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.
2017/09/25 16:32:29
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Seems to be a flurry of topics lately where people are picking apart their fellow hobbyists' choices on everything from conversions to paint jobs. It is getting a little tiresome.
At the end of the day these are fething games meant to be enjoyed, but people get hung up on the most bs minutiae and seem to take glee in crapping on other player's fun.
2017/09/25 16:38:05
Subject: Re:Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
I don't gripe about anything when I see a fully painted and based army. To me, kudos to anyone who has enough dedication, skill, and patience to actually finish their army. I have yet to run a fully painted army myself; the struggle is real.
Okay, I do gripe about one thing, that being how bad my army looks next to a fully painted army. But I don't really gripe, I just consider it motivation to get me to actually finish an army for once.
My armies (re-counted and updated on 11/1/23, including modeled wargear options):
Dark Angels: ~15000 Astra Militarum: ~1200 | Adeptus Custodes: ~1900 | Imperial Knights: ~2000 | Sisters of Battle: ~3500 | Leagues of Votann: ~1200 | Tyranids: ~2600 | Stormcast Eternals: ~5000
Check out my P&M Blogs: ZergSmasher's P&M Blog | Imperial Knights blog | Board Games blog | Total models painted in 2023: 40 | Total models painted in 2024: 12 | Current main painting project: Dark Angels
Mr_Rose wrote: Who doesn’t love crazy mutant squawk-puppies? Eh? Nobody, that’s who.
2017/09/25 17:54:14
Subject: Re:Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Gripe? Like, what do I complain about? Nothing. Why would I complain about something so petty? Now, if the thread is a question about common mistakes that I would give criticism about if I saw it another persons army when asked?
Mold lines. Drive me up the wall. Moreso on my own models than others.
Undrilled gun barrels. See above.
Badly applied decals. Decals take a lot of work to get right and can seriously detract from the model when done wrong. It's not like totally easy to do correctly but it is certainly doable for your average hobbyist.
Warped resin parts. Everyone from the professionals to the newbs make this mistake so it's understandable.
Things like color scheme, modelling choices (As opposed to errors), etc is personal taste and thus none of my business.I may not appreciate a bad/unfluffy color scheme as much but I won't "gripe" about it.
Thought for the day: Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
30k Ultramarines: 2000 pts
Bolt Action Germans: ~1200 pts
AOS Stormcast: Just starting.
The Empire : ~60-70 models.
1500 pts
: My Salamanders painting blog 16 Infantry and 2 Vehicles done so far!
2017/09/25 18:06:00
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Seems to be a flurry of topics lately where people are picking apart their fellow hobbyists' choices on everything from conversions to paint jobs. It is getting a little tiresome.
Why shouldn't someone be allowed to dislike something in an artistic, and thus, subjective-on-what-looks-good hobby? I'm sure you dislike a lot of things in this world be it from clothing to music, but we're all mature enough to not criticise someone for it or make them look a fool for their choices.
This is why a lot of threads devolve into a circlejerk (esp. on social media) as people simply cannot discern the difference between constructive criticism and calling something gak.
2017/09/25 18:07:15
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Hell, I'm just happy to play v. a painted army. I'm not at all picky about opponent's paint jobs.
Though, if I do have a pet peeve, it would be overdoing it on OSL. I've never seen it done much in person, but most examples I've seen of it are just awful - seems like it's usually like someone just blasted an airbrush full of neon green all over a side of an otherwise great looking model.
"Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment." Words to live by.
2017/09/25 18:23:19
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Seems to be a flurry of topics lately where people are picking apart their fellow hobbyists' choices on everything from conversions to paint jobs. It is getting a little tiresome.
Why shouldn't someone be allowed to dislike something in an artistic, and thus, subjective-on-what-looks-good hobby?
Everyone is allowed to their opinions. It is the sharing of individual opinions as if they are truths, and the gatekeeping of newer hobbyists by over-opinionated posters that makes threads of these nature tiresome.
