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.

How does everyone deal with changes to the base size of a unit they already have?

Examples:
Terminators getting a larger base than the standard infantry base.
Broadsides going to a Monstrous Creature Base rather than the current "suit" sized base.


Is it really modeling for advantage when it is the model/edition that changed, not me changing(I am after all using the base provided) my base?

Depends... does it impact gameplay?

A perfect example was Ghazghkull on a 60mm base in 5th drastically impacted gameplay. The same model in 6th has much less impact on gameplay.

Terminators are tricky due to deep strike rules and people get suspicious when all your deep striking termies are on 25mm and others on 40mm.

Your best bet is to be 'consistent' and not to be purposefully trying to take advantage of your larger base size. If you have broadsides on 60mm, then if you were at 2" coherency, you would be closer to 3" coherency compared to a 40mm base and gain an advantage potentially.

While you can throw it in your opponents face about 'bases they came with' there is a difference between sportsmanship and gamesmanship.

You use the base provided.

Commonly tournaments are asking people to use the more current version, where there could be a perceived advantage, but this also includes replacing items such as 2nd ed trukks with the 4th/5th edition much larger versions.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
How does everyone deal with changes to the base size of a unit they already have?

Personally, I would update the bases to the latest. I don't think it's required as the rules state to use the base it was provided with. However, updating the bases certainly raises fewer eyebrows and it gives you an opportunity to update the models..

 megatrons2nd wrote:
Is it really modeling for advantage when it is the model/edition that changed, not me changing(I am after all using the base provided) my base?

No. You are perfectly ok keeping it on the base that was provided... unless the place you play at (local group or tournament) requires you to update the bases.

Personally, I change the base size to the current version.
Bases are easy to come by, a base swap is not the end of the world.

 marv335 wrote:
Personally, I change the base size to the current version.
Bases are easy to come by, a base swap is not the end of the world.

It is if you built an army with custom resin bases that are no longer available, or if you put a considerable amount of work into the bases and made the base part of the model.

It is more me being worried about breaking my model...again. I have an original weak ankle Broadside model. It is pinned to hold it together, into the current base. It has broken once in the years of play, but I don't know if I will be able to repair it again. I will eventually replace it, but don't want to make a base change, spend money on new legs/feet, and then again when I update.

I am typically about a year behind on army updates, as real world takes precedence.

 megatrons2nd wrote:
It is more me being worried about breaking my model...again. I have an original weak ankle Broadside model. It is pinned to hold it together, into the current base. It has broken once in the years of play, but I don't know if I will be able to repair it again. I will eventually replace it, but don't want to make a base change, spend money on new legs/feet, and then again when I update.

I am typically about a year behind on army updates, as real world takes precedence.

Why not just mount it as is on the larger current base.

changing the bases would irritate the crap out of me. Random infantry i dont give really good bases but all of my more expensive models (bosses, walkers, elites, etc) i give a good one. If i had to rip it off because the base size changed i would be mordified.

For the most part you can just add it onto the bigger base, sometimes you cant pull that off though.

Don't have to remove the model from its original base, just glue it "as is" onto the larger base. This should be a non-issue.

Every tournament I have been too has required models to be on the bases that the newest edition of their kit is supplied with (which means all terminators must be on 40mm bases). Deep Striking 10 40mm bases is worlds harder than deep striking 10 standard bases. Leaving them on the old base gives you a clear advantage over those who bought them more recently.

Just mount the old base onto the new one, cover the sides with rubble/green stuff/etc, and base to match.

 Cheesedoodler wrote:
Don't have to remove the model from its original base, just glue it "as is" onto the larger base. This should be a non-issue.

Every tournament I have been too has required models to be on the bases that the newest edition of their kit is supplied with (which means all terminators must be on 40mm bases). Deep Striking 10 40mm bases is worlds harder than deep striking 10 standard bases. Leaving them on the old base gives you a clear advantage over those who bought them more recently.

And yet, by the rules, if I have old terminators on old bases, those are the bases they were supplied with. And while it might be easier to deepstrike the guys on 40mms, they're also more resistant to blasts and templates and can contact more enemy models (as well as controlling more space on the table).

For every advantage a smaller base provides, there's an opposite advantage a larger base provides. It's really not a big deal. The rules say I can use the base size my model came with.

 Redbeard wrote:

 Cheesedoodler wrote:
Don't have to remove the model from its original base, just glue it "as is" onto the larger base. This should be a non-issue.

