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.
BaconCatBug wrote: I don't get why anyone is getting angry about it. The rules don't specify what base you have to use (although I really wish it did!) so you can mount grots on 200mm bases for all the rules care.
In clubs people will work out what they want to do on their own, and tournaments will house rule as they always have. If you're a "serious" tournament player you would already be willing to deal with inconvenience to do so.
It's not even that difficult if you're willing to accept having taller models, just stick the base on top of a 32mm base. If you want to take more time and effort, you can easily cut a hole in the top of a 32mm base and slide the old 25mm base in, then patch up the hole with basing. And if you're REALLY lazy you can shell out for pre-made base converters.
I'm not doing either because existing models I bought, built and painted/flocked should require periodic maintenance because GW decided 10 to 20 years later certain models look better on a bigger base. You will have a lot of older players be turned off if you try to go with anything other than base it with what we sold it on at the time.
The issue that GW has with that is that they make no money from people using 10-20 year old mini's.
They make their money on selling models, and accessories.
I'm not saying that it should be a must do for casual players, just giving people an opinion on what I see coming.
You might not like it but GW doesn't see old model support as profitable, atleast nothing like as profitable as selling new models or bases.
Though nothing beats the look of shock when people pick up my old-school metal mini's on new bases and are shocked at the wieght
But forcing people to buy new models to replace old is soooooo good idea after all...No way they can't compete by making good models people WANT to buy rather than just changing rules so that you HAVE to buy...Well actually they don't at least do quite that badly. They do change efficiency for same effect but at least they don't ban you from using old models. GW actually is good one in that sense. They don't force you to rebase. Only TFG's are forcing people to rebase. GW? They couldn't care less.
And as for TFG?'s? Well they are TFG's. They deserve no mercy. Let them whine. Let them cry. Show them middle finger and go on. They have a problem? Tough. TFG's having a problem isn't worth worrying about.
Stux wrote: Makes sense to me, given how stocky the models are.
I put my Ork Boyz from Shadow War Armageddon on 32mm bases ages ago. (and a few other odds and ends whose feet stick off a 25mm base; Inquisitor Coteaz and one of the Malleus Inquisitors for example).
BaconCatBug wrote: I don't get why anyone is getting angry about it. The rules don't specify what base you have to use (although I really wish it did!) so you can mount grots on 200mm bases for all the rules care.
In clubs people will work out what they want to do on their own, and tournaments will house rule as they always have. If you're a "serious" tournament player you would already be willing to deal with inconvenience to do so.
It's not even that difficult if you're willing to accept having taller models, just stick the base on top of a 32mm base. If you want to take more time and effort, you can easily cut a hole in the top of a 32mm base and slide the old 25mm base in, then patch up the hole with basing. And if you're REALLY lazy you can shell out for pre-made base converters.
I'm not doing either because existing models I bought, built and painted/flocked should require periodic maintenance because GW decided 10 to 20 years later certain models look better on a bigger base. You will have a lot of older players be turned off if you try to go with anything other than base it with what we sold it on at the time.
The issue that GW has with that is that they make no money from people using 10-20 year old mini's.
They make their money on selling models, and accessories.
I'm not saying that it should be a must do for casual players, just giving people an opinion on what I see coming.
You might not like it but GW doesn't see old model support as profitable, atleast nothing like as profitable as selling new models or bases.
Though nothing beats the look of shock when people pick up my old-school metal mini's on new bases and are shocked at the wieght
But forcing people to buy new models to replace old is soooooo good idea after all...No way they can't compete by making good models people WANT to buy rather than just changing rules so that you HAVE to buy...Well actually they don't at least do quite that badly. They do change efficiency for same effect but at least they don't ban you from using old models. GW actually is good one in that sense. They don't force you to rebase. Only TFG's are forcing people to rebase. GW? They couldn't care less.
And as for TFG?'s? Well they are TFG's. They deserve no mercy. Let them whine. Let them cry. Show them middle finger and go on. They have a problem? Tough. TFG's having a problem isn't worth worrying about.
Wow calm down no need to start trying to throw TFG around.
GW haven't specified base size in 40K yet but they have done in AoS before and they seem to be following AoS with 40K so I would not rule it out.
Also there is also the other aspect of just because you can doesn't mean you should, as people have pointed out nothing stops people using epic models in 40K. (Might actually make marines playable) but that doesn't mean you should be doing it, or that people will allow it.
