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.
We've had one poster call for the removal of integral puddle bases.
Now BlackCatto is calling for their continued inclusion.
I smell a discussion.
They're gak. Get rid of them. Even Mantic is getting rid of them after starting with similar. Talk to Ronnie about their decision.
I mean, you could do a poll, but a lot of those are easy to "stuff" with simple technology (reset cookies, or VPN), not to mention that your own website is a niche place for discussion where only the most devoted go.
Could the reptile be a Kroxigor equivalent? Ogre sized lizzies would be exciting in general and even useful for AoS. Pretty sure they're still failcast.
The old meta is dead and the new meta struggles to be born. Now is the time of munchkins.
Pudle bases aren't gak... damn, just cut them off if you want to. And Mantics figures are a great example why bases are sometimes a necessity. Figures running or jumping around on one leg, connecting to the ground on 1-2 mm of glueing space... Unstable and an invitation for disaster.
It is pretty simple in the end and you can't just say good or bad.
If the figures are to be used single based, like in most skirmishers (Sci fi typically) and have two firm connecting points to glue, eg feet, then no integral base is fine.
If they are to be used on multibases with 4+ miniatures (everything historical typically) then integral bases are a must. Else the whole affair is as stable as a house of cards.
Northstar does it well - Stargrave figures: no base. Oathmark figures: integral bases.
Stupid decision on the other hand: Fireforge Cataphracts. The horse connects to the ground on one wobbly hoof, with no base... needs drilling and pinning even on plastic bases and you can pretty much forget it on wood or resin etc.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/10/22 10:08:07
Human ambassador of Cats on earth. All hail our feline overlords!!!
I understand that some models with small feet benefit from an integral base. Other than that, I prefer slotta or none.
I still find slottas great because in addition to slotting they are easily removed for scenic basing or gluing to a flat base. Also, for dramatic poses and large figures it's so easy to cut the tab down to pegs for pinning without pins.
I think there is also a usefulness difference between fantasy and historical line troops which often have outdoor basing (and group deployment) that conceals integral bases and sci Fi troops which often have styles of basing (industrial, pavement, interior, etc.) That don't play well with integral bases.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2022/10/22 12:35:39
I can understand some small piece of terrain under the foot/hoof etc. for the running model (like GW Fenrisian wolves or Squigs have) but even then there is no need for the entire pudle base, and for a standing pose (which is the majority of human sized models) there is no need for an integral base at all.
lord_blackfang wrote: Still amazed that people can claim cutting off a base from potentially two spindly breaky legs is easier than gluing it on.
Because it is. Arguing about facts, eh?
Someone who is unable to cut a base off of a figure can't be able to attach a figure properly to a base. That is like saying " I paint the pupils with an airbrush because paintbrushes don't work"...
WA does it right now. Bases for historicals and no bases for the 40k proxies. Everything else would be a dumb decision. Hope they don't fall into the trap of catering to vocal minorities and end up ruining their products.
Human ambassador of Cats on earth. All hail our feline overlords!!!
lord_blackfang wrote: Still amazed that people can claim cutting off a base from potentially two spindly breaky legs is easier than gluing it on.
I wonder how much space it would take up to make optional puddle bases with foot-shaped indentations for ease of gluing.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Wait, Garfield, are you suggesting snipping off the bases takes no time or effort more than not having to do so? Have you ever timed yourself? That’s the kind of outrageous claim that needs outrageous evidence—please post a YouTube video of you snipping and basing 5 historical minis against someone else basing 5 Death Fields minis, because I have got to see that!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/10/22 15:43:51
Puddle bases are the worst. Absolutely hate them. I'd love to see a real time video of someone clipping/sawing off puddle bases. Maybe I'm just doing it wrong, but it takes me a long time to do it well.
Gallahad wrote: Puddle bases are the worst. Absolutely hate them. I'd love to see a real time video of someone clipping/sawing off puddle bases. Maybe I'm just doing it wrong, but it takes me a long time to do it well.
Indeed. I've removed bases from about 50 Wargames Factory miniatures and it's annoying, really. The worst case is breaking legs, but it's pretty common to end up with very flat feet, or no toes.
Saying it's as time consuming as just gluing a Mini on such a base seems... ignorant.
