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.

To be fair, my own personal take on this is that at 28mm scale, a miniature is a gaming counter, nothing more. And because the miniatures will be handled (alot) and used for playing games, I'll do a decent table top gaming standard nothing more.

I save my time and effort for display painting for 54mm scale and upwards

EldarN00b wrote:There's nothing wrong with not having a fully painted army, hell, all of our armies are works in progress.

Do you think other people feel the same way you do when they see your half-painted army across the table?

Personally, for gaming and aesthetic reasons I'd rather see a fully painted or fully unpainted army. I really don't like playing against partially-painted armies.

Sidstyler makes a good point. If you waited for everyone to paint every single miniature in their armies, very few people would ever play which would be a bit of a shame.

I don't think I have ever played a game where every model was painted to table top standard. I try to go for at least a basecoat though...

At the end of the day, it's something to aspire to and those players who manage it can bask in the admiration of their fellow gamers.

Flashman wrote:Sidstyler makes a good point. If you waited for everyone to paint every single miniature in their armies, very few people would ever play which would be a bit of a shame.

I dunno, 10 years ago it was 100% required at every FLGS and GW in 100 miles and we had *MORE* players than we do now with relaxed standards. We actually have less gaming and worse gaming times because store owners don't want to give the tables all weekend to unpainted minis that don't sell models. It is a weeknight play which is hard or weekend events that require painted like a tourney. People just played with what they had painted not re-selling their army on ebay every 3 months to play the new codex.

When stores required panting, wargaming was so popular that it was wargaming 7 days a week and the sales supported it.

I almost only play at tourneys now that require fully painted and avoid FLGS because it is a total waste of time. Why make the effort to get to a store on a week night to play with a bunch of non-WYSIWYG unpainted figures.

Worst thing GW ever did was relaxing the in-store standard because it forced the FLGS to follow suit.

It doesn't bother me. Oh, I love to see well painted figures, it makes a game look so much better, but each to their own.

When I started 40K 18 months ago I had no intention of painting any models, and I made my mates aware of that before I started. I'm a gamer, I love board games & RPGs. I never painted Space Hulk or my Chess set, I had no intention of starting to paint.

Then I tried painting. I sucked. REALLY BAD.

I watched some tutorials. I got better. So I watched some more tutorials and got better.

Now I can paint to an average tabletop quality and I rarely play with unpainted minis nowadays.

I still dislike painting, but I prefer seeing painted minis on the gaming table more.

40k is this odd combination of a hobby and a sport. For those like myself and the OP, it's the hobby aspect that's most important, so have a nicely painted army is paramount and effects my enjoyment of the game. I only play people with painted armies or at least armies that are in-process or enter tournaments where a minimum painting standard is required because I have less fun if they don't. I also think that having an unpainted force is an advantage to that player as it makes it harder to clearly identify units and war gear. I have enough of a challenge keeping track of a million different rules without having to guess at wargear, etc.

There's another faction that views 40k as a sport. They don't care about modeling and painting, don't enjoy it... so for them the joy of the hobby isn't the "hobby" but the competition.

Both views are legitimate, both are necessary (it's the non-hobby gamers who buy a new army every time a new or more powerful dex comes out... they drive sales with GW and that keeps us ALL in business.

So... my advice.... Relax, pick your opponents carefully, lead by example. You'll have more fun that way.

Last time i saw an unpainted model, I DIED.

I hate it that much.

EldarN00b wrote:

Irdiumstern wrote:Painting is the most boring, painful, and slow part of the entire hobby for me. I much prefer converting and playing, and I'd rather not waste time on painting.

In the end, that pretty much kills the hobby. The hobby is built around patience, can't they at least paint flat colours? I'll respect them for that, it takes 3 hours to flat base an entire squad.

I participate for the game as well but I believe that it should be done properly.

No, you believe that everyone should do it the way you want them to.

