Jawaballs at Mechanicon GT Game Four Battle Report BA vs Salamanders


Here is what turned out to be my favorite game of the tournament. I played against Tim, who had heard of me from my youtube videos and blog. He is the big goofy looking kid in the picture, the shorter one is Brad from my necrons game.

Me vs 1850 Salamanders:
2 LR Redeemer
Vulkan
2 five man TH/SS termies
2 10 man tacticals with Multi Melta and rhinos split into combat squads
1 3 man bike squad with MM
1 speeder with mm
librarian

Tim's army was pretty straight forward. A hard hitting, in your face army.

Mission was control table quarters
Deployment was table corners

Tim won the roll and passed me 1st turn. I deployed with my preds lined up 12" from center, with bikes lined up ready to support. I reserved 1 pred and a bike squad and a Rhino with Corbs. Oh, and I bought my scenic resin bases from www.jawaballsproductions.com go there for great resin bases at great prices. Also, I bought How to paint space marines from Jawaballs.

Turn One:
He left his bike squad poking out from behind his LR so I shot lascannons at it and killed one model. That aughta teach him. I attempted to shoot his LRs with assault cannon fire but could not reach. That wrapped up my turn.

On his turn, Tim decided to dip deep into the Kracker Barrel for some supreme cheeze. He had deployed his LRs sideways on the edge of his deployment zone, roughly 24" from my tanks. He then looked at me with a rye smile saying how he was surprised I did not notice this... He Then proceeded to rotate his LR with Vulkan towards my tank, then measured from the front of it, gaining about 4" in the rotation before moving at all. This would have him getting 4" from the rotation, 12" from the movement, 2" from the deployment, and you guessed it, 24" from the charge, assaulting my tanks turn 1.

I called cheeze, and told him that yes, I have seen that before but had expected better of him. (Laying on the shame hard here... but he deserved it.) He claimed it was legal because he can rotate the vehicle for "free" any number of times. More on this later.

So I shamed him, but let him do it. I rarely bust out the rulebook mid game and rely on my opponents honor. Besides, I thought I would let the Emperor decide if he was right through force of action, not words.

I told him to go ahead and move it as he sees fit, but remember, that would cause a terrain test for his vehicle, and the Emperor would grant me a 1. He rolls the die... and of course, a 1 is the result. Immobilized Land Raider. After that, he either felt too much shame, or was afraid to chance the terrain, so he did not try to move his other LR into it. He moved his bikes around to my left flank to try to get in on my tanks, and kept his tacticals in rhinos hiding behind land raiders. His shooting would hurt me though. He killed two of my bike squads. I stupidly left them exposed.

Turn Two:
Angered by his afrontery, and inspired by my faith in the Emperor, I told him that fate was not done with him yet. That cheeze would cost him in blood. I then pointed at his second Land Raider and dubbed it heretic, and condemned it to death by assault cannon. Death by assault cannon? Thats right. My preds could have fired on his bikers instead, but I decided that a show of strength was in order. I lined up my first predator to shoot its assault cannon at his other LR. 4 hits. Then I roll the dice to wound. Ass Cannons rend on a 6. That means I can roll an extra d3 and add it to my pen roll. I roll the 4 hits, and the Emperor granted me a 6. I pick up the rend, and hold it in front of Tim. He squirmed as I sang him some terrible 80s song, I forget which. I was using my Blood Dice. The die rolled around the palm of my hand and he eyeballed it like the rate from Ice Age after his acorn. Not looking at the table, only looking at his eyes, I rolled the die, letting the look on his face tell me the result. Yes, another 6. That was a penetration. 6Str, plus 6 on the pen, plus 3 for rending. 15 penetrates the armor. Without looking down, I pick up the die again, and proclaim his Land Raider exploded. Continuing my 80s song, I roll the die again... his eyes follow it around the palm of my hand, then down to the table... then they glaze over as the result is yet another Blood Drop. (a six). Yes. I not only exploded his Land Raider with an Assault Cannon, but I called the shot.

Land Raider Crusader/Redeemer: 60.00
Package of Blood Drop from Army Dice: 24.00
Look on Tim's face when I destroy his Land Raider with an Ass Cannon: Priceless

After scraping his jaw off the floor, and my resulting seizure from hysterical laughing, we carried on.

So the rest of my shooting would do nothing. One of my pods came down and it failed to hurt his other LR.

On his turn, he bailed out of his two LRs. His librarian led one squad of terminators into my gun fire. Vulkan would lead the other after Corbulo and my Pred that came in from the side.

Turn Three:
My shooting would devestate. I killed the last of his bikes, his Librarian and most of the terminators from the squad. My dread ignored his LR that was immobilized, knowing he could come back for it later, and went after a rhino and speeder that I did not want to escape. He layed the flamer over the speeder and back of the rhino, and shot the rhino. Destroying the speeder, and weapon destroying the rhino. Then I assaulted the rhino... hit it 7 times, and only immobilized it! Jeez. This sucked because I wanted to get that rhino away from the LR and its Multi melta.

