70/25 split IMO. For some people it's meta chasing and the need to maximize resale, but now that most events have painting requirements that's less common than it used to be. For the majority it's that they treat 40k as a tabletop equivalent of an e-sport, purely a game to play with none of the narrative or aesthetic elements that were the roots of the game. The models are just tokens for playing the game, and why waste time painting a token when you could be playing more games? These are also the people who don't bother assembling their models completely, play with cardboard boxes and beer cans for "terrain", etc, because nothing matters but rolling dice and winning games.
The really hilarious part is that despite their obsession with "competitive" play they're all just big fish in small ponds. No major event allows unpainted models so all they can do is club the local seals over and over again for ego fluffing.
And why do they actually buy expensive miniatures if they are just going to use them just as tokens and not even assembly them properly or even give them a primer to figute outvif they are their "token minis", or the opfor???
Those minis are expensive partly because they are full of details that can only be appreciated if they are fully painted?
If you are so out of touch with the aesthetic nature of the hobby why dont you go all arround and simply use bases and capboard (even with a printed picture like the 2ed ork dreadnought in the starting box) to play your version of 4Ok??
Or you know, if you wanted to engage the broader community but were unable to paint for yourselve... Buy less minis but pay for others to paint them (which is not such an expense compared to the actual minis purchase)... Or even look for 2nd hand painted minis????
It look to me as paying a fee for a dance club, follow the expensive dress code of the club, and go there every week but since you lack the skill and/or find dancing boring the only thing you do is buy overpriced drinks at the bar while most people in the dancefloor watch you weirdly.
Sure you are "Tecnically" part of the dance club community but in such a limited and akward manner that it dosent seem very sensible.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Bruh, I fething suck at painting. No amount of contrast is going to help with that.
Better to suck at painting than to not paint at all. And the only way to improve is to practice.
I legitimately cannot as of 6-7 years ago. I have a really bad tendinitis and carpal that gets exacerbated as I try to paint. At least with putting together models, I can fix anything trembling might have caused. I plan to eventually hire a pro painter to make my Marines look like marble/stone of course, but I'll design the bases first. As is, I'm content with my plastic dudes. They have character, even with judgmental jackasses as yourself say they need to be painted for your immersion when the game sucks and isn't immersive to begin with.
Vatsetis wrote: And why do they actually buy expensive miniatures if they are just going to use them just as tokens and not even assembly them properly or even give them a primer to figute outvif they are their "token minis", or the opfor???
TBH they look for every opportunity to not buy the miniatures. I can't even count the number of gray armies I've seen where it's not even real miniatures, it's cheap army men from walmart or crude 3d printed proxies and their overwhelming top priority is to keep everything as cheap as possible. Aesthetics? Who cares, as long as it's cheap.
Vatsetis wrote: And why do they actually buy expensive miniatures if they are just going to use them just as tokens and not even assembly them properly or even give them a primer to figute outvif they are their "token minis", or the opfor???
Why don't you walk around in a potato sack? You need legal models to play the game, because the rules of the game check stuff like LoS, stores don't accept people with printed armies or with "printed" tokens. You there for have to buy the models to play the game.
As I've mentioned in the previous 2 threads on this, my goal is fully painted stuff.
But I paint sporadically & at one slow pace. Have for many years, dont imagine it'll change now or in the future. (Well, it might get worse as I get old)
As I've also made clear, I'm not painting for anyone's benefit other than my own. <You> do not factor into this. Nor do I consider painting minis part of my hobby.
Thus I am unconcerned with how long it'll take to reach my goal.
(If you're concerned with how long it's taking me.... we'll that's a you problem.)
But between now & the almost certainly far off day when my goal is achieved? Regardless of how much paint is on models?
There's games to be played.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Bruh, I fething suck at painting. No amount of contrast is going to help with that.
Better to suck at painting than to not paint at all. And the only way to improve is to practice.
I legitimately cannot as of 6-7 years ago. I have a really bad tendinitis and carpal that gets exacerbated as I try to paint. At least with putting together models, I can fix anything trembling might have caused. I plan to eventually hire a pro painter to make my Marines look like marble/stone of course, but I'll design the bases first. As is, I'm content with my plastic dudes. They have character, even with judgmental jackasses as yourself say they need to be painted for your immersion when the game sucks and isn't immersive to begin with.
Seriously, get over yourself.
Hiring a pro painting is fine, no one is arguing against that. Its an ok alternative if for whatever reason you are unable to paint your own minis for yourselve.
I Myself mix painting my minis, buying painted miniatures and hiring pro painters.
Vatsetis wrote: And why do they actually buy expensive miniatures if they are just going to use them just as tokens and not even assembly them properly or even give them a primer to figute outvif they are their "token minis", or the opfor???
TBH they look for every opportunity to not buy the miniatures. I can't even count the number of gray armies I've seen where it's not even real miniatures, it's cheap army men from walmart or crude 3d printed proxies and their overwhelming top priority is to keep everything as cheap as possible. Aesthetics? Who cares, as long as it's cheap.
Fine, In my experience "Grey Knights" are usually original GW minis (or at least decent copies).
As I've mentioned in the previous 2 threads on this, my goal is fully painted stuff.
But I paint sporadically & at one slow pace. Have for many years, dont imagine it'll change now or in the future.
As I've also made clear, I'm not painting for anyone's benefit other than my own. <You> do not factor into this. Nor do I consider painting minis part of my hobby.
Thus I am unconcerned with how long it'll take to reach my goal.
(If you're concerned with how long it's taking me.... we'll that's a you problem.)
But between now & the (almost certainly) far off day when my goal is achieved? Regardless of how much paint is on models?
There's games to be played.
So it seems you are not "vehement against painting your army" so this poll is not describing people like you. I dont understand what is the point of your post.
The question is not, "why people dont paint their armies? " but rather why (probably a small minority) are so vehement against painting their armies. Two very different topics.
-I have called for no standard!
-This is not an enforcement of the tenets of the (non existent) "thought/painting police".
-In a social context (like a forum or gamming community) people shouldnt be annoyed if they are asked about their public activities.
-Participating in this poll and chat is optional.
-If you fill personally offended by the content or wording of this poll, I apologize and assure you that my intentions are honest.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Bruh, I fething suck at painting. No amount of contrast is going to help with that.
Everyone sucks at painting at first. I *still* suck at painting, but I enjoy painting my minis. I don't stress out about playing with unpainted stuff though.
As I've mentioned in the previous 2 threads on this, my goal is fully painted stuff.
But I paint sporadically & at one slow pace. Have for many years, dont imagine it'll change now or in the future.
As I've also made clear, I'm not painting for anyone's benefit other than my own. <You> do not factor into this. Nor do I consider painting minis part of my hobby.
Thus I am unconcerned with how long it'll take to reach my goal.
(If you're concerned with how long it's taking me.... we'll that's a you problem.)
But between now & the (almost certainly) far off day when my goal is achieved? Regardless of how much paint is on models?
There's games to be played.
So it seems you are not "vehement against painting your army" so this poll is not describing people like you. I dont understand what is the point of your post.
Well I doubt you're going to hear from the people you started the poll about. So you'll just have to accept the replies you get.
I am not offended. You'd have to do some extreme things to offend me, as I do not easily take offense. I am also not being aggressive in my responses.
But you are asking why don't some paint and you have been given answers, some from people themselves and other answers are "possibles" or hypothetical in nature. There isn't going to be a way of getting everyone on the same page when it comes to painting. Or playing.
I paint, but I don't expect anyone else to do so either. I can appreciate the effort into assembling the minis and leave it at that. I would rather play then not, so I won't turn down a game because it's bare grey plastic.
Maybe it's due to me being somewhere the hobby isn't strong and I'll take what I can get. Maybe I am of a different frame of mind.
Vatsetis wrote: -If you fill personally offended by the content or wording of this poll, I apologize and assure you that my intentions are honest.
Option 1 in your poll is that people don't paint because they "dont fully understand the 40K hobby". In option two you suggest that these people are "just Trolling".
So forgive me if I don't believe your statement above.
I don't think you are going to get responses that are any more nuanced than you can find in the other 2 threads about this very topic.
given the responses in the polls that have been made, even considering the internet is a den of scum and villainy, I think a more appropriate question would be:
'Why is there a sizable minority of players that insist that in order for them to enjoy their hobby, you have to paint your miniatures to a standard they deem to be satisfactory'
madtankbloke wrote: 'Why is there a sizable minority of players that insist that in order for them to enjoy their hobby, you have to paint your miniatures to a standard they deem to be satisfactory'
Because playing the game involves at least two people and your unpainted models are present in my game.
I am not offended. You'd have to do some extreme things to offend me, as I do not easily take offense. I am also not being aggressive in my responses.
But you are asking why don't some paint and you have been given answers, some from people themselves and other answers are "possibles" or hypothetical in nature. There isn't going to be a way of getting everyone on the same page when it comes to painting. Or playing.
I paint, but I don't expect anyone else to do so either. I can appreciate the effort into assembling the minis and leave it at that. I would rather play then not, so I won't turn down a game because it's bare grey plastic.
Maybe it's due to me being somewhere the hobby isn't strong and I'll take what I can get. Maybe I am of a different frame of mind.
-I havent asked why people paint or dont paint their armies.
-I havent asked if people prefer to play with painted armies or not, or if they tolerate or not playing against unpainted armies.
Perhaps you are getting confused by other polls created by other fellow posters?
I have friends that can not paint, nerve damage, muscle issues, etc.... I have painted armies for them before even. Not everyone has time as well. Its a hobby and not having painted models wont effect other players, so why does it matter if they are painted if someone is unable to or unhappy to do so?
Tiberias wrote: This thread is unnecessary and the poll is ridiculous bait.
Agreed. I don't think I've met anybody or even seen anybody post about being against painting. It's often more that people can't paint, think they won't do a good job, or simply have other priorities. The thread title seems to posit that there are some people who are philosophically opposed to painting minis. If so, I've yet to see evidence of them.
Amishprn86 wrote: I have friends that can not paint, nerve damage, muscle issues, etc.... I have painted armies for them before even. Not everyone has time as well. Its a hobby and not having painted models wont effect other players, so why does it matter if they are painted if someone is unable to or unhappy to do so?
This literally has nothing to do with the poll question.
Being unable to drive because you have some sort of cognitive condition (ie being blind) and insisting to drive even if you are blind are two different issues... A third, different, issue would be being against driving because its bad for climate change, due to frecuent accidents or whatever.
Its so difficult to stay on topic? Since I was curious about an specific issue I open a poll not to hijack other fellow posters threads.
The Black Adder wrote: Agreed. I don't think I've met anybody or even seen anybody post about being against painting. It's often more that people can't paint, think they won't do a good job, or simply have other priorities. The thread title seems to posit that there are some people who are philosophically opposed to painting minis. If so, I've yet to see evidence of them.
It was in one of the other threads, but someone in response to a modified 10 VP rule where you still get the 10 VP as long as you have painted more since your last game said that they would deliberately make the smallest possible amount of progress on a single unit, put that unit in reserve, and leave it there to be automatically destroyed on turn 4 without ever seeing the table. Why? Pure self-destructive spite at the idea of having painted models.
Tiberias wrote: This thread is unnecessary and the poll is ridiculous bait.
Agreed. I don't think I've met anybody or even seen anybody post about being against painting. It's often more that people can't paint, think they won't do a good job, or simply have other priorities. The thread title seems to posit that there are some people who are philosophically opposed to painting minis. If so, I've yet to see evidence of them.
Well, some people seem indeed very angry due to the fact that painting is a relevant part of the hobby and they are therefore "pressured" someway to paint their armies (just check other recent posts in this forum). Since they express a vehement opossition to this situation, I opened this poll to better understand there reasoning.
What issue were you curious about? Was it something brought up in a different board? Why not ask it there? Have you ever actually heard someone say they are “vehemently against” painting? It just seems like a silly, baiting, non issue to make a poll about. And based on the results so far, most people here agree. I bet if one of your options was, “this is a trolling poll”, it would be winning in a landslide.
Tiberias wrote: This thread is unnecessary and the poll is ridiculous bait.
Agreed. I don't think I've met anybody or even seen anybody post about being against painting. It's often more that people can't paint, think they won't do a good job, or simply have other priorities. The thread title seems to posit that there are some people who are philosophically opposed to painting minis. If so, I've yet to see evidence of them.
Well, some people seem indeed very angry due to the fact that painting is a relevant part of the hobby and they are therefore "pressured" someway to paint their armies (just check other recent posts in this forum). Since they express a vehement opossition to this situation, I opened this poll to better understand there reasoning.
If you want to understand their* reasoning, try posting options that they themselves are giving: don’t like to paint, bad at it, don’t have time, have different priorities, physically unable. Instead your options are for people who paint their toys and dislike unpainted toys.
People who are vehement against painting are people who hate the idea that GW or their gaming community is telling them to do something. Some people just hate being told what to do, even if that thing is good for them. If they will rebel against that, what do you expect from being required to meet an esthetic requirement?
Vatsetis wrote: -If you fill personally offended by the content or wording of this poll, I apologize and assure you that my intentions are honest.
Option 1 in your poll is that people don't paint because they "dont fully understand the 40K hobby". In option two you suggest that these people are "just Trolling".
So forgive me if I don't believe your statement above.
Well those both of those options could actually be real reason for someone to actively reject painting in a hobby were painting is a core part of the experience.
Trolling could also stand for "I reject painting because I want to win an internet argument" and ofuscation could also stand for "I wont allow anyone to tell me if I should or shouldnt paint my 40K minis"... I simply didnt want to disperse the poll results.
Its very dificult for me to see a sensible reason why anyone will actively oppose painting... Is like actively opposing better security measures in a car (no fancy high tech things "aka propinted NMM" im refering to basic elements like having an extra wheel or safety belts "aka base coat and shades").
Gordon Shumway wrote: Can you understand people who only model, paint and enjoy the fiction, but don’t actually play?
Yes, just as I can understand people that just play but dont actually enjoy the fiction or model/paint.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gordon Shumway wrote: Can you understand people who only model, paint and enjoy the fiction, but don’t actually play?
A smart question. This situation those indeed happen, but we should ask why?
Did those people actually played the game in the past but dont do currently because they have lost the community, their community has became toxic or they dont like the current rules/meta?
If he has or have never had any interest on the rules is this just because no one has introduce him to that element of the hobby.
If this person has actually never played a 40K game (and therefore dosent really understand that side of the hobby) but nevertheless constantly and publickly complains about how boring 40K games are and how toxic competitive play is I wouldnt really find that perspn POV to be weird.
Gordon Shumway wrote: Can you understand people who only model, paint and enjoy the fiction, but don’t actually play?
That's a lot easier to understand. It's just someone who enjoys an art hobby, much like people paint model historical tanks or build model railroads without any game rules attached. What makes a lot less sense is people who invest in a miniatures hobby where the whole point of playing with miniatures instead of cardboard tokens is the aesthetic value of the models but don't bother to make aesthetically appealing game pieces. Why not play a cardboard token game instead and spend $20-50 instead of $2-5000? Why play a game where even most of the people who play it admit that the rules suck and its only redeeming quality is that it allows you to use your cool miniatures?
But people just dont do things "because" (they might themselves ignore tbe reasons why, but there is almost always a reason, things dont happend due to pure luck or unhinged will).
If they cannot paint (or any alternative like hiring painters or buying painted minis), for what ever reason... why dont just look for a different tabletop hobby that dosent require painting (like eurogames)... If they like 40K lore but "Cant paint" why not just play videogames or even Necromunda or Killteam which have a much lower mini count and therefore require much less modelling and painting effort that tbe massive 40K?
Vatsetis wrote: But people just dont do things "because" (they might themselves ignore tbe reasons why, but there is almost always a reason, things dont happend due to pure luck or unhinged will).
