tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post4522915266573765189..comments2024-03-26T02:32:50.095-04:00Comments on Dark Future Games: Thunderwolves and Nids: The Battle of Base Size!TJ Atwellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01304177224607153451noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-24791878557041285772010-11-28T09:52:28.477-05:002010-11-28T09:52:28.477-05:00That's the idea behind the article, however I ...That's the idea behind the article, however I would say that regardless of the model, the base needs to come from the GW line. One problem we have seen locally is people using D&D models with D&D 80mm bases. I think anybody would have a little trouble swallowing that pill ... for instance, in a local tourney we ran that happened despite the tourney FAQ specifically stating which bases T-Wolves would be allowed on in that tourney. It wasn't caught until afterward unfortunately or the models would have been completely illegal due to the blatant disregard of the FAQ.TJ Atwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01304177224607153451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-64904200778970552962010-11-27T01:13:13.001-05:002010-11-27T01:13:13.001-05:00I was accused of cheating in a tournament because ...I was accused of cheating in a tournament because my TWC weren't on the correct base. Which base should they have been on? Well the opponent wouldn't give an answer, however he didn't like the base I had them on.<br /><br />I think it is really a stupid argument. There are no models for the unit, how can you argue base size when there are no models?winterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14561873698351796093noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-31401842515902051222010-11-22T13:02:13.216-05:002010-11-22T13:02:13.216-05:00I know how you love devils advocate, but seriously...I know how you love devils advocate, but seriously, my end thought is that there really is nothing to the situation except an arguement. they have made it so nebulous to divine what their intentions are for their unreleased models that any attempt to put a stamp on it really doesn't matter.<br />I went the hobby route of putting my thunderjuggers (lol) on 60mm bases because they would look sill otherwise and I don't really feel bad about it as the majority of the T-Wolves conversions out there are on 60mm bases, so are par for the course to most opponents (especially those prepping for Adepticon). <br />As far as the nids go, I used some common sense and fairness when selecting the bases and who knows when GW will release any of these models ... with BA getting their range finished off in February, followed by a GK release, there really isn't any endstate in sight for any of these models.TJ Atwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01304177224607153451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-62848510950330096652010-11-22T12:41:46.012-05:002010-11-22T12:41:46.012-05:00Right, but by that arguement old school, people wi...Right, but by that arguement old school, people with old terminators can field them on small bases. Or what if my models were not packaged with a base? DO i field them with no base? (of course common sense comes into play, but i am playing devil's advocate here)Lord Solar Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00252060382871829075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-74157259979081169092010-11-22T06:32:32.466-05:002010-11-22T06:32:32.466-05:00Page three in The rulebook mentions bases for mode...Page three in The rulebook mentions bases for models they already have, lss. The cav base is slightly wider than the 60mm base when turned sideways and would still allow thunderwolves a huge threat range, so that is really irrelevant. Cavalry base as a term is also irrelevant as you cam comb the books and find examples in every situation of models on different bases. That's really the basis for the whole article.TJ Atwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01304177224607153451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-42689204744291266652010-11-22T03:33:24.931-05:002010-11-22T03:33:24.931-05:00Also, saying that being a on a 60mm base verses th...Also, saying that being a on a 60mm base verses the "cav" bases GW makes for 40k allows you to cover a greater threat frontage is a fallacy. Simply put, there is no facing in 40k for non-vehicle models so nothing is stopping you from turning those cav-based models sideways and covering the same (well, slightly more) frontage as the 60mm basing.<br /><br />Granted, 40k has a lot of units coming in from differing board edges, but generally speaking the advantage you want will net you the same advantage in the other direction (ie, you get the same frontage backwards as forwards). You won't be able to cover the same vectors of attack that the 60mm can, but the difference is minute to the degree of being ignored.Kremmethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06725603426922726067noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-61285228412286852742010-11-22T00:20:02.780-05:002010-11-22T00:20:02.780-05:00The problem with them not listing a base size is t...The problem with them not listing a base size is the fact that, I can then, if i want, give my Ogryns bases the size of the huge nid ones to give my troopers behind them cover, because although my models come with bases, there is nothing in the rules saying I have to use them.