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.

BRB p3 - "Citadel miniatures are normally supplied with a plastic base. If so, they must be glued onto their bases before they can be used in the game."
BRB p71 - "Unlike other vehicles, skimmers have transparent 'flying bases' under their hull."

The large oval base and plastic stalk are part of the Stormraven's base, which it must be mounted upon.

Is the stem part of the base? Are you altering it? Is it modeling the base for a clear in game advantage to gain cover?

If the answer to all these is correct and you still think there is no issue with this then let me introduce you to Ghazghkull with a 3' circular extension built only the edge of his base.

Ghazghkull at this point would at this point be: Using the base he came with, just modified a little bit to give me a clear in game advantage.


You are clearly altering the model's profile by lowering the stem, if it's a noticeable distance and TO with half a brain will disqualify the model and in friendly games don't expect to make any friends.

To the OP: Would you be okay with either of these?

Oh, hello front armor...


My, what an interesting, thematic, and completely non-abusive Terminus Ultra...


At least the second one looked good. As previously stated, any modeling for advantage is weak sauce, but a transparent and half-hearted change like lowering the flight base is the weakest of sauces.

MikeMcSomething wrote:

nosferatu wrote:
Easy. The English language.

So were you gonna come up with a rulebook page or use this garbage?

Selective quoting FTL there.

Page 3 tells you to use the base it came with. Have you used a different base? Yes, you have used a base you altered yourself.

Or is this still "garbage"? How about you find a rule allowig you to use a different base than the one supplied, like, ooooh I dont know - maybe the same page, which tells you that this now requires opponents permission.

If you feel using the English language is "garbage", please find a WH40k definition for "the" and "a". I wont hold my breath while you do so.

You guys who are looking to changed your models from how it supposed to be assembled are not stumbling onto anything new. Before stormravens it was Valks, and before that it was kneeling wraithlords.

The whole point here is the no one is going to let you away with it. People will simply not play you, and TOs will not allow you to use the model in a tourny. If you find someone who will, then congratulations, you have gamed the system and found people who will put up with it. However, overall you will find people will not allow you to do this.

Once you get into the realm of modelling for the advantage, I promise you will find far meaner things than a low stormraven. If someone wanted to do this, I'd allow it and come next week with my new vindicator whose seige shield was 24" wide and 10" tall to block LOS to everything behind it. Get the point?

Dont forget the barrel that is 24" long, so you can hit anything on the table....

I find that the regular skimmer bases, not the valk/raven ones, have that super weak stem at the top. So, I drill the hole on my falcon hulls a bit so that they fit maybe 1/4" down on the unchanged or more often tipless bases. End result is the skimmer rides a touch lower. Is this modeling for advantage?

Homer

Technically yes, in terms of gaining cover. Is it enough that anyone is likely to complain? No.

Modelling for advantage is not a black and white issue, usually, but a continuum.

First off +1 to all the people who agree that this whole thing is a bad idea and is modelling for advantage to the most extreme.

Next I do believe this whole thread may have been started just to start an argument.

You can not tell me that the OP put this up and didn't expect to get blasted for it. Personally before I even posted this I would ask people at my FLGS (after all they are the people your gonna be playing with) if they are okay with it then there is no need to come on here and ask Dakka, and if they aren't okay with it then there is still no need to come here because now the people your playing with have given you an answer.

Someone summed it up quite well in another thread about some DE vehicle conversions.

"Ask yourself if you are you changing the model to change its gameplay?

If yes, you are modeling for advantage."

In your case you change the model because those flying bases fall off as soon as you look funny at any eldar skimmer, plus you changed it at little as possible. So no modeling for advantage in that case. TFG might call over a TO to complain, and will most likely be ignored.

Homer S wrote:I find that the regular skimmer bases, not the valk/raven ones, have that super weak stem at the top. So, I drill the hole on my falcon hulls a bit so that they fit maybe 1/4" down on the unchanged or more often tipless bases. End result is the skimmer rides a touch lower. Is this modeling for advantage?