Ruin wrote: I'm sure you dislike a lot of things in this world be it from clothing to music, but we're all mature enough to not criticise someone for it or make them look a fool for their choices.
Not from what I have seen. Are you reading these threads? The lack of maturity to differentiate one's own opinions and taste from "right" and "wrong" ways to play games or model is the problem. There are often extremely immature, broadly generalized statements made in these threads that turn posters against each other and make the hobby seem even more fractured and isolating than it is.
Ruin wrote: This is why a lot of threads devolve into a circlejerk (esp. on social media) as people simply cannot discern the difference between constructive criticism and calling something gak.
So wait, I am confused? These threads often devolve into a circle-jerk because the membership here is mature and able to have these discussions or not? Seems like you are saying two different things?
2017/09/25 18:27:44
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
A bit off from the OP question (but still in line with this thread) - one thing that come to mind is... partially painted armies. It's not adressed at anyone, just my personal "little oddity" - I can enjoy a spectacle of two painted armies on a nicely finished terrain OR I can enjoy "bare clay" monochrome "spectacle of sculpts". It even feels wrong to mix metal, resin and plastic on the same table in this second case. I can get a nice, consistent "environment feel" using grey plastic and some interesting table lighting (I don't usually play at shops), I can emphisize painted battles with lighting or just enjoy painting skills, but I can't do anything to improve my experience when using mixed minis, some painted, some not, some based, some with non-matching basing etc. on a mess of a mixed terrain - this throws me out of immersion as much as playing on books or plates and using soda cans for drop pods...
2017/09/25 18:38:27
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Seems to be a flurry of topics lately where people are picking apart their fellow hobbyists' choices on everything from conversions to paint jobs. It is getting a little tiresome.
Why shouldn't someone be allowed to dislike something in an artistic, and thus, subjective-on-what-looks-good hobby?
Everyone is allowed to their opinions. It is the sharing of individual opinions as if they are truths, and the gatekeeping of newer hobbyists by over-opinionated posters that makes threads of these nature tiresome.
Ruin wrote: I'm sure you dislike a lot of things in this world be it from clothing to music, but we're all mature enough to not criticise someone for it or make them look a fool for their choices.
Not from what I have seen. Are you reading these threads? The lack of maturity to differentiate one's own opinions and taste from "right" and "wrong" ways to play games or model is the problem. There are often extremely immature, broadly generalized statements made in these threads that turn posters against each other and make the hobby seem even more fractured and isolating than it is.
Ruin wrote: This is why a lot of threads devolve into a circlejerk (esp. on social media) as people simply cannot discern the difference between constructive criticism and calling something gak.
So wait, I am confused? These threads often devolve into a circle-jerk because the membership here is mature and able to have these discussions or not? Seems like you are saying two different things?
That's the spirit, pick apart someones post line by line...
If someone can't determine the difference between a fact and an opinion (something which is taught in year 6 English classes) then I really would question their general reading comprehension. You seem to have some sort of disconnect in thinking people will go around doing these things IRL. I have never in my near 20 years in this hobby encountered this. This is a discussion forum, we discuss things. It is a place to vent, which is exactly what this thread is. If your fragile sensibilities are so offended by the fact that someone half a world away may think that something you've done in this hobby sucks then I don't know what to say.
2017/09/25 18:44:02
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
I would kind of be surprised if it was even a plurality.
The Auld Grump
Kilkrazy wrote:When I was a young boy all my wargames were narratively based because I played with my toy soldiers and vehicles without the use of any rules.
The reason I bought rules and became a real wargamer was because I wanted a properly thought out structure to govern the action instead of just making things up as I went along.
2017/09/25 18:45:28
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Hmmm, not much. TBH, if someone goes through and paints a whole army, that's an impressive feat. Only a couple things bother me.
1) (and this has happened several times) when someone has an OBVIOUSLY commission-painted or second hand army and they try to take credit for the painting.
