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.

So unless (hopefully until) GW publishes a base size chart (we know they can do this, they did it for AoS); I've a question on the base sizes for the Indomitus models. Specifically the larger bases. See they aren't 60mm and they aren't 65mm, they appear to be around 63mm. Which is half way between the two enough that one is left wondering which base size GW really wants them to be. Since a 3mm difference on a 60mm base isn't really all that much difference functionally speaking. It's well within the general margin of error you'd get just placing the model and moving it normally by hand and by eye.

It also raises the question of if 60mm bases on them are valid since those are supported by 3rd parties; or if they are supposed to be 65mm etc...

The ones that came with my Indomitus are the same size as the ones on my dreadnoughts, kans, etc. - the ones GW used to call 60mm but now occasionally calls 65mm. Are yours a different size?

Is this about the Reanimator and the Skorpekh Lord, Overread?

They're listed in the build document as 65mm bases, though I've not compared the ones that came with my set to the base size chart in the guide, which does measure 65mm (having just checked with a ruler).

Thanks Dysartes- I just measured the bases themselves and they come in at 63mm - interestingly the same size as the decorated bases for Eldar wraithlords.

Mine come with the 60mm bases that are the same 60mm bases as all other 60mm bases (but it had the correct holes cut out of them).

I never measured if 60mm are actually 60 or if they are 63/65mm.

If they are 63/65 in actuality maybe GW is just moving them all to rename to 65mm.

Here is a pic, this is a 60mm set i bought over 2yrs ago, i even compared it to a 60mm I knew i had for at least 5yrs.

So for at least 5yrs 60mm are 65mm (remember they will shrink a little in the mold process making them 64mm maybe 63.5mm)

Meaning GW is just calling it what it is.

Yeah, the beveled edge bases have never been 60mm.

The flat bases that were originally introduced for Guard heavy weapon teams were 60mm. When these were replaced with the slightly larger, beveled bases, everyone just kept calling them 60mm from habit.

 insaniak wrote:
Yeah, the beveled edge bases have never been 60mm.

The flat bases that were originally introduced for Guard heavy weapon teams were 60mm. When these were replaced with the slightly larger, beveled bases, everyone just kept calling them 60mm from habit.

I called them 60mm b.c GW does... i have the package in my picture of it saying 60mm lol.

Yeah, I'm guessing that GW kept calling them that to avoid confusing people who were already using the flat bases.

That or the raised bases were supposed to be 60mm, were manufactured too large, and nobody in marketing noticed...

It's a poignant question for anyone looking to rebase models, or use third-party... but I guess this is why the usual wording GW uses is always "the base provided with the model", instead of actually specifying the exact size.

a reason why thex changed from writing the size to "what is in the box" but therefore Termis with 25mm Bases are still legal, as those came with the Blister and no one can know the correct new size.....

 insaniak wrote:
That or the raised bases were supposed to be 60mm, were manufactured too large, and nobody in marketing noticed...

thing is, the original GW 60mm Bases are 60mm on the upper edge and 65mm on the lower, guess it was just never made clear which one it need to be and as molds are expensive kept that way

and shrinking is a thing hence why original 25mm Bases were only 23mm, making a difference if you placed a horde but people start complaining because more models than calculated fit under a 5" template (base = 1" and 2" appart is different than 23mm 2" between for 20 models)

this is a thing since 20 years now and people just ignored it and sometimes also used the GW bases for other games and than called other people cheaters because their bases were smaller (because GW can do nothing wrong but all others)


PS: my guess is that the 32mm Bases for Nu-Marines came from the same problem, GW wanted to make 30mm Bases but they turned out to be larger than they should because shrinking was calculated wrong

GW bases sizes are weird. 60mm base has never been 60mm. 80mm also has never been 80mm.

Are the tops of the bases 60mm? Maybe they're measuring the top not the bottom of the bevel.

Breton wrote:
Are the tops of the bases 60mm? Maybe they're measuring the top not the bottom of the bevel.

Pretty sure they are, as you can fit one of those aforementioned flat guard bases (or an old flying base) inside quite easily. My bits box is littered with them.

 Overread wrote:
So unless (hopefully until) GW publishes a base size chart (we know they can do this, they did it for AoS);

I hope they don't.

