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.

Can anyone who bought a recent set of Nids post what base size the models came with and I will update the post? The old Dakka base thread hasn't been updated in years.

I recently bought Warriors and Hive Guard and they came with 32mm and 50mm respectively.

Tyranids

25mm:
32mm:
40mm: Warriors
50mm: Hive Guard, Tyrant Guard
60mm:
100mm:
75x42mm:
105x70mm:
120x92mm:
Small Flying Base:

 amrogers3 wrote:
Can anyone who bought a recent set of Nids post what base size the models came with and I will update the post? The old Dakka base thread hasn't been updated in years.

I recently bought Warriors and Hive Guard and they came with 32mm and 50mm respectively.

Tyranids

25mm:
32mm: Warriors
40mm:
50mm: Hive Guard, Tyrant Guard
60mm:
100mm:
75x42mm:
105x70mm:
120x92mm:
Small Flying Base:

A warrior should be on a 40 or 50 I think. I don't think they'd even fit on a 32.

Correction, the Warrior bases are 40mm.

These aren’t 9th changes. Warriors could come with 40s or 50s depending on what set they came in. Pretty sure they’ve been on 50s since Shield of Baal: Deathstorm, if not before.

There are no base size rules for 40k, the general rule of thumb is "Don't take the piss.".

Warriors, depending entirely on when you bought them have either come on 40mm or 50mm bases. Let's not even get into things like Carnifexes or Broodlords...

Well official rule is what model came with　is fine. That's　gw's　rule, gw is official　source of rules and is the way game's supposed to be　played

tneva82 wrote:
Well official rule is what model came with　is fine. That's　gw's　rule, gw is official　source of rules and is the way game's supposed to be　played

For AoS maybe, for 40K there is no rule.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Grimtuff wrote:
There are no base size rules for 40k, the general rule of thumb is "Don't take the piss.".

Warriors, depending entirely on when you bought them have either come on 40mm or 50mm bases. Let's not even get into things like Carnifexes or Broodlords...

Haha yeah, 60mm round or whattheheckoval?

Base size really should be a rule. GW have shown they are happy to outright delete loadouts and units now, so enforcing base size should also be done.

Stealers are 25mm, and still slotta based.

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Stealers are 25mm, and still slotta based.

The fact they are slotta will be why they are still on 25s. They really should be on 32s, but that won't happen until they get a new kit.

It might not be perfectly up to date but

https://thetyranidhive.proboards.com/thread/57998/base-size-chart-tyranids?page=1&scrollTo=987153

PLEASE email GW and politely ask them to make a base size chart for 40K. The AoS one is invaluable and 40K deserves the same treatment.

 Stux wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Stealers are 25mm, and still slotta based.

The fact they are slotta will be why they are still on 25s. They really should be on 32s, but that won't happen until they get a new kit.

The purestrains that came in that first batch of genestealer cults were on 32s.

I've noticed a pattern that when tyranid warriors are bought as part of a combined box set they come on 50mm, but when buying an individual box of warriors they come with 40mm.

It has been this way since Shield Of Baal: Deathstorm in 2014.
So far in addition to that box there have been the Wrath of the Hive Mind box, and the old Start Collecting box that included Tyrant + Gargoyles + Warriors, which both came with 50mm warrior bases.

I still regularly see reports from people who have bought an individual box of warriors and got 40mm bases.

Seems bizarre, but the pattern has held up so far.
Has anyone received 50mm bases in an individual box of warriors?

If you go on to the GW website, and look at the "Description" tab for each model, it tells you the base size (eg Biovore 60mm and 3 x 25 mm for the spore mines)

stroller wrote:
If you go on to the GW website, and look at the "Description" tab for each model, it tells you the base size (eg Biovore 60mm and 3 x 25 mm for the spore mines)

Thing is this is often not updated when they change the base sizes included with the actual models.

 Stux wrote:

 Mr. Burning wrote:
Stealers are 25mm, and still slotta based.

The fact they are slotta will be why they are still on 25s. They really should be on 32s, but that won't happen until they get a new kit.

GW actually has 32mm slotta bases (they're for Blood Bowl I think ) came in handy for rebasing old metal characters.

Arson Fire wrote:
I've noticed a pattern that when tyranid warriors are bought as part of a combined box set they come on 50mm, but when buying an individual box of warriors they come with 40mm.

It has been this way since Shield Of Baal: Deathstorm in 2014.
So far in addition to that box there have been the Wrath of the Hive Mind box, and the old Start Collecting box that included Tyrant + Gargoyles + Warriors, which both came with 50mm warrior bases.

I still regularly see reports from people who have bought an individual box of warriors and got 40mm bases.

Seems bizarre, but the pattern has held up so far.
Has anyone received 50mm bases in an individual box of warriors?

I've gotten Warriors two individual boxes on 50mm bases.

I then proceeded to put them on 40s instead- partly because it matches my existing models, partly because I think it just looks better.

I rebased all my Warriors on 50mm bases, but they were due for stripping, rebuilding, and repainting. There's also some great 3rd party base-extenders. Eccentric Miniatures is my go-to.

 catbarf wrote:

I've gotten Warriors two individual boxes on 50mm bases.

I then proceeded to put them on 40s instead- partly because it matches my existing models, partly because I think it just looks better.

Interesting. So I guess for the single boxes at least, it's just more or less random which size you get.

First; 40k will never have a base size chart since it would invalidate old models and alienate tons of players with collections from the 90s.

Second; the change to engagement range makes bases sizes a non issue...which reinforces my first point. With half inch within half inch you don’t get a bonus for 25mm base melee units over 32mm models.

