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.

What are your opinions on the following models and situations:


Someone using non gw/forgeworld models as counts as conversions. (example: Blood Crushers)

Someone using a model such as a special weapon model as a different special weapon for a unit. Basically no WYSIWYG.

Someone using just a base to represent an actual model.

Someone using ridiculous conversions. (example: a huge RC car as a battle wagon, a 2 inch flame weapon, really short models for something like a daemon prince)

Someone using a vehicle as counts as for another vehicle. (example: I have 3 rhino's, but this one is a ravager. Or just this tank is actually a Battle Tank instead of a Demolisher)

Tomb King wrote: What are your opinions on the following models and situations:


Someone using non gw/forgeworld models as counts as conversions. (example: Blood Crushers)

Alot of people do this and it isn't a very big deal to me.

Someone using a model such as a special weapon model as a different special weapon for a unit. Basically no WYSIWYG.

If a player is using say a Meltagun model to represent a Plasmagun and then he has another model that's actually armed with a Plasmagun then I'd have a problem as he could say "no the Plasmagun was in this unit not that one" when it is more favorable to him.

Someone using just a base to represent an actual model.

While I can forgive this if it's being used as a proxy or the model breaks, if they are taking advantage of it by say having it be the only visible "model" when a unit is in cover and at least 1 model would be showing then again I'd have issue with it.

Someone using ridiculous conversions. (example: a huge RC car as a battle wagon, a 2 inch flame weapon, really short models for something like a daemon prince)

The RC car would be a no, a 2 inch flame weapon would depend on if it's mounted on a vehicle or not as infantry and such measure their shots from their base not the weapon and there are some flame weapons that large. Short models for a DP is a no because that's deliberatly taking advantage of LOS.

Someone using a vehicle as counts as for another vehicle. (example: I have 3 rhino's, but this one is a ravager. Or just this tank is actually a Battle Tank instead of a Demolisher)

In friendly games this woulden't be that big of a deal depending on the vehicle. But at the same time there are issues with weapons, size, access points and such.

My general rules are:

I don't like it when people just use bases for full models. Makes it hard to keep track of what's actually supposed to be there.

If it's consistent through the entire army, cool beans. i.e., Squad one has a meltagun that counts as a flamer, then every meltagun counts as a flamer. I'm fine with this, as long as it's consistent.

BIG models shouldn't be proxied by small ones. It's annoying, misleading, and takes advantage of LOS, as has been pointed out.

If I'm at my place or a friend's, this last one doesn't matter. But if I'm at a store, I like seeing things that look good. If I want to look at kid's toys, I'll stay at home with my little ones.

Tomb King wrote: What are your opinions on the following models and situations:


Someone using non gw/forgeworld models as counts as conversions. (example: Blood Crushers)

Someone using a model such as a special weapon model as a different special weapon for a unit. Basically no WYSIWYG.

Someone using just a base to represent an actual model.

Someone using ridiculous conversions. (example: a huge RC car as a battle wagon, a 2 inch flame weapon, really short models for something like a daemon prince)

Someone using a vehicle as counts as for another vehicle. (example: I have 3 rhino's, but this one is a ravager. Or just this tank is actually a Battle Tank instead of a Demolisher)

1.) Non-GW models would depend. If it reinforces the theme or if I can tell at first glance what it's suppose to be, by all means. Forge World, if it doesnt cross with any of the others, is an automatic pass.
2.) Depends. As long as all the models are consistent and there's no disputes, I'll allow it, but expect the same curtesy. My friend has a mix of LC and TH/SS termiantors and he always wants to run them as TH/SS termies (he got them before the TH/SS update) and I have no problems with that.
3.) Depends on the situation. if the guy has 19 assembled guardsmen and 1 empty base in a unit, I'd let it slide provided that he remove the base-only model first. Whole units of empty bases depends. if the guy clearly has the items in question but hasn't had time to assemble them, I'll let it. If they had sufficient time to assemble it, but chose not to, I wouldnt. Especially not a LoS dependant one like a MC.
4.) No Modelling for Advantage. However sutable creations (like a toy truck converted into an Ork Battle Wagon and it actually looks like an Ork vehicle) will get an applause from me as well as approval.
5.) Only if they have no other vehicles represented by the same proxy, and if they also intend on getting the vehicle in question.

