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.

I'm fine with playing against a WiP army, provided that something new is painted each time we play.

Mostly I play against my wife, and I paint both our armies so anything not complete is my own fault.

starsdawn wrote:Man, you see this kind of stuff cropping out all the time, only with different mediums.

Film photographers complaining that digital photography is too easy and you don't need a dark room to develop your photos.

Again, more traditional photographers complaining about Photoshop.

Graphic designers who are used to doing it manually complaining about softwares like Indesign.

Traditional painters complaining about digital painting.

and to go way, way back..... Bowmen complaining about crossbows. "They're too easy to learn how to use! They can punch through armor! It's so unfair!"

And so on and so forth.

Digital painting and sculpting are interesting for the complaints... Somehow people get the idea that it takes less skill or talent to sculpt or paint with a computer than it does by hand. Which to a certain extent is possibly correct... since software can help with a lot of the gruntwork, it's easier to get a reasonable result. But getting a good final product? That still takes the same amount of knowledge of what you are doing and artistic ability as doing it the old-fashioned way.

How would you feel playing against that kind of opponent? Would you rather play with someone with a completed, average army or an incomplete (but oh GOD THE EFFORT) army?

Personally, I would rather play the completely painted army.

insaniak wrote:
Digital painting and sculpting are interesting for the complaints... Somehow people get the idea that it takes less skill or talent to sculpt or paint with a computer than it does by hand. Which to a certain extent is possibly correct... since software can help with a lot of the gruntwork, it's easier to get a reasonable result. But getting a good final product? That still takes the same amount of knowledge of what you are doing and artistic ability as doing it the old-fashioned way.

I think part of the issue with the digial vs traditional means is that the traditional means tends to require more foresight and is less forgiving. If you screw something up, with a computer program all you have to do is hit ctrl+z. (Or erase it and change parts as necessary.) But with traditional mediums, you can't just erase something. You have to try to paint over it, fix it with other painting techniques, or start over. It's even worse with some sculptures - particularly those out of wood or stone, where you remove material from it. Accidentally remove too much, and you have to either start over or perform major damage control.

Think about painting our miniatures. If you royally screw something up, i.e. spill paint on it or have someone (or something, possibly with four legs) knock your hand as you are applying a fine detail to a miniature, then it becomes a pain to "fix". There's no "undo" option IRL, as much as I wish there was, so there's more skill required in the execution of your vision.

So to that extent, I can understand why a traditionalist would scoff at their digital counterparts - but the sell prices more than make up for it, I would think. An original painting should be worth a whole lot more than a print of a digital piece of art. But this doesn't really correlate well with the current topic at hand, as we are talking about the casual gamer and not the professional painter who is getting paid for their skills.

starsdawn wrote:How would you feel playing against that kind of opponent? Would you rather play with someone with a completed, average army or an incomplete (but oh GOD THE EFFORT) army?

I honestly wouldn't care - my purpose is to play the game, so as long as my opponent actually has an army, I'm good either way. I'd be much more likely to take pictures and write a battle report when my opponent has a fully painted army too, though.

As none of my friends have completely painted armies, I would find it hypocritical to turn my nose up at a game due to the quality of the paintjobs or lack thereof, seeing as none of my armies are completely painted and I think GW's painting "rules" are primarily designed to sell more Red, Black and Gunmetal paint....

What is this "fair" nonsense? I mean, I know what you're talking about. I used to be one of those hoity-toity players who thought if it wasn't 100% hand painted it wasn't 'real' artwork. Anything other than a can of spray primer was blasphemy. But I'm 42 now and after doing my first 40 zombies with the spray-paint method I was so impressed with the results I went out and bought an airbrush compressor. On a mostly one color army, hand painting is for the birds! And I've seen the dipping method on my friend's Nids and it looks spectacular. You'd never be able to duplicate that with a brush.

What about pens? Are pens cheating too? Let's face it, my eyesight is going and my hand isn't steady enough to write "Kill Kill Kill" legibly on a shoulder pad anymore.

Painted=better. I highly believe better painted models are "luckier" than lesser or non-painted models. It's just a fact. I can feel it in my dice. But it's not cheating to have great looking models. It just intimidates the enemy player more. It's the psychological factor.

insaniak wrote:
Digital painting and sculpting are interesting for the complaints... Somehow people get the idea that it takes less skill or talent to sculpt or paint with a computer than it does by hand. Which to a certain extent is possibly correct... since software can help with a lot of the gruntwork, it's easier to get a reasonable result. But getting a good final product? That still takes the same amount of knowledge of what you are doing and artistic ability as doing it the old-fashioned way.

