Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

while i despise dropper bottles as much as some people hate flip-tops, GW's current standard flip-tops are horrible to use, and make the paints dry out way too fast...

i still have original Citadel paints in this style pot that are 25 years old, and are still as good as the day I bought them...
i don't have a single GW paint in any of the three subsequent style pots that is still good...

i love P3 in these style pots, and they don't dry out on me within the year like GW's do...
i have ten year old P3 pots that are still as good as new...
seeing Forge World coming out with 30K specific colors in these pots makes me happy, and i look forward to getting my hands on some to try out...

for me, individual price per pot is not as important as the fact that these will stay good for many years to come...
the fact that they are unique colors that i will enjoy using is awesome!!!
let's paint some 30K!!!
can you tell that this new line of paints has me excited???

cheers
jah

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:
Wait, did this really just happen?

 Peregrine wrote:
I don't really see any difference between brands.

 Peregrine wrote:
But they usually aren't equal.

You took that out of context. The first quote is talking about the price being equal, or at least close enough that the difference is too small to be worth caring about when considered in the context of an overall hobby budget. The second quote is talking about the product being equal. The combination of the two quotes is that colors/opacity/etc are not the same, and IMO those factors are far more important than the relatively small differences in price.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Are you literally trying to argue that people's personal decision on whether an item is worth their money or not is wrong?

No, you're just too eager to find an excuse for a "Peregrine argues too much" post. The point was not that brand X or brand Y is superior and everyone should buy it, it's that there's a difference between practical cost issues (I can't afford X) and moral outrage issues (brand X is too greedy). What I was asking is if the people complaining about the cost of the new paints had any practical budget issues with them, or if it's just another "GW is too greedy and needs to lower their prices" thing. And it seems like most of the criticism seems to be in the second category.

And why does that matter? People have declared they're too expensive, and the only reason you seem interested in those reasons is so you can tell them they're wrong.

 Azreal13 wrote:
And why does that matter? People have declared they're too expensive, and the only reason you seem interested in those reasons is so you can tell them they're wrong.

Why does it matter why I care? Do you have any legitimate interest in my motivations, or are you just looking for an opportunity to complain about how much I argue?

I don't need to look for an opportunity, I just need you to be posting.

It matters why you care because it certainly seems your motivation is purely to pick other peoples opinions apart without contributing anything in return, and, assuming that's the case, and there's 14750 pieces of evidence at time of writing that largely support that hypothesis, people need to be aware of this so they don't indulge you.

In the world of miniature paints a few cents of dollars doesn't matter.

I rather have a more expensive paint that is the exact color and consistency I'm looking for then spend a dollar less for a crappier paint. Saying that there are colors and paints from several ranges that are good. I love the gw technical and metallic paints. Vallejo metallic are just not as good. I love Vallejo yellow paint for a better richer coat then gw. If you haven't notice the best painters use several paint brands because they find the color and consistency they prefer. While gw are a few cents more no one has ever said they are bad paints. They are very good quality. The fact fw comes out with a new line of air brush paints has no barring on you if you don't want to buy it. Continue buying whatever junk you have before. I am see plenty of people will be testing and trying out fw airbrush paints.

Let's act out a scenario.

"I'm two users and I'm going to try and drag a thread off topic by arguing about which user argues more"

SLAM

"cricket noise (because you won't be posting)"

Stop it and stay on topic

How many pots will you need to airbrush with?

 spudkins wrote:
Hey everyone, Hope to find out what you guys think on the new Forgeworld paints?
Here is my opinion:

My opinion about the new FW Paints:

FW makes paints?

MB


Automatically Appended Next Post:
OK...

Further thoughts:

They seem to be made for airbrush, meaning that I will not likely be using them (since I no longer have an airbrush, for one), since I do not do much large model painting, and mostly work with 15mm and 28mm infantry figures (for which an airbrush is overkill, at best).

BUT...

