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.

dkellyj wrote:I use a lot of aftermarket bases. As long as they are the same (aprox) size no one has issues with them. As for tall scenic bases, I always count my opponent as having a normal height base. Its an abstract but I see no reason to cheese a guy because he chooses to make his Army something above average.

This is how I do it as well, it kind of goes along with not being able to blast an HQ or Sgt because you can see his banner but not his face. When this happens we always assume the 'fluff' part of the model(s) are not there and try to play it as best as possible. If you don't you'd have laying down Pathfinders who could almost never fire if they were in ruins, you'd have people cutting off their banners because it was getting their model taken out too easily, you'd have people who refused to use crouching models and a million more reasons to justify making models not very eye pleasing.

Cannot say I've ever had someone complain about a scenic base though, me personally, I much prefer playing against a snazzily painted army because it is good eye candy.