Homer

To solve this issue on my Tau I used the "ball and socket" topper that comes with the SM land speeder. It worked really well and didn't change the height. Though these can be used to "pose" the skimmer mid game which would be another form of modeling for advantage.

And not that it hasn't been said a dozen times, but the rule book says to use the citadel model and base that you are supplied with, so I would agree that any modification creates a modified model or base and is therefore not the one you were supplied with.

zeshin wrote:

Homer S wrote:I find that the regular skimmer bases, not the valk/raven ones, have that super weak stem at the top. So, I drill the hole on my falcon hulls a bit so that they fit maybe 1/4" down on the unchanged or more often tipless bases. End result is the skimmer rides a touch lower. Is this modeling for advantage?

Homer

To solve this issue on my Tau I used the "ball and socket" topper that comes with the SM land speeder. It worked really well and didn't change the height. Though these can be used to "pose" the skimmer mid game which would be another form of modeling for advantage.

And not that it hasn't been said a dozen times, but the rule book says to use the citadel model and base that you are supplied with, so I would agree that any modification creates a modified model or base and is therefore not the one you were supplied with.

Get 2 1/4" Rare Earth magnets from a magnet website or even a Hobby Lobby (US). Drill a 1/4" hole into the bottom of the vehicle place magnet in with greenstuff to secure and put a thin layer of greenstuff on the outside to conceal the magnet. Lop the stand down so that the magnet's size won't change the height, scratch up the magnet's side and glue it to the post. Once dry wrap the magnet in greenstuff, making sure to keep a thin layer at the top, and go down the post just a little bit with it as well. When both sides are dry you now have a magnetize flight base that doens't change the profile of the vehicle at all.

While this still does fall under modifying the base, you are not changing it's in game profile at all.

Rule of Cool always applies. People are smart and can tell when someone modifies a base because they are trying to prevent snapping plastic rods and someone who is trying to be 'shorter' for advantage...

You can customize all you want, just be aware in any disagreement you are always in the wrong. Usually cool models that are not explicitly done for an advantage, people can see that and accept the custom changes.

Adam LongWalker wrote:Now as for the base for the Storm Raven. Even though I do not like the model, that is a really crappy stem for the base. I would have to convert it to something better if I owned one.

And providing you make something that will have minimal impact on the game then it's unlike that anyone will object.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Homer S wrote:I find that the regular skimmer bases, not the valk/raven ones, have that super weak stem at the top. So, I drill the hole on my falcon hulls a bit so that they fit maybe 1/4" down on the unchanged or more often tipless bases. End result is the skimmer rides a touch lower. Is this modeling for advantage?
Homer

If you use the longer stem then the model will sit at about the same height as it does normally on the shorter stem.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

zeshin wrote:To solve this issue on my Tau I used the "ball and socket" topper that comes with the SM land speeder. It worked really well and didn't change the height. Though these can be used to "pose" the skimmer mid game which would be another form of modeling for advantage.

Those came with all flight stand models for a short while - not available any longer though.

I hate to plug like this but there are a couple of companies offering improved flight stands at the moment.

I actually really like the look of that terminus Ultra. but that's off topic.

Modelling for advatage = wrong. Treat the game the way you woudl want to be treated.

How would you feel if your opponent mounted their genestealer on a really long base so they could get into combat quicker? Would you let that go? No? Same issue.

If your doing it for an advantage, you just lost alot of games.
Most TO's will ban it as soon as they see it, others will possibly go as far as removing you from the tournament.


I hate the flying stalk as its too lumpy.
However, i now use a thin bit of brass tubing, but its the same height as it was on the basic one.
In doing so i havent done anything to alter game play, ive just made it less ugly.

Lol but what if it came like that from ebay? Talk about ed up.

Defeatmyarmy wrote:Lol but what if it came like that from ebay? Talk about ed up.

Then buy a new flying stand, cut the old one, and put it on the new?

Or just chalk it up to the risk you take ebaying an army

I think what Defeatmyarmy is saying is that if you but a model from E-Bay and it has a custom base, to you, that IS the base the model came with.

