How far did you just wheel?!?!?!?!?

Post by **Dyvim tvar** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 7:46 pm

In every game of Warhammer I have ever played or seen played, nobody really takes correct measurements of the movement it takes a unit to wheel. There is always some level of estimation involved. Bending of measuring sticks or tape measures is the normal course. Sometimes people use "wheel templates" manufactured by GF9 or other companies. But they would only be accurate for units of a particular width (the wider the unit, the more movement it takes to wheel) and I don't even know what unit width they are calibrated for. I have also seen some pretty heated disagreements about how much movement it takes to execute a particular wheel when it can make a difference between a failed charge and a successful charge.

So how much movement does it take to complete a wheel? I spent a few minutes and set up an Excel spreadsheet to do the calculation, and the result is below. The table indicates the distance (in inches) it takes to complete a wheel based on the width of the unit and the angle of the wheel in degrees (angles are listed in 5-degree increments. Print out this table and you can use it in conjunction with a protrator to measure your angles (the cheap plastic kind you used back in elementary school would work fine) and you can measure the movement of your units (and those of your opponents ...) much more accurately.

Little horus · Post by **Little horus** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 7:52 pm

Here's something that I've found quite useful.

I printed it to the right scale and laminated it, and will be able to get all wheeling done correctly in future games.

Post by **Dyvim tvar** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 7:59 pm

Nice! Printing to correct scale would be critical.

Post by **Dalamar** » Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:58 pm

oooh, i love this template

Pops71408 · Post by **Pops71408** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 1:51 am

guy"s, this is SO increadibly usefull! Sheer brillance on your part. Thanks!

Rabidnid · Post by **Rabidnid** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 4:21 am

Hummm....

I used to play a game called DBM, in mesurements to the millimetre were normal. Mesusrement isn't critical enough for me in this game to resort to these sorts of tables and templates. The only thing I do occasionally use is a piece of movement tray plastic 25 mm wide and 75 mm long with one end chopped off at 45 degrees. It makes who is an isn't in LOS or on a unit's flank much simpler to calculate.

Post by **Dalamar** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 7:59 am

Wheeling is the manoeuvre that is done "approximately" in warhammer.
I was trying to figure out a tool to measure them but this template will work just fine until then

Akyro · Post by **Akyro** » Sat Aug 29, 2009 6:08 pm

I find using such a template is often difficult to nearly impossible. There is always somthing in the way, some piece of scenery or another unit.

I made my own wheel rulers like these:

Sure you need one for each different unit width but it's not too bad.

Swab · Post by **Swab** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 6:01 am

I use the litko ones. In friendly games it doesn't make that big of a difference unless it is down to the inch. In the tournament setting, I use those and ask my opponent to do the same since it is much more accurate. For like 10 bucks, you get the wheel for 20mm 5,6 and 7 wide and the 25mm 5,6,7 wide.

Post by **Calisson** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 9:27 am

Hey guys, I realized something:
the nice tables made by Dyvim Tvar and template used by Little Horus and ruler made by Akyro all have a major default:
they are valid only for a unit which has a single rank...

Have a look to the BRB, on the wheeling section:
it is clearly written that the distance to be considered moved by the unit is the distance moved by the model which is the fartest away from the pivot.

When the unit is 1 rank deep, it is the model on the front and all spreadsheets and templates above are right.

When the unit has more than a rank, you shoud measure the distance moved by the opposite model on the rear, not on the front.

If the unit is wider than deep, the difference is usually neglected (however, the thread was about exact distances, not approximate distances).
If the unit is deeper than wide, and the "congo lines" are extreme examples, then the difference is tremendous.

Phierlihy · Post by **Phierlihy** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:23 pm

I have never seen anyone ever measure their movement from the rear-opposite corner of the pivot. Gods that would just make infantry blocks even slower...

Lost to oblivion · Post by **Lost to oblivion** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 2:49 pm

Calisson wrote:Hey guys, I realized something:
the nice tables made by Dyvim Tvar and template used by Little Horus and ruler made by Akyro all have a major default:
they are valid only for a unit which has a single rank...

Have a look to the BRB, on the wheeling section:
it is clearly written that the distance to be considered moved by the unit is the distance moved by the model which is the fartest away from the pivot.

When the unit is 1 rank deep, it is the model on the front and all spreadsheets and templates above are right.

When the unit has more than a rank, you shoud measure the distance moved by the opposite model on the rear, not on the front.

If the unit is wider than deep, the difference is usually neglected (however, the thread was about exact distances, not approximate distances).
If the unit is deeper than wide, and the "congo lines" are extreme examples, then the difference is tremendous.

