Switch Theme:

Ork boy base size  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in si
Fresh-Faced New User




I am just starting with Warhammer 40k, I chose orks for my army, and I can't wait until i have finally finished them so i can play for real.

I do have a question though, considering base sizes.
In the Start collecting: Orks, I got 25mm ASWELL as 32mm bases for ork boyz, but in the Ork boyz solo boxes I only got 32mm bases for them.
Now i know about the GW stance on bases, saying just use what you got with packaging, but i would like to know opinion of an experienced WH40k community on what i should do.

I am leaning towards 32mm bases, supposedly many tournaments and events demand current base sizes.. I am wondering though, what does that mean for actual game tactics in 9th edition. Would it be better or worse than using 25mm bases? Supposedly 9th edition makes the fight phase tighter and there is little to no advantage with having 25mm bases, while board coverage is substantialy larger with 32mm boyz, then there is cover etc...

So I would kindly ask masters of WH40k to give their opinion.
Is it safe to just put all the boyz on 32mm bases and never think of it again, or is there a major possibility that I will regret the decision?
Im afraid to put them on 25mm in case some salty TOs demand 32mm. If 25mm would be allowed though, would my army be that much weaker(or possibly even stronger) with ork boyz being based on 32mm?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2020/11/21 11:11:38


 
   
Made in gb
Horrific Hive Tyrant





Predicting GW's future plans with any certainty is a bit of a fools game unfortunately. Predicting how that will affect independent tournaments? Even harder.

32s are safer, but not 100% safe. Give it a few years, maybe boyz end up on 40s? Its possible!

I think you've already weighed up a lot of the factors, you just have to make a personal judgement call really.
   
Made in it
Stormin' Stompa




Italy

25mm vs 32mm with orks makes some difference only if you play greentides with 90+ boyz. Otherwise there's no significant advantage or disadvantage between the two sizes.

If you don't have painted and based models that already are on 25mm bases I strongly suggest to lean towards 32mm. They're the most recent bases, they definitely look better and some models like Stormboyz suffer less from the "wobbly model syndrome".

In the start collecting you should have got only 32mm or only 25mm, not both. If both sizes are included in the same box it's definitely a mistake and you could ask the shop to provide you the missing 32mm bases.

Orks 7000
Space Wolves 4000
 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut






I can't see any reason not to put the models on the 32mm bases as this is the newer size and so is likely to be the one they will stick with. Putting them on the smaller ones will just leave you open to the chance that they will give official base sizes in a future edition, and for people to disallow your models from tournaments.

12,300 points of Orks
9th W/D/L with Orks, 4/0/2
I am Thoruk, the Barbarian, Slayer of Ducks, and This is my blog!

I'm Selling Chaos Dwarves, Infinity, 40k, dystopian wars, UK based! 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






I say put them on 32mm just to avoid arguments, even if it would be advantageous to put them on 25mm.

Add me on Discord: BaconCatBug#0294
+++++List of documents required to play Warhammer 40,000 9th edition+++++
Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written (or modified by Special Snowflake FAQ) in the rulebooks, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective. Even GW agrees with me, send an email to 40kfaq@gwplc.com for a confirmation reply "4. Apply The Rules As Written. If you still don’t have a satisfactory answer, use the rule just as it is written if you possibly can, even if you are not completely happy with the effect the rule has."
Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities || Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. || Userscript to add a button to open all "[First Unread]" links on the page, hides the "[Blog View]" links, and adds a "Subscribed Threads" link to forum pages.  
   
Made in si
Fresh-Faced New User




I was leaning towards 32mm before but now I guess I can make the decision.
Playing with no arguments is more important to me than playing with advantages. If 32mm gives that, so be it.

Thanks everyone for response, really much appreciated!


   
Made in it
Stormin' Stompa




Italy

 BaconCatBug wrote:
I say put them on 32mm just to avoid arguments, even if it would be advantageous to put them on 25mm.