<br /><br />Or for that matter I could do the same with heavy weapons teams to spread them out more to prevent instant death issues from blast templates. I can go on with examples.<br /><br />Yes T-wolves are -sort- of like bloodcrushers which is the main justification for putting them on 60 besides Canis, but they are not just like Bloodcrushers because they are calvary and Bloodcrushers are not! They are infantry models, giving them whole different sets of rules to live by, including the ability to go up levels in buildings which bikes and calvary can not do. <br /><br />This is my basis why they should be on the "calvary" basesLord Solar Stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00252060382871829075noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-53710486635593570462010-11-21T21:00:48.169-05:002010-11-21T21:00:48.169-05:00Yeah where is this mentioned?Yeah where is this mentioned?SeerKarandrashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05864552771430102654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-83003286871123649522010-11-21T19:46:46.507-05:002010-11-21T19:46:46.507-05:00Dave- Do you have an reference for this?Dave- Do you have an reference for this?Chris Vintonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02366710490951729022noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-71223756092477258712010-11-21T18:55:26.723-05:002010-11-21T18:55:26.723-05:00With the exception of Canis Wolfborn, who is speci...With the exception of Canis Wolfborn, who is specifically mentioned against this in the SW codex, you can mount a model on a BIGGER base than it is supplied on, just not a SMALLER one.<br />If TWC get biker bases, you could mount them on 60 MM anyway.Davenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-39426426306827188642010-11-21T17:53:41.724-05:002010-11-21T17:53:41.724-05:00Hmmm Interesting. I question a lot of Adepticons ...Hmmm Interesting. I question a lot of Adepticons rulings mostly due to the fact some fly in the face of the rules completely. I guess that ruling was to be expected though.SeerKarandrashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05864552771430102654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-28460474821865000052010-11-21T17:13:30.349-05:002010-11-21T17:13:30.349-05:00If your going to adaptecon, you better have them o...If your going to adaptecon, you better have them on a 60, according to their FAQ. <br /><br />~R3conR3conhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16844561123221248222noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-54965759633848597052010-11-21T11:03:56.497-05:002010-11-21T11:03:56.497-05:00This is really one of those silly issues that coul...This is really one of those silly issues that could easily be a non issue by GW by just standardizing the base sizes. A terminator goes on one size base and all terminators goes on that size base. While thunder wolf cavalry base size have not been a problem for me, the more common thing I have seen is old school players pulling out terminators on the small bases instead of today's size of the 40mm base. The game needs some form of standard for what goes on what base size. The good folks out there who think that it should up to the each individual player.Then consider this ripper or nurgling swarms on monstrous bases, their swarms just really big swarms.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07431160880498693567noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-52745136199968342282010-11-21T02:09:45.849-05:002010-11-21T02:09:45.849-05:00I think the main thing people are upset about, inc...I think the main thing people are upset about, including me, is when people base a model or just model it for the purposes of gaining a tactical advantage. I see the case for the 60mm base as now that I have seen the marines on the biker base size wolves they kind of look like shriners riding around in their little cars in a parade.<br />I have never had any complaints for blood crushers being on a 60mm base, except for my general hatred of the daemon codex. They are big models.<br />Creativity is all well and good but when base a model with the intent of chain assaulting the living crap out of another army its just sheer beardy power gaming. This makes the game not fun and really ruins it for a lot of casual players. It also causes way to many arguements, this one for instance. Classification and clarification is needed, if for any purpose just to shut up the power gamers and their victims.SeerKarandrashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05864552771430102654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-57001441930339428502010-11-20T23:52:51.800-05:002010-11-20T23:52:51.800-05:00Indeed. Bar anything really bizarre, I'm willi...Indeed. Bar anything really bizarre, I'm willing to accept a range of bases from minis- my Tervigons are actually on custom bases, being circular and slightly shorter than the Trygon base is long. This means their auras are huge, but it also means that every blast weapon on the table is magically drawn to them and that they have some trouble maneuvering. By the same token, cavalry, 40mm, and 60mm are all reasonable assumptions for TWC.