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.

Would you rather I had:

A) A fully painted army with a uniformed colour scheme but with barely any imagination net list.

or

B) A fully assembled and based army with a theme and my own written fluff on characters and units, but with no paint.

I just can't find the inspiration to paint my army as my skills are rather bad but I love the whole fluff of the 40k universe.

Yours thoughts?

I'd rather play an army of fully painted proxies than a wall of grey/primed models.

Painted always makes for a better opponent. I really dont care about the enemies fluff when I play. I don't think as to; why is my army fighting these creatures? Mabye I will afterward and write a small battle synopses in my armies history. That's just me though

Well, paint is important. I do not play with non-painted models. Period.

Gotta agree with the above posters, on the rare occasion I sit down for a game I really don't want to hear the names of my opponents characters and the fluff behind their army. I'd much rather get down to a game against some fantastically painted model and enjoy both the game and the appearance of a well made battle board with well painted miniatures.

 Melcavuk wrote:
Gotta agree with the above posters, on the rare occasion I sit down for a game I really don't want to hear the names of my opponents characters and the fluff behind their army. I'd much rather get down to a game against some fantastically painted model and enjoy both the game and the appearance of a well made battle board with well painted miniatures.

+1

While I might humor someone by listening to bits and pieces of their home fluff over the course of the game (because it is 3 hours long), I do have to look at the horde of bare plastic all game long. I'll take a little paint and effort over a novella every time.

I will say this though. I'd rather look at bare plastic than an entire army that has just been primed black and nothing else. At least you can still see the details in the plastic.

So even if my painting is bad, it's better than not at all?

To me, paint is also part of the fluff, and not an unimportant one. Color, markings and emblems are what's going to bring you army's detailed backstory to the tabletop.

Consider this: Your opponent won't be seeing a fearsome Bad Moon freebooter, a sneaky Alpha Legion cell or a Salamanders' Battle Company if there's no yellows, blues or greens in the table, but a steady sea of grey.

So, painted. Always.

I'd rather the army be fully painted and all of the models be fully WYSIWYG.

I would not refuse a game against a primed or unpainted army.

I would not refuse a game against a handful of proxies.

I would refuse a game against ridiculous amounts of proxies. If I need a crib sheet and an iPad to keep track of all of your proxies, I'll have to pass on playing you.

 Agent_Tremolo wrote:
To me, paint is also part of the fluff, and not an unimportant one. Color, markings and emblems are what's going to bring you army's detailed backstory to the tabletop.

Consider this: Your opponent won't be seeing a fearsome Bad Moon freebooter, a sneaky Alpha Legion cell or a Salamanders' Battle Company if there's no yellows, blues or greens in the table, but a steady sea of grey.

So, painted. Always.

But they're my Grey Knights! Honestly!

 KhornateCake wrote:
Would you rather I had:

A) A fully painted army with a uniformed colour scheme but with barely any imagination net list.

or

B) A fully assembled and based army with a theme and my own written fluff on characters and units, but with no paint.

I just can't find the inspiration to paint my army as my skills are rather bad but I love the whole fluff of the 40k universe.

Yours thoughts?

Gotta go with B. while I like painted units it's more important to me to have a cohesive custom army. I buy new things for my necrons every few weeks just to try out everything. My painting cannot hope to keep up.

If its just casual play or just some small time local tourney I wouldn't mind playing your grey horde . If it were a big tourny/event of some sort I might be a little irked.


If I could only choose one or the other I'd go for the grey horde. I appreciate the character you attempt to put in your army

Painted is always better than unpainted.

If you've only just started the hobby, I wouldn't mind playing against unpainted army, I mean... everyone wanna play asap, right? Not everyone got in for the modelling and painting aspect... And it helps you decide which unit to get after you've played a few games!

But I'd hope that you'd have them painted, or at least some of them, after a few games... It's just easier to tell what is what once they're painted.

I'm not gonna make a big deal out of it though.

As for B), well, I guess that would be cool for fluff players, I'm not playing for fluff, so for me, it's not as important.

hobojebus wrote:
Painted is always better than unpainted.

That's not true.

That's not true at all.

The complaint that, for myself, as one of the "I prefer painted armies" crowd is that I prefer that someone actually be trying when it comes to their army.

I do not care if you've dipped your army. I do not care if your army matches the '3-Color Rule' in spirit only, as you used three different shades of the same color, etc.

I just care that it looks like you put some effort into it, rather than just slapped paint on the army and called it a day.

I require any I play against to be painted, as for your fluff I don't care really. If you want me to read the fluff give it to me outside the gaming table

 KhornateCake wrote:
So even if my painting is bad, it's better than not at all?

I'd say so, yes.

