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.

Seriously, it seems that people who put all their time into painting think that others without such time should be obligated to do it. That seems very elitist and neckbeardy to me... Thoughts?

Why cant people dislike unpainted armies?

If you're used to playing against professionally painted armies, or at least good looking armies, then it would be pretty ugly in such situations.

However if you're like me and you usually play in smelly basements, it's no problem at all

Who cares if it's unpainted. They're offering you hours of their day to enjoy a game with them,

Well yeah but for some people the painting and modelling aspect is more important than the gaming aspect. So it appears that someone who can't be arsed to paint their models doesn't care about that and simply wants to battle, which I think some people regard as rather crude.

This thread again. Look, I didn't have a problem with unpainted armies until some git face on this site called me elitist because I insist on painting my own army. Now I resent unpainted armies. If you don't want to paint your stuff fine. Effort matters. Standards are good, especially when you hold yourself to them. Do you want to eat meals that the cook doesn't put effort into? Do you want to have sex with a woman who isn't putting effort into it? Makes life bland. I get to play 40K about once a month if I am lucky, due to work and family. My stuff is painted and I like it when my opponents is painted as well.

-J

Prefering beautifully painted armies over grey hordes is not a crime.

Demeaning others because of it is what would be bad.

And maybe on the internet people fly into a frothing rage at the sight of a grey marine army, but in the real world I have yet to encounter such a specimen.

Keeper_of_Secrets wrote:
Who cares if it's unpainted.

People that do care? your asking why unpainted armies make people angry.

Honestly if im going to spend hours playing against some one with a fully painted army that took months to complete. Id at least like to play against some one that spent some effort on it them selves.
And visually it just looks better for everyone involved and around. as well as battle reps and other things.

Strange... all the people I know who have fully painted armies are decent people, usually married with kids. I find that the people with the grey horde are the neck-beards and shut-ins.

Having nicely painted models on the board makes it more fun. I personally have tons of models that are painted and tons that are not.

I understand when people don't have the time to paint their models, it is a very long process. Some people just don't have the skill and would rather not embarrass themselves. Players shouldn't talk down to other because their army isn't painted. That's just bad sportsmanship to me.

 l0k1 wrote:
Having nicely painted models on the board makes it more fun. I personally have tons of models that are painted and tons that are not.

I understand when people don't have the time to paint their models, it is a very long process. Some people just don't have the skill and would rather not embarrass themselves. Players shouldn't talk down to other because their army isn't painted. That's just bad sportsmanship to me.

It is not compulsory to accept games; I would politely turn down a game with somebody if:
- They have had an army for several years but there is no indication of it being painted
- They are using ridiculous proxies such as coke cans for drop pods
- They cry/rage when they are losing
- They are generally unpleasant (attitude/personal hygiene)
- They use scratch-builds which do not follow the rule-of-cool

Miniature games are a sensory experience, as well as a game. You can enjoy models, terrain and tables etc on a level that you cannot with say, computer games, even if the game aspect on the computer is better in some cases.

Some people are there more for the game, others for the experience. It's just like 'competitive' and 'casual' play - both options are valid, as long as both players are in it for the same thing.

 MetalOxide wrote:
Strange... all the people I know who have fully painted armies are decent people, usually married with kids. I find that the people with the grey horde are the neck-beards and shut-ins.

I'm going to agree with MetalOxide on this one. I find that it's often the other way around also. Generally, the players who field grey hordes are more interested in the gameplay, which can be innocent enough - but is often because they're a WAAC type powergamer, and are constantly switching and buying new units and can't be bothered to paint an army that they don't have any real attachment too. If the player who poured his heart and soul into his army gets stomped by the guy with no painted units and the latest list, it's pretty upsetting for them.

Now, not to say that is always the case - there are certainly situations where it's the other way around, and the player with the painted army is just being elitist for the sake of being elitist, with the attitude "Yours isn't as good as mine." I've seen the same reaction (on Dakka as well) concerning proxies, counts-as, and conversions. Many of the players who've spent a lot of money on the game look down on people using counts-as models, or using plasticard to construct tanks or convert models into more expensive models. At the heart of the issue, it's the same, the argument that "if I spent so much on this game, why should you not have to?"