BaconCatBug wrote: I don't get why anyone is getting angry about it. The rules don't specify what base you have to use (although I really wish it did!) so you can mount grots on 200mm bases for all the rules care.
In clubs people will work out what they want to do on their own, and tournaments will house rule as they always have. If you're a "serious" tournament player you would already be willing to deal with inconvenience to do so.
It's not even that difficult if you're willing to accept having taller models, just stick the base on top of a 32mm base. If you want to take more time and effort, you can easily cut a hole in the top of a 32mm base and slide the old 25mm base in, then patch up the hole with basing. And if you're REALLY lazy you can shell out for pre-made base converters.
I'm not doing either because existing models I bought, built and painted/flocked should require periodic maintenance because GW decided 10 to 20 years later certain models look better on a bigger base. You will have a lot of older players be turned off if you try to go with anything other than base it with what we sold it on at the time.
This is the sort of pain that Napoleonic wargamers have been dealing with since the 70s. Just be grateful you might only need to do it for the infantry in a 40k army.
Ice_can wrote: GW haven't specified base size in 40K yet but they have done in AoS before and they seem to be following AoS with 40K so I would not rule it out.
In Warhammer Age of Sigmar, most distances are measured from one model’s base to another model’s base. In the vast majority of games, the actual size of the base is not terribly important, and you can use bases of whatever size or shape you prefer.
The only possible exception to this is matched play games. This is because matched play games are intended to be evenly balanced contests, and in these circumstances having the same model on a different sized base can become an issue. To address this, on the following pages you will find a set of suggested matched play base sizes for all of the models in the Warhammer Age of Sigmar range.
Don’t worry – you don’t have to rebase your model if it is not on the suggested base unless you want to (that’s why these are suggested base sizes rather than mandatory ones). If you prefer not to rebase your models, just assume that the model is mounted on a base of the appropriate size when setting the model up, moving it, or measuring any distances in a matched play game. For example, if you are a veteran player using an old unit that is mounted on 25mm square bases instead of the suggested 32mm round bases, you should set the unit up, make any moves, and measure all distances as if they were mounted on the larger 32mm round bases when you play matched play games. Although this may sound a bit complicated, in practice it is actually very easy to do.
We’ve organised the base sizes first by Grand Alliance, and then alphabetically by faction. To find a model’s suggested base size, simply look up the model’s Grand Alliance and then its faction, and then read down the list until you find the model in question. The suggested base size appears to the right of the model’s name. As new models are added to the Warhammer Age of Sigmar range, we will add their suggested bases sizes to the list.
'It is a source of constant consternation that my opponents cannot correlate their innate inferiority with their inevitable defeat. It would seem that stupidity is as eternal as war.'
- Nemesor Zahndrekh of the Sautekh Dynasty Overlord of the Crownworld of Gidrim
Don’t worry – you don’t have to rebase your model if it is not on the suggested base unless you want to (that’s why these are suggested base sizes rather than mandatory ones). If you prefer not to rebase your models, just assume that the model is mounted on a base of the appropriate size when setting the model up, moving it, or measuring any distances in a matched play game. For example, if you are a veteran player using an old unit that is mounted on 25mm square bases instead of the suggested 32mm round bases, you should set the unit up, make any moves, and measure all distances as if they were mounted on the larger 32mm round bases when you play matched play games. Although this may sound a bit complicated, in practice it is actually very easy to do.
So... what's a polite answer to this, instead of just burst into laughter?
Generic characters disappearing? Elite units of your army losing options and customizations? No longer finding that motivation to convert?
Your army could suffer Post-Chapterhouse Stress Disorder (PCSD)! If you think that your army is suffering one or more of the aforementioned symptoms, call us at 789-666-1982 for a quick diagnosis!
JimOnMars wrote: Polite answer is to get out your micrometer and physically measure 7 millimeters between each and every boy in the blob, in each phase.
Make sure to measure them all during the charge, then again during the pile in, and a third time during consolidate.
The ork players turn should only last a few hours each.
FrozenDwarf wrote: whoever dident see this move when GW first created 32mm bases must be blind.
they want to get away from 25mm cuz lots of 3rd partys makes them and do them better then what gw does.
It's not like a 25mm base can't be copyrighted but they can land exclusive rights to make discs in 32mm - the idea that they made the bases slightly larger to combat 3rd party bits makers is pretty laughable, you're just going to see all those bases re-offered in 32mm again within a few months.