<br /><br />In the end, base size is simply not all that relevant to the game. It is both an advantage and a disadvantage and, unless the opponent is clearly abusing it ("Kroot on 60mm bases?"), your time is better spent worrying about something else.AbusePuppyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07413248837734103198noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-53127015412524458952010-11-20T21:43:44.365-05:002010-11-20T21:43:44.365-05:00Nicely put Cvinton.Nicely put Cvinton.TJ Atwellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01304177224607153451noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-5440350945938770702010-11-20T21:15:41.820-05:002010-11-20T21:15:41.820-05:00I've never had too much of a personal issue wi...I've never had too much of a personal issue with this. I say personal, because I've only been able to theorize the argument since no one plays twolves (or SW consistently for that matter) at our FLGS. <br /><br />I usually have my opinions sided on the side of 'meh' so like usual, I really could care less what size base people use. In the end, you measure front of the base to front of the base so you're not netting any kind of bonus move. They can't be in transports so you're not milking the 'disembark with in two inchss' but have majority of your base hanging over that 2" cliff. (imagine this with like thammer termies on valk bases!) Templates aren't all that exciting to shoot at Twolves (unless they're demolishers and even then I'd rather annihilate that grey hunter squad without the invul). They don't have some crazy base rule like Canis.<br /><br />When you boil it all down both sizes have advantages and disadvantages. The only thing I don't like is if they are on the big bases, its easier to chain assault, sort of. You get like an extra 1-1.5" considering you can't just have one unengaged model just hanging in the open to chain your assaults together. Also, you can, with bigger bases, stretch your unit out more to create a much large threat zone. <br /><br />My wolves (Dino's) are on the 60mm bases. I feel its fair. The closest thing to a Twolf that GW has is a blood crusher. Its on a 60mm base. /meh<br /><br />An as far as bases being named as 'infantry', 'calvary', or 'monstrous' based on the unit type that should go on it, thats a terrible argument. GW has put every type on each type of base (just about). That's just terrible reasoning. The bases have that nomenclature just for reference to the base types to identify them with more than just a millimeter amount. What other name is out there for a calvary base? "25mm by 60mm round corner base"? Screw that, I'd rather just say "Calvary Base" or "Bike Base".<br /><br />In summary, if I played someone with Twolves, I would accept bike/calvary bases, 45mm, and 60mm. Anything other than those and its obvious that you didn't make a reasonable choice and you're just trying to gain some kind of leverage because you lack in skill and tactics as a 40k player. And if this is true,more likely than not, you're a douche in general and I'm not that interested in playing plastic army men with you.Chris Vintonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02366710490951729022noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-34593991374466564572010-11-20T18:33:13.433-05:002010-11-20T18:33:13.433-05:00I get why they don't list the base size: they ...I get why they don't list the base size: they don't want to paint themselves into a corner for some future model, and they don't want to restrict creativity when it comes to modelling... but it'd be healthier for the <i>game</i> (if not the hobby) if they'd list base sizes in the statline.<br /><br />As to base sizes: for me, it's all hobby. In my Daemon army, I've based my chariots on Valk ovals and Flesh Hounds on 40mm bases, entirely because I don't like square (fine, rectangular) bases in 40K.Rushputinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07867389429325778387noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-65029264710853159472010-11-20T17:12:11.024-05:002010-11-20T17:12:11.024-05:00What about 40mm bases?
Wouldn't it have been ...What about 40mm bases?<br /><br />Wouldn't it have been great if GW could have just let us know?GDMNWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14003947144311887937noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4101762574768178801.post-62160962876761264132010-11-20T17:10:55.817-05:002010-11-20T17:10:55.817-05:00I also agree with you that Thunderwolves should be...I also agree with you that Thunderwolves should be on 60mm bases. Thunderwolves are the Marine version of bloodcrushers. They add +1 toughness, wound, strength, etc, just as bloodcrushers do. It only makes sense to put them on 60mm just like Canis. If my thunderwolves were the size of goblin riders I would never play them. Yes I have 11 including 1 Canis Model and the rest converted, but anything less would be silly than 60mm.Spaguatyrinehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09459803772469387289noreply@blogger.com