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.

hello,

here isthe relevant quote from the draft:

Q: I have a question about pivoting and moving a vehicle. When is the distance that a vehicle can move measured – before it pivots for the first time or after it pivots for the first time? Some vehicles may be able to gain an extra inch or two by pivoting, then measuring, then moving.
A: If a model moves, no part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model’s move distance away from where it started the Movement phase.

am i correct in the assumption that landraiders and other large vehicles cant turn 180° anymore while maintaining combat speed?

edit: derpy

Why wouldn't it be able to?

The FAQ was about tanks gaining extra movement from pivoting, such as a ghost ark that moves 6" sideways, then rotates 90 was gaining extra inches. A pivot takes no distance and doesn't count as a move, so you can spin as much as you want, you just cannot move further than the set distance you are allowed through pivoting.

RedNoak wrote:
hello,

here isthe relevant quote from the draft:

Q: I have a question about pivoting and moving a vehicle. When is the distance that a vehicle can move measured – before it pivots for the first time or after it pivots for the first time? Some vehicles may be able to gain an extra inch or two by pivoting, then measuring, then moving.
A: If a model moves, no part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model’s move distance away from where it started the Movement phase.

am i correct in the assumption that landraiders and other large vehicles cant turn 180° anymore while maintaining combat speed?

A strict reading of that FAQ would prevent you from being able to move a Land Raider forward 6" and then rotate 180 degrees.

I read it as... "If a model moves, no part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model's move distance away from where it [the part of the model in question] started the Movement phase." So, yeah... if a Land Raider moves forward at combat speed and then pulls a 180, the rear portion of the Land Raider would have moved farther than combat speed, which would violate that FAQ,

 Kriswall wrote:

A strict reading of that FAQ would prevent you from being able to move a Land Raider forward 6" and then rotate 180 degrees.

I read it as... "If a model moves, no part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model's move distance away from where it [the part of the model in question] started the Movement phase." So, yeah... if a Land Raider moves forward at combat speed and then pulls a 180, the rear portion of the Land Raider would have moved farther than combat speed, which would violate that FAQ,

wouldnt it also restrict a landraider from turning 180° and then move more than an inch due to his size?
and ghost arks, baneblades and other big vehicles cant pivot 180° at all?

RedNoak wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

A strict reading of that FAQ would prevent you from being able to move a Land Raider forward 6" and then rotate 180 degrees.

I read it as... "If a model moves, no part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model's move distance away from where it [the part of the model in question] started the Movement phase." So, yeah... if a Land Raider moves forward at combat speed and then pulls a 180, the rear portion of the Land Raider would have moved farther than combat speed, which would violate that FAQ,

wouldnt it also restrict a landraider from turning 180° and then move more than an inch due to his size?
and ghost arks, baneblades and other big vehicles cant pivot 180° at all?

Yes to the former, no to the latter. The FAQ basically forces vehicles to move like VEHICLES. However, per the BRB, if all the vehicle does is pivot, it does not count as having moved at all. And before you ask, no. This does not mean you are allowed to turn 180 and then move. Again, vehicles move like vehicles.

although... vehicles in the far future or from highly technologized alien races apparantly dont have a reverse gear...

joke aside doesnt this effect vehicles in a major way? just think about dark eldar barges for example... they can now what? move like 2 inches if they wanna do a 90° turn?

or what about flyers? a flyer doing a 90° turn would need to fly way more than 18" to maintain the minimum 18" move...

am i the only one concerned about that? :/

RedNoak wrote:
although... vehicles in the far future or from highly technologized alien races apparantly dont have a reverse gear...

joke aside doesnt this effect vehicles in a major way? just think about dark eldar barges for example... they can now what? move like 2 inches if they wanna do a 90° turn?

or what about flyers? a flyer doing a 90° turn would need to fly way more than 18" to maintain the minimum 18" move...

am i the only one concerned about that? :/

No, but this is what RAW has been since 7th. Also HIWPI is going to stay the same, which is unless you want to measure around every point of your vehicle to ensure you are following this 100% my group tends to ignore it. Yes it does give the LR and extra inch or two off deployment but we don't really care.

It has always been clear to me (even before the FAQ) that moving a vehicle should be as follows:

1) Pick a vehicle to move
2) Pick the direction and distance desired and mark that point
3) Measure to that point from the outside edge of the model/base that is closest to that point
4) Move the model to that point, pivoting any way you wish, but making sure that NO part of you model moves past the designated point

Getting 2-3" prior to "measuring" just because your model is oblong and "pivoting is free" is clearly against the spirit of the game.

