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.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Kall3m0n wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 Kall3m0n wrote:
You never shot pistols in CC in 8th edition, right?

I mean, I did. I didn't shoot them while I was within 1" of an enemy unit, however, as I could not select that unit to shoot with.

I'm sincerely glad you practice what you preach, as long as you don't force it upon your opponent.

I am a generous not-god-king, I fully allowed my opponents to... break the rules.

But yeah, it seems that Deathreaper seems to have a fundamental inability to understand how vectors work, or is misunderstanding them despite all the advice to the contrary.

I fully admit, I am all for holding the rules to the strict letter of the rules, but this isn't such a case.

Yeah, you are in-/famous for being RAW instead of RAI. ^^

Yeah, it seems like he's just not able to understand. It's one thing to understand and not agree, but it seems like he doesn't even understand.

But this time, we have BaconCatBug on OUR side!

Which is really a bad sign for DeathReaper being right. Oftentimes, BCB and the majority are in dissent. But we're aligned this time.

 BaconCatBug wrote:


But yeah, it seems that Deathreaper seems to have a fundamental inability to understand how vectors work, or is misunderstanding them despite all the advice to the contrary.

I do know how vectors work, I also know how the game tells you to measure.

And the only way to measure is base to base.

I would ask you to prove me wrong, but I know what the rules say and you can not do so, since the only way to measure is base to base.

 Kall3m0n wrote:
Yeah, it seems like he's just not able to understand. It's one thing to understand and not agree, but it seems like he doesn't even understand.

False, I know how vectors work. I also know what the rules say. you seem to be dismissing how measuring works in the 40k rules.

 JNAProductions wrote:
But this time, we have BaconCatBug on OUR side!

Which is really a bad sign for DeathReaper being right. Oftentimes, BCB and the majority are in dissent. But we're aligned this time.

Yea, it is interesting that even BCB got this one wrong.

but he has been wrong before, so c'est la vie.

 DeathReaper wrote:

And the only way to measure is base to base.

How do you do your movement phases?

 DeathReaper wrote:

 BaconCatBug wrote:


But yeah, it seems that Deathreaper seems to have a fundamental inability to understand how vectors work, or is misunderstanding them despite all the advice to the contrary.

I do know how vectors work, I also know how the game tells you to measure.

And the only way to measure is base to base.

Yes, measuring base to base as the end points. It does, however, require you to measure the vertical distance then the horizontal distance (or vice versa) to make sure it's within the rules, as they are defined for determining whether you're within engagement range (or, if measuring only your own unit, measuring coherency) at different elevations. Of course, you can measure diagonally the base to base distance, figure out the angle that line is at, then imagine it as a triangle and run the math to convert it to a vertical and horizontal distance, but most people would find it easier to measure the horizontal then the vertical distance .

 JNAProductions wrote:
But this time, we have BaconCatBug on OUR side!

Which is really a bad sign for DeathReaper being right. Oftentimes, BCB and the majority are in dissent. But we're aligned this time.

I mean, if you wanna be picky like this, the changes to how Assault and Pistol weapons work in 9th just vindicated me (to which death is nothing compared to it), so it was actually YOU who were in dissent, I was right all along!

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
But this time, we have BaconCatBug on OUR side!

Which is really a bad sign for DeathReaper being right. Oftentimes, BCB and the majority are in dissent. But we're aligned this time.

I mean, if you wanna be picky like this, the changes to how Assault and Pistol weapons work in 9th just vindicated me (to which death is nothing compared to it), so it was actually YOU who were in dissent, I was right all along!

Hey, I agreed with you on the RAW. You're almost always right on the RAW-we just have vastly different views on whether or not the RAW is worth sticking to in a lot of cases.

 DeathReaper wrote:
And the only way to measure is base to base.

This is incorrect. I can measure distance for movement, I can measure an aura's range, I can measure the range of my weapon without measuring base to base. In particular, this rule does not tell you to measure from one model to the other, but to check whether one model is within a vertical and horizontal distance.

We need to take you back to your definitions, because you seem to not understand them.

For the record Vertically means "vertically ADVERB At right angles to a horizontal plane; aligned in such a way that the top is directly above the bottom.) https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/vertically

And Horizontally means "horizontal ADJECTIVE Parallel to the plane of the horizon; at right angles to the vertical. ‘a horizontal line’" https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/english/horizontal_1#:~:text=%2F%CB%8Ch%C9%94%CB%90r%C9%AA%CB%88z%C9%91%CB%90ntl%2F,than%20going%20up%20and%20down

These were your definitions and they are correct. Note in particular the use of "perpendicular", "plane" and "parallel". This means that they don't have to be on the same horizontal level to be measuring horizontally - you can measure distances parallel to the plane. The same is true for vertical since it is defined with respect to horizontal. What that means is that any measurement (from any point of origin) which is parallel to the battlefield level plane is a horizontal measurement, and any measurement which is perpendicular to it is a vertical measurement. I can make a horizontal measurement from 5' above the battlefield and it is still a horizontal since it is parallel to it. Same with vertical.

The origin points are defined as the base in our case, with the axes of horizontal and vertical defined with respect to the battlefield. Any horizontal measurement from the base, made at any level perpendicular to the plane on which the base exists, is a horizontal measurement. The same for vertical. Again, I could measure horizontally from the base from 5' above it as long as my measurement starts directly above and is made parallel to the reference plane of the battlefield.

You are ignoring the fact that measurements are parallel to the plane, and do not have to be on the plane, and conflating measurement to see if one models is within range of another model with a need to check if a model infringes on a set volume of space.

Just jumping in to beat this dead horse for DeathReaper. It's ludicrous to suggest that measuring the horizontal distance between two points is impossible if they're not horizontally aligned. Just google "horizontal distance" and you'll see a million different triangles that show how to measure "horizontal distance," "vertical distance" and "actual distance."

Give it up already, this is ridiculous.

 DeathReaper wrote:
Yea, I know how vectors work, but you cant measure to something that is not there.

Force in motion is not always visible or tangible. Force is expressed as vector, calculated using other available physical data (i.e. distance, mass, velocity, acceleration, time) and basic mathematical formulas. We must've been doing vector calculations all wrong then since we can't measure to/from something that's not there. I guess physics is broken.

Gravity is a hoax. It's a conspiracy set up by the illuminati.