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.

 Colonel Cross wrote:
Honestly, if the entire army is painted, respect. I don't care what you want to call them, I understand it gets boring playing the same thing week after week. I'm guilty of this myself, I'll change what guard regiment I play just to mix things up. Granted, I don't mix and match regiments and am somewhat opposed if someone were mixing and matching space Marine chapters to be super competitive and they were all the same colors.

Yep, this.

a_typical_hero wrote:
I can very well remember 5th edition when a new guy was introduced into our playing group who - through the months - showed up with Space Wolves, Blood Angels and finally Grey Knights. He actually did have seperate / correct models for everything with a crude paint job on it, so from a certain point of view you really could not complain about this guy always bringing the latest Marine codex to the table. That doesn't mean his WAAC attitude was any more enjoyable.

He wasn't invested in SW or BA or GK at all. That showed, quite obviously, from how he army hopped. The problem isn't that he used the rules for those three armies. The problem was he didn't care about the armies themselves. They were just placeholders for the crunch.

On the other hand I cant count the evenings when we proxied Monoliths with Hard Drive cases or Drop Pods with beer bottles (which came in in the same rounds as we finished them ) and everyone involved had a great time, regardless of which rules the casual (and a bit quirky) Space Marine player was using on that night.

Because he cared about Space Marines, not the crunch.

What I want to show is that intention/attitude matters just as much as your actions, when it comes to how enjoyable the game is going to be for you and your opponent.

Quoted for truth.

I have a genuine question to people who don't like their opponents using rules that do not match the respective color scheme:
How do you feel about playing against a Marine player who keeps switching his two successor traits every game?

I consider switching army rules a sign of lack of interest in their specific army. It's not a problem in itself, it's a symptom of a problem.

A player who can't decide which of two Successor traits fit his army best and switches every game is probably a fun opponent. A player who can't decide which of two Successor traits is more effective for his army and switches every game is probably not.

If this is not a problem for you, what is the difference between this and changing the chapter?

Similarly, as posted above, an UM Armory force of aspiring Tech Marines and other gearheads hitting the table in Blue and Toilet Seats using Iron Hands rules isn't the same as a generic UltraMarine army being fielded as Iron Hands for better rules. Same can be said for Successor Traits.

If this is a problem for you, does it concern you as well that my SM Captain used a Relic Blade last week and this week it is a regular power sword, despite using the same model?

As with the other variations, sure it's a minor quality drop. At some point, you should know if SM Captain Bob carries a Relic Blade or Power sword into combat. A Relic Blade should be much more imposing. If it's your model, it should be your guy. And you should know what your guy has. That should be represented on the table top. So if you really know your guy, you should know what he's carrying. Which should be consistent.

That said, sometimes you need to drop a few points. Sometimes you just want to see how a PowerSword/RelicBlade will do. Practical rules shifting happens. It's a negative, but a minor one. Let's pretend your fully-WYSIWYG army is +100 points of cool. Running that Relic Blade as a Power Sword probably costs you one point. So it's +99points of cool.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 Colonel Cross wrote:
Honestly, if the entire army is painted, respect. I don't care what you want to call them, I understand it gets boring playing the same thing week after week. I'm guilty of this myself, I'll change what guard regiment I play just to mix things up. Granted, I don't mix and match regiments and am somewhat opposed if someone were mixing and matching space Marine chapters to be super competitive and they were all the same colors.

Yep, this.

I'd rather face a fully, lovingly painted army of Cadian Guardsmen being fielded as Custodes than play against Grey Marines.

Klickor wrote:
The power difference right now is massive. A SM supplement chapter can tailor from 20+ chapter traits and a list of 6 successors for traits/etc.

A SM chapter has twice the stratagems of BA, twice the warlord traits and relics And can use 3 warlord traits and more/cheaper relics. 6 more powers for your librarians. Cheaper units. Extra AP from doctrines + a super doctrine. And chapter tactics works on their vehicles as well.

It is not like SM is only 10% stronger than BA right now. Each of those advantages adds up and multiplies. Having better strats with better units is better than just having them separately. IH /RG is probably 50% better or more than BA right now. A vehicle heavy IH list vs a vehicle heavy BA list is probably 95+% in favor of the IH player winning regardless of scenario. Unless both players play with loaded dice, I cant see BA winning. Not even enough if BA player cheats with good dice the IH player needs to roll far below average too.

