started" would move their transport 1" before rotating to unload. Feel free to play it that way...

I think that whatever your starting position is, as long as the center point has not moved more than 6", you are fully within RaW, even if you prow was facing left, and is now facing forward..

 some bloke wrote:
so here's the thing - if no part of the hull can move more than 6", does that mean that if a monolith (6" square and can only move 6") that turns 180 degrees cannot move any further?

 Dracos wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 Dracos wrote:
"from where it started" : is the word "it" here referring to "part of its base" or the point you measured from?

There are some practical problem if we have to measure all parts of the hull to make sure that no part moved more than permitted...

Not really, just measure from the point that will move the furthest.

So if you're going to drive forwards and do a 180 degree turn, measure from the back because no bit of the vehicle can possibly end further than that.

In regard to the ghost ark, it is again common sense that if the vehicle ends perpendicular to its initial position and the front of the vehicle has moved its maximum of 12" then the rear must have moved more than 12". Pretty basic Trigonometry to be honest

Assuming you know the end position you want when you start moving...

For me its VERY simple. Measuring movement distance from the center of the model to the center of the model when moving is the only way pivoting around the center of the model can prevent moving too far accidentally. To me this is clearly the RAI but its not RAW.Movement rules, when put under close inspection have serious problems RAW and they all stem from 1 line in the rules. That line is that if a model pivots while moving no part of its base can end more then 6 inches from where it started.

Problem 1) In my experience most people play allowing a model on a round base, such as a space marine to pivot on its base as it moved with out affecting movement distance. However, if you go by strict RAW a space marine model that will rotate 180 degrees on its base while moving only has a movement of about 5 inches. In fact any amount of rotation or pivot will reduce the models moment to below 6 inches, but that is not the way it has even been played by any one I have ever met. This is because models with a perfectly round base have almost no change with how they interact with all of the other rules base on the direction they are facing.

Problem 2) Any model with a movement speed greater then 6" can only move at that speed if it does not pivot while it moves. When a model pivots when it moves no part of its base may end more then 6 inches from where it started. So if My space marine biker moves 9 inches and while doing so pivots 4 degrees to the right then every part of his base will be more then 6 inches from where it started. No part of the bike movement rules gives us an override to the pivot while move 6 inch max distance. Again no body every plays it this way.

Problem 3) If we use this rule with vehicles, as many have said we should, replace references to the mode'ls base with the vehicle's hull we get some more comical errors. A land raider could never pivot 180 degrees, even if it traveled no distance. Thats because a land raider is over 6 inches long . Now some might say that a land raider that pivots on the spot did not move and that's actually wrong. You can only pivot while moving, if a model only pivots while moving it is treated as having remained stationary but still needs to follow the movement rules as it pivots because it is still technically moving.

kambien wrote:

 kingbobbito wrote:
Where in the vehicles section does it say that you aren't allowed to gain ground by pivoting, and that the entirety of the vehicle has to end within the move distance?

 easysauce wrote:
movement rules section states no part of the base may end up more then 6" away from a start point
vehicle rules tell us to use hull instead of base,
ergo, no point of the hull may be more then 6" away by RAW
vehicle rules specifically also state to pivot the vehicle "so it doesn't gain extra movement"
so no, you cannot pivot a vehicle to gain extra movement.

No, this is a quote from someone else on the forum. Find me a quote in the vehicle section that says no point of the hull can move more than 6 inches. Otherwise what you're saying is that a vehicle that does a 180 pivot can't move any further than just that., even something small like a rhino is only allowed to move what, 2" if it does a 180? Land raiders can't move an inch if they pivot 180, or they count as having moved 6"?

EDIT: This is what the rules give us:

Pivoting is always done from the centre of a vehicle to prevent it from accidentally moving further than intended or allowed.

Note that pivoting is done from the center "to prevent...moving further than intended".... meaning that pivoting is done in a way that the vehicle won't move any further. If pivoting is done so that you don't move any further, how can you say that pivoting somehow counts as moving further? It doesn't say "the vehicle may not pivot if this will cause it to move further".