If they cannot paint (or any alternative like hiring painters or buying painted minis), for what ever reason... why dont just look for a different tabletop hobby that dosent require painting (like eurogames)... If they like 40K lore but "Cant paint" why not just play videogames or even Necromunda or Killteam which have a much lower mini count and therefore require much less modelling and painting effort that tbe massive 40K?
Why would you like this hobby if you don't value the aesthetics of the miniatures? Without that all you're doing is spending thousands of dollars on a game you could be playing with cardboard tokens instead. Or you could even play a better game, since you're not committed to using the rules that match your miniatures collection.
Why would you like this hobby if you don't value the aesthetics of the miniatures?
Bunch of reasons. Some people actually like the game, shocking though that may be. Or the socialisation that comes with it. 40k isn't JUST about aesthetics for a lot of people.
It’s not about being staunchly anti-paint, it’s about not wanting to paint because you don’t enjoy it. The trouble starts when people start throwing out labels like “lazy” or “selfish” against them that the flames start to grow.
Sim-Life wrote: 40k isn't JUST about aesthetics for a lot of people.
But the reason you play with thousands of dollars worth of models instead of $5 in cardboard tokens is 100% about the aesthetics.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: It’s not about being staunchly anti-paint, it’s about not wanting to paint because you don’t enjoy it. The trouble starts when people start throwing out labels like “lazy” or “selfish” against them that the flames start to grow.
And oddly those words often seem to be introduced by people like you, who turn "I don't play against unpainted miniatures" into "you're lazy and selfish if you don't paint" even if those words were never said.
Sim-Life wrote: 40k isn't JUST about aesthetics for a lot of people.
But the reason you play with thousands of dollars worth of models instead of $5 in cardboard tokens is 100% about the aesthetics.
No it isn't.
Then why do you spend thousands of dollars on the models, if not because they look cooler than cardboard tokens?
Well I personally don't anymore but when I did its because its a fairly standard requirement for playing the game but also I like the models. I assume those are the main reason for like 99% of the people who play the game. Just because a person doesn't paint the model they like doesn't mean...actually what DO you think that means?
Why would you like this hobby if you don't value the aesthetics of the miniatures? Without that all you're doing is spending thousands of dollars on a game you could be playing with cardboard tokens instead. Or you could even play a better game, since you're not committed to using the rules that match your miniatures collection.
Who says that they don't value the aesthetics of the models? To be clear, you're complaining about people with unpainted models, not just unpainted armies. Maybe they intend to paint everything, but haven't yet, but still want to play with the unpainted models before they're finished. Maybe they can appreciate the aesthetics of the miniatures without painting them. Maybe they like the game, everyone doesn't have the same opinion on that either. And how do you know that they aren't committed to using the rules that "match their miniatures collection"?
Which is the important part: It's their miniatures collection. And they can do whatever they want with them. They paid their own hard earned $$$ for them, and it's none of your business whether they paint them or not. If you don't want to play against unpainted models, then don't play them.
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: It’s not about being staunchly anti-paint, it’s about not wanting to paint because you don’t enjoy it. The trouble starts when people start throwing out labels like “lazy” or “selfish” against them that the flames start to grow.
Even if you dont enjoy painting yourselve there are at least two alternatives... hiring a pro painter or buying 2nd hand painted minis.
If you actually like the 40K hobby and since many tournaments have a painting code, why dont expand your gamming experience and circle by adquiring/paying for painted minis?
If you only play with your local circle of gamers, were unpainted minis are fully accepted, why would you be disturbed by the POV of a random internet "paint supremacist".
Vatsetis wrote: If you only play with your local circle of gamers, were unpainted minis are fully accepted, why would you be disturbed by the POV of a random internet "paint supremacist".
'Cause I've yet to come across another group here that is as absolutist as them.
Most people here - hell the overwhelming majority of people here - just don't care. But there's a rare few here who won't stop going on about painting miniatures, and they're becoming quite insufferable.
Why would you like this hobby if you don't value the aesthetics of the miniatures? Without that all you're doing is spending thousands of dollars on a game you could be playing with cardboard tokens instead. Or you could even play a better game, since you're not committed to using the rules that match your miniatures collection.
youre so fething annoying with that gatekeeping.
how hard is it to understand that some people are part of the hobby even if they only enjoy the actual game. you don't need to love the lore or painting to love moving dudes around and shooting down your opponent ffs.
Well some people collect old functional cars and dont know how to drive them and actually pay others to drive them so they dont break down.
Some people eat a lot of food but dont digest them and rather vomit it.
Some people drink alcohol in unhealthy cuantities far beyond the point it might provide them some pleasure.
Surely if someone point out to this people that they were not ussing their cars or food or drinks in a sensible manner they would be pissed off and cry some nonsense about their "personal freedom and property". :(
Vatsetis wrote: Well some people collect old functional cars and dont know how to drive them and actually pay others to drive them so they dont break down.
Some people eat a lot of food but dont digest them and rather vomit it.
Some people drink alcohol in unhealthy cuantities far beyond the point it might provide them some pleasure.
Surely if someone point out to this people that they were not ussing their cars or food or drinks in a sensible manner they would be pissed off and cry some nonsense about their "personal freedom and property". :(
DeathKorp_Rider wrote: It’s not about being staunchly anti-paint, it’s about not wanting to paint because you don’t enjoy it. The trouble starts when people start throwing out labels like “lazy” or “selfish” against them that the flames start to grow.
Even if you dont enjoy painting yourselve there are at least two alternatives... hiring a pro painter or buying 2nd hand painted minis.
If you actually like the 40K hobby and since many tournaments have a painting code, why dont expand your gamming experience and circle by adquiring/paying for painted minis?
If you only play with your local circle of gamers, were unpainted minis are fully accepted, why would you be disturbed by the POV of a random internet "paint supremacist".
Hiring other people to paint your stuff can often be just as expensive as the model itself, sometime more. And having a bunch of randomly painted minis without an effective reasoning as to why they are like that triggers my OCD.
Why would you like this hobby if you don't value the aesthetics of the miniatures? Without that all you're doing is spending thousands of dollars on a game you could be playing with cardboard tokens instead. Or you could even play a better game, since you're not committed to using the rules that match your miniatures collection.
youre so fething annoying with that gatekeeping.
how hard is it to understand that some people are part of the hobby even if they only enjoy the actual game. you don't need to love the lore or painting to love moving dudes around and shooting down your opponent ffs.
But the reason you play with thousands of dollars worth of models instead of $5 in cardboard tokens is 100% about the aesthetics.
theres a difference between cardboard cutouts and unpainted models
Yes that cardboard can be printed with colour and therefore be aesthetically more pleasing and easy to identify that unpainted minis.
Actually, willingly limiting your 40K hobby to unpainted minis is like willllingly limiting your adult sexual live to masturbation... There might be some very few fringe cases in which both are understandable, but on most cases it just making your own experience poorer.
Yes that cardboard can be printed with colour and therefore be aesthetically more pleasing and easy to identify that unpainted minis.
Actually, willingly limiting your 40K hobby to unpainted minis is like willllingly limiting your adult sexual live to masturbation... There might be some very few fringe cases in which both are understandable, but on most cases it just making your own experience poorer.
No shot, even color paper cutouts look shittier than unpainted minis lol.
and now not painting your mini means youre an incel or something? Get a grip, take your pills
Vatsetis wrote: Well some people collect old functional cars and dont know how to drive them and actually pay others to drive them so they dont break down.
Some people eat a lot of food but dont digest them and rather vomit it.
Some people drink alcohol in unhealthy cuantities far beyond the point it might provide them some pleasure.
Surely if someone point out to this people that they were not ussing their cars or food or drinks in a sensible manner they would be pissed off and cry some nonsense about their "personal freedom and property". :(
wtf kinda point are you even trying to make here?
Its pretty clear... That cars are ment to be driven, food is ment to be diggested, alcohol should be consumed with moderation and 40k miniatures are designed with painting in mind... And that the people that dont grasp this very simple facts are somewhat non functional.
Vatsetis wrote: Well some people collect old functional cars and dont know how to drive them and actually pay others to drive them so they dont break down.
Some people eat a lot of food but dont digest them and rather vomit it.
Some people drink alcohol in unhealthy cuantities far beyond the point it might provide them some pleasure.
Surely if someone point out to this people that they were not ussing their cars or food or drinks in a sensible manner they would be pissed off and cry some nonsense about their "personal freedom and property". :(
wtf kinda point are you even trying to make here?
Its pretty clear... That cars are ment to be driven, food is ment to be diggested, alcohol should be consumed with moderation and 40k miniatures are designed with painting in mind... And that the people that dont grasp this very simple facts are somewhat non functional.
Why would you like this hobby if you don't value the aesthetics of the miniatures? Without that all you're doing is spending thousands of dollars on a game you could be playing with cardboard tokens instead. Or you could even play a better game, since you're not committed to using the rules that match your miniatures collection.
youre so fething annoying with that gatekeeping.
how hard is it to understand that some people are part of the hobby even if they only enjoy the actual game. you don't need to love the lore or painting to love moving dudes around and shooting down your opponent ffs.
But the reason you play with thousands of dollars worth of models instead of $5 in cardboard tokens is 100% about the aesthetics.
theres a difference between cardboard cutouts and unpainted models
Yes that cardboard can be printed with colour and therefore be aesthetically more pleasing and easy to identify that unpainted minis.
Actually, willingly limiting your 40K hobby to unpainted minis is like willllingly limiting your adult sexual live to masturbation... There might be some very few fringe cases in which both are understandable, but on most cases it just making your own experience poorer.
I feel like telling you about the existence of asexual people would cause your head to explode
Yes that cardboard can be printed with colour and therefore be aesthetically more pleasing and easy to identify that unpainted minis.
Actually, willingly limiting your 40K hobby to unpainted minis is like willllingly limiting your adult sexual live to masturbation... There might be some very few fringe cases in which both are understandable, but on most cases it just making your own experience poorer.
No shot, even color paper cutouts look shittier than unpainted minis lol.
and now not painting your mini means youre an incel or something? Get a grip, take your pills
What I have described its exactly the opposite of an Incel.
A "Wargaming Incel" would be someone that is frustrated by having unpainted minis and blames his inhability to paint them on the broader society (focusing on actual painters) . Not some one that "demands" to play with unpainted miniatures.
Why would you like this hobby if you don't value the aesthetics of the miniatures? Without that all you're doing is spending thousands of dollars on a game you could be playing with cardboard tokens instead. Or you could even play a better game, since you're not committed to using the rules that match your miniatures collection.
youre so fething annoying with that gatekeeping.
how hard is it to understand that some people are part of the hobby even if they only enjoy the actual game. you don't need to love the lore or painting to love moving dudes around and shooting down your opponent ffs.
But the reason you play with thousands of dollars worth of models instead of $5 in cardboard tokens is 100% about the aesthetics.
theres a difference between cardboard cutouts and unpainted models
Yes that cardboard can be printed with colour and therefore be aesthetically more pleasing and easy to identify that unpainted minis.
Actually, willingly limiting your 40K hobby to unpainted minis is like willllingly limiting your adult sexual live to masturbation... There might be some very few fringe cases in which both are understandable, but on most cases it just making your own experience poorer.
I feel like telling you about the existence of asexual people would cause your head to explode
I Know about the existence of asexual people, you could perhaps include them in the odd cases I assume... Nevertheless asexual people (I might be wrong, since I know there are many degrees and variants) arent really into having pleausure from sex (alone or with partners).
Surely the "I only want to play with unpainted minis" camp dont play 40K as a working duty... So they find some pleasure in the hobby but are "afraid" to expand their pleasure by ussing painted minis (which for me seems an odd, although respectable, option).
Yes that cardboard can be printed with colour and therefore be aesthetically more pleasing and easy to identify that unpainted minis.
Actually, willingly limiting your 40K hobby to unpainted minis is like willllingly limiting your adult sexual live to masturbation... There might be some very few fringe cases in which both are understandable, but on most cases it just making your own experience poorer.
No shot, even color paper cutouts look shittier than unpainted minis lol.
and now not painting your mini means youre an incel or something? Get a grip, take your pills
They are also significantly cheaper.
If money is not an issue, why not just hire a pro painter?
Surely the "I only want to play with unpainted minis" camp dont play 40K as a working duty... So they find some pleasure in the hobby but are "afraid" to expand their pleasure by ussing painted minis (which for me seems an odd, although respectable, option).
its not being afraid, its just not enjoying painting, its THAT fething SIMPLE.
You understand that by having painted miniatures the amount of tournaments and pick up games you could play will greatly expand? Dont you value to be able to play with a broader community?
You can buy less minis and pay for them being painted. Its a matter of cost of oportunity.
Perhaps drinking a beer can be a pleaure, but drinking 10 on a single night cause some inconvenience.
Perhaps having one nicely painted army could be an alternative to having three unpainted ones? Surely it will help for gamming with more people.
Just like quitting smoking would probably open your social circle if you live in a country where smoking is heavely penalised.
Vatsetis wrote: You understand that by having painted miniatures the amount of tournaments and pick up games you could play will greatly expand? Dont you value to be able to play with a broader community?
I don't care for tournaments.
The majority of people don't care about the paint.
I'd rather play with someone that has a good attitude and unpainted minis than a TFG with propainted minis.
So, in the thread I made, someone made an offhand comment about how the poll I made felt biased. It didn’t feel that way to me, but I freely admit that other people can be reasonable and have a different opinion.
This poll here? This is biased as hell. Especially given “I don’t enjoy painting” is, per the OP, covered under option one. No thank you.
JNAProductions wrote: So, in the thread I made, someone made an offhand comment about how the poll I made felt biased. It didn’t feel that way to me, but I freely admit that other people can be reasonable and have a different opinion.
This poll here? This is biased as hell. Especially given “I don’t enjoy painting” is, per the OP, covered under option one. No thank you.
I honestly saw the options and felt right away like this poll was made to stir up trouble
Vatsetis wrote: You understand that by having painted miniatures the amount of tournaments and pick up games you could play will greatly expand? Dont you value to be able to play with a broader community?
I don't care for tournaments.
The majority of people don't care about the paint.
I'd rather play with someone that has a good attitude and unpainted minis than a TFG with propainted minis.
Perhaps drinking a beer can be a pleaure, but drinking 10 on a single night cause some inconvenience.
Perhaps having one nicely painted army could be an alternative to having three unpainted ones? Surely it will help for gamming with more people.
Just like quitting smoking would probably open your social circle if you live in a country where smoking is heavely penalised.
???????????????????????????
In all my gamming experience (almost 20 years) I never found no correlation between playing with painted or unpainted minis and sportmanship. Why mention this?
If 40K is such an expensive hobby that you cannot afford it like it was designed (with painted minis) ... Perhaps you could try Necromunda or Killteam or other games that require less model counts.
Is like buying a car but being unable to buy fuel, and just have it parked in the garage... But speak to your friends about how fancy your -inmobile car is- perhaps it would more sensible to use the public transport or do car sharing.
No, it's more akin to buying a car and not upgrading the radio, or adding bluetooth to it, or various other things like that.
If you enjoy the game of 40k, whether or not the models are painted, your enjoyment is just as valid as someone who enjoys painting but not gaming, or someone who enjoys both, or someone who just reads the novels.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Who says that they don't value the aesthetics of the models?
The fact that they don't paint them, leaving the models in an aesthetically unappealing state.
Maybe they intend to paint everything, but haven't yet, but still want to play with the unpainted models before they're finished.
Those people are not relevant to the topic of this thread, which was people who are vehement against painting their armies.
Aesthetically unappealing to you. Not universally.
And has anyone actually said they're vehemently against painting? I don't enjoy painting, for instance, but I've certainly nothing against it. This whole thread is waging war against a strawman.