There's one guy I've played a couple times who has every single squad painted with roughly similar, but clearly different paints used and different painting styles, entirely different bases, etc. He owns the entire suite of forgeworld titans, so I know he's got the money to pay for commissions, and he claims to have painted all of his units. I've never seen anything of his partially painted, and he always claims to have "just finished" the models when he arrives with them.
Like, I would give you benefit of the doubt, dude, but when every time you paint a squad you use different colors, different details, different painting and the quality varies all over the map..I'm going to have a hard time believing you did it.
2) When someone has an incredibly well painted figure that they primed white or basecoated a primary color, and they leave the base bright, distracting white with splatters of stray paint and a little pool of excess wash around the figure's feet.
It takes about 30 seconds to brush some elmer's glue on your mini and swipe them through a container of sand that would sort that issue right out. Why take away from the incredibly nice figures you painted by not finishing the bases up?
"Got you, Yugi! Your Rubric Marines can't fall back because I have declared the tertiary kaptaris ka'tah stance two, after the secondary dacatarai ka'tah last turn!"
"So you think, Kaiba! I declared my Thousand Sons the cult of Duplicity, which means all my psykers have access to the Sorcerous Facade power! Furthermore I will spend 8 Cabal Points to invoke Cabbalistic Focus, causing the rubrics to appear behind your custodes! The Vengeance for the Wronged and Sorcerous Fullisade stratagems along with the Malefic Maelstrom infernal pact evoked earlier in the command phase allows me to double their firepower, letting me wound on 2s and 3s!"
"you think it is you who has gotten me, yugi, but it is I who have gotten you! I declare the ever-vigilant stratagem to attack your rubrics with my custodes' ranged weapons, which with the new codex are now DAMAGE 2!!"
"...which leads you straight into my trap, Kaiba, you see I now declare the stratagem Implacable Automata, reducing all damage from your attacks by 1 and triggering my All is Dust special rule!"
2017/09/25 21:06:40
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Seems to be a flurry of topics lately where people are picking apart their fellow hobbyists' choices on everything from conversions to paint jobs. It is getting a little tiresome.
Why shouldn't someone be allowed to dislike something in an artistic, and thus, subjective-on-what-looks-good hobby?
Everyone is allowed to their opinions. It is the sharing of individual opinions as if they are truths, and the gatekeeping of newer hobbyists by over-opinionated posters that makes threads of these nature tiresome.
Ruin wrote: I'm sure you dislike a lot of things in this world be it from clothing to music, but we're all mature enough to not criticise someone for it or make them look a fool for their choices.
Not from what I have seen. Are you reading these threads? The lack of maturity to differentiate one's own opinions and taste from "right" and "wrong" ways to play games or model is the problem. There are often extremely immature, broadly generalized statements made in these threads that turn posters against each other and make the hobby seem even more fractured and isolating than it is.
Ruin wrote: This is why a lot of threads devolve into a circlejerk (esp. on social media) as people simply cannot discern the difference between constructive criticism and calling something gak.
So wait, I am confused? These threads often devolve into a circle-jerk because the membership here is mature and able to have these discussions or not? Seems like you are saying two different things?
That's the spirit, pick apart someones post line by line...
If someone can't determine the difference between a fact and an opinion (something which is taught in year 6 English classes) then I really would question their general reading comprehension. You seem to have some sort of disconnect in thinking people will go around doing these things IRL. I have never in my near 20 years in this hobby encountered this. This is a discussion forum, we discuss things. It is a place to vent, which is exactly what this thread is. If your fragile sensibilities are so offended by the fact that someone half a world away may think that something you've done in this hobby sucks then I don't know what to say.
When you go on and on about something that I was never arguing, yes, I am going to pick apart your post line by line and refute your perspective of my position.
Considering my position in this thread was something you chose to ignore when originally quoting me, I'll reiterate:
DarkTraveler777 wrote: At the end of the day these are fething games meant to be enjoyed, but people get hung up on the most bs minutiae and seem to take glee in crapping on other player's fun.
