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.

 insaniak wrote:

 NAVARRO wrote:
Not being cynical or anything but I doubt GW would change bases size just because today 3rd party companies are developing compatible bases..

This is the company that is removing options from codexes that they themselves don't make and have no intention of making just because some other company might do so...

I know and I'm by no means oblivious of how they handled many other issues, I do think there's more to this than that.
There has been some interesting changes of late at GW... free painting tutorials videos? Free rules inside the boxes? Aggressive boxed sets releases...

The new bases seem to be only for specific models since the stealers are unchanged so IMO it hints to different rules and bases just for some units.
I may be wrong though but its something we will all soon find out.

With bigger bases and bigger models comes bigger tables too?

If true, wouldn't this be a boon to MDF companies? They could just cut a 32mm circle with a 25mm circle in it.

Pop out the 25mm MDF circle, paint the 32mm ring black or whatever, pop in your already based 25mm mini.

You'd only need enough 32mm rings to play a game, not one for each 25mm mini you have.

 DarthOvious wrote:
I think everybody needs to calm down a bit. Remember that two more base sizes are being sold as well. They are also going to sell 50mm round bases and 170mm oval bases. I think this suggests that there is more to it than GW just doing this out of spite because of some third party seller. If it was purely done just to mess with companies making 25mm round bases then why bother packaging and selling the other two sizes. They must have an alternative reason for it.

50mm round and 170mm oval are not new bases for GW though- they are centurion and knight bases respectively. Just available separately now.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
50mm round and 170mm oval are not new bases for GW though- they are centurion and knight bases respectively. Just available separately now.

While they are at it, they should have released Tyrannocyte's 100mm base separately as well. I want some.

I hope this isn't true, I love my 25mm SWM fall bases. I would be infuriated if this happened.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 DarthOvious wrote:
I think everybody needs to calm down a bit. Remember that two more base sizes are being sold as well. They are also going to sell 50mm round bases and 170mm oval bases. I think this suggests that there is more to it than GW just doing this out of spite because of some third party seller. If it was purely done just to mess with companies making 25mm round bases then why bother packaging and selling the other two sizes. They must have an alternative reason for it.

50mm round and 170mm oval are not new bases for GW though- they are centurion and knight bases respectively. Just available separately now.

Yes, I am aware that they already have models with those bases, but I was pointing out that the fact that they are selling them in bags doesn't mean there is a dark ulterior motive behind it. It just means that they are going to have some models coming out on 32mm bases. That's all.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:


I would tend to agree, but the oddly specific choice of 32mm still has me wondering. Why not a more standard 30mm? What line of thought led them to pick 32?

Because Armorcast already makes 30mm bases?
Not currently showing in the online store, but they do have the molds for three different 30mm bases. The Armorcast 28mm scale BattleTech Elemental now sold by Iron Wind also comes with a 30mm base.

More likely that this is the new jump infantry base though...

T

lol, i shant be switching mi bases'

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
If true, wouldn't this be a boon to MDF companies? They could just cut a 32mm circle with a 25mm circle in it.

Pop out the 25mm MDF circle, paint the 32mm ring black or whatever, pop in your already based 25mm mini.

You'd only need enough 32mm rings to play a game, not one for each 25mm mini you have.

Doughnut Bases. Good idea.

privateer4hire wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
If true, wouldn't this be a boon to MDF companies? They could just cut a 32mm circle with a 25mm circle in it.

Pop out the 25mm MDF circle, paint the 32mm ring black or whatever, pop in your already based 25mm mini.

You'd only need enough 32mm rings to play a game, not one for each 25mm mini you have.

Doughnut Bases. Good idea.

Not for me, fat enough already!

 scarletsquig wrote:
32mm would require the purchase of Games Workshop bases. Makes good business sense.

Not really. 3rd party bases are pretty much all resin (and they're generally expensive), so if this happened, there would be new resin 32mm bases pretty quickly. Of course, I would be personally screwed. I have at least 300 25mm resin bases in my collection (unpainted/unused ones).

Just use them for all you old minis which came with 25mm bases

timd wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:


I would tend to agree, but the oddly specific choice of 32mm still has me wondering. Why not a more standard 30mm? What line of thought led them to pick 32?