On his turn, he would turn things around. With lucky ass cannon shooting of his own, and his LRs melta, he killed both of my dreads. But here is another thing that did not occur to me until just now. He had the Ass cannon on this Land Raider mounted on top. The legal mounting point for a LR Redeemer's Ass Cannon is on the front, giving it only a front arc. It is not Turret Mounted, so cannot shoot behind the tank. He shot my dread with it, that was standing behind the tank. Next time I see him, I will have to point that out. Regardless, my dreads were dead and this game was now back in action, because he also took out Corbulos Rhino and my pred that came in from the side.

Turn Four:
All he had left on the table were 4 combat squads, an imob LR, Vulkan and a few terminators. I had 2 preds, a bike squad, corbs and squad, 3 combat squads and a rhino.

I charge corbs into Vulkan and company. It is a tough fight and I kill a terminator but he wins over all. I take the opportunity to cut down his other terminator squad and get into position to contest table corners. I shoot up some of his tactical marines and we move on.

On his turn, he finished corbs and massacred on. He had to take corners of his own, and still had to knock out my pods. He focused fire on them and took them down, again, rending from behind with a front mounted Land Raider assault cannon.

Turn Five:
It was time for the chess match. First of all, I finished off Vulkan and the terminators with gun fire. A lucky Lascannon shot ending Vulkan. Then I shot up some tacticals with what I could, after moving my bikes and my rhino onto his table corners. Now I was contesting or owning all of them.

On his turn, he assaulted my bikes with a combat squad, but that was all he could do.

At the bottom of five, I contested three objectives, and owned one. He had none. I would roll the die, and of course, rolled a 2. Game over. Minor Victory Jawaballs.

Tim was a likable guy, and very apologetic about his cheeze. There were a couple of other points of contention during the game as well. For example. A terminator squad dual assaulted two vehicles. As I understand the rules, the units must declare their target before assault. 3 terminators declared the Pred, 2 terms and Vulkan declared the Rhino. Vulkan destroyed the rhino on his initiative, but then Tim insisted that the other two, who had moved in to take on the Rhino, could attack the pred. They were legally in range to do so, but had he clearly had them after the rhino. He also said that he technicly never declared they were attacking the rhino... Cheeze.

I wont get into any more because I dont want to blemish a good game and a fun guy. But he needs to seriously rethink some of his tactics.

The LR Rotation trick. As I understand the rules of movement, it is completely a cheat. It is the same as picking up a model, then placing it down 4 inches closer to the direction he wants to move, then measuring with the tape.

What he is supposed to do is measure from the tank BEFORE he moves it in any way. That means if he wishes to move towards my tanks, but the side is pointing that way, yes, he has to measure from the side. The rules say "As you move" you may rotate it any number of times. So sure, as he moved the LR he was free to then pivot it and move with the front towards my tanks. But the tank must stop 12" away from where it was, measured from the original position of the side. You cannot rotate a vehicle, then measure from the new position of its front. Even if rotating is considered "Free" it is still moving, which you cannot do until you measure.

Tim pointed out the "Free" rotation. That refers to a tank that intends to remain stationary. The rules says that it may rotate for free and still count as staying stationary for purposes of shooting.

At any rate, I will get a judgment from an offical on this ruling before any games with Land Raiders in Tournaments. I can deal with trying to assault my predator after declaring assault on a rhino, but cheating out an extra 4" of movement is just wrong.

Am I wrong? Was Tim's bonus 4" rotation move legal? Are you allowed to move a tank before measuring its distance? I will put up vid on this tomorrow.

Jawaballs

48 comments:

Aleksi Lehtio said...

What can I say, your oints on the rotating LR trick sound reasonable. Why can't GW just do the same. I like the idea that you measure the distance before rotation, but I'm sure there will be a lot of people who believe te rotation trick is legal.

Doug said...

As far as I can tell there is no "calling your attacks" or whatever in the beginning of an assault. You do determine who is engaged in an assault at the beginning, but by your description it is unclear what the situation was like in person.

If they were within 2" of a model within base-to-base then they are eligible to swing, true. If they were only in base to base with the Rhino, they can only engage the Rhino. If they were not in base-to-base, but within 2" of model that was in base-to-base with BOTH vehicles, then they can do whatever they want at their initiative.

It doesn't matter if the Rhino explodes before their initiative, because you only determine eligibility at the beginning of an assault.

Multi-assaults come up frequently in tournaments, it's page 41 of the rulebook.

As far as the land raider rotation bit, the rulebook again is pretty explicit about it.

A vehicle can pivot on its center-point for free as many times as it likes during the move. The rulebook does not say he has to specify how far he is moving in advance. Technically he could pivot in place and "gain" a few inches while still remaining stationary, if he wanted.

The "declaring your movement distance first" is the restriction on Tank Shocking and Ramming moves only.

jawaballs said...

The rule says to measure before you move. I dont recall saying he has to declare how far he is going, only that he has to measure from the model, before he moves it. That is up to the mover. And it says you can pivot as much as you want AS you move, not before. SO, you need to measure before you pivot. Once you have measured your distance, you are then free to pivot and move, but your maximum distance goes from the edge of your tank as it was before you rotate it.

At the very beginning of the assault entry, it says that a unit has to declare which unit it is assaulting. In this case, the term unit means model. A terminator has to declare if it is assaulting the rhino or predator.