Enter you, Ruin, asking me, "Why shouldn't someone be allowed to dislike something artistic..." when that is NOT what I was even posting about. I saw nothing in this thread that was a true discussion about aesthetics. It is a thread started with such a poorly reasoned and written troll-fueled OP that there was nothing of merit to begin with. So, I refuted your post line by line because you were attributing a position to me that I never took. This thread began on absurd footing and devolved from there.
Personally, I think in your eagerness to get one over on someone you failed to really read my post and are now attacking me for no fething reason. So, I stand by my original post, and my follow up post to you. There is no maturity in this thread, and you are a fine example of that by not only misinterpreting what I was saying, but then also attacking my character as a result! That is hilarious considering you posted this:
Ruin wrote: but we're all mature enough to not criticise someone for it or make them look a fool for their choices.
Ah, unless YOU disagree, right? Then the person disagreeing with you is someone with "fragile sensibilities" and an implied learning disability.
2017/09/25 21:10:15
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Ruin wrote: Why shouldn't someone be allowed to dislike something in an artistic, and thus, subjective-on-what-looks-good hobby? I'm sure you dislike a lot of things in this world be it from clothing to music, but we're all mature enough to not criticise someone for it or make them look a fool for their choices.
This is why a lot of threads devolve into a circlejerk (esp. on social media) as people simply cannot discern the difference between constructive criticism and calling something gak.
Nothing and no one says you aren't allowed to DISLIKE it. Just don't be a jerk about it. The old rule applies: "If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all". Unless invited to.
CHAOS! PANIC! DISORDER!
My job here is done.
2017/09/25 23:35:00
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
I'm a pretty decent painter who tries to only play with fully painted models, and I have a high appreciation of people that also put in the effort to paint their armies even if they're Heroclix level paintjobs because fully painted armies are great no matter the skill level, but there is one thing that bugs the everliving crud out of me: lazy basing!
When people don't fill in the extra holes on either side of a figure in the slotta bases, it really looks bad. Or when people just glue an integral base on top of the plastic/washer and flock it without smoothing it out into at least look like a mound of dirt it REALLY makes the figures stick out like sore thumbs. Or when they use bases from different companies so the height or bevels don't match, holy crap what is WRONG with you? I saw one guy mix GW beveled with MDF flat sided with warmachine round lipped bases and wanted to cry myself to sleep. And the biggest crime against humanity: the dreaded "pokeball" base, where they paint the from half of the rim one color and the back half another color. Drives me bonkers!
Darn it, people! Stop RUINING all the money and time and hard work you put into the figures with sloppy basing! /rant
Kalamadea wrote: I'm a pretty decent painter who tries to only play with fully painted models, and I have a high appreciation of people that also put in the effort to paint their armies even if they're Heroclix level paintjobs because fully painted armies are great no matter the skill level, but there is one thing that bugs the everliving crud out of me: lazy basing!
See, this is something I've been wondering about for a while. I hate basing my models - not because it is difficult or time consuming, but I just really dislike the look of bases which don't match the table. If you are dealing figures that are supposed to be fighting in deserts, moons, swamps, industrial complexes, snowfields, and whatever, it just really bugs me.
I based some Warmachine Khador figures with a snowy base, which looks great individually - it really makes the models pop and is thematically appropriate... but I've never once played with them on a snowy table. To me, it just looks like they bought the snow with them, like in the Pirates of the Caribbean movie where Davey Jones stands in a bucket. I decided that I wouldn't base my Infinity figures at all (they have really tiny bases for the most part), will probably not base the majority of figures I paint, and I'm still deciding what I want to do with some of my GW monster figures - they are centerpieces of my painting skill, and to me, they are more like little statues than game pieces.
Meanwhile, I don't mind a flat black base. Maybe it is the video gamer in me, but they become almost transparent to me. My mind just filters them out of reality as unrelated. They don't contribute to the model, but they don't distract either. I can't do that with scenic bases, and the more elaborate they are, the harder it is for me. I realize that this is my own hang up, but I feel like I can't possibly be alone in this. There must be someone else out there who prefers flat, black bases.
