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.

Ulthanashville wrote:It's also a scam by GW to force players to spend more money on different iterations of the same model. How many articles on GW's website mention WYSIWIG? Zilch. Yes, you can buy magnets, but does GW sell them? No. Hey, I wonder why that is...

Sorry, but... what?

How on earth are you getting the idea that GW not telling you about WYSIWYG makes them more money?

The 'WYSIWYG is a commercial gimmick' idea inevitably comes up in every discussion of WYSIWYG. But it's a baseless claim. If GW were really using WYSIWYG as a tool for selling more models, for starters it would be an actual hard-and-fast rule in the rulebook, rather than a vague mention about modelling options hidden away in the character section.

Telling you upfront when you are in the store would result in more sales, since they would be able to point out that in order to field, say, that devastator unit with 4 missile launchers, you're going to need to buy multiple boxes of models.

WYSIWYG is nothing more than a gaming convention intended to make the game easier to play. And it has never been something that GW have pushed, outside of tournaments where it is important for all sorts of reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with increasing sales.

How many new players do you think are told about WYSIWIG by the store attendant when they purchase their first battleforce? I'm going to go out on a limb here and say not one.

So some 12-year-old has saved up their pocket money to buy 500 points of whatever, spent the time to glue and paint said models, then comes along to your gaming club one night.

If you and your buddies refuse to play them because a couple of models don't match their list, then not only are you a jerk but you've potentially cost GW a life-long customer.

No, on second thought, I agree completely. It's like when I bought that tennis racquet, and the guy at the store didn't tell me I couldn't use it for playing squash. He's clearly a jerk, and so are the guys at the squash court who wouldn't play against me just because I didn't have the right equipment...

It's easy to just assume that people are being jerks in discussions like this. In actual practice, at least from my experience, few players will refuse a pick-up game just because a couple of models aren't fully WYSIWYG. What's more likely to happen, particularly if there's a kid involved, is that the game will go ahead anyway (unless the army is just too confusing to keep track of) and/or someone will sooner or later sit down with the kid and explain what they need to do to make their army more playable.

Don't just assume that because some people say they prefer to stick to WYSIWYG that they are jerks about it.

Thank you insaniak.

@ darkcloud92: It isn't that hard to learn - I can see that for someone who never looked through a codex and only modeled and painted, it seems hard at first, but I would not mind having you look at my models pre-game and looking up each weapon's statistics in order to learn. If you do that, it won't take you forever, and you'd learn while you play, too.

I might even cut you some slack and help you configure your suits correctly if you were willing to learn wysiwyg and adhere to it. But if you insist on playing with non-wysiwyg models and not do something about it, I would not play you, no. And just so I am not called a jerk again: my decision not to play you in such a case has nothing to do with disliking you personally or thinking you were stupid, but simply with me not enjoying a non-wysiwyg game very much.

insaniak wrote:
No, on second thought, I agree completely. It's like when I bought that tennis racquet, and the guy at the store didn't tell me I couldn't use it for playing squash. He's clearly a jerk, and so are the guys at the squash court who wouldn't play against me just because I didn't have the right equipment...

That sounds more like the metaphorical store owner isn't telling you that you can't play AT-43 armies in 40K. It's obvious, so he doesn't need to say it. .....but this thread isn't about using armies from other rules systems or using unofficial 40K armies in GW-supported tornaments; it's about people not liking the fact that the model doesn't show exactly what's in your list. This then begs the question- why not have GW-supplied magnets, make magnatising part of the game. If you really want your fellow players to have WYSIWYG then surely easier access to magnetising would only be a good thing, right?

what are your alls feelings towards having extra weagear on the model being covered up for tourny play? Just leaving the actual guns visible? Or would the masking tape be too much?

sudojoe wrote:what are your alls feelings towards having extra weagear on the model being covered up for tourny play? Just leaving the actual guns visible? Or would the masking tape be too much?

Haha! Perhaps you've found the answer- turn your model into a one-man-band of wargear and just cover up the one's you're not using. Sure the masking tape would make the model look ugly as sin, but WYSIWYG matters.

sudojoe wrote:what are your alls feelings towards having extra weagear on the model being covered up for tourny play? Just leaving the actual guns visible? Or would the masking tape be too much?

My feelings towards that are not good.

WYSIWYG or stay home.

SDFarsight wrote:. This then begs the question- why not have GW-supplied magnets, make magnatising part of the game.

The obvious answer being that GW clearly doesn't think it's a big deal...

Outside of the tournament scene, WYSIWYG is really down to the individual players... and from my experience, most players are fairly casual about it, so long as people make some effort to explain what is what.

It's only the tournament scene that is big on WYSIWYG... and that's an aspect of the game that GW has never been particularly focussed on.

i think the whole idea of wysiwyg 'avoiding confusion'... is valid. I don't want to have check your army list. Your army should look like what it is.

