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.

What's interesting about such small hobbies (not just wargaming) is that on the one hand people are used to making lots of concessions to be able to share that hobby with others, and on the other hand those very concessions make the hobby a lot less likely to attract and retain new enthusiasts.

My partner has had to deal with it at the knitting shop in our small town. Something about a hobby makes us feel extra special, and some people forget to be people because of that.

 EVIL INC wrote:
"... I'll be damned if I let some jumped up ....... tell me that I'm 'doing the hobby wrong'. I'm all for people having their own opinion, but keep it to yourself if it's something along those lines.

I also have to agree with the sentiment that this is a small enough hobby as it is. Why are you acting in a fashion that is quite likely to turn someone off it?"

Seems a little im polite. Am I to take this tomean your ok with expressing your opinion but others are not allowed to? From the post, that is exactly what you are saying.
Now dont get me wrong, I agree with you in your sentiment , just not the delivery. If I wanted to use unpainted models, I'd use them and if the other guy didnt like it he has the right to tell me.I also have the right to say "So, they are my models, I'll do as I please with them. Dont like it, dont play me" if I play with unpainted models and someone online tells me I'm doing the hobby wrong. Meh, I'll tell them, I do it my way, you do it yours".
There are few enough players as it is and sometimes, it IS hard to find an opponent who has a painted army and sometimes the guy with the painted army is a jerk for one reason or another that you dont want to associate with.
I havent see where anyone is FORCING others to paint. I have seen where situations have been decribed to encourage painting or make the guy feel bad and so forth though. his is why I personal ascibe to just talking with them and finding out WHY. As has ben pointed out, it can be multiple reasons. One of which is "I just dont wanna do it". A pro-paint player (I am one ofthese) can then know why your army is unpainted and go from there which could be offering tips or offering to help/do it for you. Then the ball is in your court. I CAN say that I enjoy to paint while watching tv or a movie I've seen before, but I'm not gonna bushwhack you by inviting you over to watch and plopping paints in front of you. I might say, come on over and watch, hope ya dont mind if I paint. That would leave no onus on you to paint at all with no hard feelings but if ya DID want to, that would be ok too.

In regards to the first bit, yes, but it was hyperbole in the first place. I probably wouldn't be saying it, too many issues involved, but that's what I'd be thinking.

As to the opinions, say a 14-year-old comes over to you, as a group of older (I'm assuming, for an example) guys, and shows you his brand spanking new space marine captain. It's decent, paint's a little thick in some places, few dots of grey in hard to reach areas, but on the whole, good for a new comer. Now you'd probably respond somewhere along the lines of 'looks good, nice dry brushing on the cape, good 'painting in the lines', have you tried thinning your paints, makes it easier to get a nice finish?' You'd be constructive and helpful, encourage him.

What you wouldn't do is 'That's ......, why are you even doing this hobby, ......... off' etc. It's not constructive, it serves no point. What you are doing, is alienating a member of a niche hobby, someone who has every bit the same right to be there as you, someone who will potentially enrich your experiences and bring new people in. There is also the fact that common decency would suggest you not do something like that.

You shouldn't 'force, or make people feel bad in order to paint is again decency. You don't have any right to do that. Encourage, go for it, but that's it. In other circumstances what has been suggested previously could be seen as a felony. But at the base of it, their stuff, they can do what they want with it.

morgoth wrote:
What's interesting about such small hobbies (not just wargaming) is that on the one hand people are used to making lots of concessions to be able to share that hobby with others, and on the other hand those very concessions make the hobby a lot less likely to attract and retain new enthusiasts.

Do you see this occurring in wargaming? It's something I'm personally worried about, but I can't say that I have any experience to say one way or the other. I could point to the consistency of the membership at my painted-only club and the appeal that such a standard has to our members, but that's just one small club, a very small sample.

My gut is that over the long run, dropping the standard/ideal of painting as normative and making the hobby less visually appealing will make the hobby less attractive overall. Clearly there are many folks who feel the opposite and think that any overarching standards or metrics will discourage folks who don't have an interest in painting and that would be what will shrink the hobby.

