And because I didn't get to give my two (polite) cents on the new bases question, if no one objects, I'd like to do that here: The main advantage of smaller bases for Broadsides is being able to fit the unit in a smaller space. This can allow them to clump up tighter to more easily all draw clear LOS through a gap between terrain features. It can also allow them to fit the whole unit deeper into a corner of the table or closer to the edge to increase the distance needed for an assault unit to reach them. And it can allow more models to fit into a small restricted area like on top of a ruin, a Bastion, or inside an Aegis’ perimeter where they’re castling up with one or more other units. With assault units larger bases are usually more advantageous, as they allow the unit to have a larger footprint, covering more ground and threatening more of the table. There can be other situations where larger bases are advantageous, but not as many. Generally speaking, even if there are offsetting advantages and disadvantages, it’s going to look bad whenever a player gains an advantage from a nonstandard base, and will usually make the opponent wonder (at least a little niggling feeling in the back of their mind) whether it’s being intentionally abused.-------------In fairness, I do think the intent of the basing rules in the rulebook is supposed to be to make it easier on people with old models, allowing them to use their old guys with the bases they came with. That being said, I also think it’s legitimate in a competitive setting to set some limits on that and require folks to update eventually, to help keep the playing field level and the game more consistent. It’s similar to Modeling for Advantage. Technically the rules don’t prevent you from converting models in ways that grant game advantages; like making a custom Battlewagon that’s got a much wider front arc and narrower side arcs. A lot of Ork players have old conversions and scratchbuilds which predate the current official BW kit. And that issue came up pretty regularly in tournaments in 5th edition, where the much different arcs on a custom model made it harder to get side shots at that weaker armor. For a consistent play experience, many events (particularly big ones like NOVA and Adepticon) started ruling that a custom model would be treated as / replaced with the current official model in situations where it garnered a tangible game advantage, at the opponent’s request. I think the base situation is much the same. GW doesn’t want to forbid you from using an old model; but in fairness to opponents and for consistency in events, organizers of tournaments require a bit higher level of consistency. And sportsmanlike players who think about the issue generally go ahead and update without having to be told. I had a very similar issue come up a few years ago with my square-based Lesser Daemons in my CSM army. A lot of players maintain that either squares or rounds are allowable, as the kit comes with both, and they want to be able to use the models for either 40k or WHFB. This is the reasoning I used when I originally based mine. It wasn’t until years later that I started noticing tangible, mathematically-verifiable advantages to using the squares in 40k, and finally rebased them all when I saw it occasionally having an impact in games. To this day I still get a fair amount of pushback when I advocate for daemons always being on round bases if people want to use them for 40k, and AFAICT TOs who will require rounds are as rare as hen’s teeth. But I still re-based, because I realized I was gaining an advantage there, even without meaning to, and it was better for the game for me to re-base.
