Greetings all I’m Draxius, a newly minted guest poster here on Hogs of War, and you all have the poor luck to be reading my first post in that capacity. So forgive any odd looking choices in layout as I am still learning on how to use this format and hope to get better at it as I go.
I wanted to briefly touch on a subject which a lot of people seem to have an opinion about. So called “Counts-As” Armies. This is where models from either different armies or production companies other than the original producer are incorporated in a manner as depicted in the army book or codex. The other use is when using one army as another army.
I would like to touch upon the first in this post (making the title somewhat of a misnomer). For instance; I myself am working on building up an Imperial Guard army but have found numerous models and such that do fit my army theme and such. For instance I obtained models from the now discontinued game AT-43, Red Blok. Amongst these are the ones depicted below.
IG Sentinel/Hellhound?
I figured a suitable solution might be to actually add a base that is the same size as the Hellhound template; this does not solve the height difference. Height in my eyes is a smaller problem as its benefits are evened out with the drawback. Sure you might not be able to shoot at my model, but I cannot fire at you either.
IG Basilisk / Leman Russ?
As I am not a tournament player I am not sure what the stance is on using other models in your army but as far as I know GW Sanctioned tournaments require the army to be comprised of GW models only.
There are a lot of miniature companies out there that make fantastic models, is it wrong for wanting to use these? Especially now, with prices rising, there are some alternatives which are plain cheaper.
So I would like to ask what it is that you think on this matter. Are you for or against “Counts-As” Armies and/or Units? And regardless of the answer, why?
Related posts:
- Now What? Top Tier Armies in 40k The state of the game continues to evolve. Another codex and another marine army has checked into the fray. This time with new abilities, crazy...
- Counts-As, Proxies, Conversions and More! Where To Draw The Line? With the release of the Grey Knights I am sure more and more of you are seeing Blue, Red, Green, Grey, and plastic Grey Knight...
- TauTauTau- Armies First Tourny Yes, it is going to be a proud day. My Forgeworld Tau will finially make an appearence on the table at Meta Gaming in Springfield...
Neither and both:)
There seems to be many definitions on “count-as”, but my opinion is quite simple. If you start with a codex, and then build an army that you feel are best represented by said codex, I think that is cool. Using alternative models, completely different ones (the Kabal of the forsaken is epically awesome!), or maybe trying to get around the horror that is C:CSM. Most often these armies look unique and fantastic. If you use the codex to gain flavor it is good times. It wides the hobby and makes it better.
If you just want to win through “using the best codex” I think you should start playing poker or chess.
Cool that some of the old AT-43 minis are getting some use. Never tried it out.
There is a difference between Counts-as and proxying. What you are suggesting is more along the lines of a proxy model; a counts-as model would be like using a tactical marine as Sicarius. They mean close to the same thing, which is where most people would get confused.
Counts-as is generally more accepted than Proxying, because at least you can remember that that Avatar of Khaine over there is actually a Daemon prince… And why is that Dr. Pepper bottle on the tabl– oh wait, that’s a Carnifex, right? No? Its a Doom of Malan’tai? No? Well then, What is it?
As for the AT-43 minis, I’m not exactly sure how large they are, but perhaps they would run better as, say, Obliterators or Dreadnoughts? Or if you are dead-set on using them as what you said you are, I would mount them on bases as large as the one its supposed to be on or the GW model itself, and terrain and pose it up so that it looks pretty and is the correct height.
Hope that gave you some ideas,
–Bladebaka
The body size is about similar to a Sentinel, the legs are much shorter. They are on a smaller base as well, the reason I suggested Sentinel/Hellhound is because I acquired them for my Imperial Guard (Squat) Army.
So it is indeed more for flavoring and such than it is to build a perfect army. I agree that the example of resizing a base to match the original is almost certainly a must for tanks and such or other models without a defined base.
I still think there is a difference between using an alternate model (regardless of manufacturer) opposed to using non-models to represent models you wish you had. Like Kitbashing taken a step further in a way.
As for giving me ideas, I do have lots
But there was an underlying interest to see the opinion of multiple people on this matter.
Cheers for the replies.
I would personally be fine with it, but there are some – Shall we say, Pedro Kantors? – out there that will just beat your face in for trying. So long as your regular crew are fine with it, I shouldn’t think it would be too much of a problem.
As for the definition of Counts-as versus proxy, that was how it was explained to me, so I went with it
cheers,
–Bladebaka