As this thread show's it's clearly a divisive issue. How much do we -or any community of hobbyists for that matter- accommodate, and how much do we hold to a set of norms and standards?

morgoth wrote:What's interesting about such small hobbies (not just wargaming) is that on the one hand people are used to making lots of concessions to be able to share that hobby with others, and on the other hand those very concessions make the hobby a lot less likely to attract and retain new enthusiasts.

The way I see it though, those concessions might, MIGHT make the hobby less likely to attract new people as they are less likely to go "ooo, what's happening here". But beyond that, in my opinion and observation NOT having those concessions ends up excluding a lot more people than it includes.

Eilif wrote:Do you see this occurring in wargaming?

No. For one thing it's not something you would really see, because you can't tell who is not being drawn to the hobby because of unpainted models and people who have left the hobby usually don't hang around to talk about it.

What I CAN say from experience is I know at least 3 people who have directly said they quit because they couldn't get their army painted, mostly just couldn't stay focused long enough. 2 of those people (both quit 5 to 10 years ago) have told me they wanted to restart the hobby but don't have time to paint an army.

So my gut feeling is that setting "standards" (which frankly don't produce good looking models anyway) isn't really helping. But that's 3 people... exxxxxtreeemly anecdotal. I know more people who have quit over the years but I've never asked them why and/or they've never told me.

making the hobby less visually appealing will make the hobby less attractive overall.

But this in and of itself is a debatable point. Even if you don't have rules requiring painted models, it doesn't automatically mean no one will paint. The people who want to paint will paint. The people who want to paint their models well instead of a quick and ugly scheme can feel comfortable slowly building up their cool looking army (I have never assembled a good looking army in less than 2 years ).

Even if you don't have rules saying people need to paint their models, there will be people who won't play because they haven't painted their models.

Even though my local GW no longer requires painting and is mostly a ghost town compared to what it was in years gone by, one constant has always been the random dude or dudes sitting at the painting table.

How much do we -or any community of hobbyists for that matter- accommodate, and how much do we hold to a set of norms and standards?

I don't think we, as a community, need to set standards at all. People will set their own standards, if they like painted models they will endeavour to paint their armies.

At events where you want to maintain a good aesthetic, you institute "must be painted" rules and even push it a step further to include "best painted army" prizes to really encourage people to paint well, so you get more people trying to paint armies that are not only painted, but look good in photos instead of just being a blur of poorly painted colours.

 Eilif wrote:

morgoth wrote:
What's interesting about such small hobbies (not just wargaming) is that on the one hand people are used to making lots of concessions to be able to share that hobby with others, and on the other hand those very concessions make the hobby a lot less likely to attract and retain new enthusiasts.

Do you see this occurring in wargaming?

A lot.

When you tolerate John McAsshole because there's nobody else to play with, Mike McNoob is going to have a bad time, and probably never come back.

And like for other hobbies, some of those donkey-caves form a kind of fake majority, like the fluff bunnies, the kind that socially pressures others into not playing good army lists, etc.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

morgoth wrote:What's interesting about such small hobbies (not just wargaming) is that on the one hand people are used to making lots of concessions to be able to share that hobby with others, and on the other hand those very concessions make the hobby a lot less likely to attract and retain new enthusiasts.

The way I see it though, those concessions might, MIGHT make the hobby less likely to attract new people as they are less likely to go "ooo, what's happening here". But beyond that, in my opinion and observation NOT having those concessions ends up excluding a lot more people than it includes.

That's because we're not talking about the same concessions.

What I'm talking about is all the donkey-caves that are kept around because there's nobody else to play against.

morgoth wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

morgoth wrote:What's interesting about such small hobbies (not just wargaming) is that on the one hand people are used to making lots of concessions to be able to share that hobby with others, and on the other hand those very concessions make the hobby a lot less likely to attract and retain new enthusiasts.

