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.

Hi,

So I know the 25mm bases for boyz makes more sense because you can fit more into combat.
But i don't like the leg overhang they have and I don't plan on having hordes of boyz.

So basically are boyz that bad on 32mm? Will it be that much of a nerf on the bigger bases?

Does anyone have experience with them on bigger bases? And do they look too small on the 32s?

Thanks in advance.

Nerf? Lol its the opposite. 100+ Boyz on 32mm is a massive foot print used to protect from deep strikes and charges. No doubt thick enough that most rangel attacks can't go past that ocean of bases.

I've put mine on 32's for aesthetic reasons; 32's are likely going to make the unit much larger, so it will struggle taking cover and piling in, but then you'll have the advantage of being able to spread out more. It's probably a double edged sword depending on the situation.


I would just put them on 32's if you feel that they look better that way (like I do) and damn the consequences for games later. I don't think anyone would be able to accuse you of modelling for an advantage when the modelling in question is making them bigger on the table, and is also done aesthetically rather than for rules purposes.

 General Annoyance wrote:

I would just put them on 32's if you feel that they look better that way (like I do) and damn the consequences for games later. I don't think anyone would be able to accuse you of modelling for an advantage when the modelling in question is making them bigger on the table, and is also done aesthetically rather than for rules purposes.

Actually I think playing ork greentides with models on 32mm bases IS modelling for advantage. You won't get cover and screw the KFF but you'll occupy the entire table. 32mm bases could be ok if you play trukk boyz or other elites based lists.

Of course the aesthetics of your models is the most important thing, if you prefer them on 32mm bases I wouldn't consider you a WAAC player. But with an horde having 25mm or 32mm bases actually makes some difference.

 ProwlerPC wrote:
Nerf? Lol its the opposite. 100+ Boyz on 32mm is a massive foot print used to protect from deep strikes and charges. No doubt thick enough that most rangel attacks can't go past that ocean of bases.

Ork boyzs on 25mm can fight in 4 rows. In 32mm they can only fight in 2 rows, 3 if you do some shenanigans.

Well boyz on 25mm don't look too bad I guess and it probably makes more sense for gameplay.. I might go 25mm


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Actually just seen all orks in AoS are 32mm.. So that pushes me more that way I think

 Galas wrote:

 ProwlerPC wrote:
Nerf? Lol its the opposite. 100+ Boyz on 32mm is a massive foot print used to protect from deep strikes and charges. No doubt thick enough that most rangel attacks can't go past that ocean of bases.

Ork boyzs on 25mm can fight in 4 rows. In 32mm they can only fight in 2 rows, 3 if you do some shenanigans.

Orks greentides are not about doing damage with boyz but their strenght is to survive 5-7 turns, nullifying the anti tank and scoring points.

AOS orks are brutes or blac orks right? They're bigger than regular orks.

Yeah i think they are but I didn't think they were that much bigger.

But that comment is making me consider 32s even more.

Boyz aren't too bad on their standard bases. It annoys me that nobz are on the same ones though. Makes no sense.

Is changing the base size allowed? It's probably one of the things I am most stringent about when considering conversions or WYSIWYG etc. Base size substantially changes the way the unit works, especially in a unit that can contain up to 30 models.

That's the main reason I'm asking, I don't want to upset the game by choosing aesthetics.

But I have put nobz on 32s because they look much better and you won't have 30 of them together.

Since i prefer game with manouvers and tactics won't put on 32mm. Would require dropping points even more

Jamstrap wrote:
That's the main reason I'm asking, I don't want to upset the game by choosing aesthetics.

But I have put nobz on 32s because they look much better and you won't have 30 of them together.

Look if you're going to a tournament, I'd say any opponent who had issues with it would be in their right to complain. But casually I can argue that there are both pros and cons to having marginally bigger bases, so no big deal.

Obviously more extreme examples will just break the game/unit. (e.g. 60mm bases for boyz).

Blackie wrote:Actually I think playing ork greentides with models on 32mm bases IS modelling for advantage. You won't get cover and screw the KFF but you'll occupy the entire table. 32mm bases could be ok if you play trukk boyz or other elites based lists.

Of course the aesthetics of your models is the most important thing, if you prefer them on 32mm bases I wouldn't consider you a WAAC player. But with an horde having 25mm or 32mm bases actually makes some difference.

I do see your point there, however I would say it's still a double edged sword since you're essentially making your footsloggers a much bigger target to your opponent(s). It may depend contextually on the board how much of an advantage/disadvantage you have; I could see bigger bases being a problem in Cities of Death boards, for example, but perhaps on a more open field it may be an advantage because you can spread out more.

But yeah, I feel that people should do the switch if they want to aesthetically. Perhaps if the OP plays in tournaments, it'd be worth checking whether it'd be okay in whatever tournaments they partake in, but otherwise it should be done if they think their army will look better that way; whether you end up "modelling" for advantage or disadvantage, the difference is likely to be marginal in most cases at best in terms of how the army runs.

hollow one wrote:Is changing the base size allowed? It's probably one of the things I am most stringent about when considering conversions or WYSIWYG etc. Base size substantially changes the way the unit works, especially in a unit that can contain up to 30 models.

I haven't read anything saying it's not. Of course it would always be worth checking at local tournaments to see if it'd be a problem. I personally don't play in tournaments, and play entirely casually, so for me the change is without any major consequence.

25 mm bases is a significant advantage for boyz. 32 mm bases is a significant advantage for boyz in certain rare situations, as when blocking transports for example. If you play against rhino-bezerkers a lot then 32 mm bases are gold.

The base size actually matters, and for that reason alone I would put them on 25 mm bases, which is the legal thing to do. Personally I wouldn't mind playing against boyz on 32 mm bases, but some people might object. I wish GW would make either option legal.

When green tide came out the math was done. A 90 strong unit takes up 17 inches more on the table. That is not insignigant area denial for your opponent, personally i have played since 3rd with orks and would still not allow it.