Logo
View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Sun Nov 29, 2020 5:12 pm



Reply to topic  [ 23 posts ] 
Cauldron of Blood base size 
Author Message
Slave on the Altar

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:01 pm
Posts: 8
I'm ambivalent on the new model but I have an old metal one. What is the new model's base size?

Thanks

_________________
anewbre


Sat Feb 14, 2015 4:08 pm
Profile
Malekith's Personal Guard
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:58 pm
Posts: 920
Location: Terre Haute, IN, USA
The base that a model comes with is always still its legal base size, even if a new edition of the model replaces it later. So don't worry about re-basing it.

_________________
Chinese Relativity Axiom: No matter how glorious your triumphs, nor how miserable your failures, there will always be at least one billion people in China who don't give a damn.

Apocalypse Drow! Plog: http://druchii.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=75360


Sat Feb 14, 2015 4:12 pm
Profile
Aspiring Brush Master
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 9:19 pm
Posts: 680
Location: In my Armory, protecting my Weed.
maybe so, but expect alot of hate from your opponents for it ;)
well most likely not friends but you know the kinda ppl im talking about :P

_________________
PLOG - The House of Corvus
Image

Group 41- Name: Searinox Nagharha - Shade
WS:5 S:3 T:3 D:4 I:4
Equipment: Long sword; Falchion (family heirloom), Very Good Sabre, Short sword, Dagger, Throwing Dagger (4) SeaDragon Cloak, Chain
Inventory: 30 gold (214 still to be paid), Silver Bracelet, several flagons: 1x Strength potion, 3x Courage potion, 3x Healing Potion.
Skills: Two Weapon Fighting, Acrobatics, Basic Stealth


Sat Feb 14, 2015 6:30 pm
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 3:07 pm
Posts: 1253
Location: Somerset, UK.
direweasel wrote:
The base that a model comes with is always still its legal base size, even if a new edition of the model replaces it later. So don't worry about re-basing it.


They really should do away with that rule, though. You have to assume that any playtesting is done using the new Base Size and nothing else, so a model is balanced around that. Regardless of who benefits, it's probably best (if not enforced) to at least try and keep an army up to date.

_________________
Still Serving Slaanesh
Owner of one too many armies...


Sat Feb 14, 2015 8:41 pm
Profile
Generalissimo
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:09 pm
Posts: 3725
Location: Baltimore
Quote:
They really should do away with that rule, though

100% disagree. While I do voluntarily rebase most of my models over time, I do so as a courtesy to my opponents and would be pretty cheesed off to be compelled to do so. A model purchased should be legal forever in the format it is purchased in, not required to have constant money-costing changes made to it to stay legal.

_________________
"While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers. So answer the question."

Don't be a munchkin?

Image

I am an Extraordinary Druchii Gentleman


Sat Feb 14, 2015 9:13 pm
Profile
Slave on the Altar

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:01 pm
Posts: 8
Friends, I don't have any base so I thought that I would base it to the present size and perhaps customize it so it doesn't look too tiny
Thanks

_________________
anewbre


Sun Feb 15, 2015 2:43 am
Profile
Malekith's Personal Guard
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:58 pm
Posts: 920
Location: Terre Haute, IN, USA
Ah, sorry for the confusion then.

I believe it's the chariot base, someone else can confirm because I own the old one...and by that I mean the REALLY old one that doesn't even HAVE a base. :)

_________________
Chinese Relativity Axiom: No matter how glorious your triumphs, nor how miserable your failures, there will always be at least one billion people in China who don't give a damn.

Apocalypse Drow! Plog: http://druchii.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=75360


Sun Feb 15, 2015 3:21 am
Profile
Aspiring Brush Master
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 9:19 pm
Posts: 680
Location: In my Armory, protecting my Weed.
The old one was Chariot sized. tho I think the new one is 60 by 100 to fit neatly in our Elf footprint.

_________________
PLOG - The House of Corvus
Image

Group 41- Name: Searinox Nagharha - Shade
WS:5 S:3 T:3 D:4 I:4
Equipment: Long sword; Falchion (family heirloom), Very Good Sabre, Short sword, Dagger, Throwing Dagger (4) SeaDragon Cloak, Chain
Inventory: 30 gold (214 still to be paid), Silver Bracelet, several flagons: 1x Strength potion, 3x Courage potion, 3x Healing Potion.
Skills: Two Weapon Fighting, Acrobatics, Basic Stealth


Sun Feb 15, 2015 7:59 am
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8742
Location: Hag Graef
5x3 infantry bases indeed, i.e. 100x60.