Warhammer World wrote:Can I change the base size of my model?

Typically the bases our miniatures are supplied with are the bases the games rules are designed around, so altering the base
size can have an impact on gameplay. For Grand Tournament events miniatures must be on the intended base size, however
for other events, such as Campaign weekends or Throne of Skulls this ruling is a little more relaxed.
In these cases, ’downsizing’ the base size is not permitted as this can lead to advantages in games. On the other hand, making a
base larger within reason (usually for added detail purposes on a character or conversion) is permitted.

The models in my army used to be supplied with a smaller base than they are currently supplied with, do I need
to rebase to the new size?

As above, the bases our miniatures are supplied with are the bases the game rules are designed around, so any older base sizes
do need to be upgraded. However we understand this can take time, so if the base size changes for a model kit, any events
within a month of the change are exempt from resizing, though we would certainly encourage it.

WW are already straight up lying about models bases being designed for the game rules. For example, IG heavy weapons teams were placed on massive bases for no other reason than to make a cool diorama with sandbags and stuff. At the time of release, they still counted as two models. There is no need ingame for them to be on such an unwieldy frisbee, controlling as much of the board as a dreadnought.

And they don't have much of a problem with embiggening bases, but seem to think smaller bases grant advantages. 'Rebase those 20 year old tacticals- on 40mm if you like'.
I hope they never publish a comprehensive guide- it will become accepted as law by the community generally.

or the situation has changed since the original guard HWTs

 =Angel= wrote:

 Overread wrote:
So unless (hopefully until) GW publishes a base size chart (we know they can do this, they did it for AoS);

I hope they don't.

Warhammer World wrote:Can I change the base size of my model?

Typically the bases our miniatures are supplied with are the bases the games rules are designed around, so altering the base
size can have an impact on gameplay. For Grand Tournament events miniatures must be on the intended base size, however
for other events, such as Campaign weekends or Throne of Skulls this ruling is a little more relaxed.
In these cases, ’downsizing’ the base size is not permitted as this can lead to advantages in games. On the other hand, making a
base larger within reason (usually for added detail purposes on a character or conversion) is permitted.

The models in my army used to be supplied with a smaller base than they are currently supplied with, do I need
to rebase to the new size?

As above, the bases our miniatures are supplied with are the bases the game rules are designed around, so any older base sizes
do need to be upgraded. However we understand this can take time, so if the base size changes for a model kit, any events
within a month of the change are exempt from resizing, though we would certainly encourage it.

WW are already straight up lying about models bases being designed for the game rules. For example, IG heavy weapons teams were placed on massive bases for no other reason than to make a cool diorama with sandbags and stuff. At the time of release, they still counted as two models. There is no need ingame for them to be on such an unwieldy frisbee, controlling as much of the board as a dreadnought.

And they don't have much of a problem with embiggening bases, but seem to think smaller bases grant advantages. 'Rebase those 20 year old tacticals- on 40mm if you like'.
I hope they never publish a comprehensive guide- it will become accepted as law by the community generally.

As wonky as 40k/AoS rules are they seriously expect me to believe that the rules are designed down to the scale of +/-5-15mm?
Yeah, I'm not re-basing anything.

So we have a 60mm base that isn't 60mm which at the same time in different models is classed as both a 60mm base and a 65mm base.

And this is why you NEED a base size chart per model. At least then you've one official reference point not a dozen different ones. It also makes GW accountable for when game rules and packing don't talk to each other and you get a model listed as X base size on one page and shipped with Y base size in the box.

Yup. GW is talking out of their backside. So many examples of units on multiple different sized bases (or even within units such as Skitarri), even ones made during 8th such as Lord Felthius who comes on a 40mm base, yet the bog standard LoC (and Typhus) come on 50mms.

 Overread wrote:

And this is why you NEED a base size chart per model. At least then you've one official reference point not a dozen different ones. It also makes GW accountable for when game rules and packing don't talk to each other and you get a model listed as X base size on one page and shipped with Y base size in the box.

After the cries, screams and outrage at the chart of minimum table sizes - such a thing for bases would surely bring about the end of the world. As almost none of the bases supplied ever are quite the size they say, and at different ages of the game bases that should be the same are in fact not - either the same, or correctly sized.

