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.

So I got a glimpse of the new Ork Nob Bikers forgeworld is putting out today thanks to the folks over at Warseer. This is not intended to be a discussion about those models. I just want to throw the picture in here for reference:



From this you can get a glimpse of what GW's new biker bases are supposed to look like - presumably these are the same 25x75mm round bases that are rumored to be packaged in with the new Marine scouts.

Now, I've been working on a biker-heavy force for my Orks. When working on how to base them, I went ahead and did it the way Games Workshop's web site suggested here: by hacking and gluing a 40mm round and a 40mm square together. I've already produced a number of these for my own bikes:



Now, my first dozen bikers are not yet actually attached to their bases, as I like to keep them separate for the sake of painting.

My general question is: Should I use these larger bases on my bikers, and continue to make more of the larger bases as I expand my biker force? Or should I wait until the new biker bases are available, and use those for all of my bikes?

The main reason I ask is tournament-related, as I know some people can get incredibly picky about things like base sizes. I was always under the general impression that when in doubt, bigger is better, as it confers more of a disadvantage than making a smaller base would. However, I'm hearing arguments like 'Well, your bikers will be more spaced out so ordnance won't hit as many', or 'You're just trying to get them in base to base with as many of my guys as possible!'. Obviously, I can argue both of these points (i.e., my bikers may be more spaced out, but your scatters will be more effective in terms of still hitting something) but I am more looking at this from the hardline tournament perspective. Considering that Games Workshop themselves advised gamers to make their bases in this fashion, am I wrong for continuing to base my biker army thusly? I actually like the look the larger bases gives the bikes - particularly with my conversions, they look crammed in on 25mmx75mm bases.

So, dakka community. What do you think? Do all of us with bikes who want to play competetively have to pull the bases off and tediously 'correct' everything?

Within 2 seconds of meeting someone at a tournament it becomes clear whether a person is the kind who feels the need to convert their models to gain an advantage or is just a person who has converted their models just because they want their models to look cool.

If I encountered your army in a tournament, I would be so blown away by how cool it was I would never even consider for a second that you were purposely trying to use larger bases to gain some sort of perceived advantage in-game, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who would react differently.


Ultimately, if you really are worried, simply say this at the beginning of each game:

"Hey, I made these biker bases before the GW ones were out and I understand that they're larger than those now provided. Because of that, I'll generally try to keep them a little under their maximum coherency distance to compensate but if you spot any models in the unit at max coherency point them out to me and I'll try to reign them back in."



But what you should not do is to compromise the coolness of your converted models in any way because you are afraid of what people might think.

As long as in your heart you know that your models are made purely for the love of the conversion (which all of your models clearly are) then a quick disclaimer at the beginning of each game should easily handle any and all possible disputes.

Until those actually show up in the modeling supplies that GW makes available for purchase, there are no polite terms to describe anyone who would try to make this an issue at a tournament.
But that's just my opinion and I don't have any experience with the tournament crowd.

solkan wrote:Until those actually show up in the modeling supplies that GW makes available for purchase, there are no polite terms to describe anyone who would try to make this an issue at a tournament.
But that's just my opinion and I don't have any experience with the tournament crowd.

Well, the next tournament I plan on going to is at least six months off, so I'm anticipating them to be available by then, which is why I am concerned.

Yak, personally I agree with you, and I wish everyone who played 40k felt the same, but even in my little corner of Jersey I run into my fair share of 'nu-uh, can't use that' players. I don't play with them after a while of that, but it's not like you have much of a choice in a tournament setting...

But here's the thing. In order for you to have any trouble a number of things have to happen:


A) Your opponent has to even recognize that your bike bases are larger than the new GW bike bases.

B) Your opponent has to recognize that such a slight change may possibly give you an in-game advantage (which it really doesn't give you much of).

C) Your opponent has to then call over a judge or tournament organizer.

D) The tournament judge/organizer has to agree that you've broken some rule.


The chance that all these things will happen (especially the last one) is very remote, espeically if you make an effort to inform your opponent ahead of time and agree to play them at slightly under their max coherency range to compensate.



The thing is, the 'must be on the base they are supplied with' rule is in place clearly to stop players who would use gigantic irregularly-sized bases to gain an advantage.

The reality is, people have models from yester-year with a variety of bases and people have in the past and will continue to use different base sizes for conversions.

When a tournament organizer is faced with such strange basing challenges they are either going to have to rule that all models on improper bases are disallowed (which would make a lot of people angry) or they have to rule on a case-by-case basis on whether the player is actually trying to abuse the rules through modeling.