Since I am currently in the market for new paints (pending discovery of whether I am going to be living long enough to actually use new paints), I will likely get a few pots of neutral colors to use (since I use many different consistencies of paint for different things - black, white, red, blue, yellow, green, browns, etc...).

One thing, for instance, that I have discovered about Vallejo's "Airbush" paints:

They are fething AWESOME for dry-brushing!!!

I wound up with a bottle of white, blue, and green (in addition to the Black and Red that I bought of the Vallejo Airbrush paints) and just out of curiosity decided to see how well they worked out on dry-brushing the surfaces of some shields to get a slight bit of texture and highlights on them.

And DAYYUMMMM! the result was smooth, and even texture, not grainy at all. If I had put a bit more retarder in the base-color on the shield the result would have been a perfect blended shade on the shields (and, for anyone who recalls my last posts in the "Painting & Modeling" sub-forum, this is exactly what I have been having issues/trouble with creating - or, more precisely "Re-creating," since I used to be able to do this perfectly, every and all the time).

SOOOO. . . .

IFF (spelled correctly) the FW paints happen to allow me to produce such results even easier, then the price will be worth it.

MB


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Hey! Does this thing censor?

I could swear I said something other than "fething."

MB

I got a feeling these are just coat d' arms paints. They make the p3 paints and use the same bottle for everything. p3 is known for working very well in air brushes so I would find in interesting to know if they are the same paints repackaged.

 Lockark wrote:
I got a feeling these are just coat d' arms paints. They make the p3 paints and use the same bottle for everything. p3 is known for working very well in air brushes so I would find in interesting to know if they are the same paints repackaged.

Your feeling is probably accurate.

From around 1985/86 to around 1990-something, MOST of the miniature paints on the market looked very similar, too.

And that was because they were similar. So similar, that they were identical.

Because they were ALL made by the same company: Genesis Gaming Products/Reaper (Genesis, Ral Partha, Armory, and the first Citadel Paints... All made by Genesis).

So... Odds are pretty likely that they are also made by coat d'arms.

I know that there may, or can be, small differences between the different brands, even though they came from the same manufacturers.

Genesis had various mixtures of pigment, medium, binder, and such for their own paints, which were not used in the others, and the other companies could specify their own mixtures, depending upon how much money they wished to pay (for instance The Armory had a line of military paints that they paid a little more for to have better pigments and medium in, so that the paints would flow a bit better than the "normal" paints).

And, it might be the case that even Coat d'Arms is buying from a producer that is the one that everyone else has licensed from as well.

MB

 Lockark wrote:
I got a feeling these are just coat d' arms paints. They make the p3 paints and use the same bottle for everything. p3 is known for working very well in air brushes so I would find in interesting to know if they are the same paints repackaged.

They seem to be very specific shades for the Space Marine legions so I'm pretty sure they're not the same paints repackaged. They might be made by the same company but I think they're definitely new colours.

I really don't mind spending a little extra for the paints I want (it's not like I'm gonna buy them all) for the convenience factor. Before now, to paint SoH going by the FW scheme, you had to mix four paints just to get the base coat. Now there's one paint. I don't like mixing paint, particularly for the basecoats of a whole army, so these seem pretty ideal. I'll probably pick up the Word Bearers ones with my next order and give them a go (probably just with a brush, I doubt I'll have an airbrush by then).

 Lockark wrote:
I got a feeling these are just coat d' arms paints. They make the p3 paints and use the same bottle for everything. p3 is known for working very well in air brushes so I would find in interesting to know if they are the same paints repackaged.

I'm still amazed that people a still saying this. Coat D'arms never made any paints for GW or Privateer Press or have ever made any paint themselves, Coat D'arms, Foundry and maybe P3 paints (not confirmed only suspected but probably true as consistency is similar to Foundry) are made by industrial paint manufacturer HMG in Manchester, England (actually says so on the side of all Coat D'arms paints and Foundry make to bones about it). They also made the old GW range in the 80's and 90's which was taken on by Gladiator Games under the Coat D'arms brand after GW moved supplier, they are now owned by Black Hat Miniatures. AFAIK GW mix their own paints these days and make their own pots, the pots used by FW can be purchased online for pennies, so just because they are the same as other brands doesn't make them the same and they are probably used because of the 20 mil quantity which standard GW pots are too small for. If they are a success I imagine GW will make a larger version of the citadel pot.