RedNoak wrote:
although... vehicles in the far future or from highly technologized alien races apparantly dont have a reverse gear...

joke aside doesnt this effect vehicles in a major way? just think about dark eldar barges for example... they can now what? move like 2 inches if they wanna do a 90° turn?

or what about flyers? a flyer doing a 90° turn would need to fly way more than 18" to maintain the minimum 18" move...

am i the only one concerned about that? :/

Doesn't actually effect vehicles at all. The rules have always worked this way. People just seem to have this unconscious set of house rules that allow vehicles to move farther than they're normally able to when making turns. These house rules tend to shut off when someone tries to use the "rotate 90 degrees and move forward" trick to gain extra movement.

Yes, Dark Eldar Barges can only move 2-3 inches forward if they start with a 90 degree rotation. This is normal. Flyers will appear to move less than 18" when making a mandatory 18" move because everyone forgets that part of that movement is tied up in the turn. You don't measure from model center to model center and say you made an 18" move. You measure from all parts of the model and no part can move more than 18". So long as at least one part moved 18", you made an 18" move. In other words, if you make a 90 degree rotation and this causes parts of your plane to shift, we'll say, 6" from where they started, you're not left with 12" of remaining move... even though the center of the base is still in the same place. In that sense, creative usage of turns can keep a flyer on the table longer.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
In practice, making sure than no part moves past the maximum range is time consuming and complex, so most people seem to just eyeball it. That's what we do. It's obvious when someone is "rotating for advantage".

Try moving your DE transports in an arc like a ship would. That's how I move my GA now. It's fluffy, and it looks pretty cool, too.

No part of the base (=hull for vehicles) may move further than it's permitted moving distance.

Usually you earn confused looks when pointing that out to someone just doing a Rhino powerslide, so I'll use that as example.

And you can see in the picture, adding a non-RAW 180° spin to a 6" Rhino move results in:
- the rear door moving more about 11" from it's starting position.
- the side doors moving slightly more than 6" (since they are marginally closer to the rear than to the front) and
- disembaring passengers moving about 2" further (since the rear door is that much ahead of the side doors) as marked in red in the picture

Obviously this 2" advantage is the minimum effect. The effect of this non-RAW movement is greater if:
a) the side doors cannot be used due to other units or impassable terrain, or are not as desireable due to difficult terrain tests
b) another transport chassis without side doors is used, e.g. Eldar Serpent/Falcon.

Since 2" can make the difference in grabbing an objective, being in range to shoot or (assuming assault vehicles) assault something, ignoring the RAW makes the transports stronger.

And yet pivoting doesn't count as movement.

Exactly. "No part of your hull...." section of the rule doesn't mean that you 'keep track' of each part of the model. Simply that no part of the hull can pass the distance desired. Pivoting would not matter. Before touching the model, measure 6". No part of the model can pass that point, but turning is free.

In Stephanius' example, he implies that you measure the rear to the rear, the front to the front, etc, but I don't think the BRB implies this.
6" move + 180 turn is still only 6" that the WHOLE model moved. The BRB does not say that you measure each individual section of the model as that would be ridiculous.

 Galef wrote:
Exactly. "No part of your hull...." section of the rule doesn't mean that you 'keep track' of each part of the model. Simply that no part of the hull can pass the distance desired. Pivoting would not matter. Before touching the model, measure 6". No part of the model can pass that point, but turning is free.

In Stephanius' example, he implies that you measure the rear to the rear, the front to the front, etc, but I don't think the BRB implies this.
6" move + 180 turn is still only 6" that the WHOLE model moved. The BRB does not say that you measure each individual section of the model as that would be ridiculous.

You are not permitted to move any part of the vehicles hull more than 6".
When a move results with the rear hatch 11" away from its starting position, obviously that move violates said rule.

Yes, you are permitted to pivot as much as you want.
However, if you pivot AND move, you need to follow movement rules, which do specify that no part of your hull can move further than permitted by your movement distance.

Measuring from a single point of the model and not moving the whole model past that point is close to RAW in most cases.
However, throw in a power-slide and you see quickly how this fails to yield RAW compatible results.

 Stephanius wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Exactly. "No part of your hull...." section of the rule doesn't mean that you 'keep track' of each part of the model. Simply that no part of the hull can pass the distance desired. Pivoting would not matter. Before touching the model, measure 6". No part of the model can pass that point, but turning is free.

In Stephanius' example, he implies that you measure the rear to the rear, the front to the front, etc, but I don't think the BRB implies this.
6" move + 180 turn is still only 6" that the WHOLE model moved. The BRB does not say that you measure each individual section of the model as that would be ridiculous.

