[Archive] Legion of Azgorh Bull Centaur Base Size

Archive [Archive] Chaos Dwarf Discussion
1

Nicodemus:



So Bull Bentaur base size has been talked about off and on since the models were first mentioned to be in the Tamurkhan book.

In the Legion of Azgorh army Bull Centaurs are classed as Monstrous Beasts (MB in their profile). I spoke with Simon at Forgeworld/Warhammer Forge a few days ago (also mentioned in the thread Centaurs are your friends!) and was told that 40x40mm base was the intended base size for Bull Centaurs. I took his response with a grain of salt, however, as he had to think for a while and check their classification of “Monstrous Beast” before pondering more. BCs are 3 Wound models now and with the Monstrous Beast classification the larger than 25x50mm base size fits with the current treatment of such things in the rules and current models, however, there’s still been talk about 50x50mm bases for these guys. I’m sure some of you have already decided for yourselves what base size to use, but if you’re on the fence (like me) here’s the results of my search through the current WHFB armies for precedent on the base size. Of course you can use any base size you like for your precious dolls, but other gamers might get narky if you want to go out in public with them and try to play with others :P :hat off

In the end, it seems most things in the Monstrous Beast category can be on either 40x40 or 50x50 bases and GW hasn’t been totally consistent themselves with a lot of their models that are classified as Monstrous Beasts. In some cases models that used to be sold with 40x40 bases are now sold with 50x50 (Great Eagle). Essentially, because they’re ‘monsters’ (of a sort) I think it’s somewhat open to your own choice whether you base them on 40x40 or 50x50 mm bases.

Here’s the sumamry of my search through the WHFB line:

-±±±±±±±±±±±±±±±±±±

Monstrous Beasts from around the Warhammer Realm


Beastmen

Chaos Spawn (3 Wounds) 40x40

Razorgor (3 Wounds) 50x50

Bretonnia

Royal Pegasus (3 Wounds) 50x50 (used to be sold with 25x50)

Unicorn (mount for Fey Enchantress) (-) 50x50 (used to be sold with 25x50)

Daemons of Chaos

Beast of Nurgle (4 Wounds) 40x40

Fiend of Slaanesh (3 Wounds) 40x40

Juggernaut (1 Wound) 50x50

Dark Elves

Dark Pegasus (3 Wounds) 40x40

Sulephet/Morathi Sulephet is a Dark Pegasus, see above.

Empire

Imperial Pegasus (3 Wounds) 40x40

High Elves

Great Eagle (3 Wounds) 50x50 (used to be sold with 40x40)

Lizardmen

Terradon (1 Wound) 40x40

Ogre Kingdom

Sabretusks (2 Wounds) 25x50 (unique apart from perhaps Bull Centaurs)

update: Ogre Kingdoms in 8th edition has Sabretusks listed as War Beast, while in Storm of Magic they are Monstrous Beasts.

Orcs & Goblins

Gigantic Spider (3 Wounds) 40x40 or 50x50

Great Cave Squig (3 Wounds) 40x40

Skarsnik & Gobbla (6 Wounds) 40x60 (unique)

Skaven

Bonebreaker (4 Wounds) 40x40

Tomb Kings

Tomb scorpion (4 Wounds) 50x50 (old GW base size chart incorrectly lists it as 40x40)

Warriors of Chaos

Chaos Spawn (3 Wounds) 40x40

Daemonic Mount (1 Wound) 50x50

Dragon Ogre (4 Wounds) 40x40 (Shaggoth is a Monsters and therefore 50x50)

Juggernaut (1 Wound) 50x50

Scylla Anfingrimm (4 Wounds) 40x40

Wood Elves

Great Eagle (3 Wounds) 50x50 (used to be sold with 40x40)

Great Stag (3 Wounds) 50x50 (seems to be the consensus anyway)

Unicorn (3 Wounds) 50x50

Storm of Magic

Pegasi (3 Wounds) 40x40 (see GW website->Warhammer Bitz->Mounts)

Royal Unicorns (3 Wounds) 50x50 (see Bretonnia)