Sounds like you should've gotten consolidated! That's what the Angels players get for wanting to stay separate from everyone else because "muh Defwing muh Lib Dred".

Yeah, im all for just having 1 big space marine codex and treat BA and DA as any other chapter. UM have about the same amount of special rules and models as BA anyway. SW can get their own though Dont want to share books with furries anyway.

Even the supplements is just a money grab. Its like 5 pages of different rules, maybe 10 for UM. Rest is just fluff. The 6 supplements, BA, DA and normal codex would be a smaller book than the current codex if you just separated out the fluff and would be way easier to use.

Karol wrote:

So you can play whatever faction you like with whatever models you like, so long as they're roughly the same size? Would you be okay with me playing Chaos Space Marine Terminators as Grey Knights? How about WYSIWYG?

Well no one here plays GK, other then me, so I don't know. But considering WYSIWYG is enforced here, and I couldn't play GK as any other army, because there is no army GK can be counts as, I would say no. The weapons are wrong and the size of the models is wrong.

Why can't regular Terminators be used as Grey Knights or vice versa? They're the same size. The weapons are just a representation of their effects in-game - the actual gun itself means nothing.

And this is my point - why is the aesthetic representation of the models' weapons and army enforced and considered "wrong" if not WYSIWYG, but the aesthetic representation of their subfaction never enforced or considered "wrong"? It just feels like a massive contradiction.

Okay, but do you expect a unit armed with a plasma gun to have a model carrying a plasma gun in it?

yes, otherwise you can't play here. Only options are buy multiple box, and no one does that, or buy 3d party or recast. The third happens most often.

Cool, so why shouldn't I expect a model that clearly looks like an Ultramarine to be played as an Ultramarine? I haven't got a problem with custom painted Chapters or minor Chapters using whatever rules they want (though if I was being more strict, I'd be expecting them to be using the successor Chapter rules, and if they were a close descendant of their parent Chapter, using their rules), but when something that clearly represents something else is proxying as something, that's when I would apply the same logic as I would to standard WYSIWYG.

As long as you're not obviously looking like something else, play as what you like.

Okey, so lets say someone bought a BA army, because he could get it for cheaper, and he finds out it is really bad. Or it can be good, but he won't use most of the things, and he has to spend another 400$ on knights and other soup stuff, and they don't have the cash for it. They wouldn't be able to just play them as, any of the good marine armies, that use the same models just because maybe some of his are painted red, am assuming he bought a tournament army, as the problem wouldn't exist if he wasn't buying just a regular one, as chance of that one being painted and sold is zero. As those who paint their armies and don't play tournaments, don't sell their armies. They also generaly don't play much, just sit at the store and do commissions.

And they can't find anywhere to play that isn't hardcore tournaments and ultra-competitive? In that case, I feel sorry for that person honestly.

Again, I haven't got a problem with people prioritising winning over aesthetic. If that's what you enjoy, you go ahead and enjoy it. However, I don't want to be a part of that.
Plus, you mention a "BA army" - what makes it specifically BA? Just being painted red? That's not necessarily Blood Angels, they could be Red Talons, Genesis Chapter, or any other red marine Chapter.

Or, maybe, just paint a custom Chapter. Or just don't put Chapter specific icons on. Or just bite the bullet and play a slightly less powerful list.

okey, but this again means one would have to model and paint an army and lock oneself in to it. The army could be master class painted, and it would sell for less by virtue of having paint on it.

Clearly this person values tournament play over more relaxed play. That's fine, but I wouldn't be playing this person in the first place, so this is quite irrelevant.

Plus, playing as a custom Chapter (in my book) lets you play as any Chapter you like, because I'm not getting confused by something that's obviously looking like something being used as another.

You seem to imply that you should always strive for the most powerful, most optimised list, and compromising on that is out of the question. Why? It's not like if you don't get to play your models as Iron Hands, you'll never get to play. Just play with how you painted them, and if that's out of the question, apply a different transfer or paint scheme, or just play someone else who's more on your wavelength.

