PDA

View Full Version : Banners and WYSIWYG



whitra
19-08-2006, 15:52
Howdy all. I can probably guess the answer to this question, but I was looking for some confirmation and opinions.

From a gameplay perspective, putting banners in missile units is usually a bad idea. However, it fits from an aesthetic and fluff perspective(for some armies). A decade ago, there would have been no problem with putting a banner in a unit and just telling the opponent the unit doesn't have a banner.

Is it explicit under the what-you-see... rules that a unit cannot have a model with a banner if it's not actually paid for?

As players, how would you feel if you played against someone with banner's modelled in units that didn't have them?

Thanks in advance.

Avian
19-08-2006, 15:58
When it comes to banners, I would dislike it if my opponent took a standard bearer model when a unit did not have a standard, if he could possibly avoid it. I have quite a high tolerance for people who want to try out new stuff or proxy something on a one-off, but I do not people who make models misleading on purpose. If none of your standards represented standards, it would be fine, but if some do and some do not, I would be against it.

DeathMasterSnikch
19-08-2006, 16:42
Agreed, although it's a nice idea I think it will just complicate things. Either make lone standards on round bases etc to put near your units or model them in some way different to your other standards and tell the opponent that the banners modeled in that way are not real standards, thats pushing it but the best I can think of besides 'Don't'.

Festus
19-08-2006, 16:48
Hi

You can easily put all the non-standard standards in the corner of the unit and all the real standards in the middle, thus telling the two apart easily...

Greetings
Festus

NakedFisherman
19-08-2006, 17:05
Hi

You can easily put all the non-standard standards in the corner of the unit and all the real standards in the middle, thus telling the two apart easily...

Greetings
Festus

Command doesn't have to be centered in 7th, so...

McMullet
19-08-2006, 17:14
You copuld make big, brightly coloured standards for "real" standards and small, dowdy standards for the units that don't actually have them.

Obviously, you'd have to tell your opponent beforehand, but as long as it was very clear you should be OK. If you forget to tell them, then they have every right to get 100VPs for running the unit down.

DeathlessDraich
19-08-2006, 18:00
GW models are expensive enough to justify NOT playing with WYSIWYG.

I allow every and any model in my games, even an empty base and personally I think tournament organisers should be as flexible as possible in this respect. I'm not suggesting they condone extreme changes, just greater flexibility especially if mutually accepted.

In your case, I'm sure most reasonable players will accept the banners if you place them at the back rank (as others have suggested) and remind them when it matters e.g. just before charge declarations or charge reactions and just before the decision to pursue.

inq.serge
19-08-2006, 18:17
you can have mini-bannas on their back, like small flags, but not real big bannas. (if using wysiwyg)

DeathMasterSnikch
19-08-2006, 18:34
GW models are expensive enough to justify NOT playing with WYSIWYG.

I allow every and any model in my games, even an empty base and personally I think tournament organisers should be as flexible as possible in this respect. I'm not suggesting they condone extreme changes, just greater flexibility especially if mutually accepted.

In your case, I'm sure most reasonable players will accept the banners if you place them at the back rank (as others have suggested) and remind them when it matters e.g. just before charge declarations or charge reactions and just before the decision to pursue.

Blank bases...that's just wrong...People go through the trouble of painting masterful armies, It's insulting for people to use random blank bases. Whats the world coming to.

As for putting them in the back rank yeh that should work.


Command doesn't have to be centered in 7th, so...

Yey! :D

Gorbad Ironclaw
19-08-2006, 19:49
From a gameplay perspective, putting banners in missile units is usually a bad idea.


Depends. I'm putting banners in all my Repeater Crossbow units. Works pretty well :)

Anyway, as others have said. I don't mind proxies or alternative models or anything of that sort. But having several units with banners, where as some counts, and others doesn't might be pushing it. Certainly if some missile units have a banner, and others doesn't, but looks like it.

If no missile units have a banner, it should be possible to remember, but you might want to make them special in some way anyway.


As for tournaments. Practically every tournament I see allows you use whatever models you like. But trying to be as little misleading as possible is always a good idea.

Zzarchov
19-08-2006, 20:20
You could just pay the extra few points even if "wasted" and have a less efficient army for the sake of looks, rather than try and make it an issue about your opponents.

Rather than wish your opponents weren't so hooked on WYSIWYG perhaps you should be less hooked on on the absolute most effective unit and waste a few points for fluff..who knows, some game it might actually pay off and your missile units could narrowly win against a charge with bad dice rolls.

T10
19-08-2006, 20:22
I agree with Avian. Though I'm all in favour of colorful units, banners have such a great impact on the game that they should not be used lightly. When your opponent sees a banner in a unit he is likely to think 1) "Woops! They have a +1 Combat Resolution!" and 2) "Sweet-sweet 100 Victory Points for me if I get that banner!"

Add to this the fact that people are likely to assume the presence of a full command in even a half-finished unit. It's unlikely that they will suddenly pause and ask "Hey, those archers - that banner of theirs is just for show, right?"