Is there any citation for GW making the paints themselves? I've never heard any mention of them having the ability to do so.

Herzlos wrote:
Is there any citation for GW making the paints themselves? I've never heard any mention of them having the ability to do so.

They probably still outsource it. I recall vaguely hearing at one point they were trying to work with Vallejo but it fell through, and that's why Vallejo has the Game Color range which are almost exact matches for the old (years now, back when I played) Citadel range.

Herzlos wrote:
Is there any citation for GW making the paints themselves? I've never heard any mention of them having the ability to do so.

I never said MAKE their own paint I said MIX their own paints, when I was researching different paints I read that when GW moved from the older hexagonal pots in the mid 00's to the newer style plastic pots they took the paints in house, though I could be wrong about that, it was a while ago. Though they do have capacity to just buy in the base paint colours and mix up the colours and then put the paint straight into the bespoke citadel pot, domestic paint shops in the UK will mix up any colour you like, doing it on a industrial scale is the problem but GW have a huge factory they could quite easily do it.

Thank you all for being so civil

 jah-joshua wrote:
while i despise dropper bottles as much as some people hate flip-tops, GW's current standard flip-tops are horrible to use, and make the paints dry out way too fast...

i still have original Citadel paints in this style pot that are 25 years old, and are still as good as the day I bought them...
i don't have a single GW paint in any of the three subsequent style pots that is still good...

i love P3 in these style pots, and they don't dry out on me within the year like GW's do...
i have ten year old P3 pots that are still as good as new...
seeing Forge World coming out with 30K specific colors in these pots makes me happy, and i look forward to getting my hands on some to try out...

for me, individual price per pot is not as important as the fact that these will stay good for many years to come...
the fact that they are unique colors that i will enjoy using is awesome!!!
let's paint some 30K!!!
can you tell that this new line of paints has me excited???

cheers
jah

The solution to the current citadel paint pots is to clean the tops every now and then -- degunk the paint that accumulates on the rim with a sculpting pokey tool.

The positive to the new paint pots is that all the paint that would dry out dries on the outer lip, which leaves the paint in the pot fresh. The negative is that the paint on the outside has to be cleaned off if you want it to stay fresh.

I agree with you that the citadel paints that used to look like the current P3 fliptops were the best format. I love these pots. I too despise dropper bottles for paintbrush painting.

However, for airbrush painting, it's a whole other story. First, I go through way more paint in an airbrush, and second, there is no nice way to transfer a little bit of paint from a pot into an airbrush. You can pour it (tons comes out), or you can use a brush (as much gets stuck in the brush as the airbrush cup), or you can use a pipette (and then you have paint stuck in the pipette, so throw that away, or kill yourself cleaning it). I have no idea why FW made airbrush paints in pots.

On the bright side, the new Forge World paint colors look **fantastic**!

@Talys: there is an even simpler, more elegant, solution to the current Citadel paint pots, which is to not buy them...
that works just fine for me...

cheers
jah

 Peregrine wrote:
you're still paying £50 for the alternative paints, which makes the total investment in GW paints only £50. That's one tank, or two squads

No, it would be one tank plus 50% more paint (I'll come back to paint volume later), but that's assuming you buy an overpriced GW tank. You can buy a whole heap of airfix tanks for that, four squads from Mantic, a whole Fantasy Flight game, any new console game, go to a theme park for the day... Not to mention eat for a week! £50 is not a negligible amount of money, you can do a lot with that.

 Peregrine wrote:
If you're getting a ~2000 point army that £50 is a pretty small percentage of the cost, and if you buy multiple armies it gets even smaller.