A quick phone call to the tournament organizer should clear up his perspective on the issue if you're really concerned, but I think the reality of the hobby means that while the 'base rule' is indeed in the rulebook it will only be followed by a judge/TO when it is clearly being abused to gain an in-game advantage.

@yakface:
On a slightly related note, would it be permissible to base a commander or some HQ selection on a 40mm base instead of the stock 25mm?

I always felt that the rank-and-file bases do not convey the heroic attitude of a Black Templar Marshal or an Emperor's Champion. I'm not planning on putting them up on a pedestal (doing so would only hurt the model with regard to LOS and enemy shooting, IMO), but I would like for the models to have a feel about them -- that they stand apart from their brothers as a cut above the rest. It would also help my opponent easily identify them, though that is only an afterthought of a rationale.

I know it's a little OT, but I feel that it is related. Sorry jamsessionein, didn't mean to threadjack!

CK

Totally fine, Krieg.

Also, I think putting something like a commander on 40mm's perfectly acceptable. If a Warboss gets one, I don't see why a Marshal wouldn't.

I'm still trying to figure out if Nobz go on 25 or 40mms, myself.

Yak is bringing the wisdom on this thread.

Make your models how you want. I can see in game advantages and disadvantages to larger bike bases/40mm character bases. Shouldn't matter that much.

Corpsman_of_Krieg wrote:@yakface:
On a slightly related note, would it be permissible to base a commander or some HQ selection on a 40mm base instead of the stock 25mm?

I always felt that the rank-and-file bases do not convey the heroic attitude of a Black Templar Marshal or an Emperor's Champion. I'm not planning on putting them up on a pedestal (doing so would only hurt the model with regard to LOS and enemy shooting, IMO), but I would like for the models to have a feel about them -- that they stand apart from their brothers as a cut above the rest. It would also help my opponent easily identify them, though that is only an afterthought of a rationale.

I know it's a little OT, but I feel that it is related. Sorry jamsessionein, didn't mean to threadjack!

CK

What I'm saying is that it ultimately comes down to if your opponent feels threatened by your base sizes/conversions. If you make the simple effort to let them know that isn't the case and you're willing to play in whatever style to put their mind at ease you really limit the potential negatives you can suffer.


A pick-up game at your FLGS:

You: "Hey I've got these models on slightly larger bases than they come with. If you're worried about it I'll make every effort to keep these models slightly closer together to make up for it. If you notice a situation where you think I'm gaining some advantage because of my bigger bases just let me know and we'll work something out."

Your Opponent: "No man, the rules say you have to have your models on the bases they're supplied with."

You: "Okay, but I don't have any other models."

Your Opponent: "Well then too bad."

You: "Cool, I guess we won't play then."

(and to be honest, you probably just saved yourself from suffering through a terrible game).


At a tournament:

You: "Hey I've got these models on slightly larger bases than they come with. If you're worried about it I'll make every effort to keep these models slightly closer together to make up for it. If you notice a situation where you think I'm gaining some advantage because of my bigger bases just let me know and we'll work something out."

Your Opponent: "No man, the rules say you have to have your models on the bases they're supplied with."

You: "Okay, but I don't have any other models."

Your Opponent: "Well then too bad."

You: "I guess we better call a judge. . ..(judge walks over and you repeat the mantra about the bases)"

Cool judge: "Well, we're not going to kick this guy out of the tournament, so just play like he says, treating the models as if they were on a slightly smaller base."

or

Dick judge: "Sorry man, you can't use those models."

You: "Well I don't have any replacement models."

Dick judge: "Oh well, I guess you can't play in the tournament."

You: "OK, where do I get my money back?"


(and to be honest, you probably just saved yourself from suffering through a terrible tournament).

jamsessionein wrote:I'm still trying to figure out if Nobz go on 25 or 40mms, myself.

As you probably know they are provided with 25 mm bases unless it's meganobz.
As I understand it it's very common for ork players to use 40 mm bases for them though.

Personally I think rebasing is always ok as long as you don't use it to your advantage gaming wise, likes squeezing an extra 15 mm assault after disembarking with a 40 mm base.

Yak, lurking around here I often agree with you but...

Why is asking someone to play by the rules considered a dick thing to do? Especially since it's even spelled out in the rulebook about modelling to the intent of advantage?