The way I see it though, those concessions might, MIGHT make the hobby less likely to attract new people as they are less likely to go "ooo, what's happening here". But beyond that, in my opinion and observation NOT having those concessions ends up excluding a lot more people than it includes.

That's because we're not talking about the same concessions.

What I'm talking about is all the donkey-caves that are kept around because there's nobody else to play against.

Ah ok I misunderstood, not really sure what they has to do with painting though. I've met plenty of arses who had painted armies and plenty who didn't

morgoth wrote:

 Eilif wrote:

morgoth wrote:
What's interesting about such small hobbies (not just wargaming) is that on the one hand people are used to making lots of concessions to be able to share that hobby with others, and on the other hand those very concessions make the hobby a lot less likely to attract and retain new enthusiasts.

Do you see this occurring in wargaming?

A lot.

When you tolerate John McAsshole because there's nobody else to play with, Mike McNoob is going to have a bad time, and probably never come back.

And like for other hobbies, some of those donkey-caves form a kind of fake majority, like the fluff bunnies, the kind that socially pressures others into not playing good army lists, etc.
.

Sounds like 2 different issues to me.

First off having to tolerate donkeys (offensive people) is something I just don't do. Admittedly this is easy for me because I've got my own club. Any bit of unpleasantness toward other players is quickly nipped in the bud with us making it clear that such behavior is not acceptable.

The second issue regarding fluff bunnies vs army lists is something that can be dealt with also. The problem is not that some players are uncompetitive fluff bunnies and some are WAAC power gamers (to use the most negative terms for these playstyles). The problem is that gamers don't state up front what kind of game they are playing and/or don't listen/care to what kind of game their opponent wants. Gamers aren't always noted for the communication skills, but the key to an enjoyable game can be a brief conversation between players beforehand about what kind of game they are wishing to have. Most likely two opponents will be able to come to an accommodation, but if not, it's probably best for them not to play each other.

A narrative game where lists are based around scenario and fluff is just as valid as a highly competitive game where lists are based around maximum efficiency and unit synergy.

Anywho, I'll stop now as I've gotten a bit off topic.

Totally, on topic as I see it.

For #1, I try to do this when I'm in any situation. When I hear some 14 year old talking about "raping face", I have to at least throw in a "dude, not cool". Having your own club just helps cuz you're the authority there, which is pretty sweet.

People get all huffy about talking about what kind of game you want before playing it, but I think it's a good idea. Why wouldn't the "WAAC" player do anything but trounce the "fluff bunny" as soon as possible? Well, maybe if they talked about it previously, there could be some narrative element that requires NOT tabling them.

But yeah, talking is hard for some people.

I play fluffy lists, but my only opponent is Sir WAAC the Competitive, who uses Gunline Tau against my fluffy nids.

 melkorthetonedeaf wrote:
Totally, on topic as I see it.

For #1, I try to do this when I'm in any situation. When I hear some 14 year old talking about "raping face", I have to at least throw in a "dude, not cool". Having your own club just helps cuz you're the authority there, which is pretty sweet.

People get all huffy about talking about what kind of game you want before playing it, but I think it's a good idea. Why wouldn't the "WAAC" player do anything but trounce the "fluff bunny" as soon as possible? Well, maybe if they talked about it previously, there could be some narrative element that requires NOT tabling them.

But yeah, talking is hard for some people.

It's not about talking.

WAAC players have no business playing with so-called "fluff bunnies" (afaik that group is everyone who does not like being tabled by competitive players).

And non-gamers have no business playing with gamers (the same people, tables turned).



The point I was making about microscopic hobbies not being able to break into further divisions / have groups that stick to a hard line stance is that when you refuse to further fragment the community, you end up enabling such encounters.


Which are never a good thing.

There is absolutely nothing that a non-gamer and a gamer can share on a table apart from the rules.


It's exactly like that for "painters" vs "non-painters": the "painters" enjoy playing painted armies against painted armies and should avoid "non-painters" for their hobby to remain enjoyable.

So either you enforce a rule that says no unpainted miniatures, or you enable John McPainter to meet Mike McLazy and bitch about it for days.


