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.

 Stormatious wrote:

Yeah you're right but i don't really know why you think any ones taking extreme stances against non painters

Because, at the time of posting this, 45 people voted that way?

 Stormatious wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
As Crimson said earlier, the game is clearly intended to be played with painted models. I don't think you can really argue that. Every indication given from GW's materials, battle reports etc. would lead one to the expectation of having each army be painted. Further, I'd argue that that expectation is a perfectly reasonable one.

If you don't like painting or just don't want to do it that's fine. I don't see why that's so hard to say (many people in this thread have) opposed to acting like everyone doesn't already know this is a miniature wargame or that the models are sold unpainted for a reason.

My point is that it's not our place to force painting onto people. Gently encourage them, yes. But taking an arbitrary "My way is the only right way" stance is just going to force people out, who are otherwise fine people.

Yeah you're right but i don't really know why you think any ones taking extreme stances against non painters


Automatically Appended Next Post:

...because I've been reading and participating in this thread since the beginning. And because I've heard stories of it happening in other places. And finally because I've seen it happen IRL.

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Stormatious wrote:

Yeah you're right but i don't really know why you think any ones taking extreme stances against non painters

Because, at the time of posting this, 45 people voted that way?

doesn't mean we want them completely excluided


Automatically Appended Next Post:
just means there not ready to particpate in the game in most cases because thats how this works generally

...again, this is subjective.

Stormatious wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Stormatious wrote:You cant see detail with grey minis....

Depends on what you're painting it with. Black matte primer is going to give me far less detail than the naked model. Someone putting 5mm of paint on a model is going to obscure all detail. Painting straight from the pot can obscure plenty of detail. In fact, naked models have more detail since nothing is being obscured, short of flags and banners, of course.

So, not entirely true unless you're own vision is already too compromised to tell it with good paint.

You in no way shape or form see detail better with it being its orginal unpainted form, dont know what you are talking about seems like you're stretching unbelievely far to try and justify non painted models.

Nope, I gave my explanation quite well, I thought.

Black matte primer absorbs light like crazy requiring a very close look to observe any detail due to the lack of shadows.

Thick paint (like over-painting or even straight from the pot) can fill the valleys of a model's details, such as a face grill, such that the detail is obscured or completely buried. If it is buried, it cannot be seen. Trust me, I've seen them. I honestly would rather they be naked in some of those cases.

In these cases, naked allows me to see more detail than painted. It is only on flat surface which have no model details, such as flags and banners, that paint IS the detail, or the painting is done rather well where this doesn't apply.

 Charistoph wrote:

Stormatious wrote:

 Charistoph wrote:

Stormatious wrote:You cant see detail with grey minis....

Depends on what you're painting it with. Black matte primer is going to give me far less detail than the naked model. Someone putting 5mm of paint on a model is going to obscure all detail. Painting straight from the pot can obscure plenty of detail. In fact, naked models have more detail since nothing is being obscured, short of flags and banners, of course.

So, not entirely true unless you're own vision is already too compromised to tell it with good paint.

You in no way shape or form see detail better with it being its orginal unpainted form, dont know what you are talking about seems like you're stretching unbelievely far to try and justify non painted models.

Nope, I gave my explanation quite well, I thought.

Black matte primer absorbs light like crazy requiring a very close look to observe any detail due to the lack of shadows.

Thick paint (like over-painting or even straight from the pot) can fill the valleys of a model's details, such as a face grill, such that the detail is obscured or completely buried. If it is buried, it cannot be seen. Trust me, I've seen them. I honestly would rather they be naked in some of those cases.

In these cases, naked allows me to see more detail than painted. It is only on flat surface which have no model details, such as flags and banners, that paint IS the detail, or the painting is done rather well where this doesn't apply.

Yeah still dont understand at all how you can think that, what ever thats just me. You realise the paint is very thin to begin with, and generally we thin it down even more, its so thin you wont believe.

Black primed models are harder to see detail on.

Poorly painted models have their details obscured by paint.

Light grey models are actually reasonable to see detail on from about up to a meter away.

That's all he's saying.

As for paint thickness, people can still paint incorrectly, and paints can dry out and glob up (citidal white...my nemesis!).

I know black primed models are harder to see, thats why we highlight details. Poorley painted models fail yes, thats why we practice and get better over time spending hundreds of hours doing wargammer


Automatically Appended Next Post:
We highlight so its even more visible if it was just painted 1 color

So you agree that basic primed models and poorly painted ones are harder to see detail on than grey ones?

 Mmmpi wrote:
So you agree that basic primed models and poorly painted ones are harder to see detail on than grey ones?

no i mean i know black primed models alone with out the highlighted details are harder to see*


Automatically Appended Next Post:
i meant i know that already

 Tannhauser42 wrote:

 Stormatious wrote:

Yeah you're right but i don't really know why you think any ones taking extreme stances against non painters

Because, at the time of posting this, 45 people voted that way?