Yeah, puddle bases to me are a "can live with it if I must" sort of thing, but man is it vastly preferable to just glue the damned model to the base. That might be just me and my preference of using greenstuff world rollers to make simple but scenic bases, which is far harder when you glue a stupid puddle base on top of it, or more tedious if you have to cut the base off. If the model itself is good enough and I have a need for it I'll still buy it, but if there is something in the same niche and same price range without the puddle base, I'd go for it every time.
Gallahad wrote: Puddle bases are the worst. Absolutely hate them. I'd love to see a real time video of someone clipping/sawing off puddle bases. Maybe I'm just doing it wrong, but it takes me a long time to do it well.
No more puddle bases! It's my biggest complaint about Oathmark/Frostgrave, I hate them.
More textured bases please! Even if a base is just cobblestones or pavement or deck plates, a base that can be painted out of the box without flocking and such is a god sent!
I strongly dislike puddle bases because they're a massive pain to do anything with. Plastic ones already lead to accidents but metal or big plastic ones make it a complete disaster. I'd much prefer all models to just have their feet loose, even if the contact point is just a few square mm. It's really not that hard to glue them down and I base on washers with a mixture of grout, glue, and sand.
In terms of things I'd like to see. I'd love Death fields Hussars (as in, the 18th to 19th century style) and anything 12th century western Europe is always welcome. I unfortunately don't have a 3D printer so I'm not really in the market for STLs.
More textured bases please! Even if a base is just cobblestones or pavement or deck plates, a base that can be painted out of the box without flocking and such is a god sent!
This is something I would love to see more of. AFAIK, the only currently produced HIPS plastic scenic bases that aren't GW and are available separately are Champ Industries bases originally produced for Rezolution. and you have to email directly to get them because the website is dying and wonky. Despite their age and only having 4 sculpts in 2 styles, I like their bases and the incredible ease of use so much I keep buying them even after I've probably used a couple hundred already. http://champindustries.net/bases.html Heck, maybe WGA could acquire the Champ tooling and get them properly distributed....
Either plastic bases or base toppers would be amazing. Cobblestones are probably the safest design, but deck plates, wood grain, brick and possibly concrete are examples of nice generic plastic bases that would save modelers alot of time.
Here's two examples of the Champ bases.
Industrial
These "urban" have a bit of concrete patch smeared on
Imagine what WGA could do with this sort of concept, presumably with more than 4 sculpts per type.
More textured bases please! Even if a base is just cobblestones or pavement or deck plates, a base that can be painted out of the box without flocking and such is a god sent!
This is something I would love to see more of. AFAIK, the only currently produced HIPS plastic scenic bases that aren't GW and are available separately are Champ Industries bases originally produced for Rezolution.
More textured bases please! Even if a base is just cobblestones or pavement or deck plates, a base that can be painted out of the box without flocking and such is a god sent!
This is something I would love to see more of. AFAIK, the only currently produced HIPS plastic scenic bases that aren't GW and are available separately are Champ Industries bases originally produced for Rezolution.
I've a few hundred of the Champ Industries bases and love them. The Renedra bases are disks, not raised at all, they can work as toppers if you wanted raised, GW style, bases.
I see some are coming from Dungeons and Lasers, but want more. MORE!
Nothing too distinct, just generic rocks, pavement etc, saves so much time.
+1 for poo-pooing the puddle bases. Sure if a model has tiny feet why not do a small puddle under each foot instead? At least that would be easier to remove.
Easier to shove a model onto a thin layer of greenstuff if you need to instead of making a large amount of players have to try to shear away the puddle then cut the foot sole down without breaking fine mini legs.
With multi-piece HIPS, pegs smaller than the foot are the absolute best, tabs are workable, nothing is basing and sculpt dependent, and puddles are a scourge. Tactical rocks are a separate issue but smaller is better.
Full, somewhat sarcastic/whiny reasoning:
Spoiler:
Pegs: easy to make a hole for them or trim off, provide anchoring and with tools a grip point for painting. Nothing will make everyone happy but this is a midpoint I think everyone can agree is workable.
Tabs: not too difficult to remove but if you don’t want/have a slot in your base of choice it can get annoying. Personally I won’t actively complain but internally I’ll be ing about how pegs provide just as good of an anchor while I trim them down into a peg.
Nothing: if you have large contact areas on a naturally stable model (unburdened rhinoceros)? Great! If it’s not going to be a plastic to plastic bond and it could get knocked over? It could end badly. If the sculpt has plenty of material to sink an anchoring pin into it’s all good but if it’s, say, a horse I will be mentally cursing you if it doesn’t have a reasonable chunk of tactical rock built in.