Basically, I just want to gauge the level of offensiveness of unbased miniatures. I feel like I'm stepping over some sort of aesthetic boundary. I don't play in tournaments, but don't most of them have some sort of basing requirement?
2017/09/26 00:35:56
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
licclerich wrote: Ok we all do it when someone has taken the time to paint there figures ,any army/scale period.
Historical.regiments with huge bases and a thin line of figures on them, a bowling green of emptiness.
Very dark figures ( goth orks etc) with dark ground cover and sides of bases left black, just a big lump of blackness
Non metallic metal...hey guys there is no such thing, give it up.
Figures highlighted and shaded to hell and back, just looks stupid
15mm and 20mm tanks based on blocks of wood, sorry bases...do these idiots need a movement tray to pick up on model!!!!!!!
What have got dakka
Nope. I appreciate it every time I see a painted army. From really basic paintjobs to the best.
The only things that would "annoy" me is when I see beautiful sculpts covered in inches of thick paint. But... everyone starts somewhere.
Nothing. People get different things from the hobby. Some love painting and do it to a high standard. Some see it as a frustrating chore, something they need to do as quickly as possible to get there dudes on the field. Some don't see it as needed at all. Who am I to judge?
2017/09/26 01:08:55
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Why shouldn't someone be allowed to dislike something in an artistic, and thus, subjective-on-what-looks-good hobby? I'm sure you dislike a lot of things in this world be it from clothing to music, but we're all mature enough to not criticise someone for it or make them look a fool for their choices.
This is why a lot of threads devolve into a circlejerk (esp. on social media) as people simply cannot discern the difference between constructive criticism and calling something gak.
There are a whole bunch of stylistic elements that I don't like - in terms of "I wouldn't paint my own models like that". Or "huh, that's a bit lazy" to "I don't like that style." But any of those are a far cry from "griping" about other people's varying levels of ability, style of painting/modelling or their aesthetic preferences. Especially since we're talking about other people's fully painted/based armies.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
nou wrote: A bit off from the OP question (but still in line with this thread) - one thing that come to mind is... partially painted armies. It's not adressed at anyone, just my personal "little oddity" - I can enjoy a spectacle of two painted armies on a nicely finished terrain OR I can enjoy "bare clay" monochrome "spectacle of sculpts". It even feels wrong to mix metal, resin and plastic on the same table in this second case. I can get a nice, consistent "environment feel" using grey plastic and some interesting table lighting (I don't usually play at shops), I can emphisize painted battles with lighting or just enjoy painting skills, but I can't do anything to improve my experience when using mixed minis, some painted, some not, some based, some with non-matching basing etc. on a mess of a mixed terrain - this throws me out of immersion as much as playing on books or plates and using soda cans for drop pods...
My bases probably don't match yours. Would that destroy your immersion? What about if my (or your) bases don't match the table? What if I run my Legion of the Damned (with desert bases) alongside my Dark Angels (with temperate bases). Would that destroy your immersion?
I try to play with only fully-painted forces these days, but often there's some unfinished stuff in my games. I have always found that an imminent game acts as a fantastic motivator to get models or units finished, and the "afterglow" of a game also acts as a great motivator to get any part-finished models completed for the next one.
Figures highlighted and shaded to hell and back, just looks stupid
?? What? Can anyone explain to me why youd complain a model is highlighted and shaded?
I imagine he's talking about what I call the "James Wappel" style, where everything is highlighted all the way to white and shaded all the way to black.
Spoiler:
I personally find it over the top on James' stuff, but I can certainly recognise his skill and talent. Most others are obviously not going to have the same level to skill to pull it off as James. But stll - not liking a style doesn't mean I'm going to gripe about it if I see it facing me across a table, or even someone's army posted online.
Kalamadea wrote: I'm a pretty decent painter who tries to only play with fully painted models, and I have a high appreciation of people that also put in the effort to paint their armies even if they're Heroclix level paintjobs because fully painted armies are great no matter the skill level, but there is one thing that bugs the everliving crud out of me: lazy basing!