H.B.M.C. wrote: 'Cause I've yet to come across another group here that is as absolutist as them.
Most people here - hell the overwhelming majority of people here - just don't care. But there's a rare few here who won't stop going on about painting miniatures, and they're becoming quite insufferable.
There's that double standard again, complaining about how "insufferable" the side you dislike is while ignoring the fact that every time this comes up even the most mild of criticism of unpainted models draws an endless parade of hyperbolic statements about how nasty everyone is being to them.
JNAProductions wrote: So, in the thread I made, someone made an offhand comment about how the poll I made felt biased. It didn’t feel that way to me, but I freely admit that other people can be reasonable and have a different opinion.
This poll here? This is biased as hell. Especially given “I don’t enjoy painting” is, per the OP, covered under option one. No thank you.
Even if you dont enjoy painting there are many alternatives to use painted armies. Deniyng this is an act of ofuscation.
Perhaps if you can only eat beef meat if its burn out so it has almost no trace of its original taste or can only tolerate fresh fish if you drown it with citrics... You indeed dont like beef or fish that much.
If you dont enjoy riding dont buy a riding horse and keep it at the stable pretending you are a jockey.
Go ahead, make a poll with the general population. Show them a picture of an unpainted miniature next to one painted to GW's battle-ready standard and let's see what they say. I bet you that, outside of the minority of people who have a personal stake in being able to play with unpainted models, virtually everyone agrees that the painted miniature looks better.
And has anyone actually said they're vehemently against painting? I don't enjoy painting, for instance, but I've certainly nothing against it. This whole thread is waging war against a strawman.
Using that word? Probably not. But even if you generalize it to people who are against painting someone who is for painting but still in the process of finishing their project is clearly not in the same category.
There's a big difference between "Not as appealing" and "Unappealing", Shas'O. If you gave me a well-made burger and a well-made pork chop, I'd find the burger more appealing to eat. Does that mean the pork chop is bad? No-just that I find the burger better. Likewise, grey plastic doesn't offend my sensibilities. Nor does it for the people I game with. It's not as appealing as a painted mini, but it's still appealing because the model is very well-designed.
And Vatsetis, I enjoy the game of 40k. I fully admit it's got TONS of flaws and faults, but despite that, I enjoy it. I do not enjoy painting. The two parts are related, but they aren't the same. Do you understand that?
Edit: Shas'O, I think you're conflating "I don't want to paint my own models" with "I think painting is bad".
The former is an attitude I have, because I don't enjoy painting. The latter is not something I agree with at all.
JNAProductions wrote: No, it's more akin to buying a car and not upgrading the radio, or adding bluetooth to it, or various other things like that.
If you enjoy the game of 40k, whether or not the models are painted, your enjoyment is just as valid as someone who enjoys painting but not gaming, or someone who enjoys both, or someone who just reads the novels.
How is this poll about the validity of enjoyment? Its about denial.
You know some people would say that eating until vomiting is a great pleasure. Certainly it defeats the standard porpouse of eating and in some cases might be unhealthy... But subjectively this people enjoy doing so, to the point of addiction.
Im sure that accumulating stashes of unpainted minis... With no intention of painting or perhaps even playing with them creates enjoyment to the point of addiction amongst many in the hobby.
JNAProductions wrote: No, it's more akin to buying a car and not upgrading the radio, or adding bluetooth to it, or various other things like that.
If you enjoy the game of 40k, whether or not the models are painted, your enjoyment is just as valid as someone who enjoys painting but not gaming, or someone who enjoys both, or someone who just reads the novels.
How is this poll about the validity of enjoyment? Its about denial.
You know some people would say that eating until vomiting is a great pleasure. Certainly it defeats the standard porpouse of eating and in some cases might be unhealthy... But subjectively this people enjoy doing so, to the point of addiction.
Im sure that accumulating stashes of unpainted minis... With no intention of painting or perhaps even playing with them creates enjoyment to the point of addiction amongst many in the hobby.
Except no one has said "You shouldn't paint your minis."
No one. No one is saying that the people who enjoy painting shouldn't enjoy that part of the hobby.
What some people ARE saying is that that part of the hobby doesn't appeal to them-and I count myself in that category. If you enjoy painting, paint! But I don't.
JNAProductions wrote: No, it's more akin to buying a car and not upgrading the radio, or adding bluetooth to it, or various other things like that.
If you enjoy the game of 40k, whether or not the models are painted, your enjoyment is just as valid as someone who enjoys painting but not gaming, or someone who enjoys both, or someone who just reads the novels.
How is this poll about the validity of enjoyment? Its about denial.
You know some people would say that eating until vomiting is a great pleasure. Certainly it defeats the standard porpouse of eating and in some cases might be unhealthy... But subjectively this people enjoy doing so, to the point of addiction.
Im sure that accumulating stashes of unpainted minis... With no intention of painting or perhaps even playing with them creates enjoyment to the point of addiction amongst many in the hobby.
JNAProductions wrote: There's a big difference between "Not as appealing" and "Unappealing", Shas'O.
If you gave me a well-made burger and a well-made pork chop, I'd find the burger more appealing to eat. Does that mean the pork chop is bad? No-just that I find the burger better.
Likewise, grey plastic doesn't offend my sensibilities. Nor does it for the people I game with. It's not as appealing as a painted mini, but it's still appealing because the model is very well-designed.
And Vatsetis, I enjoy the game of 40k. I fully admit it's got TONS of flaws and faults, but despite that, I enjoy it. I do not enjoy painting. The two parts are related, but they aren't the same. Do you understand that?
Edit: Shas'O, I think you're conflating "I don't want to paint my own models" with "I think painting is bad".
The former is an attitude I have, because I don't enjoy painting.
The latter is not something I agree with at all.
But enjoying painting and playing with painted armies are not the same thing. Unless you are ofuscated or trolling.
JNAProductions wrote: There's a big difference between "Not as appealing" and "Unappealing", Shas'O.
If you gave me a well-made burger and a well-made pork chop, I'd find the burger more appealing to eat. Does that mean the pork chop is bad? No-just that I find the burger better.
Likewise, grey plastic doesn't offend my sensibilities. Nor does it for the people I game with. It's not as appealing as a painted mini, but it's still appealing because the model is very well-designed.
And Vatsetis, I enjoy the game of 40k. I fully admit it's got TONS of flaws and faults, but despite that, I enjoy it. I do not enjoy painting. The two parts are related, but they aren't the same. Do you understand that?
Edit: Shas'O, I think you're conflating "I don't want to paint my own models" with "I think painting is bad".
The former is an attitude I have, because I don't enjoy painting.
The latter is not something I agree with at all.
But enjoying painting and playing with painted armies are not the same thing. Unless you are ofuscated or trolling.
Okay, allow me to elaborate.
I don't enjoy painting. And I don't care about whether or not my models are painted.
I do enjoy building the models, and customizing them that way-so I buy kits and build them.
So, buying second-hand minis isn't something I'd enjoy. And throwing $500 to get an army painted isn't worth it for me.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Who says that they don't value the aesthetics of the models?
The fact that they don't paint them, leaving the models in an aesthetically unappealing state.
Yeah, I covered that in my original response to you. To reiterate, with emphasis:
Gadzilla666 wrote:Who says that they don't value the aesthetics of the models? To be clear, you're complaining about people with unpainted models, not just unpainted armies. Maybe they intend to paint everything, but haven't yet, but still want to play with the unpainted models before they're finished. Maybe they can appreciate the aesthetics of the miniatures without painting them. Maybe they like the game, everyone doesn't have the same opinion on that either. And how do you know that they aren't committed to using the rules that "match their miniatures collection"?
Which is the important part: It's their miniatures collection. And they can do whatever they want with them. They paid their own hard earned $$$ for them, and it's none of your business whether they paint them or not. If you don't want to play against unpainted models, then don't play them.
Stop assuming that your opinions are universal. They're not.
Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:Those people are not relevant to the topic of this thread, which was people who are vehement against painting their armies.
Sorry, I was trying to actually talk about people who actually exist. No one is "vehemently opposed to painting their armies". There's people who don't, but they're not "vehemently opposed" to it. They have their own reasons, that are generally sane, and not some silly strawman for you to smack around.
JNAProductions wrote: There's a big difference between "Not as appealing" and "Unappealing", Shas'O.
If you gave me a well-made burger and a well-made pork chop, I'd find the burger more appealing to eat. Does that mean the pork chop is bad? No-just that I find the burger better.
Likewise, grey plastic doesn't offend my sensibilities. Nor does it for the people I game with. It's not as appealing as a painted mini, but it's still appealing because the model is very well-designed.
Sure, let's go with the food analogy. If you're someone who claims to really care about quality food then I'd be really surprised if you picked a $0.99 fast food burger over that well-made burger. Sure, a fast food burger is great for utilitarian purposes like getting a quick meal on a road trip but we all know it's significantly worse in quality. And I think we'd all be in agreement on questioning the sanity of someone who claims to really care about burgers but never eats anything but the $0.99 pile of fillers, meat byproducts, and solidified HFCS.
Same thing with miniatures. I can get why someone who doesn't care about aesthetics wouldn't be driven to improve the aesthetics of their miniatures by painting them, but if you care about aesthetics why would you settle for a lower-tier product? And if you don't care about aesthetics why buy expensive models instead of cheap cardboard tokens?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: Stop assuming that your opinions are universal. They're not.
Then, like I said, poll the general population. You and I both know which answer is going to win.
Sorry, I was trying to actually talk about people who actually exist. No one is "vehemently opposed to painting their armies". There's people who don't, but they're not "vehemently opposed" to it. They have their own reasons, that are generally sane, and not some silly strawman for you to smack around.
And, like I said already, even if you discard "vehement" from the description it still doesn't apply. Someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished their army yet is not in the same category as someone who does not paint at all.
JNAProductions wrote: No, it's more akin to buying a car and not upgrading the radio, or adding bluetooth to it, or various other things like that.
If you enjoy the game of 40k, whether or not the models are painted, your enjoyment is just as valid as someone who enjoys painting but not gaming, or someone who enjoys both, or someone who just reads the novels.
How is this poll about the validity of enjoyment? Its about denial.
You know some people would say that eating until vomiting is a great pleasure. Certainly it defeats the standard porpouse of eating and in some cases might be unhealthy... But subjectively this people enjoy doing so, to the point of addiction.
Im sure that accumulating stashes of unpainted minis... With no intention of painting or perhaps even playing with them creates enjoyment to the point of addiction amongst many in the hobby.
Except no one has said "You shouldn't paint your minis."
No one. No one is saying that the people who enjoy painting shouldn't enjoy that part of the hobby.
What some people ARE saying is that that part of the hobby doesn't appeal to them-and I count myself in that category. If you enjoy painting, paint! But I don't.
I have no problem with you not painting. Its s crime if I try to understand why you and other fellow gamers dont enjoy painting?
JNAProductions wrote: There's a big difference between "Not as appealing" and "Unappealing", Shas'O.
If you gave me a well-made burger and a well-made pork chop, I'd find the burger more appealing to eat. Does that mean the pork chop is bad? No-just that I find the burger better.
Likewise, grey plastic doesn't offend my sensibilities. Nor does it for the people I game with. It's not as appealing as a painted mini, but it's still appealing because the model is very well-designed.
Sure, let's go with the food analogy. If you're someone who claims to really care about quality food then I'd be really surprised if you picked a $0.99 fast food burger over that well-made burger. Sure, a fast food burger is great for utilitarian purposes like getting a quick meal on a road trip but we all know it's significantly worse in quality. And I think we'd all be in agreement on questioning the sanity of someone who claims to really care about burgers but never eats anything but the $0.99 pile of fillers, meat byproducts, and solidified HFCS.
Same thing with miniatures. I can get why someone who doesn't care about aesthetics wouldn't be driven to improve the aesthetics of their miniatures by painting them, but if you care about aesthetics why would you settle for a lower-tier product? And if you don't care about aesthetics why buy expensive models instead of cheap cardboard tokens?
I like to build minis, and customize them. I've got 10 kitbashed Possessed, made with three different kits and some green stuff.
They aren't painted, because I don't enjoy painting. They are built, because I enjoy that part.
For you, painting is essential. A mini can't even be considered complete without a paintjob. For me, it's not.
We have different preferences-and that's okay.
JNAProductions wrote: I like to build minis, and customize them. I've got 10 kitbashed Possessed, made with three different kits and some green stuff.
They aren't painted, because I don't enjoy painting. They are built, because I enjoy that part.
For you, painting is essential. A mini can't even be considered complete without a paintjob. For me, it's not.
We have different preferences-and that's okay.
If you could press a button and magically have all of your models fully painted would you consider them improved? Or would you refuse to press the button because you prefer bare plastic with glue/green stuff/etc still visible from the conversion work?
JNAProductions wrote: I like to build minis, and customize them. I've got 10 kitbashed Possessed, made with three different kits and some green stuff.
They aren't painted, because I don't enjoy painting. They are built, because I enjoy that part.
For you, painting is essential. A mini can't even be considered complete without a paintjob. For me, it's not.
We have different preferences-and that's okay.
If you could press a button and magically have all of your models fully painted would you consider them improved? Or would you refuse to press the button because you prefer bare plastic with glue/green stuff/etc still visible from the conversion work?
Amishprn86 wrote: I have friends that can not paint, nerve damage, muscle issues, etc.... I have painted armies for them before even. Not everyone has time as well. Its a hobby and not having painted models wont effect other players, so why does it matter if they are painted if someone is unable to or unhappy to do so?
This literally has nothing to do with the poll question.
Being unable to drive because you have some sort of cognitive condition (ie being blind) and insisting to drive even if you are blind are two different issues... A third, different, issue would be being against driving because its bad for climate change, due to frecuent accidents or whatever.
Its so difficult to stay on topic? Since I was curious about an specific issue I open a poll not to hijack other fellow posters threads.
They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?
"I hate painting my army, I'm not playing with 10VP for painted army"
"Dude WTF why?"
"BC I physically can't paint...."
But I guess that isn't a good enough reason for you to "stay on topic"? I mean for me it seems like a pretty good reason to not like painting their army.
Amishprn86 wrote: They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?
Because the question was about why people choose not to paint. A person who has a disability that makes them unable to paint is not making a voluntary choice and their reasons for not painting have nothing to do with the reasons OP is asking about.
Amishprn86 wrote: They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?
Because the question was about why people choose not to paint. A person who has a disability that makes them unable to paint is not making a voluntary choice and their reasons for not painting have nothing to do with the reasons OP is asking about.
The OP did not ask "Why don't you like to paint?"
They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"
And the options are:
1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAACTFG 4) All the above
5) None of the above
As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.
Enlighten me on how you've come to fully understand the hobby. Where have you discovered this universal truth? Show me where there is a rule that says not only must I paint my figures but I must also read all the lore and make all of my armies "fluffy". That, to me, is what you must mean by "fully understand the hobby".
Your choices are all biased with the idea that if your figures are not painted then you are doing it wrong. What's the point in answering when your reply is nothing more than "You're wrong!" You're entitled to your opinion but that doesn't mean you are right in your assumption.
JNAProductions wrote: There's a big difference between "Not as appealing" and "Unappealing", Shas'O.
If you gave me a well-made burger and a well-made pork chop, I'd find the burger more appealing to eat. Does that mean the pork chop is bad? No-just that I find the burger better.
Likewise, grey plastic doesn't offend my sensibilities. Nor does it for the people I game with. It's not as appealing as a painted mini, but it's still appealing because the model is very well-designed.
And Vatsetis, I enjoy the game of 40k. I fully admit it's got TONS of flaws and faults, but despite that, I enjoy it. I do not enjoy painting. The two parts are related, but they aren't the same. Do you understand that?