From what little expiriance I have, the most powerful is rarely marines, and if it is marines then it is either something like characters. If lets say ahriman suddenly becomes utter trash replacing him with something is much easier, then replacing a 700$ or more army that went bad. the obligation to paint and mark armies seems to me, very restrictive. It locks one in to an army, costs extra money and time to do. And on top of it all one may just not like painting.

You seem to have missed my question. Why can't they just play a weaker list? Is having a competitive game all that matters to them? If that's the case, then I wouldn't want to play them, because we would have very big differences in what we wanted from the game.

That's my whole point - if the only reason you're jumping between what Chapter you're playing as is because "I want to be competitive", then that's exactly why I don't want to play against that person in particular.

Now I don't have such problems as my army came prepainted, when I bought it. But If I was unpainted and now to play I would have to spend money and time to paint, an army that isn't fun to play, I wouldn't feel good about it at all.

I didn't say anywhere that you need to be painted XYZ to play as XYZ. I said that if you're clearly painted as X, why are you playing them as Y? If that reason (as your argument suggests) is so that they can be more powerful, then that tells me what that player wants from the game, and I know in advance that we would not be compatible.

Eldarsif wrote:Let us estimate costs here:

Buying and painting ton of new models because of color obsessives: 1000s of dollars and 1000s of hours

Painting your old models because of color obsessives: Throwing away 1000s of hours to spend 1000s of hours.

Ignoring the color obsessives and just play the game with good and fun people: 0$ (unless you want to buy snacks for people. Always recommend buying snacks for people. Nothing bonds people more than food)

People just need to chill and play the game and have fun with good people. Ignore the haters and just have fun.

While I absolutely agree with the last comment and snacks (always a good move!), I would also add this in:
Playing your models how they're modelled and painted: £0

There's nothing that forces people into *needing* to play with the strongest rules, the most optimised ruleset, or other stuff. What's wrong with having a less competitively-driven game?

For some people, the more competitive game is the more fun option. For others, having a less competitive game is more fun. We should all be allowed to choose for ourselves what our preferred source of fun is from the hobby, and prioritise that over what other people might prefer.

Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
Or, maybe, just paint a custom Chapter. Or just don't put Chapter specific icons on.

I wish more people woud create custom chapters. I really love when someone has put a lot of thought into creating a colour scheme, symbols, markings and background for their custom chapter, Much more interesting than copying the stock studio paint job. But still, this is something people should do because they lake the creativity it allows, not for some rule benefit. And I certainly can't imagine telling to an opponent that has painted their marines in official colours that they couldn't use the rules they want while simultaneously I with my custom chapter could. That is a TFG move, and I really don't want custom chapters to be associated with that sort of WAAC mentality.

I can see that, I really can, but at the same time, I also don't appreciate just swapping to whatever the flavour of the month is. I agree that it's not a fault of the paint job, and is more a criticism on that sort of "WAAC mentality", but if someone's got a problem with me asking them to stick to how their models look because then they can't have the most optimised list, that kind of speaks for itself on why I wouldn't play them in the first place.

Or just bite the bullet and play a slightly less powerful list.

You seem to imply that you should always strive for the most powerful, most optimised list, and compromising on that is out of the question. Why? It's not like if you don't get to play your models as Iron Hands, you'll never get to play. Just play with how you painted them, and if that's out of the question, apply a different transfer or paint scheme, or just play someone else who's more on your wavelength.

First: at this point the differences in power level are not slight, they're massive. I really don't think Blood Angels or even White Scars have much of a chance against the Iron Hands.

When the list is optimised for take advantage of that, perhaps, but the power difference isn't that stark to me.

Second: it is not always the power, it can be about the playstyle. Even if different chapters were balanced properly (which they even remotely aren't) they play differently. And people might want to experiment with different playstyles without buying and painting a full new army. And I think it can be reasonably fluffy. An Armoury force lead by the Master of the Forge using Iron Hand rules, Tenth Company force using Raven Guard rules etc. Chapter rules are fighting styles, and a section of a chapter could easily utilise a fighting style that is usually associated with another chapter.