When I was in the military we marched and had to pivot much like a wheel when we turned corners. you still would measure from the front rank as the rest of the ranks "Fan" in order to accommodate the turn. The rear rank wouldn't run to the side to catch the new formation. Your rear corner measurement is correct if you're moving a box but this is a column of troops that is fluid. Also I'd like to point out that we, in the military, could change the facing of an entire formation without losing any speed, whereas in Warhammer you lose distance marched. Turning is where all the speed was lost.

If you have a mac print the template at 102% after saving it to your documents. This yields the perfect scale.

Lost

Post by **Dyvim tvar** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:17 pm

Calisson wrote:Have a look to the BRB, on the wheeling section:
it is clearly written that the distance to be considered moved by the unit is the distance moved by the model which is the farthest away from the pivot.

You are correct. I've actually noted this in the past in a discussion of the "fanatic slingshot" where a goblin player will claim that it only takes 1" of movement to swing around the tail end of a night goblin unit deployed in single file.

phierlihy wrote:I have never seen anyone ever measure their movement from the rear-opposite corner of the pivot. Gods that would just make infantry blocks even slower...

It would have the greatest effect on units that are narrow and deep -- bretonnian cavalry in particular. Or on the aforementioned single-file night goblins ...

Red... · Post by **Red...** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 4:32 pm

we, in the military, could change the facing of an entire formation without losing any speed, whereas in Warhammer you lose distance marched.

I suspect that your unit was trained in marching quite a bit though (if my own time at UOTC was anything to go by...), which would have allowed you to become very experienced and skilled at marching in time and performing semi-complex manoeuvres with no loss in speed.

In contrast, I suspect that your average unit of ugly goblins or festering rats doesn't do much parade square drill. Even the lofty elite forces of elves and chaos warriors probably don't do too much of it. When they march in column its unlikely to be in lockstep together and it does seem quite feasible fluffwise that trying to wheel would slow them down a bit.

Cathel · Post by **Cathel** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:03 pm

Lost to Oblivion is right, same opinion about wheeling and we did not march much in the navy.

About the more or less complex manoeuvres:
Todays military does not need that stuff unless on the parade ground.
If you look back (e.g. napoleonic wars) you would need much more complex stuff than done in the rulebook. The square comes to mind, to fend of cavalry attacks. And in close combat you would rely very much on keeping formations e.g. a shieldwall to minimize losses.
So I guess that almost all armies drill formations not to look neat but to survive. (well gobbos, BOC and skaven might be an exeption)

Post by **Dalamar** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:09 pm

Turn slows them down because the silly command group has to run to the new front while the rest of the unit waits for the buggers

Red... · Post by **Red...** » Thu Sep 17, 2009 5:14 pm

So I guess that almost all armies drill formations not to look neat but to survive.

Nah, it's only armies during selected periods. Drilling for modern armies only really began in the 16th and 17th centuries (with a bit in the 15th too), by which time guns were becoming the dominant force in combat and other types were becoming obsolete.

Ancient armies (Romans etc) did of course do lots of drill too.

But your average high medieval infantry man would have done next to no drill at all.

That's why generals in the 16th and 17th century who re-introduced drill for their soldiers were so successful - suddenly you had rag tag armies being ripped to shreads by more disciplined foes. The Swiss pike wall which helped to herald in the new era of drilling etc (mid 15th century) was immensely successful for that very reason.

High medieval with its mix of cavalry, traditional infantry, gunpowder infantry and cannons seems about the right time parallel for warhammer. It does seem unlikely to me, therefore, that warhammer armies would be drilling enough to carry out manoeuvres as complex as wheeling without losing speed...

Phierlihy · Post by **Phierlihy** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:30 pm

Nothing like watching a regiment of Ghouls practicing their marching in the morning... And those Saurus - I bet teaching that Stegadon how to stay in formation has got to be a b*tch!

Firebuck · Post by **Firebuck** » Sat Oct 03, 2009 3:15 pm

Does anyone still have this template. I can't get the image or link.

Druchii77 · Post by **Druchii77** » Sat Oct 03, 2009 5:49 pm

I think the problem with the GF9 template is that people don't measure from the outside of a unit. If this isn't done correctly, you won't move the unit correctly. This becomes problematic the longer the frontage of the unit goes.

Dyvim, I think it is important to note that your spreadsheet tells how far the furthest outside model in the unit should travel. The further inside the wheel a model is, the less distance it travels.

Post by **Dyvim tvar** » Sat Oct 03, 2009 9:39 pm

Right, but it's the outside model that normally matters since no model in the unit can move more than it's maximum move.

In theory, if the unit wheels twice, in the shape of an S, then you could do two long wheels -- the outside model on one wheel would be the inside model on the next, hardly moving at all on the second wheel.