This is starting to sound like an appeal to bigger problems. I can compare any amount of spending to a wider "budget" and call it insignificant. For example: all my hobby spending against my annual cost of living. But that is just deflecting attention away from the issue, it does nothing to refute the fact that money can be saved (or is perhaps being wasted) in a specific area. Paint is one such area where you can save money by comparing brands.

 Peregrine wrote:
*We shouldn't automatically grant that assumption because a large part of it is based on other companies selling larger packages. That's relevant for the most common colors in your army that you're going to use a lot of, but much less relevant for detail colors. For example, the two shades of yellow I use to paint hazard stripes are a one-time expense because the amount I use is so tiny. I don't really care if I could theoretically get twice the volume for the same price because I'll probably finish all of my painting projects and find a different hobby before I use up the smaller volume.

Well that just sounds like you being wasteful. Yellow is a primary colour, you could use some of that excess paint to mix all kinds of new colours or triads. Pour it into an empty pot with some other colour that you have too much of: bam! new colour. You could even 'probably' have used the first yellow to make the second (I assume one is just a shade/highlight). Or give/share it with someone else if you aren't going to use it. Saying "I'm going to waste it anyway" doesn't mean you aren't getting better value, it just means you aren't utilizing it.

 Peregrine wrote:
So in that case the other brand is more expensive

No, GW is still more expensive. GW paints are ~£2.50 per pot, Coat d'Arms and Vallejo are ~£180, even though those unscrupulous bastards force an extra 6ml on you!

 Peregrine wrote:
Let's use a really extreme example: I need a cup of water to paint. I can buy a package of plastic cups at the grocery store for $0.99, or I can buy the package next to it for $1.99. That's a huge percentage difference in price, but when I add up the total cost of building and painting my army the difference is negligible. The issue ceases to be one of practical effects on my budget and becomes moral outrage about paying "too much" for something.

Again, this is an appeal to bigger problems. You are trying to argue that the difference in price is negligible (I.e. not worth discussing) by comparing it to a bigger expense: the cost of an entire army. Even though you say yourself that the difference is huge. This is a flawed argument. I could just as easily compare the cost of an army to something like the national debt, and say that it isn't worth discussing. But all I'd really be doing is pulling focus. Someone buying many thousands of cups for business purposes might find the $1 difference in price makes the cost of an army look laughably insignificant. But that doesn't mean the cost of buying an army isn't relevant to some people, and neither is the cost of buying paint.

It might not be relevant to you personally. If you are so rich (or carefree) that you don't consider amounts as small as £50 worth discussing, then congratulations! Feel free to not discuss them. But you can't seriously expect that to be true for everyone. I can entertain the notion that there might be such a thing as a universally insignificant amount of money. It's true that very small amounts can feel worthless when they become impossible to spend. What can you seriously buy with a penny? Might as well drop it in a jar, or throw it in a wishing well etc... (give it to GW). But there is no way £50 falls into that category, you can get all kinds of cool stuff for £50.

I fail to see why this is bad. Why are more choices a bad thing?

One point about getting paint from a pot into an airbrush.

Have none of you people ever used drinking straws?

This is what they taught us to use in art school.

You get a drinking straw, put the end into the paint. Suck a small amount of paint into the straw, and then put your finger over the end, and then remove your finger when over your airbrush container.

The drinking straw is cheap as dirt, easily cleaned (just drop it into a glass of water after it has been used, and it will just need to have the water flicked off when it is next needed.

Once a straw starts to crack, you get a new one.

ALSO, drinking straws allow you to take a marker to measure out specific amounts of paint by drawing a line on the side of the straw.

THAT is how you get the paint out of this kind of pot without a dropper.

MB

 Smacks wrote:
No, it would be one tank plus 50% more paint (I'll come back to paint volume later), but that's assuming you buy an overpriced GW tank. You can buy a whole heap of airfix tanks for that, four squads from Mantic, a whole Fantasy Flight game, any new console game, go to a theme park for the day... Not to mention eat for a week! £50 is not a negligible amount of money, you can do a lot with that.