Besides, GW isn't really in the scenic base business, there is no reason for them to spend significant outlays to hinder competition in a space they don't even play in.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/29 20:38:03
lord_blackfang wrote: Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.
Flinty wrote: The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
While I do think Orks look good on 32mm, I am not looking forward to playing against someone with a 100+ Boy army all spaced out with larger bases. That's gonna be a pain.
Not to mention all the minor affects it will have for the Ork player himself. Personally, I feel anything short of a Space Marine (in both physical size and points cost) should have remained on 25mm bases. None of the lesser daemon Troops should have been put on 32mms. Not that they don't look good on them, but they are not durable enough to merit it. Pink Horrors and 'Letters specifically are just too big as-is. Pinks should be the size of Blues and 'Letter should be closer to Beastmen Gors Just my personal opinion on scale creep
Nobs on 32mms work fine as they have an extra wound, but Boyz should be 25mm
-
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/29 22:06:35
Ice_can wrote: GW haven't specified base size in 40K yet but they have done in AoS before and they seem to be following AoS with 40K so I would not rule it out.
In Warhammer Age of Sigmar, most distances are measured from one model’s base to another model’s base. In the vast majority of games, the actual size of the base is not terribly important, and you can use bases of whatever size or shape you prefer.
The only possible exception to this is matched play games. This is because matched play games are intended to be evenly balanced contests, and in these circumstances having the same model on a different sized base can become an issue. To address this, on the following pages you will find a set of suggested matched play base sizes for all of the models in the Warhammer Age of Sigmar range.
Don’t worry – you don’t have to rebase your model if it is not on the suggested base unless you want to (that’s why these are suggested base sizes rather than mandatory ones). If you prefer not to rebase your models, just assume that the model is mounted on a base of the appropriate size when setting the model up, moving it, or measuring any distances in a matched play game. For example, if you are a veteran player using an old unit that is mounted on 25mm square bases instead of the suggested 32mm round bases, you should set the unit up, make any moves, and measure all distances as if they were mounted on the larger 32mm round bases when you play matched play games. Although this may sound a bit complicated, in practice it is actually very easy to do.
We’ve organised the base sizes first by Grand Alliance, and then alphabetically by faction. To find a model’s suggested base size, simply look up the model’s Grand Alliance and then its faction, and then read down the list until you find the model in question. The suggested base size appears to the right of the model’s name. As new models are added to the Warhammer Age of Sigmar range, we will add their suggested bases sizes to the list.
The above might be the single handed dumbest thing I've ever seen GW produce.
FrozenDwarf wrote: whoever dident see this move when GW first created 32mm bases must be blind.
they want to get away from 25mm cuz lots of 3rd partys makes them and do them better then what gw does.
expect tanks to be forced on bases in 9th edition.
A quick search on Ebay alone shows dozens of 3rd party resin bases in 32mm.
"Courage and Honour. I hear you murmur these words in the mist, in their wake I hear your hearts beat harder with false conviction seeking to convince yourselves that a brave death has meaning.
There is no courage to be found here my nephews, no honour to be had. Your souls will join the trillion others in the mist shrieking uselessly to eternity, weeping for the empire you could not save.
To the unfaithful, I bring holy plagues ripe with enlightenment. To the devout, I bring the blessing of immortality through the kiss of sacred rot.
And to you, new-born sons of Gulliman, to you flesh crafted puppets of a failing Imperium I bring the holiest gift of all.... Silence."
- Mortarion, The Death Lord, The Reaper of Men, Daemon Primarch of Nurgle
Galef wrote: While I do think Orks look good on 32mm, I am not looking forward to playing against someone with a 100+ Boy army all spaced out with larger bases. That's gonna be a pain.
Not to mention all the minor affects it will have for the Ork player himself. Personally, I feel anything short of a Space Marine (in both physical size and points cost) should have remained on 25mm bases. None of the lesser daemon Troops should have been put on 32mms. Not that they don't look good on them, but they are not durable enough to merit it. Pink Horrors and 'Letters specifically are just too big as-is. Pinks should be the size of Blues and 'Letter should be closer to Beastmen Gors Just my personal opinion on scale creep
Nobs on 32mms work fine as they have an extra wound, but Boyz should be 25mm
-
I have the same sentiment. Especially in regard of models "deserving" the bigger base, because of their size and/or wounds. It's weird, but it's more or less what's behind the true reason about what I feel "appropriate" for a model. It just "feels" right in the way you described it!