That said, I have a termie 'heavy flamer' that's two flamers glued together, a crozius made out of a back standard, and a power sword made from two combat knives. But they at least resemble what they represent. I've also taken crap for not having sleeves on my power armor, but I feel like that's a cosmetic choice, like having helmets or not.

Without diverting the subject too much, how does everyone feel about the 'angry marine' look, provided no codex rules are outright broken?

insaniak wrote:

SDFarsight wrote:. This then begs the question- why not have GW-supplied magnets, make magnatising part of the game.

The obvious answer being that GW clearly doesn't think it's a big deal...

Outside of the tournament scene, WYSIWYG is really down to the individual players... and from my experience, most players are fairly casual about it, so long as people make some effort to explain what is what.

It's only the tournament scene that is big on WYSIWYG... and that's an aspect of the game that GW has never been particularly focussed on.

Really? Considering how unofficial armies and units, even semi-official ones like Kroot Mercs, Human Auxilleries, DeathWatch, LatD etc. Sure people don't want to be playing in a tournament against something which hasn't been thoroughly play-tested, but from the strictness that I've heard of you'd think that a GW employe was walking around checking if the player had brought the models from a GW store rather than buying off eBay.

SDFarsight wrote:Really? Considering how unofficial armies and units, even semi-official ones like Kroot Mercs, Human Auxilleries, DeathWatch, LatD etc. Sure people don't want to be playing in a tournament against something which hasn't been thoroughly play-tested, but from the strictness that I've heard of you'd think that a GW employe was walking around checking if the player had brought the models from a GW store rather than buying off eBay.

I'm guessing, since you appear to have wandered off mid-sentence at the start there... but if you're talking about GW stores not allowing people to use unofficial or out of date armies instore, that's a completely different issue. It's nothing to do with WYSIWYG... it's just about stores not wanting to promote out of date or unofficial armies.

insaniak wrote:

SDFarsight wrote:Really? Considering how unofficial armies and units, even semi-official ones like Kroot Mercs, Human Auxilleries, DeathWatch, LatD etc. Sure people don't want to be playing in a tournament against something which hasn't been thoroughly play-tested, but from the strictness that I've heard of you'd think that a GW employe was walking around checking if the player had brought the models from a GW store rather than buying off eBay.

I'm guessing, since you appear to have wandered off mid-sentence at the start there... but if you're talking about GW stores not allowing people to use unofficial or out of date armies instore, that's a completely different issue. It's nothing to do with WYSIWYG... it's just about stores not wanting to promote out of date or unofficial armies.

Then it makes me wonder, where is the strictness with WYSIWYG comming from?

In casual play, it's coming from a desire to get on with playing the game rather than having to sit through your opponent pointing out that this lascannon is actually a missile launcher and that flamer is actually a powerfist... and then having to remember that for the entire game.

In tournament play, it's coming from a need for transparency to prevent shenanigans.

Again, at its core, WYSIWYG is simply a tool for making the game easier to play. Strict adherance to WYSIWYG makes it much easier for your opponent to tell what is what, and gives you both one less thing to keep track of through the game.

There shouldn't really be any need for your opponent to insist on WYSIWYG... you should be following it anyway out of courtesy for your opponents.

If any opponent of mine wants to know if I'm proxying any special weapons, all they have to do is ask--I'll be happy to clear things up for him. Obviously I wouldn't be gauche enough to do this in a tournament, but in a casual setting where the only time pressure is when the store closes, what's the big deal? How dare you spend 15 seconds asking your opponent to clarify something!

Scambone wrote:i think the whole idea of wysiwyg 'avoiding confusion'... is valid. I don't want to have check your army list. Your army should look like what it is.

That said, I have a termie 'heavy flamer' that's two flamers glued together, a crozius made out of a back standard, and a power sword made from two combat knives. But they at least resemble what they represent. I've also taken crap for not having sleeves on my power armor, but I feel like that's a cosmetic choice, like having helmets or not.

Without diverting the subject too much, how does everyone feel about the 'angry marine' look, provided no codex rules are outright broken?

If that marine has a plasma pistol and chainsword as his base equipment, I think he's quite cool.

Custom modelling is at the core of the hobby, if someone doesn't like them, tell them to go play HeroClix.

Grey Templar wrote:Remember that some people want WYSIWYG is casual games too because they want an astetically pleasing game, and having to constantly get reminded whats what detracts from the appearence.

one or two weapons that are different is ok, but to do it with an entire army is kinda tacky and can convey a sense that you don't care about these things.

I agree entirely.

I don't mind player's proxying a model to try it out and see how it works in a couple of games. But if you repeatedly represent one of your carnifexes as a Tervigon in almost every single game you play, I'm going to start wondering why you won't just buy the damn thing or at least convert the carnifex to be a more accurate representation.