To clarify, they were next to each other. His two termies that were attacking the rhino, were within 2" of a model that was attacking the predator. If you are required to "declare" which unit you are attacking, but then change your mind mid assault, then it is legal. Is that the case?

Xzandrate said...

The multiple charge is a tough one to judge one, but with two tanks I find it hard to believe.

The restriction on close combat is that when they move, they need to move in coherency with any previously moved models, be in base contact with an enemy model if possible.

So really, you'd need to have your two tanks within about 4 inches of each other, so shame on you. But keep in mind he'd have to move each of those models into base combat with something, so if he had a floating termie between the tanks as a coherency bridge, it's done wrong. That's the biggest mistake I see with multiple assaults.

Then like Doug said, at the beginning of the assaut phase, it's determined that models can only attack what they are in base contact with. So lost attacks.

jawaballs said...

Yah, I know, I was trying to get the rhino out of trouble, it ended up too close to the predator.

But lets look at this from a different perspective. Let the two units being assaulted be Vulkan and 5 chainsword space marines. And let Dante assault them with 4 chainsword SM and 1 Power Fist SM. Dante and the "Declare" that they are assaulting Vulkan. The rest of the marines declare that they are assaulting the chainsword marines. Dante and co. get furious charge, so they will be going first, all except for the PF who goes last.

Remember, I declared the fist and Dante on Vulkan. Dante rolls great, and Vulkan rolls terrible, and dies. The rest of Dante's group roll terrible and miss. So do Vulkans. Can the fist then attack Vulkan's chain sword marines? He is within 2" of a model that is base to base, but he declared his attacks on Vulkan at the beginning of the assault...

Thomas aka Goatboy said...

Assaults are determined in the beginning of the phase. If you are in base to base with someone, you can only assault that unit. If you are not, but within 2 inches of someone assaulting something else, you can assault that.

So he would have only been able to assault the dead rhino, because he was in base to base with that model at first. He should have declared the assault versus the other model, let all his guys move and cover the base to base, vulkan can't get to that model so he has to assault the pred etc. That way it would have been illegal.

It sounds like he was a douche for sure with all those tricks. Apologizing it and then doing it is shitty as hell and I wouldn't have called him a great player. The rearranging the guns on the tank, is another big no no. Hell he knew you from online and still pulled that crap. I know you had fun, and with some great rolling you were able to outlast his nonsense, but it is still nonsense that shouldn't have been thrown down.

As I read the movement thing, he did pull a legitimate dirty trick. It states that you can pivot at any time during the movement phase and you measure movement from the hull. And since the pivot doesn't count as moving, pivot then measure from the hull to get your distance seems correct. This happens in fantasy too as some monsters can get a free pivot before they move, meaning they can all of a sudden get a few extra inches of movement.

Cheesy as hell and really only works for LR's as they are an assault vehicle as well all around armor 14. Battlewagons can't do that haha.

Either I call shenanigans on that guy!!! May the space marine clothing washers over starch Vulkans Cloak!!!

And another thing, I am tired of seeing Vulkan Marines. Did he try to reroll the inferno cannon wounds? They aren't flamers damnit. I would think Lysander or Shrike would be a better option in this army. Fleeting terminators.

jawaballs said...

Thanks for the insight goatboy!

But again, the free pivot thing applies to two things:

A vehicle that is remaining stationary may pivot for free as if it did not move for the purposes of shooting.

Or, a vehicle may pivot for free AS it moves. The term AS implies that it has already measured it's movement and has begun movement, which are the steps for moving a model. Is that making sense or am I on crack? :)

Doug said...

Read the movement rules on page 11 of the rulebook, and then the vehicle additions on page 57. It is extremely explicit that you do not have to declare your total movement, you can turn without affecting your move distance, and that you can measure and then change your mind if you want. It's really VERY clear.

Nothing in the vehicle section contradicts the core movement rules EXCEPT for Tank Shock and Ramming.

jawaballs said...

And yes, the guy was a nice guy. Just playing cheeze. The kicker is that he won best sportsman. I didn't see fit to dock him sportsmanship for employing tactics he probably found on every ones favorite Truth blog and believed were legal. But I don't know if there was even a line in the sportsmanship scoring rubric for assessing cheeze. I think by the rubric he scored full points. I forget.

jawaballs said...

Doug, again, I didnt say you have to declare your movement before you move. Once you have measured, you can go 1 or maximum inches. I said that you can move a maximum from where your vehicle was before you moved. While rotating is free, it is still moving, and you have to measure before you move.

If your LR is pointing North, and you wish to move it East, you lay the tape down extending from the LRs east side. The tape remains stationary. You may then rotate your LR and move it up to 12", based on the position of the tape.

I know what the rules say. They say you measure your movement from the model, in any direction you want. THEN you move it. The rules also say that AS you move, you may rotate as much as you want.

The questions here are:

What do you do first, measure or move?

While rotating is free, is it still considered moving?

When do you move the Land Raider? Before or After you measure?

In most cases this irrelevant. In the land raider, it is stealing/cheezing an extra 4" of movement which will allow your boys inside to assault something they would normally not be allowed to.

John said...

