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.

Hey, I've recently purchased some old Obliterator models, and they came on the regular (25mm?) round bases, unlike the newer model which is on the larger base.

I know that you should use the bases that the model came with, but I'm just wondering if there is any rule stating that different squads of the same type must be on the same size of bases, or if I can have one squad with the old, small bases and one with the new, bigger ones.

Also, if the above is alright, I assume it's not possible to mix the base sizes within one squad, but could anyone verify this?

Hope somebody knows

There are no rules requiring different units to use the same bases, or models within a unit to all be based the same. Models just use the base with which they were supplied.

GrafWattenburg wrote:

I know that you should use the bases that the model came with...

Or a base of appropriate size, using models of a similar type as guidance.

If the model is on a valid base is done on a model to model basis. You can have two different units of the same type on different base sizes or two different models in the same unit on different base sizes as long as all bases involved are either the base the model came with or a base of appropriate size.

That being said, in my area, we prefer to see old models re-based onto what ever GW currently supplies with that model. This is our preference and not a requirement.

 DJGietzen wrote:
Or a base of appropriate size, using models of a similar type as guidance.

That part of the rule is in reference to models that for whatever reason don't come with a base.

"Sometimes a player may have models in his collection on unusually modelled bases. Some models arn't supplied with a base at all. In these cases..."

Its referring to both the 'no base' or the 'unusuall base' situations.

Using a 40mm base with an obliterator that came with a 25mm base is OK becouse that is an unusual base and 40mm is the normal base for an obliterator these days. You could also use a 25mm base with an obliterator that came with a 25mm base becouse thats the base it came with. However using a 25mm base with an obliterator that came with a 40mm base is not ok. While it is also an unusual base, its not the normal base for obliterators any more (even i though it was once upon a time) and this obliterator did not come with a 25mm base.

 DJGietzen wrote:
Using a 40mm base with an obliterator that came with a 25mm base is OK becouse that is an unusual base ...

Why?

Becouse that is an obliterator on an unusualy modeled base and 40mm is the normal base for an obliterator these days so 40mm is a base of appropriate size using other models of a similar type as guidance.

Thanks for the replies. I'm glad to hear that I can have different bases within a unit too, saves me from a little re-basing work.

While legal, I would frown upon mixed bases within the squad, unless there are not enough models. If for example, you had 3 termies on 25mm, and 2 on 40mm (and didn't own any more), that's fine, I won't be upset. If you had 5 of each and ran two squads mixed, then I would be.

Imperial guard use units with mixed base sizes.

 6^ wrote:
Imperial guard use units with mixed base sizes.

True, but they're not all the same model. There's quite a difference between a guardsman and a heavy weapon team.
Not the same as a unit of all terminators.

 Happyjew wrote:
While legal, I would frown upon mixed bases within the squad, unless there are not enough models. If for example, you had 3 termies on 25mm, and 2 on 40mm (and didn't own any more), that's fine, I won't be upset. If you had 5 of each and ran two squads mixed, then I would be.

I would be more upset if all the terminators were identically equipped but if their equipment is driving what squad they are in there is'nt much we can do.

That being said, GW sells bases. Bits stores on the net sell bases. Its not hard or expensive to rebase models if your concerned about your opponents reaction.

 DJGietzen wrote:
That being said, GW sells bases. Bits stores on the net sell bases. Its not hard or expensive to rebase models if your concerned about your opponents reaction.

Absolutley.
I've re based many models over the years to match the current range of models. And encourage those I play against to do the same.
It's one less thing to worry about mid-game, and let's you get on with the game instead.

In my experience, most of the players who play for fun or even competative players rebase their models to fit the updated models. I did it myself with all of my chaos termies. I have usually seen that its TFG (based on the reputation they have already developed by other actions and WAAC attitudes) that refuses to because you are technically allowed to leave them (which they have the right to do so none of us will fault them for it).
I think that if you rebase them to match, you will likely find the gaming atmosphere a lil more friendly towards you in your local gaming community.

I don't think it would be too much of an issue to play agaisnt or play with a unit on mixed sized bases.

Running two or more units would probably cause a few raised eyebrows but shouldn't get in the way of enjoying the game.

However, rebasing may lead to a more aesthetic appearance and stop idiots accusing you of being tfg.

Notice that i did not say that refusing to rebase made you TFG.
What i said was that TFG are more likely to refuse to rebase. They were already TFG for other behaviors and attitudes.
When i rebased my chaos termies, i thought they looked better and allowed me to 'upgrade" them from before in terms of flocking and such that i had not done for them years before. looking at my army set up, i felt better looking at them for as you said, aesthetic reasons.