Edit: Shas'O, I think you're conflating "I don't want to paint my own models" with "I think painting is bad".
The former is an attitude I have, because I don't enjoy painting.
The latter is not something I agree with at all.
But enjoying painting and playing with painted armies are not the same thing. Unless you are ofuscated or trolling.
Okay, allow me to elaborate.
I don't enjoy painting. And I don't care about whether or not my models are painted.
I do enjoy building the models, and customizing them that way-so I buy kits and build them.
So, buying second-hand minis isn't something I'd enjoy. And throwing $500 to get an army painted isn't worth it for me.
Does that make sense?
Not really. If you are such a passionate modeler but you dont enjoy painting. But you understand that many people indeed enjoy much more the 40k games against painted armies. Then you could exchange your valuable modelling labour (and enjoyment) for a fellow gamer paint job, its a win-win situation.
In many social contexts you might not want to do something (like saying "thanks") out of selfish own interest but nevertheless understand the need for that social convention and make the sacrifice (like following the dress code at a party)... Thats assuming that you consider ypur 40k hobby a social activity and not something strictly solitaire, but if you dont why are you exchanging views about the hobby in a publuc forum?
JNAProductions wrote: There's a big difference between "Not as appealing" and "Unappealing", Shas'O.
If you gave me a well-made burger and a well-made pork chop, I'd find the burger more appealing to eat. Does that mean the pork chop is bad? No-just that I find the burger better.
Likewise, grey plastic doesn't offend my sensibilities. Nor does it for the people I game with. It's not as appealing as a painted mini, but it's still appealing because the model is very well-designed.
And Vatsetis, I enjoy the game of 40k. I fully admit it's got TONS of flaws and faults, but despite that, I enjoy it. I do not enjoy painting. The two parts are related, but they aren't the same. Do you understand that?
Edit: Shas'O, I think you're conflating "I don't want to paint my own models" with "I think painting is bad".
The former is an attitude I have, because I don't enjoy painting.
The latter is not something I agree with at all.
But enjoying painting and playing with painted armies are not the same thing. Unless you are ofuscated or trolling.
Okay, allow me to elaborate.
I don't enjoy painting. And I don't care about whether or not my models are painted.
I do enjoy building the models, and customizing them that way-so I buy kits and build them.
So, buying second-hand minis isn't something I'd enjoy. And throwing $500 to get an army painted isn't worth it for me.
Does that make sense?
Not really. If you are such a passionate modeler but you dont enjoy painting. But you understand that many people indeed enjoy much more the 40k games against painted armies. Then you could exchange your valuable modelling labour (and enjoyment) for a fellow gamer paint job, its a win-win situation.
In many social contexts you might not want to do something (like saying "thanks") out of selfish own interest but nevertheless understand the need for that social convention and make the sacrifice (like following the dress code at a party)... Thats assuming that you consider ypur 40k hobby a social activity and not something strictly solitaire, but if you dont why are you exchanging views about the hobby in a publuc forum?
Are you saying I should offer to build someone else's models in exchange for them painting my minis?
I don't think that would work. Especially given that most of the people I know ALSO like to build their own models-some of them also enjoy painting.
And you seem to be assuming that the people I play with care strongly about paintjobs. They don't. So it's not impolite to have unpainted models.
JNAProductions wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but you highly value painted minis. It is essential to your enjoyment of the game and the overall hobby.
Correct. I will have some room for compromise if someone is making a good-faith effort to paint their army and needs more time to finish it, it's silly to make people wait months/years before being able to play their first game. But it's definitely a sacrifice made for the good of the community, and I'm not really interested in playing with someone who is not at least working towards that goal.
For me, that's not true. I'd rather have a painted than unpainted army, but it's not even close to essential for me.
And that's the contradiction I'm getting at. I understand not painting because you don't value aesthetics (though I question the point of spending thousands of dollars on aesthetics). I don't understand claiming to value aesthetics but having no problem settling for the option that is clearly inferior from an aesthetic point of view and feeling no drive at all to achieve a better aesthetic result. IOW, being the gaming equivalent of the guy who claims to love burgers and really want to have a great one but refuses every offer of a high-end burger because the dollar menu at McDonalds is good enough.
JNAProductions wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but you highly value painted minis. It is essential to your enjoyment of the game and the overall hobby.
Correct. I will have some room for compromise if someone is making a good-faith effort to paint their army and needs more time to finish it, it's silly to make people wait months/years before being able to play their first game. But it's definitely a sacrifice made for the good of the community, and I'm not really interested in playing with someone who is not at least working towards that goal.
For me, that's not true. I'd rather have a painted than unpainted army, but it's not even close to essential for me.
And that's the contradiction I'm getting at. I understand not painting because you don't value aesthetics (though I question the point of spending thousands of dollars on aesthetics). I don't understand claiming to value aesthetics but having no problem settling for the option that is clearly inferior from an aesthetic point of view and feeling no drive at all to achieve a better aesthetic result. IOW, being the gaming equivalent of the guy who claims to love burgers and really want to have a great one but refuses every offer of a high-end burger because the dollar menu at McDonalds is good enough.
I enjoy the gaming. I enjoy the modeling. I don't enjoy the painting.
It's not an intellectual decision. It's not something you can crunch the numbers and find the results of. It's how I feel. You don't have to understand or share the feelings, but you should respect them.
Amishprn86 wrote: They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?
Because the question was about why people choose not to paint. A person who has a disability that makes them unable to paint is not making a voluntary choice and their reasons for not painting have nothing to do with the reasons OP is asking about.
You did not ask "Why are players that are still able paint with no obstacles in their way against painting"
You asked why players are against it and nothing else. Maybe phrase your question better next time.
They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"
And the options are:
1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAACTFG 4) All the above
5) None of the above
As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.
Yes, the poll is obviously stupid and I'm starting to think OP is some kind of anti-painting false flag thing given their comments about "painting incels" and such. But to interpret it as charitably as possible for the sake of having any discussion at all you have to generalize it to "why do people who are strongly against painting feel that way" and someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished yet clearly isn't in that group. Asking that person why they don't like painting is a nonsense question where the only answer is "WTF, I like painting".
Amishprn86 wrote: They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?
Because the question was about why people choose not to paint. A person who has a disability that makes them unable to paint is not making a voluntary choice and their reasons for not painting have nothing to do with the reasons OP is asking about.
The OP did not ask "Why don't you like to paint?"
They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"
And the options are:
1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAACTFG 4) All the above
5) None of the above
As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.
Yes he just asked "Why are they against it" not "Why are able people against it" vehement doesn't mean able, it means strongly or passionate, so he literally said "Why are some players so strongly against painting their armies?"
They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"
And the options are:
1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAACTFG 4) All the above
5) None of the above
As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.
Yes, the poll is obviously stupid and I'm starting to think OP is some kind of anti-painting false flag thing given their comments about "painting incels" and such. But to interpret it as charitably as possible for the sake of having any discussion at all you have to generalize it to "why do people who are strongly against painting feel that way" and someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished yet clearly isn't in that group. Asking that person why they don't like painting is a nonsense question where the only answer is "WTF, I like painting".
No one is AGAINST painting. Or at least, I've not seen a single poster say "You shouldn't paint your models."
I have only seen people say "I shouldn't paint my models, because [REASONS]." For me, that reason is I don't enjoy it.
JNAProductions wrote: No, it's more akin to buying a car and not upgrading the radio, or adding bluetooth to it, or various other things like that.
If you enjoy the game of 40k, whether or not the models are painted, your enjoyment is just as valid as someone who enjoys painting but not gaming, or someone who enjoys both, or someone who just reads the novels.
How is this poll about the validity of enjoyment? Its about denial.
You know some people would say that eating until vomiting is a great pleasure. Certainly it defeats the standard porpouse of eating and in some cases might be unhealthy... But subjectively this people enjoy doing so, to the point of addiction.
Im sure that accumulating stashes of unpainted minis... With no intention of painting or perhaps even playing with them creates enjoyment to the point of addiction amongst many in the hobby.
Why are you making these outrageous comparisons?
Because its not outrageous from my POV.
Compulsive consumption/shopping can be an adiction just as compulsive eating.
Painting your miniatures, and making the discipline choise of not fielding unpainted miniatures can actually reduce the rithym of unnecesary shopping.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Stop assuming that your opinions are universal. They're not.
Then, like I said, poll the general population. You and I both know which answer is going to win.
It doesn't matter which one is more "popular". It only matters for the person who owns the models. Only their opinion matters when it comes to their own property. Not yours, or the "majority". It's their property, and they can do whatever they want with them, regardless of what you think.
Sorry, I was trying to actually talk about people who actually exist. No one is "vehemently opposed to painting their armies". There's people who don't, but they're not "vehemently opposed" to it. They have their own reasons, that are generally sane, and not some silly strawman for you to smack around.
And, like I said already, even if you discard "vehement" from the description it still doesn't apply. Someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished their army yet is not in the same category as someone who does not paint at all.
That wasn't the little "snippet" you took from my post. The snippet was: "Who says they don't value the aesthetics of the models?". And you've yet to prove that someone can't value those aesthetics on an unpainted model. Only that you can't. And you're opinion only matters for what you do with your models. You don't get to tell anyone else what they can or can't do with theirs.
Amishprn86 wrote: You did not ask "Why are players that are still able paint with no obstacles in their way against painting"
You asked why players are against it and nothing else. Maybe phrase your question better next time.
I am not OP, btw.
And someone who is unable to paint is not against painting. Being against painting means having made a deliberate choice, someone who is unable to paint has made no such choice and is clearly not in the group OP is asking about.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: It doesn't matter which one is more "popular". It only matters for the person who owns the models. Only their opinion matters when it comes to their own property. Not yours, or the "majority". It's their property, and they can do whatever they want with them, regardless of what you think.
Ok? Nobody is disputing that they can do whatever they want, there are no pro-painting death squads enforcing painting rules. But appealing to their property rights isn't a very useful argument in a discussion about their motives.
Amishprn86 wrote: You did not ask "Why are players that are still able paint with no obstacles in their way against painting"
You asked why players are against it and nothing else. Maybe phrase your question better next time.
I am not OP, btw.
And someone who is unable to paint is not against painting. Being against painting means having made a deliberate choice, someone who is unable to paint has made no such choice and is clearly not in the group OP is asking about.
The group the OP is asking about doesn't exist.
There's a group of people who don't paint their own minis, for various reasons. But they're not railing and raving against people who paint their own models. There is some pushback against people who insist they need to paint their models, but that's not at all the same as sayhing you shouldn't paint your own models if you want to.
Amishprn86 wrote: They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?
Because the question was about why people choose not to paint. A person who has a disability that makes them unable to paint is not making a voluntary choice and their reasons for not painting have nothing to do with the reasons OP is asking about.
The OP did not ask "Why don't you like to paint?"
They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"
And the options are:
1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAACTFG 4) All the above
5) None of the above
As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.
Option 1 is was not supposed to mean" they are stupid", perhaps that they are under some sort of self-delusion, but those are hardly synonims. :(
They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"
And the options are:
1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAACTFG 4) All the above
5) None of the above
As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.
Yes, the poll is obviously stupid and I'm starting to think OP is some kind of anti-painting false flag thing given their comments about "painting incels" and such. But to interpret it as charitably as possible for the sake of having any discussion at all you have to generalize it to "why do people who are strongly against painting feel that way" and someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished yet clearly isn't in that group. Asking that person why they don't like painting is a nonsense question where the only answer is "WTF, I like painting".
Gadzilla666 wrote: It doesn't matter which one is more "popular". It only matters for the person who owns the models. Only their opinion matters when it comes to their own property. Not yours, or the "majority". It's their property, and they can do whatever they want with them, regardless of what you think.
Ok? Nobody is disputing that they can do whatever they want, there are no pro-painting death squads enforcing painting rules. But appealing to their property rights isn't a very useful argument in a discussion about their motives.
Neither does appealing to the "popularity" of painting, but that was the statement that you made that I was responding to. Jeez, pick a lane.
And they've explained their motives. Over, and over, and over. And you apparently won't listen to them.
Amishprn86 wrote: You did not ask "Why are players that are still able paint with no obstacles in their way against painting"
You asked why players are against it and nothing else. Maybe phrase your question better next time.
I am not OP, btw.
And someone who is unable to paint is not against painting. Being against painting means having made a deliberate choice, someone who is unable to paint has made no such choice and is clearly not in the group OP is asking about.
The group the OP is asking about doesn't exist.
There's a group of people who don't paint their own minis, for various reasons. But they're not railing and raving against people who paint their own models. There is some pushback against people who insist they need to paint their models, but that's not at all the same as sayhing you shouldn't paint your own models if you want to.
I have edited for clarity the tittle of the poll because there seem to be some basic misunderstanding of my intentions here.
Im just simply trying to make sense of why people seem so adamant to express publickly their contempt towards painting their OWN 40K armies.
When making the OP I had my doubts, but I realised after all this healthy debate that many posters in the "you cannot force me to paint my minis" camp only really want to win the internet argument and are therefore, trolling. :(
Not painting your army, in itself, is actually your own choice and a legit hobby option for a number of reasons.
They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"
And the options are:
1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAACTFG 4) All the above
5) None of the above
As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.
Yes, the poll is obviously stupid and I'm starting to think OP is some kind of anti-painting false flag thing given their comments about "painting incels" and such. But to interpret it as charitably as possible for the sake of having any discussion at all you have to generalize it to "why do people who are strongly against painting feel that way" and someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished yet clearly isn't in that group. Asking that person why they don't like painting is a nonsense question where the only answer is "WTF, I like painting".
No one is AGAINST painting. Or at least, I've not seen a single poster say "You shouldn't paint your models."
I have only seen people say "I shouldn't paint my models, because [REASONS]." For me, that reason is I don't enjoy it.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Neither does appealing to the "popularity" of painting, but that was the statement that you made that I was responding to. Jeez, pick a lane.
Is the appeal to popularity completely decisive? No. But when virtually everyone who doesn't have a personal stake in unpainted armies being allowed is in agreement that the painted model looks better it does pretty strongly suggest that "I like unpainted models" is less of a genuine aesthetic opinion and more of a self-interested rationalization for why not painting is ok.
And they've explained their motives. Over, and over, and over. And you apparently won't listen to them.
"I don't like it" isn't much of an explanation, especially when it isn't carried through to its natural conclusion of using cardboard tokens instead of expensive miniatures.
There's that double standard again, complaining about how "insufferable" the side you dislike is while ignoring the fact that every time this comes up even the most mild of criticism of unpainted models draws an endless parade of hyperbolic statements about how nasty everyone is being to them.
theres no double standard, your side has been attacking and insulting the people that dislike painting by telling them theyre lazy or they should quit the hobby. Thats why you've been described as insufferable.
again, no one here is saying painted minis are bad or look worse than unpainted ones.
How is this poll about the validity of enjoyment? Its about denial.
You know some people would say that eating until vomiting is a great pleasure. Certainly it defeats the standard porpouse of eating and in some cases might be unhealthy... But subjectively this people enjoy doing so, to the point of addiction.
Im sure that accumulating stashes of unpainted minis... With no intention of painting or perhaps even playing with them creates enjoyment to the point of addiction amongst many in the hobby.
you keep bringing up that argument (and the driking and car ones) as if it was a good "gotcha" argument when in reality it falls short because it has no basing
Then, like I said, poll the general population. You and I both know which answer is going to win.
poll the population about what?
"Do you think painted minis look better than unpainted ones yes/no?"
No gak "yes" is gonna win. But thats not at all whats being argued by the non painters, they just don't wanna be insulted for not spending time doing something they dislike doing.
JNAProductions wrote: I like to build minis, and customize them. I've got 10 kitbashed Possessed, made with three different kits and some green stuff.