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Sun Feb 15, 2015 10:27 am
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 3:07 pm
Posts: 1253
Location: Somerset, UK.
Red... wrote:
Quote:
They really should do away with that rule, though

100% disagree. While I do voluntarily rebase most of my models over time, I do so as a courtesy to my opponents and would be pretty cheesed off to be compelled to do so. A model purchased should be legal forever in the format it is purchased in, not required to have constant money-costing changes made to it to stay legal.


Even if that model (for the sake of this example) was completely broken rules-wise on that base size? If it bought better game balance I have no issue re-basing the odd model (it's changed its base size once in 20 years (given that the original fitted on the same-sized base as the second version)). How about if there were two Cauldron's of Blood one used the old base size and was dreadful and the other the new base size as was brilliant? Would that be better?

On the one hand we complain about a lack of game balance and on the other we rail against small changes we might be asked to make for the benefit of the balance.

_________________
Still Serving Slaanesh
Owner of one too many armies...


Sun Feb 15, 2015 10:51 am
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8742
Location: Hag Graef
There are small advantages and small drawbacks coming from a larger base compared to a smaller one.
Overall, the balance is not outrageously broken by using one or another.

Large base:
- fits neatly in infantry
- increases very slightly influence range (spell, BSB range)

Small base:
- fits neatly in cavalry
- lowers by 1 the number of attackers who can reach it

Small model:
- hides more efficiently from TLOS.

Really not changing dramatically the balance of the battle.
I would even find it cool to see in the same army a COB fitting neatly inside a cav unit and a BWS fitting neatly inside an infantry unit.

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Sun Feb 15, 2015 12:34 pm
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 12:19 am
Posts: 2089
I believe GWs actual rule is the correct base size is the base the model is currently sold with, not that it was originally sold with.

_________________
Proud supporter of druchii.net
phierlihy@druchii.net


Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:09 pm
Profile
Corsair
Corsair
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 10:00 pm
Posts: 8742
Location: Hag Graef
Phierlihy wrote:
I believe GWs actual rule is the correct base size is the base the model is currently sold with, not that it was originally sold with.
Well, the actual rule can be found p.80.
BRB, p.80, wrote:
A model should always be mounted on the base it is supplied with.
The word "currently" is nowhere to be found.

Many years ago, there were some tables telling which size was appropriate for each unit.
It was provided at least in the French GW site. There was a single base size for each model, reflecting the most recently sold. That was the closest to the rule you seem to have in mind.
Then GW unified their websites and that page was lost.

_________________
Winds never stop blowing, Oceans are borderless. Get a ship and a crew, so the World will be ours! Today the World, tomorrow Nagg! {--|oBrotherhood of the Coast!o|--}


Sun Feb 15, 2015 1:55 pm
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 3:07 pm
Posts: 1253
Location: Somerset, UK.
Calisson wrote:
Many years ago, there were some tables telling which size was appropriate for each unit.
It was provided at least in the French GW site. There was a single base size for each model, reflecting the most recently sold. That was the closest to the rule you seem to have in mind.
Then GW unified their websites and that page was lost.


I miss those. I'm a little surprised that in the Army List GW don't list the current base size (with a sidenote saying that other base sizes "can be used with permission"), it would seem a good way to encourage sales of the new stuff whilst not ruffling feathers.

_________________
Still Serving Slaanesh
Owner of one too many armies...


Sun Feb 15, 2015 11:28 pm
Profile
Generalissimo
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:09 pm
Posts: 3725
Location: Baltimore
Quote:
n the one hand we complain about a lack of game balance and on the other we rail against small changes we might be asked to make for the benefit of the balance.

No evidence for any link between changing base sizes and balance to be fair. In fact, I can't think of a single instance where a rebasing has happened primarily due to balance rather than the fact that GW keeps making its models bigger and bigger.

Quote:
I believe GWs actual rule is the correct base size is the base the model is currently sold with, not that it was originally sold with.

Other way around. As Calisson correctly states.

Quote:
I'm a little surprised that in the Army List GW don't list the current base size (with a sidenote saying that other base sizes "can be used with permission"), it would seem a good way to encourage sales of the new stuff whilst not ruffling feathers.