There's definitely a middle ground as well. As Dakkanut said, some people just like to play for the experience too, and an unpainted army isn't very conducive for that.

That's just my two cents. I find that everyone gets along a hell of a lot better if we all just take a moment to recognize that this is a game where you build your soldiers and pit them against each other, and taking it too seriously isn't worth it.

 SweaterKittens wrote:

 MetalOxide wrote:
Strange... all the people I know who have fully painted armies are decent people, usually married with kids. I find that the people with the grey horde are the neck-beards and shut-ins.

I'm going to agree with MetalOxide on this one. I find that it's often the other way around also. Generally, the players who field grey hordes are more interested in the gameplay, which can be innocent enough - but is often because they're a WAAC type powergamer, and are constantly switching and buying new units and can't be bothered to paint an army that they don't have any real attachment too. If the player who poured his heart and soul into his army gets stomped by the guy with no painted units and the latest list, it's pretty upsetting for them.

Now, not to say that is always the case - there are certainly situations where it's the other way around, and the player with the painted army is just being elitist for the sake of being elitist, with the attitude "Yours isn't as good as mine." I've seen the same reaction (on Dakka as well) concerning proxies, counts-as, and conversions. Many of the players who've spent a lot of money on the game look down on people using counts-as models, or using plasticard to construct tanks or convert models into more expensive models. At the heart of the issue, it's the same, the argument that "if I spent so much on this game, why should you not have to?"

There's definitely a middle ground as well. As Dakkanut said, some people just like to play for the experience too, and an unpainted army isn't very conducive for that.

That's just my two cents. I find that everyone gets along a hell of a lot better if we all just take a moment to recognize that this is a game where you build your soldiers and pit them against each other, and taking it too seriously isn't worth it.

Yeah, I try to take the middle ground with it, especially when there are new players joining the gaming group. I too have come into contact with elitist painters who put people off painting which is rather sad.

Seriously, it seems that people who do not put time into painting think that others with such time should feel bad for being proud of their army and making the non painted armies look like garbage just because they are not painted.

That seems very elitist and neckbeardy to me... Thoughts?

Keeper_of_Secrets wrote:
Who cares if it's unpainted. They're offering you hours of their day to enjoy a game with them,

You seem to have this idea that deciding who to play is a 1 person thing. Offering to play warhammer with someone is like offering to have sex with someone, You will both enjoy it to begin with but if you want different things it can turn ugly. The reason I play Warhammer and not some computer game is because I like the look of moving models around the board, why on earth would I want to play against unpainted ones when I could find someone else with painted models. That's where I get my kick, lovely models moving around a lovely board, if that's not where you get your kicks, fine. Don't take it out on us. That's why you should play people who want the same kick as you, to ensure your both happy.

Also, can someone define Neckbeard for me. I assume its someone with a hairy neck? Is it somekind of insult/derogatory comment?

 MetalOxide wrote:
Strange... all the people I know who have fully painted armies are decent people, usually married with kids. I find that the people with the grey horde are the neck-beards and shut-ins.

. . . I'm not sure whether I should be insulted or not because this is totally dead-on for me.

Personally, I just don't like painting. And I often go a long time without shaving. And I barely leave the house. But I am a decent enough person, even if my social skills are a bit rusty.

Not liking painting doesn't have anything to do with the amount of spare time I have. When I was in my early-to-mid teens, I usually showed up to game with a badly-painted army, but it was painted and I painted it it myself. I've gotten better at painting since then, but also slower at painting. I also grew to like painting a lot less, particularly since I got more heavily into MMOs and started spending most of my free time on them.

Edit: Alex, a neckbeard is - if I understand correctly - an unusually nerdy guy who doesn't spend enough of his time on personal hygiene, ending up with poorly-groomed facial hair and often a bad odor. Also, I just pictured a porno that started with one character saying to the other, "Hey, wanna... play some 40k?" And then the other character is like, "Sure." And then the porno music plays as they agree on a points limit and get their armies out and set up the board. And then the music kicks into high gear as the dice start rolling on turn one. And it's making me laugh.