This effects boys, genestealers, marines, etc. and is an awesome rule change that I love. You always fight in two ranks no matter your base size.

Bitharne wrote:
First; 40k will never have a base size chart since it would invalidate old models and alienate tons of players with collections from the 90s.

GW didn't seem to mind when they alienated the ENTIRE Old World fanbase ;
Besides those players for 40K are already in problems if they want to compete or play fair with the current rules and current base sizes. They are already changing their bases. IF GW was worried about alienating them they'd either never change base sizes or they'd make the base size a non-element in the game rules.

Right now the issue isn't so much that bases have changed, its that there's no clear resource that details what the changes are and some models appear to change based on what box you get even when they were released at the same time or around the same time. So there's currently confusion.

A base size chart would clear the confusion. Old bases would still "be valid" so far as GW is concerned and for casual play; whilst any wanting to play current and in events would have a simple easy to check resource that they can use.

The AoS base size chart is popular and well used and makes it effortless to see when something has changed and to what it has changed too.

 Overread wrote:
It might not be perfectly up to date but

https://thetyranidhive.proboards.com/thread/57998/base-size-chart-tyranids?page=1&scrollTo=987153

PLEASE email GW and politely ask them to make a base size chart for 40K. The AoS one is invaluable and 40K deserves the same treatment.

Nah. Cause then grognards will whinge about my models not being on the right bases since most of them date from 5th Ed. I'm not rebasing gak

 Overread wrote:

Bitharne wrote:
First; 40k will never have a base size chart since it would invalidate old models and alienate tons of players with collections from the 90s.

GW didn't seem to mind when they alienated the ENTIRE Old World fanbase ;

1. AoS shifted to round bases, which makes it a slightly different scenario.
2. The "ENTIRE Old World fanbase" was a lot fewer people than 40K, so again, not directly comparable.

 Overread wrote:

Besides those players for 40K are already in problems if they want to compete or play fair with the current rules and current base sizes. They are already changing their bases. IF GW was worried about alienating them they'd either never change base sizes or they'd make the base size a non-element in the game rules.

Thing is, it's entirely possible to play 40K with whatever size bases you like, as long as nobody – as someone pointed out above – starts taking the piss, which is usually a pretty solid indicator of someone not worth playing against anyway. If it's really upsetting you, maybe remind yourself that 40K, ultimately, is a bunch of entirely arbitrary rules for playing games with toy spacemen and not a high-level competitive sport.

That doesn't mean we can't play to the core of the rules.


Different base sizes do have an effect. Sure a 60mm to 65mm is a marginal difference on a large monster. but when you've 30 troops going from 25mm to 32mm that can make a big difference in the number that would make it into close combat.

In the end yes you can just play it casual and not worry, a base size chart won't change that fact. The information on "current bases" is technically out there in the wild right this very moment in current packs and boxes.


The real issue is that there's old stock and there;s stock that sells current on different bases (eg the genestealers; the brood lord). This means that two people will have a different view on what is correct which leads to conflict. If the GW base size chart is published it at least gives a single simple clear answer.


The Social or Tournament obligation to rebase on the player is the same either way. One way you have to muddle around online like the OP has to try and work out what the sizes are; the other way you look at a simple single PDF and the information is right there. What your local group; local events and attitudes are is down to the individual.

Plus I'd note that for going to larger bases (which is what most base size changes have been) there are quite a few companies making attachments that you can simply fit to existing bases to upscale the size.

I mean, sure, sweat it all you like if that's what you want to expend your mental energy on, but I'm gonna file it under "doesn't really matter". Clearly it's not a priority for GW – who knows, maybe they think it'll cause as many, if not more, problems as it solves – and it certainly does't seem like a big enough issue to lose any sleep over.

 Nazrak wrote:
I mean, sure, sweat it all you like if that's what you want to expend your mental energy on, but I'm gonna file it under "doesn't really matter". Clearly it's not a priority for GW – who knows, maybe they think it'll cause as many, if not more, problems as it solves – and it certainly does't seem like a big enough issue to lose any sleep over.

Lose sleep - that's nothing! I'm currently preparing a major campaign with banners, burning torches and some pitchforks to set full protest outside their gates and, if need be, use the legions of angered geeks to storm the offices for answers!



It's not about losing perspective, but at the same time GW already has this information (their pickers/packers use it); they already changed the base sizes (boo hiss whatever). All a size chart would do is convey that information clearly to the customer. That's all I'm asking for in a base size charge - a clear communication of information already out there for changes which have already happened.

The debate on if you change is not really a factor, that's a local end social element and something each person works out on their own and within their play group. GW's whole "play with the base it was sold on" will still stand, its just that for those wanting to compete and play with the current standard the information will be clearly displayed.

Arson Fire wrote:

Interesting. So I guess for the single boxes at least, it's just more or less random which size you get.

I got a Warrior box last year with three 40mm bases, and a single 50mm base (presumably for the Prime). It's a crapshoot, I think.

My Warriors came direct from GW and as September, they were on 40mm if that makes a difference to anyone.

A new rule should be made just measure from the middle of the miniature or base. Problem solved for GW and everyone else.

Davor wrote:
A new rule should be made just measure from the middle of the miniature or base. Problem solved for GW and everyone else.

Measure from the middle works for things like objective markers or ripper swarms. For most models things like legs get in the way.

Theoretical: This solution fixes the problem.
Practical: Unless playing with empty bases, it is going to be impossible to find the center on the battlefield.