Great Stag (3 Wounds) 50x50 (see Wood Elves)

Great Eagle (3 Wounds) 50x50

Gigantic Spider (3 Wounds) 40x40 or 50x50 (see O&G)

Dragon Ogre (4 Wounds) 40x40 (see WoC)

Razorgor (3 Wounds) 50x50 (see Beastmen)

Chaos Spawn (3 Wounds) 40x40 (see Beastmen/WoC)

Rhinox (3 Wounds) 40x40

Sabretusks (2 Wounds) 25x50 (see Ogre Kingdoms)

Plague Toads (2 Wounds) 40x40 (see Forge World/Warhammer Forge)

update: Sabretusks are listed as Monstrous Beasts, whlie in Ogre Kingdoms in 8th edition Sabretusks are listed as War Beasts.

Chaos Dwarfs (Ravening Hordes era and earlier, etc)

Bull Centaurs (1 Wound) 25x50

Forge Word/Warhammer Forge

Bull Centaurs (3 Wounds) ? keep reading

Plague Toads (2 Wounds) 40x40

Nightmaw (with Sayl) 40x40

-±±±±±±±±±±±±±±±±±±

So ignoring oddities like the 25x50 Sabretusks and Skarsnik’s 40x60 base, I’m in agreement with what seems like the general consensus around that “Monstrous Beasts” can be mounted on a 40x40 or 50x50 base and there’s lots of evidence to back up that choice. Even the Gigantic Spider seems to be on the fence. Of course there’s always the caveat and general rules that you put your GW model on the base that comes with it for gaming reasons… although we have no current Bull Centaurs so the point is moot.

The real choice between base sizes comes down to two things in my opinion: 1) game play considerations and 2) aesthetics. … and I think aesthetics trumps any game play considerations are they are very minor.



1) In terms of game play, the 40x40 base gives you an additional 60% frontage to your BCs, while 50x50 doubles the frontage (50x50 gives 25% more frontage than 40x40). This may be good or bad depending on who you are up against as you may be facing twice the number of models from an opposing unit than before. That said, you’re also in base contact with potentially that many more opponents who are now all about to be wailed on :wink:

The other gameplay factor that I can think of is templates. With the large base size you’re somehwhat more likely to be hit by a template. The 40x40 base increases the footprint of the BCs by 28%, whlie the 50x50 base doubles the footprint (50x50 gives a footprint 56% larger than the 40x40 base). This may sound all bad, however, a larger footprint also means fewer models will be under the template. I don’t think it’s necessarily a straight 1-to-1 trade in terms of a 50x50 base makes you twice as likely to be hit but your opponent will hit half as many models… but I haven’t the time or inclination to give it a lot more thought.



2) I’m much more interested in the aesthetics of 40x40 vs 50x50 bases. I had a tough time ranking up my big hat BCs on the original cav bases. They were always a little too close together and I ended up shifting some models further forward and others further back on their base to slightly stagger their weapon and shield arms (and in some cases their weapons would clash with a big hat on an adjacent model). Going to a 40x40 base gives you an additional 28% to work with for creating scenic bases, and let’s face it, the cav bases don’t leave you much space to do stuff with. The 50x50 bases gives you scads of space with the old big hat BCs to create some interesting bases. Heck, there’d be enough realestate there to build a diorama into your unit just by using up that extra space ;) The 40mm length is just enough to cover the old BC models from front to back, but there’s not a lot of overhang and if you have some heavily converted BCs you may need to jockey positions left and right for them to rank up properly. With the 50x50 base you’ve got all of the space front-to-back you had on the cav bases. Unfortunately, I think units made from the old BCs models on 50x50 bases would look too sparse (see above image), and even with adding in lots of extra scenery and basing around them they’re almost too far apart. I think 50x50 isn’t the right choice in this case, but hat’s my own opinion I realize. Other scratch built ones or from other vendors may fill out the sapce better and look OK. I really wanted the 50x50 bases to work because then I could use my old cavalry movement trays… but they won’t accommodate many combinations of 40x40.