As others have said, there are a large number of different aspects to the tabletop wargaming hobby. Some people love the social aspect, some love the competitive aspect, some love converting, some love painting, some love other things.

Are you willing to adapt your level of comptetive play to the level that every opponent desires? Are you willing to adapt your level of conversions to that of every one of your opponents? Are you willing to adapt your social skills such that you're a joy to hang out with for every one of your opponents? Are you willing to adjust everything about how you play your hobby so that every opponent is satisfied that you're participating in the hobby the way that your opponent does?

If not, it's kind of arrogant to expect everyone to do things the way you want them to.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

nkelsch wrote:I dunno, 10 years ago it was 100% required at every FLGS and GW in 100 miles and we had *MORE* players than we do now with relaxed standards. We actually have less gaming and worse gaming times because store owners don't want to give the tables all weekend to unpainted minis that don't sell models. It is a weeknight play which is hard or weekend events that require painted like a tourney. People just played with what they had painted not re-selling their army on ebay every 3 months to play the new codex..

That's interesting. I've been playing since 1988, and I've never been in a store that required 100% painted models.

biccat wrote:

EldarN00b wrote:There's nothing wrong with not having a fully painted army, hell, all of our armies are works in progress.

Do you think other people feel the same way you do when they see your half-painted army across the table?

Personally, for gaming and aesthetic reasons I'd rather see a fully painted or fully unpainted army. I really don't like playing against partially-painted armies.

I agree. Pick one.

If you're not a hobbyist, play with 100% grey models.

If you are a pure hobbyist, play with 100% painted and based models.

I won't allow any in-between at my table. Cheater.

Edit: by the way.

You know, I've been in this hobby for a decade, and I'm not sure I've ever seen a discussion on painted and unpainted armies.

The OP's visceral reaction is interesting, and finding out that there are likeminded fellows that have opinions on the painting status of armies is fascinating.

Gitsplitta wrote: (it's the non-hobby gamers who buy a new army every time a new or more powerful dex comes out... they drive sales with GW and that keeps us ALL in business.

I would disagree with the assertion that the 'non-hobby' gamer keeps GW going. I think the 'non-hobby' gamer is a statistical nothing compared to what keeps GW in business... 12 year old gaming children... And they are basically not even aware of this paint-vs-non paint because they do whatever the redshirts tell them from my observation.

For every adult meta gamer who is churning through full armies every 3 months to buy new codexes, there is a hardcore painter who buys thousands of points of stuff to paint, paint and sell, collect or whatever. I am not convinced that I have to thank the non-painted grey hordes for the prosperous sales of the game.

Polonius wrote:You know, I've been in this hobby for a decade, and I'm not sure I've ever seen a discussion on painted and unpainted armies.

The OP's visceral reaction is interesting, and finding out that there are likeminded fellows that have opinions on the painting status of armies is fascinating.

Wow. Someone's feeling sarcastic today.

So, I walked into my LGS yesterday and there was half a dozen people playing games with battleforce-esque armies.

I mean seriously, they were terrible from a list building standpoint, plus their tactics left a lot to be desired.

Is this a common phenomenon where painting is more important than the game? Or is it a phase they grow out of? I've never fielded more than a single squad of Ogryns, even after only 3 months. Yet some of these guys have 2 or 3 squads of them.

In the end, that pretty much kills the game. The game is built around list building and tactics, can't they at least read a couple tactics articles? I'll respect them for that, it takes 30 minutes to read a couple.

To the OP: No, no you're not the only one. There is constant moral outrage that occurs basically bi-monthly on this grievous and most horrific sin against the righteous purity of our most scared hobby. After drawing attention to the fact that the people that the poster complained about last month still don't have their thousands of points painted given A FULL MONTH to do it, typically there will be the detractors and nay-sayers who appear in the thread trying to spread such dangerous and heretical ideology like "It's their stuff", "You shouldn't paint for others, and shouldn't expect them to paint for you", and (the most dangerous of all) "It's just a game!"