Because Armorcast already makes 30mm bases?
Not currently showing in the online store, but they do have the molds for three different 30mm bases. The Armorcast 28mm scale BattleTech Elemental now sold by Iron Wind also comes with a 30mm base.

More likely that this is the new jump infantry base though...

T

Yeah it would seem to bring other jump infantry in line with ones on flying bases (like Gargoyles), and allow mixing and matching of flying and regular bases in those units without size discrepancies.

Pro tip: Smashing your 25mm based infantry with a hammer flattens the plastic base in to roughly 32mm!
Get ahead of GW and their crazy policies with this money saving tip!
I recommend a rubber coated mallet to preserve those painstaking conversions and paint jobs.

jullevi wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
50mm round and 170mm oval are not new bases for GW though- they are centurion and knight bases respectively. Just available separately now.

While they are at it, they should have released Tyrannocyte's 100mm base separately as well. I want some.

MY god please

I wana base my attack bikes, tarantulas, and TFCS forever now :/

privateer4hire wrote:

 VorpalBunny74 wrote:
If true, wouldn't this be a boon to MDF companies? They could just cut a 32mm circle with a 25mm circle in it.

Pop out the 25mm MDF circle, paint the 32mm ring black or whatever, pop in your already based 25mm mini.

You'd only need enough 32mm rings to play a game, not one for each 25mm mini you have.

Doughnut Bases. Good idea.

That was pretty much what they did for Infinity like these, conversions for 40mm to 55mm, then simply glue and touch up the bases some. Just like these here, except they'd make 7mm circles:
https://undergroundlasers.com/home/40-10-x-40mm-to-55mm-conversion-rings.html

timd wrote:

 Tannhauser42 wrote:


I would tend to agree, but the oddly specific choice of 32mm still has me wondering. Why not a more standard 30mm? What line of thought led them to pick 32?

Because Armorcast already makes 30mm bases?
Not currently showing in the online store, but they do have the molds for three different 30mm bases. The Armorcast 28mm scale BattleTech Elemental now sold by Iron Wind also comes with a 30mm base.

It's not just Armorcast, 30mm bases are available from a multitude of makers in both plastic and resin. EM4 has the best deal if you're looking for GW style (slanted side) bases.

Got a bunch of magnetized jump pack marines. Anyone insisting that they have the wrong base size when their packs are on will be ignored.

 Dark Severance wrote:

privateer4hire wrote:
Doughnut Bases. Good idea.

That was pretty much what they did for Infinity like these, conversions for 40mm to 55mm, then simply glue and touch up the bases some. Just like these here, except they'd make 7mm circles:
https://undergroundlasers.com/home/40-10-x-40mm-to-55mm-conversion-rings.html

If this turns out to be true then I want to be on record predicting GW will soon switch all their games from inches to cubits and sell proprietary cubit rulers and tape measures.

Zywus wrote:

 warboss wrote:

Zywus wrote:
While GW is not above overreaching when it comes to their IP, they aren't going to claim copyright on what is basically a 32mm wide cylinder.

We're talking about the company that tried to claim they owned the generic arrow and chevron shapes. Nuff said. Nothing is beyond GW; the only question is whether they'll actually try it.

Assuming those claims were actually made and that's not simply a misunderstanding of the legalese of the chapterhouse case, said claims were presumably summarily rejected by the court.

The reason the chapterhouse case dragged on for a long time and consumed resources were that GW had a case for some of their claims. A copyright claim for a cylinder-shape would need almost no time or resources to refute.

It was in the list of claims, and still had to get as far as a court to be rejected. Maybe they'd stop at after a denied C&D, but I wouldn't put it past them.

Herzlos wrote:

Zywus wrote:

 warboss wrote:

Zywus wrote:
While GW is not above overreaching when it comes to their IP, they aren't going to claim copyright on what is basically a 32mm wide cylinder.

We're talking about the company that tried to claim they owned the generic arrow and chevron shapes. Nuff said. Nothing is beyond GW; the only question is whether they'll actually try it.

Assuming those claims were actually made and that's not simply a misunderstanding of the legalese of the chapterhouse case, said claims were presumably summarily rejected by the court.

