| Tactical Command http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/ |
|
| Base preferance http://www.tacticalwargames.net/taccmd/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=834 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | Shadow Hunter [ Thu Feb 27, 2003 2:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
Which bases do you guys prefer? Both aesthetically and game play wise. I haven't any square bases yet, but a few bids for items I have include infantry on them. I'm not sure I like the layout of them though. The strips seem far nicer to both paint and look at, especially with the slightly different positions of holes. Game wise though, I dont know about. I would assume the squares are more vulnerable to blasts. Is this actually true though? |
|
| Author: | Legion 4 [ Thu Feb 27, 2003 4:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
I use both, since I started with SM1 in '90. ?Most of my forces are on Squares. ?However the long bases work well too. I put special units, like Scouts, on the new bases, and it appears the long bases make figure painting easier. ? As far as burst templates go, we have not seen a difference. ?But as any good Grunt knows - keep everything under cover or you'll be a statistic !!! 
|
|
| Author: | CyberShadow [ Thu Feb 27, 2003 6:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
I agree with legion, there really is little difference. I also have both types, and it just comes down to how you think it looks. I dont like the Nids on strips, but the Marines look better that way. Have we had confirmation that the newer metal strips will be the same as Epic40K? I want to put my nids in columns, rather than rows, but if the newer metal stuff is in rows then it will look out of place. As for blast templates, it doesnt really matter, since it is the center of the base that dictates the effect. And I put my characters and monsters on washers, they look loads better. Bikes and such end up on whatever I have to hand, either long bases or squares. Squares are prefered as you get two to a base, instead of three, and so it is more ecomonical! |
|
| Author: | MonsterDude [ Thu Feb 27, 2003 9:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
I love rectangular, but I'll play with square. The models are just so squished. You can hardly see a good paint job! |
|
| Author: | signius [ Thu Feb 27, 2003 11:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
I prefer the longer stands for command and bigger units such as termies or ogryn. For normal pogues, the square is fine. |
|
| Author: | primarch [ Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
Hi! I absolutely LOATHE the rectangular bases. For me its square or death  Its really just preference though and it doesn't impact much playing epic 40k or Epic A. Its somewhat more of an issue with older versions of epic and net epic the way close combat and barrages work. I agree some armies look better in rectangular bases. Tyranids and orks look better on squares for that horde look. Primarch |
|
| Author: | Jackhammer [ Fri Feb 28, 2003 12:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
I definitely prefer the square bases, I think they look better on the battlefield and, having grown up with them as it were, they just seem 'right'. The long strips are easier to paint though. In practice, I've a mix of the two, as I have infantry from both periods. |
|
| Author: | nealhunt [ Fri Feb 28, 2003 11:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
I think either are fine, and my preference depends on the unit. I think square bases are the only way to go for Orkish Mobz. They just look clumped up all the time. Same for Tyranid Broods. OTOH, It's nice to have that stand of Devastators spread out on line, instead of trying to fire over eachother's shoulders. |
|
| Author: | dafrca [ Sat Mar 01, 2003 5:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
I like both. I use the stand that I think looks best for the unit. I tend to like the longer stand for the troops, the squar one for the special stuff and the swarms. dafrca |
|
| Author: | Jimbo [ Sat Mar 01, 2003 5:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
personal preference is the rectangular bases though I also thinkg Tyranids look best on round bases aka Markco |
|
| Author: | MaksimSmelchak [ Mon Mar 03, 2003 9:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
RECTANGULAR (10x40mm) bases. I absolutely prefer the rectangular bases since there is some variety to the position of the mounting holes and because I can assemble the stands and then paint them later. If I assemble square stands, the middle guy becomes a bear to paint later. Granted that the square stands look better for "horde" armies, but I prefer the rectangular ones for almost all other counts. The only thing I use square stands for anymore are support weapons that don't fit on or look good on rectangular bases (things like Mole Mortars, Thud Guns, and many proxy infantry figures). Like Jimbo mentioned, I think that Markco's Tyranids look great on pence. Being that I spend most of the year in the USA, I like US pennies for many things. All of many new E-A characters (Warbosses, Nobz and whatever other special Ork characters might come out) are based on US pennies. I also base Eldar grav bikes, Landspeeders, Dreadnoughts and other large roboty things on US pennies. I'm still at odds whether I should base Ork cavalry on Warmaster bases (x3 on the 20x40mm base) or on old Epic square bases (x2 on the 20x20mm base). So far I'm using my old stuff which is a mix of the two. Shalom, Maksim. |
|
| Author: | Jimbo [ Tue Mar 04, 2003 10:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
My support weapons, dreadnoughts, robots, Land Speeders etc all go on 20x20 bases, though originally I put them on pennies, it's just to get some compatiability with the 10x40 and 20x40 bases (lots of corners) I much prefer using the 20x40 bases for cavalry and bikez - and I never realised for a long time that Warmaster bases are in fact 20x40 it must be an optical illusion as the black bases look bigger than the whiste plasticard ones I cut up.... |
|
| Author: | Shadow Hunter [ Tue Mar 04, 2003 11:21 am ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
Thanks for the input guys. I think I'm gonna go with the rectangular bases. I use them for my Eldar already, but despite everyone saying hordes look better on square bases, I'm going to use rectangular for the Orks I'm buying too. The combination of easier painting, and different hole positions has made my mind up on them. I forgot to ask about what you all use for dreads etc. At the moment all my Eldar ones are unbased, and its a nightmare. I think I'm leaning towards the penny idea. I'm not sure I want square ones. For the cavalry/bikes I really like three minis per base, but also like getting my moneys worth  
|
|
| Author: | signius [ Tue Mar 04, 2003 11:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
For me, I use Evergreen styrene tiles. 1/4 or 1/2 inch squares. I am not sure, off hand, what that converts to. I just snap off the size I need. Though, this isn't the most cost effective way possible. As a matter of fact, it is probably the exact oppsite.  What is my problem?
