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.

Dark Age Irish posted on Facebook

Why the foot surf boards! Whyyyyyy!
In other reactions: they do look good otherwise.

historical gamers are a thrifty bunch, they don't like having to buy bases (or use 1p or 2p pieces instead) I suspect

Not to insult you Gallahad, but you're also the first person I've encountered in 25 years of this hobby who has puddle-bases as a make or break item. It's never phased anyone else I've ever met or even seen online. If this really bugs you, maybe steer clear of the thread because it isn't going to change most likely.

Also, if the boxes don't ship with a sprue or two of bases (even though the manufacturers know damn well the miniatures will end up on a variety of bases for wargaming) it saves them costs. Particularly on historical or fantasy miniatures - where the various games use different basing standards. Sure you can ship a box with 20mm squares...or 25mm circles, etc....but that's wasted time/effort if the bases are discarded by the end user.

However, if they don't put bases in the box....and then don't add puddle bases they're now selling a bizarre, incomplete miniatures which is unable to stand.

i just use clippers & a file.

 Elbows wrote:
Not to insult you Gallahad, but you're also the first person I've encountered in 25 years of this hobby who has puddle-bases as a make or break item. It's never phased anyone else I've ever met or even seen online. If this really bugs you, maybe steer clear of the thread because it isn't going to change most likely.

Also, if the boxes don't ship with a sprue or two of bases (even though the manufacturers know damn well the miniatures will end up on a variety of bases for wargaming) it saves them costs. Particularly on historical or fantasy miniatures - where the various games use different basing standards. Sure you can ship a box with 20mm squares...or 25mm circles, etc....but that's wasted time/effort if the bases are discarded by the end user.

However, if they don't put bases in the box....and then don't add puddle bases they're now selling a bizarre, incomplete miniatures which is unable to stand.

Exalted for truth. It also helps people who sell bases like me

 Elbows wrote:
Not to insult you Gallahad, but you're also the first person I've encountered in 25 years of this hobby who has puddle-bases as a make or break item. It's never phased anyone else I've ever met or even seen online. If this really bugs you, maybe steer clear of the thread because it isn't going to change most likely.

Also, if the boxes don't ship with a sprue or two of bases (even though the manufacturers know damn well the miniatures will end up on a variety of bases for wargaming) it saves them costs. Particularly on historical or fantasy miniatures - where the various games use different basing standards. Sure you can ship a box with 20mm squares...or 25mm circles, etc....but that's wasted time/effort if the bases are discarded by the end user.

However, if they don't put bases in the box....and then don't add puddle bases they're now selling a bizarre, incomplete miniatures which is unable to stand.

Im not much a fan of those bases myself. Hobby saw time just puts more time on my turnaround of a project. If at all possible, would love non circled bases. Not the end of the world though.

It's easier to glue bases on than to cut them off, that's enough reason to mold them without.

The dogs look cool. Does anyone know if this kit is in historical scale or fantasy scale?

rgdgaming wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Not to insult you Gallahad, but you're also the first person I've encountered in 25 years of this hobby who has puddle-bases as a make or break item. It's never phased anyone else I've ever met or even seen online. If this really bugs you, maybe steer clear of the thread because it isn't going to change most likely.

Also, if the boxes don't ship with a sprue or two of bases (even though the manufacturers know damn well the miniatures will end up on a variety of bases for wargaming) it saves them costs. Particularly on historical or fantasy miniatures - where the various games use different basing standards. Sure you can ship a box with 20mm squares...or 25mm circles, etc....but that's wasted time/effort if the bases are discarded by the end user.

However, if they don't put bases in the box....and then don't add puddle bases they're now selling a bizarre, incomplete miniatures which is unable to stand.

Im not much a fan of those bases myself. Hobby saw time just puts more time on my turnaround of a project. If at all possible, would love non circled bases. Not the end of the world though.

Why not just put basing material over the puddle base? My skeletons as pictured on the last page have puddle bases and the basing material covers it fine.

Historical gamers expect them. Besides, unless they do skirmish level, they will multi-base and hide them with the flock etc.