Seriously though, chill out, it's just a game and they're not grown, mature adults like you. They'll get it in two or three years when they are and all will be harmonious. If it's that big a deal, why not take the initiative and try to "grow the hobby" in your area by having a painting class or finding other ways to encourage them to actually up their game? That's what I did. We have a guy playing Imperial Fists who paints, well, badly, to put it honest. To give myself to experiment with yellow, and because I knew he had AOBR and a couple of Rhinos, I put together a plasmagun guy from bitz I had laying around, painted to the best of my ability, and gave it to him. I then told him what every paint I used on it was, and where I put them. He got taught how to highlight and he got a model out of it, and was very appreciative.

Much more productive that complaining annonymously on a wargaming forum.

EDIT: Also, just checked out your Serpent. Nice job. I've been painting for a few years now and I still can't get my whites to come out that smooth.

Wow. Someone's feeling sarcastic today.

PFFT Part timer

Just don't see the commitment to being a fully paid up member of the Sarky Gets Society like you used to
I blame the internet memes as it is so easy to copy paste with the flavour of the month for the drop in standards.

Timmah wrote:So, I walked into my LGS yesterday and there was half a dozen people playing games with battleforce-esque armies.

I mean seriously, they were terrible from a list building standpoint, plus their tactics left a lot to be desired.

Is this a common phenomenon where painting is more important than the game? Or is it a phase they grow out of? I've never fielded more than a single squad of Ogryns, even after only 3 months. Yet some of these guys have 2 or 3 squads of them.

In the end, that pretty much kills the game. The game is built around list building and tactics, can't they at least read a couple tactics articles? I'll respect them for that, it takes 30 minutes to read a couple.

Yeah, because pushing little plastic men on the table is serious business.

I used to play World of Warcraft.

I had a friend tell me that I wasn't playing the game right because I didn't run dungeons.

I had a friend tell me that I wasn't playing the game right because I didn't PvP.

I think that it's just a game, made for fun, and I can get my jollies any way I darn well please.

If I want to put an emphasis on painting because I enjoy it and tactics be damned, good for me.
If I want to put an emphasis on gaming because I want to win and don't care about a sea of gray plastic, also good for me.

If I get my jollies from running around the painball feild buck naked waving my arms in the air and screaming "TO-RA-LU-RA-LA!", then I'll darn well do it. I know I'll (probably) lose and get shot to oblivion, but if that's what I call fun, then I'll do it every chance I get.

If you don't like it, you don't have to play with me.

kronk wrote:

biccat wrote:

EldarN00b wrote:There's nothing wrong with not having a fully painted army, hell, all of our armies are works in progress.

Do you think other people feel the same way you do when they see your half-painted army across the table?

Personally, for gaming and aesthetic reasons I'd rather see a fully painted or fully unpainted army. I really don't like playing against partially-painted armies.

I agree. Pick one.

If you're not a hobbyist, play with 100% grey models.

If you are a pure hobbyist, play with 100% painted and based models.

I won't allow any in-between at my table. Cheater.

Well, I'd never refuse a game, whether painted, unpainted, or cardboard chits.

I think it's confusing and aesthetically displeasing playing a half-painted army, especially when the painted half is done to a very high standard and they're placed next to their grey and metal bretheren. Or worse, primed. The contrast creates the appearance of a half-done job that you didn't care to finish. It shows you have the ability but not the interest in following through with your project.

But like I said, I wouldn't turn down a game based on the state of someone's models. Everyone enjoys the hobby differently. I personally prefer not to play with unpainted models (which is why my O&G army hasn't seen a table yet...damn you goblins!)

Chibi Bodge-Battle wrote:

Wow. Someone's feeling sarcastic today.

PFFT Part timer

Just don't see the commitment to being a fully paid up member of the Sarky Gets Society like you used to
I blame the internet memes as it is so easy to copy paste with the flavour of the month for the drop in standards.