@kingbobbito. Not direct quotes but...When a model pivots while moving no part of its base may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started. This is in the movement phase section of the rule book. Since vehicles do not have a base, instead measure to and from the vehicles hull. This is in the vehicles section of the rule book. The logical extension of these statements taken together would mean that when a model that is a vehicle pivots while moving no part of its hull may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started.

 DJGietzen wrote:
@kingbobbito. Not direct quotes but...When a model pivots while moving no part of its base may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started. This is in the movement phase section of the rule book. Since vehicles do not have a base, instead measure to and from the vehicles hull. This is in the vehicles section of the rule book. The logical extension of these statements taken together would mean that when a model that is a vehicle pivots while moving no part of its hull may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started.

But then we run into the issue I said about.... a pivoting before moving land raider that moves an inch will count as moving more than 6, while just pivoting doesn't count as moving at all? And as you said, no one would try to argue that if I pivot a marine he loses an inch of movement, as that's just absurd. With infantry it's always played that they can do a pirouette as it moves, and it's still going to move 6". Unless gaming is totally different outside of the stores I've been to?

And there's this:

As vehicle models do not usually have bases, the normal rule of measuring distances to or from a base cannot be used.

 DJGietzen wrote:
@kingbobbito. Not direct quotes but...When a model pivots while moving no part of its base may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started. This is in the movement phase section of the rule book. Since vehicles do not have a base, instead measure to and from the vehicles hull. This is in the vehicles section of the rule book. The logical extension of these statements taken together would mean that when a model that is a vehicle pivots while moving no part of its hull may end its move more then 6 inches from where it started.

No need to make a logical extension based on those statements taken together. You seem to have missed reading the very first paragraph of the Movement Phase section. In the first paragraph it states: "For the time being, we'll just explain how squads of infantry move. Vehicles, Jump units, Bikes and certain other units move in different ways to represent their greater mobility, and these will be discussed in full detail later."

Then when you go to the vehicles it is pretty clear how to move. It appears that whatever advantage or disadvantage pivoting from the center and measuring from the hull entails it's considered negligible. Probably for expediency, maybe to spare themselves 30-40 pages of hand walking customers through highly detailed intricate and micro measured rules that account for even factors found within Einstein's theory of general relativity.

kambien wrote:

 kingbobbito wrote:
Where in the vehicles section does it say that you aren't allowed to gain ground by pivoting, and that the entirety of the vehicle has to end within the move distance?

 easysauce wrote:
movement rules section states no part of the base may end up more then 6" away from a start point
vehicle rules tell us to use hull instead of base,
ergo, no point of the hull may be more then 6" away by RAW
vehicle rules specifically also state to pivot the vehicle "so it doesn't gain extra movement"
so no, you cannot pivot a vehicle to gain extra movement.

 kingbobbito wrote:
You measure where the center of the tank is

No you measure from the hull

 kingbobbito wrote:
because pivoting doesn't count as movement, as a 90 turn that makes my gun closer to my target doesn't count as movement. If pivoting doesn't count as moving, how can you say that it subtracts from the distance you're allowed to move?

Pivoting ALONE doesn't count as movement

WRONG!!!

Any form of pivoting "DOES NOT COUNT AS MOVING". There's a comma after that statement. After the comma all the author is doing is giving one example, a popular one at that.

So essentially, any pivot done by a vehicle never counts as official movement for ANYTHING, except when you're immobile. The moving 6" only applies to bona fide MOVEMENT. Pivoting does not qualify whatsoever.

https://www.hookedonphonics.com/

So much made up gak and misunderstood rules in this thread.

The rules are simple and easily abused.

I will go point by point

1)pivoting is done on the center point. This establishes how vehicles pivot.