Teln wrote:If any opponent of mine wants to know if I'm proxying any special weapons, all they have to do is ask--I'll be happy to clear things up for him. Obviously I wouldn't be gauche enough to do this in a tournament, but in a casual setting where the only time pressure is when the store closes, what's the big deal? How dare you spend 15 seconds asking your opponent to clarify something!

I would hope that if you are proxying anything your opponent doesn't need to ask for you to inform them. You should be telling him before the game even starts, rather than waiting to see what's what.

I'd be very annoyed if I charged into a SM squad and it turns out the sergeant has a power fist rather than his represented chainsword, and even moreso if my opponent felt the onus was on me to check if he was proxying anything.

Teln wrote: How dare you spend 15 seconds asking your opponent to clarify something!

Let's not try to make this into a bigger deal than it actually is. It's not unreasonable to expect an opponent to make some effort to represent their army correctly on the table top... but ultimately, most players won't care if there are one or two proxies scattered through your army, so long as you point them out ahead of time.

players not minding proxies though doesn't mean that it isn't easier to have everything (or as much as possible) accurately modelled.

sudojoe wrote:Not even the masking tape idea?

I think masking tape would be nicely obvious and though ugly, accepted by most opponents.

Otherwise, there are *really* small Post-It pieces that ought to be okay for one tourney. Attach to the XV8's back, with a clear :
Pulse Rifle, Missile Pod
on it and you're good. But if you show to the *next* tourney and you still haven't applied a hobby knife to the unwanted gun ... then you're just not being as dedicated as the rest of us.

I'd still play you, but you're gonna pay the price of some thorough ball-busting.

I'm very for a strict adherence to wysiwyg but at the same time I'm very open to 'counts as.'

You don't need to magnetize every weapon option and painstakingly order out of production bits to convert options that they don't even support in the model range anymore or anything. But for serious if you have like 3 unpainted crisis teams that all look like they have burst cannons and you just point at each as they're deployed and say 'this squad actually has this and this and this and that squad has hard wired thats and more of those and that squad actually has burst cannons' that's a huge pain in my butt to keep track of on top of your entire codex worth of weapon profiles and stat lines as I play.

Post-its are a great idea, or you can grab some oatmeal packets and cut out some pieces to make to scale paper bags and write 'fusion blaster' or 'flamer' on them or paint little symbols or color code them or something and stuff them over the ends of the burst cannons. Suddenly I can tell at a glance what everything is and you don't need to be captain hobbyphile mcmagnetsoneverything. If you think a crisis suit brimming with crude paper bags over shamefully unmodeled weapons looks silly, well, so does a big shoota that shoots rokkits in the same mob as a big shoota that shoots bullets.

Sudojoe's masking tape over hurricane bolters example sounds perfectly okay by me, you don't need to cut up your model to play your list a little differently some days.

I'm for wysiwyg for my army only. That has to do with my OCD more than anything. However I will not require it from Nyone else or refuse to play if your army isn't. I prefer my models to look exactly the way thy they should which adds to my frustration that GW doesn't give you enough bits in the squad box to outfit them correctly. I could convert them I suppose however anything I could come up with wouldn't look as good as the real thing. My nobz box only comes with 1 combi flamer so if I want another then I have to buy more boxes. Then I have what amounts to a 25 dollar flamer and a bunch of nobs I don't need.

I do proxy at this point on occasion since my bits are limited and so is my budget but it's mainly to try different variations of wargear. Its my goal to have everything wysiwyg though. I usually us the colored glass beads next to the proxies as a visual reminder for myself as well as my opponent though. e.g. red for flamers, green for poison (always forget about the poison), blue for lasgun.

so no sleeves are a pass. How about permanent 'counts-as' that are intended to represent things that I can't afford

would this be easily recognized as what it represents? It's not like it can be 'mistaken' for a storm bolter on the shooting turn. I know its not pretty but would this form of proxy be acceptable for continuous use?

Yeah, conversions are cool.

Its pretty obvious that he's got a heavy flamer and a chainfist.


It would be ok if you occasionally ran him with an assault cannon instead just to try it out, but I would want to eventually see you get a real assault cannon termie if you want to stick with it.


and magnets are actually pretty easy. especially with terminators. Rare Earth Magnets are the perfect size for their shoulder joints and the Terminator box has seperate arms for each weapon. You can easily just pop them off and on depending on what you want.

The biggest issue with converting is getting started. Once the initial fear is passed it can be surprisingly easy to do conversions.

insaniak wrote:In casual play, it's coming from a desire to get on with playing the game rather than having to sit through your opponent pointing out that this lascannon is actually a missile launcher and that flamer is actually a powerfist... and then having to remember that for the entire game.