25mm is only better for KFF coverage, 32mm are better for other bubbles like painboyz, ghaz, banner nob auras. Blobs on 32mm are also more effective in controlling the board. For fighting there's no real difference between 25mm and 32mm, two rows get to attack in both cases.

Orks 7000
Space Wolves 4000
 
   
Made in gb
Horrific Hive Tyrant





There is a difference in fighting to be fair, as in a real game scenario you usually won't be able to perfectly your Boyz into optimal ranks and your opponent likely has their unit spaced in somewhat irregular patterns. 25mm does give you a decent chance of getting more attacks in than 32mm. But its much more complex to work out exactly how much benefit it is in practice than a lot of people realise when you look at perfect case diagrams that often do the rounds.

For a simple example, imagine charging an enemy unit that is between two buildings. The gap between the buildings would fit five 25mm bases but only three 32mm (yes, that is possible). Then when you look at the ranks behind, that has huge ramifications.

Maybe that seems contrived, but imagine that whatever layout of terrain and enemy models there is will have an impact on your ability to optimally position your models for melee, and your base size WILL effect this.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2020/11/22 13:44:46


 
   
Made in gb
Norn Queen






I don't think the difference matters as much now that "second rankers" only have a 1/2" range rather than 1" range.

Add me on Discord: BaconCatBug#0294
+++++List of documents required to play Warhammer 40,000 9th edition+++++
Disclaimer: My YMDC answers are from a "What the rules, as written (or modified by Special Snowflake FAQ) in the rulebooks, actually say" perspective, not a "What I wish the rules said" perspective. Even GW agrees with me, send an email to 40kfaq@gwplc.com for a confirmation reply "4. Apply The Rules As Written. If you still don’t have a satisfactory answer, use the rule just as it is written if you possibly can, even if you are not completely happy with the effect the rule has."
Mathhammer tables for 2D6 and 3D6 Charging with various re-roll abilities || Stylus CSS theme for DakkaDakka forums to hide black avatar background and fully hide ignored users. || Userscript to add a button to open all "[First Unread]" links on the page, hides the "[Blog View]" links, and adds a "Subscribed Threads" link to forum pages.  
   
Made in gb
Horrific Hive Tyrant





 BaconCatBug wrote:
I don't think the difference matters as much now that "second rankers" only have a 1/2" range rather than 1" range.


Agreed. It does matter LESS than in 8e.
   
Made in de
Waaagh! Ork Warboss on Warbike






 Stux wrote:
There is a difference in fighting to be fair, as in a real game scenario you usually won't be able to perfectly your Boyz into optimal ranks and your opponent likely has their unit spaced in somewhat irregular patterns. 25mm does give you a decent chance of getting more attacks in than 32mm. But its much more complex to work out exactly how much benefit it is in practice than a lot of people realise when you look at perfect case diagrams that often do the rounds.

For a simple example, imagine charging an enemy unit that is between two buildings. The gap between the buildings would fit five 25mm bases but only three 32mm (yes, that is possible). Then when you look at the ranks behind, that has huge ramifications.

Maybe that seems contrived, but imagine that whatever layout of terrain and enemy models there is will have an impact on your ability to optimally position your models for melee, and your base size WILL effect this.


Nope, it wont. This "advantage" absolutely theoretical. I run both types of bases, depending on when the mobs were bought, and the difference is effectively zero, even during 8th. For every time an additional boy can fight in the first row because of a smaller base on one mob, another boy could fight in second row because of the larger base having a larger "within 1/2" area. In 8th large bases were even better than now, because multi-charges were easier and the range for second rank was 1".

Irrespective of base size, under 9th edition rules you can expect 10-12 boyz to fight unless you mange to surround your opponent.

Earth is not flat
Vaccines work
We've been to the moon
Climate change is real
Chemtrails aren't a thing
Evolution is a fact
Orks are not a melee army
Stand up for science!
 
   
 
Forum Index » 40K You Make Da Call
Go to: