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.

The biggest advantage to smaller bases on terminators is for deep striking.

Everything else tends to balance itself out in the end. For every time there is an "advantage" there is another where its a "disadvantage." And, if the game is coming down to where everything in hinging on that missing 1/4 inch of space, then it sounds like it an exciting, well fought game.

osirisx69 wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Please explain to me when it would be a disadvantage to run the small bases on this specific unit? Outside of multi-charging units

Models have less base to measure for shooting on a 28mm then a 40mm. Models fall over a lot more, less stable. Harder to deny board space, less coverage, more models get hit under a blast or a template..,,


Andy Chambers himself wrote that there is NO discernible advantage to base sizes. Any perceived advantage has an equal or higher disadvantage.


TBH though the burden of proof is on you because you are the one who made the sweeping generalized statement. I just stated (correctly) that it was false as I have proven.


The larger base size was made just for more dynamic posing and larger models...

Except that we are not just talking about base size, we are talking about the old models versus the new. What advantage does the new model have versus the old model on the new base size?

Anyway a majority of interactions are that you are allowed to model for disadvantage but you have to give up any advantage that comes with it. That is standard practice everywhere I have played

 Leth wrote:
I would be kind of annoyed because it is almost 100% pure advantage to run the smaller ones on the smaller bases.

Would I still play? Sure, but it would annoy me.

I would at a minimum have 1 of the current model on hand so that I could place it for when things mattered.

It may or may not be advantageous to run the older, smaller and smaller based miniatures, but either way, thems the breaks.

It would be against the rules to rebase them.

 Leth wrote:

osirisx69 wrote:

 Leth wrote:
Please explain to me when it would be a disadvantage to run the small bases on this specific unit? Outside of multi-charging units

Models have less base to measure for shooting on a 28mm then a 40mm. Models fall over a lot more, less stable. Harder to deny board space, less coverage, more models get hit under a blast or a template..,,


Andy Chambers himself wrote that there is NO discernible advantage to base sizes. Any perceived advantage has an equal or higher disadvantage.


TBH though the burden of proof is on you because you are the one who made the sweeping generalized statement. I just stated (correctly) that it was false as I have proven.


The larger base size was made just for more dynamic posing and larger models...

Except that we are not just talking about base size, we are talking about the old models versus the new. What advantage does the new model have versus the old model on the new base size?

Anyway a majority of interactions are that you are allowed to model for disadvantage but you have to give up any advantage that comes with it. That is standard practice everywhere I have played

Also there is no expire date for GW models. If you have the model you can field it, even if it is radically different then the current model. Case in point, old ork battle wagons vs new ork battle wagons...

osirisx69 wrote:
Also there is no expire date for GW models. If you have the model you can field it, even if it is radically different then the current model. Case in point, old ork battle wagons vs new ork battle wagons...

Yes, and no.

You do get some raised eyebrows when model have changed significantly. The Dark Eldar Grotesques are a perfect example of this... while yes, the original models were sold as Grotesques, in the current rules they work better as Wracks.

Similarly, the original Ork Battlewagon was a very different kit, and these days would work better as a trukk.

Some players will also have issues with the original ork Trukk (I've always run mine as a buggy, which it fits as much better) the original Eldar Avatar (who is barely taller than a modern Space Marine) and the original Chaos Obliterators (which are just ugly and should never be used unless you're playing with the lights out.)

I'm with Insaniak on this one, but it's important to distinguish between…

... what you can legaly get away with using Rules as Written:
-use the original sized bases. GW says it's the way it is.
-Use old models even when they are vastly smaller than new ones. All GW models are valid for current play.

..vs...

... what kinds of things you can do to foster a spirit of fairness and good play.
- Rebase those models on the bases they are currently supplied with'
- Use them as something if they resemble and are sized closer to a different current unit.
- Use creative basing to adjust the overall height of a model to reflect current versions.

Not that you have to do all these things, but at least consider how your opponent would feel, being at a disadvantage, especially if they are a newer player who isn't aware of the old models and might not even have been born when those models were in store.