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 Dakka,

I was thinking about modeling my next flying Hive Tyrant on the ground (using the kits legs instead of the long tail) and I wanted to know if Dakka considered this modeling for advantage. I was considering this option because I don't want my Flyrants to look exactly the same. I hope this is the right forum for this topic if not I apologize.

Thank you for any input on this matter.

Sincerely,

Marshal86

Weren't all hive tyrants with wings modelled like this before the new kit came out? I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Marshal86 wrote:
Hello Dakka,

I was thinking about modeling my next flying Hive Tyrant on the ground (using the kits legs instead of the long tail) and I wanted to know if Dakka considered this modeling for advantage. I was considering this option because I don't want my Flyrants to look exactly the same. I hope this is the right forum for this topic if not I apologize.

Thank you for any input on this matter.

Sincerely,

Marshal86

Perfectly fine, its a perfectly legitimate way to build it. Would it be considered modelling for advantage to build a walking tyrant this way? No. So why a flying one? Is it modelling for advantage to build a walking tyrant or the Swarmlord with the long tail? No.

Not at all. Go for it. The Rule of Cool is the only thing that matters.

Thank you everyone for the feedback.

I myself didn't feel that it was modeling for advantage and I'm glad almost everyone agrees. I haven't seen any modeled this way in my area and I was afraid someone might think I was trying to make a Flyrant that was harder to see.

I guess now all I need to do is figure out how I want to make the twin linked devourers....devourers + crushing claws or fleshborer hives.

Thanks again everyone!

Sincerely,

Marshal86

Marshal86 wrote:
Thank you everyone for the feedback.

I myself didn't feel that it was modeling for advantage and I'm glad almost everyone agrees. I haven't seen any modeled this way in my area and I was afraid someone might think I was trying to make a Flyrant that was harder to see.

I guess now all I need to do is figure out how I want to make the twin linked devourers....devourers + crushing claws or fleshborer hives.

Thanks again everyone!

Sincerely,

Marshal86

Forge World now produces a TL Devourer arm. Its not that expensive and if you can jump in on a group order, even better, free shipping. Its literally a normal looking Devourer arm, except with 2 Devourers joined to it, and the arms are in pairs. Perfect for 2x TL Devourers and a must imo.

As long as the finished model stands about as high over terrain as the flying one I wouldn't care.

Wouldn't have an issue, as long as you tell me what it is before the game starts and make it so it looks like it could fly if it wanted to. I'm all for the same unit being modeled differently. It makes the game more interesting and adds more flavor to the army! Post some pics when you get it built up, would love to see it.

tilarium wrote:
Wouldn't have an issue, as long as you tell me what it is before the game starts and make it so it looks like it could fly if it wanted to. I'm all for the same unit being modeled differently. It makes the game more interesting and adds more flavor to the army! Post some pics when you get it built up, would love to see it

He means use the standard walking legs instead of the "traditional" long tail for putting the tyrant in the air. The upper half is unchanged and has the wings as normal.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
As long as the finished model stands about as high over terrain as the flying one I wouldn't care.

why should it stand at the same height above terrain? the model is the same size etc height above terrain is not a requirement of modeling

If you stand them next to one another, the flying variant is about a centimeter taller (because it is propped up on its tail, and its feed are off the ground).

However, the flying variant is also leaning forwards quite heavily, and so has a smaller front-on profile than the ground variant in many respects (important for true LoS).

There is very little difference over-all.

I've never had any complaint about mine, which started off originally as a metal Hive Tyrant with Balrog wings.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
As long as the finished model stands about as high over terrain as the flying one I wouldn't care.

this is a ridiculous thing to say, he's obviously just wanting his tyrants to look different. and is perfectly able, and rules legal to model it this way. he's not altering the kit in any fashion, he's just using one of the two options provided in the kit. he's not asking to do anything for an advantage, and shouldn't have to do any modeling for your perceived advantage either.tfg.

I hate the "skiing" feet on the flyrant, so when I modelled mine I cut the hooves down and modelled them as though they had landed. I like it much better this way. Out of sensitivity to future opponents, I modelled them on elevated bases. HQs should stand out after all!

wargamer1985 wrote:why should it stand at the same height above terrain? the model is the same size etc height above terrain is not a requirement of modeling

No, but significantly altering the model's profile can affect its ability to see/be seen over or receive cover from any given piece of terrain. This can confer distinct gameplay advantages, hence the OP's concerns about opponents calling MFA and Kilkrazy's desire for roughly equivalent height. Perfectly sensible from a rules-centric perspective, where, in the interest of fairness during play, the ideal solution would be to have everyone use identical models. That's boring, though, so nearly everyone makes reasonable allowances (note how he said "about"), with a smaller subset granting near-unlimited leeway.

zachwho wrote:this is a ridiculous thing to say, he's obviously just wanting his tyrants to look different. and is perfectly able, and rules legal to model it this way. he's not altering the kit in any fashion, he's just using one of the two options provided in the kit. he's not asking to do anything for an advantage, and shouldn't have to do any modeling for your perceived advantage either.tfg.

1. Relax.
2. See above.

According to Xyptc, there's rather little difference in the profiles of the two variants, so this is really a non-issue. If there were a more serious discrepancy, it's fairly simple to make up the lost height with basing, as AesSedai did.

AesSedai wrote:I hate the "skiing" feet on the flyrant, so when I modelled mine I cut the hooves down and modelled them as though they had landed. I like it much better this way. Out of sensitivity to future opponents, I modelled them on elevated bases. HQs should stand out after all!

Using an elevated base is a good idea to minimize the height difference, I might try and do the same. Nice looking Tyrant by the way!

'Modelling for advantage' genuinely never crossed my mind when I built my Hive Tyrant. I just wasn't a fan of the flying pose.