I do agree. I think in the end, it's less manual labor (which makes sense, since supposedly every invention we make is to make things easier to do. Like wheels.) but it would still take training for years to have good results.

Personally, I would rather play the completely painted army.

Me, I would be welcome to play both. Especially if you can see that insane painter guy's army would take at least a year to complete.

starsdawn wrote:To save this thread from eternal damnation, let me pose another question:

Your opponent's army is , at best, only 30% done. More than half of the army is just basecoated, and only a few are painted. BUT the painting level of those few are very, very sweet. A gakload of conversions, NMM, hardcore freehand painting: you can certainly say that your opponent took time and effort to produce said results.

How would you feel playing against that kind of opponent? Would you rather play with someone with a completed, average army or an incomplete (but oh GOD THE EFFORT) army?

I would rather play the guy with the fully painted army, that is average looking. That doesn't mean I'm going to be a douche and not play the guy with the 30% completed army with some good looking models. Playing games with 2 fully painted armies on a finished game-table just adds a certain cinematic effect to it... Those are the games that are somewhat rememberable in this hobby, and sadly, even a single unfinished squad/regiment kinda ruins that cinematc experience entirely.

Even if your individual models are painted to a low-end table top quality, there is a good chance that the look of the army as whole will turn out to be good. The end result is usually better then the sum of it's parts.

Much of this argument seems to come down to folks who object to what they see as dippers who aren't "painting".

I use spray primers (sometimes colored) and I use a varnish matte spray, but these are widely accepted practices and considered part of panting. Additionally, I apply my minwax "dip" with a brush, thus meeting the standard definition of "painting".

So I ask, "Am I not Painting? "

Alternatively, are you offended that the pigment and oil-base of the "dip" is also mixed with polyurethane?

Carried to it's conclusion, we end up with silly rules like:

Paint applied shall be a mixture of pigment, base and other suspended materials. However, it shall not be mixed with any polyurethane or other varnish or hard finishing protective elements, lest one be not really painting and shall be commiting the dire sin of shortcuting, thereby cutting oneself off from the glorious tree of True-Painters.

Silly? Yes, but so is declaring Army Painter to be "not fair".

So, you'd rather that people wait until they finish their armies completely (meaning bases, paint, and any conversions) than play against someone who's partially done? What about those of us that take 3 days to paint an Ork Boy to the standard we consider 'done'? What about those of us who aren't going to buy two armies, one for conversion and one for playing, and so are continually working on the army we have, maybe for years, maybe for decades, and not painting because we're still doing some of the basic skratching and Konvertin', and paint would A- get in the way, and B- be useless before we know how we're gonna need to paint it?

Anvildude wrote:So, you'd rather that people wait until they finish their armies completely (meaning bases, paint, and any conversions) than play against someone who's partially done? What about those of us that take 3 days to paint an Ork Boy to the standard we consider 'done'? What about those of us who aren't going to buy two armies, one for conversion and one for playing, and so are continually working on the army we have, maybe for years, maybe for decades, and not painting because we're still doing some of the basic skratching and Konvertin', and paint would A- get in the way, and B- be useless before we know how we're gonna need to paint it?

so what? They didn't say that they wouldn't play against the partially or unpainted army, but they would prefer to play against fully painted. There really is no need to go into hysterics over it.

I prefer coffee flavored icecream over other flavors, but if someone offers me chocolate, I probably will eat it too. I won't stamp my feet and scream that I want coffee ice cream only.

Norsehawk wrote:so what? They didn't say that they wouldn't play against the partially or unpainted army, but they would prefer to play against fully painted. There really is no need to go into hysterics over it.

I prefer coffee flavored icecream over other flavors, but if someone offers me chocolate, I probably will eat it too. I won't stamp my feet and scream that I want coffee ice cream only.

Exactly. I've played against plenty of unpainted or partially painted armies over the years. I've used them myself, or that matter, on plenty of occasions. It's not a deal breaker... I just prefer playing with and against fully painted armies.

Anvildude wrote:So, you'd rather that people wait until they finish their armies completely (meaning bases, paint, and any conversions) than play against someone who's partially done? What about those of us that take 3 days to paint an Ork Boy to the standard we consider 'done'?

In a word Yes. I make no bones about my extremely strong prefference for painted armies. I'm an adult with responsibilities. I have limited game time and one of my favorite parts of the hobby is the specatcle of painted miniatures. I'm even more interested in glorious layout of painted armies on a battlefield of good terrain than I am in the actual playing of the game. I only field painted figures and I seek out those who do likewise.

