| Cacique Caribe | 11 Aug 2009 11:02 p.m. PST |
These bases: link
link Most importantly . . . why? What are the advantages and/or disadvantages? Thanks. CC |
| Cacique Caribe | 11 Aug 2009 11:15 p.m. PST |
Kyoteblue, any particular reason? Well . . . here's another one: link CC |
| Cacique Caribe | 11 Aug 2009 11:30 p.m. PST |
"Can be retro fitted with magnetic sheets" Hmm. Didn't know that. Thanks! Is that so that individual figures can be removed from the base? CC |
| Cacique Caribe | 12 Aug 2009 12:00 a.m. PST |
But . . . are they easy to get? CC |
| ZeroGee2 | 12 Aug 2009 12:05 a.m. PST |
"But . . . are they easy to get?" Inasmuch as a LOT of independent game shops stock FoW stuff, yet, they are relatively easy to get…..
I use a lot of them. Jon (GZG) |
| Eli Arndt | 12 Aug 2009 1:33 a.m. PST |
|
| Jay Arnold | 12 Aug 2009 1:41 a.m. PST |
Haven't decided yet. For my 15mm Ogre project, I want to be able to remove figures to show reduction in effectiveness for the platoon. Probably do FoW base shaped magnets while the dudes are on small washers (1/2" or smaller). |
| Porthos | 12 Aug 2009 1:43 a.m. PST |
I do not use FOW bases for my FOW armies – for transport reasons I need magnetic bases, so buy them from Litko. The original FOW bases are therefore used (up till now) for the Khurasan Getinmahbeli and the Lizards. Although I am not Army, I still have the urge never to throw anything away… |
| Two Owl Bob | 12 Aug 2009 1:57 a.m. PST |
I hate the FoW bases due to the chamfer which makes them impossible to pick up by the base. I much prefer Peter Pig's 3cm square bases – I'm far too lazy to cut my own from cardboard and plasticard is not available around here (I've been looking for years). |
| Jay Arnold | 12 Aug 2009 3:42 a.m. PST |
hate the FoW bases due to the chamfer which makes them impossible to pick up by the base. A buddy and I were play testing some rules, I had the figures based on the FoW bases, but the bevel was down. "Why are the bases upside down?" he asked. "Pick that up," I said,tossing an empty base right side up on the table. After two or three failed attempts, he said "Oh. I get it now." |
| jizbrand | 12 Aug 2009 5:58 a.m. PST |
Wargames Accessories do metal bases in the same sizes as the FOW bases and are specifically listed for FOW (stock codes FOW 1, 2, and 3). I use those simply because I like the fact that each base is half the size of the next larger base so, when placed on magnetic sheeting, they rack up nicely and save on storage space. I use them for my AK47-like stuff, 15mm SF, 3mm WWII, in fact, pretty much everything except FOW :) |
 JammerMan  | 12 Aug 2009 7:30 a.m. PST |
limited use of FOW bases for 15mm SF |
aecurtis  | 12 Aug 2009 8:12 a.m. PST |
FoW-sized bases, for FoW: Wargames Accessories: proper, manly bases; and convenient, as John says. Litko: ferrous sheet under the wood; makes bases easy to pick up, and convenient to store. Minor pedestal effect. Battlefront: useless tat; accumulates in large Rubbermaid containers unless painting a unit to sell to the suckas… er, fanboyz.
FoW sized bases, for other than FoW:
Ahhhh… no, thanks. Allen |
| KJdidit | 12 Aug 2009 9:08 a.m. PST |
I use them for both 6mm and 15mm; they're cheap and easy to find. |
| Dave Gamer | 12 Aug 2009 10:03 a.m. PST |
I hate the FoW bases due to the chamfer which makes them impossible to pick up by the base True dat. I've seen some people use the bases "upside down" so that the base sides angle in on the bottom. That way you can get you fingertips (or fingernails) under the base. |
| Dave Gamer | 12 Aug 2009 10:04 a.m. PST |
Oop! Missed Jay Arnold's message when I posted mine. Oh well… |
| Dropship Horizon | 12 Aug 2009 10:25 a.m. PST |
my older minis are based to FOW, but newer ones are on 30mm round bases and I have no problem using one type against the other, cause I really don't care about 'corners' and such like in a Sci Fi game. The advantage of an FOW style base is that you have room to place 4 figures in a tactical formation or give them some separation. The FOW base also reminds me of a NATO unit map symbol, so it makes it easier for me to think of the base as a platoon or company of men if the level of the game being played demands it. The chamfered edge to the base is a good surface for indicating unit and function if necessary. Biggest downside is it's sooooo Napoleonic. Gamers are encouraged to line up the bases, edge to edge. and that's what ACW wargaming is for. Cheers
Mark |
| Cacique Caribe | 12 Aug 2009 10:30 a.m. PST |
Jay Arnold: "I had the figures based on the FoW bases, but the bevel was down." Have you posted any photos of what that looks like? Thanks. CC |
| spasSGII | 12 Aug 2009 11:59 a.m. PST |
I use the FOW bases. I usually mount 3 figs per base for heavy troops and 4 per base for light troops. You can view them on my blog. minfigs.blogspot.com Cheers Mat |
| sunderland | 12 Aug 2009 5:13 p.m. PST |
I used the Litko 3mm bases with magnetic sheets for my FoW stuff, and they're pretty easy to pick up now, and as mentioned previously, pretty easy to store.
I really don't like the look of single based 15's, either, which is probably the main reason to use them in non-FoW games. You can basically put a half-squad on a medium base. |
| Lion in the Stars | 13 Aug 2009 7:31 a.m. PST |
Mixed bag. I play FoW, so I use a lot of bases there, but most of my Ambush Alley/FoF stuff is based on Pennies. I like putting weapons teams on FoW bases, though. Mortars and tripod MGs just look better in a small diorama. |