Puddles: step 0 flock over a puddle or two and find that they’ll be standing in wet sand or deep grass and need 2-3 layers to hide the edges. Step 1 abandon all hope, pray the legs don’t get shoved too far or catch a saw in the groin, curse the sculptor. Step 2 clip and if it’s only one or two patiently saw the bulk of it off. If you have a box of human sized? Give up and find a different supplier. Like those nice potato monstrosities claiming to be a human with tabs in pewter. It will actually be easier to remove the bulk of the tab and turn into a peg. No, really. Step 3 file the extra 1-2 mm of material off so they aren’t in platform shoes, or worse, platform feet. You might be able to skip this one step if you’re generous with the flock. Step 4 carefully carve the rest of the scrap material down until it looks like an unburdened shoe/foot. Step 5 now we’re at the same point as one with nothing! Only even less care was given to making sure there was anything to attach to, much less be drilled into for a pin.
There is a reason why those of us who aren’t trying to crank out 100+ of the same thing that look okay at three to six feet kinda hate the people that think puddle bases aren’t a big deal.
Another reason I hate puddle bases: they screw up scale shots with fantasy minis! Puddle thickness definitely varies by manufacturer and many people simply ignore their height when taking side by side photos. I don't blame those people (never look a gift horse in the mouth), rather I blame the companies that keep producing puddle bases.
Another reason I hate puddle bases: They make it look funny if you have some members of a warband on a puddle and some not.
"Everybody except Frank and Jerry are standing on their own little hill??" They make it harder to basing uniform across miniature types (those made by companies and those made by companies that hate progress)
I stand corrected. It looks like the plastic base scenic market has grown beyond what I had thought.
I do wonder though, with Renedra being only thin toppers (I'll likely now be buying some to go on top of disc style bases) and hard to find in the US and Dungeons and lasers being the only bargain priced GW-size base set at the height of a standard slotta, I wonder if there's still a niche for affordable bases?
WGA's current base offerings are very well-suited to fantasy figures with cast-on-bases and being able to magnetize easily is brilliant, but I think they missed a trick with the hole in the middle (could have been a punch-out instead) mucking up the look for anyone who might want to use the textured side. I think something scenic and standard 3mm tall (alot of gamers do notice the difference between 2 and 3 mm) without a hole in the middle, and with a cavity on the bottom for magnets would be a hit with the wider gaming audience.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/10/23 12:37:18
Eilif wrote: AFAIK, the only currently produced HIPS plastic scenic bases that aren't GW and are available separately are Champ Industries bases originally produced for Rezolution. and you have to email directly to get them because the website is dying and wonky. Despite their age and only having 4 sculpts in 2 styles, I like their bases and the incredible ease of use so much I keep buying them even after I've probably used a couple hundred already. http://champindustries.net/bases.html Heck, maybe WGA could acquire the Champ tooling and get them properly distributed....
I didn't think Champ was still operating, I am running low on those. I'll have to send an email.
A few months ago I too was wondering if Wargames Atlantic could team up with them.
I got 200 or so from them a few months ago so yeah, they're still there.
But for any plastic making companies that might be listening TAKE NOTE.
We are willing to go to sketchy circa 1998 websites and send them money in a brown paper bag (or paypal, I forget which) to get pre-textured bases. Now imagine how many bases you could sell with some nice, generic, 25mm and 32mm bases!
Sell them in bags of 100, with a nice generic common theme, and bob's your uncle!
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2022/10/23 19:43:39
....any plastic making companies that might be listening TAKE NOTE.
We are willing to go to sketchy circa 1998 websites and send them money in brown paper bag (or paypal, I forget which) to get pre-textured bases. Now imagine how many bases you could sell with some nice, generic, 25mm and 32mm bases!...
ChaoticMind wrote: With multi-piece HIPS, pegs smaller than the foot are the absolute best, tabs are workable, nothing is basing and sculpt dependent, and puddles are a scourge. Tactical rocks are a separate issue but smaller is better.
+1 for pegs!
So much better than slots!
Pegs, just add to one foot! Make textured bases with holes for pegs!
Pegs! So useful!
Pegs!
ing about how pegs provide just as good of an anchor while I trim them down into a peg.