I don't see how the pivot thing is that complicated. I'm with Mr. Balls on this one. You measure your maximum distance you are allowed to move, choose a path, move that path, and during that movement you pivot your tank to your hearts content so you can get past things and whatnot. After you've moved you will now be facing the direction you want, or the direction you thought you wanted at least.

I simply don't believe that something as basic as movement was written in a way where you could gain an advantage, as oppose to extra rules which explicitly are suppose to give you advantages. For instance I still believe that the LR can shoot one shot after popping smoke. If it can drive around and shoot without anyone being *in* it, why should it need LoS?

The Ass Cannon (*snicker*) being mounted silly to gain an advantage, buuuh. Mine will be properly mounted, as will the two on my two Razorbacks :) Now I want to ditch work and run home and paint :)

The assault is tricker. Do you explicitly say, for each model, that I assault this unit, or do you declare that your unit attacks this (or those) unit(s)? That makes all the difference really. Then I would assume that things happen in initiative order and all things during that initiative happens simultaneously. If you only do unit on unit declaring you should be able to select legal targets at will.

You describe the guy as being nice, and you also put a picture of him up on the page. Sure he pulled a few bad moves, but I think that leading by example is far better than acting all high and mighty. I understand the angry feelings some have here, but I think that it is better to show younger/"cheasier" players how to act and how to interpret rules and most importantly to have fun.

If Mr. Balls (*snicker*) opponent is reading this, keep on being a nice guy and be inspired by the Jawa. We've all tried to pull something at one time or another in our lives, and if we live and learn and become better it's all good.

Speaking of rules. I've asked about the dreads before, but I will just have to ask one more time. You say you go seven attacks. I assume that a Death Company Dread gets 3 attacks (for having 2 CCW), and then +1 for charge, and +D3 for Death Company. Which gives you 4+D3 attacks on the charge. Am I wrong or do you simply roll very well on these rolls? Seriously not trying to trolling or anything. I just seem to have trouble wrapping my head around the codex :) If they release a new edition paper codex I might just buy it and build an army :)

Warhammer 39,999 said...

I don't see what the problem is with moving (but maybe I don't understand what he did). What's the difference if he pivots and then moves, or moves and then pivots? I would say pivoting at the begining or end of a move is fine. Your argument is that he needs to measure his distance and then move--but if he were to measure from the side, move 12", then pivot, how is that any different than if he had pivoted, then measured and moved?


As for the second "cheese" where he declared a split charge--I'd have to look at the rulebooks on this (since I'm so mired in 3rd & 4th edition rules). However, my understanding is that models don't declare attacks until they actually strike (at initiative value). Since the rhino no longer existed when it came time for the termies to assault, why shouldn't they be allowed to strike another available model within their range?

Doug said...

The rulebook says that you can change your facing at any time without affecting the distance you can cover. In that case, he could just as easily measure first from the front of the land raider, then turn and still move that full distance in a different direction.

I mean, the words verbatim from the rulebook are "models can turn in any direction without affecting the distance they are able to cover."

In the vehicles section it says "Turning does not reduce a vehicle's move."

What you're describing is that he could move further if he went straight than if he turned.

He could rotate in place and remain "stationary," and then change his mind and move. That exact scenario is actually described in the rulebook as a possible move!

I'd chalk it up as a lesson learned and be wary of sideways landraiders during deployment in the future.

Sort of falls under the same category as deploying an empty dedicated troop transport 6" away from the table edge in dawn of war. Then during turn 1, you move the troops 6" onto the table, they embark on the transport, and drive the transport 12" forward.

Sneaky, but not particularly useful UNLESS it catches your opponent unawares. Forewarned is forearmed.

Coolhand said...

ok, so the way I read it is like Jawaballs...

p11. 'As you move the models in a unit, they can turn to face in any direction, without affecting the distance they are able to cover.'

clearly saying not affecting the distance.

p57. 'pivoting on the spot alone does not count as moving.'

this is for shooting puposes.. if you pivot AND move it is part of your move so you need to measure from the original starting position, then pivot freely AS you move.

quite clear I think.

Doug, seems you are confused by what Jawaballs was contesting. not that he should have declered how far he was going to move, but it's how far he is ALLOWED to move.

CH

Jwolf said...

The problem he had with the Land Raider is that you rotate on the center, not pivot on a corner. With the width and length of a Land Raider, he could gain 1.5" inches, but 4 inches is incorrectly moved (Land Raiders are 4" wide and 7" long). I would not take this additional distance; my rule is measure displacement and then change facing, but as a player I'd only ridicule someone who used this little cheat, not stop everything and demand a judge's input. As a judge, I would move him back.
And regardless, gaining 1.5" is questionable, gaining 4" is cheating, as the Land Raider would have to be 8" longer than it was wide to rotate around the center and be 4" closer.

The assault thing sounds kosher. Attacks are resolved in initiative order, so when Vulkan blows up the Rhino, the Terminators that were in BtB with the Rhino can assault something else if they are within 2" of a model in BtB with something else. Now that might be hard, with the requirement that you get into BtB with a model if possible, but I'd have to see it on the table to be sure. Additionally, you only declare a charge against 1 target; you can assault any other units that you can wrap into while making legal assault moves. This particular thing is one of the most commonly done wrong items for veteran players (green players get everything wrong, and this, too).