2) pivoting alone keeps your vehicle stationary for rules purposes (# of weapons you can fire and your assumed ws if you have none)

3) bases are generally round, and the "any part of your base" bit is more about having your base exist beyond 6" from where the "front" of your model was to begin with. This topic bears more discussion, so i will go there. When moving a space marine there is no problem with moving him straight in one direction 6" while simultaneously spinning the model 180 degrees, in the end the model has only made forward progress of 6". Vehicles are the same, so long as you move a total of 6" from your starting point with your model you are moving at combat speed. Also there is no definition as to which way you can move, so technically you can move sideways with a tank. Adding the oblong bases the regular movement and the core rules of "no part of the base further; we get a net result of pivoting the oblong sideways, then moving that 6" "forward" results in a movement of further than 6" in that direction, the sa n e applies to vehicles thus negating the "raider power slide" tactic. If you deploy sideways on your line, then pivot 90 you can still only end with your front 6" from your line(as otherwise a point if your hull is further than 6" from your starting point in that direction). A 180 degree turn will not at all put any point of your vehicle more than 6" from the vehicles starting point.

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
When moving a space marine there is no problem with moving him straight in one direction 6" while simultaneously spinning the model 180 degrees, in the end the model has only made forward progress of 6".

Is this a RAW/RAI/HIWPI statement? If its RAW how do you justify it when the rulebook states "As you move the models in a unit, they can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of its base can finish the move more then 6" away from where it started in the Movement phase."

....and as I write this it occurs to me I've been misreading that statement. Lets remove the pronouns. "As you move the models in a unit, the models in a unit can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of a model's base can finish the move more then 6" away from where the model started in the Movement phase." Because you measure to the model's base by measuring to the closest point on the model's base relative to the direction it will be moving (diagram on how to properly measure distance) you only need to measure to the farthest point on the models base in its final position and if the model has a round base that point will always be the same distance of travel.

The logical extension to using the outer edge of the hull would make this rule become "As you move the models in a vehicle unit, the models in a vehicle unit can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of a model's hull can finish the move more then 6" away from where the model started in the Movement phase."

Yes, exactly.

So from the starting point of your dz you cannot end your movement across the table with any point on your vehicle more than 6" from your dz and still be considered moving combat speed(thus negating the raider power slide)

So does this mean certain vehicles are actually unable to pivot and move 6"? If they are 6" long/wide then any pivot and move would mean parts are further than 6" away from where they started

No not at all.

Unless they are over 12" long by less than an inch wide.

Its hard to explain the specifics without diagrams(and i am on a phone so can't do that) or some complicated geometry.

Basically in order for a vehicle to not be able to move after pivoting(while only trying to move at combat speed) it has to have a length radius that is 6" greater than its width radius.

 DJGietzen wrote:
Movement rules, when put under close inspection have serious problems RAW and they all stem from 1 line in the rules. That line is that if a model pivots while moving no part of its base can end more then 6 inches from where it started.

 BlackTalos wrote:

Gravmyr wrote:
My problem with saying you always measure to the center in movement means you you have set precedent to measure there for all measurements to the hull. Do you require charges to reach that same point?

No, i made quite a big point earlier that "Distances" is not the same as "movement".

Distances: Measuring from Unit A to Unit B (charge distances, etc)

Movement: Measuring from a model "in a direction", "up to a distance"


The BRB explains very well how we measure distances. It also describes movement for Based models pretty well. Vehicle, as per this thread, is slightly less clear, but I think there is enough wording to make sense of it.
There is nothing saying exactly where you measure movement from, only that the Travel of what you measure does not exceed a distance. I would suggest taking it from the centre-point, only because the centre-point "does not move" when you Pivot (around the centre point).

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Vehicles are the same, so long as you move a total of 6" from your starting point with your model you are moving at combat speed. Also there is no definition as to which way you can move, so technically you can move sideways with a tank. Adding the oblong bases the regular movement and the core rules of "no part of the base further; we get a net result of pivoting the oblong sideways, then moving that 6" "forward" results in a movement of further than 6" in that direction, the sa n e applies to vehicles thus negating the "raider power slide" tactic. If you deploy sideways on your line, then pivot 90 you can still only end with your front 6" from your line(as otherwise a point if your hull is further than 6" from your starting point in that direction). A 180 degree turn will not at all put any point of your vehicle more than 6" from the vehicles starting point.