 Gallahad wrote:
Why the foot surf boards! Whyyyyyy!
In other reactions: they do look good otherwise.

 lord marcus wrote:

rgdgaming wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
Not to insult you Gallahad, but you're also the first person I've encountered in 25 years of this hobby who has puddle-bases as a make or break item. It's never phased anyone else I've ever met or even seen online. If this really bugs you, maybe steer clear of the thread because it isn't going to change most likely.

Also, if the boxes don't ship with a sprue or two of bases (even though the manufacturers know damn well the miniatures will end up on a variety of bases for wargaming) it saves them costs. Particularly on historical or fantasy miniatures - where the various games use different basing standards. Sure you can ship a box with 20mm squares...or 25mm circles, etc....but that's wasted time/effort if the bases are discarded by the end user.

However, if they don't put bases in the box....and then don't add puddle bases they're now selling a bizarre, incomplete miniatures which is unable to stand.

Im not much a fan of those bases myself. Hobby saw time just puts more time on my turnaround of a project. If at all possible, would love non circled bases. Not the end of the world though.

Why not just put basing material over the puddle base? My skeletons as pictured on the last page have puddle bases and the basing material covers it fine.

For example, in a recent project I needed mantic orcs on wooden chariots to use as battlewagons. The square bases or circles hinder me from putting a few within the confines of the carriage. Otherwise, not too big of a deal to flock them up a tad. I just don't want to have to do a hobby step if I can help it. Not the end of the world.

Of course people still put them on bases (individually or multibased), but they're a heck of a lot more secure with a little platform attached. Sure, a miniature with both feet solidly on the ground will be good with some glue anyway, but that dog would require pinning. I'd rather spend a few seconds adding a layer of glue or milliput around the platforms and know they'll be good forever, than pin every few models and/or glue back figures that broke off.

The main thing is not that they have platforms, but that those platforms appear to be very low. Basing material straight over them will look alright, and they won't all end up on a little hill.

Sprue looks pretty good, enough parts to equip everyone with melee weapons or javelins, and large shields or small shields. Can't quite make out what the difference between the two sets of small shields is though. Would have been nice to have more than just the one sling, and I hope the figures match existing Dark Age ranges for headswaps, as non-uniform figures may otherwise end up looking a bit samey anyway.

The perfect compromise for the customers concerning integral bases would IMO be to have the discs be separate, with two or more holes in them. Then have pegs under the minis feet corresponding to the holes on the discs.

Those who want to use the discs can easily clip the legs into the holes and glue it, those who don't want the disc can easily cut of the pegs (for a fraction of the work it takes removing a integral disc).

Only downside is that this would have the discs take up more sprue space, but it could be mitigated by casting the discs separately on their own sprue.

 Zywus wrote:
The perfect compromise for the customers concerning integral bases would IMO be to have the discs be separate, with two or more holes in them. Then have pegs under the minis feet corresponding to the holes on the discs.

Those who want to use the discs can easily clip the legs into the holes and glue it, those who don't want the disc can easily cut of the pegs (for a fraction of the work it takes removing a integral disc).

Only downside is that this would have the discs take up more sprue space, but it could be mitigated by casting the discs separately on their own sprue.

I really like this

 Zywus wrote:
The perfect compromise for the customers concerning integral bases would IMO be to have the discs be separate, with two or more holes in them. Then have pegs under the minis feet corresponding to the holes on the discs.

Those who want to use the discs can easily clip the legs into the holes and glue it, those who don't want the disc can easily cut of the pegs (for a fraction of the work it takes removing a integral disc).

Only downside is that this would have the discs take up more sprue space, but it could be mitigated by casting the discs separately on their own sprue.

Yeah pegs are much more useful than feet, slots or integral bases, I'd love them to be the standard.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Zywus wrote:
The perfect compromise for the customers concerning integral bases would IMO be to have the discs be separate, with two or more holes in them. Then have pegs under the minis feet corresponding to the holes on the discs.

Those who want to use the discs can easily clip the legs into the holes and glue it, those who don't want the disc can easily cut of the pegs (for a fraction of the work it takes removing a integral disc).