So, if after buying, assembling, and painting a huge unit of 40 executioners, GW released a new armybook that indicated that the base size had changed from 20mm to 25mm, you would happily accept the complete delegalization of your unit, unless you were willing to buy 40 new bases, paint up those bases, debase your executioners from their old bases (quite a feat, given that you probably glued them using superglue) and then rebase them on the new bases? That's a lot of work for models that you legitimately purchased, glued together, and painted. No, for me I think it is far better that you are allowed to use the bases your models originally came with, to avoid such a waste of money and time.

_________________
"While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers. So answer the question."

Don't be a munchkin?

Image

I am an Extraordinary Druchii Gentleman


Mon Feb 16, 2015 12:10 am
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 3:07 pm
Posts: 1253
Location: Somerset, UK.
Red... wrote:
Quote:
n the one hand we complain about a lack of game balance and on the other we rail against small changes we might be asked to make for the benefit of the balance.

No evidence for any link between changing base sizes and balance to be fair. In fact, I can't think of a single instance where a rebasing has happened primarily due to balance rather than the fact that GW keeps making its models bigger and bigger.


Really? We know that base sizes make a difference to balance and we know that GW make the models first and then do the rules after, so have to assume that some playtesting goes into making that particular model work on the base size it's now being sold on. Yes, the models change for the purpose of selling more of them (that's GW's primary aim, after all), but contrary to what some alarmists might state, GW do still make rules that are generally balanced and then playtest them

Red... wrote:
Quote:
I'm a little surprised that in the Army List GW don't list the current base size (with a sidenote saying that other base sizes "can be used with permission"), it would seem a good way to encourage sales of the new stuff whilst not ruffling feathers.

So, if after buying, assembling, and painting a huge unit of 40 executioners, GW released a new armybook that indicated that the base size had changed from 20mm to 25mm, you would happily accept the complete delegalization of your unit, unless you were willing to buy 40 new bases, paint up those bases, debase your executioners from their old bases (quite a feat, given that you probably glued them using superglue) and then rebase them on the new bases? That's a lot of work for models that you legitimately purchased, glued together, and painted. No, for me I think it is far better that you are allowed to use the bases your models originally came with, to avoid such a waste of money and time.


You're going for the extreme there, I notice, but I'll answer... Would I find a way to make that unit legal? Absolutely. Some 5mm spacers between the models or sticking the bases to 25mm mdf squares would work absolutely fine if you don't want to take the models off their bases (you can freeze superglue off, btw, it's far easier to break the bond of than plastic glue which actually melts the parts together). Cauldron of Blood - same deal (although raising it would help as well - perhaps a hillock with a space on top for the old CoB). Going up base sizes is far easier than going down them (like the Harpies did (from 25mm to 20mm)).

I guess we're coming at this from different angles. I want game balance first and don't mind making sacrifices for that to happen, you want your models to always be viable. GW, of course, just want to sell us as much stuff as possible, so don't really want us to keep our old models regardless of what we do with the bases.

_________________
Still Serving Slaanesh
Owner of one too many armies...


Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:41 am
Profile
Generalissimo
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 3:09 pm
Posts: 3725
Location: Baltimore
Quote:
I want game balance first and don't mind making sacrifices for that to happen, you want your models to always be viable

Nope, you're making an assumption that I agree that updated base sizing is done for balancing purposes. As already indicated, I don't think this is why it is done. GW likes bigger minis because it can charge more for them, and because larger minis are easier to sculpt. I see no evidence that larger bases are brought in for balancing purposes. So, my angle is that I see no reason why I should be compelled to spend money rebasing models that have been rebased for purely pecuniary reasons by GW. I like balance, I agree with balance, but I don't think that rebasing by GW has to do with balance - so I don't reject balance in favor of keeping bases the same size no matter what, I embrace balance while also being in favor of players being allowed to keep bases the same size no matter what. The two things do not counteract one another.

_________________
"While all answers are replies, not all replies are answers. So answer the question."

Don't be a munchkin?

Image

I am an Extraordinary Druchii Gentleman


Tue Feb 17, 2015 3:25 am
Profile
Malekith's Best Friend
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2003 3:07 pm
Posts: 1253
Location: Somerset, UK.
Red... wrote:
Quote:
I want game balance first and don't mind making sacrifices for that to happen, you want your models to always be viable

Nope, you're making an assumption that I agree that updated base sizing is done for balancing purposes. As already indicated, I don't think this is why it is done. GW likes bigger minis because it can charge more for them, and because larger minis are easier to sculpt. I see no evidence that larger bases are brought in for balancing purposes. So, my angle is that I see no reason why I should be compelled to spend money rebasing models that have been rebased for purely pecuniary reasons by GW. I like balance, I agree with balance, but I don't think that rebasing by GW has to do with balance - so I don't reject balance in favor of keeping bases the same size no matter what, I embrace balance while also being in favor of players being allowed to keep bases the same size no matter what. The two things do not counteract one another.