They aren't painted, because I don't enjoy painting. They are built, because I enjoy that part.
For you, painting is essential. A mini can't even be considered complete without a paintjob. For me, it's not.
We have different preferences-and that's okay.
If you could press a button and magically have all of your models fully painted would you consider them improved? Or would you refuse to press the button because you prefer bare plastic with glue/green stuff/etc still visible from the conversion work?
THATS NOT WHAT WERE SAYING
you keep trying to gotcha us with that argument when everyone here agrees with it, you're being a dumbass
Gadzilla666 wrote: Neither does appealing to the "popularity" of painting, but that was the statement that you made that I was responding to. Jeez, pick a lane.
Is the appeal to popularity completely decisive? No. But when virtually everyone who doesn't have a personal stake in unpainted armies being allowed is in agreement that the painted model looks better it does pretty strongly suggest that "I like unpainted models" is less of a genuine aesthetic opinion and more of a self-interested rationalization for why not painting is ok.
Only for your hypothetical "virtually everyone". Whose opinions only matter for their models. Not anyone else's.
And they've explained their motives. Over, and over, and over. And you apparently won't listen to them.
"I don't like it" isn't much of an explanation, especially when it isn't carried through to its natural conclusion of using cardboard tokens instead of expensive miniatures.
It is when they do like the models, and building them, but just don't like painting. Again, everyone doesn't think like you.
Ok? Nobody is disputing that they can do whatever they want, there are no pro-painting death squads enforcing painting rules. But appealing to their property rights isn't a very useful argument in a discussion about their motives.
Dude, the motive is sooo fething simple, get it in your stupid head : THEY DON'T ENJOY PAINTING.
You : Do you enjoy crawling through broken glass?
Them : No.
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
"I don't like it" isn't much of an explanation, especially when it isn't carried through to its natural conclusion of using cardboard tokens instead of expensive miniatures.
its a perfectly valid explanation : 3d minis look better than paper minis.
VladimirHerzog wrote: your side has been attacking and insulting the people that dislike painting by telling them theyre lazy or they should quit the hobby.
And your side has been posting hyperbolic claims that even mild criticism is an inexcusable attack. The double standard is obvious.
THAT WAS NEVER IN QUESION FFS
You're right, it wasn't. I just wanted to get it on record that JNAProductions is in agreement about painted models being aesthetically superior, therefore undermining any claim to valuing the aesthetic component of the game while not painting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: Only for your hypothetical "virtually everyone". Whose opinions only matter for their models. Not anyone else's.
And, again, the point is that it isn't a genuine opinion. Which is more likely, given the overwhelming numbers for the population as a whole: that a person who "enjoys unpainted models" is a genuine extreme outlier, or that they are using their supposed "enjoyment" as nothing more than a self-serving defense of that precious 10 VP they don't want to lose. You and I both know which one it is.
VladimirHerzog wrote: your side has been attacking and insulting the people that dislike painting by telling them theyre lazy or they should quit the hobby.
And your side has been posting hyperbolic claims that even mild criticism is an inexcusable attack. The double standard is obvious.
what hyperbolic claim?
We were litterally told that we're :
ofuscated or dont fully understand the 40K hobby.
just Trolling.
meta chasers and painting is an inconvenience for reselling.
in the poll.
we've also been called lazy and told to get out of the hobby for enjoying it the "wrong way" how are those not attacks?
Did someone attack you because of how you choose present your armies?
VladimirHerzog wrote: your side has been attacking and insulting the people that dislike painting by telling them theyre lazy or they should quit the hobby.
And your side has been posting hyperbolic claims that even mild criticism is an inexcusable attack. The double standard is obvious.
THAT WAS NEVER IN QUESION FFS
You're right, it wasn't. I just wanted to get it on record that JNAProductions is in agreement about painted models being aesthetically superior, therefore undermining any claim to valuing the aesthetic component of the game while not painting.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gadzilla666 wrote: Only for your hypothetical "virtually everyone". Whose opinions only matter for their models. Not anyone else's.
And, again, the point is that it isn't a genuine opinion. Which is more likely, giving the overwhelming numbers for the population as a whole: that a person who "enjoys unpainted models" is a genuine extreme outlier, or that they are using their supposed "enjoyment" as nothing more than a self-serving defense of that precious 10 VP they don't want to lose. You and I both know which one it is.
Again, you're conflating "Prefers painted models to unpainted models" with "Unpainted models are an eyesore."
Moreover, I can value aesthetics without enjoying the process of getting there. I like a well-painted army. But I don't enjoy the process of getting an army painted, I don't want to spend the money on a commission paintjob, and I don't value aesthetics enough to make either of those worth it.
VladimirHerzog wrote: your side has been attacking and insulting the people that dislike painting by telling them theyre lazy or they should quit the hobby.
And your side has been posting hyperbolic claims that even mild criticism is an inexcusable attack. The double standard is obvious.
what hyperbolic claim?
We were litterally told that we're :
ofuscated or dont fully understand the 40K hobby.
just Trolling.
meta chasers and painting is an inconvenience for reselling.
in the poll.
we've also been called lazy and told to get out of the hobby for enjoying it the "wrong way" how are those not attacks?
Did someone attack you because of how you choose present your armies?
Honestly I would consider the whole topic and poll a troll.
The claim that it's more than just one person posting stupid stuff about "painting incels" and such. OP's poll is obviously terrible but that's one person. Over and over again you, and people like you, keep insisting that polite disagreement or mild criticism are an inexcusable attack and invent your own straw man comments about "laziness" or "get out of the hobby" to justify your accusations. It's happening here, it's happening in the other threads, and it happens every time this subject comes up. You just can't tolerate the idea that someone would disagree with allowing unpainted models.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Only for your hypothetical "virtually everyone". Whose opinions only matter for their models. Not anyone else's.
And, again, the point is that it isn't a genuine opinion. Which is more likely, given the overwhelming numbers for the population as a whole: that a person who "enjoys unpainted models" is a genuine extreme outlier, or that they are using their supposed "enjoyment" as nothing more than a self-serving defense of that precious 10 VP they don't want to lose. You and I both know which one it is.
It's definitely a "genuine opinion" to prefer unpainted models to "cardboard tokens and chits". And it's also entirely possible to prefer painted models but still find unpainted models aesthetically appealing, but only less so, and not enough to make up for some people's dislike of painting.
And the ones who seem the most worried about those "precious 10VP" are the ones who are getting them, not losing them.
If I had to guess I imagine it would be because of the insecure drooling neckbeards who try to pressure and gatekeep them into partaking in a part of the hobby they don't enjoy.
Void__Dragon wrote: If I had to guess I imagine it would be because of the insecure drooling neckbeards who try to pressure and gatekeep them into partaking in a part of the hobby they don't enjoy.
Hey VladimirHerzog, going to complain about this one too?
The claim that it's more than just one person posting stupid stuff about "painting incels" and such. OP's poll is obviously terrible but that's one person. Over and over again you, and people like you, keep insisting that polite disagreement or mild criticism are an inexcusable attack and invent your own straw man comments about "laziness" or "get out of the hobby" to justify your accusations. It's happening here, it's happening in the other threads, and it happens every time this subject comes up. You just can't tolerate the idea that someone would disagree with allowing unpainted models.
It's been more than one person tho... Across more than one post.
Oh and even better, its been this thread's vreator with the poll options and YOU, telling us that we hobby wrong. Mind your own fething business, paint your dudes as you want but let others play as they wish without giving them gak.
Oh and for the record, i paint my armies, i just have enough empathy to understand its not for everyone
Void__Dragon wrote: If I had to guess I imagine it would be because of the insecure drooling neckbeards who try to pressure and gatekeep them into partaking in a part of the hobby they don't enjoy.
Hey VladimirHerzog, going to complain about this one too?
Namecalling is unwarranted but holy gak are you making it tempting.
(Notice how he didnt criticise you based on your painting tho. He criticized you based on your attitude)
VladimirHerzog wrote: Mind your own fething business, paint your dudes as you want but let others play as they wish without giving them gak.
People can play however they want, I'm not stopping them. But if you think people have a right to never face even mild criticism for their choices you're wrong, especially when that criticism is limited to clearly titled threads about the topic.
Namecalling is unwarranted but holy gak are you making it tempting.
(Notice how he didnt criticise you based on your painting tho. He criticized you based on your attitude)
Ah, there's the weaseling I expected from you. "Namecalling is bad, but really it's completely understandable" because it's someone on your side, gotcha.
I can honestly say that I have never in my 20+ years of playing this game ever met anyone who had such a strong opinion on only playing against fully painted armies. You can be as passive aggressive and judgemental as you want, but I want to play my new model before it is painted then I will. If you are the kind of person that gets so put off by someone playing models that aren't painted than I have no problem never playing a game with you.
Luckily, as I said, I have never actually met someone with such an extreme opinion.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: I can honestly say that I have never in my 20+ years of playing this game ever met anyone who had such a strong opinion on only playing against fully painted armies. You can be as passive aggressive and judgemental as you want, but I want to play my new model before it is painted then I will. If you are the kind of person that gets so put off by someone playing models that aren't painted than I have no problem never playing a game with you.
Luckily, as I said, I have never actually met someone with such an extreme opinion.
Most things that are strongly worded/opinion on Dakka never happens on the table.
Arbiter_Shade wrote: I can honestly say that I have never in my 20+ years of playing this game ever met anyone who had such a strong opinion on only playing against fully painted armies. You can be as passive aggressive and judgemental as you want, but I want to play my new model before it is painted then I will. If you are the kind of person that gets so put off by someone playing models that aren't painted than I have no problem never playing a game with you.
Luckily, as I said, I have never actually met someone with such an extreme opinion.
Most things that are strongly worded/opinion on Dakka never happens on the table.
Nah I've seen similar attitudes. It's why, despite how over the top some of the stories are. I believe Karol and support them for the most part.
Gadzilla666 wrote: Only for your hypothetical "virtually everyone". Whose opinions only matter for their models. Not anyone else's.
And, again, the point is that it isn't a genuine opinion. Which is more likely, given the overwhelming numbers for the population as a whole: that a person who "enjoys unpainted models" is a genuine extreme outlier, or that they are using their supposed "enjoyment" as nothing more than a self-serving defense of that precious 10 VP they don't want to lose. You and I both know which one it is.
It's definitely a "genuine opinion" to prefer unpainted models to "cardboard tokens and chits". And it's also entirely possible to prefer painted models but still find unpainted models aesthetically appealing, but only less so, and not enough to make up for some people's dislike of painting.
And the ones who seem the most worried about those "precious 10VP" are the ones who are getting them, not losing them.
Sure, unpainted models are superior aesthetically to cardboard tokens and chips... But probably cost 30 or 40 times more.
When people reject comissioning painting because it will "double" the price tag on their minis I assume that perhaps reducing the cost by at least 90% would have some appeal for them.
Im sure if cardboard and tokens were given a "official status" by GW for 40k games... Many in the unpainted crowd(perhaps even those that are passionate modelers but hate painting) would quickly put on ebay or the like their grey plastic mountains.
They would obviously not recognised it. Since being told that you do the bare minimum for participating in the hobby (IE, to be tolerated by fellow gamers, TOs and LGS) surely hurts their feelings. Thats why they believe Im a troll, because if Im not their POV is compromised
OMG, the pedantry on display in this thread is insane.
I've only ever met one person whom actively didn't paint their minis and the reason not was fething childish.
Everyone else has ranged from I'm in school/work 2 jobs etc to I have better things to do than paint. All are valid and none more/less moral than the other.
I have many hobbies that do not include miniatures or wargaming. I wouldn't consider someone who races their stock civic less of a racer than I, I just choose to go a little but further in my speed addiction. I wouldn't consider someone who only plays golf on city courses less...
Same as painting, the only time I'd question it is if you're just building gray Tamiya Racecar model kits...
Im certainly not debating the morality of painting or not someones "property" miniatures.
In isolation thats hardly a moral issue.
Im only worried about the motivations of the "dont force me to paint my minis crowd".
Being self delusional, trolling or being very competitive dont imply a moral fault of any sort... Its certainly not like cheating or insulting someone.
Subfactions have obliterated the hobby. The simple selection of a color now has real game consequences for the collector, and meta chasers are more enabled than ever because of it. I've seen equal parts grey tide and all black "stealth" armies explicitly because of the meta chasing.
Its very dificult for me to see a sensible reason why anyone will actively oppose painting..
Thats because no one does. They just don't want to or aren't able to do it.
If someone prefers PL and can't be asked to paint their minis, though, they're probably too casual for me to get a good game against them.
What the feth does PL have to do with this?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also Vatsetis and Shas'O, since your insisting on continuing this farce let me ask a question.
Say you have a community like mine where the number of players is very small (4 of us would be considered Veterans with big collections, another 5 have 40k models but not big collections or attend games so infrequently that they don't know the game as well as the other 4) and games are infrequent (like once every two months) because a lot of the players have work and very young children so free time is scarce.
If I held your opinions in my circumstances would you paint the models of players who don't have the time to play free of charge in order to improve your own enjoyment of the game since apparently painted models are such a major part of the game for you?
Vatsetis wrote: Well some people collect old functional cars and dont know how to drive them and actually pay others to drive them so they dont break down.
Some people eat a lot of food but dont digest them and rather vomit it.
Some people drink alcohol in unhealthy cuantities far beyond the point it might provide them some pleasure.
Surely if someone point out to this people that they were not ussing their cars or food or drinks in a sensible manner they would be pissed off and cry some nonsense about their "personal freedom and property". :(
wtf kinda point are you even trying to make here?
Its pretty clear... That cars are ment to be driven, food is ment to be diggested, alcohol should be consumed with moderation and 40k miniatures are designed with painting in mind... And that the people that dont grasp this very simple facts are somewhat non functional.
That has to be among the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.
Your poll describes absolutely nobody an is pure bait. Absolutely nobody is "vehemently against painting" some people just don't have the time or don't want to invest the time. Some just don't want to do it and are happy with their grey models which they have built. And guess what? That's totally fine because it's their property and they can do with it as they please.
The only thing anyone objects to here is if people who don't want to paint get called lazy, trolls or non-functional. That's it, how is that so difficult to grasp?
Sim-Life wrote: If I held your opinions in my circumstances would you paint the models of players who don't have the time to play free of charge in order to improve your own enjoyment of the game since apparently painted models are such a major part of the game for you?
If my options are "spend a ton of time painting someone else's army for free" or "play with unpainted models" then I'd choose the third option: stop playing with that group.
Sim-Life wrote: If I held your opinions in my circumstances would you paint the models of players who don't have the time to play free of charge in order to improve your own enjoyment of the game since apparently painted models are such a major part of the game for you?
If my options are "spend a ton of time painting someone else's army for free" or "play with unpainted models" then I'd choose the third option: stop playing with that group.
Sim-Life wrote: If I held your opinions in my circumstances would you paint the models of players who don't have the time to play free of charge in order to improve your own enjoyment of the game since apparently painted models are such a major part of the game for you?
If my options are "spend a ton of time painting someone else's army for free" or "play with unpainted models" then I'd choose the third option: stop playing with that group.
So you'd just not play at all in my case then?
Yep. I do not enjoy games with unpainted models, there is no realistic chance of them ever painting theirs, and I don't value 40k enough to spend that much time and energy on painting someone else's stuff for free.
Its very dificult for me to see a sensible reason why anyone will actively oppose painting..
Thats because no one does. They just don't want to or aren't able to do it.
If someone prefers PL and can't be asked to paint their minis, though, they're probably too casual for me to get a good game against them.
What the feth does PL have to do with this?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also Vatsetis and Shas'O, since your insisting on continuing this farce let me ask a question.