Experimentation, sure, I can work with that, but I want to be sure that's what they're after here. I just want to avoid playing games against people who have a very different priority of what they want from the game, and if talking to them about why their "Ultramarines" are actually "Iron Hands" reveals that, I'll keep doing it.

Colonel Cross wrote:Honestly, if the entire army is painted, respect. I don't care what you want to call them, I understand it gets boring playing the same thing week after week. I'm guilty of this myself, I'll change what guard regiment I play just to mix things up. Granted, I don't mix and match regiments and am somewhat opposed if someone were mixing and matching space Marine chapters to be super competitive and they were all the same colors.

That's the thing though - it's not a problem with just switching Chapter to break boredom, it's people switching to be super competitive that's my personal problem - not because I think those people are wrong, but because I just don't want to be involved with that.

Klickor wrote:Yeah, im all for just having 1 big space marine codex and treat BA and DA as any other chapter. UM have about the same amount of special rules and models as BA anyway. SW can get their own though Dont want to share books with furries anyway.

Even the supplements is just a money grab. Its like 5 pages of different rules, maybe 10 for UM. Rest is just fluff. The 6 supplements, BA, DA and normal codex would be a smaller book than the current codex if you just separated out the fluff and would be way easier to use.

Honestly with how subfactions have gone, I really don't see why they've not all been folded in together. I don't want anyone to lose any fluff or flavour, but I don't think having a separate book would change that.

But it's unfair to expect Space Marine players to have to forego picking and choosing from a dozen rulesets for the same models...

Karol wrote:But most people don't paint their armies at all, as that lowers the army resell value, when they quit or want to play something else. And most of those that do paint do it, because they play at tournaments or the large stores in big cities when they force people to paint stuff, or they don't get tables to play on.

I think this sentence reveals a great deal of difference in our attitudes concerning painting an army. I don't care about the resale value of my army. That seems like very transitory way to think about this game. If group believes this they should just probably just agree to use wooden dowels and blocks with stickers representing what they are instead since it would be far cheaper and easier. I paint my armies because I want my army to look nice and I enjoy all aspects of this hobby. I have no plans of selling any of them. I always find it strange that often the entry fee to miniatures war gaming is just buying and (mostly) building the miniatures, full stop when so much money could be saved if they use less expensive gaming pieces. To be sure, some of the lore and mind's eye theater still comes through just with the models, but it is a pale shadow of the game compared to even poorly (read: not awful, 'thin your paints' models) painted models.

Crimson wrote:Looks matter a lot. I want encourage people to paint their models at the best standard they're capable of. That's why I don't want to place any unnecessary hurdles that would discourage people from doing so. This is very simple.

So do I. That's why even though it does bother me I never bring it up as it is only a minor annoyance and not worth risking my opponent feeling bad for their choice. Ideally, I want players to have rules that fit their idea of what they have painted and fit the lore. Or at very least, rules that if not optimal aren't insurmountable to then enjoying the game.

a_typical_hero wrote:I have a genuine question to people who don't like their opponents using rules that do not match the respective color scheme:
How do you feel about playing against a Marine player who keeps switching his two successor traits every game?

If this is not a problem for you, what is the difference between this and changing the chapter?

If this is a problem for you, does it concern you as well that my SM Captain used a Relic Blade last week and this week it is a regular power sword, despite using the same model?

It bothers me an equal amount as some playing their army as one subfaction but being painted in another color. I don't really see a difference.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

NurglesR0T wrote:It's amazing how 40k has somehow gotten to a point where people are basically being punished for painting their army.

Question: do you play WYSIWYG? Do you expect your opponents to? Just to put it to you another way:
"It's amazing how 40k has somehow gotten to a point where people are basically being punished for building their army."

Of course, if you don't believe in WYSIWYG, disregard this, but I'm purely asking to see if you're at least being consistent.

That aside, if my personal preference of not playing someone who cares more about getting stronger rules than embracing their models is "punishing", then what would be your solution? I shouldn't have any expectations or personal preferences on who I play? I should just drop my army and be ready to play at anyone's beck and call? I'm not allowed to choose who I want to play?

I don't think anyone is advocating that "play as what you paint" should be a forced compulsory rule everyone should abide by - rather, they're saying "this is my preference, and is important to my enjoyment of the game". Unless you genuinely think that people shouldn't be allowed to enjoy the game how they see fit, why is that a problem?

