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.

Why'd they go and make heavy weapon squads their own little 2 wound single model / two models in transport thing? Why couldn't it just be a heavy weapon operator and a second model that's just a guardsman?

M.

Erm, they dont take up two spaces in a transport, from memory....

They made them that way because two guys on a base simplifies deployment, looks cooler (because they ARE teams, a loader and gunner) and to give them a disadvantage to offset how cheap they are and how insanely numerous they can be. (ID hurts them)

Going to be a pain to set up those large bases in close in terrain; maybe I can still keep them seperately based...

M.

Infantryman wrote:Why'd they go and make heavy weapon squads their own little 2 wound single model / two models in transport thing? Why couldn't it just be a heavy weapon operator and a second model that's just a guardsman?

M.

Because GW sell a Heavy Weapon squad box.

And GW consider their fanbase to be too stupid to mount them on two bases and therefore dumbed down the rules to cover their model kit.

Emporer forbid!

From what I've read in P&M, plenty of people do model their heavy weapons as three separate figures. I don't know, but maybe the heavy weapons used to be separate models, like the Eldar ones.

Purely due to the ridiculously difficult placement when trying to hug cover, I'm considering re-basing mine, 3rd Ed style, on two bases.

Would Dakka consider this cheating via Modelling for Advantage, or would you guys think it kosher?

I wouldn't care, others probably would.

I'd be all for it. The large base is cool for scenic stuff...but not so cool for playability.

M.

I would care.

Unless you actually had some old 3rd ed ones, then it's all good.

I use some of the older models, such as Steel Legion, which still come on two separate bases.

Kilkrazy wrote:From what I've read in P&M, plenty of people do model their heavy weapons as three separate figures. I don't know, but maybe the heavy weapons used to be separate models, like the Eldar ones.

Original IG heavy weapons were shoulder-fired like the modern marine missile launcher, there was a lascannon mixed in with the lasgun sprue. IIRC in 2nd edition they moved to the semi-modern style with the weapon and one gunner on a single base, and a gunner on the other, then later to the modern style with all 3 on one base. I don't think there ever was a time where they had 2 guys and a seperate heavy weapon.

Old Steel Legion / Mordians etc had two separate models, with two bases. In fact the auto/lascannons didn't even have a base IIRC. I have some old Tallarns that illustrate my point on this.

Whilst I understand the rules Gwar!, it seems a little double-standardy on behalf of GW to say my Tallarns can do it, but my Vostroyans can't. Similar goes for old metal Terminators.

Rules is rules I suppose. I only play casual so i don't think my buddies would mind.

BearersOfSalvation wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:From what I've read in P&M, plenty of people do model their heavy weapons as three separate figures. I don't know, but maybe the heavy weapons used to be separate models, like the Eldar ones.

Original IG heavy weapons were shoulder-fired like the modern marine missile launcher, there was a lascannon mixed in with the lasgun sprue. IIRC in 2nd edition they moved to the semi-modern style with the weapon and one gunner on a single base, and a gunner on the other, then later to the modern style with all 3 on one base. I don't think there ever was a time where they had 2 guys and a seperate heavy weapon.

I've still got some of the old Imperial Army models lying around somewhere.

Melissia wrote:I use some of the older models, such as Steel Legion, which still come on two separate bases.

The irony being that Steel Legion is the model range that introduced the crew and gun on a single large base, leading to the current IG heavy weapon rules.

nosferatu1001 wrote:Erm, they dont take up two spaces in a transport, from memory....

Yes, they do. Page 29, IG Codex.

Can't recall exactly when the 'current' bases came into play, late 3rd or sometime in 4th I think. Prior to that, HW Teams were two seperate models and sometimes a seperate piece for the weapon.

Late 3rd, when previous (READ: Interesting) Guard Codex came out.

IIRC, they were still two models back then but I could be wrong. They don't even get a lasgun shot anymore :/

And it's even in squads; I know for sure 3rd edition squad based HW's were two or there different models.

M.

I don't have mine on the new single base, and everyone around here understands that they are a single model just fine... even my buddies kid who is 9 years old.

I just keep one of those lame new bases in my bag and when people want to assault, I center it on the closest model and go from there.

Quick, easy, and keeps the flow going.

Tek wrote:Old Steel Legion / Mordians etc had two separate models, with two bases. In fact the auto/lascannons didn't even have a base IIRC. I have some old Tallarns that illustrate my point on this.

Whilst I understand the rules Gwar!, it seems a little double-standardy on behalf of GW to say my Tallarns can do it, but my Vostroyans can't. Similar goes for old metal Terminators.