The so called "tabletop standard" isn't really all that hard to achieve. As long as you have patience and practice, you're miniatures will always come out just fine. And, you'll also get better at it. GW have made it an increasingly child/user-friendly hobby (for better or worse, you decide)... their paint ranges, WD mag and hobby guidebooks provide a plethora of tips and tricks, plus there's plenty of guides online for painting miniatures.

Nowadays, you can just undercoat, couple of basecoats, a wash, then throw on a highligh shade and BAM! - tabletop standard ...and beyond (as you get better with time/practice).

At the end of the day, you get out of the hobby what you put in. You ask for A or B - I say make it both.

EDIT: Although, after now having read Kanluwen's post, I do agree with their overall point about making an effort. But, seeing as your option B already shows that you've put thought into your guys, that will (should) naturally bleed through in your painting of them - no matter your inherent skill level. So, as before: both.

I would say A if you had to choose 1

 wuestenfux wrote:
Well, paint is important. I do not play with non-painted models. Period.

This, this, 1000x this.

I couldn't give a tinker's damn about the list. If it isn't painted, I am not playing with it.

 Anfauglir wrote:

 KhornateCake wrote:
So even if my painting is bad, it's better than not at all?

Although, after now having read Kanluwen's post, I do agree with their overall point about making an effort. But, seeing as your option B already shows that you've put thought into your guys, that will (should) naturally bleed through in your painting of them - no matter your inherent skill level. So, as before: both.

I actually have to say again, that this is not necessarily true.

I've seen some truly horrendous "counts-as" armies, mostly spurred by the fact that the owners could not control themselves from the "Must buy the shiny new thing!" syndrome.

I'm a bit of a stickler when it comes to things like this I guess. I like seeing coherently themed armies, with effort put into both how they look and how they present themselves aesthetically.
I don't like seeing the "My army can be used as W, X, Y, or even Z depending on who I'm going to face!" forces.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I actually have to say again, that this is not necessarily true.

I've seen some truly horrendous "counts-as" armies, mostly spurred by the fact that the owners could not control themselves from the "Must buy the shiny new thing!" syndrome.

I'm a bit of a stickler when it comes to things like this I guess. I like seeing coherently themed armies, with effort put into both how they look and how they present themselves aesthetically.
I don't like seeing the "My army can be used as W, X, Y, or even Z depending on who I'm going to face!" forces.

Well, it's interpretive on various levels, true, but I still think we're on the same page, pretty much. I did say "should" when it comes to thoughtfulness about your army list being reflected in the paint job. Of course there's always going to be those (I assume) who care only about playing the game, and just "slap together a few minis" with little-to-no effort put into their presentation. Also, I'm interpreting the armies you like to see being under category B (sans the paint, granted), whilst the type you don't like to see being under category A.

At the end of the day, I'm sure there's nothing stopping the TC from getting a more-than-presentable army on the table, both structurally and aesthetically - besides a lack of patience/creativity/care for painting one, that is. Let's face it, when you're battling, spending more time pouring over sourcebooks, rules, charts and dice rolls than admiring the miniatures, the difference between an "okay" and a "good", or between "good" and "very good" paint job isn't much of a deal-breaker - at least for me, anyways.

As I say, it's all down to personal preference and interpretation. But I can say that between an army that A) is built purely for TT performance with a very good paint job, and an army that B) is built with some creativity in terms of the overall setting and hobby and an okay/good paint job - I'd pick to go against the latter.

A final note: as for your unfortunate encounters with horrendously presented armies... well, like I said, there's always bound to be a few, and I see them as the exception to the rule in this scenario. But, seriously, it's not that hard to make these minis look good enough to battle with. Of course, there is a steep curve to climb between beginner/novice and showcase/pro level... but seriously, with a little mix of common sense and patience, you can make the washes do 90% of the work for you.

I really don't care one way or another. Frankly, I haven't painted much because I'm trying to make conversions that my Imagination comes up with and as soon as I put together one, I jump to another, then another... So yeah, lots of unpainted models here.

 KhornateCake wrote:
Would you rather I had:

A) A fully painted army with a uniformed colour scheme but with barely any imagination net list.

or

B) A fully assembled and based army with a theme and my own written fluff on characters and units, but with no paint.

I just can't find the inspiration to paint my army as my skills are rather bad but I love the whole fluff of the 40k universe.

Yours thoughts?

A every time.

Fluff is for those that do not care about playing 40K, it is for the RPer's, if you want a ton of fluff Play Deathwatch.

I would rather play primed black/white mini's that are WYSIWYG than unpainted plastic.

Even if the paint job is not that great, paint your minis. At least make progress on them.

I don't care at all if they're painted or no. I would like WYSIWYG or at least an attempt therein so that I can look and figure out what they are.

Some people like war games and hate painting. I'm not going to be a dick and shun them over it.

Get someone else to paint it for you.