Every tournament I have been too has required models to be on the bases that the newest edition of their kit is supplied with (which means all terminators must be on 40mm bases). Deep Striking 10 40mm bases is worlds harder than deep striking 10 standard bases. Leaving them on the old base gives you a clear advantage over those who bought them more recently.

And yet, by the rules, if I have old terminators on old bases, those are the bases they were supplied with. And while it might be easier to deepstrike the guys on 40mms, they're also more resistant to blasts and templates and can contact more enemy models (as well as controlling more space on the table).

For every advantage a smaller base provides, there's an opposite advantage a larger base provides. It's really not a big deal. The rules say I can use the base size my model came with.

But we do not play these games in a vacuum and are smart enough creatures to maximize advantages and mitigate risks.

People always say 'well this fictional bad thing could happen to balance it out' except you would explicitly be capable of playing where your models on 25mm which are more vulnerable to templates won;t ever be in a situation to be wrecked by templates.

It never balances out because we play to maximize advantages. You would need to explicitly play to not maximize the advantages for it to balance out in many situations as the advantages are too much (like 5th edition Ghazghkull on a 60mm base is all advantage and no real disadvantage)

That is why it is easier for TOs to ban undersized/oversized vehicles and ask people to play as if all models were on the current base size. And you can rail against it, or just accept it and bluetac your 25mm termies to pokerchips.

nkelsch wrote:

That is why it is easier for TOs to ban undersized/oversized vehicles and ask people to play as if all models were on the current base size. And you can rail against it, or just accept it and bluetac your 25mm termies to pokerchips.

It's easier for TOs to ask all players to use the same codex too, but there's no basis in the rules for that either. I don't have to rail against it, I simply won't take part in it. My models, small or not, are legitimate GW models. They're all based on the appropriately sized base for when they were purchased. Any TO who wants to disallow me from playing is welcome to do so, but I don't think our hobby is so popular that turning away players is good sense. Again, the rules of the game back my position, not yours, not the TOs.


Edit:

As an aside, and why I'm so adamant about this, is that it really shows some stupidity in action. You're worried that having a model on a slightly larger (or smaller) base is going to provide some massive advantage. GW isn't. GW has, on multiple occasions, changed the base size provided with models without a codex change, without a points-change, seemingly on a whim. And while you're correct, people will play to maximize advantages and minimize disadvantages, the game is inherently so imbalanced that the minor edge gained or lost by a base-size change is relatively insignificant compared to things like rolling a better Warlord Trait, or Seizing the Initiative.

So, you're playing this game, where one side can literally be handed a model that can rack up extra Victory Points, while the other gets to pick whether it's dark for a turn, where one codex is new and shiny and has flyers and another hasn't been updated in ten years, and the best way you can find to create balance is to make sure that everyone rebases their models because GW repackaged something last week. Yeah, that'll fix it.

See how ludicrous this is yet? If GW actually gave a rat's ass about having a balanced game, if they made even the slightest indication that base size was actually factored into a unit's point cost then I'd be happy to make sure they were all accurate. But it's not. And maybe there are better places to seek balance than in getting all upset that someone doesn't want to hack the feet off their older OOP models.

 Redbeard wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

That is why it is easier for TOs to ban undersized/oversized vehicles and ask people to play as if all models were on the current base size. And you can rail against it, or just accept it and bluetac your 25mm termies to pokerchips.

It's easier for TOs to ask all players to use the same codex too, but there's no basis in the rules for that either. I don't have to rail against it, I simply won't take part in it. My models, small or not, are legitimate GW models. They're all based on the appropriately sized base for when they were purchased. Any TO who wants to disallow me from playing is welcome to do so, but I don't think our hobby is so popular that turning away players is good sense. Again, the rules of the game back my position, not yours, not the TOs.

You can't possibly think using Gorkamorka trukks is fair play. You can't have a competitive ruleset and then exploit OOP models for unintended advantages... That is gamesmanship and rude to people in a supposedly social atmosphere... Hence why TOs simply make people use 40mm termies and Ban Gorkatrukks.

Now see I'm "that guy"


What I mean by that is, okay I play grey knights and Ordo Malleus inquisitors can come in terminator armor. Now, I have my "Terminator armor" inquisitor on a 40mm base, now the power armor version of him (SAME EXACT MODEL, they look no different cept for the base and paintscheme, and the power armor one has a demonsword plasma pistol combo.) is on a 28mm base. I had a TO ask me, what was going on and I explained it to him. All my Terminator armor models are on 40mm bases except for one fig I can't play in tournaments cause its Reaper and not GW, but I go by what armor they have. Power/Flak/Carapace/Artificer/Infantry go on 28mm Terminators/Heavy Infantry go on 40s, Walkers and Heavy Teams go on 60s, and Monsters go on the monster bases.

