Another thing I've done for medium ship bases that have loose ID token slots is paint thin layers of brush-on gloss varnish, testing for fit between each later. It works great, and wild probably help with pegs, too.

I only worry because sometimes pegs are loose because the hole gets cracks, so making the peg thicker with bags or varnish may help in the short term to create a snug fit, but might ultimately break the plastic piece that has the hole.

Okay, forget the link I posted earlier. they won't work with the new way the bases are >_>

Just opened a conversion kit.

Had same issue for the 1.0 Raider and C-Roc. Basically the holes in the cardboard doesn't tie up with the pegs.

Note the C-ROC uses the closer distance and the Raider the further ones. So both sizes seems to have issues.

After forcing it in both cut-out holes now looks like this:

And just in case you want to work with older stuff.

There is quite a big size difference between the V1.0 and V2.0 C-ROC base in terms of length.

That being said... the new base is much more stable than the 2 separate bases as used in V1.0.

And the move template really does fit very nice for the bank move.

9 minutes ago, Bort said:

Was that indentation there when you opened the package or is it from trying to fit the base?

Just now, Hiemfire said:

Was that indentation there when you opened the package or is it from trying to fit the base?

Nope. This is from me forcing the pegs into place.

4 hours ago, Darth Meanie said:

This is one reason all my 1.0 ships have never been disassembled once I got a good fit the first time. They all live in shoeboxes, assembled and ready to go.

This thread is kinda bumming me about needing new bases.

Has anyone tried using the 2.0 movement template with a 1.0 base?? Is it impossible, or is there a fudge factor that would be fine for uber-casual play?

Unfortunately, the redesign is significant and the new movement tool is engineered to work directly with the new base design.

The movement range is different, and the hook and base interface is changed. It's much better than 1.0, but it does make the 2 versions non-interchangeable.

Edit; OTOH, if its "uber casual" I suppose you could just make your own house rules for how the maneuver template works...

It would be more loose play, but could be done.

Raider base.

Independently done by my friend, while I was playing around with the C-ROC base. Same bulging happened on both ends as well.

Basically what happens is the holes are slightly too close to each other. So when you insert the pegs, and push them into place it actually damages the cardboard.

1 minute ago, Bort said:

Raider base.

Independently done by my friend, while I was playing around with the C-ROC base. Same bulging happened on both ends as well.

Basically what happens is the holes are slightly too close to each other. So when you insert the pegs, and push them into place it actually damages the cardboard.

Yup. ^^THIS

I ended up taking a blade to one of the holes and opening it up a bit.

* EDIT. Deleted.

* I thought the range ruler was misaligned too, but held it against a R3 and R2 placed end to end and was same length. So all good here.

49 minutes ago, Kehl_Aecea said:

I ended up taking a blade to one of the holes and opening it up a bit.

So. . .primitive.

2 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

So. . .primitive.

At least he didn't use a blaster, because that would be so uncivilized.

Hearing all this is really sapping my excitement for the huge ship conversion

6 minutes ago, ScummyRebel said:

Hearing all this is really sapping my excitement for the huge ship conversion

It's a minor inconvenience. The bases are still a huge improvement and hold together well.

26 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

So. . .primitive.

🤨 You'd rather the entire base insert be charred to vapor? That's what a light saber would do. A small vibro blade is plenty for applications where the intense heat of your over glorified plasma clubs is not required. 😆

26 minutes ago, Parakitor said:

At least he didn't use a blaster, because that would be so uncivilized.

🤨 🤣 🤣 😝

1 hour ago, ScummyRebel said:

Hearing all this is really sapping my excitement for the huge ship conversion

1 hour ago, Tervlon said:

It's a minor inconvenience. The bases are still a huge improvement and hold together well.

So true! Once you break that cardboard in, you won't even notice. Literally - the pegs themselves cover up any damage that may occur when trying to fit them in the first couple of times. Don't let this get you down.

I can't believe it's finally here!

2 hours ago, Parakitor said:

So true! Once you break that cardboard in, you won't even notice. Literally - the pegs themselves cover up any damage that may occur when trying to fit them in the first couple of times. Don't let this get you down.

I can't believe it's finally here!

Yes, absolutely this^^.

Dont let it stop your Epic enthusiasm for Epic! It's all part of that silly "charm" that makes FFG FFG. 🤪

The game is still awesome, the improvements are great, and its very fun to play Epic now.

Just be careful - the tension from the slightly misaligned base/cardboard assisted my C-ROC's female peg connector to snap off while I was carefully removing the peg, so I'll be trying the needle trick to pull out the broken piece and reattach it.

7 hours ago, Tervlon said:

It's a minor inconvenience. The bases are still a huge improvement and hold together well.

Your definition of "minor" and mine vary. I will grant this isn't a critical fail and a reason to avoid the kit completely, but the fact they screwed up that badly on Quality Control is seriously annoying. We shouldn't have to modify their parts to get stuff to fit. One either has to risk a worrying amount of force to press fit them or modify them with a sharp knife.

5 hours ago, Wolfshead said:

Your definition of "minor" and mine vary. I will grant this isn't a critical fail and a reason to avoid the kit completely, but the fact they screwed up that badly on Quality Control is seriously annoying. We shouldn't have to modify their parts to get stuff to fit. One either has to risk a worrying amount of force to press fit them or modify them with a sharp knife.

Or in my case, having the model fall off the pegs with a slight breeze!

16 hours ago, ScummyRebel said:

Hearing all this is really sapping my excitement for the huge ship conversion

16 hours ago, Tervlon said:

It's a minor inconvenience. The bases are still a huge improvement and hold together well.

12 hours ago, Echoseven said:

Dont let it stop your Epic enthusiasm for Epic! It's all part of that silly "charm" that makes FFG FFG. 🤪

The game is still awesome, the improvements are great, and its very fun to play Epic now.

All of these things for me.

I ordered 2 kits, and now kinda wish I'd only gotten one.

I had also figured that the 2 stands were one "Corvette Size" and one "Transport Size." But I guess all Huge ships now have the same footprint, then?

32 minutes ago, Darth Meanie said:

But I guess all Huge ships now have the same footprint, then?

Looks like. There's two sets of peg holes. The outer ones are for ships like the CR-90, while I'd imagine the inner ones are for smaller Huge ships.

I'm super sad about this. Neither my 1.0 Gozanti or CR90 fit the 2.0 epic bases...

I just got a huge ship conversion kit last week but haven't tried fitting the new bases to my 1.0 GR-75 or CR-90 yet. Now I'm worried... For those who had severe issues, has anyone tried reaching out to FFG customer support about this, and if so, what did they say?