The above situation, no, few folk are going to be PO'd at the difference between editions' bases; personally, I don't even base my bikes since they balance upright on their own and, in this case, the lack of basing is to my coherency and ranged-weapon disadvantage. Someone who bases something for a clear advantage, though, such as effectively allowing them to block more Line of Sight, lets them get out of a vehicle and closer to the enemy for assault (which, yes, includes Space Marine non-Terminator characters on 40mm bases; they don't take up two slots in the Land Raider, neither should their base), those are the two biggest ones I've not only heard of but seen in play.

In friendly play, you go to have fun, you overlook the tiny stuff. In big time tournament play, where any substantial prize is involved, expect and embrace the little crap. If I have to put up with your X formations to give cover saves, you have to put up with my basing expectations. :p

"bases you are supplied with" = Ork bikes didn't come with bases.

Ork bikes are often sideways fat which means they overflow anyways so the 'skinny' bases are going to cause problems for our bikes in CC anyways.

*Bigger bases helps with templates and unit coherency, hurts CC
*Smaller bases hurts with templates and unit coherency and helps CC.

If CC units are on bigger bases 9 times out of 10 it is not a basing advantage.

Why is asking someone to play by the rules considered a dick thing to do?

Because a powergaming rules lawyer asking me to rip the bases off 12 years of painstakingly crafted, painted and loved models so he can eliminate a perceived (may not be actual) minor advantage is a dick thing to do. If 'keeping my few models in tighter formation as if they had smaller bases and eating the disadvantage in CC' isn't good enough and isn't seen as perfectly reasonable, I declare the player a 'dick'.

The rule is not actually as harsh as it sounds and for those who have been around we 'KNOW' why the rule exists. And 15mm wider bike bases (7mm on each side) is not why the rule was made. It was made for 60mm Chaos cultist blocking LOS to everything.

The most extreme abuse that I can think of was the suggestion to put grots on 60mm bases.

Like Yak said, probably 90% of the people you play either won't notice or won't care. 9% of the people might care, but figure that it's as many advantages as disadvantages (esp. with the increase in template weaponry). 1% will be TFG, and if you have to play him in a tourney, it doesn't matter what you do - he's going to be a jerk and miserable to play against.

Why is asking someone to play by the rules considered a dick thing to do?

And the answer is...

Someone who bases something for a clear advantage, though

I think we all agree that stopping someone that is basing in order to get an advantage.... is a good thing.

But when you see someone that has done a nice job modeling, and the base is a just a bit off, it is a 'dick thing' to make him stop playing.

@ the OP

I would say don't worry about it and go with your bases. Everything that's been pointed out is correct. As a point of reference at the LVGT there was a land raider with it's TL Las Cannons on top instead of on the sides. It was such a cool and inspired model. I heard of no issues even though this lended a clear advantage when played as modeled.

That being said, bikes do not need to be worried about it because if an opponent has an issue with the bases respond with "Alright, I understand that the bases are against the rules. Since my bikes weren't supplied with them we'll play as though the bases aren't there and mesure from the bike itself." Your bases look flat enough for models to assault onto, so just ignore them (the bases) and play by the bike. Problems solved.

@ JamSession: I put all my Nobs on 40mm bases, and am SOOO Glad I did, because they look way cooler than on small bases. Also, when you have 30 guys on foot and moving in the assault phase, being able to pick out the nob easily due to his larger base is instant, in order to make sure he is within the combat zone.

I'll post pics when I'm not at work.

Only other thing I'll put down is...

If your uber-cool looking bases give you a clear advantage, save 'em for the display case and put your playable stuff on acceptable bases. Period.

GW games aren't a one-part hobby. You have to actively balance playability versus appearance. Some conversion work, while cool, doesn't work on the table top.

There's a reason you don't see too many Golden Demon winning pieces on the table top to game with.

As some one who plays a Dark Angel Ravenwing army I understand where you are coming from.

However,
the bike bases that you are referring should be fine without arguement,

GW themselves were the ones to post that base (and how to make it) as a way of legally basing bike models (on their website, it probably still is up there)

I have never heard of anyone saying that my bases were out of line. In fact it makes them much easier to play as there is no ambiguity.

I understand that they are a little bigger than the bike it self, but the base has been designed around GW meaurements and recommendations (not something you made up out of no where)

I also have attack bikes on even larger bases,
I would understand if some-one objected to this (until they like I realised there is almost no advantage and I now can barely hide the silly things!!)

I just started putting my bikes on rectangle bases (I thought that's the only thing that was out by GW). Do you think a rectangle base (calvary) gives more advantages or disadvantages?