You are not permitted to move any part of the vehicles hull more than 6".
When a move results with the rear hatch 11" away from its starting position, obviously that move violates said rule.

Yes, you are permitted to pivot as much as you want.
However, if you pivot AND move, you need to follow movement rules, which do specify that no part of your hull can move further than permitted by your movement distance.

Measuring from a single point of the model and not moving the whole model past that point is close to RAW in most cases.
However, throw in a power-slide and you see quickly how this fails to yield RAW compatible results.

I understand how this interpretation occurs, I really do.
However, I have always read it as no part of the model as a whole can pass the intended point that you measured to. NOT that you measure each part of the model separately

-

This ruling does of course mean that certain vehicles, longer than 12" (such as the Centurio Ordinatus engines) can't actually turn, then, because even a 90* pivot with something so large means the end and the front both swing quite far.

Yeah I will stick with the rule that pivoting is free.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Okay so I did the math with the radius as 1/2 the Ordinatus's length pivoting through 90*. That uses up 9.5 inches of movement, so it could then move a whopping 2.5".

But pivoting is still free guys.

I thought pivoting was only free so long as you didn't move. If you move, you need to abide by the movement rules. Sure, you can pivot as much as you want... but not part of the model or it's base can move more than the model's maximum move. For non-circular models, this means that a pivot can very easily eat up a decent portion of a model's movement... which makes total sense. This is how vehicles work in the real world.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
This ruling does of course mean that certain vehicles, longer than 12" (such as the Centurio Ordinatus engines) can't actually turn, then, because even a 90* pivot with something so large means the end and the front both swing quite far.

Yeah I will stick with the rule that pivoting is free.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Okay so I did the math with the radius as 1/2 the Ordinatus's length pivoting through 90*. That uses up 9.5 inches of movement, so it could then move a whopping 2.5".

But pivoting is still free guys.

Something like the Ordinatus absolutely CAN turn. It just can't turn very far each turn. A smaller vehicle would be able to make a wider turn since it requires less space to do so.

Think about a large 18 wheeler transport truck versus a tiny smart car. Both are looking to make a full 90 degree turn. Obviously, both have to move forward to do so. The smart car needs far less actual distance moved to achieve a 90 degree turn. The truck needs more. In game turns, this would be the equivalent to the smart car making a 90 degree turn in one game turn while it takes the truck several game turns. Big vehicles can be awkward and ponderous to turn.

Note that my example specifically ignores free pivoting where the vehicle chooses not to move. You could, if you want, pivot the vehicle in turn 1 and then move it in the chosen direction in turn 2.

Realistically, this is just another example of the 40k rules having become too cumbersome and complex. Asking a player to measure to and from each point on the hull to ensure no part moves more than 6" is ridiculous.

 Galef wrote:

 Stephanius wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Exactly. "No part of your hull...." section of the rule doesn't mean that you 'keep track' of each part of the model. Simply that no part of the hull can pass the distance desired. Pivoting would not matter. Before touching the model, measure 6". No part of the model can pass that point, but turning is free.

In Stephanius' example, he implies that you measure the rear to the rear, the front to the front, etc, but I don't think the BRB implies this.
6" move + 180 turn is still only 6" that the WHOLE model moved. The BRB does not say that you measure each individual section of the model as that would be ridiculous.

You are not permitted to move any part of the vehicles hull more than 6".
When a move results with the rear hatch 11" away from its starting position, obviously that move violates said rule.

Yes, you are permitted to pivot as much as you want.
However, if you pivot AND move, you need to follow movement rules, which do specify that no part of your hull can move further than permitted by your movement distance.

Measuring from a single point of the model and not moving the whole model past that point is close to RAW in most cases.
However, throw in a power-slide and you see quickly how this fails to yield RAW compatible results.

I understand how this interpretation occurs, I really do.
However, I have always read it as no part of the model as a whole can pass the intended point that you measured to. NOT that you measure each part of the model separately

-

I think this is the only sensible approach. Create an outline of your vehicle and expand it by your desired movement on all sides. No part of the model can go further than this outline.

 Hanskrampf wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 Stephanius wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Exactly. "No part of your hull...." section of the rule doesn't mean that you 'keep track' of each part of the model. Simply that no part of the hull can pass the distance desired. Pivoting would not matter. Before touching the model, measure 6". No part of the model can pass that point, but turning is free.

In Stephanius' example, he implies that you measure the rear to the rear, the front to the front, etc, but I don't think the BRB implies this.
6" move + 180 turn is still only 6" that the WHOLE model moved. The BRB does not say that you measure each individual section of the model as that would be ridiculous.

You are not permitted to move any part of the vehicles hull more than 6".
When a move results with the rear hatch 11" away from its starting position, obviously that move violates said rule.

