Possible to Turbo-boost 0" ?

[Losing Command]

Well, if you look at the jink rule, it reads :
"A model with this special rule that has moved in its Movement phase gains a 5+ cover save untill the start of its next Movement phase. If a model with this special rule moves Flat Out or Turboboosts, it instead gains a 4+ cover save untill the start of its next movement phase"

So I'd say, if you didn't move you can't get the 4+ cover, because you didn't get the 5+ SO can't get the 4+ instead of it. You can still do the 0.1 nudge and get it though. But what could you possibly gain by remaining as good as stationary, not shooting and charging with a unit, just to get a 4+ coversave ? Someone explain that

[kaboodle]

Better defense when objective holding on turn 5.

[Axeman1n]

Having no save from movement and instead gaining a 4+ is the same as going from 5+ to a 4+. Instead is not important for parsing this rule.

[Excessus]

Better defense when objective holding on turn 5.

In most games a vehicle can't hold objectives even with troops inside...

[Axeman1n]

It's for a squadron of Jetbikes that decide to turboboost 0", they will gain a 4+ cover for just being there.

[Threeshades]

Well it doesnt seem RAI to me that you can not move at all and count as moved but then, you could just nudge the models half a millimeter or move them 6 Inches in one direction and then 6 in the exact opposite, i think there is no such rule anymore that your move can't end under a certain distance from where it began, like there was with skimmers once.

I cant really think of a situation where it would not be a good idea to make use of at least a few milimeters of that move, if it is to fudge their position, get out of potential weapon or charge ranges, or similar things. And even if its not going to get you into a better position its highly unlikely that any move at all no matter how short would get you into a worse position.

[Balerion]

Moving a model 0.0000000000000001 mm is functionally the same as moving it zero, but unambiguously moving. Why people would insist on slowing the game down by going round tapping every model when you could just say "these models count as moving" (assuming they are allowed to at that point in time) is beyond me.

Obviously all stationary models wouldn't count as moving, only those that have been declared to have done so, so nice strawman. You could similarly argue that all models that haven't physically moved don't count as having done so and so I could roll my run dice, get a number I don't like, and then still assault if I decide not to move my models (since I haven't moved) .

It "slows the game down" about as much as turning your models to face the enemy or rotating a tank's turret does.

If my opponent has the motor control to move the model 0.0000000000000001 mm then he's welcome to do exactly that. Otherwise, I'd like him to move the model the minimum distance he is physically capable of applying. This is a TLoS game, after all...

[DoctorTom]

In most games a vehicle can't hold objectives even with troops inside...

Vehicles don't turboboost - bikes and jetbikes turboboost. Eldar jetbikes can hold objectives.

[Chapters Unwritten]

Exactly. We can debate this all day but ultimately it amounts to what I think many 6E arguments amount to:

There's a way to do it fully within the letter of the rules, and there's a way that requires some additional abstract thinking and literal per-word interpretations of the rules. Occam's Razor, people.

This is all quite beside the point that it says flat out is "moving up to" however many inches -- which undeniably implies the model must be moved. I could understand moving them 0.00000001" and acting like that is okay, to save time, but the reality is it would save probably less than 2 seconds and clearly this entire thread exists to troll GW devs rather than because anyone out there actually would feel the need to utilize this rather than just moving a millimeter.

[Thanatos_elNyx]

This reminds me of that Simpsons episode where the family are in the Duff Brewery and the tour-guide says something along the lines of...
Tour-guide: "...and a certain percent of our profits go to charity."
Lisa: "How much of a percent."
Tourguide: "Zero."
::family is incredulous::
Tour-guide: "Zero is a percent!"

So while I agree moving the model 0" is NOT moving,
it is functionally the same as moving 0.1" on the tabletop and I would be willing to let it slide

[Axeman1n]

If you use these moves in difficult terrain, moving zero would mean no dangerous test right?

[Sons of Lorgar]

If someone say it's moving zero to get a turbo boost save while in difficult terrain, I'd demand the dangerous terrain test or I'd call on a TO for cheating. In a 'friendly' pick-up game I'd simply pack up and defame the cretin as a cheat.

Can't have the cookie and eat it, you either state moving and take the dangerous terrain test otherwise you don't get the turbo boost save.

[Reaver_hive_tyrant]

Why would someone even ask this, you're actually asking if you can "turbo boost" by not moving because of a small technicality in the rules writing? Stuff like this is just dumb, I mean would you actually try to pull this over on an opponent?

[Kevlar]

Hehe this reminds me of everquest. You can't move and cast a spell, but you can start casting a spell, run around, and if you make it back to the exact spot where you started casting before the cast timer runs out the spell works!

[Lord Zarkov]

If someone say it's moving zero to get a turbo boost save while in difficult terrain, I'd demand the dangerous terrain test or I'd call on a TO for cheating. In a 'friendly' pick-up game I'd simply pack up and defame the cretin as a cheat.

Can't have the cookie and eat it, you either state moving and take the dangerous terrain test otherwise you don't get the turbo boost save.

This - If you're moving you're moving even if you don't physically move any distance you still would take dangerous terrain tests if you started your move in terrain