I plan on doing some highlighting on the green gun bits - when I learn how to.

Hard to call modelling for advantage really. He may be lower down, and thus harder to hit, but at the same time he can't see near as much.

Maybe magnetise him? That way if you get a real pedant you can make everyone happy.

Its actually really hard to MFA. I have an Elysian with a plasma gun who's modelled kicking a marine over while dropping from the sky (dynamic entry FTW) who is elevated to shoot, but he can be shot over walls and buildings, so it's pretty give and take. The reverse should be true for the tyrant.

I voted no because you wouldn't take advantage of any opportunities given now would you?

If any real LOS issue arose you would either swap the model out for one posed "properly" or just imagine the model being a bit taller.

Who's advantage? Yours or your opponents?

With the changes to MC rules it probably doesn't matter how you model your flyrant, and the old flyrant kit used to come with only one pose, so I'm sure noone is gonna mind you putting your guy on the ground. Not to mention, it might even be a disadvantage for you. If you want your flyrant to swoop around and shoot things, if he's on the ground, he may not see quite as far as if he was in the air.

Also if you magnetize him, that gives you all the options

 oadie wrote:

wargamer1985 wrote:why should it stand at the same height above terrain? the model is the same size etc height above terrain is not a requirement of modeling

No, but significantly altering the model's profile can affect its ability to see/be seen over or receive cover from any given piece of terrain. This can confer distinct gameplay advantages, hence the OP's concerns about opponents calling MFA and Kilkrazy's desire for roughly equivalent height. Perfectly sensible from a rules-centric perspective, where, in the interest of fairness during play, the ideal solution would be to have everyone use identical models. That's boring, though, so nearly everyone makes reasonable allowances (note how he said "about"), with a smaller subset granting near-unlimited leeway.

zachwho wrote:this is a ridiculous thing to say, he's obviously just wanting his tyrants to look different. and is perfectly able, and rules legal to model it this way. he's not altering the kit in any fashion, he's just using one of the two options provided in the kit. he's not asking to do anything for an advantage, and shouldn't have to do any modeling for your perceived advantage either.tfg.

1. Relax.
2. See above.

According to Xyptc, there's rather little difference in the profiles of the two variants, so this is really a non-issue. If there were a more serious discrepancy, it's fairly simple to make up the lost height with basing, as AesSedai did.

1. get over yourself
2. it was ridiculous
3. you're just as ridiculous for telling someone on the internet to relax, like you're some kind of dakka counselor here to make things better.

you didn't like my opinion of the quoted post, that's great and also your privilege. it's the internet!! just like how i don't like yours, life goes on. so really, just relax.

I have 4 flyrants all modeled on the ground, because I bought the kit before they re released it with wings. I have conversion / bitz wings.

This was a kit which was released between codex's, so it's more likely than a lot of other differing models people will have the older kit with them on the ground.

No ones ever questioned my flyrants, and I don't feel like spending £100 to replace them or trying to convert them at this stage

Nem wrote: I don't feel like spending £100 to replace them or trying to convert them at this stage

I don't think anyone expects you to!

I've been running a Flying Hive Tyrant built in such a way since the kit came out, and I've never had any complaints (and I've used it a lot). I magnetised it in case I ever wanted to use the Swarmlord, who obviously doesn't fly.

wargamer1985 wrote:

 Kilkrazy wrote:
As long as the finished model stands about as high over terrain as the flying one I wouldn't care.

why should it stand at the same height above terrain? the model is the same size etc height above terrain is not a requirement of modeling

I presume a flying one comes on a flying base because it flies.

I am answering the original question. If you make changes to a model that make it a lot harder to see, like making it nearer the ground and therefore more likely to be hidden behind terrain, it begins to look like modelling for advantage. It is like those Eldar Wraithknights that have been posed in lying down sniper poses.

I am all in favour of Rule of Cool but there is an invisible line too.

It sounds like his proposed changes to the model are well within any reason, unlike some of the other MFA's mentioned above like Wraithknights lying down. One centimeter difference in height on a model of that size is negligible, and even then, if we were to get technical, he would be putting himself at a "disadvantage" because he is making his taller flying model shorter.

Well here is what I ended up with. The base didn't add too much to the height, but it's not that far off. I play a lot of 1500 point games and will probably only use one Flyrant at this level, so if anyone complains I'll just switch it out for my other one.

Thanks again everyone for helping make my decision.

Sincerely,

Marshal86

*edited for photo issues*

Bah! Looks fine to me. Great even. And yeah any MFA issues that do arise can be quickly solved by bringing along the "proper" model.

Someone said in response to my earlier post about taking advantage of MFA, and how the owning player would not seek to use the advantage. I was merely stating that if it were me, I would not be looking for that, advantage or disadvantage. I would strive to play it fair, no matter what the model looked like, whether it was my model or not.

Here's another photo. My ipad would only post the same photo in a single reply (not sure why).

considering this game doesnt use a balanced and competitive rule set, I would say that if someone gives you trouble about it then just refuse to play them.

at the same time, it goes hand in hand with you not being a douche about it. the rare time that it comes into account that your model is receiving a bonus that it WOULDNT receive if it were not converted, then be a good guy and dont take the advantage.

ive got tons of weird conversions that change models. no ones ever given me a problem about it. the game is about dynamic stories, cool scenarios and awesome fluffy fights. if a WAAC gamer decides to be a loser about a cool looking model, then tell them to stuff it and go play starcraft if balance is what theyre looking for.

Not really about modelling for advantage as such, more about the way you then play the model.

If you are not TFG, I doubt anyone will have a problem, if you are then everything you do will be seen as modelling for advantage.

Sounds like you're not so shouldn't be an issue