I feel like I'm repeating myself a little here, but...

1) GW make models first, then rules
2) The rules team then balance that model
3) Ergo the rules for a model take into account the size of the model

No, GW does not change base sizes for the sake of game balance, but it does balance the game around the base sizes. Different approach same result. There are no assumptions that need to be made about this particular statement, as we have facts.

The obvious downside to them removing the 'original base' rule is that we'd probably have at least one 'testing the water' release where half of an army got a base size change, which would be bad (very bad if it was horde army). This for me is the strongest argument as to why they should keep the 'original base' rule, it prevents another case of the 'Dark Elf price bloat' fiasco*

*Okay, I'm dramatising there, but it was clearly a case of pushing boundaries and then taking a step back with the next release.

_________________
Still Serving Slaanesh
Owner of one too many armies...


Tue Feb 17, 2015 9:54 am
Profile
Miscast into the Warp
Miscast into the Warp
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:07 am
Posts: 3510
Location: Investigating Mantica
It amuses me that there are discussions with the words 'Balance' and 'Games Workshop' in the same sentence. I don't for one minute believe there is anywhere near as much playtesting these days. :)

_________________
My Kings of War Plog - Forces of Nature

My Kings of War Plog - Twilight Kin / Nightstalkers


Tue Feb 17, 2015 11:02 am
Profile
Malekith's Personal Guard
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:58 pm
Posts: 920
Location: Terre Haute, IN, USA
Yeah I don't think there is anything about base sizing that is playtested one way or the other. It's not about game balance, if anything it's about model balance, as in, can we balance this model on a small base? If not, then get a bigger one.

If word came down that all my boys and girls had to be rebased, my stuff would be on eBay within a week or two.

_________________
Chinese Relativity Axiom: No matter how glorious your triumphs, nor how miserable your failures, there will always be at least one billion people in China who don't give a damn.

Apocalypse Drow! Plog: http://druchii.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=75360


Tue Feb 17, 2015 11:07 am
Profile
Miscast into the Warp
Miscast into the Warp
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:07 am
Posts: 3510
Location: Investigating Mantica
direweasel wrote:
If word came down that all my boys and girls had to be rebased, my stuff would be on eBay within a week or two.


Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear......

More and more rumours are coming along regarding round and oval bases. Suggestion is this is the new cav base, from some of the most respected rumour mongers.

http://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Shield-of-Baal-Deathstorm-English

Anyway this is a little off topic. Bad Amboadine.

_________________
My Kings of War Plog - Forces of Nature

My Kings of War Plog - Twilight Kin / Nightstalkers


Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:21 pm
Profile
Malekith's Personal Guard
User avatar

Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:58 pm
Posts: 920
Location: Terre Haute, IN, USA
Well, a few things there:

- Those are 40k figs. Totally different system, doesn't necessarily mean anything for fantasy.
- Even if new fantasy stuff would be on those, that doesn't necessarily mean that they force old minis to comply.
- Rumors mean nothing to me. I believe it when it's in official print. Got too much going on to follow what MIGHT be happening months down the road.

_________________
Chinese Relativity Axiom: No matter how glorious your triumphs, nor how miserable your failures, there will always be at least one billion people in China who don't give a damn.

Apocalypse Drow! Plog: http://druchii.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=75360


Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:30 pm
Profile
Miscast into the Warp
Miscast into the Warp
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:07 am
Posts: 3510
Location: Investigating Mantica
direweasel wrote:
Well, a few things there:

- Those are 40k figs. Totally different system, doesn't necessarily mean anything for fantasy.
- Even if new fantasy stuff would be on those, that doesn't necessarily mean that they force old minis to comply.
- Rumors mean nothing to me. I believe it when it's in official print. Got too much going on to follow what MIGHT be happening months down the road.


Quite agree, just passing on the rumours really. I am still basing the same way, still buying figures and will take it as it comes.

_________________
My Kings of War Plog - Forces of Nature

My Kings of War Plog - Twilight Kin / Nightstalkers


Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:40 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 23 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software