Say you have a community like mine where the number of players is very small (4 of us would be considered Veterans with big collections, another 5 have 40k models but not big collections or attend games so infrequently that they don't know the game as well as the other 4) and games are infrequent (like once every two months) because a lot of the players have work and very young children so free time is scarce.
If I held your opinions in my circumstances would you paint the models of players who don't have the time to play free of charge in order to improve your own enjoyment of the game since apparently painted models are such a major part of the game for you?
Is this an actual question? Seems like one that will be said in a fake court like the one depicted in SEASON 5 of "The Good Wife".
Can you rephrase the question so that I could answer it in a sensible manner, please.
EviscerationPlague wrote: Bruh, I fething suck at painting. No amount of contrast is going to help with that.
Everyone sucks at painting at first. I *still* suck at painting, but I enjoy painting my minis. I don't stress out about playing with unpainted stuff though.
Same here, I prefer playing against painted armies but I've got plenty of friends with mostly grey. I am by no means a great painter so I wound up getting some contrast pots a while back since I really enjoyed the output when it came to painting infantry.
Vatsetis wrote: Well some people collect old functional cars and dont know how to drive them and actually pay others to drive them so they dont break down.
Some people eat a lot of food but dont digest them and rather vomit it.
Some people drink alcohol in unhealthy cuantities far beyond the point it might provide them some pleasure.
Surely if someone point out to this people that they were not ussing their cars or food or drinks in a sensible manner they would be pissed off and cry some nonsense about their "personal freedom and property". :(
wtf kinda point are you even trying to make here?
Its pretty clear... That cars are ment to be driven, food is ment to be diggested, alcohol should be consumed with moderation and 40k miniatures are designed with painting in mind... And that the people that dont grasp this very simple facts are somewhat non functional.
That has to be among the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.
Your poll describes absolutely nobody an is pure bait. Absolutely nobody is "vehemently against painting" some people just don't have the time or don't want to invest the time. Some just don't want to do it and are happy with their grey models which they have built. And guess what? That's totally fine because it's their property and they can do with it as they please.
The only thing anyone objects to here is if people who don't want to paint get called lazy, trolls or non-functional. That's it, how is that so difficult to grasp?
Being unable to do something as intended/design is the definition of non-functional.
EG: being unable to drink alcohol without getting drunk.
There might be very good reasons for not being able to paint your armies but its certainly not something to be proud of. Its a non functional element of your 40K hobby that needs to be solved not denied.
Saying "my personal life is very hard, therefore I need to get drunk to go along, respect my personal choices" is not very sensible, but neither is saying "I have nor spare time, nor money, therefore I cannot afford to paint my 40K minis, respect my personal choices".
Its very dificult for me to see a sensible reason why anyone will actively oppose painting..
Thats because no one does. They just don't want to or aren't able to do it.
If someone prefers PL and can't be asked to paint their minis, though, they're probably too casual for me to get a good game against them.
What the feth does PL have to do with this?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also Vatsetis and Shas'O, since your insisting on continuing this farce let me ask a question.
Say you have a community like mine where the number of players is very small (4 of us would be considered Veterans with big collections, another 5 have 40k models but not big collections or attend games so infrequently that they don't know the game as well as the other 4) and games are infrequent (like once every two months) because a lot of the players have work and very young children so free time is scarce.
If I held your opinions in my circumstances would you paint the models of players who don't have the time to play free of charge in order to improve your own enjoyment of the game since apparently painted models are such a major part of the game for you?
Is this an actual question? Seems like one that will be said in a fake court like the one depicted in SEASON 5 of "The Good Wife".
Can you rephrase the question so that I could answer it in a sensible manner, please.
How is it not a sensible question? It's my current situation and group dynamic. We're a small group, some vets, some beginners. We don't get to play often and they all have family and work commitments that limit their free time. There are no other groups in the area because we live in a rural area and already for most people its around a 20 min drive to another players house on average. So why not answer the question instead of pretending it's a trap? Are you in the same boat as Shas'O where you'd throw out the baby with the bathwater or would you take on the burden of meeting your own standards in order to play a game?
Well, it all really depends on some sort of social transaction... Obviously not money... If I gave my time to others for no compensation other than "meeting my own standards" I will became a slave of shorts.
If I indeed had the time to paint 10+ armies, and all my fellow gamers did indeed appreciate my paint jobs, and if they recognize and aknoledge my effort, perhaps inviting me to a drink or reparing my car or house if I needed to and they had the time and ability to do so... I would most probably do it.
Is this answer satisfactory for the public prosecutor?
Being unable to do something as intended/design is the definition of non-functional.
EG: being unable to drink alcohol without getting drunk.
There might be very good reasons for not being able to paint your armies but its certainly not something to be proud of. Its a non functional element of your 40K hobby that needs to be solved not denied.
Saying "my personal life is very hard, therefore I need to get drunk to go along, respect my personal choices" is not very sensible, but neither is saying "I have nor spare time, nor money, therefore I cannot afford to paint my 40K minis, respect my personal choices".
You're very bad at analogies. Like, spectacularly, unimaginably terrible. Please stop using them to attempt to illustrate your points if you want to be taken seriously (though that ship sailed a long time ago anyway).
You also don't understand what non-functional means, or you're looking for some other word/phrase instead. Something not working as designed doesn't necessarily make it non-functional, though it can.
The reality is, the aesthetic part of the game exists on a spectrum with cardboard tokens and bits of paper on one end up to Golden Daemon standard armies at the other. People's preferences for their own models and for their own enjoyment against other people can have minimum standards at any point on that spectrum. That doesn't mean they don't appreciate Golden Daemon standard paint jobs even if they don't demand that level of skill themselves. Additionally, the game rules require built miniatures due to TLoS, so there's a rules imperative to at least use assembled models, which makes that a reasonable minimum within the context of the game. If someone is happy using unpainted, assembled models there's no gotcha or contradiction if they also agree painted models can look more appealing. What they're saying in that case is there's a minimum threshold for their enjoyment that's lower than other people's, which is fine.
Vatsetis wrote: Well some people collect old functional cars and dont know how to drive them and actually pay others to drive them so they dont break down.
Some people eat a lot of food but dont digest them and rather vomit it.
Some people drink alcohol in unhealthy cuantities far beyond the point it might provide them some pleasure.
Surely if someone point out to this people that they were not ussing their cars or food or drinks in a sensible manner they would be pissed off and cry some nonsense about their "personal freedom and property". :(
wtf kinda point are you even trying to make here?
Its pretty clear... That cars are ment to be driven, food is ment to be diggested, alcohol should be consumed with moderation and 40k miniatures are designed with painting in mind... And that the people that dont grasp this very simple facts are somewhat non functional.
That has to be among the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.
Your poll describes absolutely nobody an is pure bait. Absolutely nobody is "vehemently against painting" some people just don't have the time or don't want to invest the time. Some just don't want to do it and are happy with their grey models which they have built. And guess what? That's totally fine because it's their property and they can do with it as they please.
The only thing anyone objects to here is if people who don't want to paint get called lazy, trolls or non-functional. That's it, how is that so difficult to grasp?
Being unable to do something as intended/design is the definition of non-functional.
EG: being unable to drink alcohol without getting drunk.
There might be very good reasons for not being able to paint your armies but its certainly not something to be proud of. Its a non functional element of your 40K hobby that needs to be solved not denied.
Saying "my personal life is very hard, therefore I need to get drunk to go along, respect my personal choices" is not very sensible, but neither is saying "I have nor spare time, nor money, therefore I cannot afford to paint my 40K minis, respect my personal choices".
Jesus fething christ your analogies are so bad it hurts. You did not just equate having alcohol problems in your personal life with not being able/not wanting to paint minis....I mean what the hell is wrong with you? One can lead to severe health problems and even endanger other people, the other has no effect on anyone except some people who don't like looking at unpainted minis. These two things are not in the same ballpark...they are not even in the same galaxy. Geez what a gak comparison.
For the last time, people not being able/not wanting to paint their minis is their business. You can judge them/not like them all you want, the only thing anyone is objecting to is if you call them lazy, trolls or non-functioning...online or not. How is that so difficult to grasp for you?
Vatsetis wrote: Well some people collect old functional cars and dont know how to drive them and actually pay others to drive them so they dont break down.
Some people eat a lot of food but dont digest them and rather vomit it.
Some people drink alcohol in unhealthy cuantities far beyond the point it might provide them some pleasure.
Surely if someone point out to this people that they were not ussing their cars or food or drinks in a sensible manner they would be pissed off and cry some nonsense about their "personal freedom and property". :(
wtf kinda point are you even trying to make here?
Its pretty clear... That cars are ment to be driven, food is ment to be diggested, alcohol should be consumed with moderation and 40k miniatures are designed with painting in mind... And that the people that dont grasp this very simple facts are somewhat non functional.
That has to be among the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.
Your poll describes absolutely nobody an is pure bait. Absolutely nobody is "vehemently against painting" some people just don't have the time or don't want to invest the time. Some just don't want to do it and are happy with their grey models which they have built. And guess what? That's totally fine because it's their property and they can do with it as they please.
The only thing anyone objects to here is if people who don't want to paint get called lazy, trolls or non-functional. That's it, how is that so difficult to grasp?
Being unable to do something as intended/design is the definition of non-functional.
EG: being unable to drink alcohol without getting drunk.
There might be very good reasons for not being able to paint your armies but its certainly not something to be proud of. Its a non functional element of your 40K hobby that needs to be solved not denied.
Saying "my personal life is very hard, therefore I need to get drunk to go along, respect my personal choices" is not very sensible, but neither is saying "I have nor spare time, nor money, therefore I cannot afford to paint my 40K minis, respect my personal choices".
I think this is where some people in here dont understand, its NOT part of THEIR hobby its part of YOUR hobby. A Hobby is not bound by laws, it is what EACH PERSON makes it out to be. If a person doesn't want to paint then its not part of their Hobby, thats how hobbies work.
Vatsetis wrote: Well some people collect old functional cars and dont know how to drive them and actually pay others to drive them so they dont break down.
Some people eat a lot of food but dont digest them and rather vomit it.
Some people drink alcohol in unhealthy cuantities far beyond the point it might provide them some pleasure.
Surely if someone point out to this people that they were not ussing their cars or food or drinks in a sensible manner they would be pissed off and cry some nonsense about their "personal freedom and property". :(
wtf kinda point are you even trying to make here?
Its pretty clear... That cars are ment to be driven, food is ment to be diggested, alcohol should be consumed with moderation and 40k miniatures are designed with painting in mind... And that the people that dont grasp this very simple facts are somewhat non functional.
That has to be among the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.
Your poll describes absolutely nobody an is pure bait. Absolutely nobody is "vehemently against painting" some people just don't have the time or don't want to invest the time. Some just don't want to do it and are happy with their grey models which they have built. And guess what? That's totally fine because it's their property and they can do with it as they please.
The only thing anyone objects to here is if people who don't want to paint get called lazy, trolls or non-functional. That's it, how is that so difficult to grasp?
Being unable to do something as intended/design is the definition of non-functional.
EG: being unable to drink alcohol without getting drunk.
There might be very good reasons for not being able to paint your armies but its certainly not something to be proud of. Its a non functional element of your 40K hobby that needs to be solved not denied.
Saying "my personal life is very hard, therefore I need to get drunk to go along, respect my personal choices" is not very sensible, but neither is saying "I have nor spare time, nor money, therefore I cannot afford to paint my 40K minis, respect my personal choices".
I think this is where some people in here dont understand, its NOT part of THEIR hobby its part of YOUR hobby. A Hobby is not bound by laws, it is what EACH PERSON makes it out to be. If a person doesn't want to paint then its not part of their Hobby, thats how hobbies work.
Then if their hobby is a self contained activity with no social implications whatsoever, why do people get so mad about what a random guy of the internet say about their sovereign hobby?
Vatsetis wrote: Well some people collect old functional cars and dont know how to drive them and actually pay others to drive them so they dont break down.
Some people eat a lot of food but dont digest them and rather vomit it.
Some people drink alcohol in unhealthy cuantities far beyond the point it might provide them some pleasure.
Surely if someone point out to this people that they were not ussing their cars or food or drinks in a sensible manner they would be pissed off and cry some nonsense about their "personal freedom and property". :(
wtf kinda point are you even trying to make here?
Its pretty clear... That cars are ment to be driven, food is ment to be diggested, alcohol should be consumed with moderation and 40k miniatures are designed with painting in mind... And that the people that dont grasp this very simple facts are somewhat non functional.
That has to be among the dumbest things I've ever read on this forum.
Your poll describes absolutely nobody an is pure bait. Absolutely nobody is "vehemently against painting" some people just don't have the time or don't want to invest the time. Some just don't want to do it and are happy with their grey models which they have built. And guess what? That's totally fine because it's their property and they can do with it as they please.
The only thing anyone objects to here is if people who don't want to paint get called lazy, trolls or non-functional. That's it, how is that so difficult to grasp?
Being unable to do something as intended/design is the definition of non-functional.
EG: being unable to drink alcohol without getting drunk.
There might be very good reasons for not being able to paint your armies but its certainly not something to be proud of. Its a non functional element of your 40K hobby that needs to be solved not denied.
Saying "my personal life is very hard, therefore I need to get drunk to go along, respect my personal choices" is not very sensible, but neither is saying "I have nor spare time, nor money, therefore I cannot afford to paint my 40K minis, respect my personal choices".
I think this is where some people in here dont understand, its NOT part of THEIR hobby its part of YOUR hobby. A Hobby is not bound by laws, it is what EACH PERSON makes it out to be. If a person doesn't want to paint then its not part of their Hobby, thats how hobbies work.
Then if their hobby is a self contained activity with no social implications whatsoever, why do people get so mad about what a random guy of the internet say about their sovereign hobby?
Bc people feel attacked for some reason.... maybe starting a topic literally attacking people that dont want to paint is not a healthy way to have a conversation.... The freaking top 3 questions to the poll are literally trollish attacking questions for crying out loud, yeah people are going to be more aggressive when you start out like that.
All this talk about aestethics makes me remember that I've actually seen painted armies that made me wish that they weren't painted. The paint jobs were so bad that, in my opinion, that it would have been better to bring the models in unpainted.
Also in regards to painted is better than unpainted- I guess that means that the Venus di Milo would like nicer if someone painted it say Ultramarines blue rather than leaving it in its current unpainted state. Or, how about painting the Eiffel Tower a wonderful Neon Pink. People can enjoy models in their natural, unpainted, state. Maybe that's enough to satisfy them and since it's their property that's all thats important.
Vatsetis wrote: So if you believe a poll/thread is a troll trap, shouldnt you just ignore it rather than feed it with further posts?
Have we go back in time to the 2000´s?
PD: poll is about to reach 100 results, thanks to everybody that participated.
It's a discussion board. People will discuss aspects of a topic they feel need discussing. This can include criticism of a poll or topics directly related to the poll, without ever responding to the poll itself.
Vatsetis wrote: So if you believe a poll/thread is a troll trap, shouldnt you just ignore it rather than feed it with further posts?
Have we go back in time to the 2000´s?
PD: poll is about to reach 100 results, thanks to everybody that participated.
So let me get this straight. You write a bunch of nonsense like actually comparing not painting your minis to being a drunkard, you make a nonsensical poll and when people start calling you out on your utter BS you revert back to the old "well, you can just ignore my post if you don't like it"....nobody is ever going to take you seriously again on this forum and rightly so.
Vatsetis wrote: So if you believe a poll/thread is a troll trap, shouldnt you just ignore it rather than feed it with further posts?
Have we go back in time to the 2000´s?
PD: poll is about to reach 100 results, thanks to everybody that participated.
So let me get this straight. You write a bunch of nonsense like actually comparing not painting your minis to being a drunkard, you make a nonsensical poll and when people start calling you out on your utter BS you revert back to the old "well, you can just ignore my post if you don't like it"....nobody is ever going to take you seriously again on this forum and rightly so.