What's your point? The premise here is that you're buying GW stuff already. If you play board games and occasionally paint a historical kit then obviously you're not the target market.

This is starting to sound like an appeal to bigger problems. I can compare any amount of spending to a wider "budget" and call it insignificant. For example: all my hobby spending against my annual cost of living. But that is just deflecting attention away from the issue, it does nothing to refute the fact that money can be saved (or is perhaps being wasted) in a specific area. Paint is one such area where you can save money by comparing brands.

But the question is how much money can you save, and how much of an impact that really has on your overall financial situation. If I can save 0.000000000000001% of my 40k budget then I don't care. I'm not going to pay any attention at all to that potential savings because it's less significant than the difference in driving expenses between different parking spots at the store, or whether or not I bother to pick up a penny on the ground as I'm walking through the parking lot. If I can save 1% then I probably still don't care, because it's not enough of a factor to outweigh concerns like the paint being a perfect match for the color I want, having faster or slower shipping, etc. If I can save 10% then it's going to be worth thinking about seriously. Maybe if you're on an extremely tight budget then you have to save money everywhere you can, but most people really aren't going to feel any meaningful impact from a $1 difference on a $50 model kit.

Well that just sounds like you being wasteful. Yellow is a primary colour, you could use some of that excess paint to mix all kinds of new colours or triads. Pour it into an empty pot with some other colour that you have too much of: bam! new colour. You could even 'probably' have used the first yellow to make the second (I assume one is just a shade/highlight). Or give/share it with someone else if you aren't going to use it. Saying "I'm going to waste it anyway" doesn't mean you aren't getting better value, it just means you aren't utilizing it.

It's not waste, it's convenience. Yes, I could buy one pot of each primary color and mix everything I want, but why would I put that much effort into it when I can buy pre-mixed colors? And why would I screw around with trying to share paints when I do all of my painting at home by myself? All of that sounds like a case of trying to find ways to use the "extra" paint to prove that I've extracted every possible bit of value from it, and that's just silly. My goal is to use the paint to make an army, not to become the master of efficiently using a pot of yellow paint.

And yes, getting more paint that I'm not going to use means that I'm not getting better value. Value only exists if you actually want the thing you're getting. For example, adding more cardboard packaging to the box my paint is shipped in doesn't add value even though technically I've been given additional materials that I could somehow utilize. I don't want the extra cardboard, I have no practical way to get anything out of it, and it's going straight into the recycling bin.

I could just as easily compare the cost of an army to something like the national debt, and say that it isn't worth discussing.

No, because that is a completely unrelated comparison. If I want to add another LRBT to my army then I don't care about the individual components of the tank, I care about the total cost in time and money to get it. But the national debt has absolutely nothing to do with my new tank. I'm not paying for the national debt, I'm not using it to build my tank, etc.

If you are so rich (or carefree) that you don't consider amounts as small as £50 worth discussing, then congratulations! Feel free to not discuss them. But you can't seriously expect that to be true for everyone.

This is a hobby where £50 doesn't even buy you the rulebook to start playing the game, and you can expect to spend many times that amount to get even a small army. Obviously there are a lot of people who consider £50 a big deal, but how many of them can afford to play a game like 40k?

Paint has to fulfill 3 requirements:

a) Good
b) Cheap (or at least affordable)
c) Available.

I have no idea about a) since there's a problem with c) - no local vendor has FW paints. And at almost 4 GBP per pot (plus shipment) the paint can not possibly be good enough to justify that price, since all other model paints I know of are good enough already.

In general, when a person's first reaction to a new product is "that's too expensive," it isn't exactly an objective statement from a market analyst. It is, almost always, a personal reaction to a new product, and often not a particularly accurate one. Nearly always, when a person rejects a new product on price, it's not because the price of the new product is so dramatically different from what they have. It's because they already have something similar, and the full cost now involves paying the price for the new product, and sidelining an existing product.

