Bloodletter base size for tournaments ?

[Kousei]

Thanks,  It's to bad they are not switchable between the two sizes.  It looks like you glue them together. I still have the same debate about 40k bases.

 

 

 

[RuneBrush]

13 hours ago, Kousei said:

It seems like I am going to be switching all my Plague bearers over as well :(.  A major concern I have is that I also play 40k here and there. I liked that I didn't have to switch base sizes/ types anymore.  I am guessing that plague bearers will be switching to 32mm in 40k as well,  but thats not for sure.  In 40k the large base size will be more of a disadvantage compared to AOS ( knowing this isn't a 40k site, so not trying to start a major 40k discussion or any thing).  I could just make it so I can switch them back and forth , but that its kind of a pain and more work. 

12 hours ago, Kousei said:

Thanks,  It's to bad they are not switchable between the two sizes.  It looks like you glue them together. I still have the same debate about 40k bases.

If I were in your shoes I'd leave the Plague Bearers on 25's until such time they repack them with 32's (as in the standalone box set, not the SC box).  I can't see anybody who plays AoS having an issue whereas 40k they might.  One alternative (temporary) option would be to pick up a pack of laser cut MDF 32mm bases and simply blu tack the model onto them.  It's not very pretty (give it a coat of black paint so it's not unfinished) but would provide the same end result.

13 hours ago, Kousei said:

Have you used them before and do you know of any good sites that sell them?

12 hours ago, phizzco said:

https://www.secretweaponminiatures.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=761

The ol' goog had the answer all along

I've not used either in fairness (left most of my 40k marines on 25's), but toying with picking some up for my in progress Death army so I can use some of my old metal characters.

Another supplier is: http://eccentricminiatures.com/adapterrings.html which I've read very good reviews on.  The two are slightly different format though do exactly the same thing.  You could glue magnets into the "join" if you wanted to make them removable, but it'd be quite costly and a massive amount of work!

[phizzco]

I agree with the above post about the plaguebearers bases. I just spoke with a GW employee about another base question and they say, you're free to use the round OR square bases, and the size changes in AOS are more aesthetic than balancing tweaks. They believe that units look better on the bases they're repackaging them with, but they're not repackaging everything yet.  So as the above poster states, I'd leave them as is, unless you like the way they look better on different bases.

 

[phizzco]

I also noticed that the new box set with skaven and aelves come with BOTH square and round bases.

[Kousei]

On 2017-01-11 at 2:55 AM, RuneBrush said:

Another supplier is: http://eccentricminiatures.com/adapterrings.html which I've read very good reviews on.  The two are slightly different format though do exactly the same thing.  You could glue magnets into the "join" if you wanted to make them removable, but it'd be quite costly and a massive amount of work!

Thank you very much for the link.   So I deiced to go with matching whatever the newest boxing base is. So I ordered 200 of those rings. I am going to rebase both my Plaguebearers and my bloodletter on them. There are major game play changes that come depending on base size. I don't want to be trying to get some advantage I shouldn't be allowed to have. I don't follow the GW fantasy land of bases don't matter. Thank you very much for all the replies  

[AGPO]

GW have been pretty clear that most bade size changes are for aesthetic reasons only,  and most TOSHIBA seem to work on the basis that models should be on the bases that they are supplied with, which yours are. Personally I've kept my 'letters on 25s, but that's mostly for ease of storage and the fact I'm spending enough hobby money on rounds for my mortals as is. 

[Nubgan]

This topic is the one reason my old fantasty miniatures make me sad. I am a sucker for the aesthetic of models and it makes me not want to use them. Both my Elf armies are on squares, and my Warriors of Chaos and Demons are a mix actually. Back in the day I put all the infantry on rounds and then converted some Lord of the Rings movement trays to fit 5 wide so they are okay (even if they are sadly the smaller ones. I did have similar home made trays for my larger stuff, but then I rebased them square after a while (before AoS was a thing) and I regret my life choice.

Maybe when I have nothing else to do I will rebase and touch the painting up, but that won't be for a while lets be honest and in the mean time it will just make me sad they are sat there like a rejected puppy because I want the bases to look nicer

[Thomas Lyons]

On January 9, 2017 at 9:39 PM, sal4m4nd3r said:

Even on 25mm, with a range of 1" only the first row can swing in the combat phase. 