Is the hobby about bitching (yes a lot why ?) ? no.



In my opinion, painters should stick with painters, gamers with gamers, and then everyone would have an awesome time enjoying the hobby the way they like it with people who like it that way too.


Which is physically impossible because nobody plays this game anyway, as is the case for the other minority hobbies where the same problem is visible.




I believe that a community needs to have a very clear definition of what it's about in order to prosper, and most micro-hobby communities don't have that, mostly because they're afraid of becoming non-communities.


In my opinion, the strongest community within 40K should exterminate all the other ones and be reborn from their ashes, growing so large that it could be fragmented in the end and enable anyone to enjoy the hobby.



But it's not going to happen and people are going to keep on playing people with different visions of the game and be disappointed and posting threads on dakka about how disappointed they are.

Steelmage99 wrote:

Verviedi wrote:

They look really good. How did you get that fur texture?

Thank you.

It is "just" a matter of doing small sections of the model at a time, and poking and prodding at the green stuff long enough.

I think most of the trick lies in trying to avoid straight parallel lines.

Wolves don't really have hooves.

Zsolt wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

Verviedi wrote:

They look really good. How did you get that fur texture?

Thank you.

It is "just" a matter of doing small sections of the model at a time, and poking and prodding at the green stuff long enough.

I think most of the trick lies in trying to avoid straight parallel lines.

Wolves don't really have hooves.

They also aren't exactly done, as demonstrated by the areas lacking greenstuff and the lack of paint.

Steelmage99 wrote:

Zsolt wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

Verviedi wrote:

They look really good. How did you get that fur texture?

Thank you.

It is "just" a matter of doing small sections of the model at a time, and poking and prodding at the green stuff long enough.

I think most of the trick lies in trying to avoid straight parallel lines.

Wolves don't really have hooves.

They also aren't exactly done, as demonstrated by the areas lacking greenstuff and the lack of paint.

I'd love to see them when they're painted!"

I'm of the opinion that you should paint your whole army. I won't refuse a game for it but I think it should be done and should count toward voerall tournament victory. Then again I'm primarily a fantasy player & we see things differently. In fact most WHFB tournaments won't let you use unpainted models at all.

Verviedi wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

Zsolt wrote:

Steelmage99 wrote:

Verviedi wrote:

They look really good. How did you get that fur texture?

Thank you.

It is "just" a matter of doing small sections of the model at a time, and poking and prodding at the green stuff long enough.

I think most of the trick lies in trying to avoid straight parallel lines.

Wolves don't really have hooves.

They also aren't exactly done, as demonstrated by the areas lacking greenstuff and the lack of paint.

I'd love to see them when they're painted!"

I am afraid to say that that is a wish with very distant prospects.
Until some serious changes happens to GW and 40K, I'll be playing X-Wing.

Farseer Anath'lan, So your paraphrasing what others including myself are saying. Good we are on the same page.


Eilif, it is not affecting the hobby. The stuff we have painted draws the new players in. What usually doesnt draw them in is what they think they can paint. Ya gotta keep the horse in front of the cart. They will decide for themselves if they wanna paint or not. someone offering to help or give them constructive encouragementif they make the effort is not going to run them off.

My stuff is painted and I am perfectly willing to play someone whose stuff is not. Their stuff, they can do what they want with it (or not not). None of my business although I will offer what help I can.Now, if they feel bad because their stuff doesnt look as good as mine or because they dont have time to paint their stuff, thats on them. What we seem to have here are people trying to tell the painters NOT to paint their stuff because they themselves dont want to paint. I say let me paint my stuff. My models, I'll do as I like. You can not paint your stuff, your models, you do as you like. Treat one another with respect and dignity and respect the rights you have with our properties and we should get along great.

 melkorthetonedeaf wrote:
Totally, on topic as I see it.

For #1, I try to do this when I'm in any situation. When I hear some 14 year old talking about "raping face", I have to at least throw in a "dude, not cool". Having your own club just helps cuz you're the authority there, which is pretty sweet.