Only downside is that this would have the discs take up more sprue space, but it could be mitigated by casting the discs separately on their own sprue.

Yeah pegs are much more useful than feet, slots or integral bases, I'd love them to be the standard.

 Zywus wrote:
The perfect compromise for the customers concerning integral bases would IMO be to have the discs be separate, with two or more holes in them. Then have pegs under the minis feet corresponding to the holes on the discs.

Those who want to use the discs can easily clip the legs into the holes and glue it, those who don't want the disc can easily cut of the pegs (for a fraction of the work it takes removing a integral disc).

Only downside is that this would have the discs take up more sprue space, but it could be mitigated by casting the discs separately on their own sprue.

That would be ideal.

With a peg system you wouldn't even need the discs. Just have the pegs slot directly into the bases like most push fit GW kits.

Don't want them on those bases? Clip it off and be done with it, and glue them wherever you please then!

 highlord tamburlaine wrote:
With a peg system you wouldn't even need the discs. Just have the pegs slot directly into the bases like most push fit GW kits.

Don't want them on those bases? Clip it off and be done with it, and glue them wherever you please then!

But they don't add bases into the kits as that would mean an increased price.

Honestly puddle bases are fine. Throw em on an MDF base and use vallejo acrylic basing mix or the equivalent texture paint from GW.

with pegged feet, you would either have every model with the same spacing between their feet or model-specific bases.
I still can't see the amazing hassle of clipping off 'puddle' bases is.

 bubber wrote:
with pegged feet, you would either have every model with the same spacing between their feet or model-specific bases.
I still can't see the amazing hassle of clipping off 'puddle' bases is.

Well, I can't see the amazing hassle of having to glue miniatures to whatever base you want instead of one group shoving their preference down everyone's throats

 bubber wrote:
with pegged feet, you would either have every model with the same spacing between their feet or model-specific bases.

Not if you add more than two holes to the discs, and/or have models with unusual spaces between their feet just come with one peg on one of their feet.

 bubber wrote:
I still can't see the amazing hassle of clipping off 'puddle' bases is.

How many models have you personally removed from integral bases?

I'd reckon it takes roughly 20 times as much time to safely remove an integral base than it takes to glue a pegged-feet-mini to a base with holes. And you're liable to damage the models feet getting it off the base.

I went through a phase in which I was basing all my miniatures on super thin plastic disks, which required sawing, grinding, or filing off the integral metal bases on about 100-150 figures.
Removing an integral plastic base is complete cake compared to that, and probably not too much effort if it bothers someone enough to even consider it.

Nowadays I have a different perspective on what my time is worth and worrying about a mini's height on the base is one of my least concerns.

I wonder what's taking the free sprues so long.

 BrookM wrote:
I wonder what's taking the free sprues so long.

I got an email a couple of days ago saying mine had been dispatched.

 Zywus wrote:

 bubber wrote:
with pegged feet, you would either have every model with the same spacing between their feet or model-specific bases.

Not if you add more than two holes to the discs, and/or have models with unusual spaces between their feet just come with one peg on one of their feet.

 bubber wrote:
I still can't see the amazing hassle of clipping off 'puddle' bases is.

How many models have you personally removed from integral bases?

I'd reckon it takes roughly 20 times as much time to safely remove an integral base than it takes to glue a pegged-feet-mini to a base with holes. And you're liable to damage the models feet getting it off the base.

have we met then? i'm afraid it's escaped my memory...

btw, as a 30-year veteran, i can't really count how many minis i've converted let alone done some minor mods like taking an integral base from...

btw, less than a minute. no biggie

 ImAGeek wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
I wonder what's taking the free sprues so long.

I got an email a couple of days ago saying mine had been dispatched.

What sprue did you choose?

if it's from the great wargaming survey, i got mine ages ago.
i asked for the WW2 command sprue.

 BobtheInquisitor wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:

 BrookM wrote:
I wonder what's taking the free sprues so long.

I got an email a couple of days ago saying mine had been dispatched.

What sprue did you choose?

Oh, good point, I’d forgotten there was a choice. I chose the Space Grognard sprue.

Old GW ogres had just one foot with a peg, that's what I was thinking og