See, this is something I've been wondering about for a while. I hate basing my models - not because it is difficult or time consuming, but I just really dislike the look of bases which don't match the table. If you are dealing figures that are supposed to be fighting in deserts, moons, swamps, industrial complexes, snowfields, and whatever, it just really bugs me.
Try clear round acrylic bases. I know a lot of people have started using them in the last few years. I think they look great... but I'm not rebasing decades worth of completed models, so on other people's figures they shall remain.
I based some Warmachine Khador figures with a snowy base, which looks great individually - it really makes the models pop and is thematically appropriate... but I've never once played with them on a snowy table. To me, it just looks like they bought the snow with them, like in the Pirates of the Caribbean movie where Davey Jones stands in a bucket. I decided that I wouldn't base my Infinity figures at all (they have really tiny bases for the most part), will probably not base the majority of figures I paint, and I'm still deciding what I want to do with some of my GW monster figures - they are centerpieces of my painting skill, and to me, they are more like little statues than game pieces.
I used to have that concern for literally decades. Mine was about people basing their heroes on boulders and the like. What, do they lug the boulder around on the battlefield to stand on again and again? I eventually got over it about 10 years ago. It still bothers me in its extremes, though - like when (flyers in particular) are based attached to tall ruins or trees. Great for dioramas, but not so much for tabletop models.
I saw a wonderful painted Undead army showcased in WD once. The guy had modelled spectral troops literally passing through some ruins, and the units were assembled and (multi) based around that. As display models they were top notch, but again.... do they drag those ruined buildings around with them all the time?
I do recognise it's just my own OCD of the original type, though. Just toned down but for the most egregious examples. Again. Not something I'm going to "like" but not something I'm going to gripe or bitch about to someone who has done all that work.
Meanwhile, I don't mind a flat black base. Maybe it is the video gamer in me, but they become almost transparent to me. My mind just filters them out of reality as unrelated. They don't contribute to the model, but they don't distract either. I can't do that with scenic bases, and the more elaborate they are, the harder it is for me. I realize that this is my own hang up, but I feel like I can't possibly be alone in this. There must be someone else out there who prefers flat, black bases.
Basically, I just want to gauge the level of offensiveness of unbased miniatures. I feel like I'm stepping over some sort of aesthetic boundary. I don't play in tournaments, but don't most of them have some sort of basing requirement?
I used to base my models with mid-green flock. Then I changed to dark green flock. Then I decided that I wanted all of my models to be consistent. So I went with drybrushed dark brown over black - Largely because of Space Hulk Terminators wanting to also spend time with Space Marines on "normal" tables. That was fine (with static flock added to Imperial Guard and others that would never see the interior of a Space Hulk) for many years until Gorka Morka became a thing. What with the desert and all. Now I keep my basing consistent for each force/army, but each force/army is not all required to have the same bases as every other force. I now see the different base styles as an opportunity to "tell the story" of those models to a degree, and even place them in some context.
Spoiler:
Black bases suggest to a lot of people that you didn't even try and tend to bother people more than a temperate base on a desert world. In your situatiom I'd potentially go for the clear acrylic, depending on how much work that would be to rebase your stuff.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2017/09/26 01:43:43
nou wrote: A bit off from the OP question (but still in line with this thread) - one thing that come to mind is... partially painted armies. It's not adressed at anyone, just my personal "little oddity" - I can enjoy a spectacle of two painted armies on a nicely finished terrain OR I can enjoy "bare clay" monochrome "spectacle of sculpts". It even feels wrong to mix metal, resin and plastic on the same table in this second case. I can get a nice, consistent "environment feel" using grey plastic and some interesting table lighting (I don't usually play at shops), I can emphisize painted battles with lighting or just enjoy painting skills, but I can't do anything to improve my experience when using mixed minis, some painted, some not, some based, some with non-matching basing etc. on a mess of a mixed terrain - this throws me out of immersion as much as playing on books or plates and using soda cans for drop pods...