Doug said...

Well, terminators have fairly large bases, and only the tiniest smidge of that base needs to be within 2" of an access point, which could easily be where he got the 4" number from.

It's gaming the system for sure, but in my mind it's not really against the rules. Just so happens it's really only tactically advantageous for the land raider due to its size, all-around armor value, and assault vehicle rules.

Tim Hudak said...

*Ehrm*

Hello all angry and not so angry people! My name is Tim Hudak, Chris's opponent.

Besides the fact that it was a GREAT game, and tha I would love to have another, more legit shot at Chris, I do have a few things to say:

Great Game. From my perspective, luck really looked down upon me 1st turn and forced me to play the game in my deployment zone; something my army cannot handle. Koudos for Chris for penetrating me with the Ass. Cannon!

As per the LR movement rules; Chris is right. Besides the fact that I never even got to use the tactic (Heh, the big 1!), my interpretation of the rules was incorrect. You can only pivot during movement, not prior to; period. So my mistake, sorry if anyone was offended, and I tried to be a good sport about it, since I felt that perhaps I was incorrect a few minutes after the fact.

Secondly, I need to have the BBoR in front of me in order to actually have an educated debate about this! Alas, later when I have one, I will reply more adequately. At this point however, as I recall, I'm not sure if declaring assaults also means declaring attacks (I guess you could say this was the point we couldn't agree on!); especially since they are resolved in initiative order. That was simply my interpretation at the time: Hestan destroyed the first Rhino before the TH/SS Termies could swing; thus they directed the I1 attacks after the I5 attacks at the other vehicle since they were easily in range. In all honestly, and seriousness, that was my interpretation of the rules (and I think Chris will agree that the judges couldn't really help us!). He contested initially, which is completely understandable! I offered to look it up, but we decided not to. In this ruling though, it is kinda grey. I do apologize if I am incorrect after all the dust settles; no cheating intended!

Chris you neglected to post our assaulting a unit in cover dispute! What was your final ruling on that after consulting our bible?!

Tim Hudak said...

Oh I almost forgot! My raider with the assault cannon on the top! Wow.

I would never, in any circumstance, purposely for the reason of cheating, model one of my tanks to purposely abuse the 360 degree arc of fire. The tank is a forge world model, and lacks the hull port that other raiders have to place the assault cannon in; extra cool detail and such goes in there instead!

That being said, I do recall shooting the Raider's assault cannon out of its arc of fire. Believe it or not, but Chris is the FIRST person to EVER call me on this (Ive been to my fair share of tournaments in my 7 years of play as well!). And he is absolutely correct, I did, right there cheat. I completely forgot *normal* assault cannons can't shoot behind them on a LR.. that would mean shooting into your own tank.. which would be stupid! So yea, my bad on that one (this time.. I think it's pretty obvious you were right!).

We shall see each other again on the field of battle, I guarantee it! Next time you won't walk away the victor!

Cheers,

Tim

Doug said...

Not trying to beat a dead horse here, but I attempted to sketch a roughly proportionate image of a 4" x 7" vehicle rotating at the beginning and end of its movement, moving only 12" from the hull.

http://i35.tinypic.com/aeweaa.jpg

I hope this explains why "when" the vehicle pivots is kinda irrelevant. Since a land raider is longer on one side than the other, it's always going to pick up a few inches for the purpose of disembarking if it rotates.

Even if it stays perfectly still, it will still get a few inches from it. It's a rectangle. That's not really cheating.

Hope this shows what I was driving at. The center point of the vehicle remains perfectly still during the rotation. Page 57 says that "turning does not reduce a vehicle's move."

Jason said...

Regarding the assaulting, see page 41. "Models that were engaged with just one of the enemy units at the beginning of the combat (before any model attacked) must attack that unit." Simple enough. Base to base with a unit means you can only attack that unit in that combat.

"Models that were engaged with more than one enemy unit at the beginning of the combat (before any model attacked) may split their attacks freely between those units. Declare how they are splitting their attacks immediately before rolling to hit."

So, if you aren't in base combat, but rather, within 2" of someone who is in contact with either unit, you can wait to call what you are attacking until right before you roll.

As for the pivoting tank, you can use the tank shocking rules to see partial intent. You turn the tank before measuring, giving you extra distance as well. I think the intent here carries over to other vehicle movement rules. Yes, it's not tank shocking, but tank shocking is pivoting and then moving, giving the tank an extra few inches on the tank shot.

I think the wording is clear enough, and the intent is also clear, and there are rules that support this line of thinking.

CJ said...

Sounds like there was a lot of misinterpretation of the rules and a modelling mishap which I believe is not intended as a cheat.

@ Doug Well the difference here is that a pivoting landraider will never get a extra 4"move that would require him to pivot around something else then his centre point. It's simple mathematics the maximum distance he can gain this way is 3,5" (centre point to front) - 2"(centre point to side)= 1,5" anything more then that means you are pivoting around a point that's not your centre and is a CHEAT!

Cheers CJ

p.s. Yes it states in the rule book that the pivoting is around the centre explicitly. Wheeling is not allowed for this purpose!

Flekkzo said...

I think Tim sounds like a nice guy. 'Nough said. Also the assault rules sounds crystal clear to me now.

