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.

Since I rebased my Boyz from 25mm to 32mm bases, Big Mek W/ Kustom Force Field is obviously much weaker.

Should the KFF range be increased proportionally to compensate for the base size changes??

Should it be changed for that reason?
No.

Should it be changed?
Maybe.

But your presented reason is not a good one-think about what changing it would do for both good and ill for the game.

I think you could safely extend the KFF's range a bit without breaking anything. Even before the base size changes, my ork opponents were commenting on how tricky it could be to keep a blob of boyz in range of the thing.

It definitely feels like one of those rules that worked a bit better when the mek could be attached to a unit. You don't want to change the wording to impact every model in a unit provided one model of the unit is in range because then you potentially end up projecting the shield across half the table (by putting the tips of several blobs in range of it). You don't want to make it a targeted buff because it seems like it *should* benefit multiple small units provided they're close to the mek and because it seems like it should work even if you got blasted out of a transport or came in from reserves that turn. So yeah. A modest (3"?) range extension probably makes sense.

Extended base sizes is a bit of a weird justification. It makes sense that larger bases get less use out of it than smaller bases thus making you want to extend the range, but also (as far as I know) the core rules don't actually require you to use the most recent base sizes; it's just some tournaments that do. So you potentially end up buffing armies that happen to still be on the old (but technically legal) base sizes when your original goal is just to break even with models on the new base size.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Should it be changed for that reason?
No.

Should it be changed?
Maybe.

But your presented reason is not a good one-think about what changing it would do for both good and ill for the game.

IDK as far as I see It my presented reason is sound.
When the rule was written consideration will have been given to the effective range of the KFF, how many models it could cover and how that was balanced.
Base sizes have changed, therefore the effectiveness is reduced, so it it plausible a rebalance is in order.

What do YOU think about what changing it would do for both good and ill for the game??

I think it should simply go back to his old way of covering stuff, which means the single word "WHOLLY" should be removed.

This way large models such as a battlewagon with deffrolla can actually fit under a KFF bubble. 90 boyz will probably still too many but I think it's fair.

 Blackie wrote:
I think it should simply go back to his old way of covering stuff, which means the single word "WHOLLY" should be removed.

This way large models such as a battlewagon with deffrolla can actually fit under a KFF bubble. 90 boyz will probably still too many but I think it's fair.

Realistically though, with all the shenanigans in 9th going on, if 90-120 boyz all gained 5++ because of 1 Big mek would it really be that game breaking? I would argue it wouldn't be. It would definitely be good though.

Choppy Da Ork wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Should it be changed for that reason?
No.

Should it be changed?
Maybe.

But your presented reason is not a good one-think about what changing it would do for both good and ill for the game.

IDK as far as I see It my presented reason is sound.
When the rule was written consideration will have been given to the effective range of the KFF, how many models it could cover and how that was balanced.
Base sizes have changed, therefore the effectiveness is reduced, so it it plausible a rebalance is in order.

What do YOU think about what changing it would do for both good and ill for the game??

I have not seen an official rule from GW changing base sizes. I've looked just last week and found nothing. Perhaps you've seen something from GW about that? Maybe
GW should add an inch of range. I think less is more in that depending on which model has the KFF changes to over all footprint of the KFF protection.