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, I'm going to be getting some SM scout bikes for their wheels for my Leman Russes, and I don't want to waste the rest of the bike so I'd like to convert them into counts as autocannon armed sentinels looking something like this:


I'm just wondering if you encountered someone with this as their sentinel would you let them use it?

Depends on the overall dimensions, I suppose. A SM bike is much shorter than a sentinel though, so you'll have some LOS issues unless you model them ramping up in the air twice their height (could be fun). As such I'd probably be a little annoyed, but if they were cool enough, I wouldn't care. Rule of cool always wins.

I generally don't mind using alternate models that look decent but bikes are way too short to be sentinels. Most people would categorize it as modeling for advantage due to big LOS differences. Be like someone swapping a Tyranid Warrior for a Carnifex.

 60mm wrote:
I generally don't mind using alternate models that look decent but bikes are way too short to be sentinels. Most people would categorize it as modeling for advantage due to big LOS differences. Be like someone swapping a Tyranid Warrior for a Carnifex.

I saw that last week, believe it or not. I agree, too much for a counts as here.

what if I used this design:

now suddenly if I remember my LOS rules correctly I'm modeling for disadvantage. you will be able to see the tail, but the driver and thus LOS can't see you. (may need to check my LOS rules again)

I think you'd be disadvantaging yourself, considering how short bikes are, but as long as it was on a 60mm base, it should be fine.

You could use the bikes as alternative HWTs, if you wanted to! I think that would be really neat!

see that's what I thought. I never understood the idea of modeling for LOS advantage. the thing is if you can's see me there's no way I can see you.

 Lobukia wrote:

 60mm wrote:
I generally don't mind using alternate models that look decent but bikes are way too short to be sentinels. Most people would categorize it as modeling for advantage due to big LOS differences. Be like someone swapping a Tyranid Warrior for a Carnifex.

I saw that last week, believe it or not. I agree, too much for a counts as here.

Some people have no shame!

Yeri wrote:see that's what I thought. I never understood the idea of modeling for LOS advantage. the thing is if you can's see me there's no way I can see you.

Well let's say we're playing a game, and you've proxied your Heavy Flamer Sentinels with Bikes. You could move across the board, hiding behind terrain you normally wouldn't be able to get away with until you are in Flamer range, where normally the opponent could have tried to shoot you. Not all weapons/units benefit from having more LoS. Suppose I swap my Swarmlord with a Termagant. Sure, he can't see you from behind that ottoman . . . but he can't shoot anyway and is just using cover to get close enough for his swords to hit. If you were my opponent, would you find this fair? The big point is that since the importance of having LOS and the importance of being able to fit in cover is so different for different units, the only way to be fair is to proxy models of the same general size as the original model.

Probably too much of a difference in model size and type. Also, how are you going to make a bike if you are scavenging the bike for wheels? You have to end up with wheels somehow. Might as well just buy 3rd party wheels instead of overpaying and making up for it with a stretch counts as.

Maybe you could put them on a bases with a lot of height, stacked up rocks or something similar. If you model them to about the same height, then you wouldn't have any LoS issues. I'd allow it whichever way you did it, but I'm very lenient. Rule of cool overrides any other rule for me.

 ph34r wrote:
Probably too much of a difference in model size and type. Also, how are you going to make a bike if you are scavenging the bike for wheels? You have to end up with wheels somehow. Might as well just buy 3rd party wheels instead of overpaying and making up for it with a stretch counts as.

I can scratchbuild the segmented steel wheels for the bikes out of leftover tank treads. what I can't build is the rubber tire looking wheels that I need for my russes. but if you know of some good 3rd party wheels I'd love to hear about them.

Use the bikes as rough riders instead. That makes sense at least.

Since you're scavenging the wheels perhaps you could make them like your proposed image but as jetbikes.

It should alleviate the LoS issues and be easier to pull off than making your own wheels.

 Eldarain wrote:
Since you're scavenging the wheels perhaps you could make them like your proposed image but as jetbikes.

It should alleviate the LoS issues and be easier to pull off than making your own wheels.

Well that would be horribly unfluffy and probably an even worse counts-as so yeah that's not great.