 BlackTalos wrote:
I still disagree with the "bubble method". As Insaniak posted a long time ago, you would move just like Infantry: Place your "bubble" and line yourself up to it, regardless of pivots or anything that happens along the way.

Vehicle rules are clear that you measure "Travel", a word i hope i do not need to define. ALL other rules will say "move". Vehicles movement is the only rule that uses the word "Travel", and i personally believe that this is not accidental.

And the post by insaniak showing a problem with the "bubble" method:

 insaniak wrote:

Ventiscogreen wrote:
Pivoting is not only used to abuse transports. I've set up some dense cities that required a lot of pivots to get around a corner.

The thing is, if the interpretation being presented here is correct, there is absolutely no need to pivot the tank as it moves. If all that matters is how far the front edge of the tank has travelled from where it started, you would just measure your movement distance from the tank's starting position, pick it up, and put it down facing the appropriate direction against the measured point.

You would need to make sure that there is a wide enough path for it to travel from start to finish, but there would be no need to push it along the table, pivot it around the corner, and then push it along some more. How it gets around the corner becomes completely irrelevant... specifically, the rule that says that you pivot on the centre point instead of wheeling around a side edge would be redundant, because it would never actually come into play.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
No not at all.

Unless they are over 12" long by less than an inch wide.

Its hard to explain the specifics without diagrams(and i am on a phone so can't do that) or some complicated geometry.

Basically in order for a vehicle to not be able to move after pivoting(while only trying to move at combat speed) it has to have a length radius that is 6" greater than its width radius.

Don't forget you can look through the old thread for pictures: http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/602413.page

But it does seems that you are arguing for the "bubble method":

TimmyIsChaos wrote:


I think this is what a vehicles maximum movement looks like.

No part of the vehicle can end outside the line which is 6" away from each part of the hull if you want to remain at combat speed.

Or point out what you disagree with from this method ( pivot as much as you want, as long as no part of your vehicle is 6" away from the "footprint" it had at the start of the phase)
To which Insaniak's post is very relevant


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 DJGietzen wrote:
The logical extension to using the outer edge of the hull would make this rule become "As you move the models in a vehicle unit, the models in a vehicle unit can be turned to face in any direction, but if a model does move, no part of a model's hull can finish the move more then 6" away from where the model started in the Movement phase."

And no, i do not personally think that this rule applies to vehicles. It clearly says "Base", and the Vehicle rules are also completely self contained:

• Combat Speed. A vehicle that travels up to 6" is said to be moving at Combat Speed. This represents the vehicle advancing slowly to keep firing, albeit with reduced firepower.

Vehicles can turn any number of times as they move, just like any other model. Vehicles turn by pivoting on the spot about their centre-point, rather than wheeling round. Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving,(...etc)

Yes bubble, for final position, in straight line movement.

For pivoting with movement where actual maneuvering is necessary; you are not often going to have to pivot more than 45 degrees at first, square shapes make pivot and move just fine with a 45.
If you are moving to a cross-roads you can still use the bubble for that 90 degree turn: move forward, measure from side hull to desired distance, pivot to see if that was even allowed, move your vehicle to measured point, add measured distance to initial straight line distance and you have final distance move

Its probably a bigger issue for gun facings/access points than for total movement...

 Kommissar Kel wrote:
Yes bubble, for final position, in straight line movement.

For pivoting with movement where actual maneuvering is necessary; you are not often going to have to pivot more than 45 degrees at first, square shapes make pivot and move just fine with a 45.
If you are moving to a cross-roads you can still use the bubble for that 90 degree turn: move forward, measure from side hull to desired distance, pivot to see if that was even allowed, move your vehicle to measured point, add measured distance to initial straight line distance and you have final distance move

And i shall provide with 2 examples of how your "Bubble technique" would create 2 "wrong" scenarios:
1) The blue line is clearly the "bubble" you refer to. Which rules say that you have to measure the green line? ("Travel")

 BlackTalos wrote:
You are saying that you measure the blue line, but both RaW and HIWPI, i'd force you to measure only per the green line:

2)Feel free to share results of this experiment if you have a long and thin Vehicle

 BlackTalos wrote:
Also, try this if you can:

 BlackTalos wrote:

So i spent some time to get this explained in a picture.