This is not technically true.   25 mm is exactly .98 inches.  If all bases are flush with one another, the second rank will be within 1" across the full length of a base.  They will definitely be within range if they are organized in a honeycomb pattern.

[Kousei]

On 2017-01-24 at 6:09 PM, AGPO said:

GW have been pretty clear that most bade size changes are for aesthetic reasons only,  and most TOSHIBA seem to work on the basis that models should be on the bases that they are supplied with, which yours are. Personally I've kept my 'letters on 25s, but that's mostly for ease of storage and the fact I'm spending enough hobby money on rounds for my mortals as is. 

Even if GW's reasoning was purely for aesthetic reasons, it has a real game changing effects.  It is fairer if everyone use the most updated bases sizes for their models. If not people's bloodletters on 25mm bases would be more effective due to be able to get more in base contact or surrounding the other model(s)  and being able to attack in two "ranks" compared to people with new bloodletters on 32mm bases, who can only attack in one rank, even though both cost the same points.   

Sorry, I am not sure what "TOSHIBA" is in regards to AOS ? 

[AGPO]

TOSHIBA is TOs plus my phone's over-enthusiastic auto correct.

I'll have to respectfully disagree on the base size issue. There are advantages and disadvantages to different base sizes, such as battlefield control vs extra attacks, but in my opinion they are minor compared to the advantages derived from competitive list building or from a turn's lucky or unlucky dice rolling. The rules say measure from the model, so a similar advantage could be derived from modeling my troops with weapons pointing forwards rather than up. Ultimately I'd rather gamers didn't have to spend time and money re-basing every time a new version of a model is released or repackaged, just to end some minor advantage that those who have been playing with the same army for years probably aren't that fussed about anyway.

 

 

 

[Kousei]

1 hour ago, AGPO said:

TOSHIBA is TOs plus my phone's over-enthusiastic auto correct.

I'll have to respectfully disagree on the base size issue. There are advantages and disadvantages to different base sizes, such as battlefield control vs extra attacks, but in my opinion they are minor compared to the advantages derived from competitive list building or from a turn's lucky or unlucky dice rolling. The rules say measure from the model, so a similar advantage could be derived from modeling my troops with weapons pointing forwards rather than up. Ultimately I'd rather gamers didn't have to spend time and money re-basing every time a new version of a model is released or repackaged, just to end some minor advantage that those who have been playing with the same army for years probably aren't that fussed about anyway.

All good on the disagreeing, nothing wrong with having a conversation about it .  I think on average players are far more likely to pick a unit with stronger "damage output", compared to a unit that can "takes up more room". One will come into play and have a larger impact far more than the other. No one I know or have read about in a long time tries to play the game measuring from the actual models. I am not saying" No one does it", but its far from the common way to play.  

Not intending to sound harsh ( sorry internet makes it harder to do a times) . I personally don't think, the fact that there are other parts of the game ,that may have a larger impact compared to this, really change if this is an issue with the game or not.  As for listing building , picking more effective units is part of that. If someone can pick a unit of 30 bloodletters that can't fight through each other , however they can "take take-up more room"  for a 300pts or picks a unit of 30 bloodletters that can attack through each other and get more in base contact for 300pts. I think most people would pick the fight through each other unit for the same points. 

I agree with you on the point of not wanting to ask players to have the need to rebase.  I wish I didn't "have" to rebase my guys. I also wish GW would drop the ridiculous "measuring from models idea" and just put out an official chart for tournament play of the proper bases sizes/ types. A big factor for myself choosing to rebase my guys is, I didn't want to feel like I was getting some advantage I shouldn't have and to me Bloodletters are now on 32mm bases. I also didn't want someone I am playing against, thinking I am trying to keeping some advantage I shouldn't have anymore, but because I can't bother putting in the work/ money to bases my guys properly to negate it. The chance of someone saying a comment like or even thinking "you just won because your guys are on the wrong base and you were able to attack with more guys then you should be able to" is pretty high. So I decided to go with the better safe then sorry approach.