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.

I'm running a painting competition at my LGS in a few months and thought the format could use some work. I want to encourage more people to participate but some of the less talented painters need an edge to have a chance, so I figured the best way to do this would be to score each participant in how well they actually play the game.

So the general breakdown would be:

Painting - 15 possible points
Best general - 10 points, based on standings of single elim tournament
Composition - 5 points. Assumption is that players will get the full score, with penalties for using too many (more than 2) shades of the same color. So, if I used 3 different shades of yellow paint, 2 different shades of red and a red wash, this would result in -2 to my comp score.

It's also worth noting that due to recent events non-bronze metallic paints will be banned for this painting competition. Non-bronze metallic paints just make models look too good and give painters who use them an unfair edge.

I think this is personally a good way to make sure everyone feels welcome at painting competitions. Playing the game, after all, is an important part of the hobby and I think it's naive to think that the person who is simply the best painter should be winning a painting competition.

Is this fair?

what? I don't understand the 'non-bronze metallic paints' begin banned.

Who cares how they paint it if they painted it and some paint looks good with no effort, so be it? How is it unfair?

Who knew we had army comp for painting competitions now?

If you want to encourage some other 'tiers' of painting, and spread the prize support around, that is what categories are for.

*Best Army is the default
*Best single miniature - Allows people who have time to paint well but not every rank and file to put forward the BEST model
*Best Conversion - Allows people who convert or sculpt but not so much paint to have an outlet.

At some point though, people gotta lose, and in a merit-based competition the person who painted the best should win. You could possibly have something like 3 wins becomes a 'hall of fame' and you can't enter anymore, but I am not sure how else to include lower tiers.

8/10

I thought it was pretty obvious, but you did get someone to take the bait pretty nicely so I guess I have to bump your score up a couple points.

I'm really not getting what's wrong with using using 2 shades of a colour.

also what's the prize.

What's a non-bronze metallic paint?

 Ostrakon wrote:
...I think it's naive to think that the person who is simply the best painter should be winning a painting competition.

Ok...

I'm not sure what's more amusing, the original post or the fact that there still exist people who are utterly incapable of recognizing even the most obvious satire.