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.

Hello all,

Just wanted to get everones opinion on basing your tanks and vehicles. I just started GSC and I think I still need to get used to the Ridgerunners on the base. I do think, bases are a huge factor to tie the army together. I checked the ridgerunner base and it would fit nicely under a Taurox as well. Does anyone here base their vehicles despite them originally NOT on a base? Did you ever run into problems with players/TOs? Are some of you hesitating and would like to but dont because of TOs/Players?

I am still on the edge, so looking for some input. For me, I dont care about TOs or stuff, but I am npt 100% sold on it aesthetically.

I like bases on vehicles.
My main army is Tau and obviously every single model there comes with a base already (flying tanks, battlesuits and so on).
But even in my other armies I have put some vehicles that don't have a base on one. Main example: Triarch Stalker in my Necrons army.

It helps in tying the army together but it also helps in transporting models, if you use magnets under the bases and not foam cases.

Only vehicles I've based are my Knights and Titans, the latter purely for stability reasons.

I don't see the point of basing some vehicles. Ridgerunners, Sydonians, anything of that size yes, but Russes, Rhinos etc I don't bother with.

If it's a ground vehicle and is stable I don't bother.

Basing is the one aspect in the hobby I don't like so I'm happy about anything that doesn't need a base
That said if you based your vehicles I don't think anyone would complain since for gameplay a vehicle with a base is easier to handle/ resolve.

I think the only thing I put on a base that didn’t come with one are my attack bikes. I’m not sure if they come with them these days, but didn’t when I got them. Helps them fit in with their squad.

Everything else is either a marine brick, where you don’t need a base really, or on some sort of flying stem/stand.

Basing is one of my favourite parts, particularly for large bases. It gives me opportunity to make a diorama, both tie the army together and display the lore at a glance. The marshy, teal terrain, where footprints reveal green glow and the water is brown muck, shows the nuclear devastation of their homeworld. All the buried Chaos symbols and ork equipment show why it was necessary.

The Dunecrawler bases are technically optional, but the army simply wouldn't have the same presence without them.


I don't have other armies with a lot to vehicles yet, but when I eventually get my ork army going I think I will stick a base under their tanks and trukks. It'd help with thematic cohesiveness, and I'd still measure everything to the hull.

I've got a Voidweaver that I'm trying to find a stylish alternative to those clear-plastic stands.

Installed a magnet on the underbelly but....pfff...need something to hover over, but also able to support it...without being toooooo obvious.

I usually don’t base ground vehicles, except maybe for static weapons. The DKoK have a good selection of towed artillery that work well on bases, especially since you can throw the extra bits around it

I have some new Ork buggies and they came on bases, but I won't use it as it looks dumb, any vehicle that's not a IK, dread, flier, and bigger than a bike doesn't get a base for me.

Taking something off a base that has a base is a no-no for competitive play, unless stuff isn't measured from the base (and I don't think there are any such models, except skimmers and you can't really remove the base from those anyway because how would they stand up?).

Adding a base doesn't seem like a problem to me, if you have a competitive game and your opponent wants you to, you can just measure from the vehicle instead. Similarly, you can just treat the base like it wasn't there and move models on top of it if you have to. I would avoid using a base that is significantly bigger than the model, but otherwise, I can't imagine many people would care.

 Big Mac wrote:
I have some new Ork buggies and they came on bases, but I won't use it as it looks dumb, any vehicle that's not a IK, dread, flier, and bigger than a bike doesn't get a base for me.

Yeah, my next question would be, how the ork players feel about being "forced" to base their buggies.

It's just how the game works. You're also "forced" to base infantry models, or bikers, or anything else, even if you'd prefer not to.

In general GW doesn't go far enough towards measuring everything from the base, IMO. Ideally everything should be based, and everything should key off the base (LOS, etc), it would make for better games. People who don't like their models on bases can always magnetize and leave them off the bases for display purposes if they really want to.