My bases probably don't match yours. Would that destroy your immersion? What about if my (or your) bases don't match the table? What if I run my Legion of the Damned (with desert bases) alongside my Dark Angels (with temperate bases). Would that destroy your immersion?
No, as there is a clear logic and structure in such mismatch - it doesn't create additional "overlay of visual chaos". Funnily enough, there was a further part to my previous post, covering such eventualities, but I deleted it prior to posting. So let me elaborate: I know, that there is no practical way to counter this fully in real life 40K. And it's even creating my own problems with painting my own miniatures - I have quite large collection of minis, inlcuding ones I used during my 2nd ed period of gaming. I have this "unbearable" mismatch when playing some of my own games and I tend to build lists so to that I can avoid it. And I paint my minis "in order of battlefield role" and in batches, to minimise this "chaos" and have some visual structure to my own army when partially painted. But to be crystal clear, I never "throw" this in a face of other players or refuse games because of it. Not that level of "unbearable destroying of immersion"... I just enjoy games "as close to one ends of my spectrum as possible" more than mismatched ones. I know exactly, that this is my personal oddity, and I keep it to myself - this thread is the first time I'm expressing this.
2017/09/26 12:12:45
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
AUGmaniac wrote: Simple rule for painted armies:
Are they your models? If not, say a quick compliment on getting them painted and move on with life.
Simple solution
Same here. This thread is silly, petty and unnecessary.
"The 75mm gun is firing. The 37mm gun is firing, but is traversed round the wrong way. The Browning is jammed. I am saying "Driver, advance." and the driver, who can't hear me, is reversing. And as I look over the top of the turret and see twelve enemy tanks fifty yards away, someone hands me a cheese sandwich."
2017/09/26 12:23:19
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Kalamadea wrote: I'm a pretty decent painter who tries to only play with fully painted models, and I have a high appreciation of people that also put in the effort to paint their armies even if they're Heroclix level paintjobs because fully painted armies are great no matter the skill level, but there is one thing that bugs the everliving crud out of me: lazy basing!
See, this is something I've been wondering about for a while. I hate basing my models - not because it is difficult or time consuming, but I just really dislike the look of bases which don't match the table. If you are dealing figures that are supposed to be fighting in deserts, moons, swamps, industrial complexes, snowfields, and whatever, it just really bugs me.
I based some Warmachine Khador figures with a snowy base, which looks great individually - it really makes the models pop and is thematically appropriate... but I've never once played with them on a snowy table. To me, it just looks like they bought the snow with them, like in the Pirates of the Caribbean movie where Davey Jones stands in a bucket. I decided that I wouldn't base my Infinity figures at all (they have really tiny bases for the most part), will probably not base the majority of figures I paint, and I'm still deciding what I want to do with some of my GW monster figures - they are centerpieces of my painting skill, and to me, they are more like little statues than game pieces.
Meanwhile, I don't mind a flat black base. Maybe it is the video gamer in me, but they become almost transparent to me. My mind just filters them out of reality as unrelated. They don't contribute to the model, but they don't distract either. I can't do that with scenic bases, and the more elaborate they are, the harder it is for me. I realize that this is my own hang up, but I feel like I can't possibly be alone in this. There must be someone else out there who prefers flat, black bases.
Basically, I just want to gauge the level of offensiveness of unbased miniatures. I feel like I'm stepping over some sort of aesthetic boundary. I don't play in tournaments, but don't most of them have some sort of basing requirement?
I don't care what other people do - as stated before in this thread - but I can somewhat understand your point. I do something somewhat similar as well as question my basing choices every now and again.
The only basing I am fully content with is basing for models fighting on earth, say Bolt Action soldiers, because regardless of which board I may end up playing on, just like the miniature the base as geographical and historical background and I am cool to have my Volkssturm based for temperate summer and my IJA with more lush subtropical colors. They are also mounted on flat bases where the edge is so slim that I fully integrate it into the basing.
By extension, I was happy to put my Tomb Kings on desert bases, because... well, you know. Nehekhara and all that.