But as far as the Ass. Cannon (I can't stop loving that name!) goes, I want image evidence:) I.e. can we see a pic of your Land Raider because at least I am curious of how it looks. Not your fault FW and GW didn't synch their stuff up. I'd easily make the same mistake looking at it.

Thomas aka Goatboy said...

Thanks for the reply Tim - the Ass cannon on the raider thing makes sense due to the lack of the space on the FW model. No worries on that.

But even with some of the wonky bits the game was still fun in Jawa's eyes means that you are not a "beardy" player as some would say.

And Jawa we need to get a game in sometime. heh. If some of the rumors of the changed in BA are true, you should be happy with tanks that won't get stuck when their engines get over zealous.

Oanue said...

Baal Predator
-$50


Cost to put that Baal Predator on the table

-150pts


Blowing up a Land Raider with an assault cannon and calling it while singing an 80's tune

-Priceless

jawaballs said...

Tim I didnt mention the bike assault thing because I didnt want this to be gang up rant against you! Besides, that was resolved with a simple look in the book.

The situation was, I had two models in difficult terrain, one in front of the other. He was assaulting them. The front of the lead bike was sticking out of terrain. He could reach that one easily without entering terrain, but the rules of assault mean that his next model has to try to reach the next one if it can. That means that even though he could reach the first one without a difficult terrain test, he still had to make one since the next model would have to make a test to reach the second bike. (Tim was argueing that he did not need to make a terrain test.)

But that was resolved easily enough.

Goatboy, it is all Jwolf's fault. We were supposed to play at Bolscon and the pairings got messed up! We can point fingers directly at him. :) I doubt I will make it to Adepticon, so the next chance we are going to get to play is Bolscon next year. Unless you all go to Gamesday.

Docrailgun said...

The whole point of being able to picot during a move is to make sure that a model can get through tight spaces. People sometimes forget that like true line of sight, there true movement as well. If a model (like a Rhino or a LR) can't fit in between two terrain pieces and it doesn't want to (or can't) go into that terrain... it can't go. So if there's an immbolized Rhino just a smidge less than another Rhino's width next to an impassible hill, a second Rhino can't go through there. The model has to be physically able to move where it needs to be moved. GW really ought to say "push your model along the table", because that's what they want... not so much picking up a model and putting it back down in a new spot after measuring.

Michael said...

good bat rep jawa, sounded like a fun game!

all the salient points have been hashed so I'll leave them alone.

i'm saddened by your stab at Stelek. I know he's unpopular among some of the 40k blogosphere, but taking blind stabs at someone is lame. he advocates strong lists and good tactics, and is the first to call out d-bag play. i'd suggest you read his blog if you don't, he has lots of good ideas in that crazy head of his, if you can see through the non-tactic stuff

jawaballs said...

It wasnt a stab at Stellek because no offense was intended. More of a friendly poke. I've enjoyed reading his blog myself and he has posted no gripe with me, in fact, compliments. (as much as a compliment as he will give.) However, guys try to use some of the stuff he preaches as if it is law. They use his end product without the background to how he got there. I can almost guess sometimes when my opponents have been reading Yes the Truth Hurts based on the shenanigans they are trying. :)

I think even he will admit that some of what he writes is not on the up and up and I dont think he would take offense to this.

Michael said...

point taken.

i agree that some people use the end result without a grasp of the thought process that created the list. same goes for all net lists really.

i don't know about the up and up comment, I don;t know the guy personally, but like I said, from his posts, it is obvious he is about fair play with hard lists.
one example being the PoTMS shooting after popping smoke. he called it the BS that it is. Insert your own house rule here, because I'm sure people will argue that one into the ground. But I am of the group that think it is a lame move.

point of story is this, keep winning despite what cheese-heads thow at you!

pissclams said...

First the LR smoke/PotMS and shooting post.
Now the extra movement on LR's after pivoting.

These are declared as cheese !!! and cheats!!! By Jawa...
yet its acceptable to pull out the "draw a line out from vehicals corners to determine vehical facings hiding behind a piece of terrain to get a +3 cover save"..or the "model sniping" to avoid melta gunners during tank shocks.

All acceptable Easter Eggs squeezed out of the rules to gain some sort of benefit.

Whats difficult to stomach is our competitive gamers in our group calling out people as cheese mongerers to each others face or in there blogs and then either using the same tactic or equivalent easter eggs against the unsuspecting casual gamers.

Im a casual gamer having only attended 3 local tournys, I however love playing against competitve gamers in our group because it ups my game lot.

Its apparent to me that legal tactics get called cheese and cheats when our competitive gamers experiance these suprises for the first time and then deem them acceptable when it suits them.

Gonewild said...

What concerns me the most about this post was the fact that there was a judge present and so many discrepancies went unanswered.
At least you two competitors kept in perspective.

jawaballs said...

Jeez Ed, got beef? Seriously, I like and respect you too much to take that too personally. Should I read it as any thing more then just a guy calling a buddy out?