Yes, you are permitted to pivot as much as you want.
However, if you pivot AND move, you need to follow movement rules, which do specify that no part of your hull can move further than permitted by your movement distance.

Measuring from a single point of the model and not moving the whole model past that point is close to RAW in most cases.
However, throw in a power-slide and you see quickly how this fails to yield RAW compatible results.

I understand how this interpretation occurs, I really do.
However, I have always read it as no part of the model as a whole can pass the intended point that you measured to. NOT that you measure each part of the model separately

-

I think this is the only sensible approach. Create an outline of your vehicle and expand it by your desired movement on all sides. No part of the model can go further than this outline.

Sensible, and how many people play it... but also a total violation of the current rules/new FAQ. Your solution is simpler, but allows for the 180 degree turn to move a disembarkation point an extra X" before a unit disembarks.

 Kriswall wrote:

Spoiler:

 Hanskrampf wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 Stephanius wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Exactly. "No part of your hull...." section of the rule doesn't mean that you 'keep track' of each part of the model. Simply that no part of the hull can pass the distance desired. Pivoting would not matter. Before touching the model, measure 6". No part of the model can pass that point, but turning is free.

In Stephanius' example, he implies that you measure the rear to the rear, the front to the front, etc, but I don't think the BRB implies this.
6" move + 180 turn is still only 6" that the WHOLE model moved. The BRB does not say that you measure each individual section of the model as that would be ridiculous.

You are not permitted to move any part of the vehicles hull more than 6".
When a move results with the rear hatch 11" away from its starting position, obviously that move violates said rule.

Yes, you are permitted to pivot as much as you want.
However, if you pivot AND move, you need to follow movement rules, which do specify that no part of your hull can move further than permitted by your movement distance.

Measuring from a single point of the model and not moving the whole model past that point is close to RAW in most cases.
However, throw in a power-slide and you see quickly how this fails to yield RAW compatible results.

I understand how this interpretation occurs, I really do.
However, I have always read it as no part of the model as a whole can pass the intended point that you measured to. NOT that you measure each part of the model separately

-

I think this is the only sensible approach. Create an outline of your vehicle and expand it by your desired movement on all sides. No part of the model can go further than this outline.

Sensible, and how many people play it... but also a total violation of the current rules/new FAQ. Your solution is simpler, but allows for the 180 degree turn to move a disembarkation point an extra X" before a unit disembarks.

Not how I read the FAQ. The FAQ sounds to me like Galef's solution. We need a FAQ for the FAQ...

A price I am willing to pay if it means I don't have to measure every single atom to male sure it didn't move more than 12".

Also, what about vehicles that can change their configuration? The Ordinatus can bend in the middle, how does that work? If you just to an outline, then it doesn't matter - bend it how you like as long as it doesn't cross the line. But measuring each part - bits near the joint will move less than bits further away, so if we are really measuring every bit of it we have to do two circles (one for the pivoting engine around its center and one for the front pivoting around a point behind it) and...

... honestly I dunno if I can remember the math for this.

Also this means tanks can't turn their turrets - e.g. if you have. Leman Russ and move it 6" without turning the turret and then turn the turret, the end of the gun barrel has just moved further than 6" that turn. Turning your tank's turret mounted guns reduces your movement, lol.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
That means tanks with longer gun barrels use up more movement traversing their turrets than tanks with shorter gun barrels.

FAQ Is a stealth nerf to Vanquishers and buff to Demolishers...

 Hanskrampf wrote:

 Kriswall wrote:

Spoiler:

 Hanskrampf wrote:

 Galef wrote:

 Stephanius wrote:

 Galef wrote:
Exactly. "No part of your hull...." section of the rule doesn't mean that you 'keep track' of each part of the model. Simply that no part of the hull can pass the distance desired. Pivoting would not matter. Before touching the model, measure 6". No part of the model can pass that point, but turning is free.

In Stephanius' example, he implies that you measure the rear to the rear, the front to the front, etc, but I don't think the BRB implies this.
6" move + 180 turn is still only 6" that the WHOLE model moved. The BRB does not say that you measure each individual section of the model as that would be ridiculous.

You are not permitted to move any part of the vehicles hull more than 6".
When a move results with the rear hatch 11" away from its starting position, obviously that move violates said rule.

Yes, you are permitted to pivot as much as you want.
However, if you pivot AND move, you need to follow movement rules, which do specify that no part of your hull can move further than permitted by your movement distance.

Measuring from a single point of the model and not moving the whole model past that point is close to RAW in most cases.
However, throw in a power-slide and you see quickly how this fails to yield RAW compatible results.