Thats what I do.


TL DR?

Keep the bases consistant with what armor the figurines are wearing/equipted with.

nkelsch wrote:

You can't possibly think using Gorkamorka trukks is fair play.

I have never bought a truck with gorkamorka packaging. Every trukk I have bought has clearly been packaged for 40k.

You can't have a competitive ruleset and then exploit OOP models for unintended advantages...

Worry about correcting the first part of your assumption and then I'll worry about the second part. The rules are not competitive, they're social. As such, my trukks are just a social as anyone else's.

RAW is, OOP models, on OOP bases are legal,

TOs and house rules may vary,

but if its GW model,

its legal, no matter how old it is

if its came with a 28mm base, you can use a 28mm base,

we dont punish demon players by making them swap between square/round bases when they want to play 40k/fantasy with the models, why punish people who have played the hobby for a long time?

I had lots of OOP terminators, and yes it is a pain to rebase,
models get broken, and if you actually spend the time and effort to make a nice 28 mm base, you now have to spend that effort making it blend into a 40mm one, and accept that now your model is taller to its disadvantage,

I have never heard of a tourny banning GW models like the old ork trucks, that has no basis in rules at all and just penalizes people who have been in the hobby for a long time.

the game is social, not competitive, if 12mm makes or breaks a game, even a tourny one, you are doing it wrong

easysauce wrote:
if 12mm makes or breaks a game, even a tourny one, you are doing it wrong

That is not always true.

I wont a game because I had an old model with an old square base.

He was just barely close enough to an objective to make the game a win instead of a draw because of his square corner.

Luckily it was a friendly game an not a tournament, so my opponent was fine with it.

In 5th Edition, Ghaz on 60mm gained 20mm on his assault. Being S&P it was almost to the effect of getting a +1 to his assault roll. That does make or break games I can name multiple times my S&P assaults failed by 1" due to a roll as ork assaults cut it close and often need every inch.

Trucks which would be able to be clearly seen in EVERY situation being able to get not just cover but totally hide LOS is gamebreaking. Deepstriking 25mm termies can be drastically game impacting too. This idea that the disadvantages always balance out the advantages is wrong which is why fir there to be the illusion of fairness, everyone's models must work the same with the rules for it to be fair. When your models interact with the rules differently then there is a problem

And TOs correct that problem usually by saying 'play it as if it is the current size' or providing stand-in models or flat out disallowing the models.

nkelsch wrote:
In 5th Edition, Ghaz on 60mm gained 20mm on his assault. Being S&P it was almost to the effect of getting a +1 to his assault roll. That does make or break games I can name multiple times my S&P assaults failed by 1" due to a roll as ork assaults cut it close and often need every inch.

Okay. When the game went from 5th to 6th, Ghaz went from granting all the orks in the army an extra 6" charge, to doing nothing special at all. This causes many assaults to fail. Did Ghaz get a price decrease as a result? No. Is it possible that the game simply isn't balanced. It's not fair at all. Sometimes, the rules change, and the model you had before is then better than the one you had after. Sometimes the rules just change and the model you had after is better than the one you had before. And their points don't change. It's just... different.

Trucks which would be able to be clearly seen in EVERY situation being able to get not just cover but totally hide LOS is gamebreaking. Deepstriking 25mm termies can be drastically game impacting too. This idea that the disadvantages always balance out the advantages is wrong which is why fir there to be the illusion of fairness, everyone's models must work the same with the rules for it to be fair.

You seem to believe that it's fair, even if these models are the same. That's humorous. And, yet, even in trying to make this claim, you point out that you're not trying to get fairness, you're trying to get the illusion of fairness. So, what you're really fighting for here is an illusion. That's quite the noble cause you have taken up.

Sometimes, the model just changes. Sometimes the exact same model is given a larger, or a smaller base. And their points don't change either. One may be better, one may be worse. The rules say we use True Line of Sight. We don't pretend that it's bigger because a newer one is bigger. The rules say that my Citadel produced, 40k branded trukk is 100% legal. Who are you to demand that we all fall for your illusion of fairness?

When your models interact with the rules differently then there is a problem

No, there isn't. In fact, the rules specifically state that it's not a problem. The only problem is that you seem to want to believe that the game is balanced. You can't make an unbalanced game fair. You're making a big fuss about something that isn't a problem. The real fairness problem is that my trukks went from being able to move 12" and unload passengers to being able to move 6" and unload them, with no corresponding decrease in their price. GW clearly doesn't care. Why do you?

