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.

I know you are supposed to put the model on the base it comes with, but they don't make a Wazdakka model. Normally, you but ork bikers on a bike base. My argument is that while Nobz and Boyz go on a 25mm base, Big Meks and Warbosses go on a 40mm base. And while Wazdakka is neither a Big Mek or Warboss, wouldn't it make sense, to put him on a larger base (one you made or otherwise)? I would say that it would, as he is a bit of both rules wise, and especially if you scratch build him a larger bike.

What does Dakka think?

Disclaimer: I have already made my decision in regards to this. I know that you should ask a TO if you if are planning on doing anything other than the standard and bringing it to their tournament. I am actually planning on 2 bases for him (one larger, and 1 standard bike base, just in case.

I have a Large Oval base that I use for Wazz. He's not glued onto it though, so I can remove him if someone gets uppity. (He also still rolls so that's a double plus.)

Mine is a conversion i got in trade (awesome job too) on a bigger base. It's built like a 40k biker base, but about twice as long and twice as wide. The models is pretty beefy.

I take a mundane bikerboss with me to tournaments in case someone has an issue, and will field the boss instead, but most folk don't have a problem with him being a bit bigger, at least where i've played.

I could see it having rule issues (like the pivot trick and LOS blocking) but i don't pivot-trick as a rule (i consider it a bit TFG) and have the larger profile working against me also.

My advice is to base him how you like, and take a spare biker as a tradeout if anyone gets their nose in a sling

I'd say regular biker base, or the size of Zardsnark da Rippa (the FW biker boss). But, as it's a scratchbuild, anything is firne really, as long as it looks good.

I use the FW biker boss' base for my Wazzy and got my FW biker boss a Dragonforge attack bike base. I like the more slender Wazdakka base personally~

But as far as rules go, since there's no official model there's no official base size :/

I would use the normal bike base, however I could potentially see someone using the same base as The Thunderwolf Lord they made a model for ... forgot his name ...

Large oval. It's the only thing big enough for his bike

If the model looks awesome, do people at tourneys *really* complain? Unless you then proceed to attack like he skid into the unit to maximize contact and then turn it narrow end to incoming fire.

Homer

Redbeard wrote:Large oval. It's the only thing big enough for his bike

He's a beauty, RB!

Are we in show-off mode now?




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Homer S wrote:If the model looks awesome, do people at tourneys *really* complain? Unless you then proceed to attack like he skid into the unit to maximize contact and then turn it narrow end to incoming fire.

Homer

With an alternative model, there is always the possibility. That being said, no one has complained about either my Wazz or my Warboss who are both on ridiculously large bases. They both can be removed from the bases for transport though, so that makes it easier. If someone complains, I just plop them on the table without base.

As long as you are not doing the PIVOT trick for extra distance to exploit the larger base, most of the real advantages for an oversized base are from disembarking (which bikerboss can't do).

I don't think people complain about bike bases in general as except for the pivot trick, there is no real advantage. Worse comes to worse, you can always offer to replace the biker with an empty base for any and all issues with base size.

nkelsch wrote:As long as you are not doing the PIVOT trick for extra distance to exploit the larger base, most of the real advantages for an oversized base are from disembarking (which bikerboss can't do).

I don't think people complain about bike bases in general as except for the pivot trick, there is no real advantage. Worse comes to worse, you can always offer to replace the biker with an empty base for any and all issues with base size.

For bike bases though, the pivot trick is legal. It happens both intentionally and unintentionally throughout games. I don't get the resistance against it. I try to avoid it specifically with my boss and wazz, but it happens no matter what you do. That's what you get when they design non-round bases for the system.

pretre wrote:

nkelsch wrote:As long as you are not doing the PIVOT trick for extra distance to exploit the larger base, most of the real advantages for an oversized base are from disembarking (which bikerboss can't do).

I don't think people complain about bike bases in general as except for the pivot trick, there is no real advantage. Worse comes to worse, you can always offer to replace the biker with an empty base for any and all issues with base size.

For bike bases though, the pivot trick is legal. It happens both intentionally and unintentionally throughout games. I don't get the resistance against it. I try to avoid it specifically with my boss and wazz, but it happens no matter what you do. That's what you get when they design non-round bases for the system.

Pivot trick is legal... and if you plan to use the pivot trick, then you also get to use it on the standard bike base size. If you mount your Bikerboss on a 120mm base or a 7" long super base or whatever us crazy ork bosses use... then don't add insult to injury by saying 'oh by the way, my 7" wazdakka is now pivoting for 3" extra distance.

As long as you are not explicitly gaining an advantage from the larger base, no one will mind.

pretre wrote:
Are we in show-off mode now?

Always

pretre wrote:

nkelsch wrote:As long as you are not doing the PIVOT trick for extra distance to exploit the larger base, most of the real advantages for an oversized base are from disembarking (which bikerboss can't do).