So in my case I think I’ve settled on going with 40x40, just based on looks. They’re nicely separated, but not so far apart that they look oddly small and unable to fill out their base. The 40x40 base still gives a little more room for more interesting basing and such… and at least in my case the units would be compatible with all of my 40x40 unit fillers I’ve made for my CD Warrior units ;) Then again, I give it more thgouht and lean more toward the 50x50 again just because I can do so much more with the bases and it would allow for more interesting conversions. The Warriors of Chaos Lords on daemonic mounts all go on 50x50 bases and they’re all pretty epic (below). While the models could look like they’re on these huge bases the bases usually have other things going on with each of them that they aren’t boring. Then again, there isn’t an entire unit of them that you have to fill out :wink:



Good gravy! Hopefully this gives you all some food for thought. Feel free to disagree, or add you own thoughts here. Please save comments like “well this was a waste of time, we all new this”, etc. for a PM and just send it to me directly… I’m more likely to read it ;) :P

~N

follow-up

Added Ogre Kingdom Sabretusks (were already covered in SoM)

Added Chaos Dwarfs, both RH era and FW/WF

follow-up #2

clarified the difference between the Sabretusk unit type in SoM and OK (as they differ).

2

Thommy H:

Yeah, 40x40 makes the most sense - but make no mistake, GW’s decision on which base to use on their own figures is motivated purely by aesthetics.

3

lostmember:

40x40 is best. But, like Thommy says, it really is about the look of the whole thing between 50x50 and 40x40…mine are on 50x50 due to them being massive.

4

RTMaitreya:

BRILLIANTLY DONE!

I love this review. 40x40 it is. An important note that was not put into the discussion on other monstrous beasts was whether or not they were supposed to be for mounts for characters (in which case they have been moved or modified to fit with the most common units they would go into) as opposed to mounts/beasts that are in units vs. all on their own (in which case all decisions trended towards what fit the model). With this reasoning, it’s clear that 40x40 is the right choice, as some of the 50x50 options in your list were pretty clearly made just to give characters a nice fit into armies that are almost exclusively 25x25 or 25x50 units.

I used to haunt Bret, WoC, and O&G sites where these issues are much much more important. The move for royal pegasi vs. regular pegasi for Brets tied a whole lot of underpants in a bunch, and was eventually agreed that either 40x40 or 50x50 was acceptable, and even made it into a mainstream (unofficial but tourney recognized) FAQ.

5

Caine:

Realy nice read. Thumbs up :smiley:

Im still waiting for FW to release my ponys since i whant a all resin army :smiley:

6

the_Forge_Lord:

Excellent work! I have been wondering about the new base size as 50mm seems very big for the old models, 40 mm would be my preference, but its a bit of a coin toss as to whatever ends up ‘official’. For now and for me, I will put them on the 40mm.

7

aka_mythos:

I voted 40x40 but in a world of infinite possibilities, I think 40x50.

On a side note GW really needs to do more with that 40x60 base as far as I can tell Skarsnik & Gobbla are the only one to use it.

8

Time of Madness:

With only 2 attacks the only base my centaurs (if I buy them) will be on is my showcase shelf.

Time of Madness

9

Grimbold Blackhammer:

Excellent post Nicodemus! Have some slaves!!

And for the record, I voted 40x40 =)

Grimbold Blackhammer

10

macbeth:

I agree on the 40x40 base. They do need to be on bigger bases now, but they would look silly on 50x50 ones…

11

Grimstonefire:

The models would be in proportion to their base, so it’s not a question of ‘looking small’.

I voted for 40mm, though I was told 50mm.

Imo they’re fairly decent, but personally I would have given them a 4+ scaly skin to compensate a bit for 2A.

12

Nicodemus:

With only 2 attacks the only base my centaurs (if I buy them) will be on is my showcase shelf.
Time of Madness

Time of Madness
Base size = shelf... awesome ToM~!! x.x
13

Pyro Stick:

So are we still “allowed” to use 25x50 bases? If not im going to have to rebase a few models. TBH i would prefer to have them on 40x40 anyway. I dont think that would look too bad. 50x50 is just a bit too big for the older models.

