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.

aren't most tournaments like that, augustus?

3 paint minimum required, but painting score doesn't effect your overall chance of winning?

I know most tournaments I go to have like 3 different 1st prizes.... overall battle performance, battle performance + painting skill, and sportsmanship....

I definitely agree that no tournament should include a painting score in all categories for winning... I take pride in my painting skills, but I know it doesn't even compare to some people at these tournaments, and never will, and I shouldn't be unable to ever win because of it.

However, you don't want to go too far in the other direction and disregard painting totally, it lessens the hobby overall. A happy medium is to require a painted army to play at all, and then leave it at that. Add a category of judging for painting if you want, but allow some prize to be solely on battle skill.

At golden daemon, you don't get points for how competative your miniature's loadout is. 'Ardboyz is just the same.

Do Golden Demon entries have to be "game legal"?
I have never entered, as my painting-fu is weaker than grot-ale!
I know there are several categories, but the main ones?

Horst wrote:aren't most tournaments like that, augustus?

3 paint minimum required, but painting score doesn't effect your overall chance of winning?...

I think painting counts for overall or outright at most events, (there's a shortage of GW run events this year I think). Generally:

OLD RTTs and GTs (I think):
Overall (Battle, Paint, Sports)
Painted (Paint)
Sportsman (Sports)
General (Battle Points only)

Most events:
1st (Battle, Paint, sports and comp)
2nd (Battle, Paint, sports and comp)
3rd (Battle, Paint, sports and comp)

Hardboy
1st (Battle)
2nd (Battle)
3rd (Battle)

the only tournaments i've EVER seen that have no painting component at all are the yearly GW 'ardboyz tournaments, and we all know thats nothing more than a ploy to sell miniatures.

To continue the comparisons of 'Ardboy vs Golden Demon, i've just checked the 2008 Golden Demon rules.
Some entries (Units, specifically) state that the units must be game-legal.
This leads me to believe that although the competition is judged on the painting quality, there is a basic level of game-based qualification, that although it does not affect the points, must be met to enter the competition.

IMHO, 'ArdBoyz could work the same way, with the points being awarded for actual battle results, but with a basic painting-based entry requirement of "Army must be at lest 3-colour painted"

Exactly what I was proposing.

Whole idea of hardboy tournaments is to generate sales for GW because of the larger then normal points values of tournaments. If people aren't going to play because they can't or won't paint this loses money for GW so unpainted is the way they will stay so that GW makes the max amount of money.

People who like to paint have the GTs with their paint scores to play in.

Augustus wrote:Exactly what I was proposing.

BlackSpike wrote:To continue the comparisons of 'Ardboy vs Golden Demon, i've just checked the 2008 Golden Demon rules.
Some entries (Units, specifically) state that the units must be game-legal.
This leads me to believe that although the competition is judged on the painting quality, there is a basic level of game-based qualification, that although it does not affect the points, must be met to enter the competition.

IMHO, 'ArdBoyz could work the same way, with the points being awarded for actual battle results, but with a basic painting-based entry requirement of "Army must be at lest 3-colour painted"

Augustus wrote:Exactly what I was proposing.

i completely agree (and did so on the first page... so first!) a three color entry standard with no score for painting (just the minimum requirement) is a very low entry barrier. primer = base color, two color highlights on each model. that 3000pt army could be done in one 8 hour stint. that way, gw could at least take some pics of the whole tabletop to actually promote the event for the next year.

Kirika wrote:Whole idea of hardboy tournaments is to generate sales for GW because of the larger then normal points values of tournaments.

and having a painting requirement for a tourny run by a company that sells a complete line of paints/brushes/bases/flock/etc won't? would all the players buy exclusively gw hobby supplies? nope, but i bet you some would and with GW's financial status not all that great ANY purchases help.

BlackSpike wrote:To continue the comparisons of 'Ardboy vs Golden Demon, i've just checked the 2008 Golden Demon rules.
Some entries (Units, specifically) state that the units must be game-legal.
This leads me to believe that although the competition is judged on the painting quality, there is a basic level of game-based qualification, that although it does not affect the points, must be met to enter the competition.

IMHO, 'ArdBoyz could work the same way, with the points being awarded for actual battle results, but with a basic painting-based entry requirement of "Army must be at lest 3-colour painted"

Why? Every other tournament have a paint requirement. Let there be one thats JUST about playing. If its not your cup of tea....dont enter.