Someone using non gw/forgeworld models as counts as conversions. (example: Blood Crushers)
Fine with it, no problems

Someone using a model such as a special weapon model as a different special weapon for a unit. Basically no WYSIWYG.
Usually no problem, but I would expect them to be courteous and not use it to cheat.

Someone using just a base to represent an actual model.
Only if one, maybe two models in a unit, of course remove empty bases first!

Someone using ridiculous conversions. (example: a huge RC car as a battle wagon, a 2 inch flame weapon, really short models for something like a daemon prince)
Don't mind so long as there is no modelling for advantage. I think it was posted here, might have been at the-waaagh.com, but can anyone remember the guy who made his looted wagons out of rhinos, with 7" high panels attached to the front back and sides to obscure TLOS?, that would be a bit out of order IMHO. Say in the DP example, they had a model shorter than a grot representing a nurgle DP, I would insist of being able to draw line of sight to it at a more appropriate height, as in draw an imaginary line vertically upwards from the model's base to the height of the original model.

Someone using a vehicle as counts as for another vehicle. (example: I have 3 rhino's, but this one is a ravager. Or just this tank is actually a Battle Tank instead of a Demolisher)
Don't usually mind, so long as it's a sensible i.e. 'this is a leman russ demolisher not a standard russ' is fine, so long as he is not then using a leman russ demolisher to proxy a basilisk (in which case I would probably remind him it would be easier to use the standard russ as the bassy, and the demolisher as a demolisher).

On the subject of base proxies, I have a rather random idea for BaseHammer 40,000! just bases! no TLOS! no 3d terrain! All the fun and excitement of Warhammer 40,000 but with 1 less dimension!

Leigen_Zero wrote:On the subject of base proxies, I have a rather random idea for BaseHammer 40,000! just bases! no TLOS! no 3d terrain! All the fun and excitement of Warhammer 40,000 but with 1 less dimension!

So vassal? lol

As long as everything is consistent and as close to WYSIWYG as possible I don't really care what their army looks like, though cool conversion are always appreciated.

Someone using non gw/forgeworld models as counts as conversions. (example: Blood Crushers)

Fine with me aslong as i know what they are before the game.
Would prefer them to look alike in some way, but all depends really.

Someone using a model such as a special weapon model as a different special weapon for a unit. Basically no WYSIWYG.

Nope, rather not get into changing weapons as it causes no end of problems.

Someone using just a base to represent an actual model.

Depends on the rest of thier army.
If they are playtesting a model im fine with it aslong as im told.
If its a few units like it then i rather not play against it.

Someone using ridiculous conversions. (example: a huge RC car as a battle wagon, a 2 inch flame weapon, really short models for something like a daemon prince)

If they have done it simply for an advantage then no.

Someone using a vehicle as counts as for another vehicle. (example: I have 3 rhino's, but this one is a ravager. Or just this tank is actually a Battle Tank instead of a Demolisher)

Same as with the special weapons further up.

Someone using non gw/forgeworld models as counts as conversions. (example: Blood Crushers)

Someone using a model such as a special weapon model as a different special weapon for a unit. Basically no WYSIWYG.

Someone using just a base to represent an actual model.

Someone using ridiculous conversions. (example: a huge RC car as a battle wagon, a 2 inch flame weapon, really short models for something like a daemon prince)

Someone using a vehicle as counts as for another vehicle. (example: I have 3 rhino's, but this one is a ravager. Or just this tank is actually a Battle Tank instead of a Demolisher)

No problem, as long as it makes SENSE. Theres a mr. Potato head that was converted into a stompa, that looks better than "legit" model. I don't mind this at all. Someone cast their own shotgun models because GW/FW solutions are impractical as hell, or combi weapons...again, fine.
If, however, you bring those 50 cent per 100 packs of green army men and try to tell me they're imperial guardsmen outside of a VERY informal testing game, i'm going to hop up on the board and tell you I'm an imperator titan.

#2: As long as the special weapons are the same every time. If you tell me this squads grenade launcher is a plasma gun, but that squads 3 grenade launchers are a melta, a sniper rifle, and a plasma gun, we have a problem. If you tell me that one lasgun in this squad of 10 is actually a melta, we have a problem. If you tell me that all flame throwers on the board are plasma guns, I have less problem, but would really prefer you just run them as flamers.