I already did stop taking them seriously, this thread just confirms it.
I have no idea why the mods are letting this kind of thread continue to exist. It's clearly inflammatory and non-productive.
So, should people be prevented to get drunk if they want to?
Isnt getting drunk part of someone personal freedom just like painting or not their 40K minis?
Most of the times when people get drunk they dont harm anyone, you have some serious prejudice against drunkness. :(
Yes, drinking alcohol is a personal freedom. But if painting miniatures and drinking alcohol is the same activity to you in regards to how much harm it can do and how it can affect other people, then you might have a seriously unhealthy and irresponsible relationship towards alcohol buddy.
You equating these two activities is dishonest in just about any context let alone this discussion.
Also in regards to painted is better than unpainted- I guess that means that the Venus di Milo would like nicer if someone painted it say Ultramarines blue rather than leaving it in its current unpainted state. Or, how about painting the Eiffel Tower a wonderful Neon Pink. People can enjoy models in their natural, unpainted, state. Maybe that's enough to satisfy them and since it's their property that's all thats important.
Leo_the_Rat wrote: All this talk about aestethics makes me remember that I've actually seen painted armies that made me wish that they weren't painted. The paint jobs were so bad that, in my opinion, that it would have been better to bring the models in unpainted.
Also in regards to painted is better than unpainted- I guess that means that the Venus di Milo would like nicer if someone painted it say Ultramarines blue rather than leaving it in its current unpainted state. Or, how about painting the Eiffel Tower a wonderful Neon Pink. People can enjoy models in their natural, unpainted, state. Maybe that's enough to satisfy them and since it's their property that's all thats important.
Most classical marble statues were originally painted... the "bare stone" aesthetic is a result of subsecuent copies and the pass of time.
Also if the Eiffel tower wasnt painted it will suffer heavily due to corrosion.
I have no idea why the mods are letting this kind of thread continue to exist. It's clearly inflammatory and non-productive.
honestly, it seems like the mods have been asleep for the last couple of months. so many threads last way longer than they should where they become 2-3 posters slinging gak at each other. I remember when these threads used to be nipped in the bud not that long ago....
So, should people be prevented to get drunk if they want to?
Isnt getting drunk part of someone personal freedom just like painting or not their 40K minis?
Most of the times when people get drunk they dont harm anyone, you have some serious prejudice against drunkness. :(
Yes, drinking alcohol is a personal freedom. But if painting miniatures and drinking alcohol is the same activity to you in regards to how much harm it can do and how it can affect other people, then you might have a seriously unhealthy and irresponsible relationship towards alcohol buddy.
You equating these two activities is dishonest in just about any context let alone this discussion.
I hardly drink nowdays and have been drunk perhaps three of four times in my lifetime. Im not a particularly good or quick mini painter, but I do my best to improve.
Im not dishonest, and Im not a troll... perhaps Im just putting forward my POV in a challenging manner like Socrates or Jesus of Nazareth did in the past, both of which suffer severe backclash during their lifetimes but were sort of vindicated by history.
Sgt_Smudge wrote: I have no idea why the mods are letting this kind of thread continue to exist. It's clearly inflammatory and non-productive.
Because the Mods don't moderate as much on weekends which is hilarious because that's often when people will have the most time to be on this site.
So people put bait threads like this knowing they'll get a rise with 0 consequences because the Mods won't act until Monday at the earliest and by then it's already 6 pages deep with troll posts and the like, which won't be acted on because the Mods don't follow their own site rules anyway.
To be honest I don't mind. These threads are good for a laugh and letting them run acts as a containment to stop these discussions leaking out all over the board. Though its not stopped Vatsetis from making multiple threads about something he apparently is not mad about.
So, should people be prevented to get drunk if they want to?
Isnt getting drunk part of someone personal freedom just like painting or not their 40K minis?
Most of the times when people get drunk they dont harm anyone, you have some serious prejudice against drunkness. :(
Yes, drinking alcohol is a personal freedom. But if painting miniatures and drinking alcohol is the same activity to you in regards to how much harm it can do and how it can affect other people, then you might have a seriously unhealthy and irresponsible relationship towards alcohol buddy.
You equating these two activities is dishonest in just about any context let alone this discussion.
I hardly drink nowdays and have been drunk perhaps three of four times in my lifetime. Im not a particularly good or quick mini painter, but I do my best to improve.
Im not dishonest, and Im not a troll... perhaps Im just putting forward my POV in a challenging manner like Socrates or Jesus of Nazareth did in the past, both of which suffer severe backclash during their lifetimes but were sort of vindicated by history.
Did you just compare your arguments to those of Socrates and Jesus?
But you are right, you put your arguments forth in a challenging way, like it's actually challenging to read all that nonsense without wanting to gouge your own eyes out.
You yourself not drinking or being a slow painter has nothing to do with the idiotic comparisons you have put forth in this thread.
Everything has a context, in the context of an ongoing debate in which people are hinting that the reason for not trying to paint their armies is that they suffer from serious health issues or that their family live will suffer if they do... Well, comparing yourselve to one of the many Greek Philosophers or Middle Eastern Prophets is hardly an Hyperbole.
The reason why the Joker cant be defeated is not the "not killing" rule of Batman... But rather than the Joker represent the zeitgeist of Gotham.
Everything has a context, in the context of an ongoing debate in which people are hinting that the reason for not trying to paint their armies is that they suffer from serious health issues or that their family live will suffer if they do... Well, comparing yourselve to one of the many Greek Philosophers or Middle Eastern Prophets is hardly an Hyperbole.
The reason why the Joker cant be defeated is not the "not killing" rule of Batman... But rather than the Joker represent the zeitgeist of Gotham.
Can anyone kindly translate this delusional babble for me please?
Painting is a main aspect of this hobby, as had been converting models to represent wysiwyg wargear etc... I voted all of the above, and understood it non-exhaustively, as there might be other reasons, but none of the above is plain false on its face, objectively, so how half the people responding chose that boggles the mind. Peak clown world, ... next, people will argue that they dont need to read the words to appreciate literature. How does something like this even make sense? Honestly, I am so confused.
Trolling is not an absolute but rather a relative term... Its more dificult to be considered a drunkard if everyone in your community is regularly having vodka for breakfast... Suddenly you became a "social drinker".
jeff white wrote: , ... next, people will argue that they dont need to read the words to appreciate literature. How does something like this even make sense? Honestly, I am so confused.
No.... you dont need to paint to play thats the point.... You seem do not understand what a hobby is.
Painting is a main aspect of this hobby
To you, some people dont see painting 40k as a part of their hobby, heck some people play with bottle caps.
as had been converting models to represent wysiwyg wargear
again to you, and GW seems to be against this anymore so you can't say its GWs intent either
jeff white wrote: , ... next, people will argue that they dont need to read the words to appreciate literature. How does something like this even make sense? Honestly, I am so confused.
No.... you dont need to paint to play thats the point.... You seem do not understand what a hobby is.
Painting is a main aspect of this hobby
To you, some people dont see painting 40k as a part of their hobby, heck some people play with bottle caps.
as had been converting models to represent wysiwyg wargear
again to you, and GW seems to be against this anymore so you can't say its GWs intent either
What would you think about someone that pretends to be into the "literature hobby" just because they listen to literature podcasts altough they are (mostly) illeterate and their vocabulary is therefore somewhat limited.
Not only that but imagine that such individual feels a sort of pride of their illeterate status and rejects as "elitists" those that suggest that their appreciation of literature would actually improve if they took the time to learn to read and write.
Perhaps painting is not "necessary" to engage into the 40K hobby, but it certainly enrich the experience.
Is someone in the literature community, despite only listening to literature podcasts? Yes.
Is someone in the literature community part of it even if they only listen to audio books, which is a more apt comparison? Yes.
If you tell someone that they're lazy, illiterate, stupid, or blind to the hobby because they prefer these aspects more, you're an donkey-cave.
Just like in Miniature Wargaming, you can feel free not to talk to people about literature if the only thing they do is one of those activities. But why insult them personally?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, I'm a huge book fan. I've started a group for a series to talk to people about it. I cannot visualize. I can only read the text on paper, yet I enjoy reading. If I were to meet someone who only listened to podcasts about the book series, I'd love talking to them, and discussing what they think as someone who never read the series.
Why is calling someone that is illiterate, illiterate, being a donkey-cave?
Politeness means to preserve people in their ignorance?? I BELIEVE thats a rather cruel attitude.
Thats a really perverse way of thinking.
*edit to correct mispelling.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheBestBucketHead wrote: Is someone in the literature community, despite only listening to literature podcasts? Yes.
Is someone in the literature community part of it even if they only listen to audio books, which is a more apt comparison? Yes.
If you tell someone that they're lazy, illiterate, stupid, or blind to the hobby because they prefer these aspects more, you're an donkey-cave.
Just like in Miniature Wargaming, you can feel free not to talk to people about literature if the only thing they do is one of those activities. But why insult them personally?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, I'm a huge book fan. I've started a group for a series to talk to people about it. I cannot visualize. I can only read the text on paper, yet I enjoy reading. If I were to meet someone who only listened to podcasts about the book series, I'd love talking to them, and discussing what they think as someone who never read the series.
I can certainly have a productive discussion about 40K tactics with someone that dosent play with painted armies. Whats exactly your point?
The poll options are limited. There are a myriad of reasons why players chose not to paint their models.
That said I did check 'meta chasers; easier to sell the army'. I checked this one because, for the players I know, it's the reason their models are all grey all the time. They're constantly churning through factions, selling off their stuff to jump on the new hotness.
jeff white wrote: Painting is a main aspect of this hobby, as had been converting models to represent wysiwyg wargear etc... I voted all of the above, and understood it non-exhaustively, as there might be other reasons, but none of the above is plain false on its face, objectively, so how half the people responding chose that boggles the mind. Peak clown world, ... next, people will argue that they dont need to read the words to appreciate literature. How does something like this even make sense? Honestly, I am so confused.
listening to audiobooks doesnt let you appreciate literature?
And you clearly have a problem with seeing things from any other point of view than your own.
For YOU, painting is a main aspect of this hobby, so is converting. YOUR opinion is not the divine law, people are free to have different ones.
Feel free to block me since that seems to be your reaction to anyone not agreeing to you btw.
What would you think about someone that pretends to be into the "literature hobby" just because they listen to literature podcasts altough they are (mostly) illeterate and their vocabulary is therefore somewhat limited.
Not only that but imagine that such individual feels a sort of pride of their illeterate status and rejects as "elitists" those that suggest that their appreciation of literature would actually improve if they took the time to learn to read and write.
??? whats with the gak analogy once again. And yes, if you listen to literature podcasts, you are still a part of the hobby ,even if you can't read.
jeff white wrote:next, people will argue that they dont need to read the words to appreciate literature. How does something like this even make sense? Honestly, I am so confused.
Have you heard of plays? Audio dramas? Spoken word poetry? Hell, any poetry reading? Songs? You can listen to all of those without seeing a single word written. Are they now not literature? Or are people not engaging with plays properly if they're not following along, script in hand?
Literature doesn't need to be written to be enjoyed and appreciated, and it's hilariously myopic to think so.
A better analogy between painting and choosing not to paint would be people who prefer to read poetry/drama out loud (as it is written to be read) vs. quietly to themselves.
jeff white wrote: , ... next, people will argue that they dont need to read the words to appreciate literature. How does something like this even make sense? Honestly, I am so confused.
No.... you dont need to paint to play thats the point.... You seem do not understand what a hobby is.
Painting is a main aspect of this hobby
To you, some people dont see painting 40k as a part of their hobby, heck some people play with bottle caps.
as had been converting models to represent wysiwyg wargear
again to you, and GW seems to be against this anymore so you can't say its GWs intent either
Oh, i understand what a hobby is... and yours isnt mine, so do your thing and judge all you want but i still have less than zero interest sharing my hobby time with people who choose to do things your way. Should be clear enough, or maybe you dont understand hobby. There is no requirement that i have respect for your grey plastic. I mean, it is called a pile of shame for a reason.
TheBestBucketHead wrote:Is someone in the literature community, despite only listening to literature podcasts? Yes.
Is someone in the literature community part of it even if they only listen to audio books, which is a more apt comparison? Yes.
If you tell someone that they're lazy, illiterate, stupid, or blind to the hobby because they prefer these aspects more, you're an donkey-cave.
Just like in Miniature Wargaming, you can feel free not to talk to people about literature if the only thing they do is one of those activities. But why insult them personally?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, I'm a huge book fan. I've started a group for a series to talk to people about it. I cannot visualize. I can only read the text on paper, yet I enjoy reading. If I were to meet someone who only listened to podcasts about the book series, I'd love talking to them, and discussing what they think as someone who never read the series.
I am an donkey-cave? Did you read my post? Oh, right... you like books but cannot "visualize". Let me make this picture clear: good readers, and good writers, understand the craft of wordsmithing e.g. alliteration, foreshadowing, meter. Nothing to do with community. You can either see the value in these things, or you cannot. If you cannot, I have zero interest in talking about books with you. Maybe others do. But call me an donkey-cave again, and I will flag your post and request that you be sanctioned by a mod, in clear, concise terms that require no imagination to appreciate.
Gordon Shumway wrote: A better analogy between painting and choosing not to paint would be people who prefer to read poetry/drama out loud (as it is written to be read) vs. quietly to themselves.
Why is this a "vs" situation, cant you do both?
Why limit yourselve to either of those options?
Un painted minis are the poorer option unless you are a meta chasser in need to recicle your army.
jeff white wrote: , ... next, people will argue that they dont need to read the words to appreciate literature. How does something like this even make sense? Honestly, I am so confused.
No.... you dont need to paint to play thats the point.... You seem do not understand what a hobby is.
Painting is a main aspect of this hobby
To you, some people dont see painting 40k as a part of their hobby, heck some people play with bottle caps.
as had been converting models to represent wysiwyg wargear
again to you, and GW seems to be against this anymore so you can't say its GWs intent either
Oh, i understand what a hobby is... and yours isnt mine, so do your thing and judge all you want but i still have less than zero interest sharing my hobby time with people who choose to do things your way. Should be clear enough, or maybe you dont understand hobby. There is no requirement that i have respect for your grey plastic. I mean, it is called a pile of shame for a reason.
TheBestBucketHead wrote:Is someone in the literature community, despite only listening to literature podcasts? Yes.
Is someone in the literature community part of it even if they only listen to audio books, which is a more apt comparison? Yes.
If you tell someone that they're lazy, illiterate, stupid, or blind to the hobby because they prefer these aspects more, you're an donkey-cave.
Just like in Miniature Wargaming, you can feel free not to talk to people about literature if the only thing they do is one of those activities. But why insult them personally?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Also, I'm a huge book fan. I've started a group for a series to talk to people about it. I cannot visualize. I can only read the text on paper, yet I enjoy reading. If I were to meet someone who only listened to podcasts about the book series, I'd love talking to them, and discussing what they think as someone who never read the series.
I am an donkey-cave? Did you read my post? Oh, right... you like books but cannot "visualize". Let me make this picture clear: good readers, and good writers, understand the craft of wordsmithing e.g. alliteration, foreshadowing, meter. Nothing to do with community. You can either see the value in these things, or you cannot. If you cannot, I have zero interest in talking about books with you. Maybe others do. But call me an donkey-cave again, and I will flag your post and request that you be sanctioned by a mod, in clear, concise terms that require no imagination to appreciate.
I can't visualize, as in I cannot see images in my head. You just said I can't see the value in all of those things simply because I cannot see anything but the written word on paper, not due to not being able to appeciate it, but due to a mental inability of just not being able to see things in my head. If you call me lazy, or stupid, or tell me that I'm an idiot, or just that I can't appreciate literature, yes, I'm going to call you an donkey-cave.
jeff white wrote:Let me make this picture clear: good readers, and good writers, understand the craft of wordsmithing e.g. alliteration, foreshadowing, meter. Nothing to do with community.
