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 didn't see anything in the rules primer, so... I'm guessing you can shoot an antenna, banners, a finger, part of a backpack, you can't see the model but you can see a bit of the base, basically even a ponytail, a misplaced hair can potentially get you killed?

I'm considering which sized flying base my hammerheads and shadowsuns advanced guardian drone will be modeled on. If flying bases and the tip of an antenna are all targetable, I'll have an impossible time hiding this poor drone behind an immense hovertank.

I guess the base perhaps? Besides that if you can see part of the model, even a barrel of a gun, you can see the model.

Think of it in IRL purposes. If you can see someone behind a penetrable wall by the edge of their backpack or even a shoetip you're not going to have much trouble putting a few rounds into them.

Here's the relevant part of the rules:

"In order to target an enemy unit, at least one model in that unit must be within range (i.e. within the distance of the Range characteristic) of the weapon being used and be visible to the shooting model. If unsure, get a look from behind the firing model to see if any part of the target is visible."

Emphasis mine. However, do be wary of the distance because, as per "Measuring Distances" a few pages beforehand, that has to be done from base to base (or hull, for models without one).

I'm considering which sized flying base my hammerheads and shadowsuns advanced guardian drone will be modeled on.

This is where you ought to be careful - if you use a base that the model wasn't provided with, or make it shorter by conversion, that'd be modelling for advantage. I think I can speak for most people here in that it's widely regarded as unsportsmanlike.

My only take from reading the rules is... models have two parts... the base and the model.

Now how bad is it, if.... I convert my drone so that instead of the antenna sticking straight up like a bullesye, I have two antenna on the underside of the disc looking more like stabilizing fins (and reducing the profile of the model!)

Changing the configuration of a model primarily to reduce the size of the target, or to make it harder for your opponent is the very definition of “modelling for advantage”. Switching the location of antennas to make it harder to target is modelling for advantage, and is usually frowned upon. Some tournaments don’t allow it in their house rules.

But then, it's not modelling for advantage if I choose to use only the gretchin models who aren't waving their arms around as if they want to be shot. Which, amusingly, allows them to hide behind an Aegis without presenting a target at all.

And its okay for commaders to have their arms flailing about, but regular crisis teams ahve their arms down and to their sides.

And if I lay down all my marines on their backs because I don't want you to be able to see them? And remove the ruins from the bases of my harlequins so they're shorter? And don't use flying stems, just put the jetbikes on their base directly on the ground? And remove the wings and tail on my stormraven so that it's just a brick, that's now way easier to hide?

See a problem with this line of thinking yet?

Modeling for advantage is at best a douche move. At worst cheating. Trying to justify it changes nothing. Especially when the justification is "but I don't want it to be able to be targeted!"

There's two sportsmanship issues with what you're proposing.
One is the intent - it's obvious you want to do it for an in-game advantage. That's a massive difference between someone modelling their Commander with their arms up because they think it looks cool.
Two is the nature of the model - some models obviously come with a degree of posability for the purpose of their appearance - the change to the fins you're proposing is admittedly a small one, but it's clearly not how the model was intended to be put together.
Conversions are usually cool and all, but again, the intent changes things.

Bottom line - it seems you know full well that you're trying to pull a fast one, but I don't know why you thought you'd get the all-clear from us. No-one here is going to agree with you that modelling for advantage is acceptable.

It's like that old joke, about stealing a bike and then asking for God's forgiveness - you could run that by all the Christian priests in the world and I daresay you wouldn't find one that agrees you've got the right idea.

 troa wrote:
And if I lay down all my marines on their backs because I don't want you to be able to see them? And remove the ruins from the bases of my harlequins so they're shorter? And don't use flying stems, just put the jetbikes on their base directly on the ground? And remove the wings and tail on my stormraven so that it's just a brick, that's now way easier to hide?

See a problem with this line of thinking yet?

Modeling for advantage is at best a douche move. At worst cheating. Trying to justify it changes nothing. Especially when the justification is "but I don't want it to be able to be targeted!"

Don't forget that the changes you outlined also make it harder for those models to shoot back. Line of sight works both ways - if it's harder to see you it's harder for you to see them back. If somebody modeled something that looks cool that happens to change the height or whatever, I wouldn't automatically jump to accuse them of modeling for advantage. I remember seeing pictures of an Alaitoc Wraithlord years back that somebody modeled kneeling, holding a bright lance like it was a rifle and making him look like a large sniper. I don't mind a conversion like that even though the wraithlord no longer stands as tall as he did. It might be harder to see him through terrain, but it's also harder for him to see through the terrain himself.

For the OP, you could easily get accused of modeling for advantage. If you use gun drones as well as other drones and model all of them that way, then you have a better argument for doing it because you prefer the way they look. You could also model them the way you want, but if anybody wants to shoot at the drones treat them as the height they would have been with the antennae sticking up (not having one here I don't know if sticking the model on top of a d6 when it came time for them to be shot would be the right height, or maybe if you have spare drone models before assembling them all you could make one with the antennae sticking up to use that as your mockup and when someone wants to shoot at a unit you can temporarily replace a model with that for them to determine LOS).

I liked the idea of using only the grethchin without the arms in the air.

So... I tried out taller of the two pegs for the clear base for the hovertanks, and the shorter of the two pegs for the drone, and since I had the wrong antenna on the model and don't have the correct one anyhow, I swapped it for the most common antenna that I have on all my drones and in the correct location.

Overall effect, careful planning vs modeling for advantage... drone with antenna on top can hide behind the tank.