#3: Depends on the situation. I hate flat base proxies or soda can carnifexes, but If its a friendly game and we go in with the intention of testing builds to decide if the opponent or I want to shell out for X/Y/Z model for too much money, fine.

#4: Sometimes I will run with it, sometimes I won't. I have a sentinel model craning out far and low on its legs, its lower than what people would usually expect for a sentinel, and to boot it's only using the leg positions GW modelled into it. I did no conversion work at all. It's noticeably easier to get cover on that model...but it's also a lot harder to get a LOS or a non cover LOS with its cannon. However, that same sentinel with its gun moved to the roof of the model? Yeaaaaa......No.

#5: I don't mind terribly if someone has vehicles proxied as something different since there generally aren't too terribly many and they're huge, so long as it's trackable. Write down on a piece of paper that the basilisk with the big number "3" on it is being used as a colussus, whereas the one with a "5" on it is still a basilisk or similar, and i'm fine. I'm not fine with you using your basilisk as a leman russ, again, barring informal testing games. I'm not fine with your predator being a land raider. I'm not fine with a sentinel being used as a dreadknight or dreadnought. Or vice versa. A gun change is fine with notation, a hull change is generally not.

I don't care if you don't model your grenades, I don't care if every model is GW/FW manufactured and bought at full retail price. I don't care if they're from the days when i was a single celled organism and have been out of production for 15 years...but THEY MUST MAKE SENSE. I must be able to look at them, and at a glance figure out what they are, or you better have something to give me with writing on it should peoples memories not be what they think they are.

Sternguard and Vanguard made from tacticals with different paintjobs and equipment (if applicable) so I can at a glance tell whats what? Cool! Land raider crusaders with some scratch built, or kitbashed miniguns and quad machine guns for weapons? Also cool, generally! Imperial guard lascannons bolted onto the shoulders of a devastator marine? Also cool, but perhaps a bit large for your purposes, eh? Your two imperial guard lascannon dev marines with one proxied as a plasma cannon that later becomes a lascannon again because neither of us can remember what you said in the beginning, having got caught up with the game? Not cool at all.

Please, keep it simple, If I Liked having 10 pages worth of crap to keep track of everything, what its equipped with, blah blah I would still be playing classic battletech.

1) No problems whatsoever. There's a lot of darn fine products out there and I think it's childish to say that you can't play with such and such because they're not from my favorite company.

2) As long as they're not mixing and matching, no problems. If every single flamer on the table counts as a melta, not a problem. If I have to start thinking about what's representing what in different units? I don't like it.

3) Uh, no. Unless there was a tragic breaking mere moments before and all our super glue was dried out. Or a child flushed it down a toilet mere minutes before. Seriously though, who doesn't have a spare mini they can use as a substitute until that wound gets peeled?

4) Meh. If the size is about right, it's fine for a little bit. If they're converting it to an appropriate model, definitely fine.

5) Not a huge issue, especially if they're feeling out a new list. Vehicles are a pretty darn pricey for something that could be trash. I've got 3 old style rhinos that I'm phasing out of my CSM and I'm sorely tempted to convert them over to griffin mortars or something so I can still get some use of them.

ive done quite a few counts as armies, my 'Khrave & Barghesi' (shamless plug - click on my name and look at my threads) are my fav. The whole army has been vastly converted. Ive played this army in quite stores and clubs and even at warhammer world. Ive only ever had people say good things about it. Which is how it should be. A project like this is alot of hard work and very costly but having group of 13 year olds look at my army in awe and mouths agap is really cool. If your using the counts as rule for any other reason your missing the point.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
ive done quite a few counts as armies, my 'Khrave & Barghesi' (shamless plug - click on my name and look at my threads) are my fav. The whole army has been vastly converted. Ive played this army in quite stores and clubs and even at warhammer world. Ive only ever had people say good things about it. Which is how it should be. A project like this is alot of hard work and very costly but having group of 13 year olds look at my army in awe and mouths agap is really cool. If your using the counts as rule for any other reason your missing the point.