Golden demons is about painting. You dont hear people whining its all about painting, and maybe the cotestats should actually enter the tournment or play the game.

Let each have their own.

carmachu wrote:
Why? Every other tournament have a paint requirement. Let there be one thats JUST about playing. If its not your cup of tea....dont enter.

Golden demons is about painting. You dont hear people whining its all about painting, and maybe the cotestats should actually enter the tournment or play the game.

Let each have their own.

I totally agree.

This is why i keep bringing up the poll . Because reading from people's responses its almost like they believe its
only a myth that some people didnt get into warhammer for painting aspects.

the_Armyman wrote:
I'm not elitist. I've played against unpainted armies, but I certainly don't relish it and it makes the conversation with my opponent rather dull. I'd rather play the 12 year old who sloppily paints his stuff than an adult who merely flashes his debit card, purchases his 2,000 points of metal and plstic, glues his little figs together and does nothing else before showing up for open gaming. If some of you are getting your panties in a bundle because someone has the audacity to ask you to paint your minis, I'm not too bothered by it. Just tell yourselves that you'll never meet me IRL, so my opinion matters only as much as your own in this thread.

Actually, in this thread? You are an elitest. You think people dont bring anything to the table by showing up with an unpainted army at a tournment or playing, you obviously miss the whole point of the hobby. Your example above CLEARLY shows your elitism.

The game(not the hobby) was since time immortal, from RT to 5th, about having fun. Some folks like to paint, some folks like to model, some folks like to play. Some like all aspects. To each their own. The fact you look down on folks, as clearly seen in this thread, shows a pretty good lack of class on your part.

I'd never want to play someone like you with a well painted army. Give me someone that wants to throw dice and have fun with bare plastic or even proxied models any day.

having a minimal painting requirement does not make the tourny "about" painting, just like having a playable model requirement in the golden demons (except in the open category) doesn't make it "about" playing. there is a DIFFERENCE between acknowledging a part of the hobby and making it a focus. having a pathetic painting standard like three colors for the hard boyz is the former.

LunaHound wrote:

I totally agree.

This is why i keep bringing up the poll . Because reading from people's responses its almost like they believe its
only a myth that some people didnt get into warhammer for painting aspects.

I come from a time of playing where we didnt even base the models. It wasnt required. I HATE painting. I Dont care for it. I'd rather pay someone else to do it.

I enjoy pushing models around the table with good company, sometimes in a beer and prezels fashion, sometimes ina much more cutthroat fashion- but either way against enjoyable company. Thats what I liek and get out of the game. And a bit of creating and coverting models...thats what I enjoy, and thats what I want to get out of the game.

If you like painting? Cool. If you like all aspects, hey knock yourself out. But understand- some folks just want to play and have fun. And thats alright too. Even in a tournment setting set up that way. I dont whine that many tournments have a painting score- those are the rules. Stop complaining about Hard Boyz not having one. Its not for you if your complaining about the lack of it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

warboss wrote:having a minimal painting requirement does not make the tourny "about" painting, just like having a playable model requirement in the golden demons (except in the open category) doesn't make it "about" playing. there is a DIFFERENCE between acknowledging a part of the hobby and making it a focus. having a pathetic painting standard like three colors for the hard boyz is the former.

Why? Its not about having painted models any more than Golden demons is about playing. Let folks that enjoy playing and not much else have their fun if they want it.

carmachu wrote:

Why? Its not about having painted models any more than Golden demons is about playing. Let folks that enjoy playing and not much else have their fun if they want it.

This.

I don't want to force someone else to paint just to play against me.

carmachu wrote:
Why? Its not about having painted models any more than Golden demons is about playing. Let folks that enjoy playing and not much else have their fun if they want it.

agreed. and when you play with your opponent for fun you should be able to dictate the rules between yourselves without anyone else getting involved. a tournament (as stated multiple times) is ultimately about selling more models as well as about "the hobby" and "the fun" AND marketing. it's a profit engine whose side goal for the company is to advertise their product (both at the event and later in various publications). grey armies don't accomplish that last part. if you and i were playing a game together, i wouldn't care it you played only with figs assembled from the waist down because you don't like that aspect of the hobby. as long as i can reasonably easily tell what they are, i'm cool with facing them on the table. a hard boyz tourny is not a friendly game. a minimal painting standard for hard boyz would be nice but i'd be opposed to using painting for any scoring; that's my $0.02.

carmachu wrote:

LunaHound wrote:

I totally agree.

