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.

So ordering conversion trays for units, what sized units are people thinking of as "common"? For example I run Lizardmen and Skaven but have no idea what sort of frontage vs depth I might want for my units and of course trays are fixed sizes.

Can anyone suggest what sort of sizes might be flexible for different sized games, with different units like the meek skavenslaves or ranged units like skinks? Is the old 5 x 4 standard past its prime? Obviously you could also add a file either side of a tray for a game, to add 2 width without too much fuss.

There are too many unknowns (or at least things I don't know!) to say for certain, but most infantry units are going to be 4 or 5 across, and 3 or 4 deep. Cavalry will be 5 or 6 across, usually 1 but sometimes 2 deep.

5x4 or 4x4 seems perfectly viable for cheaper or defensive infantry. Offensive infantry and cavalry will probably want a wider frontage to get more attacks in. Units that cause Fear will want to be fairly big to increase their chances at outnumbering their enemies.

An advantage of a 5x4 tray is that it can easily be a 4x4 try if you leave the back rank empty.

there are some details around that not many reviews yet covered and some give different information on details

as, infantry needs to be 5 wide and caps at +2 for rank bonus
cavalry needs to be either 3 or 4 wide (seen both) and caps at +1 (could be 3 for heavy cavalry and 4 for regular one)

Horde special rule let you get +1 for another rank

so non horde infantry is 5x3 minimum sized for max bonus, hordes 5x4, cavalry 3x2 or 4x2

usually adding another rank as buffer to still have the mx bonus when you reach combat, it would be 5x4/5x5 for infantry while cavalry want to maximize attacks so rather be 5x2 than 3x3

Full front rank always fights, it's the main way to bypass the lack of stepup. Many units are going to be wider than the 5 model minimum, as it's a way to ensure the ability to strike back in melee. Ranks of 6-8 minis seem to be more the sweet spot.

1-3 attacks won't make a big difference if charged by a hammer unit
for fortifying infantry you would rather add a hero than going larger outside of horde units

and for hammer infantry, it would be 6-7 wide and 2-3 deep, as wheeling will be a problem if they are too wide

overly wide frontages will be seen in elite units, not in normal or chaff ones.

The elite units will have smaller counts, reducing their possible Rank bonus, so it is far more logical to make them wider and shallow, giving up 1 or 2 RB for the extra attacks and kills they will make.


It's the chaff units that rely on RB and they won't be trying to make wider units, they'll be maximising their RB.

It's a RB to casualty ratio - is it easier for your unit to generate RB, or casualties and is your unit likely to have enough models to generate RB?

If low models and high lethality, then wider unit is going to generate the best combat outcome.

if high models and low lethality, then deeper units are going to be best.

Huh, interesting analysis there, it makes sense

 Hellebore wrote:
overly wide frontages will be seen in elite units, not in normal or chaff ones.

The elite units will have smaller counts, reducing their possible Rank bonus, so it is far more logical to make them wider and shallow, giving up 1 or 2 RB for the extra attacks and kills they will make.


It's the chaff units that rely on RB and they won't be trying to make wider units, they'll be maximising their RB.

It's a RB to casualty ratio - is it easier for your unit to generate RB, or casualties and is your unit likely to have enough models to generate RB?

If low models and high lethality, then wider unit is going to generate the best combat outcome.

if high models and low lethality, then deeper units are going to be best.

It seems like elite units have a lower maximum RB as well, so another inducement for them to go wide.

regular infantry, 5 wide minimum, +2 RB maximum
heavy infantry, 4 wide minimum, +2 RB
monstrous infantry, 3 wide minimum, +2 RB
light cavalry, 5 wide, +1 RB
heavy cavalry, 4 wide, +1 RB
monstrous cavalry, 3 wide, +1 RB
light chariots, 3 wide, +1 RB

keywords only, not linked to base sizes and for example mist dwarf infantry are heavy infantry

close order +1 combat result, horde special rule (increases maximum RB)

Those are rookie numbers! And it's the same way that the influencers are talking. I wholeheartedly disagree. There are HUGE advantages to larger units UNLESS they flee and are run down:

1. If they don't flee, they are tarpits, opening the enemy to flank charges.

2. Harder to wipe, harder to get below both 50 and 25% for various rules.

3. Fewer banners for the enemy to try and collect. This one is big!

4. Fewer units competing for buffs.

5. Enemy shooting becomes largely irrelevant.

I'm an Empire player, very few options for getting around break tests. Nevertheless, I'd rather have one block of 40 state troops than have two blocks of 20 (before even considering 15 points for a second command group). With 8x5, you have to kill literally half of the unit before I lose the first point of passive CRes. Naturally, I'm throwing in the BSB with the Imperial Banner for another point of passive CRes. Often will still lose combat, but by less, and rolling against LD8 (or 9, if in range of the general) to fall back in good order on 3D6, drop the highest, with a reroll? They're not getting run down. Another reason to take one large block is I can only do this for one unit. So that one large block of swordsmen is my anvil. It's going to bleed bodies like crazy with T3 and 5+ armor. But it will stick, and then comes the countercharge. (n.b., I'm also taking small detachments to screen my flanks. Yeah, you'll blow through 10 models, but they're wide enough that even if you flank charge them, you're not overrunning into the swordsmen's flank.)

With offensive units (like my greatswords), the logic in larger units is threefold. One, they're pretty much apathetic towards any shooting they face going in. If I took 15 greatswords in a 5x3, every model lost would be painful. Second, they can finish a fight with enough remaining models for a second fight. Third, they can afford a wider frontage. My greatswords prefer to go in at 10x3. That's 10 models fighting and they can lose 5 and still max their rank bonus.

I suspect this is going to be a case of 'wait and see how your local meta settles out on the issue'.