To Nem, but all can try this:
"No part of the vehicle can be further than 6" or you have moved more than you allotted distance"

Now please set up a "long" vehicle, such as a Dark Eldar Raider or Necron Ghost Ark on your Table.
Now assume you move at maximum 6" for 3 turns of the game
All the Red lines on the diagram MUST be 6" (or less)

After these 3 quite simple turns of play, measure the distance (Green lines) from the centre point of the vehicle (or any other part of the Hull you wish to pick)

I can guarantee that your vehicle is now MUCH further than 18" away from its starting position.

Feel free to add a 4th Turn just to make sure the vehicle is facing the same way again, and measure.

In example 1, why is the vehicle's grey position different for the blue line? Is that supposed to reflect a different potential stopping point? If so what are the dimensions of the vehicle? Its actually important to the math. In your example it looks to be about a 7:4 in terms of length to width. So for the vehicle to have "bubbled' 12 inches to that new position it needs to be about 1.17 inches wide and 2 inches long. and that's assuming the space between the two is .3 inches. That means, if I read your example right, the vehicle would have bubbled 12 but traveled 14.3 inches. Essentially gaining that 2.3 inches of movement.

Now, if we assume the vehicle is 4.5:3 like a rhino and it bubbles 12 inches then it traveled 16.4 inches, gaining 4.4 inches of movement And all of that is moot. I din't believe any one is suggesting that the bubble replaces the travel measurment, but rather then both are required and neither allows for a maximum beyond the movement speed.

Using the Rhino, and having it travel 3 inches forward,pivot 90 degrees right, travel another 6 inches, pivot 90 degrees left before traveling another 3 inches (a total of 12 inches of travel) in will only have bubbled 6.71 inches and therefore no part of its hull will be more then 12 inches from where the vehicle started so its A-OK.

 DJGietzen wrote:
In example 1, why is the vehicle's grey position different for the blue line? Is that supposed to reflect a different potential stopping point? If so what are the dimensions of the vehicle? Its actually important to the math. In your example it looks to be about a 7:4 in terms of length to width. So for the vehicle to have "bubbled' 12 inches to that new position it needs to be about 1.17 inches wide and 2 inches long. and that's assuming the space between the two is .3 inches. That means, if I read your example right, the vehicle would have bubbled 12 but traveled 14.3 inches. Essentially gaining that 2.3 inches of movement.

Now, if we assume the vehicle is 4.5:3 like a rhino and it bubbles 12 inches then it traveled 16.4 inches, gaining 4.4 inches of movement And all of that is moot. I din't believe any one is suggesting that the bubble replaces the travel measurment, but rather then both are required and neither allows for a maximum beyond the movement speed.

Using the Rhino, and having it travel 3 inches forward,pivot 90 degrees right, travel another 6 inches, pivot 90 degrees left before traveling another 3 inches (a total of 12 inches of travel) in will only have bubbled 6.71 inches and therefore no part of its hull will be more then 12 inches from where the vehicle started so its A-OK.

I beleive that you have that image in reverse.
First of all it is an approximation, i could attempt a collage with real pictures of Rhinos and buildings, but it would take me too long for what it's worth.

In the example above, the Blue line is exactly 12" in length. As the Rhino has rotated 90 degrees right, and then 90 degrees left, it would be, in relation to where it started, identical.
As such, any part of the vehicle, such as the front Right corner, will be 12" away from where the front Right corner was.

To which i disagree: You must measure the travel of the vehicle: You measure 3" forward, pivot 90 degrees, measure forward 6", pivot 90 degrees, measure another 3".

By simple pythagoras, i can tell you that the rhino will "only" be 8.485 inches from where it started, but it has traveled 12".

