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

Straw poll on whether people prefer painted armies or not.

No consderation as to quality of paint job or whether painting is more important than modelling etc. or whether there should be any penalties or bonuses associated with painting of models.

Is this a serious question?

I voted yes. I personally don't put it on the table unless I have fully painted it. But I play against primed armies all the time or gray armies even. I don't really care. I still usually win against unpainted teams.

Misleading poll. I doubt that anyone would answer "In a perfect world, why yes, I'd rather play with unpainted figures".

Silly poll... why would anyone conceivably prefer NONpainted mini's over painted ones?

Someone did, they voted no.

I'd rather play against a Games Workshop Grey army than a really poorly painted army.

MarvinGayeIsMyDaddy wrote:I'd rather play against a Games Workshop Grey army than a really poorly painted army.

That is the point of the poll I think. I, on the other hand, would rather play against I horrible, but honest, attempt at a fully painted army than a table full of metal and plastic.

Anyone can paint. It's only when beginners try to go beyond the skills they've not yet developed that makes for poorly painted armies.

Yes. Even if they're trying (and it stinks out loud), I'm happy. We can't all be good painters (I'm not).

So long as there is honest effort in the painting I love to play painted armies.

The biggest deal to me is that there is progress, if I play someone semi-regularly, is the army closer to fully painted than it started?

In a tournament other than ard boyz if it isn't painted you better get thrown out.

I really dislike when I put my 50 painstakingly painted ork boys on the table and my opponent puts up his mold line infested, badly put together Tau/marines etc..

And I really hate getting my ass kicked by a non-painted army. Sure you won but hey, I actually painted my army and therefore had less time for gaming.

The general rule for me is that people who paint their army are more fun to play against since they like things to look "cool" they also like their armies to be "cool" and I won't be facing a six landraider army.

Grindah wrote:I really dislike when I put my 50 painstakingly painted ork boys on the table and my opponent puts up his mold line infested, badly put together Tau/marines etc..

And I really hate getting my ass kicked by a non-painted army. Sure you won but hey, I actually painted my army and therefore had less time for gaming.

The general rule for me is that people who paint their army are more fun to play against since they like things to look "cool" they also like their armies to be "cool" and I won't be facing a six landraider army.

You don't think 6 land raiders is cool? It's like playing with that trainset that daddy never go you as a kid.

Ah but what about a PAINTED 6 LR army?

It doesn't take that long cause there aren't that many models.

Some people prefer gameplay to hobbying. I myself couldn't stand to
have all metal, but then again I use hobby as an excuse to reign in the whole
"shopping with my eyes" phenomenon.

I voted no, though idon't really know if it was in the spirit of the question or not. I like to play interesting armies, or challenging/strong armies, or armies that people are trying to playtest that they think will be good. And typically this means the army is mostly if not all unpainted (and sometimes proxied, but we have a certain friend with model-horder syndrome that that is not as common).

If I had to choose, all things being equal? of course I'd choose the painted army. But I know if I always played what I had painted, especially right now with a new rulebook and in some cases new codexes, the army is often not going to be as competitive as it could be.

Darrian13 wrote:Is this a serious question?

Just what I was thinking.

I can't think of a time when unpainted would be better than painted. I guess if the guys were just dipped in one color or something, that would be just as bad (basically like primed), but if we're talking actually painted and based, even if it's really really crappy, it will always be better than unpainted as far as I'm concerned.

Oh, and I heard Iorek was an awesome painter.

Just throwin' that out there.

Another kink in this question is half painted armies. I'll take pics to back this up, but my Vamp counts are looking downright boss, but only half of my units are painted.

I think a better question would be: "Do unpainted figures significantly affect your enjoyment of the game."

MarvinGayeIsMyDaddy wrote:

Grindah wrote:I really dislike when I put my 50 painstakingly painted ork boys on the table and my opponent puts up his mold line infested, badly put together Tau/marines etc..

And I really hate getting my ass kicked by a non-painted army. Sure you won but hey, I actually painted my army and therefore had less time for gaming.

The general rule for me is that people who paint their army are more fun to play against since they like things to look "cool" they also like their armies to be "cool" and I won't be facing a six landraider army.

You don't think 6 land raiders is cool? It's like playing with that trainset that daddy never go you as a kid.

Six landraiders is not cool.
One or maybe two would be cool, but six is just insulting to me. Just press the "i win" button and don't waste my time.

/Grindah

oni wrote:It's only when beginners try to go beyond the skills they've not yet developed that makes for poorly painted armies.

What exactly do you mean? I'm a beginner and I am honestly interested to know. I don't think my few guys I've done so far are too bad, but I don't have that much to compare them to.

captain.gordino wrote:

oni wrote:It's only when beginners try to go beyond the skills they've not yet developed that makes for poorly painted armies.

What exactly do you mean? I'm a beginner and I am honestly interested to know. I don't think my few guys I've done so far are too bad, but I don't have that much to compare them to.

The most obvious ones are highlighting and blending of any variety. Without a handle
on decent brush control, a good paint mixture or a good brush, it's really easy to botch
manual highlights and sloppy ink washes.

My first efforts had none of those things. I have hidden the miniatures away to avoid
the blackmail.

i dunno, i like how gray models look. cuz i always have an intense fail feeling before i paint them

If your profile pic is self-painted, you have no reason to feel failure.

Even a poorly painted army is better than gray. We all started painting at some point, and the first results were rarely pretty. I'd rather play against someone who really tried to make their purple and green and red and yellow and purple drybrushed Grey Knights look cool, than to play against some guy who has 4500 points of bare plastic Tau. At least get a can of spray paint and then dip in a wash.

wasserrj wrote:Another kink in this question is half painted armies. I'll take pics to back this up, but my Vamp counts are looking downright boss, but only half of my units are painted.

Like a previous poster said, if you're a regular opponent and your army is getting painted little by little (or smidgen by smidgen in the case of my DA) working towards a completely painted army that's respectable. We all know that you can't paint 2000 points overnight and having some unpainted models in your WIP army is nothing to be ashamed of.

I obviously prefer painted, but with one caveat:

After priming a mess of figures black and dry brushing with white to bring out details for easier planning, I have developed an extremely strong desire to do a film noir army. Possibly just an Inq. Retinue, but all black and white. Because really, I thought my marines looked cooler when they were black with greyish white highlights and wite helms and legs, like something out of Sin City etc.

Wehrkind: I wanted to try to do that Charcoal art style they had going with the Wood Elf
book, but decided that it would end up boring me while working on it (not that it doesn't
bore me painting the same colors over and over again)

I would rather play against an all painted army then a black one. That said most of my force is painted black because while i like painting, i hate painting the same thing intricately 30 times in a row.


My pet peeve though is things painted different colors by different people. I would rather have a mix painted and unpainted then a mix of different paint jobs where it just looks like you bought someone else's force.