It's similar to the economic concept of diminishing returns. Lets say you go to the pizza parlor and eat your fill of pizza. Walking back to your car, you see an ad for a new, gourmet pizza place. When you say, "that's really expensive," you have to remember that you are already full of pizza! Take a look at that ad when hungry, and see how it grabs you.

For me, while I'm a avid paint collector and working on a 30k force, I probably wont' be buying these. I'm already 33 infantry and two rhinos into my current paint scheme, so I'm not looking for an exact color match. I do like trying new paints, but for the cost of each pot of FW I can buy two pots of reaper to expand my collection.

So, while my main motivating factor for not being excited by these is that they are wildly unnecessary for me, their limited availability and high price means I'm unlikely to grab a color or two just to try out.

 Peregrine wrote:
What's your point? The premise here is that you're buying GW stuff already. If you play board games and occasionally paint a historical kit then obviously you're not the target market.

Well since we're on dakkadakka boards and not "GW" boards, and you said everything else in the hobby. It made sense that we were talking about people who paint miniatures generally and buy miniature paints. Now you seem to want to restrict our hypothetical customer to something like:

1) Only collects GW.
2) Collects multiple large armies (but not enough to make sufficient use of yellow)
3) Is GW's "target market" (this one is just unfair, since their target market seems to be people who will pay anything for GW)
4) Is spending over a billion pounds on miniatures. (sorry but how is £50 or even $1 going to be 0.000000000000001% of their budget?.)

This is all starting to sound quite contrived, and I think you're just moving the goal posts around to prop up your argument. But I suppose I can agree: the above person probably has bigger things to worry about than spending £50 on paint, and would be unlikely to ever consider a non-GW brand like Vallejo.

Now back to the real world...

But the question is how much money can you save, and how much of an impact that really has on your overall financial situation. If I can save 0.000000000000001% of my 40k budget then I don't care. I'm not going to pay any attention at all to that potential savings because it's less significant than the difference in driving expenses between different parking spots at the store, or whether or not I bother to pick up a penny on the ground as I'm walking through the parking lot. If I can save 1% then I probably still don't care, because it's not enough of a factor to outweigh concerns like the paint being a perfect match for the color I want, having faster or slower shipping, etc. If I can save 10% then it's going to be worth thinking about seriously. Maybe if you're on an extremely tight budget then you have to save money everywhere you can, but most people really aren't going to feel any meaningful impact from a $1 difference on a $50 model kit.

There are all kinds of people on dakka, who paint miniatures from all kinds of brands. Some spend a lot, some spend a little, some have miniatures and even paints going back decades when prices were very different. Saving money just makes sense. It doesn't have to be because someone is on a tight budget, or because of "moral outrage". Since no one has infinite money, it follows that finding better deals will allow you to buy more. For example: an extra tank.

It has been a few years since I lost interest in 40k, but I don't remember a Land raider being anything like 0.000000000000001% of my army. LR Terminators, SR DC, assault squads, HQ... that was kind of it for my BAs. The land raider was quite a substantial part. Why would you not want/notice a free Land raider?

It's not waste, it's convenience. Yes, I could buy one pot of each primary color and mix everything I want, but why would I put that much effort into it when I can buy pre-mixed colors?

Oddly enough, that is exactly what I do these days. I buy the larger 60ml bottles of Vallejo premium and mix my own pots (I bought 100 empty pots of ebay for ~£5). Aside from being a lot cheaper, it allows me to mix the exact colours I want, highlight shades, pink (which GW stopped carrying for ages), decent NMM gold tones. I don't find it inconvenient, I work and trained as an artist, so I consider mixing paints quite a natural part of painting. I can mix up any colour I need in a few minutes for pennies (I think it works out something like ~30p per pot). Certainly a lot more convenient than driving to the shop, or waiting on mail order. And there is very little waste as I'll only mix as much as I need.

And why would I screw around with trying to share paints when I do all of my painting at home by myself?

