PDA

View Full Version : Bases, Spears, and ranges in AoS



Kisanis
12-07-2015, 15:04
So after I played a game if my skaven, against lizardmen, I concluded something.

Old small square bases are better than the 40k round bases.

I can pack the units in tighter, thus get range on, and essentially fight with spears 3 ranks deep, whereas with round bases they dont pack as tight, and I maybe would only get 2 ranks deep.

I really think smaller square bases for everything will be the way i'd prefer to base my models where able.

Its about weapon range, you want to pack as tight as possible on the charge to get in as many attacks (some circumstances may dictate otherwise).

Thoughts?

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk

Azaireal
12-07-2015, 17:38
It's measured from the weapon, so if you angle the back spears you can fit even more models in.

Kisanis
12-07-2015, 18:31
We were measuring from the model, lest we get insanely gamey with some models (my old spearmen were modelled with the spears up so they would rank)

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk

Ayin
14-07-2015, 02:36
Really, everything should be put on 20mm squares, or just make your own bases. The base ONLY needs to be large enough to hold the model up. Chaos Warriors work fine on 20mm squares as well when they don't need to actually form a ranked unit and DO need ot be pushed together as close as possible.

Kisanis
14-07-2015, 02:57
And with that in mind I think square bases will remain my preferred basing. When ranks close in on a field, they can work to ensure optimal attacks, its not like im shaving calvalry bases down... yet...

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk

DVeight
14-07-2015, 12:43
You do not measure from the weapon. Yes the weapons all have a range profile though please do not make the mistake of measuring from the weapon itself. You measure from the model. Please read second paragraph on first page of rules under heading "Tools of War"

How your weapon is placed on he model is all relative, though yes..... by having square bases I find I get more of my Empire spear piling in and adding to my dice pool to hit. Have no intention of rebasing anyway so win-win.

Wazdak
14-07-2015, 16:45
As you're measuring from the "model" I read this (rightly or wrongly) to effectively mean bases are ignored for all purposes.

With this in mind, can't you just overlap the bases as you see fit?

Just my two pennies, I haven't played any games yet and certainly not asking to break any gamesmanship rules...

Ayin
14-07-2015, 16:56
As you're measuring from the "model" I read this (rightly or wrongly) to effectively mean bases are ignored for all purposes.

With this in mind, can't you just overlap the bases as you see fit?

Just my two pennies, I haven't played any games yet and certainly not asking to break any gamesmanship rules...

There's no reason not to (besides aesthetics and people being upset that your base is on theirs) and it's actually reasonable to argue that NOT allowing bases to overlap punishes people with models that have larger bases for modeling purposes or allows people with larger bases to limit attacks against their models unfairly. Everyone's goal should be the smallest bases possible, not for any unfair or unreasonable purposes, but because the base serves no purpose other than to hold the model up and can influence the game. Taking monsters like Hydras and Hellpits, basically anything that will stand on it's own off of bases is a good idea.

Kisanis
14-07-2015, 17:16
Fun question:

Stacking models.
If its move into contact and the bases dont matter and overlapping is allowed, why wouldnt stacking be allowed.

I would never do it... but it will come up eventually in the forums.

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk

Attilla
15-07-2015, 21:12
Yeah, I think the whole overlapping business just feels wrong. My gaming group will rebase to round bases and measure from the base "as usual". That just feels better for us. But to each their own, I suppose.

Bede19025
15-07-2015, 21:23
You do not measure from the weapon. Yes the weapons all have a range profile though please do not make the mistake of measuring from the weapon itself. You measure from the model. Please read second paragraph on first page of rules under heading "Tools of War"

How your weapon is placed on he model is all relative, though yes..... by having square bases I find I get more of my Empire spear piling in and adding to my dice pool to hit. Have no intention of rebasing anyway so win-win.

What makes you think the weapon is not part of the model?

Kisanis
16-07-2015, 03:13
Each gaming circle will decide differently.

Its part of the hardest part for those who play pickup games in stores. The variations will get numerous.


Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk

Ayin
16-07-2015, 03:28
Each gaming circle will decide differently.

Its part of the hardest part for those who play pickup games in stores. The variations will get numerous.


Indeed. The more "house rules"/locally created additions to the game the less universal it is, and the harder time individual players have interacting as part of a larger community. Which, if you don't care about establishing or maintaining a large community involved in your product, isn't really a problem.

grin
16-07-2015, 06:13
From a gaming standpoint I think it is best to ditch the bases AoS models come with altogether and put them on custom min-bases. Even when stacking the huge 32mm bases of bloodreavers for example make it hard to get enough of them into reach... I will at least put them on 25mm round bases for sure.