It seems that with the calvary bases on bikes (especially ork bikes) the bike is fatter AND longer than the base, so I find myself measuring from the model most of the time - simply using the base to make them stand up the same way every time. (I don't want my models to wobble and cause game play movement issues).

Really the only time the bike bases come into play are on the front and back corners of the bikes.

I'd like to hear your thoughts, but after writing this and reading the above posts, I think I'm just going to tell my oppents at the start of a game that I'll be ignoring the bases for measuring purposes (they simply make the bike stand up straighter). I might actually trim down the bases as well so they are just a stand.

I put most of my bikes in a wheely position because
1. its more orky and
2. its the only way to get them to fit on a regular cavalry base!!

I don't think i'm gonna change all the bases just so i can buy new GW ones that are a rip off price for just a few pieces of black plastic.

but i do want to make a mega cool base for my wazdakka conversion..

so if HQ models get a bigger base and wazdakka is on a bike is his base meant to be majassive?

I see it like this: The 5 edition rulebook states that you have to use the bases a modell is supplied with. Fourtunatly, I don't play at tournaments and therefore, don't give a damn about it. I think you Ein are just like me, a builder first and a gamer second.
The thing is, as already mentioned, that Ork Bikes don't come with bases, and altough GW tends to make unbelivable ridioulus choices sometimes, I rarely get the feeling that they sold something new which made old models illegal. Well, except you own old terminators I guess
Anyway, up until recently there were no official bike bases except the ones build as suggested by the GW website, so I'd say those are legal. Also, most of the Ork bikes are larger than the new bike bases anyway.


I would also like to add something else:

Within 2 seconds of meeting someone at a tournament it becomes clear whether a person is the kind who feels the need to convert their models to gain an advantage or is just a person who has converted their models just because they want their models to look cool.

If I encountered your army in a tournament, I would be so blown away by how cool it was I would never even consider for a second that you were purposely trying to use larger bases to gain some sort of perceived advantage in-game, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who would react differently.


Ultimately, if you really are worried, simply say this at the beginning of each game:

"Hey, I made these biker bases before the GW ones were out and I understand that they're larger than those now provided. Because of that, I'll generally try to keep them a little under their maximum coherency distance to compensate but if you spot any models in the unit at max coherency point them out to me and I'll try to reign them back in."



But what you should not do is to compromise the coolness of your converted models in any way because you are afraid of what people might think.

As long as in your heart you know that your models are made purely for the love of the conversion (which all of your models clearly are) then a quick disclaimer at the beginning of each game should easily handle any and all possible disputes.

Yak, things like that are the reason that you are our benevolent Overlord.

No bases on my bikes! THose wheels should be able to turn when I battle with them .

I bought these bases and made a few others like EIN did using two 40 mm round,plasticard , and Urban basing kit. Yu can't have Ork bikes toppling over when you are playing.


It's true still that you must use the bases supplied with the model but, may one use a larger base?

There's an obvious reason for the rule and it is not to inhibit creativity. I've run numerous models on larger "display" bases without incident. Besides, the negatives in game seriously outweigh the positives. Even if you are always trying to max out unit cohesion (which most of us are not), the effect of having more models potentially in base-to-base with your command models in CC is clearly a huge disadvantage. Anyone insisting that you re-base your models or remove them from play, when the choice of a larger base is clearly an asthetic one, is only hiding behind the "letter" of the rules in hopes of gabbing some unreasonable and uninteded advantage because winning is so important to them that they would rather abuse and alienate other players than embrace modeling as an extremely important part of this hobby. If someone has gone to the trouble to create a great looking piece for play and display, why be a douchebag, particularly if they are up front about it as Yak suggests?

Brice

For once I agree with Beale. Use your custom bases.

I used the GF9 magnetic bases (shaped like the biker bases) for my Nob Bikers. I've played in two different tournaments with them and haven't had anyone bring it up. The bikes didn't come with bases and I thought they looked bad w/o bases. The bases aren't oversized and the bikes fit perfectly on them length-wise.

I'd be very surprised if anyone complained about the base size issue you bring up. If he does, you may have bigger issues to worry about in-game.

hmm my ork bikers are on 60mm bases as at the time they were the only ones avaliable you think people would stop me from playing with them??

yeah,
the right thing to do is base with the new bases...

saying that I wouldn't be put off by your larger base sizes. what yak says is true, its fairly obvious what you've done, following the old out of date GW article...

Panic...

Edit:
they sell the Square Cavalry bases in bags of 32 for £4.
So I predict (guess) that even with GW sqeezing for more money it'll probabily be about £5 for 25 bases when they are released...