How would we rebase all our models that are 1mm too large, or too small! It would be bedlam, pandemonium, insanity!

(Well at least on the louder parts of the internet anyway, the normal folks would shrug and just get on with it as normal )

it would only be a problem if the new base sizes in the chart would also be much smaller than the current ones.....

 Kcalehc wrote:


How would we rebase all our models that are 1mm too large, or too small! It would be bedlam, pandemonium, insanity!
)

Eh AoS seems to get on just fine and they had at least two rebasing phases - once when GW went from square to round (ok that one WAS a nightmare) and then again when they updated some units for 2.0. The Base Size Chart even highlighted and changed some bases for models when it was clear that rules had set one base size, but no one had told packing - so the packing base won.

The "correct base" isn't hidden information; its out there in the latest boxes. But without a chart it gets confusing; esp when GW is using the same base component for two different sizes (which is a pain if you're wanting to rebase to different bases and GW isn't making it clear).

With the "supplied bases" does this work for old school models?

Like is my St Celestine ok on a small base because she's an OOOOOLD model? My Termies on their small bases....

Kayback wrote:
With the "supplied bases" does this work for old school models?

Like is my St Celestine ok on a small base because she's an OOOOOLD model? My Termies on their small bases....

Base sizes tend to matter most when you put chaff on too-large bases to let them clog more efficiently and when you put characters on too-large bases so their auras affect more of the board. One of the reasons "use the base shipped with the model" is such a widespread standard is that it tends to shrink things' bases, which is usually more of a downside than not.

 Grimtuff wrote:

Breton wrote:
Are the tops of the bases 60mm? Maybe they're measuring the top not the bottom of the bevel.

Pretty sure they are, as you can fit one of those aforementioned flat guard bases (or an old flying base) inside quite easily. My bits box is littered with them.

62mm across the top of the one I just measured.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 kodos wrote:

and shrinking is a thing hence why original 25mm Bases were only 23mm, ...

HIPS shrinkage is .5%. A base sculpted at 25mm would still be only a fraction under 25mm when cast.

And GW's 25mm bases are 25mm. The shenanigans came from the fact that most people treated them as being an inch in diameter for the purposes of coherency and combat, whereas 25mm is actually a fraction under an inch.

PS: my guess is that the 32mm Bases for Nu-Marines came from the same problem, GW wanted to make 30mm Bases but they turned out to be larger than they should because shrinking was calculated wrong

Given that they've also added 28mm bases, I doubt that. I would suspect that 32mm was chosen simply because it looked good on the models they wanted to use them on.

 insaniak wrote:

 kodos wrote:
PS: my guess is that the 32mm Bases for Nu-Marines came from the same problem, GW wanted to make 30mm Bases but they turned out to be larger than they should because shrinking was calculated wrong

Given that they've also added 28mm bases, I doubt that. I would suspect that 32mm was chosen simply because it looked good on the models they wanted to use them on.

Those 28mm bases are 28.5mm bases, putting them exactly halfway between the 25mm and 32mm bases.

I will point out, though, that this:

 insaniak wrote:

That or the raised bases were supposed to be 60mm, were manufactured too large, and nobody in marketing noticed...

...was meant to be tongue in cheek. I would expect that the real reason that the raised bases were made larger is simply that the Space Marine Dreadnought's feet hung off the sides of the flat 60mm bases.

Waaaaaait a second... I see it now. THIS is what Primaris was really all about!
Bases haven't been selling... so the buff to oldmarines is so that people will re-base them on 32mm instead of 25mm. I see through your plan GW, I'm buying nothing but Primaris from now on, so take THAT

Here is where things get weird for me. I purchased 12 FW Aquilon Terminators for my Custodes. I assembled them, and glued them to the bases supplied. The problem? They sent me 40mm bases, and apparently they are supposed to come with 50mm bases. If anyone told me I couldn't use them that way they could feth right off.

 insaniak wrote:

And GW's 25mm bases are 25mm.

the newer ones are now
I don't know why GW does not care what they are selling or if the bases fit their game

might be that no one ever checked what size they are after coming out of the mold or they made them in a different size because some models needed it but never felt the need to change the description
or both