Further, we have an unrwitten rule at our gaming club against playing with bare miniatures. This is mitigated by the fact that we play mostly skirmish games of 10-20 minis on a side and we'll let the occasional basecoated fig in, but we stick pretty much to it, and our battles are usually some of the best looking in the store where we play.

Sum up, I could be persuaded to play against your unpainted figures and I'm not going to turn down a personal request for a game. However, unless your an extremely good sport, an excellent conversationalist and/or making real progress painting your army, I'm not going to seek you out for a second game. I realize that this may sound elitist, but it's not. It's simply a choice. My paint jobs aren't anywhere near golden demon winners, and I don't judge the charachter of those playing with unpainted figs. I simply choose the gaming experience that pleases me most.

I'm not saying you're elitist, or that anyone who would rather play against painted, finished armies are. But I'm coming from the side of someone who's not going to be satisfied with themselves if they are pressured into fielding what they'd consider poorly painted armies by their local group. I could paint a Boyz mob in a day, and I could do it so that it'd look fine from 3 feet- but I'd know that they were 'unfinished', all the little details hadn't been picked out, that last wash wasn't finished... Yet I still like to play.

It's a lot less stressful, and a lot more fun, if the people I'm playing against, or the people that are watching, aren't of the stripe that thinks unpainted armies are 'lazy'. I'll grant you that yes, perhaps a vast majority of unpainted armies are the product of lazyness, but there's also those that are the product of psychological disorders, or tough home life, or working 3 jobs to pay for college/a family, or sheer pigheaded perfectionism- and people who have armies like that aren't coming to gaming stores, or inviting people to their houses/going to others houses to have their work or lack thereov picked over and looked upon critically. If I wanted to display my army, I'd shell out for a camera from my next bit of gaming allowance, instead of the mold rubber for my custom made bases that probably won't be fielded for another 2 years. When I go somewhere to play, I'm going to play, as a method of escape from the daily grind- a chance to joke with friends, maybe get some good ideas from seeing an interesting use of bitz on another model.

Yeah, a well painted army looks nice. Yeah, the spectacle of a couple fully painted, coordinatingly themed armies going at it on a custom table is awesome. But I don't game in order to look cool. I game to Game, to have fun and do silly things with little plastic army men, and tiny green things that let me get away with bellowing WAAAGH!! in the middle of a store.

Clearly you are too inhibited. I yell WAAAAAGH in the middle of the mall. Just to make sure everyone knows I'm the biggest so I'm the boss.

Anvildude wrote:So, you'd rather that people wait until they finish their armies completely (meaning bases, paint, and any conversions) than play against someone who's partially done? What about those of us that take 3 days to paint an Ork Boy to the standard we consider 'done'? What about those of us who aren't going to buy two armies, one for conversion and one for playing, and so are continually working on the army we have, maybe for years, maybe for decades, and not painting because we're still doing some of the basic skratching and Konvertin', and paint would A- get in the way, and B- be useless before we know how we're gonna need to paint it?

This is me. spending years, maybe decades on an army before it is completely painted. I have been working on my Deathgaurd since about 2008. I have finished about 20 models (see the link in my signature if your interested). However this is a army that i am enjoying the process with. I also dipped all of my nids, and painted up a ork army and a space marine army. None of these armies besides my nurgle is painted to a high standard but i fielded a fully painted army most of the time. I prefer to face an army that i can tell the user is trying to paint. I make no bones however about an unpainted army unless its my freinds whom i can gently tease about it. For the most part i play for my own reasons. I play to have fun playing the game. I model to enjoy the moldeling. The two are not mutually exclusive but for me, it required two armies so that i could play with one while i model the other.

BTW. when i am done with my nurlge i will go back and repaint and detail all of my Ultramarines. Its a process. It just takes time.

sennacherib wrote:This is me. spending years, maybe decades on an army before it is completely painted. I have been working on my Deathgaurd since about 2008.

Though we're getting a bit off topic, I like this particular rabbit trail. There's nothing inherently wrong with playing with unpainted figures, but by the same token, there's definitely nothing wrong with the delayed gratification of not playing with an army until it's painted. Everything doesn't have to be right-now. At the risk of sounding like an old fogey, I do feel that the masses of unpainted figs on the table is at least partially a product of the instant gratification ethos that seems to permeate most everything else. The miracle of the dip is that it allows those of us who don't enjoy painting or are extremely slow (me on both counts) to get a fully painted army up to tabletop standard in a reasonable period (not short, as I still spend quite a bit of time painting even with the dip) of time. Dippers still have to put forth the effort to paint their armies, which is infinitely preferrable to the grey hordes.

