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 this has been somewhat covered and spread throughout the forums when 6th came out but let me run something bye you guys.
I see custom bastions all the time, the other day i saw an awesome Tau bastion that was made out of a upside down bowl and a bucket (with details of course)
Anyway, as far as i can tell, please correct me if i am wrong but the only requirements are that it must:

be a medium size building aka fit within a 9x9x9 cube...

have at least 1 access point

have 4 emplaced heavy bolters (or counts as gun models)

a battlement to place a comms relay or gun emplacement

My question is the above true since it says "typically" for the heavy bolters placement and access/fire point as modeled?

Could i put them all on 1 side? can i put them on a rotating section of the building (I think this might not work so well since it doesn't say anything about being able to rotate.

Can a chaos bastion be floating in the air a little and be represented by a Silver Tower? Assuming it doesn't move and it has steps or something to the access point.

Does the access point even need to be on ground level or can i make it elevated with a ramp so it takes more movement to get to it? Of course this would subtract when leaving too.

I am asking these based on RAW, that is why i am asking it here. It seems though that bastion is a type of building and an imperial bastion is specific rules for a bastion with point costs etc....

If my bastion is bigger and can hold more guys on top that is modeling for advantage... but is it legal modeling for advantage?

What about just increasing the height of the GW Imperial bastion box to 9 inches so it's hard to block LOS of the Quad gun/Las cannon with other terrain?

Yes i realize i would be considered TFG but these measures are taken to ensure TFG can't be TFG to me, and because i think it would be awesome to have an epic (as in awesome not the scale) silver tower be my bastion.

It depends I guess whether you take the illustrations in the rulebook as being 'the model' or not. You're then stuck with the model GW produces.

If not, there are no clear rules how your model should look. Apart from 'As per model', i.e. what you put down on the table.

Even the picture of the Bastion is odd since it has the higher fire points unevenly distributed (2 high ones on the same facing). Regardless, I did assemble mine the same, but I usually play it like it has 1 high and 1 low fire point and 1 heavy bolter on each facing.

Well i see people use alternative models such as the tau one all the time, even in games workshop stores, but my question is imore of a... Is this RAW or since it is about the same and i fun game that it doesn't matter since it ostensibly more awesome looking then the way it affects the game.

There isn't really a RAW, since there's no rules to cover this, apart from vague terms like 'typically one per facing' (so what about a-typical cases?), 'as per model' and such.

Like any conversion or scratchbuild, it's simply a matter of being reasonable. Are you getting a significant advantage by using a different model? If so, then don't use it. That just seems like common sportsmanship to me. If you're worried about other players being TFG to you, then simply don't play them; engaging in some sort of escalating arms race for who can build the biggest, most abusive piece of terrain is not the way to go.

None of your questions are directly addressed in the rulebook so we can't give you a RAW answer, but all can be answered by asking yourself one simple question: would you be comfortable playing against this?

Well reasonable is subjective, for example if i made the current bastion 2ish inches taller, it would still fit within 9 inches and not change much unless someone tried putting a 8 inches build directing in front of it.

As far as not playing them... I don't mind playing them but if they are in a WAAC mindset, I will be too. for example in a casual game where i can change my list if my opponent isn't playing any flyers and has no AA (or very little) I take out my heldrake(s) and replace them with Forge Fiends if i have the slots or bikes if i don't. However if the other player is a WACC player who is using what is accepted as an cheezy/op list then, well they should have included AA.

There are certainly plenty of cases in GWs literature with kit bashed fortifications. For example, an extra level added to a bastion.

I'd say it needs to be of the appropriate size / capability in order to justify the correct classification for points cost. In other words don't model two bastions together with 8 bolters and 2 lascanons and expect to pay 50 points for it in a game against me...

well that's the thing, the bastion states the weapons it has, 4 bolters and options for 1 of the other ones.
But kit bash 2 bastions and you can still have a medium building. Also there is nothing in there from having more holes for more fire points.