Frankly, the whole measure from model/ ignore base thing is the only thing outright wrong with AoS.

Gobskrag 'Eadbasha
16-07-2015, 08:01
This guy made a pretty good video on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM4weAdsOi0

Ayin
16-07-2015, 08:24
This guy made a pretty good video on the subject: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rM4weAdsOi0

Guys got a solid number of house rules built on assumptions going on there. Which is fine, you've always been able to play Warhammer however you want (assuming you have your opponents consent), but let's not act like that's the only way (or the "right" way, as in correct via rules, as we might have said about other games) of playing it.

Bede19025
16-07-2015, 15:31
But why do you think they decided to do measurement from model instead of bases? People say it's to prevent people from gaming the system by using odd sized bases, but don't you have the same issue with models ( i.e. People can pose them to det extra reach). Also, doesn't that cut both ways? For example, Bret knights with lances levelled and pointing forward give them extra reach. But they also create a long, thin protuberance that you can surround with models and thus get more models into contact with the knight.

the whole thing seems needelessly complicated to me.

Ayin
16-07-2015, 19:59
But why do you think they decided to do measurement from model instead of bases? People say it's to prevent people from gaming the system by using odd sized bases, but don't you have the same issue with models ( i.e. People can pose them to det extra reach). Also, doesn't that cut both ways? For example, Bret knights with lances levelled and pointing forward give them extra reach. But they also create a long, thin protuberance that you can surround with models and thus get more models into contact with the knight.

the whole thing seems needelessly complicated to me.

If they had of just said 'center of the model', which is generally the center of the base, instead of the edges of the base, it wouldn't be an issue. It was one @#$%ing word they could have put in, along with an overhead shot of a shiny new Stormcast Eternal with an 'X' dividing it showing the center of the model/base, and it would have eliminated issues concerning base size, issues concerning model shape, ect.

But "center of the base" is a Rules Company way of doing it, and "model" is a Model Company way of doing it.

Vulgarsty
16-07-2015, 22:53
Centre of the base is the most sensible thing Ive heard. completely objective and preserves the principle they may have been trying to achieve. I say we promote this thinking so it becomes default

Ayin
16-07-2015, 23:28
I hope it catches on really, but it's still somewhat subjective and, most importantly, it's not GW official, and from what I've seen/read and experienced, those who like AoS are about the most 'it's official so it's right!' defenders of the game I've ever seen in the hobby.

Attilla
18-07-2015, 15:10
I think the real sensible way is still the old fashioned "base to base". It has worked well enough for many years now :)

bigbiggles
18-07-2015, 17:16
The only problem I see with center of base is the 1" reach on weapons. At least on some newer models, that might be just enough to reach the side of their own base.

For me I'm going to just use the side of the base. Easy to see and measure from, not complicated, and no base stacking(would be a huge problem if I ever got around to basing my models)

Carnelian
19-07-2015, 10:34
Base to base is what my group are.doing

DVeight
22-07-2015, 03:50
What makes you think the weapon is not part of the model?

Nothing. You probably misunderstand. The weapon is part of the model though where it is on the model is irrelevant as you do not literally measure from the weapon itself. You measure from the model. If weapon is positioned so it is forward facing, ala spearmen, then you measure from that weapon tip as that is the end point of the model.

Model and weapon are one and the same thing.

thesoundofmusica
22-07-2015, 13:35
@ ayin

I love how you can take basically anything and make GW, AoS or proponents thereof look bad. I applaud you, you are skillful and certainly persistant.

Ayin
22-07-2015, 17:25
So, you're not a fan of the 'center of model' compromise specifically or just feel that RaW is fine for measuring in AoS?

Overtninja
30-07-2015, 18:22
Center of model measurement doesn't work when you're measuring ranges of 1-2 inches. It would do things like prevent many characters riding monsters from attacking with anything, prevent some models from attacking properly, and the like.

To my mind, measuring from the model itself isn't really a problem - modeling for advantage is something that people genuinely don't do - and if they do, they're shooting themselves in the foot anyway, as violating the social contract that enables you to even play a game with others is stupid. Even with models that have lots of things sticking out, or extended weapons, or whatever, it's a disadvantage and an advantage at the same time, and there aren't many models that actually gain any heavy advantage for it.

Measuring from the base is also just fine, certainly visually, as it doesn't encourage people to back into stuff because of a billowing cape or whatever. Either measuring from the base or the model is fine, frankly.