Also, it is entirely possible to play smaller point games, or play with a different army (if you have one). Folks might say that it's hard to find opponents for smaller point games, but not only do I think it's possible, if more folks only fielded painted figs, then you'd see many more low pointed games.

If it takes you decades to finish an army you're running the serious risk of having large parts of it squatted or rendered useless. I'm still painting my Dogs of War, look where that got me.

Yeah I would agree with Eilif, and I think every body doesn't care weather you use army painter or not. Whatever, I withdraw my case.

On the plus side, a thread was created to disparage a line of products has apparently served to introduce between 2 and 3 hobbyists/new customers per page to their offerings.


Claiming that using colored primers and dip is "cheating" is not functionally different from saying that people who use a basecoat brush to work quickly instead of using an eyeball brush for the whole mini are cheaters.

Ok ok. My bad. Next time I will look at how other people paint differently, and there is no need to bad mouth about army painter. Looks kinda good too. My friend could really use it. And do you think that "voting graphic" thing is really helping Dakka Dakka's community? Aren't you a DCM? For a jolly good sake, be encouraging to the site, be always polite, and remember, have fun! Don't worry, your outside social problems shouldn't effect the way you post on Dakka Dakka. Cheer up, I only wanted to see what peoples opinions were.

I was polite! I said it was, in my opinion, a terrible thread, not that you were a terrible person.

I do encourage people to play, and that includes not pushing them away by prejudging them by their painting methods. Asking if something is "fair" is kind of loading the question. As others have said, anything that's gets more painted armies on the tabletop, I'm good with.

Well every one has a opinion right? A thread is aloud to have an opinion. I should be able to have one as well. Please don't be egotistical, the world doesn't revolve around just you. Maybe the Sun, don't you think? Remember, threads are aloud to have opinions, just not "off topic spam". Thanks, and help Dakka Dakka's community!

Lord of Baal wrote:Well every one has a opinion right? A thread is aloud to have an opinion. I should be able to have one as well. Please don't be egotistical, the world doesn't revolve around just you. Maybe the Sun, don't you think? Remember, threads are aloud to have opinions, just not "off topic spam". Thanks, and help Dakka Dakka's community!

Inanimate objects can't have opinions, and this isn't your thread. You are getting all uppity for nothing.

Yes actually this is my thread but I just changed my name recently with Yakface. My old name was Dark Angels Champ-Master but I now play Blood Angels. Sorry if you feel that I am uppity, I just explained to another guy on being great full on another post. Sorry, I just want to respect Dakka Dakka and be kind. Your brain is functioning in a way where your replacing my voice to be stubborn, and thats not how I intend it.
-Really sorry

Well, this is his thread, and how is he being uppity? He is just stating his valid point.

ChaosLordSam wrote:Well, this is his thread, and how is he being uppity? He is just stating his valid point.

Is that a good way to be encouraging? I think not. Please stop being mean, join together as one community. Here, I even mad A wall to separate our differences.
This side is for thou who like to argue
-------------------------wall-----------------------entrance--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And this side is for thou who would like to help Dakka Dakka's community! Join the fun with a good old post!

I'm over ur wallz, trollin yur doodz.

Seriously, you sound like one of those guys who make an inflammatory comment, and as soon as someone diagrees with you, you're all 'Chill out, man. Jeez, ain't this guy a loser, amirite?'

To be on topic, army painter (and washes in general) are fantastic ways for people who want their army to look decent, but don't have quite the skills yet, to get a satisfying look to their armies. The only way GW gets my money anymore is through my purchasing of Devlan Mud.

Lord of Baal wrote:Yes actually this is my thread but I just changed my name recently with Yakface. My old name was Dark Angels Champ-Master but I now play Blood Angels. Sorry if you feel that I am uppity, I just explained to another guy on being great full on another post. Sorry, I just want to respect Dakka Dakka and be kind. Your brain is functioning in a way where your replacing my voice to be stubborn, and thats not how I intend it.
-Really sorry

No you don't get it, people don't 'own' threads. The OP doesn't own the topic, after the first post it's released into the wild.

Ok ok. I get it. I am just saying I created it. Look at yourself, your not improving anything, your only making things worse.
And Infinite Array, please don't bully me anymore.