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.

Ok guys I have a question.

With WYSIWYG my boyz either shootas or sluggas.
For instance I have one group of 25 with all sluggas and another 25 with shootas. Should all of the models be holding shootas and vise versa? Or can I just make it clear to whom I am playing with?

Also how far can I convert models before its to far? As long as I keep it the same size or bigger (disadvantage) should that be fare?

 typhus40k wrote:
With WYSIWYG my boyz either shootas or sluggas.
For instance I have one group of 25 with all sluggas and another 25 with shootas. Should all of the models be holding shootas and vise versa? Or can I just make it clear to whom I am playing with?

Technically, yes, all of your models should accurately represent what they are supposed to be. In practice, a few models scattered through with incorrect gear isn't usually a big deal, so long as it is still obvious to your opponent what they are supposed to be.

Also how far can I convert models before its to far? As long as I keep it the same size or bigger (disadvantage) should that be fare?

The key is: Are they recognisable for what they are supposed to be?

WYSIWYG isn't a hard rules area where there is a line you can push. It's a courtesy issue ... Ultimately, WYSIWYG is about keeping the game easy for you and your opponent to play. The less accurately your army is modeled, the more of a headache you are making for your opponent.

if the whole unit is meant to have shootas, I'd just make sure they all have shootas. for converting purposes, 'shoota' is a very broad term to orks, and as long as it shoots more than a slugga, it's a shoota. if it shoots loads more, it's a big shoota, and so on.

what conversions did you have in mind that'd make orks noticeably bigger? i can't see why you wouldn't be able to, obviously if they're being put on stilts to help you get line of sight it'd be modelling for advantage, but general conversions like backpacks, armour, scenic bases etc won't affect the game very much at all.

This is my battle wagon its the same length but the width is a bit bigger so I think it puts me at a disadvantage.

My only issue is that big banner could possibly block LOS to things. But i wouldn't have any complaints playing against it.

 typhus40k wrote:
This is my battle wagon its the same length but the width is a bit bigger so I think it puts me at a disadvantage.

Actually, wider battlewagons are generally seen as an advantage for the Ork player, as it effectively gives them a wider front arc (where the armour is higher) when shot at.

That being said, most players don't care that much so long as the model looks cool

Sluggas: gun in one hand, something pointy or shooty in the other.
Shootas: gun in one hand or hold with two, nothing in the other hand.
Try pins or magnets for the second hand and make the weapon removable to change sluggas to shootas.

Vehicle is fine, Orks have an advantage with this. Agreed that just try your best to make it look good and no complaints.