In 40k I never could bring myself to decide on on thing over another until fairly recently. I started out with static grass and green base edges, coming from historical WW2 models, then gave brown ground with patches of grass a try, complete with brown edges. I kept going with brown edges and tried stone tiles, as well as a short experiment with winter basing. Ultimately, I settled on daemon world basing. Picture provided below to illustrate. Daemon worlds are not necessarily bound by laws of physics and reason, and I can expand it as necessary with new elements while retaining a fitting color palette across my armies. But I think the integral part that makes all the difference is that I paint the base edge black. So no matter where I put the model, there is a clear line to divide the model and the table. I like to think this is important - where a painted edge should tie the base to the table, the black edge separates the generally absurd and unfitting basing from the table. As such I can have a base that supplements and wraps up the model on it, while at the same time not having to worry that it won't fit the table.
From personal experience, I think you're going to be in the vast minority. All of my friends paint their base edges in a matching color except one, who agrees with my reasoning. But I generally don't get negative remarks, and those that are are more a statement of personal taste than criticism.
Nehekhara lives! Sort of!
Why is the rum always gone?
2017/09/26 13:21:30
Subject: Re:Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Unless someone has literally splashed paint randomly just so they can say its painted and ready for a tabletop, I'll give credit to anyone who gets through a fully painted TT army.
Wait! I now have an idea to paint my next army!
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing
2017/09/26 15:40:56
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
Hell I'd be pleased as punch if even 33% of my FLGS bothered to even buy a paint brush to work on a model. I'm so used to seeing a sea of grey when I go there that I've stopped gaming there all together. I just pick up games with friends who have fully painted armies now.
Necrons - 6000+
Eldar/DE/Harlequins- 6000+
Genestealer Cult - 2000
Currently enthralled by Blanchitsu and INQ28.
2017/09/26 16:23:28
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
licclerich wrote: Ok we all do it when someone has taken the time to paint there figures ,any army/scale period.
Historical.regiments with huge bases and a thin line of figures on them, a bowling green of emptiness.
#1) I am terribly happy someone took the time to paint. I would suggest you be too.
Very dark figures ( goth orks etc) with dark ground cover and sides of bases left black, just a big lump of blackness.
#2) Could be worse, I made the mistake of being impatient and wanting to play and fielded my matt-black primed models.
This is actually WORSE than bare plastic.
Non metallic metal...hey guys there is no such thing, give it up.
#3) It takes serious skill to do this well.
Skill I do not have (yet).
It is such a thing and is impressive.
Figures highlighted and shaded to hell and back, just looks stupid.
#4) This is the stage when a person is STARTING to get good at this and are probably shooting for a good 3' tabletop standard.
No-one should be discouraged by bad comments on this.
15mm and 20mm tanks based on blocks of wood, sorry bases...do these idiots need a movement tray to pick up on model!!!!!!!
#5) They are probably trying to have a means of picking up the model without damaging it.
I think also the game system may have some impact on a base being needed/wanted or not.
It is a preference.
What have got dakka
The OP appears to be easily irritated.
"Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!"
- Presenting models as "pro-painted". Show them, take a picture, something and let the viewer decide that.
- Area affect lighting by airbrush. Spray area around light... done. Great and fine when starting out, but again the "pro-painted" folk going crazy with that affect with no subtlety to it.
My absolute #1 gripe seeing a fully painted army: if it is far better than I can paint.
A revolution is an idea which has found its bayonets.
Napoleon Bonaparte
2017/09/30 04:42:26
Subject: Things you gripe about when you see a fully painted/based army and why!
~15000 Astra Militarum: 
~1200 | Adeptus Custodes: 
~1900 | Imperial Knights: 
~2000 | Sisters of Battle: 
~3500 | Leagues of Votann: 
~1200 | Tyranids: 
~2600 | Stormcast Eternals: 
The Empire 
1500 pts
: 
Necrons - 6000+
Eldar/DE/Harlequins- 6000+
Currently enthralled by Blanchitsu and INQ28. 