Rules is rules I suppose. I only play casual so i don't think my buddies would mind.

My Valhallans are in this manner.

Tek wrote:Old Steel Legion / Mordians etc had two separate models, with two bases. In fact the auto/lascannons didn't even have a base IIRC. I have some old Tallarns that illustrate my point on this.

Mordians and Tallarns yes, Steel Legion no. Other than the Missile Launcher, the Steel Legion HW Teams have always been two guys on one base. For all the old metal Guard from 2nd Ed, most of the HW's were separate to the crew or didn't have a base (Lascannon, Mortar, Heavy Bolter, Autocannon).

Tek wrote:Purely due to the ridiculously difficult placement when trying to hug cover, I'm considering re-basing mine, 3rd Ed style, on two bases.

Would Dakka consider this cheating via Modelling for Advantage, or would you guys think it kosher?

"I find it hard to set up those large bases close together in cover, can I change the bases so they're smaller and easier to set up in cover, that totally wouldn't be modeling for advantage would it?"


Seriously can I start making the gun barrels on my vehicles longer? I find it hard to measure distance to enemy models with such short gun barrels...

H.B.M.C. wrote:

Mordians and Tallarns yes, Steel Legion no. Other than the Missile Launcher, the Steel Legion HW Teams have always been two guys on one base. For all the old metal Guard from 2nd Ed, most of the HW's were separate to the crew or didn't have a base (Lascannon, Mortar, Heavy Bolter, Autocannon).

Yeah i only have ML teams from the Steel Legion line, so that was an ill-educated guess. I'm painting my Tallarns right now, and am at a loss with the bases. I also have OOP imperial army plastics (with the shoulder-mounts) which will be included in my army.

@Chongara - No need for the acid. The massive bases make my HW guys look fething stupid. No-one fires a missile launcher 8" away from a brick wall. I want them to hug cover, not randomly float about near it. RAW - my OOP teams can do it, the question was would you allow other, newer models to do it. If you were spitting acid about it then I'd just go buy more OOP metals to achieve the desired result.

I personally like having all three on one base, to me it's much more satisfying and more fun to model...then again I am much more of a painter and modeller type than a player, I have never played more than just a casual game

Can I get some shots of those Imperial Army plastics? I don't think I've ever seen them...

M.

Tek wrote:
@Chongara - No need for the acid. The massive bases make my HW guys look fething stupid. No-one fires a missile launcher 8" away from a brick wall. I want them to hug cover, not randomly float about near it. RAW - my OOP teams can do it, the question was would you allow other, newer models to do it. If you were spitting acid about it then I'd just go buy more OOP metals to achieve the desired result.

It's modeling for advantage, pretty plain and simple if the reason your changing the bases is to make them easier to get into cover. You're changing the way something is modeled (what base it is) to get an advantage (easier to fit into cover) that is by definition modeling for an advantage. That things get all wacky because GW a bit derpy and changes bases while trying to maintain backward compatibility is quite silly, but hey that's the game I suppose. I don't think anyone would claim WH40k rules are particularly well written coherent.

In any case it probably wouldn't bother me as a player in most cases. Then again it probably wouldn't bother me if someone modified a tank with a longer barrel, all that much. Provided the multiple bases weren't being used to create some kind of crazy cover-abusing heavy weapons snake or the barrel was like 6" long or whatever.

Yeah exactly. I'm not some WAAC freak. I appreciate it is cheating, but it's not like I need a win that bad, I just think if anyone deserves cover, it's the HW teams.

Hell, in the olden days HB teams had an automatic cover save from the gun shield.
I really dislike TLoS as it ruins the dynamic of the game, for the same reason I dislike 60mm bases for two men. That said what do you reckon to a 40mm for the gunner and a 30mm (is that right?) for the loader? That could be cool.

@Infantryman - keep your eyes on my IG blog. I'm going to be photographing the old plastics and putting them in there. I'll PM you when they're in there.

Look at the collector's range of IG stuff. There are Heavy Weapon squads with multiple bases there.

Kilkrazy wrote:I've still got some of the old Imperial Army models lying around somewhere.

If you go all the way back to Imperial Army, I think some of them had the waist-high heavy weapons like the modern marine ones. The oldest guard I have are from the original plastic box and the blisters from the same timeframe.

I am in the process of building a small Guard contingent out of some non-GW figures, and I will be mounting my HW teams on 50mm round bases because I have a bunch of them. I asked some general opinions about it a week or so ago on this board, and most everyone seemed to think that was fine for friendly games.