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.

So I am working on a Skyshield Landing pad for my Eldar. I want it to be Eldar terrain, not Imperial.
I know the dimensions are about 3-4" tall, 12" diameter with shields up, 15" when down

My main question is how much difference will the following make?
A) only 3 legs instead of 4
B) doing a single large column in the center instead of 4 legs
C) not making the "shields" movable. I intend to always use them up and will use spoons to create the shields. It will be easier just to glue them in place.

I feel that A & B would actually be a disadvantage to me as it would provide less spots to hide units under the LP.
C probably would matter unless my opponent tries to change the configuration, but it's an unlikely situation.

For reference, I want the Landing pad to match the terrain I have already made, which I have tried to keep as close to the imperial equivalents as possible:
http://glennsgwmodels.blogspot.com/2013/06/eldar-corsair-hqs-terrain-and-wip-units.html

-

Sounds fine to me. As for C, if someone controls it and wants to lower them, it’s just a simple mater of saying “Ignore these for LOS when down.”

YMMV, check with your local players/TO/etc, as they are the ones you will be dealing with.

I don't see a problem with it.

You'd expect Eldar platforms to look different from Imperial platforms. And, since you're actually disadvantaging yourself by making the changes (for A and B) it shouldn't be an issue.

If there's some issue where the opponent would try to take the sheilds down, you can let it happen by saying they jammed some electronics in it so the shields don't work, and if you get them up again for some reason you can say the machine repaired itself (of was repaired by an invisible bonesinger who wasn't participating in the batte )

Ok, so I found a round food tray at home that is 16" in diameter (so just a cm or 2 larger that the LP with shield unfurled). The outer lip of the try curves up a bit.
If I place the spoons (barricades/outer wall/whatever) at the 12" diameter to represent the shields when up and not allow models to be placed outside that perimeter. what are the possible abuses to avoid?
I'd like to use this tray since it is very sturdy and perfectly round, but I can cut a 12" circle out of foam board if the extra width causes too much of an issue.

The only thing I can see this affecting is LoS for models on ground close to the LP trying to see models on the platform, or models at the edge of the wall looking down at close enemy units. The models in question would have to be rather close for this to happen, but the actual Landing Pad model can cause this too especially if the model on top are back far enough.

But I think as long as it's clear that models cannot be on the outer 2" (outside the wall) I shouldn't have any issues. Especially since I may not have a complete "wall", but rather about 20 spoon heads about 1" apart, so you'd be able to see through the gaps, with the extra lip blocking the same LoS that the lower part of the shield wall actually would.

-

The more you stray from the stock, the more you should be willing to yield any rules disputes.

So if someone has a unit where the should have LOS, but don’t, let them shtto.

 Nevelon wrote:
The more you stray from the stock, the more you should be willing to yield any rules disputes.

So if someone has a unit where the should have LOS, but don’t, let them shtto.

Oh definitely. I want this model to look cool as well as be functional. In game, I will do my best to position models so that there would be no dispute whether they could be seen on the actual LP.
For example, if I have Jetbikes on the Pad and a CC unit is getting close, I will make sure to use my Assault move to get as far back on the Pad as possible. Unless the CC can get onto the platform, they should not be able to see the Jetbikes whether I was using the actual LP model or not.

And the more I think about it, having the extra lip would give it the dimensions of the shields unfurled, so that's a bonus, making the different modes a simple "on-off" that can easily be represented with a marker.
I'm leaning heavily towards modeling it with a center column rather than legs so that it looks more "Eldar". I don't have my book at the moment (forgot to check last night), can anyone confirm if the pad can take Obstacles? I have a few Eldar barricades that would look great underneath it.

-

Rule of Cool. If it looks good, nobody will complain. If it looks like crap, people will be all "um, there is supposed to be a leg there, so you can't actually see my models".

They can take obstacles.

And yes, Rule of Cool forgives many sins.

Yeah, I am lucky because my local group is a bunch of rather cool laid back guys and they typically love my conversions. I just like to have that piece of mind that I could take my conversions to tournaments with no issues.

Man I am excited about this. Once I'm done I'll have pics, including all my Eldar terrain together as a "mega-structure"

-

Since it's supposed to be a force shield, were you going to use clear spoons for it or opaque spoons? You might want to use clear ones.

 doctortom wrote:
Since it's supposed to be a force shield, were you going to use clear spoons for it or opaque spoons? You might want to use clear ones.

I'll be using opaque spoons, specifically 20 because the actual LP has 20 of those raised shield bits. Ya know, the ones with the view slits.
I'll not be connecting them with that half inch high wall, however, allowing full LoS between the spoons to compensate for the larger platform
The 4++ "shield" will emanate from the center column, similar to how I assume the legs of the Landing Pad generate the shield.

Clear spoons would be a really cool idea, but considering how hard they are to cut without splitting, and the I already have used opaque spoons for my barricades, and that I'll be gluing High Elf shield designs on them, it just makes sense to use opaque ones

Edit:
Well, I just took another look at the Draft FAQ and the "petals" do not give any kind of cover save, as that is what the 4++ is supposed to represent. It makes sense, but kinda sucks for units with Shroud.
Makes the conversion easier though, since I won't matter too much if the "petals" match the silhouette of the actual model. LoS blocking would only happen in the extreme case that models on the ground close to the Pad would not see those on the Pad towards the rear.

-

-

Got it finished:
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-Rvtl-sqEw7o/V-_TidMAuNI/AAAAAAAABXU/iqFCRH6c5J4KP9V0Mw9C1fEIIRxoy3Z6wCLcB/s1600/Landing%2BPad.jpg

Sweet! Nice job!

Simple, curvy, elegant, looks like a cake topper: yup, very Eldar, you nailed it!

I cannot believe you made spoons look that darn good.

Props to you, good sir!

Thanx guys.
You'll notice that I place 4 small pieces hanging down below the platform. Those are to mark where the legs of the Landing Pad would be if it ever comes into question.

That was a good idea!