People get all huffy about talking about what kind of game you want before playing it, but I think it's a good idea. Why wouldn't the "WAAC" player do anything but trounce the "fluff bunny" as soon as possible? Well, maybe if they talked about it previously, there could be some narrative element that requires NOT tabling them.

But yeah, talking is hard for some people.

It is pretty sweet. 4 years on, we've gone from a few guys just trying to find a wargaming community outside of the "big games" to a group of friends who all want pretty much the same kind of gaming experience. We're all busy adults with lives who aren't going to waste our bi-weekly game time with unpleasantness or unpleasant people.

As for the WAAC Bunny Trouncing…. The WAAC player will still be playing to win (the fluff bunny should be too) but a conversation might result in them both playing fluffy lists, or a scenario that lays out what units should be used. Odds are the WAAC player will still win but it won't be a shutout that is obvious from the minute the minis hit the table.

Another compromise might be the Bunny agreeing to play a more competitive list once in a while. Maybe the WAAC will write something up or another Competitive Gamer will make up a list for the Bunny to play that is specifically tailored against WAAC? There are many options, one of which is of course just to play someone else.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

morgoth wrote:
[

So either you enforce a rule that says no unpainted miniatures, or you enable John McPainter to meet Mike McLazy and bitch about it for days….


...In my opinion, painters should stick with painters, gamers with gamers, and then everyone would have an awesome time enjoying the hobby the way they like it with people who like it that way too.

Not sure I agree with everything you say (I still say Gamers Vs Painters is a false dichotomy), but the above has some merit. It's certainly what my painted-only club has settled on. That is, an all-painted experience that is made up of like-minded players

 EVIL INC wrote:
What we seem to have here are people trying to tell the painters NOT to paint their stuff because they themselves dont want to paint.

I agree with most your point except this. No one is trying to tell people who paint not to paint. I think you'll find many (most?) the people in this thread who are arguing against the idea that people should paint before they play are people who themselves use painted models but simply don't want to be exclusionary of people who don't have the time or desire to paint (and yes I consider telling people they are doing it wrong, telling people they are lazy and telling people they aren't meeting some imagined minimum standards as being exclusionary).

I myself have a personal rule that I always paint a model before playing with it. This has at times meant that I haven't played a game for years on end when I didn't have a fully painted army to play with. The reason I don't want to be exclusionary of people who don't paint their models is because I know people who have quit the hobby for the express reason that they couldn't paint an army for one reason or another.

 EVIL INC wrote:
. What we seem to have here are people trying to tell the painters NOT to paint their stuff because they themselves dont want to paint.

Nobody is saying the people shouldn't paint.

What they're saying is simply - if you want to paint, paint. If you don't want to paint, don't. But don't expect that everyone else will share your ideals, or see their hobby the same way you see yours.

I'm gonna be a hypocrite here, I like painted models better than unpainted, but I dont paint mine. I suck at painting these guys.

Phoenix3270@gmail.com wrote:
I'm gonna be a hypocrite here, I like painted models better than unpainted, but I dont paint mine. I suck at painting these guys.

That's not really being hypocritical (if you were telling people they have to paint and even though you yourself didn't paint, THAT would be hypocritical, simply liking something but not doing it yourself is not).

But I think that's a pretty common sentiment. To like painted models but not have the time/capacity/desire to paint your own.

 Eilif wrote:
Not sure I agree with everything you say (I still say Gamers Vs Painters is a false dichotomy), but the above has some merit. It's certainly what my painted-only club has settled on. That is, an all-painted experience that is made up of like-minded players

It's a false dichotomy and I did not suggest it.

it's Gamers vs non-gamers.
And Painters vs non-painters.

Painter Gamers belong with Painter Gamers, just like Non-Gamers Painters belong with Non-Gamers Painters

Phoenix3270@gmail.com wrote:
I'm gonna be a hypocrite here, I like painted models better than unpainted, but I dont paint mine. I suck at painting these guys.