I play WYSIWYG. I don't expect my opponents to (within reason, so not proxying a necron warrior as a chaos lord etc but a marine holding a flamer but in this game I'm trying out plasma? Sure, go for it).

Is it essential to play the game? No. You are of course absolutely free to play against whomever you want using whatever expectations or preferences you want to apply to that game. Find like minded individuals and you'll always have an enjoyable game.

My comment is an observation that someone who builds their marine army but leaves it as grey plastic will be free of the community stigma that has developed of choosing a sub faction to run as because "hey they must use Imperial Fist rules because they are yellow"

What would you prefer to play against? Grey plastic which is acceptable from a rules point of view for any faction apparently, or a fully painted army that uses whatever rules that are clearly defined in the army list? I know which one I'd prefer.





Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 Colonel Cross wrote:
Honestly, if the entire army is painted, respect. I don't care what you want to call them, I understand it gets boring playing the same thing week after week. I'm guilty of this myself, I'll change what guard regiment I play just to mix things up. Granted, I don't mix and match regiments and am somewhat opposed if someone were mixing and matching space Marine chapters to be super competitive and they were all the same colors.

Yep, this.

100%

I think this sentence reveals a great deal of difference in our attitudes concerning painting an army. I don't care about the resale value of my army. That seems like very transitory way to think about this game. If group believes this they should just probably just agree to use wooden dowels and blocks with stickers representing what they are instead since it would be far cheaper and easier. I paint my armies because I want my army to look nice and I enjoy all aspects of this hobby. I have no plans of selling any of them. I always find it strange that often the entry fee to miniatures war gaming is just buying and (mostly) building the miniatures, full stop when so much money could be saved if they use less expensive gaming pieces. To be sure, some of the lore and mind's eye theater still comes through just with the models, but it is a pale shadow of the game compared to even poorly (read: not awful, 'thin your paints' models) painted models.

We play games at stores, few people here have flats big enough to play games in them, and those that do play at the store anyway, because they don't have to buy terrain this way. So no playing with sticks and stones, would not work here. We need official GW models, to play, just like we need official books to use the rules. We can't use print outs, or bring models the store doesn't sell like FW stuff for example.

But it's unfair to expect Space Marine players to have to forego picking and choosing from a dozen rulesets for the same models...

Well I don't see tyranids, necron, orcs or IG being locked in to one specific dynasty, regiment etc

Why can't regular Terminators be used as Grey Knights or vice versa? They're the same size. The weapons are just a representation of their effects in-game - the actual gun itself means nothing.

the weapon loads outs are different. From what I understand there are no termintor, other then chaos, that have pole weapons or swords as weapons alongside storm bolters. And the weapons where I play mean everything. No one here is going to let you use flamers , which are easier to get, instead of plasma guns etc.

And this is my point - why is the aesthetic representation of the models' weapons and army enforced and considered "wrong" if not WYSIWYG, but the aesthetic representation of their subfaction never enforced or considered "wrong"? It just feels like a massive contradiction.

because people don't care about aesthetics of armies that aren't popular or that they don't play?

Cool, so why shouldn't I expect a model that clearly looks like an Ultramarine to be played as an Ultramarine? I haven't got a problem with custom painted Chapters or minor Chapters using whatever rules they want (though if I was being more strict, I'd be expecting them to be using the successor Chapter rules, and if they were a close descendant of their parent Chapter, using their rules), but when something that clearly represents something else is proxying as something, that's when I would apply the same logic as I would to standard WYSIWYG

because paint on the model doesn't matter. gear matters, LoS matters, shade of blue or green does not. Plus all such stance achives. is that people do not paint their armies, because it would lock them in to one. That is a bad thing, specially for new player, who just may not want to spend 50-100$ on paints and brushs, when it ain't needed to play the game. It is like saying someone needs regulation gear to play football against the other street or block. I understand why I need school gear in events, because school ethocs and mostly sponsors wanting stuff to look good. Outside of them it is just another entry barrier.

And they can't find anywhere to play that isn't hardcore tournaments and ultra-competitive? In that case, I feel sorry for that person honestly.