The dues are just so expensive nowadays...

And, I believe you meant "Snarky Git".

LunaHound wrote:

Irdiumstern wrote:Painting is the most boring, painful, and slow part of the entire hobby for me. I much prefer converting and playing, and I'd rather not waste time on painting.

Exactly, not only is painting time consuming and not fun, it LOWERS the resale value.
So logically speaking, why would i put effort into something counter productive?

Logically speaking, skip buying the figures altogether, and invest the money elsewhere. )

mikhaila wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

Irdiumstern wrote:Painting is the most boring, painful, and slow part of the entire hobby for me. I much prefer converting and playing, and I'd rather not waste time on painting.

Exactly, not only is painting time consuming and not fun, it LOWERS the resale value.
So logically speaking, why would i put effort into something counter productive?

Logically speaking, skip buying the figures altogether, and invest the money elsewhere. )

Grooming.

Free Weights or Gym Membership.

Girls.

lol true enough

Get worked better
Is a variation of git
cf The Beatles "I'm So Tired"

I'm so tired, I'm feeling so upset
Although I'm so tired I'll have another cigarette
And curse Sir Walter Raleigh
He was such a stupid get.

/runs off to begin cutting cardboard instead of buying figures.

I myself find playing with an fully painted army versus an fully painted army, much more enjoyable than playing with dull grey minis. Painting is an essential side of the hobby, and I feel embarrased if I must field unpainted miniatures. Sure people can play with unpainted ones if they like, but putting even little effort on painting their minis is much more better than not a giving s***. I must be lucky, because even my FLGS 10-year old kids try to paint their minis, and almost always field an fully painted army. Well tomorrow is friday, so Magic the Gathering players like myself, will be taking over our FLGS so I don't have to watch unpainted miniatures dominating the battlefield.

Ps: People seriously, even try to paint your fething minis

biccat wrote:
But like I said, I wouldn't turn down a game based on the state of someone's models. Everyone enjoys the hobby differently. I personally prefer not to play with unpainted models (which is why my O&G army hasn't seen a table yet...damn you goblins!)

Didn't mean for that to look like I was taking a dig at you, biccat.

I appreciate a well painted army but I understand if people don't like painting as much as I do. My army certainly isn't 100% painted, but I make sure that a new miniature or unit has been painted since the last time I played. The first time I put a 100% painted army on the table was very satisfying for me.

Not sure if this has been said but armies are very often works in progress.
Also the shifting level of points making armies larger surely has an adverse effect on completely painting a force.

As long as people play with likeminded gamers, all is well. Remember, someone does have the right to tell you how to enjoy 'your hobby'. It is the person paying the rent on the gaming space you are playing in at the time.

mikhaila wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

Irdiumstern wrote:Painting is the most boring, painful, and slow part of the entire hobby for me. I much prefer converting and playing, and I'd rather not waste time on painting.

Exactly, not only is painting time consuming and not fun, it LOWERS the resale value.
So logically speaking, why would i put effort into something counter productive?

Logically speaking, skip buying the figures altogether, and invest the money elsewhere. )

Yeah, 'cause Mik said so...

I don't field unpainted stuff, have not since I started in 1990. I will at minimum undercoat and pick out detailing if the models are unpleasant or chorish to paint, especially large blocks of fantasy d00ds, however, since 40K models tend to stand on their own, I lavish them with details.

Oddly, my guardsmen are all very well painted, individually, yet my former dwarves were pretty much bronze, silver, with a drybrushed beard/hair color.

LunaHound wrote:

Irdiumstern wrote:Painting is the most boring, painful, and slow part of the entire hobby for me. I much prefer converting and playing, and I'd rather not waste time on painting.

Exactly, not only is painting time consuming and not fun, it LOWERS the resale value.
So logically speaking, why would i put effort into something counter productive?

Lowers resale value? Why buy them at all if you're only worried about the value you can hawk them for later?