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.

A vehicle with a minimum movement arrives via reinforcements. It cannot move further after it arrives. Is it immediately destroyed? If it has an ability such as "Hover" must it use it to survive?


GW has responded to my question on their community Facebook page. They conclude that because the vehicle arrives at the END of the movement phase and not in the phase itself, the minimum movement does not come into play. Hope this helps.

Riggs wrote:
A vehicle with a minimum movement arrives via reinforcements. It cannot move further after it arrives. Is it immediately destroyed? If it has an ability such as "Hover" must it use it to survive?

This is covered in the FAQ.

In short, units with minimum move arriving from reserve count as having moved its minimum move value.

 skchsan wrote:

Riggs wrote:
A vehicle with a minimum movement arrives via reinforcements. It cannot move further after it arrives. Is it immediately destroyed? If it has an ability such as "Hover" must it use it to survive?

This is covered in the FAQ.

In short, units with minimum move arriving from reserve count as having moved its minimum move value.

But which FAQ? If you're going to answer at least provide a proper citation. Can you tell me which FAQ this is in because it's not in the Rulebook one as far as I can see. Searching for "minimum" or "reinforcements" gives no answer.

Models with a minimum move distance have to end their movement at least that distance from where they started the Movement phase.

It's obvious we don't consider a model's physical position off the battlefield at the beginning of the Movement phase for this purpose, but if you are dealing with that kind of person, simply place it somewhere off the table at least its minimum move away from where you wish to set it up.

The closest we have to an FAQ that I know of is the precedent of the Tallarn Ambush, which states that models arriving that way are considered to have moved their maximum distance.

This argument has rumbled on for days in other identical threads. Suffice to say, some folk are intent on claiming a plane crashes when deployed. To me this is ridiculous and unreasonable. You’re better off not playing anyone who tries to pull such a douche move on you. Easiest solution to this non-problem.

For a reasonable approach, that is coincidentally based on RAW, use the Tallarn Ambush FAQ as guidance and treat your planes as having moved their maximum.

 JohnnyHell wrote:
For a reasonable approach, that is coincidentally based on RAW, use the Tallarn Ambush FAQ as guidance and treat your planes as having moved their maximum.

Using the errata like this is quite literally the opposite of RaW. The errata for the Tallarn Ambush stratagem applies ONLY to that stratagem. Nothing more, nothing less.

The fact it has errata at all actually proves that you don't by default count as moving maximum distance.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

 JohnnyHell wrote:
For a reasonable approach, that is coincidentally based on RAW, use the Tallarn Ambush FAQ as guidance and treat your planes as having moved their maximum.

Using the errata like this is quite literally the opposite of RaW. The errata for the Tallarn Ambush stratagem applies ONLY to that stratagem. Nothing more, nothing less.

The fact it has errata at all actually proves that you don't by default count as moving maximum distance.

It literally isn’t. It’s a logical application of relevant notes from a similar situation.

Using a similar deployment’s FAQ notes for guidance is literally not the opposite of RAW. It’s using the guidance we’ve been given, in a very similar way to how we’ve had to use the Hive Tyrant 1W Index FAQ to resolve other ‘dead but gets to shoit’ situations.

Adding literally to every sentence literally doesn’t add any weight to it either, FYI.

(The Tallarn FAQ wasn’t added to prove the inverse of anything, it was patched because people were claiming their Ambushing Russes could fire twice. Usually the same people who were claiming you had to move 0.0001” to fire twice, and we know how that panned out. So it doesn’t prove what you say in the slightest and strengthens the case for using it as precedent to patch the crashing flyer non-problem for those unable to be an agreeable opponent.)

The Tallern Ambush Errata can’t really be applied as an president for other abilities. I would agree if it was a FAQ answer, but as Errata it only applies to itself.

Well, I can't seem to find it either. Must've gotten it confused with something else.

I guess then the flyer explodes since it can't be considered to have moved it's minimum move. Don't deepstrike flyers I guess.

 skchsan wrote:
Well, I can't seem to find it either. Must've gotten it confused with something else.

I guess then the flyer explodes since it can't be considered to have moved it's minimum move. Don't deepstrike flyers I guess.

What flyer can deep strike though? I don't recall there being one, since you can only arrive from reserves if you have a rule that says you can.

Angelofblades wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Well, I can't seem to find it either. Must've gotten it confused with something else.

I guess then the flyer explodes since it can't be considered to have moved it's minimum move. Don't deepstrike flyers I guess.

What flyer can deep strike though? I don't recall there being one, since you can only arrive from reserves if you have a rule that says you can.

Certain stratagems allow you to place a vehicle in reserves (i.e. Cloudstrike). Elysian flyers have this innately.

Angelofblades wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Well, I can't seem to find it either. Must've gotten it confused with something else.

I guess then the flyer explodes since it can't be considered to have moved it's minimum move. Don't deepstrike flyers I guess.

What flyer can deep strike though? I don't recall there being one, since you can only arrive from reserves if you have a rule that says you can.

There are a few flyers that can do this. Crimson Hunters (and their Exarchs) and Hemlocks via CWE stratagem Cloudstrike, Elysian Valkyries (and variants) can do this too. Any of the narrative missions that use reserves have this issue, as do the Chapter Approved matched play missions Recon and Roving Patrol.

 BaconCatBug wrote:

Angelofblades wrote:

 skchsan wrote:
Well, I can't seem to find it either. Must've gotten it confused with something else.

I guess then the flyer explodes since it can't be considered to have moved it's minimum move. Don't deepstrike flyers I guess.

What flyer can deep strike though? I don't recall there being one, since you can only arrive from reserves if you have a rule that says you can.

There are a few flyers that can do this. Crimson Hunters (and their Exarchs) and Hemlocks via CWE stratagem Cloudstrike, Elysian Valkyries (and variants) can do this too. Any of the narrative missions that use reserves have this issue, as do the Chapter Approved matched play missions Recon and Roving Patrol.

Had this issue come up recently. Opponent wanted to burn CP to hold his 2 CHs and Hemlock in reserve and then DS them. I wasnt sure he could do it. He felt he could. I couldnt find a precedent that allowed for it so it was a friendly and we rolled on it. He won. Keeping them off the table and allowing them to DS in was frankly devestating to my army.

Riggs wrote:
GW has responded to my question on their community Facebook page. They conclude that because the vehicle arrives at the END of the movement phase and not in the phase itself, the minimum movement does not come into play. Hope this helps.

GW has responded to my question on their community Facebook page. They conclude that because the vehicle arrives at the END of the movement phase and not in the phase itself, the minimum movement does come into play. Hope this helps.

See, I can make things up too!

Until it's in an official FAQ or Errata, I don't care what some random GW intern on Facebook says.

Too bad you forgot gw has decided fb is also official. Case in point da jump etc

tneva82 wrote:
Too bad you forgot gw has decided fb is also official. Case in point da jump etc

No, it hasn't. The facebook page QUITE LITERALLY says it's not official. But let's not start this idiotic discussion again, shall we?

I might be showing my age here, but I remember a time when "asking GW" via email the same question 3 times produced 4 mutually exclusive answers. Until it's in in the actual FAQ or Errata, their response changes nothing.

It's an idiotic discussion because they state they are not official, not the channel, and you repeatedly decide to inaccurately change that.

So I asked a question to GW community FB page regarding this issue and how the GW responded with "end of phase" and "minimum move" after reading rigg's post.

He/she said that it must've been an opinion of whoever was answering that question and told me that the FB team has no say on determining the meaning of the rules - he/she emphasised that they may give an opinion, but it should not be taken as a rule source and that I should always discuss with opponent/TO to clear things up before the game begins.