by Mob of Blondes » September 3rd, 2014, 1:29 am
by Section9 » September 3rd, 2014, 3:06 am
by Mob of Blondes » September 3rd, 2014, 5:05 am
by Errhile » September 3rd, 2014, 5:11 am
by Hero of Man » September 3rd, 2014, 8:23 am
by Errhile » September 3rd, 2014, 8:32 am
Hero of Man wrote:Bikes are on the same bases as the average TAG now, so I'd figure they were the same silhouette as them.
by Manit0u » September 3rd, 2014, 9:04 am
by CoveredInFish » September 3rd, 2014, 4:15 pm
by Errhile » September 3rd, 2014, 6:47 pm
by macfergusson » September 3rd, 2014, 6:51 pm
by Mob of Blondes » September 4th, 2014, 1:00 am
by Lone_Pathfinder » September 4th, 2014, 1:13 am
by Harlekin » September 4th, 2014, 2:11 am
Manit0u wrote:That's something Warmahordes had since forever and I was actually using it in all the systems ever since I saw it. You could go crazy on conversions without worrying that your dude won't find cover just because he has certain "extensions".
by Arachas » September 4th, 2014, 9:43 am
Lone_Pathfinder wrote:LoF, if still from centre of base to edge, then one model cannot be in cover for S2 models because >50% needs to be in cover.
by Errhile » September 4th, 2014, 10:50 am
by Scorch » September 4th, 2014, 12:25 pm
Errhile wrote:
On a side note - I like a lot the lines on these silhouettes that apparently mark "if that much of me is out of sight due to the obstacle I'm in contact with, I'm in cover".
by Errhile » September 4th, 2014, 12:41 pm
by Scorch » September 4th, 2014, 1:31 pm
by Errhile » September 4th, 2014, 2:13 pm
by Scorch » September 4th, 2014, 2:14 pm
Errhile wrote:And generally it isn't unlike what you said IRL. But the Infinity method makes it all more simple...
by Harlekin » September 4th, 2014, 2:29 pm
Errhile wrote:Doesn't affect the requirement of being both in base-to-base with the obstacle, and being obscured by it, really. Just makes it easier to check.
by IJW Wartrader » September 4th, 2014, 5:29 pm
Harlekin wrote:You didn't have to worry up to now, as the "replace with a model with normal pose" thing already is in the FAQs since the very beginning of said FAQs.
by Hordshyrd » September 4th, 2014, 7:31 pm
by Hero of Man » September 5th, 2014, 12:54 am
Errhile wrote:Hero of Man wrote:Bikes are on the same bases as the average TAG now, so I'd figure they were the same silhouette as them.
You haven't noticed that average "advanced" REM are on the same sized bases too...?
I'd bet on bikes being S4, i.e. 55mm base, ~30mm tall (which would be a lil' bit lower than 36mm tall S2 for regular human models).
by Harlekin » September 5th, 2014, 7:34 am
IJW Wartrader wrote:Harlekin wrote:You didn't have to worry up to now, as the "replace with a model with normal pose" thing already is in the FAQs since the very beginning of said FAQs.
You might want to go and re-read that FAQ, it's nowhere near as wide in application as that.
by Section9 » September 6th, 2014, 4:10 am
Scorch wrote:Section9 wrote:
Wonder what the Mag Guard is going to end up with.
IJW showed something off in this thread. It looks like it will fit on a 55mm base, where the tail-section will become as high as a TAG. (Yes, please.. I'll have one of those.)
by Scorch » September 6th, 2014, 1:07 pm
Section9 wrote:Scorch wrote:Section9 wrote:
Wonder what the Mag Guard is going to end up with.
IJW showed something off in this thread. It looks like it will fit on a 55mm base, where the tail-section will become as high as a TAG. (Yes, please.. I'll have one of those.)
That's HIGHLY cool! So cool I might actually buy more than one, in fact.
by Mob of Blondes » September 7th, 2014, 3:21 am
by IJW Wartrader » September 7th, 2014, 11:44 am
Harlekin wrote:Well, yes. The FAQs only include the crouching model pose.
But as you might remember, you also were/are a promoter of the "replace with normal model" handling of such situations AND stuff like quantum climb and others also aren't included in the FAQs.
Harlekin wrote:The easiest solution for "your" LOF problems would so have been: add the "replace with normal model" thing to the rules. Case closed.
Harlekin wrote:And what we got was a possible can of worms which doesn't address the real problem (of people sometimes being dicks).