|
|
| Author: | Falesh [ Tue Jan 13, 2004 8:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Base preferance |
I've decided to make a guide to the advantages and disadvantages of the different Ork units. It's something I could use myself and instead of asking for it I thought I'd have a go at making one. I have yet to play a game of EA so all help anyone can give would be much appreciated! I thought I'd post it now as I work on it so I can incorporate any feedback and to check if people want it in the first place  .Unit Name: Ork Boyz Advantages: Cheap (25), good in CC (4+), can move freely through most terrain and they also usually come with a free Grot to soak up enemy fire. Disadvantages: With a 6+ needed when shooting they are not going to hit much when taking a Double action (because of the extra -1), they are also slow (15cm) which can make it more difficult for them to get into hand to hand combat. Unit Name: Warbikes Advantages: Cheap (25), very fast (35cm), decant guns vs infantry (5+) and good in CC (4+). These bikes can take a Double action, move 70cm then shoot at infantry within 15cm needing a 6 to hit, then next turn assault a formation up to 35cm away with a CC score of 4+. Disadvantages: Low armour (5+), counts as infantry so easier to hit, poor in a FF (6+), low weapon range (15cm), poor to hit vehicles (6+). Unit Name: Warbuggies/Wartraks Advantages: Cheap (25), very fast (35cm), good guns (AP5+, AT5+, 30 range). With the move of these units they can get to where the shooting is needed, this is very useful for focusing casualties on or suppressing a formidable enemy formation. Disadvantages: These are LV's so can be hit by AP or AV rounds, poor in an assault (5+ CC, 5+ FF), low armour (5+). Unit Name: Scorcha Advantages: Cheap (25), very fast (35cm), great guns vs infantry when in range (4+, ignores cover), great in a FF (4+). Disadvantages: These are LV's so can be hit by AP or AV rounds, poor weapon range (15cm), can't hit vehicles, low armour (5+), poor in CC 6+. Strategy: These are more support units, for instance if you have a formation just made up of these and someone assaults you in CC you will be devastated. Their advantage comes in because you often can't get all units in a formation into CC, so to get the most out of an assault formation you need a good amount of CC and a decant amount of FF. How much FF you want in a formation depends on your opponent. For instance when fighting Space Marines you will probably be fighting small formations so only a limited number can get into CC, but if you fight Orks or Imperial Guard you may be up against larger formations where more units that can CC could be an advantage. Stompas Advantages: Great armour (4+ & Reinforced), great gunz (2-3 AP5+, AT5+, 45 range), good in a FF or CC (4+), even better if you take the Kombat 'Ammer (base contact, MW, +1A). Disadvantages: Expensive (75), just as easy to suppress as any other normal Ork unit, slow (15cm). Strategy: These are tough to kill but can be easy to suppress, for instance it take an average of 36 shots, if the enemy needs 5+ to hit, to kill 3 stompas. But it only takes 3 formations to shoot at them to give 3 BM's and break them. These are often used as shields for formations. This is because hits are allocated from the front of a formation to the back, so if you put a stompa or two in front the first 1 or 2 hits gets taken by the Stompa, and with their very thick armour they are move likely to survive then the other vehicles in the formation. Unit Name: Stormboyz Advantages: Cheap (25), Fast (30cm), good at CC (4+), they have Jump Packs and are Scouts. Disadvantages: No weapons that work outside an assault, low save (6+), infantry so easy to hit, if they end their move in dangerous terrain they must take a dangerous terrain test. Strategy: Because of their 30cm movement and the fact that they have jump packs (which lets them jump over impassable of dangerous terrain) they can get to most places on the battlefield. A basic formation is also very cheap (150). One strategy to use these advantages could be to buy a formation of these solely to charge an enemies barrage (or other vulnerable units at the back of the field) formation. With a 60 double or 90 march there is a decant chance they can get within range to assault on the next turn, this means the enemy can either let you assault, and quite probably loose their barrage, or send a formation to stop you. The formation sent to stop you is probably worth more then 150 points, so you have the enemy at a disadvantage while they deal with you, or you destroy or seriously damage a barrage formation worth most probably more then 150 points, so both ways you win. Another way to exploit their strengths could be to use them as a shield to stop the enemy assaulting one of your formations. They are scouts, which means that they have a 10cm zone of control and only need to be within 20cm of each other instead of 5cm, this means that with only 6 units they can protect a whooping 120cm of battlefield. For the enemy to pass through this with ground troops they must first shoot a hole in it or assault it, both ways you have succeeded in making the enemy attack you instead of your guarded formation. General Strategy Plan your strategy before you build your army. This can be very important, for instance if you have found that large formations can work against one enemy it might be a disaster against another that has huge barrage formations. Another thing to think about is the speed of your units, if you have an army that is mostly very fast and is going to charge into assault immediately you may not want some slow units that get left behind. Think through how you will use each formation before you add it to your army list, if you can't think of how it will work with the rest of your formations it may be a good idea to get a diferant one. Another thing to consider when building an Ork army is the fact that they get a +2 to initiative when taking double or engage actions. So if you are building a shooty army that mainly goes for sustained fire you may end up failing a fair amount of action tests. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|