This is why i keep bringing up the poll . Because reading from people's responses its almost like they believe its
only a myth that some people didnt get into warhammer for painting aspects.

I come from a time of playing where we didnt even base the models. It wasnt required. I HATE painting. I Dont care for it. I'd rather pay someone else to do it.

I enjoy pushing models around the table with good company, sometimes in a beer and prezels fashion, sometimes ina much more cutthroat fashion- but either way against enjoyable company. Thats what I liek and get out of the game. And a bit of creating and coverting models...thats what I enjoy, and thats what I want to get out of the game.

If you like painting? Cool. If you like all aspects, hey knock yourself out. But understand- some folks just want to play and have fun. And thats alright too. Even in a tournment setting set up that way. I dont whine that many tournments have a painting score- those are the rules. Stop complaining about Hard Boyz not having one. Its not for you if your complaining about the lack of it.

Wait , did you quote me because you agree with what i said or you dont? Im confuesd now ><

LunaHound wrote:

the_Armyman wrote:Funny how when the shoe is on the other foot and someone other than you acts all sanctimonious, you're incensed, Luna. Frankly, I will not stop speaking my opinion despite your "official" poll that I am obviously in the minority.

First of all , i dont know what you mean .

Of course you don't. That's the trick to being holier-than-thou: you never seem to understand what anyone means when they have the audacity to think counter to you.

a) You want to be in a tournament just for painting? Go for it! Golden Demons
b) You want to be in a tournament where they mix judging criterias? Sure go for it as well! Most tournaments are like this!
c) You want to be in a tournament where you are there for actual battle purpose only? Go for it!

Why try to mix A and B into C? when they already exist for the people that prefer them?
Let the Type C people enjoy what they do will you?

Once again, I'm not sure you're understanding the whole point of this Intrawebz forum thing. A person creates a thread. I type my opinion in the thread. Here comes the really hard part: my opinion may run counter to yours. Let the bawing commence. I am of the opinion that it's relatively pointless to spend all this money on a hobby and then never do anything to actually take part in said hobby. 'Ard Boyz, in it's current incarnation, adds nothing to the hobby and doesn't interest me in the least. I don't care if you don't agree. I don't care if the people who have a gazillion points of unpainted Space Marines agree. In the end, I'm not going to kick in their door and force them to paint, and they're not going to discourage me from spending hours painting a single fig.

warboss wrote: a hard boyz tourny is not a friendly game. a minimal painting standard for hard boyz would be nice but i'd be opposed to using painting for any scoring; that's my $0.02.

IF were going to insist on a minium painting score for Hardboyz- which is a tournment designed to just be played, because some of you insist that its part of the hobby, then let me ask this:

Should we then turn back the clocks on Golden Demons then, as it use to be models taken from an army that they played. Because playing IS part of the hobby after all. So, for random example, no more Jennifer Haley(or other painters) showing up with a handful of painted models. If you dont play the games, as it IS part of the "hobby" *rolls eyes*, you cant enter Golden Demons.


Any takers? ANyone? Why? Why Not?


Let the people that want to play hard, play hard with no painting. Let those of you that want soft scores- painting comp, whatever, enter those tournments. Everyone wins, everyone has fun.

And for the record I have NO plans to enter a Hard Boyz, Golden Demons, RT, GT or the local weekly tournment at the store nearby. I dont care about tournments much. To each his own-painters, players, fluff guys, converters and folks that like to do it all....


Automatically Appended Next Post:

the_Armyman wrote: I am of the opinion that it's relatively pointless to spend all this money on a hobby and then never do anything to actually take part in said hobby.

Thats because your a sucker thats fallen into GW stuff as "THE HOBBY!!!!!"

Its a game to have fun with. And everyone views their fun in a different light. You like it all around. SOme like to just paint. I prefer to play with some good folks.

Neither is right, neither is wrong. However you dont seem to want to have any room that yeah maybe just playing the game with some models, painted or not, tournment wise? Is not ONLY fun, but actually part of "THE HOBBY!!!!"

carmachu wrote:

the_Armyman wrote: I am of the opinion that it's relatively pointless to spend all this money on a hobby and then never do anything to actually take part in said hobby.

Thats because your a sucker thats fallen into GW stuff as "THE HOBBY!!!!!"