I don't think people complain about bike bases in general as except for the pivot trick, there is no real advantage. Worse comes to worse, you can always offer to replace the biker with an empty base for any and all issues with base size.

For bike bases though, the pivot trick is legal. It happens both intentionally and unintentionally throughout games. I don't get the resistance against it. I try to avoid it specifically with my boss and wazz, but it happens no matter what you do. That's what you get when they design non-round bases for the system.

]

It doesn't happen no matter what you do.

^
|
|

measure from the middle going to the right

. -->
Tip pointing to the right, you have gained no distance due to pivoting.

Shrike325 wrote:It doesn't happen no matter what you do.
.

Umm. If you line your bikes up against the line of your deployment zone sideways and then pivot on the center of the base during your first turn, you gain movement. Same as if you do it with a rhino or any non-round object.

It's as old as 40k.

pretre wrote:

Shrike325 wrote:It doesn't happen no matter what you do.
.

Umm. If you line your bikes up against the line of your deployment zone sideways and then pivot on the center of the base during your first turn, you gain movement. Same as if you do it with a rhino or any non-round object.

It's as old as 40k.

I was more saying it doesn't HAVE to happen. I understand that you can.

Shrike325 wrote:

pretre wrote:

Shrike325 wrote:It doesn't happen no matter what you do.
.

Umm. If you line your bikes up against the line of your deployment zone sideways and then pivot on the center of the base during your first turn, you gain movement. Same as if you do it with a rhino or any non-round object.

It's as old as 40k.

I was more saying it doesn't HAVE to happen. I understand that you can.

Just saying if you are going to use gamemanship to get a minor advantage out of the letter of the law, then I will gamemanship back by fussing about the non-standard base size. (I have seen many long bike bases)

So if you pivot, then I will say 'please use a standard biker base for all pivot measuring'. If you don't attempt it with the bikerboss on his megabase in the first place, it won't have to be an issue.

I didn't think 'pivot' was applicable to anything other than vehicles. (page 57)

If you put him sideways at deployment, and then want to move forward, you measure from the edge of your base to where you want to go, and then place the edge of your base at the tape measure, oriented in whatever direction you want, like for any other model with a base.


The one possible advantage of having a bike base is, if you're careful, and they're close together, you can assault two units at once. But this is actually not possible with an oval base (it's about geometry. There's a straight line on a standard bike base, which is what makes this possible. There is no straight line on an oval).

Redbeard is correct. Vehicles get a pass because it specifically says that rotating does not count for their movement. In the movement section, it says in an example that you measure from front to front (as an example) to make sure you do not move more than their allotted movement.

It says the exact same thing for vehicles. Pivoting works for any model with a non- square/circle base.

If you pivot with anything but a vehicle, and it gains forward movement, that takes away from further distance you can move.

Fearspect wrote:If you pivot with anything but a vehicle, and it gains forward movement, that takes away from further distance you can move.

That is not a rule.

The 'rule' is that bikes can move 12" in a turn, not 14".

Fearspect wrote:The 'rule' is that bikes can move 12" in a turn, not 14".

Then please quote the part where turning a model around its center point is a 2" move. Unless you can, your claim is baseless.

The rule you request is part of the general measurement rules, presented on page 3 and then on page 12 for moving.

You will see a picture showing how you measure from the front edge of your model's base, and the final position of your model is determined by placing the edge of their base at the distance measured.

Unlike vehicles, models with bases do not move as a series of shorter moves, and so, while you can rotate freely during your movement, this doesn't affect either the starting, or ending point of the move.

You are making the mistake of believing that the rules will tell you what you cannot do. That's not how they work. The rules tell you what you can do. You can measure from your base and make your final position a certain distance away. Nothing in the rules allows you to pivot a non-vehicle model for anything other than aesthetic purposes.

Please show where pivoting counts as movement for non-vehIcles.

Redbeard wrote:The rule you request is part of the general measurement rules, presented on page 3 and then on page 12 for moving.

You will see a picture showing how you measure from the front edge of your model's base, and the final position of your model is determined by placing the edge of their base at the distance measured.

Unlike vehicles, models with bases do not move as a series of shorter moves, and so, while you can rotate freely during your movement, this doesn't affect either the starting, or ending point of the move.

You are making the mistake of believing that the rules will tell you what you cannot do. That's not how they work. The rules tell you what you can do. You can measure from your base and make your final position a certain distance away. Nothing in the rules allows you to pivot a non-vehicle model for anything other than aesthetic purposes.

Fearspect claimed that you are allowed to pivot, as long as you reduce your movement distance accordingly. That's something entirely different than you are saying, and not even anywhere near the rules.

Note that I'm not arguing for or against gaining distance by pivoting, I was merely pointing out that Fearspect was making up rules.

All I said is the farthest distance you can move is 12". That is what the rules say.

Fearspect wrote:All I said is the farthest distance you can move is 12". That is what the rules say.

So vehicles aren't allowed to pivot either?

Vehicles have a special extra rule that states pivoting does not count as movement.