You don't have to "screw around". A lot of my first paints, when I was a kid, were given to me by a friend who had stopped playing. I also sometimes spot used paints for sale on ebay. I've never bought any, but like 2nd hand miniatures they fetch a decent price. If you truly have finished with your paints, and they are still good, then why waste them? You could gift/sell them, put them on dakka swap shop, and get something you want instead. And who says your painting projects will ever be finished? Jah has paints over 10 years old. Lots of dakka posters remember RT and still play and paint today. If you keep going, then eventually you will use up your yellow. I don't normally use much yellow either, but a while ago painted up some Mantic Veer-Myn for my friend's Project Pandora, which burned through a lot of my yellow in one go (airbrushing uses up paint at an alarming rate). I have quite a lot of warlock purple which is one of my 'hardly used' colours, but I'm sure a project will turn up eventually which will utilize it more. It might even be the natural choice for my next project, since I know I've got loads of it. It's not hard to get value out of your paints if you choose to.

And yes, getting more paint that I'm not going to use means that I'm not getting better value. Value only exists if you actually want the thing you're getting.

Okay, agreed. But lots of people do get good value out of their paints, which should answer your question, even if you don't personally get good value. But since GW and FW pots are more expensive pot for pot. Buying a different brand and throwing the extra 6ml in the bin would still be better value than you get with GW.

No, because that is a completely unrelated comparison. If I want to add another LRBT to my army then I don't care about the individual components of the tank, I care about the total cost in time and money to get it. But the national debt has absolutely nothing to do with my new tank. I'm not paying for the national debt, I'm not using it to build my tank, etc.

In fairness, the huge £10,000 apocalypse army, which you require to make your point, is just as "unrelated" to the cost of paint pots, as your spending is to the national debt. Yes the paints will add to the total cost of the army, in the same way your spending will impact the GDP, but they are separate issues. The only reason to confuse them is subterfuge to try and play down an issue which you aren't able to refute. Which is: paint brands are different prices, you can save money by acknowledging the difference, and the money saved is significant enough to be useful in the scope of collecting miniatures.

This is a hobby where £50 doesn't even buy you the rulebook to start playing the game, and you can expect to spend many times that amount to get even a small army. Obviously there are a lot of people who consider £50 a big deal, but how many of them can afford to play a game like 40k?

Well I agree that 40k has become very expensive, possibly to the point where only 'affluent' people who consider money no object, and the very dedicated are able to continue playing. You don't have to look far to see people getting upset about that. Lots of people started playing years ago when things felt a lot cheaper, and now they feel pushed out by the prices, there is nothing hypothetical about that.

I have quite a few 40k armies, lots of FF and CMON games, Soda Pop, Infinity. I'd say I'm fairly engrossed in the miniature collecting hobby, and I don't feel it costs me too much. I don't feel I can afford to buy 40k rulebooks... In the same way I can't afford to flush money down the toilet. The combination of being expensive, going out of date too quickly, and me not playing frequently enough, makes them a non-option. Could I buy them all and still afford to eat? Yes. Is it moral outrage? Perhaps a little, but I think mostly it's just not worth it for me, I'd rather spend my money on something else (such as infinity). The same is true with paint. £3.75 for a pot of watery paint that you're going to fire through an airbrush in about two goes, seems a bit extravagant, when there is £2 option. I don't think you necessarily need to be "on a budget" to see the sense in saving money.

I keep checking this thread every time that there is a new post, in the hope that someone has described their experience of using the new paints.

Needless to say, I am continually disappointed.

 Undead_Love-Machine wrote:
I keep checking this thread every time that there is a new post, in the hope that someone has described their experience of using the new paints.

Needless to say, I am continually disappointed.

Which might translate to folks just not buying the paint - not a good sign in regards to how well the line will do.

I am not sure that there is a need for this line - regardless of the quality. (Which may well be pretty high - GW paint is good, just not good enough to justify the price.)

The Auld Grump