In tournament play, it's coming from a need for transparency to prevent shenanigans.

Again, at its core, WYSIWYG is simply a tool for making the game easier to play. Strict adherance to WYSIWYG makes it much easier for your opponent to tell what is what, and gives you both one less thing to keep track of through the game.

There shouldn't really be any need for your opponent to insist on WYSIWYG... you should be following it anyway out of courtesy for your opponents.

This.

insaniak wrote:
There shouldn't really be any need for your opponent to insist on WYSIWYG...

I agree.

you should be following it anyway out of courtesy for your opponents.

Oh my, how that last half totally changed the whole sentence.

I think there's a balance to be struck- try to make your army represent your list so that it doesn't turn into a game of 'guess the model' for both you and your opponent, but to expect 100% WYSIWYG out of "courtesy" is pompous. I assume that the person has the chance to at least do some research into magnetising rather than "look at that oik who hasn't even bothered to put Flatchette Dischargers onto his Hammerhead, the utter nerve of him!! To come infront of I, presuming that I would- HA! Actually play a match with him and his peasant models..."

What I'll never understand is how people play a game that involves building and painting models, and yet do not care about whether or not their models are built properly or painted. If you just want to fight stuff, go play a video game. If you're going to take the time to play a miniatures game, put in the tiny amount of effort it takes to build your stuff properly. Rip the guns off and replace them with what you actually want. If you don't have the proper guns, trade for them or convert. I'd suggest buying them but apparently spending money on an expensive hobby is a travesty.

Go play Starcraft if you don't want to take the time to model your army.

Indeed, if you assembled your models in a poor fashion then thats your problem not your opponents.

You learned your lesson, now you can fix it and you won't do it again.

lledwey wrote:What I'll never understand is how people play a game that involves building and painting models, and yet do not care about whether or not their models are built properly or painted. If you just want to fight stuff, go play a video game. If you're going to take the time to play a miniatures game, put in the tiny amount of effort it takes to build your stuff properly. Rip the guns off and replace them with what you actually want. If you don't have the proper guns, trade for them or convert. I'd suggest buying them but apparently spending money on an expensive hobby is a travesty.

Go play Starcraft if you don't want to take the time to model your army.

Having a weapon or two which isn't WYSIWYG = no passion and effort put into model making?

I don't mind people proxying occasionally, most people round here like to try out new lists, builds and units before they go out to buy them.

I'm also not too bothered about WYSIWYG in friendly play either; if it's instantly identifiable from a distance (i.e post-its) then I'm game.

For a tournament game I'd consider it poor form if your models weren't WYSIWYG, I've taken the time to ensure the game runs as smoothly and quickly as possible, why can't you?

Iranna.

SDFarsight wrote:

lledwey wrote:What I'll never understand is how people play a game that involves building and painting models, and yet do not care about whether or not their models are built properly or painted. If you just want to fight stuff, go play a video game. If you're going to take the time to play a miniatures game, put in the tiny amount of effort it takes to build your stuff properly. Rip the guns off and replace them with what you actually want. If you don't have the proper guns, trade for them or convert. I'd suggest buying them but apparently spending money on an expensive hobby is a travesty.

Go play Starcraft if you don't want to take the time to model your army.

Having a weapon or two which isn't WYSIWYG = no passion and effort put into model making?

No, but having the majority of the army be wrong is. especially if combined with no effort being put into correcting it.

You made a mistake, ok thats fine. Not correcting your mistake, thats lazy.

Grey Templar wrote:

SDFarsight wrote:

lledwey wrote:What I'll never understand is how people play a game that involves building and painting models, and yet do not care about whether or not their models are built properly or painted. If you just want to fight stuff, go play a video game. If you're going to take the time to play a miniatures game, put in the tiny amount of effort it takes to build your stuff properly. Rip the guns off and replace them with what you actually want. If you don't have the proper guns, trade for them or convert. I'd suggest buying them but apparently spending money on an expensive hobby is a travesty.

Go play Starcraft if you don't want to take the time to model your army.

Having a weapon or two which isn't WYSIWYG = no passion and effort put into model making?

No, but having the majority of the army be wrong is. especially if combined with no effort being put into correcting it.

You made a mistake, ok thats fine. Not correcting your mistake, thats lazy.

As I'm sure you know, modeling takes time so I wouldn't call it a "mistake"; but I agree, showing no will to correct and model your armies, turning up with the same unpainted Carnifex game after game is poor form.

Mistake in the sense that you didn't put the weapon you actually would want on the model, or possably an illegal combination of wargear.

Like there was a newb who showed up with a DA army and he had a plasma gun, meltagun, and missile launcher in one tac squad. Of course its easily solved by getting a new tac squad so the weapon ratios are legal, and he was getting a 2nd squad soon anyway.