14

cornixt:

Imo they're fairly decent, but personally I would have given them a 4+ scaly skin to compensate a bit for 2A.

Grimstonefire
5+ scaly skin, plus heavy armour, plus T5, plus 3 wounds, plus shield option...
15

Hashut’s Blessing:

The rulebook states to use them on the bases the models come with - most people, RAW, should have 25x50. i fthey make their own: whatever they want :wink:

40 by 40 is the most aesthetically pleasing out of the large bases though and that, ultimately, is the decider. The rules benefits are negligible (smaller bases means more models hit by templates, even if less enemies in contact with you).

16

Nicodemus:

The rulebook states to use them on the bases the models come with - most people, RAW, should have 25x50.

Hashut's Blessing
Yes, this is true, although there are other instances where models of a bygone era came with cavalry bases but were later changed to something else.  Best examples of this are the Bretonnian pegasus and mounted Fey Enchantress, both of which used to be sold with 25x50 bases but are now sold with 50x50 bases.  Although searching through other forums some folks still open otherwise ''new" boxes from retailers that still have those old cav bases in them and then get all messed up ;)

I chose 40x40 in the poll.... Sure 50x50 looks big, but those Bretonnian mounts as well as the WoC daemonic mounts are on 50x50 bases and helps them rank up nicely with other cavalry-type units.  If I could convince myself that I could make enough unique and interesting scenes on each of the BC bases I just might do it... only problem is that one has to fill lots of space. If the BCs are not going to be awesome in game play then I'll be unlikely to field them very often and then it's just going to feel like a lot of wasted effort to spend so much time on their big 50x50 bases.

follow-up To flip the above argument around, maybe spending the time to make interesting 40x40 bases could be time well spent! Even if I'm unlikely to use BCs in many of my games, they would make excellent unit fillers, so for every BC I stick in I'm expanding my IG by 4 models ;) Now I'm saving money!! :hat off  x.x
17

Thommy H:

although there are other instances where models of a bygone era came with cavalry bases but were later changed to something else.
Yeah, but there aren't any new Bull Centaur models yet, so "the base the model is supplied with" is still, technically, a cavalry base.
18

Nicodemus:

although there are other instances where models of a bygone era came with cavalry bases but were later changed to something else.
Yeah, but there aren't any new Bull Centaur models yet, so "the base the model is supplied with" is still, technically, a cavalry base.


Thommy H
Yeah, that's all well and good, but it doesn't always apply.  To say nothing of the fact that Bull Centaurs are from several editions ago and are now classed as a different creature type to boot.  I don't think using "the base the model is supplied with" was intended to apply to all cases as a rigid rule, seems more of a guide. Especially given that GW works its way around this very 'rule'.  Unicorns are sold with a 25x50 base, but I think only the basic unicorn type in SoM would ever use that now... Wood Elves, Bretonnia and the SoM Royal Unicorns all go on 50x50 bases, which are not sold with the model as far as I've ever seen.

If we stuck to that as a hard rule and FW doesn't release any new models would we all just claim that BCs are supposed to go on 25x50 bases?  Seems silly to do that given that FW have indicated 25x50 was not their intention and all but one of the current GW models use bases larger than 25x50.

~N

edit @Thommy H I should haasten to add though, I agree with you! 25x50 is still technically valid as we have not seen a single piece of hard evidence that Bull Centaurs go on anything else yet. Oh, woe is Bull Centaur basing!
19

Abecedar:

all good arguments for either side of the fence, but I think the best one is that all the models we already have, have to not look dinky on a too big base. 40 x 40 gets my vote.

20

rabotak:

after having read and reflected all the arguments, i guess i will go with RAW, so leave them as they are, 25x50- i am not going to rebase them on contradicting info by WF, the rules are clear on this issue, and it’s not like their high point cost would give me an advantage by being able to field more models.

that said, WHEN WF or even GW finally get around to produce new minis, i’d be in the camp for 40x40.