Of course, you could *tell* them, but still. When I see a unit without a banner I ask if it actually has one. If I see a unit with a banner I always assume that it is in fact there.

-T10

Crazy Harborc
19-08-2006, 21:19
IMHO, using minies with whatever/shields/heavy or light armour and saying it is or isn't there, is NOT the same thing as adding banners/standards/flags to a unit and saying they aren't there.

Around here, we place "extra" banners somewhere other than the front rank. If points aren't paid the banner is "extra/not there". Now, if it's with shooters who can't have the option/banner AND your opponent knows that AND doesn't object.....fine. IF/when an opponent is confused by the whatever being there AND it's not a legit option......Why is it there?

Festus
19-08-2006, 21:21
Hi

Command doesn't have to be centered in 7th, so...

Doesn't change the fact that you can distinguish between the units with standard in the middle and standard to the side.
As long as you stick to it, there is no problem at all...

Festus

vampires are cool!
19-08-2006, 23:13
i really dont care, as long as you tell me whats what when i need to know then i'll let you use anything
hell, i let my mate use a snotling swarm to proxy archaon!

whitra
20-08-2006, 14:59
You could just pay the extra few points even if "wasted" and have a less efficient army for the sake of looks, rather than try and make it an issue about your opponents.

That's probably what I'll end up doing. But I like the idea of putting obviously different small banners in units like detachment, which have no option for banners.

Reading over the discussion, it sounds like I should be in the clear if the banners were visibly different, if there is no option for purchasing them, if I'm consistant, and if I inform the opponent?

Alathir
20-08-2006, 15:16
Blank bases...that's just wrong...People go through the trouble of painting masterful armies, It's insulting for people to use random blank bases. Whats the world coming to.



Get real mate.

My opponent could put down a whole army of blank bases and I wouldn't care, as long as their is a clear way of telling what telling what units are and what they do or do not have then play on.

xmbk
20-08-2006, 23:06
Get real mate.

My opponent could put down a whole army of blank bases and I wouldn't care, as long as their is a clear way of telling what telling what units are and what they do or do not have then play on.

You're clearly missing part of the hobby experience. It may not bother everyone, but you'd be limiting your potential opponents by doing this.

Cpt. Drill
21-08-2006, 00:22
I agree with alot of players in the fact that if a unit doesnt have a banner then you probobly shouldnt model one....

On the other hand.. I really like the look of some units with multiple banners... (Only a few can get away with it) Like I have seen really nice big units of night goblins 12 wide with two or three banners... a few small rags and one big one.. It looks really nice and horde like!

ZomboCom
21-08-2006, 09:30
It annoys me if a unit has a banner in the front rank and doesn't have one in the army list.

Putting a banner in the back ranks is fine though.

Highborn
21-08-2006, 22:37
You're clearly missing part of the hobby experience. It may not bother everyone, but you'd be limiting your potential opponents by doing this.

Hos is he 'missing part of the hobby experience' and 'limiting potential opponents'?

I'm with him. I don't care if you don't have a wonderfully modelled and painted army. Hell, I don't care if you have an army at all. I'm not saying I'll do the same, just that I'm not tight enough to force my opponent to buy several hundred dollars of toy soldiers to play a game with me.

xmbk
22-08-2006, 12:53
Modelling is clearly part of the hobby. If you don't enjoy that, no problem - but you are definitely missing part of the miniatures gaming experience if you treat it like a boardgame or computer game.

The fact that it doesn't bother everyone to see blank bases is hardly the same as saying it bothers no one. It's irrelevant that you don't care - the point is that there are some who at least demand to see a model they recognize before playing. That's a fact, passing judgment doesn't change it's truth value.

Alathir
22-08-2006, 14:58
The 'truth value' that exists because you said it does..

Brilliant stuff.

Modelling is a part of the hobby, but it's not the reason I play warhammer, I play warhammer because it's a challenging, strategic game. If i meet someone who wont play me because 'your using empty bases to represent a rank of eternal guard!!!!!!!!1111111111111' will be sure to cop a punch in the head from me.

xmbk
22-08-2006, 19:51
"your using empty bases to represent a rank of eternal guard" is hardly the same as "an entire army of blank bases" you referred to in the original post. I wouldn't play the latter, so that alone justifies my "truth value". If you think I'm the only one, I'm glad I don't play in your region. Not to mention it might save me a punch in the head. :angel:

My point was that your willingness to ignore blank bases in no way refutes the fact that there is a nonsignificant minority who do care, and would avoid playing someone like that, thereby limiting potential opponents. You might disagree with those "snobs", but denying their existence is rather ostrich-like.

Alathir
23-08-2006, 06:53
If I'm limiting my opponents by not playing the ones who care about that sort of thing, then I'm glad for it.

Although it seems I will miss out on punching them in the head.

Oh no, I'm caught in a paradox.

MadJackMcJack
23-08-2006, 07:28
Try swagging a few Bretonnian knight lances, the ones with the small banners on them. They'd make good "non-banner banners"