This is a poll with preworded options, and people choose one which matches their view the best. I certainly wouldn't have worded the middle option that way, but I chose it as I actually do care about the matter quite bit. Whether people's armies are painted or not affects my likelihood of wanting to play with them a lot.

I cannot stand unpainted miniatures. It looks disgusting. Not holding it against the person playing them, but I still avoid the grey crap wherever and whenever possible.

I don't care if the opponents model's are painted or not. Its the personality and the attitude of the opponent that will determine if I will play them or not.

I have known opponents that are hardcore into a game system (be it 40k, AoS, Warmachine, or Battletech) that are absolute blasts to play... but for various reasons (some medical, some because painting is not their interest) they have models assembled, but unpainted. I've offered to help them paint their stuff, I have offered to paint it for them (some of whom gladly accepted the help, others politely declined), but I have never turned someone a game because they have an unpainted army, nor will I.

 Stormatious wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
So you agree that basic primed models and poorly painted ones are harder to see detail on than grey ones?

no i mean i know black primed models alone with out the highlighted details are harder to see*


Automatically Appended Next Post:
i meant i know that already

Well that was literally what he was saying.

 Mmmpi wrote:

 Stormatious wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
So you agree that basic primed models and poorly painted ones are harder to see detail on than grey ones?

no i mean i know black primed models alone with out the highlighted details are harder to see*


Automatically Appended Next Post:
i meant i know that already

Well that was literally what he was saying.

i know so my point is like so it doesn't matter, who leaves a model primed black?

People who primed/basecoated their whole army and that's it?

If it becomes a regular thing then honestly yes, I do a little. I'd never say anything to them, but I'd silently judge them. I'm a hobbyist first and a gamer second, so I don't field anything that's not painted. But in the end if it's a fun game with a good player I don't really mind.

 Mmmpi wrote:
People who primed/basecoated their whole army and that's it?

yeah


Automatically Appended Next Post:
im gettng sick in the stomach thinking of how hard your trying to defend non painted minis when people spend so much time and learning and effort painting


Automatically Appended Next Post:
its like what the heck

I usually paint models as I assemble them, so almost all of the models I field often are painted to some degree.

That said, there's also almost always something not fully painted, because I forgot, like that one Guardsman who's just white and grey because he got lost while I was painting the rest of his unit, or aren't really sure what I'm doing with in the end, like the two Seraphim who I'm still on the fence about cutting up to give Inferno Pistols, or it's new and I'm still working on it.

Most of my IG infantry is also not painted in the same scheme as my armor, because I went through the effort to repaint my armor but I don't really have the will to repaint 130+ infantry. I'll just slowly buy new infantry. And there's some models that I'll probably never paint, because I can't be bothered, like my Dropzone Commander Infantry or my Space Wolves.


I don't really have a problem with opposing unpainted models, as long as they're built unpainted models. Unbuilt models ["this chassis is my buggy" or "these bases are my guardsmen"] annoy me, though. I don't think there's any requirement to have the miniature be painted and based, but it should be built enough for me to tell what it's supposed to be.

Stormatious wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
So you agree that basic primed models and poorly painted ones are harder to see detail on than grey ones?

no i mean i know black primed models alone with out the highlighted details are harder to see*

i meant i know that already

If you know that, then why did you keep asking about it? I thought I was quite clear.

Stormatious wrote:i know so my point is like so it doesn't matter, who leaves a model primed black?

Plenty. They may not like how their modelling looks, so they prime it, and they are either too nervous to paint or whatever. Sometimes you learn the game while you're learning the hobby. Sometimes you simply don't have the paints or color scheme figured out yet (yes, some people have quandaries about that).

Heck, I didn't start painting until I sold my first army and got my hands on my second army, and I sure as heck didn't have the money to pay someone else to do it. My last army was sold before I painted it because I was still in the middle of building it and I was done with the game for a time.

Stormatious wrote:

 Mmmpi wrote:
People who primed/basecoated their whole army and that's it?

yeah

im gettng sick in the stomach thinking of how hard your trying to defend non painted minis when people spend so much time and learning and effort painting

its like what the heck

It's called being a noob, not having time to do it, or not having a final paint scheme, dood. I mean, what the heck, do you expect everyone to have started the hobby at 6 years old and have a Golden Daemon waiting inside their fingers?

 Charistoph wrote:
I mean, what the heck, do you expect everyone to have started the hobby at 6 years old and have a Golden Daemon waiting inside their fingers?

No, but painting to a basic tabletop standard does not require Golden Demon level skill. It requires being willing to spend the time doing the work instead of complaining about how you shouldn't have to paint anything.

Who's complaining about painting?

We're discussing whether or not having a painted army are valid choices.

Try to keep up.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Who's complaining about painting?

Lots of people in this thread are complaining about being required to paint their models.

This has gone on long enough and we are way off topic, I am locking this thread.