Do I need to make another post on Facing and Tank Shock? I have brought up both right here and elsewhere and am confident that the way I play them are accepted as the way they are intended to be played. Not as cheeze. I take advantage of no loop hole in either of those examples. There is a fine line between cheezing and good tactical decisions. Tank shocking the back half of a squad so that you don't make contact with the Meltagun is just smart. Why charge that model if you can avoid it. Why should you get to Death or Glory with a Meltagun that is 10 inches away? Or even 2 or 3 for that matter... Only models that a vehicle comes in contact with can DoG. I even go as far as to offer DoG to models that are forced to move by being within 1" of my tank when I finish moving even though I don't contact them. If I was cheezing it, I could say that only the model my tank physically would touch can DoG. The way I resolve it sounds pretty fair and open minded to me.

Moving a model before you measure, then measuring from the new position is just cheezing and defines cheeze because guys that do it know it is the product of rules wording wonkiness which they can get away with. There is no clear answer either way.

Vehicle Facing? It is the position of your model that determines which armor value of my tank that it fires on. If you are in the side facing of my predator, you get to shoot at armor value 11. Nothing we can do about it. If that side is obscured 50%, I get a cover save. There is no abuse of rule wording there my friend. That is just how it works. Am I wrong? I will open up a new blog post for your benefit on this one.

Cheezers take advantage of wonky rule wording to get an advantage, like PoTMS and Smoke which I agree they can get away with but call it cheeze because it abuses a loop hole, moving (pivoting) a LR before measuring and Twin Linking redeemer cannons. By the way, after 30 comments I still don't see a clear answer in one direction or the other on the pivot discussion.

Smart tactical players know how the rules work and use them when their opponents don't rather then exploiting loop holes.

Also, knowing the rules and explaining them to some one who is ignorant of them is doing you a favor man. I even put up a nice post with diagrams to help explain facing and see if my understanding was wrong. It was not. I thought that you left that game satisfied that the rules were resolved appropriately, if a bit annoyed. I guess you still object?

If you think I am wrong, show me. I will be the first to admit it. If you got problems with how some one plays, open up a discussion, don't come drop passive aggression on a blog post. "Hey Jawa, I'm still not convinced on Vehicle Facing... think we can talk about it some more?" I discussed this issue at length with Tim before posting on it. We both agreed it was cheeze. Don't I deserve the same respect from you? If I am not playing the game right, I need to know. Educate me.

As I write this, I do admit a little cheeze in how I tank shock, to get back to that topic. I will aim a tank shock so I clip a single model on the end of a squad and stop there. Thus making contact only with that model, and having that model be the only one that can Death or Glory. Is that abusing a loop hole and being a cheezer or just being smart? Another topic for a post tomorrow!

And I hardly consider you a casual player. You come to play hard, with tough lists, and can compete to win any tournament that I can. This weekend at BFS I consider you, Danny Internets and Rob Baer the top contenders.

Fury said...

Go Jawaballs!!

So here is how I see the moving and pivoting issue. So if a vehicle is allowed to move 12 inches maximum how can it end up 14" away? It doesn't matter how you lawyer the rules on pivoting or turning during the move, the vehicle can only end 12" away from where it started. Any other clever interpretation of the rules that will let you end up farther away will break the maximum move rule and is so null and void. Done.

The declaring attacks thing, well that's the mistake Tim made, he declared. There was no need to do so until the initiative based attack was up for roll. I can see the confusion with an opponent declaring "model x is attacking model y", but then model y dies first and "so now x is going to attack something else instead"... It shouldn't have been declared in the first place.

As for this other stuff, I agree with you Jawa, there is no clever interpretation involved here at all. With tank shock, the rulebook clearly says "one of it's models in the vehicles path" so if you run over 1 or 9 models in a unit the others don't get the option of DoG, period.
And vehicle facing? There is even a nice picture on pg60 to illustrate just how to draw those armor facing lines from corner to corner. How is this even an issue?

I hope all this internet crap hasn't soured what was described as a fun game with a good opponent.

I'd love to see some more of the videos of Mechanicon when you get a chance! And I just picked up some of the resin bases from the JawaForge to help support the Jawababy! Congrats!

Questions,
So what was your Final list exactly? It seems different then what is listed as the "final Mechanicon list" is why I ask.
Are you playing this weekend too? Same list, or making any more changes?

-Fury

pissclams said...

"got beef" yea i guess.
PoTMS and smoke are wonky
Vehicle pivot is wonky
Tank shock Model sniping is wonky
Vehical facing and 3+ cover is wonky

there all easter eggs and exploits as far as im concerned. Do the rules support them...yup they do. Are they RAI... nah i dont think so.

These gems among others get discovered during tournaments and then tossed in during casual games. I cant tell you how many times ive heard that "so and so did this and that..during some sort of tourny so im going to use it now"

Now im not going to call someone out for using these exploits because they are supported by RAW and i know you can go into full blown rant on how you would be a fool not to use certain questionable rule exploits,you can fully explain in detail to us how the rule works. Thats not my beef. My beef is Jawa, that i respect you way to much not to call you out when you use your Blog to call out others as exploit abusers and cheesers for using the same sort of rules bending that i see going on at out club.

What i would prefer is some honesty here and that honesty is not declaring people as cheaters when they are simply using exploits that are supported by RAW.

jawaballs said...

I see your point Ed, and I will be more careful about how I word my posts in the future.