Again, I haven't got a problem with people prioritising winning over aesthetic. If that's what you enjoy, you go ahead and enjoy it. However, I don't want to be a part of that.
Plus, you mention a "BA army" - what makes it specifically BA? Just being painted red? That's not necessarily Blood Angels, they could be Red Talons, Genesis Chapter, or any other red marine Chapter.

Well in any place where the avarge adult salary is 430-450$ per month, you will find out that people would rather have a working army, then a not working one, because they can't afford to switch it out every 2-3 months. Their decision to buy in to something locks them in. It is not a tournament thing, I never played in a big tournament, out of 30+ people at my store maybe 7-8 go to any tournaments and regulars fit in one car. But that doesn't mean the armies aren't build for efficiency.

and rules make a BA army a BA army. If it is not a BA army, but a succesor one it has different rules. If it neither of those two, it also has different rules.

Plus, playing as a custom Chapter (in my book) lets you play as any Chapter you like, because I'm not getting confused by something that's obviously looking like something being used as another.

but if you play as succesor then you get strictkly worse rules. you lack all the special characters, the relics, and some of the stragagems.

You seem to have missed my question. Why can't they just play a weaker list? Is having a competitive game all that matters to them? If that's the case, then I wouldn't want to play them, because we would have very big differences in what we wanted from the game.

That's my whole point - if the only reason you're jumping between what Chapter you're playing as is because "I want to be competitive", then that's exactly why I don't want to play against that person in particular.

Because there is no weaker stuff in w40k. There is good stuff and there is bad stuff. Playing Word Bearers instead of red coloured renegades or black legion is not just playing a weaker army, it is missing a ton of rules. When I play with my army, it isn't just a bit weaker then other armies, it down right sucks. And it gets only worse then less focused on tournaments you are. Because the gap between lets say a tournament soup DA list and a tournament Ultramarine army is relativly smaller, to a casual ultramarine and DA army. It is not a question of competition, but a question of having fun with models that cost a lot of money. If I spent the money I spent on a bike and it crashed day one, so I wouldn't able to take it anywhere it would be comperable.

I said that if you're clearly painted as X, why are you playing them as Y? If that reason (as your argument suggests) is so that they can be more powerful, then that tells me what that player wants from the game, and I know in advance that we would not be compatible.

that is trading fun in a game, for something inconsequantial like painting. That is like saying a football uniform is the most imporant part of a football game. Which is true, if you own a store that makes the uniforms. Or if you really like to design cloths. But it has nothing to do with the game. Same way as painting, has nothing to do with a game of w40k. How or if models are painted has zero impact on the game. The dice don't roll better, new rules don't suddenly start working just because the models are painted, scenarios don't suddenly score different etc.

There's nothing that forces people into *needing* to play with the strongest rules, the most optimised ruleset, or other stuff. What's wrong with having a less competitively-driven game?

have you tried to play a few games vs the new marines with a bad army like Grey Knights. Because I tell you that if you had to play them for 2 years, and saw updated marines you would not want to play GK, and if you could play them as something else, you would.

NurglesR0T wrote:I play WYSIWYG. I don't expect my opponents to (within reason, so not proxying a necron warrior as a chaos lord etc but a marine holding a flamer but in this game I'm trying out plasma? Sure, go for it).
Is it essential to play the game? No. You are of course absolutely free to play against whomever you want using whatever expectations or preferences you want to apply to that game. Find like minded individuals and you'll always have an enjoyable game.

Lovely, just checking that it was a consistent opinion. If you're cool with proxying a flamer as a plasma gun and proxying one aesthetic paint scheme as another, then that's consistent, and I respect that greatly.

And yeah, absolutely agreed on "find like-minded individuals" - that's probably the most important part of any game.

My comment is an observation that someone who builds their marine army but leaves it as grey plastic will be free of the community stigma that has developed of choosing a sub faction to run as because "hey they must use Imperial Fist rules because they are yellow"

What would you prefer to play against? Grey plastic which is acceptable from a rules point of view for any faction apparently, or a fully painted army that uses whatever rules that are clearly defined in the army list? I know which one I'd prefer.

Honestly, if I was playing someone who only left their army unpainted so they could use whatever flavour of the month rules, I probably wouldn't want to play them either, because it's the "flavour of the month" part I have a problem with.