Also Ghaz - to clarify, I was not laughing at you, but at the policy reported, for the reasons JimOnMars illustrated so well. Just in case.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2018/10/30 00:23:49
Generic characters disappearing? Elite units of your army losing options and customizations? No longer finding that motivation to convert?
Your army could suffer Post-Chapterhouse Stress Disorder (PCSD)! If you think that your army is suffering one or more of the aforementioned symptoms, call us at 789-666-1982 for a quick diagnosis!
Galef wrote: While I do think Orks look good on 32mm, I am not looking forward to playing against someone with a 100+ Boy army all spaced out with larger bases. That's gonna be a pain.
Not to mention all the minor affects it will have for the Ork player himself.
Personally, I feel anything short of a Space Marine (in both physical size and points cost) should have remained on 25mm bases.
None of the lesser daemon Troops should have been put on 32mms. Not that they don't look good on them, but they are not durable enough to merit it. Pink Horrors and 'Letters specifically are just too big as-is. Pinks should be the size of Blues and 'Letter should be closer to Beastmen Gors
Just my personal opinion on scale creep
Nobs on 32mms work fine as they have an extra wound, but Boyz should be 25mm
-
Why should Bloodletters be closer to Beastmen Gors when they have always been monsters in all of their incarnations? And I use monster in the sense of demons with a ton of strenght and agility. This incarnation of Bloodletters look very slick but if you go to the artwork they are actually beffy.
Spoiler:
They are bigger and stronger that humans, and they have always been that way, it is not creep in any sense of the word.
At the end of the day, Boyz have always find themselves too big for 25mm bases, thats why in old fantasy normal humans where in 20mm square bases like goblins and elfs and dwarfs but ork boyz where on 25mm square bases alongside the bigger Chaos Marauders and Chaos Warriors (Fantasy's Space Marines)
Dakka does have White Knights and is also rather infamous for it's Black Knights. A new edition brings out the passionate and not all of them are good at expressing themselves in written form. There have been plenty of hysterical responses from both sides so far. So we descend into pointless bickering with neither side listening to each other. So posting here becomes more masturbation than conversation.
ERJAK wrote: Forcing a 40k player to keep playing 7th is basically a hate crime.
RogueApiary wrote: Easy fix. In tournaments don't count the 4th row of boyz. Done.
How is that a fix? Permanently nerfing a base troop unit that just got a point increase as a codex gift?
Because the alternative is that putting new Ork models on older bases becomes advantageous. The models come on 32 mm, they play on 32mm. I respect your right to not have to rebase everything, but if you think you're entitled to an extra rank of attacks over the brand new Ork guy at the club because you're grandfathered in then you're 'that guy.'
FrozenDwarf wrote: whoever dident see this move when GW first created 32mm bases must be blind.
they want to get away from 25mm cuz lots of 3rd partys makes them and do them better then what gw does.
expect tanks to be forced on bases in 9th edition.
Ah they want to get away 25mm so they make entirely new kits with 25mm...Yeah makes sense!
(oh and hint: 3rd parties do 32mm as well and better than GW)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JimOnMars wrote: Polite answer is to get out your micrometer and physically measure 7 millimeters between each and every boy in the blob, in each phase.
Make sure to measure them all during the charge, then again during the pile in, and a third time during consolidate.
The ork players turn should only last a few hours each.
Yep. If TFG's are going to make issue with that in tournaments I'll do just that and ensure game goes 1 turn. 2 tops. Have fun at that TFG.
RogueApiary wrote: Easy fix. In tournaments don't count the 4th row of boyz. Done.
How is that a fix? Permanently nerfing a base troop unit that just got a point increase as a codex gift?
Because the alternative is that putting new Ork models on older bases becomes advantageous. The models come on 32 mm, they play on 32mm. I respect your right to not have to rebase everything, but if you think you're entitled to an extra rank of attacks over the brand new Ork guy at the club because you're grandfathered in then you're 'that guy.'
You are "that guy" if you invent your own house rules like have to rebase old models
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2018/10/30 07:13:59
FrozenDwarf wrote: whoever dident see this move when GW first created 32mm bases must be blind.
they want to get away from 25mm cuz lots of 3rd partys makes them and do them better then what gw does.
expect tanks to be forced on bases in 9th edition.
Ah they want to get away 25mm so they make entirely new kits with 25mm...Yeah makes sense!
(oh and hint: 3rd parties do 32mm as well and better than GW)
Automatically Appended Next Post:
JimOnMars wrote: Polite answer is to get out your micrometer and physically measure 7 millimeters between each and every boy in the blob, in each phase.