If you want to improve fast, I'd advise looking up loads of tutorials (both published by GW and online tutorials by individual painters) on how to paint various materials as well as techniques for certain things that are 10x faster than a straightforward approach. I was questionable at best when I started off, but once I spend a bit of time learning and applying good practice, instead of just charging headlong into painting. I improved drastically in months.

 Las wrote:

Got any numbers to disprove me? Everything in this discussion is anecdotal.

That is not how discussion works, if you make a statement its your responsibility to prove that statement. Since by your own reply you admit that you have no proof, I'll graciously take your concession that you are just talking out of your behind and have absolutely no proof to back up any of your ridiculous claims.

 thegreatchimp wrote:

Phoenix3270@gmail.com wrote:
I'm gonna be a hypocrite here, I like painted models better than unpainted, but I dont paint mine. I suck at painting these guys.

If you want to improve fast, I'd advise looking up loads of tutorials (both published by GW and online tutorials by individual painters) on how to paint various materials as well as techniques for certain things that are 10x faster than a straightforward approach. I was questionable at best when I started off, but once I spend a bit of time learning and applying good practice, instead of just charging headlong into painting. I improved drastically in months.

In months when most people don't even play 2 years. spend time aka money. buy paints aka more money. you only improve after months so the starter models look bad. So to get them right you spend even more time and more paint aka even more money..
AND your doing all this so that the other dude who likes painting, unlike you, has more fun. Yeah right, totaly makes sense. What is next make your opponent pick units for your army, so he has fun too or maybe change rules for your army so he has more fun?

+the tutorials are totaly unrealistic, they assume that everyone has a whole desk to themselfs or even a whole room to paint, and equipment that goes way beyond brush+paints.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:

Phoenix3270@gmail.com wrote:
I'm gonna be a hypocrite here, I like painted models better than unpainted, but I dont paint mine. I suck at painting these guys.

That's not really being hypocritical (if you were telling people they have to paint and even though you yourself didn't paint, THAT would be hypocritical, simply liking something but not doing it yourself is not).

But I think that's a pretty common sentiment. To like painted models but not have the time/capacity/desire to paint your own.

I think the majority view is generally for 'paint encouraged' but not making it a restriction.

Lazyness is a worse excuse than time... but then again, does anyone really care that much? (friendly weekly gamer view).

Makumba wrote:

 thegreatchimp wrote:

In months when most people don't even play 2 years. spend time aka money. buy paints aka more money. you only improve after months so the starter models look bad. So to get them right you spend even more time and more paint aka even more money..
AND your doing all this so that the other dude who likes painting, unlike you, has more fun. Yeah right, totaly makes sense. What is next make your opponent pick units for your army, so he has fun too or maybe change rules for your army so he has more fun?

+the tutorials are totaly unrealistic, they assume that everyone has a whole desk to themselfs or even a whole room to paint, and equipment that goes way beyond brush+paints.

Your first statement is correct, but applies to painters who are trying to goad non-painters into their way of thinking, not me. My reply was intended to be informative to Phoenix, who had expressed that he sucks at painting. If most people play for 2 years, what they do with the hobby in that time and what they're willing to spend on it is up to them. Yes to get more enjoyment out of the hobby you have to invest a little, but that's true of most pastimes. Obviously if someone doesn't enjoy going down that route, I'm not suggesting they do so.

In all reality I'd say most people in the position to collect the hobby do indeed have access to a desk or table. re: expensive equipment, yes if you're talking about airbrushes, weathering poweder, etc, you can expect to fork out. But there's plenty of tutorials with just 9 or 10 citadel paint & 2 brushes -hardly "totally unrealistic". I haven't invested in mad expensive tools, the main input in improving from my experience is perseverance and a willingness to try new things.

PhantomViper wrote:

 Las wrote:

Got any numbers to disprove me? Everything in this discussion is anecdotal.

That is not how discussion works, if you make a statement its your responsibility to prove that statement. Since by your own reply you admit that you have no proof, I'll graciously take your concession that you are just talking out of your behind and have absolutely no proof to back up any of your ridiculous claims.

