Why is measure from the base so popular?

[Flogger]

7 hours ago, Ratamaplata said:

Is this ever an actual issue during games? Surely outside of hardcore tournaments it's pretty easy to agree on LoS or models in combat range?

Not really, no. 

No one Will base their whole army on 50mm bases, just as no one built an entire army of crawling men when TLoS was introduced in 40k back in 5th edition. People talk a lot more than they build models. 

BtB is more common because all other games use it and it's widely known and accepted and doesn't hurt models. Base stacking is not legal anyway so I don't see why it's being discussed as a legal way of placing models. 

As you said, these problems are rarely an issue when it comes down to it, in the game. 

[rokapoke]

42 minutes ago, Flogger said:

Base stacking is not legal anyway so I don't see why it's being discussed as a legal way of placing models. 

Actually, GW has recommended that to attack, say, a Bloodthirster, you are supposed to stack your models on its base.

[Kamose]

Frankly I see no problem with either method.  Measure to base, measure to model, measure to model which includes the base...whatever.  We have some folks who prefer playing base to base because that's what they've always done and they're more comfortable with it.  Some people prefer model to model because its simple.  "Is any part of my model within my melee weapon's range?  I get to attack because I understand that the model is a static representation of the entire range of motion of a dynamic individual."  Both ways work just fine.

As for the base stacking thing...has anyone, honestly, seriously, in real life, had another adult take their model and place it on top of your finely sculpted and painted base?  Have they done it more than once? On purpose?  Am I the only who's gaming group is not composed exclusively of egregious ****** and mean-spirited dickery?  

This has literally never happened to me nor to any person I've ever heard of at my FLGS.  If it somehow does happen to you, you say, "Please don't do that."  If they continue, explain why you don't like it.  If they persist, end the game and tell them why you won't play AoS with them, then leave or find another game.  Seriously, the entire argument sounds like someone's hyperbolic 'worst-case scenario' argument that the AoS community just seemed to accept as inevitable.

[EldritchX]

Base stacking is not legal anyway so I don't see why it's being discussed as a legal way of placing models.

Why are you spreading misinformation about something you clearly don't have enough knowledge about? Did you miss reading my post about where the Generals Handbook specifically mentions base stacking as something that normally happens?

Sent from my SGP621 using Tapatalk

[WarbossKurgan]

14 hours ago, daedalus81 said:

Envision on army with no models with overhang.  And another that has lots of them.  The army with lots of overhang exerts greater board control by occupying more space with their models.

Isn't that a bit abstract and unrealistic though? You could just as easily say the same about an army that has all its bases slightly too big. Is this even an issue in real games? I doubt it.

[Ollie Grimwood]

41 minutes ago, WarbossKurgan said:

Isn't that a bit abstract and unrealistic though? You could just as easily say the same about an army that has all its bases slightly too big. Is this even an issue in real games? I doubt it.

It certainly is (abstract) and it raises the question is it even much of an advantage given that being bigger isn't necessarily better certainly when TLOS is concerned. 

Also I've found most of the supposed issues aren't issues in real games  

[daedalus81]

5 hours ago, WarbossKurgan said:

Isn't that a bit abstract and unrealistic though? You could just as easily say the same about an army that has all its bases slightly too big. Is this even an issue in real games? I doubt it.

Maybe and maybe not.  In either case the cleaner and less confusing thing to do is just bases.