I bought a Landspeeder off of E-Bay and it didnt have the flying base, but it did come with a few 25mm bases that I had bought as well, but I am not going to mount my Landspeeder on a 25mm base, even though that is the base it came with...

Somehow, I doubt most TOs for bigger tournaments are going to care what base you got with it when you bought it off ebay, if it provides an advantage over the standard base for the model, expect to have issues.

Although, funnily enough, you can still use older models such as the pewter rhinos, which get cover from being behind 2 space marines.

Quick question.
Can I draw LoS under a skimmer, over its base to another squad?

Sorry to piggyback.

Assuming you can, yes you can.
PG 16 of the BRB, is where the instructions for this are.

ChrisCP wrote:Assuming you can, yes you can.
PG 16 of the BRB, is where the instructions for this are.

Right, was just making sure this was a standard practice. I thought it was, but was cussed up and down by a Necron player who used his 'lith as a shield for his troops that this was illegal, so I had just given up (new player at the time) and assumed this was true and standard practice. Thanks for clearing that up. I would have won a turn faster!

DeathReaper wrote:I think what Defeatmyarmy is saying is that if you but a model from E-Bay and it has a custom base, to you, that IS the base the model came with.

I bought a Landspeeder off of E-Bay and it didnt have the flying base, but it did come with a few 25mm bases that I had bought as well, but I am not going to mount my Landspeeder on a 25mm base, even though that is the base it came with...

It does not matter who modified base, even if you don't know the person because he sold you the model on ebay. Otherwise you could legaly field the before mentioned tank with a 72"x10" siege shield, if your buddy glued it on.

Deal with it, you can't hide a stormraven behind a Land Raider. I'm sure that Apache pilots would love to hide behind an Abrams tank, but it ain't happening...

As funny (and annoying) as it would be, it is abusing the cover rules and many players wouldn't like this, they would demand to be able to shoot at the vehicle without you getting a cover save because it defies logic and is exploitive :( The same point would hold for if I wanted to have only the head of my trygon on a modified base that and saying "he's coming out of his hole, you just can't see him yet but that doesn't affect him at all in combat"

Zoot wrote:As funny (and annoying) as it would be, it is abusing the cover rules and many players wouldn't like this, they would demand to be able to shoot at the vehicle without you getting a cover save because it defies logic and is exploitive :( The same point would hold for if I wanted to have only the head of my trygon on a modified base that and saying "he's coming out of his hole, you just can't see him yet but that doesn't affect him at all in combat"

I have already seen a player who has 120mm bases that look like a pile of rocks and he claims it is a 'trygon underground conversion'.

Oh, and he claims TLOS as he says you cannot shoot at models underground and his civer save is him being protected from the dirt.

Yeah. People actually go there.

nkelsch wrote:
I have already seen a player who has 120mm bases that look like a pile of rocks and he claims it is a 'trygon underground conversion'.

Oh, and he claims TLOS as he says you cannot shoot at models underground and his civer save is him being protected from the dirt.

Yeah. People actually go there.

Then he needs his opponents permission to use such a model. The underground Trygon can't shoot either of course.

Shivan Reaper wrote:Somehow, I doubt most TOs for bigger tournaments are going to care what base you got with it when you bought it off ebay, if it provides an advantage over the standard base for the model, expect to have issues.

Although, funnily enough, you can still use older models such as the pewter rhinos, which get cover from being behind 2 space marines.

But if it explodes, any marines that can't fit in the MUCH smaller footprint are killed outright. Balances out somewhat.

Son 0f Dorn wrote:
But if it explodes, any marines that can't fit in the MUCH smaller footprint are killed outright. Balances out somewhat.

Can't they still emergency disembark?

And the old rhinos are so similar I don't think it is that big of an issue. The old land raiders might turn some heads.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
These threads also baffle my mind. What would in real life be a 3 second conversation boiling down to "your being stupid, knock it off" explodes into hours of internet discourse. The marvels of technology.