But the conclusion to the above drawing was that even though the "bubble method" (Blue line) is an argued interpretation, it creates a situation as that demonstrated here, and underlines what Insaniak explained quite well:

 insaniak wrote:

Ventiscogreen wrote:
Pivoting is not only used to abuse transports. I've set up some dense cities that required a lot of pivots to get around a corner.

The thing is, if the interpretation being presented here is correct, there is absolutely no need to pivot the tank as it moves. If all that matters is how far the front edge of the tank has travelled from where it started, you would just measure your movement distance from the tank's starting position, pick it up, and put it down facing the appropriate direction against the measured point.

You would need to make sure that there is a wide enough path for it to travel from start to finish, but there would be no need to push it along the table, pivot it around the corner, and then push it along some more. How it gets around the corner becomes completely irrelevant... specifically, the rule that says that you pivot on the centre point instead of wheeling around a side edge would be redundant, because it would never actually come into play.

You can pivot as you move just like any other model, and you measure movement before moving the model. Measuring tells you where your hull may move up to, including any pivots.

 Nem wrote:
You can pivot during movement, and you measure movement before doing the move. Measuring tells you where your hull may move up to, including any pivots.

Which was proven flawed in the previous discussion.... The two example given above show exactly why.

If you measure your "bubble" before you move, then the rule that says that you pivot on the centre point instead of wheeling around a side edge would be redundant. Because you could wheel around and drive in zig-zags between any terrain, Unit or other, and "finish" your move as normal infantry might do....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
As a quick re-cap, this is my current view on the RaW:

 BlackTalos wrote:
Indeed, the movement rules talk about bases, which vehicles do not have.

To move a vehicle, you have to use these rules:

VEHICLES IN THE MOVEMENT PHASE
The distance a vehicle moves influences how accurately it can fire its weapons, as described later.
• Stationary. A vehicle that remains Stationary will be able to bring its full firepower to bear on the enemy.
• Combat Speed. A vehicle that travels up to 6" is said to be moving at Combat Speed. This represents the vehicle advancing slowly to keep firing, albeit with reduced firepower.
• Cruising Speed. A vehicle that travels more than 6" and up to 12" is said to be moving at Cruising Speed. This represents the vehicle concentrating on moving as fast as possible – all of its firepower will be wildly inaccurate.
Vehicles can turn any number of times as they move, just like any other model. Vehicles turn by pivoting on the spot about their centre-point, rather than wheeling round. Pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving, so a vehicle that only pivots in the Movement phase counts as Stationary (however, Immobilised vehicles cannot even pivot on the spot). Pivoting is always done from the centre of a vehicle to prevent it from accidentally moving further than intended or allowed. Just like other units, vehicles cannot move over friendly models.

You simply measure the travel of the vehicle. Where you measure is not mentioned, and all parts of the vehicle will travel the exact same distance, so it does not make a difference.

You are never told to measure vehicle movement from the Hull only. That is an assumption.

 BlackTalos wrote:

 Nem wrote:
You can pivot during movement, and you measure movement before doing the move. Measuring tells you where your hull may move up to, including any pivots.

Which was proven flawed in the previous discussion.... The two example given above show exactly why.

If you measure your "bubble" before you move, then the rule that says that you pivot on the centre point instead of wheeling around a side edge would be redundant. Because you could wheel around and drive in zig-zags between any terrain, Unit or other, and "finish" your move as normal infantry might do....

There's no need to measure a bubble, you measure from the side of the vehicle you want to move, and move the model there. If there is a corner, you measure say, 3 and 3 then move, or stick your tape around the corner.

I don't think there's a model you can really pierce this distance with when you are measuring the full distance before you move on the correct facing. I did quite extensive testing with a DE raider - at some points you could if you measured from the side with a wider area and moved it up to the part with a thinner area but in general, if you measure from the same point and move it up to that point including the pivots as you go I found it didn't breach (other than bad MM measurement).


Just measure the distance on the correct facing, and then move it up to that point, do as many pirouette as you want on the way but the traveled distance can not exceed as you have already determined the end point with the tape measure, which has to be the same point as per the rules for measuring distances.