GreyKnightsDude wrote:
Now see I'm "that guy"


What I mean by that is, okay I play grey knights and Ordo Malleus inquisitors can come in terminator armor. Now, I have my "Terminator armor" inquisitor on a 40mm base, now the power armor version of him (SAME EXACT MODEL, they look no different cept for the base and paintscheme, and the power armor one has a demonsword plasma pistol combo.) is on a 28mm base. I had a TO ask me, what was going on and I explained it to him. All my Terminator armor models are on 40mm bases except for one fig I can't play in tournaments cause its Reaper and not GW, but I go by what armor they have. Power/Flak/Carapace/Artificer/Infantry go on 28mm Terminators/Heavy Infantry go on 40s, Walkers and Heavy Teams go on 60s, and Monsters go on the monster bases.

Thats what I do.


TL DR?

Keep the bases consistant with what armor the figurines are wearing/equipted with.

Exalted. This is exactly how it is meant to be played.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Redbeard wrote:

nkelsch wrote:

You can't possibly think using Gorkamorka trukks is fair play.

Worry about correcting the first part of your assumption and then I'll worry about the second part. The rules are not competitive, they're social. As such, my trukks are just a social as anyone else's.

You are in the WRONG subforum if you are looking for the fun "beer and pretzels" social game of warhammer 40k. This is for hashing out the rules for the competetive/tournament aspect of the game. If you won't admit that using the old Ork trucks gives you a clear and distinct advantage over the people who are using the new trucks than I don't know what else I can say to you.

While GW can't stop you from using them in their stores (because you bought it from them, afterall) a TO at a privately owned FLGS certainly can, and in many cases will. You can stomp your foot and argue how you think it is legal all you want, and he still won't let you play with them in his tournament. I've seen this argument play out over and over again in the last couple years at local tournaments.

 Cheesedoodler wrote:

You are in the WRONG subforum if you are looking for the fun "beer and pretzels" social game of warhammer 40k. This is for hashing out the rules for the competetive/tournament aspect of the game.

And here I thought it was the forum for discussing what the rules actually said, or did you conveniently forget that?

If you won't admit that using the old Ork trucks gives you a clear and distinct advantage over the people who are using the new trucks than I don't know what else I can say to you.

I never failed to admit that. I'm fully aware that it provides an advantage. What I'm arguing is that the game is inherently unbalanced and unfair and that the advantage I am gaining is not significant enough to justify ignoring the rules for. If we're proposing rules to ignore for the sake of fairness and balance, I have a whole lot more that should be implemented before this one.

While GW can't stop you from using them in their stores (because you bought it from them, afterall) a TO at a privately owned FLGS certainly can, and in many cases will. You can stomp your foot and argue how you think it is legal all you want, and he still won't let you play with them in his tournament. I've seen this argument play out over and over again in the last couple years at local tournaments.

No one is stomping their feet. I'm more than happy to not attend any tournament that refuses to allow me to use my models. But this forum isn't about what house rules various TOs choose to implement, it's about what the rules in the rulebook say. Do you believe there is a rule in the rulebook that says I cannot use my trukks, and if so, can you provide a page number?

Well said Redbeard. And for those who insist that old Termies on 28mm bases should just be glued on top of new 40mm bases- that would be forcing me to model for YOUR advantage by increasing the height of my model, thereby making it harder for me to gain cover or get out of LOS. Why should I be forced to give you an advantage the rules don't tell me to give you?

Sure, TOs can make any ruling they want in their Tourney, but the rules don't support forcing people to convert old models to the latest bases supplied for the newest models, or to even use the newest models for that matter... What the rules DO say is to use the bases that were supplied with THOSE models...

And as Redbeard alluded, nobody is forcing me to play in a Tourney. If the TO wants to void certain rules for some illusory sense of "fairness" then that is certainly his right as the TO, but that doesn't mean that is RAW...

its funny how people like to swtich from "this is the fair way to play it even if its not RAW" in YMDC

to "I dont care if thats the fair way to play it, RAW says I get to be unfair in this case"

besides it seems much more "unfair" to expect someone to give up real money, and real time, to convert or replace models, then to ask someone to simply pretend a base/model is slightly bigger.


YMDC is RAW orientated, RAW is you use the base supplied, weather its the "current" one or not,

RAW is citadel models are allowed, the old 40 truks are citadel models, hence allowed,

TO's enforcement of house rules on bases/trukks is just that, house rules, not RAW.