I understand how this interpretation occurs, I really do.
However, I have always read it as no part of the model as a whole can pass the intended point that you measured to. NOT that you measure each part of the model separately

-

I think this is the only sensible approach. Create an outline of your vehicle and expand it by your desired movement on all sides. No part of the model can go further than this outline.

Sensible, and how many people play it... but also a total violation of the current rules/new FAQ. Your solution is simpler, but allows for the 180 degree turn to move a disembarkation point an extra X" before a unit disembarks.

Not how I read the FAQ. The FAQ sounds to me like Galef's solution. We need a FAQ for the FAQ...

"A: If a model moves, no part of the model (or its base) can finish the move more than the model’s move distance away from where it started the Movement phase. "

While potentially ambiguous, the most common interpretation in core English would be that the last "it" refers back to "part". So, no part may move more than the model's move distance from where it [that part] started. Interpreting "it" to refer back to the model is another possibility, but presents its own issues as we're never told how to determine an overall model's starting point. Do you measure from the center of the model? ...from that same originating part? ...from any part? ...from all parts simultaneously? Interpreting "it" to mean part far simplifies the measurements needed. You measure from a specific point to another specific point and make sure none of those distances exceed the maximum move range.

But you're right. They need to clean up the wording in the FAQ to make it more explicit. They're terrible technical writers and don't seem to understand the ambiguity that using words like "it" can introduce when there are two possible meanings for "it".

Oh god, some tanks have multiple turrets

Do you add up the moment of each turret's barrel to deduct it from the tank’s move? I can't visualize how that would work...


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually it may not matter, so long as the gun barrels stay in movement range of where they were before traversing. But if you traverse them, do you have to reduce the tank's speed to account for that part moving?

Conversely, it could only be the turret with the longest barrel- once you have moved slowly enough to traverse that turret you can be sure the others can traverse as well.

 Galef wrote:
Exactly. "No part of your hull...." section of the rule doesn't mean that you 'keep track' of each part of the model. Simply that no part of the hull can pass the distance desired. Pivoting would not matter. Before touching the model, measure 6". No part of the model can pass that point, but turning is free.

In Stephanius' example, he implies that you measure the rear to the rear, the front to the front, etc, but I don't think the BRB implies this.
6" move + 180 turn is still only 6" that the WHOLE model moved. The BRB does not say that you measure each individual section of the model as that would be ridiculous.

My whole group has always placed it this way.

 Kriswall wrote:


Something like the Ordinatus absolutely CAN turn. It just can't turn very far each turn. A smaller vehicle would be able to make a wider turn since it requires less space to do so.

Think about a large 18 wheeler transport truck versus a tiny smart car. Both are looking to make a full 90 degree turn. Obviously, both have to move forward to do so. The smart car needs far less actual distance moved to achieve a 90 degree turn. The truck needs more. In game turns, this would be the equivalent to the smart car making a 90 degree turn in one game turn while it takes the truck several game turns. Big vehicles can be awkward and ponderous to turn.

Note that my example specifically ignores free pivoting where the vehicle chooses not to move. You could, if you want, pivot the vehicle in turn 1 and then move it in the chosen direction in turn 2.

Realistically, this is just another example of the 40k rules having become too cumbersome and complex. Asking a player to measure to and from each point on the hull to ensure no part moves more than 6" is ridiculous.

For one you can't use real world examples in 40K, secondly I don't understand why my anti-gravity engines can't just make me do loop-de-loops on the battle field. let alone make pivoting while moving easier.

I can't tell if vehicles can turn their turrets in the Shooting phase or not. If I am reading the wording correctly you pick a target before looking at LOS, in which case they can but that doesn't make sense to me.

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I can't tell if vehicles can turn their turrets in the Shooting phase or not. If I am reading the wording correctly you pick a target before looking at LOS, in which case they can but that doesn't make sense to me.

Are you supposed to physically turn your turrets anyway? I thought that if it was a turret, it just had the 360 degree firing arc.

 BossJakadakk wrote:

 Unit1126PLL wrote:
I can't tell if vehicles can turn their turrets in the Shooting phase or not. If I am reading the wording correctly you pick a target before looking at LOS, in which case they can but that doesn't make sense to me.

Are you supposed to physically turn your turrets anyway? I thought that if it was a turret, it just had the 360 degree firing arc.

Yes, because you look down the barrel for line of sight. The only exception is if the weapon can't physically turn (e.g. it was glued down).

Ah okay haha. I glue so much down, I really have a weird thing against moving parts. Unless it's something that makes the model harder to transport by gluing down by increasing it's size by a lot. Then the pieces are separate.