Make sure to measure them all during the charge, then again during the pile in, and a third time during consolidate.
The ork players turn should only last a few hours each.
Yep. If TFG's are going to make issue with that in tournaments I'll do just that and ensure game goes 1 turn. 2 tops. Have fun at that TFG.
RogueApiary wrote: Easy fix. In tournaments don't count the 4th row of boyz. Done.
How is that a fix? Permanently nerfing a base troop unit that just got a point increase as a codex gift?
Because the alternative is that putting new Ork models on older bases becomes advantageous. The models come on 32 mm, they play on 32mm. I respect your right to not have to rebase everything, but if you think you're entitled to an extra rank of attacks over the brand new Ork guy at the club because you're grandfathered in then you're 'that guy.'
You are "that guy" if you invent your own house rules like have to rebase old models
I never said you need to rebase. I said you don't get the benefits of having the older bases now that 32mm bases are the standard. The easiest way to do that is to simply not count the fourth row of boyz models in close combat. Saying your Boyz get to fight in 4 ranks while an Ork player who started this year only fights in three ranks is the epitome of feth you got mine.
Quite frankly even suggesting that saying fefth you eat slow playing is an acceptable response to someone going you should be using 32mm so only 3 rows can fight is a far worse attitude than just saying only the front 3 ranks get to fight.
3 rows of 25mm will include more models than 32mm in three rows.
Galef wrote: While I do think Orks look good on 32mm, I am not looking forward to playing against someone with a 100+ Boy army all spaced out with larger bases. That's gonna be a pain.
Not to mention all the minor affects it will have for the Ork player himself. Personally, I feel anything short of a Space Marine (in both physical size and points cost) should have remained on 25mm bases. None of the lesser daemon Troops should have been put on 32mms. Not that they don't look good on them, but they are not durable enough to merit it. Pink Horrors and 'Letters specifically are just too big as-is. Pinks should be the size of Blues and 'Letter should be closer to Beastmen Gors Just my personal opinion on scale creep
Nobs on 32mms work fine as they have an extra wound, but Boyz should be 25mm
-
Why should Bloodletters be closer to Beastmen Gors when they have always been monsters in all of their incarnations? And I use monster in the sense of demons with a ton of strenght and agility. This incarnation of Bloodletters look very slick but if you go to the artwork they are actually beefy.
Why? Toughness THREE, that's why
When the current plastic kit was released, 'Letters were T4, just like Orks who are also "beefy". And it made perfect sense Why on Holy Terra did GW think it was a good idea to make them T3???? Something nearly twice the bulk of a Gaurdsman or Aeldari should NOT be T3. But if they insist on keeping them that stat, I'll insist on keeping mine on 25mm bases, or use an alternative model (like Beastmen Gors with red skin).
At least Orks are still T4, so they at least "kinda" make sense on 32mm, even if it'll be a pain for Ork players
-
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2018/10/30 13:50:25
Galef wrote: While I do think Orks look good on 32mm, I am not looking forward to playing against someone with a 100+ Boy army all spaced out with larger bases. That's gonna be a pain.
Not to mention all the minor affects it will have for the Ork player himself.
Personally, I feel anything short of a Space Marine (in both physical size and points cost) should have remained on 25mm bases.
None of the lesser daemon Troops should have been put on 32mms. Not that they don't look good on them, but they are not durable enough to merit it. Pink Horrors and 'Letters specifically are just too big as-is. Pinks should be the size of Blues and 'Letter should be closer to Beastmen Gors
Just my personal opinion on scale creep
Nobs on 32mms work fine as they have an extra wound, but Boyz should be 25mm
-
Why should Bloodletters be closer to Beastmen Gors when they have always been monsters in all of their incarnations? And I use monster in the sense of demons with a ton of strenght and agility. This incarnation of Bloodletters look very slick but if you go to the artwork they are actually beefy.
Why? Toughness THREE, that's why
When the current plastic kit was released, 'Letters were T4, just like Orks who are also "beefy". And it made perfect sense
Why on Holy Terra did GW think it was a good idea to make them T3????
Something nearly twice the bulk of a Gaurdsman or Aeldari should NOT be T3.
But if they insist on keeping them that stat, I'll insist on keeping mine on 25mm bases, or use an alternative model (like Beastmen Gors with red skin).