Out of the two, I'd rather play the person with the painted army, and ask them if they didn't mind either playing with the Chapter they're painted as, or as a different compromise, both of us play with no subfaction rules altogether (barring special characters and relics if we've taken them, or course), which I'm happy to do (odds are I'm playing Space Marines as well anyway, and I'm more than happy to not use subfaction rules).

End of the day, me preferring to play against people who play how they've painted their army is an effort to avoid people who prioritise winning over less competitive play, because that's how I prefer to play.

Karol wrote:

Why can't regular Terminators be used as Grey Knights or vice versa? They're the same size. The weapons are just a representation of their effects in-game - the actual gun itself means nothing.

the weapon loads outs are different. From what I understand there are no termintor, other then chaos, that have pole weapons or swords as weapons alongside storm bolters. And the weapons where I play mean everything. No one here is going to let you use flamers , which are easier to get, instead of plasma guns etc.

So your group has a problem with things not looking how they're meant to, yes?
So, back to my question - why is one aesthetic difference (flamers used as plasmas) any different from another aesthetic difference (Ultramarines used as Iron Hands)?

I wouldn't have a problem if this were consistently applied, but the fact it's not; that is my concern.

And this is my point - why is the aesthetic representation of the models' weapons and army enforced and considered "wrong" if not WYSIWYG, but the aesthetic representation of their subfaction never enforced or considered "wrong"? It just feels like a massive contradiction.

because people don't care about aesthetics of armies that aren't popular or that they don't play?

That's not applicable to everyone. Plus, are you saying that Space Marines aren't popular, or that people can't recognise the difference between an Ultramarine and an Iron Hand?

Secondly, let's assume that T'au aren't popular. Could I use a flamer as a plasma rifle, because "people don't care about aesthetics of armies that aren't popular don't they don't play"?

Cool, so why shouldn't I expect a model that clearly looks like an Ultramarine to be played as an Ultramarine? I haven't got a problem with custom painted Chapters or minor Chapters using whatever rules they want (though if I was being more strict, I'd be expecting them to be using the successor Chapter rules, and if they were a close descendant of their parent Chapter, using their rules), but when something that clearly represents something else is proxying as something, that's when I would apply the same logic as I would to standard WYSIWYG

because paint on the model doesn't matter. gear matters, LoS matters, shade of blue or green does not.

Why doesn't it matter?

I could just as easily turn around and say "paint on a model doesn't matter, and gear doesn't matter", so why is that wrong?

My point is "why do we care about the right representation of a gun, but not about the right representation of a model's subfaction?" Not just "it doesn't matter" - WHY is that the case? What reason is there?

Plus all such stance achives. is that people do not paint their armies, because it would lock them in to one. That is a bad thing, specially for new player, who just may not want to spend 50-100$ on paints and brushs, when it ain't needed to play the game.

Cool, so I shouldn't glue a special weapon onto one of my guys because that would lock them into having to always use that weapon! Again, something I think you're missing as well - if you paint your models in a non-iconic faction's colour, then you're not going to be locked down to anything! Hell, if you sprayed your models blue, they're not Ultramarines! You'd have to deliberately paint your models in a certain way to be recognisably a major Chapter, just putting a basic spray down won't do that.

It is like saying someone needs regulation gear to play football against the other street or block. I understand why I need school gear in events, because school ethocs and mostly sponsors wanting stuff to look good. Outside of them it is just another entry barrier.

So, as I've said - why do I need to have the right weapon modelled? That's just like needing regulation gear to play football against the other street.

And they can't find anywhere to play that isn't hardcore tournaments and ultra-competitive? In that case, I feel sorry for that person honestly.

Again, I haven't got a problem with people prioritising winning over aesthetic. If that's what you enjoy, you go ahead and enjoy it. However, I don't want to be a part of that.
Plus, you mention a "BA army" - what makes it specifically BA? Just being painted red? That's not necessarily Blood Angels, they could be Red Talons, Genesis Chapter, or any other red marine Chapter.