Phantom Viper,
I think you're confusing "discussion" with debate. Admittedly the lines are blurred here between the two, but it looks like Las and yourself both put down anecdotal evidence which is perfectly fine in a discussion. If one person can provide numbers and one can't, it does strengthen the first person's side, but no one is "required" to provide some kind of statistical evidence and it's fine to trade anecdotes.

morgoth wrote:

 Eilif wrote:
Not sure I agree with everything you say (I still say Gamers Vs Painters is a false dichotomy), but the above has some merit. It's certainly what my painted-only club has settled on. That is, an all-painted experience that is made up of like-minded players

It's a false dichotomy and I did not suggest it.

it's Gamers vs non-gamers.
And Painters vs non-painters.

Painter Gamers belong with Painter Gamers, just like Non-Gamers Painters belong with Non-Gamers Painters

Thanks, that's a useful clarification that makes more sense to me.

People act like this is somehow unique to wargaming or hobbies in general when this is all a subset of life itself.

The problem here is one of expectations and control. People live their lives with expectations as to how it should be every day. When something doesn't happen that meets those expectations it makes us sad or angry. If we come upon a situation where everytime our expectations are unmet we have three choices: 1) Keep our expectations exactly the same and keep getting upset about it when our expectations aren't met, even though all evidence makes it clear they will never be met. 2) Change our expectations for that situation, so the regular result is the one we expect. 3) Move on to a different situation that fulfills our expectations better. Happy people in life do 2 and 3 regularly. The majority of people in life, who are constantly in varying levels of unhappiness, follow the 1st path over and over and over. Emotionally some people never learn the "fire/hot burns so don't touch" approach and they keep touching that fire expecting that *this* time it won't burn.

This whole silly arguement/demand that people paint their minis for gaming is yet another one of these situations. The OP expects/wants his opponents to have painted mins or the game isn't fun for him. Meanwhile the one opponent he regularly plays against has stated clearly he does not and will not paint his minis. Currently the OP keeps sticking to number 1 above. He keeps wanting those minis to be painted and keeps being unhappy because they are not. Does this help his enjoyment of the game? Nope? Does this make sense? Nope, but some people claim it does and that is just silly.

If the OP follows the 2nd path above, yes he has a preference to play against painted armies, but accepts that this regular opponent doesn't have a painted army, but that is OK and it still enables him to get in a game to have some fun. This path is much better and leads to no unhappiness because the OP isn't expecting the regular opponent to have painted minis anymore.

The OP can also follow the 3rd path. He can tell the regular opponent that he really prefers games with all painted armies and he can then go off and find/wait for other players who prefer painted armies just like he does. Again this path is much better and leads to no unhappiness because ultimately he'll play against people with the same preference to him.

Now the 3rd path in this situation can hit a snag when no opponents who prefer painted armies in games show up or are ever available when he plays. Again he is back to the same situation he can get annoyed again because no one is accomidating him, or... He can follow path 2, change his own expectations and play with whatever opponents show up whether they have painted armies or not and have fun playing games. He can also follow the 3rd path again and find another place to play where the players fit his prefered playing style. What he shouldn't do in any of these paths is expect others to change for him as the likelihood of that happening is close to nil. Sure you can sometimes encourage non-painters to give it a start, but people don't have paint on their minis for as many different reasons as their are people so it isn't always as simple as "Here's how you paint".

I don't mind unpainted minis, but like everyone else I have my own prefered ways to play and approach 40k which made me very unhappy playing in pickup games in my FLGS or with strangers because their expectations and mine didn't line up. I got so unhappy I almost stopped playing and then took a different path: I found a group of likeminded individuals who approached the game the same way I did and now we've been playing together for 15+ years. I always enjoy myself when playing and I am much happier for it. *I* changed what I was doing. I didn't demand/expect everyone else at the store I was playing at to change for me, because that wasn't going to happen.

Learn to change your expectations or to seek out situations that fulfill your expectations instead of demanding that situations change to fulfill your expectations and you'll have a much happier life and be able to enjoy your hobby all the more.

Skriker