Good writers and creatives also recognise the practicality of performance and in spoken word, and how alliteration, assonance, sibilance and rhyme in particular are something that takes on more significance when spoken aloud, not read, which you seemed to decry earlier as "not appreciating literature".
Literature is to be appreciated by the audience in whatever way they see fit, according to their own preferences. Literature is for everyone, as is this hobby, unless you try and shove others out of it.
You can either see the value in these things, or you cannot. If you cannot, I have zero interest in talking about books with you.
I also have no interest in talking about *literature* with someone who can't appreciate the spoken elements of it, and gatekeeps the enjoyment of it.
But call me an donkey-cave again, and I will flag your post and request that you be sanctioned by a mod, in clear, concise terms that require no imagination to appreciate.
I also selected none of the above. Admitedly nobody in my friend circle shares my hobby but I assume most people with grey armies just don't enjoy that part of the hobby or don't have the time/ability/money (for commisioned painters or the like) to do it on a level they enjoy at the moment. And that's about it. No need to be a d*** about it.
These threads are created and then filled with a small minority of vocal players who happen to inhabit a very old school style forum. As with the last thread similar to this the voting options are too split and nearly half of the votes are for None of the Above.
Outside of health reasons, serious home issues, or financial issues you should be able to paint your army.
You're not obligated to but others would perceive you to be having "less fun" than enjoying all facets of the hobby. It's where you allocate your time. I know many commission painters or hobbyists who only paint and have never played or have no interest in it.
If I spent 80-90% of my hobby time building and painting models and getting a few games in a month... my hobby is the painting and modeling side.
Folks who do not paint their armies? Maybe they want to spend that 10% of time gluing some grey warriors together and then getting to the 90% of dice rolling and gaming. Some players only convert and never paint.
The only downside to not painting is a lesser visual, harder to understand what you're looking at model wise if you're not familiar with your opponent at the local store (I had this issue in Warmachine frequently with white metal models). The last downside is the -10 VPs which nearly everyone in these threads exist is a bit dumb.
The most frequent "grey tide" players are however the tournament meta chasers.
oni wrote: The poll options are limited. There are a myriad of reasons why players chose not to paint their models.
That said I did check 'meta chasers; easier to sell the army'. I checked this one because, for the players I know, it's the reason their models are all grey all the time. They're constantly churning through factions, selling off their stuff to jump on the new hotness.
With how the future is going - GW may turn to a AT43 formula and offer prepainted minis in the future. I'm a huge fan of heroclix and Mageknight and think this is a viable future idea that would resolve MANY players issues. Ultramarines right out of the box would be fantastic honestly.
But you'd be hard pressed top say that this:
Spoiler:
is a better visual game than:
Spoiler:
Boils down to real life home issues and not having the time to "fully invest" into the hobby and if you want to play a GAME and not pick up an ART then some folks won't paint. The majority of hobbyists do however like to glue and build models. It's just finishing an army is daunting.
I used to hate painting; it was after all completely coincidental to the game and took so much work for making my models look worse. But I was in the middle of painting up some Tyranids for a tournament when I realized that I would have a better time if I spent the time I would have at the tournament painting my models. It's just a better hobby. Easier on my back at least.
jeff white wrote: , ... next, people will argue that they dont need to read the words to appreciate literature. How does something like this even make sense? Honestly, I am so confused.
No.... you dont need to paint to play thats the point.... You seem do not understand what a hobby is.
Painting is a main aspect of this hobby
To you, some people dont see painting 40k as a part of their hobby, heck some people play with bottle caps.
as had been converting models to represent wysiwyg wargear
again to you, and GW seems to be against this anymore so you can't say its GWs intent either
Oh, i understand what a hobby is... and yours isnt mine, so do your thing and judge all you want but i still have less than zero interest sharing my hobby time with people who choose to do things your way. Should be clear enough, or maybe you dont understand hobby. There is no requirement that i have respect for your grey plastic. I mean, it is called a pile of shame for a reason.
I never said you need to play with others with non painted models, and I never said to not paint your models for your hobby. I said I can not understand how you can't understand others that dont have the same feeling in THEIR hobbies. You want to play with others with painted models, Cool for you, but others dont care, guess what, cool for them. One persons hobby doesn't need to interact with yours if you dont like it.
I also never judged you for how you handle your hobby, you are the one that is being "judge" about it You are calling peoples unpainted models a pile of shame. It really sounds like you are the Judgement one here and again you seem to not understand what a hobby is.No one is telling you to play against non painted models, we all are trying to help you understand why many people just dont care and you are acting like its an attack on you.
The Black Adder wrote: Agreed. I don't think I've met anybody or even seen anybody post about being against painting. It's often more that people can't paint, think they won't do a good job, or simply have other priorities. The thread title seems to posit that there are some people who are philosophically opposed to painting minis. If so, I've yet to see evidence of them.
It was in one of the other threads, but someone in response to a modified 10 VP rule where you still get the 10 VP as long as you have painted more since your last game said that they would deliberately make the smallest possible amount of progress on a single unit, put that unit in reserve, and leave it there to be automatically destroyed on turn 4 without ever seeing the table. Why? Pure self-destructive spite at the idea of having painted models.
Oh that's me. What? Is me fielding 1 more painted Grot each time NOT progress? Must I also play the unit to your expectations as well?
Do not confuse me with being against painting. I'm not. I simply do it at my own pace. Wich happens to be pretty damned slow & isn't likely to ever change.
The person I responded to (was that you?) stated that they EXPECTED to see progress. Well La-dee-da. Let me tell you, unless your my boss & it's a paying job, (it's not, it's a game of toy soldiers) that elitest attitude crap will only ever elicit a spiteful response from me. So progress EXPECTED, progress delivered. Just 1 grot at a time, painted to a decent standard. Eventually the whole force will look this good.
The Black Adder wrote: Agreed. I don't think I've met anybody or even seen anybody post about being against painting. It's often more that people can't paint, think they won't do a good job, or simply have other priorities. The thread title seems to posit that there are some people who are philosophically opposed to painting minis. If so, I've yet to see evidence of them.
It was in one of the other threads, but someone in response to a modified 10 VP rule where you still get the 10 VP as long as you have painted more since your last game said that they would deliberately make the smallest possible amount of progress on a single unit, put that unit in reserve, and leave it there to be automatically destroyed on turn 4 without ever seeing the table. Why? Pure self-destructive spite at the idea of having painted models.
Oh that's me. What? Is me fielding 1 more painted Grot each time NOT progress? Must I also play the unit to your expectations as well?
Do not confuse me with being against painting. I'm not. I simply do it at my own pace. Wich happens to be pretty damned slow & isn't likely to ever change.
The person I responded to (was that you?) stated that they EXPECTED to see progress. Well La-dee-da. Let me tell you, unless your my boss & it's a paying job, (it's not, it's a game of toy soldiers) that elitest attitude crap will only ever elicit a spiteful response from me. So progress EXPECTED, progress delivered. Just 1 grot at a time, painted to a decent standard. Eventually the whole force will look this good.
I always thought "pile of shame" was a reference to unpainted models by people who want to paint their models but haven't done so yet. I did not think that it referred to unpainted models in general as some people in this thread are doing. Am I wrong in my understanding of the term or is it just being used incorrectly?
Leo_the_Rat wrote: I always thought "pile of shame" was a reference to unpainted models by people who want to paint their models but haven't done so yet. I did not think that it referred to unpainted models in general as some people in this thread are doing. Am I wrong in my understanding of the term or is it just being used incorrectly?
Correct, its your "back flow of projects you started" it doesn't even need to be unpainted it could be unbuilt even. If you have no intent to paint or build then its not a pile of shame.
Amishprn86 wrote: If you have no intent to paint or build then its not a pile of shame.
If you have a pile of models you don't even intend to build you absolutely should be ashamed of your financial irresponsibility and hoarding.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Leo_the_Rat wrote: I always thought "pile of shame" was a reference to unpainted models by people who want to paint their models but haven't done so yet. I did not think that it referred to unpainted models in general as some people in this thread are doing. Am I wrong in my understanding of the term or is it just being used incorrectly?
You're wrong about it. It has always meant both the embarrassing stuff you bought but haven't touched and the unpainted models in your army. People who are opposed to painting just don't like that second meaning and have tried to make it exclusively about the first.
Amishprn86 wrote: If you have no intent to paint or build then its not a pile of shame.
If you have a pile of models you don't even intend to build you absolutely should be ashamed of your financial irresponsibility and hoarding.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Leo_the_Rat wrote: I always thought "pile of shame" was a reference to unpainted models by people who want to paint their models but haven't done so yet. I did not think that it referred to unpainted models in general as some people in this thread are doing. Am I wrong in my understanding of the term or is it just being used incorrectly?
You're wrong about it. It has always meant both the embarrassing stuff you bought but haven't touched and the unpainted models in your army. People who are opposed to painting just don't like that second meaning and have tried to make it exclusively about the first.
You do know a lot of boxes are 1 time buys with set bundle boxes and it is generally cheaper to buy the box now and sell the other minis than it is to piece buy the ones you want, or wait 6months to a year to get them right? Not all of use are irresponsible or hoarding. Then there are boxes you get for parts of models or bits to kit base, i have many of those, and some other reasons as well... but I guess you dont know about any of that bc you dont really care to think outside your tiny box. Heck even if someone wanted to collect the models, who cares! Are you going to tell people that play the lottery they are irresponsibly to bc they like that rush once a week? To be irresponsible you need to be in final problems, not bc someone likes to spend money on things they like.
Amishprn86 wrote: If you have no intent to paint or build then its not a pile of shame.
If you have a pile of models you don't even intend to build you absolutely should be ashamed of your financial irresponsibility and hoarding.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Leo_the_Rat wrote: I always thought "pile of shame" was a reference to unpainted models by people who want to paint their models but haven't done so yet. I did not think that it referred to unpainted models in general as some people in this thread are doing. Am I wrong in my understanding of the term or is it just being used incorrectly?
You're wrong about it. It has always meant both the embarrassing stuff you bought but haven't touched and the unpainted models in your army. People who are opposed to painting just don't like that second meaning and have tried to make it exclusively about the first.
But "its my property" I can do whatever I want with it... If I want to use GW kits to get high by burning the plastic, how is that less valid than painting the kit to a high standard for the amussement of everyone???
Making a difference between painted and unpainted miniatures in the hobby opens the door to a totalitarian hellscape!!!!!
Amishprn86 wrote: You do know a lot of boxes are 1 time buys with set bundle boxes and it is generally cheaper to buy the box now and sell the other minis than it is to piece buy the ones you want, or wait 6months to a year to get them right?
Having a bundle deal that you bought all at once and plan to use soon isn't really a "pile".
Then there are boxes you get for parts of models or bits to kit base
Having leftovers from a box you bought to use in building other models is not the same as buying stuff with no intent to build it.
Are you going to tell people that play the lottery they are irresponsibly to bc they like that rush once a week?
I absolutely will say that. There's a reason there's a saying that lotteries are a tax on stupid people.
Amishprn86 wrote: You do know a lot of boxes are 1 time buys with set bundle boxes and it is generally cheaper to buy the box now and sell the other minis than it is to piece buy the ones you want, or wait 6months to a year to get them right?
Having a bundle deal that you bought all at once and plan to use soon isn't really a "pile".
Then there are boxes you get for parts of models or bits to kit base
The other models you dont plan to use..... do you even think about things before you type? seriously please slow down and think.
Example Suppressors literally only come in 1 box and there is no way i need Impulsors, so sell the Impulsor later, or hold onto if rules change.
Amishprn86 wrote: The other models you dont plan to use..... do you even think about things before you type? seriously please slow down and think.
...
You literally described using the model by taking pieces of it out to build something else.
Edit: and now you changed your post to something else.
Example Suppressors literally only come in 1 box and there is no way i need Impulsors, so sell the Impulsor later, or hold onto if rules change.
Having a model from a bundle deal that hasn't yet sold on ebay is not a "pile of shame" because it is not a pile. Please stop moving the goalposts from your original comment about people who buy stuff with no intent to build or paint it.
Amishprn86 wrote: The other models you dont plan to use..... do you even think about things before you type? seriously please slow down and think.
...
You literally described using the model by taking pieces of it out to build something else.
Edit: and now you changed your post to something else.
Example Suppressors literally only come in 1 box and there is no way i need Impulsors, so sell the Impulsor later, or hold onto if rules change.
Having a model from a bundle deal that hasn't yet sold on ebay is not a "pile of shame" because it is not a pile. Please stop moving the goalposts from your original comment about people who buy stuff with no intent to build or paint it.
If you do not intent to PAINT or BUILD them its NOT a pile of shame... do you disagree with that? You are the one that is arguing against that. Someone wanted to clarify and i did, a Pile of Shame is a group of stuff you want to finish, why would you be shamed for having it for other purposes other than not finishing it? Seriously man come on lol. I. I just can't stop laughing.
Let me be more clear Clears throat "People with Grey toys that dont like to paint are not shameful of that"
Amishprn86 wrote: If you do not intent to PAINT or BUILD them its NOT a pile of shame... do you disagree with that?
Yes, I disagree with that. If you have a substantial number of kits you bought with no intent to ever use then you should be ashamed of your poor impulse control, financial irresponsibility, and hoarding behavior. But please stop trying to move the goalposts, an occasional extra kit you bought as part of a bundle deal is not a "pile".
"People with Grey toys that dont like to paint are not shameful of that"
They aren't. Whether they should be is a very different question.
"People with Grey toys that dont like to paint are not shameful of that"
They aren't. Whether they should be is a very different question.
Are you seriously trying to shame how someone goes about their hobbies? So you just have a problem with how other people like to be happy with toys..... you are a real piece of work, it was fun but now its not. You are now consider a waste of time to me. Buh-bye.
Amishprn86 wrote: Are you seriously trying to shame how someone goes about their hobbies? SO you just have a problem with how other people like to be happy with toys..... you are a real piece of work, it was fun but now its not. You are now consider a waste of time to me. Buh-bye.
I remind you once again that insults and rage are not a substitute for a valid argument.
Amishprn86 wrote: Are you seriously trying to shame how someone goes about their hobbies? SO you just have a problem with how other people like to be happy with toys..... you are a real piece of work, it was fun but now its not. You are now consider a waste of time to me. Buh-bye.
I remind you once again that insults and rage are not a substitute for a valid argument.
Then tell me why you ignored my point that someone with a more complicated paint scheme gets the same VP as someone painting Raven Guard or Iron Hands. Why should a Howling Griffons or Imperial Fist player get the same score as someone not trying hard enough?
Amishprn86 wrote: Are you seriously trying to shame how someone goes about their hobbies? SO you just have a problem with how other people like to be happy with toys..... you are a real piece of work, it was fun but now its not. You are now consider a waste of time to me. Buh-bye.
I remind you once again that insults and rage are not a substitute for a valid argument.
Then tell me why you ignored my point that someone with a more complicated paint scheme gets the same VP as someone painting Raven Guard or Iron Hands. Why should a Howling Griffons or Imperial Fist player get the same score as someone not trying hard enough?
LOL I always felt bad bc my Nids "counted as painted" when its just spray, splash, dip, it took less time to paint 8k nids than it did 2k Cities of Sigmar haha (heck it took less than than 500pts but I needed to wait for it to dry lol). Pic for example. Literally its just Spray white, rush and dont care get red on the carapace, claws, and mouth, sand, and nip. But thats worth 10VP and some persons 400 hour beautifully painted Knights army isn't worth anything bc 1 Armiger wasn't painted in time WHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