 MetalOxide wrote:
Strange... all the people I know who have fully painted armies are decent people, usually married with kids. I find that the people with the grey horde are the neck-beards and shut-ins.

That's been my experience as well. I still remember tabling him by turn two and this gentleman who was in his 30's or 40's threw a fit like my son used to at 5yrs old. Jeez, date much?

 DeathReaper wrote:
Seriously, it seems that people who do not put time into painting think that others with such time should feel bad for being proud of their army and making the non painted armies look like garbage just because they are not painted.

That seems very elitist and neckbeardy to me... Thoughts?

It's not a universal trait. I do love ogling the nicely-painted armies in White Dwarf and nicely-painted models on Dakka. And I think that painted armies are superior to unpainted armies. And I recognize that my mostly-unpainted armies look like garbage in comparison to a painted one - especially my Grey Knights, because holy crap I built them with messed-up poses.

As someone that really didn't like painting but finally forced myself to do some and now have an army that is atleast totally base coated, I must say it really adds alot to the game.

I don't mind playing against unpainted armies, but it really makes the battle come alive when both sides are decently painted.

The least you can do though is prime your minis. That alone makes them look 10x better than the drab grey plastic they would be without it.

 Pouncey wrote:
Edit: Alex, a neckbeard is - if I understand correctly - an unusually nerdy guy who doesn't spend enough of his time on personal hygiene, ending up with poorly-groomed facial hair and often a bad odor.

Alternatively a "neckbeard" can be defined as "someone who says something I don't like about a geeky subject, and because I can't possibly be wrong they must embody the worst stereotypes so I can dismiss them as worthless". Usually it acts as a pretty good sign that the person using the term is not someone worth listening to.

This, of course, is how it's being used in this thread: as an attempt to dismiss anyone who doesn't agree with the OP's personal opinion and preemptively kill any counter-argument. Which is why this thread will probably be locked soon.

You know what would be funny...
Paint an army with a grey color similar to the plastic's grey the have a tiny little spot of another color and call the army "painted".

To be perfectly honest if you don't have the time or money to paint the army then so be it. but if you have both and simply don't make any effort Ill question why not but otherwise I won't bother.

 Engine of War wrote:
You know what would be funny...
Paint an army with a grey color similar to the plastic's grey the have a tiny little spot of another color and call the army "painted".

To be perfectly honest if you don't have the time or money to paint the army then so be it. but if you have both and simply don't make any effort Ill question why not but otherwise I won't bother.

I used some grey primer spray for a while that was like that. The only way I could tell that they were primed was that the base turned grey - and the detail became a bit less sharp due to the thin layer of spray paint.

Edit: There was also a very minor color difference, but it was only noticeable if you held it right next to a bare plastic model.

Why do people always ask this question over and over?

Its your hobby play your way, if people don't like it go find another sand box.

lynxstrife wrote:
Why do people always ask this question over and over?

Its your hobby play your way, if people don't like it go find another sand box.

It's an attempt to validate one's perspective. You can be the judge as to its success.

The Beastie Boys said it best... "I don't play to win, I play to show". When you look good you win every time.

I don't mind an unpainted army. But what really grinds my gears are those people who use scratch builds. I find it down right insulting when a person is too cheap to buy a rhino, or drop pod, and use card board to make one.

Don't get me started on scratch built apoc units that have actual models.....

The horse is dead, long ago beat...

Because it is a tangible measure of investment into the game.

It also shows a lack of commitment to a codex (i.e. my gray army is space wolves this week, no wait, now GK).

I'm going full on hipster and deciding to hate on fully-painted armies before it becomes cool. And armies that are only primed or basecoated are "trying too hard".

I dislike the look of it. That being said if youve only been playing for a couple of months thats one thing. Veteran player of several years on the other hand might need some good natured goading to get into gear on his painting.