I don’t like bases on models that don’t need them. Ork buggies with bases are silly, too proprietary, and though I wanted to like them, after seeing the rules and figuring why they were made that way I decided not to invest. Squigarucktukk nast,,, I cannot imagine why a rhino or land raider would require a base. I do base walkers, of course… but tanks and buggies? Never.

I don't. I like to be able to flip tanks on their sides or backs when playing older versions of the game where wrecks remain in play, and bases make that look weird.

One vehicle i did base was triarch stalker. No other way to put magnets that doesn't stick out(i mean sure i could just glue magnet to end of feet...but then that would be visible)

There's 4 instances where I'll put a base on a vehicle:
1) I'm making a display only piece. Even then many times I'll make it so the base is removable. But playing with the piece isn't really a concern.
2) Models that need a base in order to stand - dreadnaughts, walkers, etc.
3) Many flying/hovering vehicles. Most also fall into category #2. But not all - my Tau tanks have landing gear deployed, so no bases & I've never bothered with a base for any of my Monoliths old or new.
4) Spider-legged ones - Triarch Stalker, Defilers, Dunecrawlers.... The base simply helps everyone at the table define where exactly melee contact is. These bases are removable.

*Technically my Termite assault Drill does have a base. I gave it a tiny margin of base (about 20mm all around the portion already in contact with the table) of chewed up earth/rubble because it just looked silly sitting there on the table by it's lonesome.

Ork buggies? Ridge Runners? Etc? Nope. Unless talking about #1 above, you'll never see me base such a thing. They're stable models & there's no debate about the area they take up/where melee contact would occur.
I don't play in tourneys so wether or not this is ok there is of no consequence to me.
If I run into someone in casual play for whom this is a problem? Then that's just an indication they aren't worth wasting time playing with.

yukishiro1 wrote:
It's just how the game works. You're also "forced" to base infantry models, or bikers, or anything else, even if you'd prefer not to.

Not really. Old bikes like ork ones in 2nd to 4th edition used to come with no base, then they came on a base and ultimately they come with a different base. Infantries also have been re-packaged with different bases. And there's no official rule that impose a base on a model, let alone a base size.

My entire collection has the base that came with the package at the time of the purchase, so basically a large portion of my orks are not on the current base sizes. Pretty much every vehicle I own is scratch built or kitbashed and only approximately of the right size. No one has complained about that so far.

The only case in which you may be forced is tournaments, but we know tournament rules (like time limitations or the ban for unpainted armies) are house rules, not official ones.

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I don't. I like to be able to flip tanks on their sides or backs when playing older versions of the game where wrecks remain in play, and bases make that look weird.

I've generally never liked flipping models over.
1) that's how parts get broken - ariels, railings, pintle mounts, etc
2) flipping them on their sides often alters the cover profile they provide in non-sensical ways - I've seen Rhinos used to make a wall taller in death than they were in life.

So I just invested in a whole bunch of plastic fire markers (I think they were made by Litko) - one for every 40k vehicle I owned at the time.
Tank get's blown up? I place a flame marker on it. Sometime removing the turret to place the flame.
(*Wich reminds me, I've added a fair # of vehicles since then, I should track down some more of these markers. I'm sure someones still making them or similar)

tneva82 wrote:
One vehicle i did base was triarch stalker. No other way to put magnets that doesn't stick out(i mean sure i could just glue magnet to end of feet...but then that would be visible)

Drill holes in the base to accept the ‘feet’?

I base vehicles if they come with one, and require it to stand on their own (dreadnoughts, flyers). I don't base my tanks: they don't require them to stand, and all measurements are done from the hull (and seriously, what size base would I use for the Fellblade?). The only instance where I "do a little of both" are my Dreadclaws, as they have a rule that says that you measure from the hull, and it makes more sense that a drop pod would deploy on the ground so that it's cargo can get out. But they come with bases and flying stands, which I use for display, because they just look wicked flying with their "teeth and mouths" out.

