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.

Does this look right or should I do something different. I'm about 85% on board with the look.

Not a bad base at all from a modeling standpoint, but if you're playing at store/tournament, I'd be careful about the "modeling for advantage" accusations that could come from a base that high. Personally, I believe that Assault Marines should be able to have line of sight over everyone else because that's what Jump Packs do...but that's a different argument Overall I think the base is good! Maybe some debris at the bottom could give it a little more life, and I'd like to see it painted up!

Thanks! I will work on painting soon

On the other hand... you might be modeling for disadvantage; you should try to hide this model in 'regular' cover next to your tactical marines.


The base looks fine, though it can indeed be given a coat of sand and small grit, like TheWarpSaysHello said.

Yeah. You cannot hide in cover behind anything shot of a knight!

That's not a advantage when you only have a plasma.pistol.
And the odds 1 out of 6 times it can kill you!

Yeah that's def not modeling for advantage The few times you would benefit from extra LOS are outweighted by the times you get shot without being able to be in cover.

Well except figuring out LOS without that base is pretty easy most of the time so no real difference either way.

Lord Xcapobl wrote:On the other hand... you might be modeling for disadvantage; you should try to hide this model in 'regular' cover next to your tactical marines.

jhe90 wrote:Yeah. You cannot hide in cover behind anything shot of a knight!

That's not a advantage when you only have a plasma.pistol.
And the odds 1 out of 6 times it can kill you!

tneva82 wrote:Yeah that's def not modeling for advantage The few times you would benefit from extra LOS are outweighted by the times you get shot without being able to be in cover.

Sometimes I think Nottingham should be nuked from orbit, just to be sure.

Base looks great, by the way. Pity it had to be banjaxed by ridiculous things.

It really looks awesome love his pose

 Vermis wrote:

Lord Xcapobl wrote:On the other hand... you might be modeling for disadvantage; you should try to hide this model in 'regular' cover next to your tactical marines.

jhe90 wrote:Yeah. You cannot hide in cover behind anything shot of a knight!

That's not a advantage when you only have a plasma.pistol.
And the odds 1 out of 6 times it can kill you!

tneva82 wrote:Yeah that's def not modeling for advantage The few times you would benefit from extra LOS are outweighted by the times you get shot without being able to be in cover.

Sometimes I think Nottingham should be nuked from orbit, just to be sure.

Base looks great, by the way. Pity it had to be banjaxed by ridiculous things.

Why? Gamers are the ones who make fuss about modeling for advantage, base sizes etc. Notthingham(whether you refer to the city or to the GW located there) couldn't care one way either way.

You have problem with complains about modeling for advantage? Complain to the player base. They are the ones who create the issue.

I believe what Vermis was alluding to is the true-sightline LOS system in the game, which would consider this model, how nicely done, at a disadvantage because it's so tall.

THAT is made by Nottingham, not the clubs or the tournaments.