Well in any place where the avarge adult salary is 430-450$ per month, you will find out that people would rather have a working army, then a not working one, because they can't afford to switch it out every 2-3 months. Their decision to buy in to something locks them in. It is not a tournament thing, I never played in a big tournament, out of 30+ people at my store maybe 7-8 go to any tournaments and regulars fit in one car. But that doesn't mean the armies aren't build for efficiency.

I don't build armies for efficiency, but I don't swap it round "every 2-3 months" because I don't need an efficient army to enjoy the game.

And my salary is far less than 400$ a month, for what it's worth.

It doesn't have to be about being efficient if you're in a group that cares less about winning. If you don't mind how your group works, then good on you. However, that kind of atmosphere isn't for me.

and rules make a BA army a BA army. If it is not a BA army, but a succesor one it has different rules. If it neither of those two, it also has different rules.

Yes, but what about the MODELS make them BA? That's my point. Rules make an Iron Hands army an Iron Hands one, but we're talking about the models here.

Plus, playing as a custom Chapter (in my book) lets you play as any Chapter you like, because I'm not getting confused by something that's obviously looking like something being used as another.

but if you play as succesor then you get strictkly worse rules. you lack all the special characters, the relics, and some of the stragagems.

Firstly, I'm happy with successors using the same rules as their progenitors. Secondly, it doesn't have to be about having the most efficient list! What's wrong with having a less competitive game?

You seem to have missed my question. Why can't they just play a weaker list? Is having a competitive game all that matters to them? If that's the case, then I wouldn't want to play them, because we would have very big differences in what we wanted from the game.

That's my whole point - if the only reason you're jumping between what Chapter you're playing as is because "I want to be competitive", then that's exactly why I don't want to play against that person in particular.

Because there is no weaker stuff in w40k. There is good stuff and there is bad stuff. Playing Word Bearers instead of red coloured renegades or black legion is not just playing a weaker army, it is missing a ton of rules. When I play with my army, it isn't just a bit weaker then other armies, it down right sucks. And it gets only worse then less focused on tournaments you are. Because the gap between lets say a tournament soup DA list and a tournament Ultramarine army is relativly smaller, to a casual ultramarine and DA army. It is not a question of competition, but a question of having fun with models that cost a lot of money. If I spent the money I spent on a bike and it crashed day one, so I wouldn't able to take it anywhere it would be comperable.

That kind of black and white "it's good or it's bad" is simply not true. Just because I don't use the Loyal 32 or have plasma guns on every surface I can doesn't mean it's a "bad" list. It's just less powerful.

As for your bike analogy, I can still play a game with even a "bad" army as you put it - I can't ride a destroyed vehicle. Why wouldn't I be able to play a game with a "bad" army and have fun with them?

I said that if you're clearly painted as X, why are you playing them as Y? If that reason (as your argument suggests) is so that they can be more powerful, then that tells me what that player wants from the game, and I know in advance that we would not be compatible.

that is trading fun in a game, for something inconsequantial like painting. That is like saying a football uniform is the most imporant part of a football game. Which is true, if you own a store that makes the uniforms. Or if you really like to design cloths. But it has nothing to do with the game. Same way as painting, has nothing to do with a game of w40k. How or if models are painted has zero impact on the game. The dice don't roll better, new rules don't suddenly start working just because the models are painted, scenarios don't suddenly score different etc.

And here's the crux of the argument - I would derive more fun from playing against someone who beat me with an army painted how they play it (Iron Hands painted as Iron Hands etc) than winning against someone who didn't.

That's because there's more than one way to enjoy the game beyond winning it. I don't expect you to change your mind and change how YOU enjoy it, but just recognising that other people can enjoy it in different ways.

Saying "that's got nothing to do with the game" or "that's inconsequential" isn't a general fact - it's just your opinion.

There's nothing that forces people into *needing* to play with the strongest rules, the most optimised ruleset, or other stuff. What's wrong with having a less competitively-driven game?

have you tried to play a few games vs the new marines with a bad army like Grey Knights. Because I tell you that if you had to play them for 2 years, and saw updated marines you would not want to play GK, and if you could play them as something else, you would.

Yes, I have. But I don't care about winning, because I get my fun in other ways.

If you need to play with the strongest rules in order to have fun, you're welcome to that, but that's not how I enjoy the game.