Moriarty wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
One vehicle i did base was triarch stalker. No other way to put magnets that doesn't stick out(i mean sure i could just glue magnet to end of feet...but then that would be visible)

Drill holes in the base to accept the ‘feet’?

Have you seen the Triarch Stalker? The legs come down to a point and doesn't really have 'feet' and burying a part of the legs into the base wouldn't look right in most cases (e.g., an urban rubble base).

Bago wrote:
Hello all,

Just wanted to get everones opinion on basing your tanks and vehicles...

I use a different base than the one supplied with my Ghost/Doomsday Arks so that I don't have to measure from the hull and can just measure from the base which prevents me from having to do geometry. I only play casually so your mileage may vary but I haven't run into issues, at LVO 2019 I saw someone who used custom flying stands that made his hover vehicles sit taller than ones on GW flying stands would, as always ask your opponent/TO.

ccs wrote:

 AnomanderRake wrote:
I don't. I like to be able to flip tanks on their sides or backs when playing older versions of the game where wrecks remain in play, and bases make that look weird.

I've generally never liked flipping models over.
1) that's how parts get broken - ariels, railings, pintle mounts, etc
2) flipping them on their sides often alters the cover profile they provide in non-sensical ways - I've seen Rhinos used to make a wall taller in death than they were in life.

So I just invested in a whole bunch of plastic fire markers (I think they were made by Litko) - one for every 40k vehicle I owned at the time.
Tank get's blown up? I place a flame marker on it. Sometime removing the turret to place the flame.
(*Wich reminds me, I've added a fair # of vehicles since then, I should track down some more of these markers. I'm sure someones still making them or similar)

Swappable pintle mounts/antennae not glued to the model help a lot, yes.

Moriarty wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
One vehicle i did base was triarch stalker. No other way to put magnets that doesn't stick out(i mean sure i could just glue magnet to end of feet...but then that would be visible)

Drill holes in the base to accept the ‘feet’?

If you have base you can glue magnet to base. No need to drill

Issue would have been had i not based. The feet have no real room for magnets so i would need to glue magnet tip of feet which would look silly.

160mm base solved issue nicely.

No, I don't like basing tanks unless it has to have one, like a dread or the like for stability. I get why some people like them but it looks stupid to me, imo of course to each their own. If they try and make it mandatory I'll just say no and people can play with me or not because of it. They make the vehicles harder to store by taking up more space than they have to and just look off to me.

tneva82 wrote:

Moriarty wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
One vehicle i did base was triarch stalker. No other way to put magnets that doesn't stick out(i mean sure i could just glue magnet to end of feet...but then that would be visible)

Drill holes in the base to accept the ‘feet’?

If you have base you can glue magnet to base. No need to drill

Issue would have been had i not based. The feet have no real room for magnets so i would need to glue magnet tip of feet which would look silly.

160mm base solved issue nicely.

Just so I'm clear, as the magnet reference is confusing me - is this so it can be stuck to a metal sheet/tray as part of your army transport solution?

Yes just so. Can't beat magnets as transport solution

Bago wrote:

 Big Mac wrote:
I have some new Ork buggies and they came on bases, but I won't use it as it looks dumb, any vehicle that's not a IK, dread, flier, and bigger than a bike doesn't get a base for me.

Yeah, my next question would be, how the ork players feel about being "forced" to base their buggies.

Bases look dumb, play dumb, but the rules is the rules.

I've based both my (converted) PBCs and Land Raider for my DG and they look far better than unbased stuff. The PBC was out of practicality to cover up the underside that was a mess of parts, but I just looked really good, so I did the same with a LR later on.

Based all my Soul Grinders years ago as well. This was before GW made the larger bases so it was based on 3 CDs stacked on top of one another. Works like a charm and makes it look less dopey.

I'll probably go back and base all of my other vehicles too, as it provides an extra layer of protection as well. Why go to all of that trouble of painting up the tracks etc. to only have it get scuffed up on a gaming board? Boggles the mind it does.