I have to say that I still don't see a relationship between Tank Shock/Facing and smoke/pivot. The first two are simply RAW. You may not like them, and it may be cheezy to employ them, but they are rules with clear cut resolutions. The second two rely on contradicting rules that say they are both legal and illegal. People know that, and use them any way.

pissclams said...

i dont consider poorly worded rules as clear cut resolutions as is in the case of DoG or Vehical facing and 3+ covers .Im also not a fan of the pivot or smoke trick either.
I lump rules contradictions and poorly worded rules in the same pile because they usually come to the same result, which is some sort of rules exploitation giving the user an in-game edge.
But that my opinion i guess.

BTW... i luv ya chris, so i appologize for sounding confrontational its not my intent. I know these are things you and i could easily discuss in person just as pationatly(sp)

jawaballs said...

I know man, thats why I didnt just delete the comment. Usually when dudes are just posting to be jerks or unhelpful, I delete them.

Ryanjsmall said...

Ah i love a good debate.

I have never faced a landraider and i will keep all of this in mind if i do come up against one. I wish the rulebook stated a few things a bit more clearly.

The assault thing i think was fair but would have been different if they were models with the same initiative and decared that they were splitting their attacks and then changed his mind after doing half of them.

The same thing seems to keep coming up tho. lack of detail in the rulebook. Why dont GW have a online live rulebook FAQ running to clear up these things?

Jawaballs and fellow gamers could you clear 2 things for me. Im not trying to hyjack the thread or anything but am new to playing at a club. A guy at my club was trying to tell me you can only use one psychic power a phase which i think is bull am i correct? and the space marine codex states that the psychic hood has a 24" range yet the blood angels codex doesnt give a range? Do blood angels have unlimited range with they psychic hood? Cheers

CJ said...

If I recall correctly the blood Angels still have the old Psychic hood which negates Psychic powers with a LD roll off between the to psychers. This old one does not have any range and their for hasn't got any specified.

Secondly unless you have a wargear option that allows you to use more then one psychic power a turn you can't use 2 powers in the same turn. it's clearly stated in the Psycher section of the rulebook.

"Psycher can use one psychic power per player turn"

this does however mean that you can use things like warptime in the opponents turn if you where a chaos player.

if you have wargear for to powers you can still only use one power that is considered a psychic shooting attack since a normal model can only shoot once. And if you want to use a force weapon you can also only use only that. also stated in the Psychic section of the rulebook

hope this clears things up for you.

Cheers CJ

Ryanjsmall said...

Thanks CJ

Yeh Mephistons page says he can use one of each power + his force weapon per turn but the guy was saying that the 2 powers used in assault, i could only use 1. Me thinks he preyed upon my newbieness.

CJ said...

Yes indeed his arguments are not valid at all. Seems like a push made by a more experienced player who got his ass kiced by the en kid on the block and demanded some immoral pay-back.

you are more then allowed to use a power and your Force weapon in the same assault phase. the rules are clear that you ca use 1 power per player turn and added the mephiston rule can use his force weapons as well. nothing limits these 2 being used in the same phase.

Cheers CJ

jawaballs said...

Mephiston can actually use all three of his powers per turn. He is one of the sepcial exceptions. He can use his Wings of Sanguinius to get into combat, then he can use Might of Heroes and Transfixing Gaze in your assault phase, THEN you can use them again in his! Mephiston is one of the most powerful psychers in the imperium and his abilities should reflect that. Sadly though, he only had 3 crappy powers.

Ryanjsmall said...

Wow good point jawaballs. I've always forgot to use those powers on my enemies turn. Cheers. Only problem I find with him is the missing invun save.

jawaballs said...

An invul would make him supreme! Just keep him in a squad and he should not die. He will go first against most enemies, and should kill all but the toughest before they can hit back.

Quaddle said...

Man alive. Headed to the Con of the North in less than two weeks and just now I realize my buddies BA librarians have an unlimited range psychic hood. I'm taking along a 140 Pt Librarian in Terminator army to try and get within 24" of the lashes and tyranid lance lasers and here he can buy an unlimited range for 120. Oh the sweet poetry. You're my boy Jawaballs. Uttini friend. Uttini. Congratulations on the little Jawa by the way. Hope alien desert scavenger and mother are both well.

Steve said...

Not to beat a dead horse here but back to the LR movement. lets say in my movement phase i rotate my LR, which by the way i don't use in my BA army, but just for the sake of argument. So i rotate my LR, which is free and doesn't count as moving, then go about my business of moving the rest of my units. i then come back and decide to move my LR. would this be illegal? i would measure from the front of the LR as it had already been turned. i do agree that is cheesy but maybe not exactly illegal

Archeteuthis said...

and I will beat this dead horse again..

We have house ruled and it has been going on for a couple of years now...

that to avoid any issues with funky vehicle moves is to measure movement distances from the center of the vehicle.

Yes its changing of the actual rules.. but it removes any of that extra inches crap.

Hope that helps

jawaballs said...

Necromancy! :)

I am at peace with how Land Raiders and rotations work. Especially since I will be playing one for the first time this weekend! Oh yes, I will be taking full advantage of the extra bit of movement. Oh yes...

Post a Comment