 EVIL INC wrote:
Notice that i did not say that refusing to rebase made you TFG.
What i said was that TFG are more likely to refuse to rebase. They were already TFG for other behaviors and attitudes.
When i rebased my chaos termies, i thought they looked better and allowed me to 'upgrade" them from before in terms of flocking and such that i had not done for them years before. looking at my army set up, i felt better looking at them for as you said, aesthetic reasons.

I don't know if you are referring to my comments or not.

If you are, then, my original comment was not based on reference to your posting.

As for bases. Its cool either way. I prefer rebasing but for the odd unit it shouldn't ever be an issue. Unless it is MFA.

Just FYI: Many tourneys will require you to put your 25mm model on a poker chip if you have inconsistent base sizes. Some have requirements of using the modern base size/model size.

Especially for models which are on smaller bases than their modern counterpart, it is so simple to simply set them on a 40mm poker chip, there is no argument not to do it unless it is MFA (which I have seen with terminators at tourneys)

I rebase when needed. I try to have consistent models and base sizes.

 Mr. Burning wrote:

 EVIL INC wrote:
Notice that i did not say that refusing to rebase made you TFG.
What i said was that TFG are more likely to refuse to rebase. They were already TFG for other behaviors and attitudes.
When i rebased my chaos termies, i thought they looked better and allowed me to 'upgrade" them from before in terms of flocking and such that i had not done for them years before. looking at my army set up, i felt better looking at them for as you said, aesthetic reasons.

I don't know if you are referring to my comments or not.

If you are, then, my original comment was not based on reference to your posting.

As for bases. Its cool either way. I prefer rebasing but for the odd unit it shouldn't ever be an issue. Unless it is MFA.

LOl, I had thought your post was reference to mine as it came right after me popsting that in my experience it was TFG that would be the ones to refuse to rebase.

nkelsch, i wish my local shop would do something like that. We have TFG with the broadsides on the teeny tiny bases and sits all 3 on the top of ruins where even a single one of the newer models would not fit. One tourney, I thought his head would explode when I pulled out 3 extra heavy weapons squd bases for him to borrow for the tourney. He would not have lost points because they were all flocked. needless to say, he refused them.

 EVIL INC wrote:

LOl, I had thought your post was reference to mine as it came right after me popsting that in my experience it was TFG that would be the ones to refuse to rebase.

nkelsch, i wish my local shop would do something like that. We have TFG with the broadsides on the teeny tiny bases and sits all 3 on the top of ruins where even a single one of the newer models would not fit. One tourney, I thought his head would explode when I pulled out 3 extra heavy weapons squd bases for him to borrow for the tourney. He would not have lost points because they were all flocked. needless to say, he refused them.

It used to be more of an issue with 5th edition disembarking and deep striking for terminators, but the discrepancy in Tau and the upsize from 40mm 60mm is a real issue as well.

I really question the motivation when people blindly defend 'in-game' advantages granted by inconsistent base size and try to see why they deserve a more effective unit for the points than their peer at the next table?

And if the issue is 'my models are pretty and rebasing hurts the model' then sitting it on a placeholder base seems like a reasonable effort which keeps your models undamaged.

I feel like GW would have done well to make 'base size' part of the statline 3 editions ago.

Exalted nkelsch, i REALLY like the idea of making it part of the statline.
To be honest, even with my termies,rebasing to a larger base actually makes the model slightly taller (I say LET someone claim MFA, would they rather I have the advantage i would have if i didnt?) Because, i just glued the smaller base onto the center of the correct size base and flocked and such so it looks like they were standing on slightly higher ground. (good thing the didnt change grot base size or that would be a whole different can of worms wouldnt irt lol)

While the Statistic Line thing would be an improvement; we really need more solid rules concerning 'Modeling for Advantage' to start with.

JinxDragon wrote:
... we really need more solid rules concerning 'Modeling for Advantage' to start with.

That won't happen so long as the game uses True LOS. Short of just requiring every model to be assembled exactly as per the assembly instructions, and requiring units to only use the parts included in their own box, it would simply be too complicated to regulate modelling and the way it affects the game.

I dunno - with The Internet and web enabled devices everywhere it shouldn't be too hard to have a "reference" model on the website that's used to resolve disputes. That way you can freely model, but if "something's fishy" you have an official "this is how it should look" to go off of.