At least Orks are still T4, so they at least "kinda" make sense on 32mm, even if it'll be a pain for Ork players
-
Sisters of Silence have been 32mm since launch and are only T3 all be it in Power Armour
In all honesty I expect the new Sisters of Battle to be 32mm and 40mm based aswell from what GW have shown.
Iron_Captain wrote: It does look better, but it is a pretty big nerf to Ork infantry lists.
They'll lose attacks for sure, as less boyz will get into combat, but I wonder if the additional board control from bigger bases make up for this at all?
Galef wrote: While I do think Orks look good on 32mm, I am not looking forward to playing against someone with a 100+ Boy army all spaced out with larger bases. That's gonna be a pain.
Not to mention all the minor affects it will have for the Ork player himself.
Personally, I feel anything short of a Space Marine (in both physical size and points cost) should have remained on 25mm bases.
None of the lesser daemon Troops should have been put on 32mms. Not that they don't look good on them, but they are not durable enough to merit it. Pink Horrors and 'Letters specifically are just too big as-is. Pinks should be the size of Blues and 'Letter should be closer to Beastmen Gors
Just my personal opinion on scale creep
Nobs on 32mms work fine as they have an extra wound, but Boyz should be 25mm
-
Why should Bloodletters be closer to Beastmen Gors when they have always been monsters in all of their incarnations? And I use monster in the sense of demons with a ton of strenght and agility. This incarnation of Bloodletters look very slick but if you go to the artwork they are actually beefy.
Why? Toughness THREE, that's why
When the current plastic kit was released, 'Letters were T4, just like Orks who are also "beefy". And it made perfect sense
Why on Holy Terra did GW think it was a good idea to make them T3????
Something nearly twice the bulk of a Gaurdsman or Aeldari should NOT be T3.
But if they insist on keeping them that stat, I'll insist on keeping mine on 25mm bases, or use an alternative model (like Beastmen Gors with red skin).
At least Orks are still T4, so they at least "kinda" make sense on 32mm, even if it'll be a pain for Ork players
-
Sisters of Silence have been 32mm since launch and are only T3 all be it in Power Armour
In all honesty I expect the new Sisters of Battle to be 32mm and 40mm based aswell from what GW have shown.
Ugh, that's horrible. And they aren't even bulky like 'Letters or Orks.
Guess I'll just go rebase all my Eldar Guardians on 40mm bases in preparation for this ridiculousness
I am going to once again say that Base Size should be listed on the datasheet and be enforced in Matched Play. If you wanna bash toys together, go nuts and do whatever, but for structured play you have to bite the bullet and do things correctly.
BaconCatBug wrote: I am going to once again say that Base Size should be listed on the datasheet and be enforced in Matched Play. If you wanna bash toys together, go nuts and do whatever, but for structured play you have to bite the bullet and do things correctly.
doing things correctly means giving models an appropriate base size in the first place, then not changing it without a very good reason as it relates to the games, specifically not "well it looks better", Orks especially being too big for the 25mm base they used to sit fine on tends to suggest the models should have been slightly smaller perhaps.
BaconCatBug wrote: I am going to once again say that Base Size should be listed on the datasheet and be enforced in Matched Play. If you wanna bash toys together, go nuts and do whatever, but for structured play you have to bite the bullet and do things correctly.
doing things correctly means giving models an appropriate base size in the first place, then not changing it without a very good reason as it relates to the games, specifically not "well it looks better", Orks especially being too big for the 25mm base they used to sit fine on tends to suggest the models should have been slightly smaller perhaps.
This was a decision taken decades ago. You can't expect them to be bound by that forever. 32mm makes loads of sense for Orks. They are supposed to be large, broad, and muscular so making them smaller doesn't really make sense either.
RogueApiary wrote: Easy fix. In tournaments don't count the 4th row of boyz. Done.
How is that a fix? Permanently nerfing a base troop unit that just got a point increase as a codex gift?
Because the alternative is that putting new Ork models on older bases becomes advantageous. The models come on 32 mm, they play on 32mm. I respect your right to not have to rebase everything, but if you think you're entitled to an extra rank of attacks over the brand new Ork guy at the club because you're grandfathered in then you're 'that guy.'
FFS of course I would let the new guy attack 4 rows. Easy fix is to allow his model bases to overlap a little, making the orks fit the way were designed, before the nerf.
(and a few other odds and ends whose feet stick off a 25mm base; Inquisitor Coteaz and one of the Malleus Inquisitors for example).
5300 | 
2800 | 
3600 | 
1600 | 