The reason the chapterhouse case dragged on for a long time and consumed resources were that GW had a case for some of their claims. A copyright claim for a cylinder-shape would need almost no time or resources to refute.

It was in the list of claims, and still had to get as far as a court to be rejected. Maybe they'd stop at after a denied C&D, but I wouldn't put it past them.

I kinda doubt that GW would try to claim copyright on a simple arrow shape. Perhaps a shoulderpad or something including an arrow shape.

 Desubot wrote:

jullevi wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
50mm round and 170mm oval are not new bases for GW though- they are centurion and knight bases respectively. Just available separately now.

While they are at it, they should have released Tyrannocyte's 100mm base separately as well. I want some.

MY god please

I wana base my attack bikes, tarantulas, and TFCS forever now :/

60mm round is a tad small for attack bikes, but they do fit on them. 100mm round would be too big for an attack bike.
Same is probably true for tarantulas and thunderfire cannons. you can fit an entire drop pod on the 100mm round base.
For thunderfires and Rapiers, I use the fantasy 50mm x 75mm monstrous cav bases.

I dont like square bases though :/

I might just use wall nob protectors.

they are about 80mm rounds.

 MajorWesJanson wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

jullevi wrote:

 MajorWesJanson wrote:
50mm round and 170mm oval are not new bases for GW though- they are centurion and knight bases respectively. Just available separately now.

While they are at it, they should have released Tyrannocyte's 100mm base separately as well. I want some.

MY god please

I wana base my attack bikes, tarantulas, and TFCS forever now :/

60mm round is a tad small for attack bikes, but they do fit on them. 100mm round would be too big for an attack bike.
Same is probably true for tarantulas and thunderfire cannons. you can fit an entire drop pod on the 100mm round base.
For thunderfires and Rapiers, I use the fantasy 50mm x 75mm monstrous cav bases.

Would be nice to be able to model a drop pod as if it had landed at an odd angle and ploughed into the ground, 100mm would be just right for that!

 Dark Severance wrote:
When Infinity was changing bases sizes there was fear that they would require them to rebase them. Officially the decision was allowed that existing models currently based and out would not need to be rebased. New models would be coming out with the new base sizes. However Infinity also has a template to use whenever there is a discretion when it comes to base size, miniature pose, etc.

I also could see 3rd party simply making a 32mm base that the current base inserts into. Then developing a new 32mm line if needed.

Iirc units will need to be in correct 55mm bases for ITS 2016. It was a reprieve so people could rebase with enough time or find another solution (like the base extended disks some people are using), not an exemption for old models.

Zywus wrote:

Herzlos wrote:

Zywus wrote:

 warboss wrote:

Zywus wrote:
While GW is not above overreaching when it comes to their IP, they aren't going to claim copyright on what is basically a 32mm wide cylinder.

We're talking about the company that tried to claim they owned the generic arrow and chevron shapes. Nuff said. Nothing is beyond GW; the only question is whether they'll actually try it.

Assuming those claims were actually made and that's not simply a misunderstanding of the legalese of the chapterhouse case, said claims were presumably summarily rejected by the court.

The reason the chapterhouse case dragged on for a long time and consumed resources were that GW had a case for some of their claims. A copyright claim for a cylinder-shape would need almost no time or resources to refute.

It was in the list of claims, and still had to get as far as a court to be rejected. Maybe they'd stop at after a denied C&D, but I wouldn't put it past them.

I kinda doubt that GW would try to claim copyright on a simple arrow shape. Perhaps a shoulderpad or something including an arrow shape.

They tried to claim copyright on Roman Numerals in the Chapter House Studios case IIRC.

Sounds like small blast weapons will be pretty screwed against jump pack units :(

I wouldn't actually mind a change to 32mm if you just weren't forced to change and it was simply preference. Just new MEQ units being sold with 32mm, and frankly it's a pain at times trying to cram CSM's with squating legs onto their current bases.

 Kid_Kyoto wrote:
If this turns out to be true then I want to be on record predicting GW will soon switch all their games from inches to cubits and sell proprietary cubit rulers and tape measures.

I'm pretty sure measurements in future GW products will be in "grims".