Measure Model to Model,Or Base to Base?

[Threejacks]

OK,gonna bring this up again as im a huge fan of Model to Model.

 

RAR measuring is to be model to model,however many don't like this or believe that "modeling for advantage" will become an issue.

 

Ive played dozens of games now with my Son using Model to Model and it has grown on both of us.We do make one modification to the rule though,that is that models that are in base contact are always to be considered to be within 1" range,,so no base stacking allowed or needed,ever.

 

Having models with various poses including outstretched weapon arms,swords at the side or running with weapons stowed all makes for additional tactics in positioning for a charge,you actually want the front rank guys to be the ones that have their weapons stowed or held close to hit first so the outstretched weapons can go in between them.Weapon ranges can affect this of course.Also this can be a hinderence if further units are brought into the combat on a flank and you want to move to engage them,,which you cant do because the closest model is not the one 2" from your base but the one that has your spear tip stuck up their nose.

 

Certainly it goes both ways,a large dragon can make a charge measuring from its left wing tip to the enemy,but its other wing that stretches several inches from its base could pull in an enemy unit 6" away(from its base).I love this as large models are in fact Large!,,yes they are hard to maneuver on the field as they should be,not just a "somewhat' larger rectangle base.Also raised weapons that otherwise would have to close with the beasts base to get into range can be allowed to attack from several inches out by reaching to a wing tip or outstretched limb.

 

Its NOT as fiddly as people make it out to be,actually its very easy to get used to.Also its more realistic if that's your thing.Just remember that no part of the model can move further than its movement allowance,so no spinning the model to face a new direction unless you've measured from the part furthest back(which Im in the habit of doing for pile in)

 

Some would say that there is no reason to not make all your models with their weapon arms sticking straight out in front of them,and im fine with that as it goes both ways.I don't see any modeling for advantage in this game.

[Guest]

I like model-to-model. Solves issues with conversions, outdated models and so forth. I do think models should require bases, even if only for ease of movement and making them look pretty.

[Malakithe]

Isn't the actual rules model to model anyway? I've seen it used in battle reports on youtube. I did see where a guy measure off some super stretched out vine whips but other then not a huge problem

[Guest]

Isn't the actual rules model to model anyway? I've seen it used in battle reports on youtube. I did see where a guy measure off some super stretched out vine whips but other then not a huge problem

It is, but all things GW are in flux if the players want it a certain way. They've never been very good at make a ruleset that people follow.

[Malakithe]

Haha true

[Gorgosaurusrex]

I prefer base-to-base. The first few games of AoS I played used model-to-model and I didn't like it much as almost all of my Fantasy stuff is old models that (in some cases) are half the size of their modern counterparts. Measuring from base-to-base makes the game smoother and easier in my opinion.

[Steel Angel]

The rule is model to model ,BUT also that you can stack you models on anther persons base. With some players that's just not kewl cause they spend a lot of time on bases to get messed up stacking models on.