Wargaming is "THE HOBBY", bro, not the company calling itself Games Workshop. And I've never seen a historical gamer NOT paint their stuff. From my experience, unpainted armies seems to be relatively unique to sci-fi and fantasy genre wargames.

the_Armyman wrote:
Once again, I'm not sure you're understanding the whole point of this Intrawebz forum thing. A person creates a thread. I type my opinion in the thread. Here comes the really hard part: my opinion may run counter to yours. Let the bawing commence. I am of the opinion that it's relatively pointless to spend all this money on a hobby and then never do anything to actually take part in said hobby. 'Ard Boyz, in it's current incarnation, adds nothing to the hobby and doesn't interest me in the least. I don't care if you don't agree. I don't care if the people who have a gazillion points of unpainted Space Marines agree. In the end, I'm not going to kick in their door and force them to paint, and they're not going to discourage me from spending hours painting a single fig.

You're allowed your opinion, no doubt, but I think it's ok for people to point out areas in whcih your opinion is flawed.

First, I'd argue that just because you don't paint your models doesn't mean you aren't taking part in the hobby.

Second, while you might think that 'Ard Boys adds anything to your hobby (a fine opinion), it's simply improper to state that it adds nothing to the hobby as a whole. If even one person gets something out if it, than the hobby as a whole is richer.

I'm just going to say what I always say in threads like this...if you don't like my unpainted army, then why not paint them for me if it bothers you so much? lol

And for you smart asses who come in demanding payment, no, that's not how this works. You're painting my army for yourself, since I couldn't care less if it's painted or not. This is for your benefit, not mine, so have at it.



Anyway, I notice a lot of people in these threads start going on and on about the "three color minimum", too, but I know for a fact that if anyone did do that you would still bitch because they clearly aren't putting enough effort into it. Three colors wouldn't be good enough for you either, so why should I bother with it at all, especially if I don't have to, since I'm going to have to listen to your bitching either way?

Sidstyler wrote:
Anyway, I notice a lot of people in these threads start going on and on about the "three color minimum", too, but I know for a fact that if anyone did do that you would still bitch because they clearly aren't putting enough effort into it. Three colors wouldn't be good enough for you either, so why should I bother with it at all, especially if I don't have to, since I'm going to have to listen to your bitching either way?

While I agree in principle, a decent three color job really is pretty quick and looks much better than primer black or bare plastic grey. An ork with green skin, brown armor/pants, and a metal weapon looks dramatically better than a primed ork.

I view painting requirements the same way I view adult swim at a pool: a great way to give some people what they want, and serve their interests, but there's nothing wrong with allowing more people to play at other events.

the_Armyman wrote:
Of course you don't. That's the trick to being holier-than-thou:

I still dont know what the feth you are talking about .
Not enough calcium intake?

All i know is you are getting angry at me for telling you to accept the other type of players that exists
that didnt get into warhammer for painting. Thats also why i kept refering to the dakka poll , so you know
im not making up these "players that plays warhammer for gaming aspect "

Do we understand each other atleast at this point?

Polonius wrote:While I agree in principle, a decent three color job really is pretty quick and looks much better than primer black or bare plastic grey. An ork with green skin, brown armor/pants, and a metal weapon looks dramatically better than a primed ork.

Agreed, but that wasn't the point. If someone did slap three colors on their models so they would be "painted", they would still get complaints because they aren't detailed enough, and people would still be demanding that they put more time and effort into their army because it's insulting to them to play such a horrendously painted army.

You can't win, unless you're a Golden Demon level painter, and even then you see tools left and right going over your work with a fine tooth comb looking for imperfections. "OMFG IS THAT A MOLD LINE?!!!?"

BlackSpike wrote:To continue the comparisons of 'Ardboy vs Golden Demon, i've just checked the 2008 Golden Demon rules.
Some entries (Units, specifically) state that the units must be game-legal.
This leads me to believe that although the competition is judged on the painting quality, there is a basic level of game-based qualification, that although it does not affect the points, must be met to enter the competition.

IMHO, 'ArdBoyz could work the same way, with the points being awarded for actual battle results, but with a basic painting-based entry requirement of "Army must be at lest 3-colour painted"

What I'm saying is , if you force a paint requirement on an 'ard Boyz type event then you should also force a force organization chart on Gold Demons. You know 1 HQ and 2 troops to be a single entry also a entry point value must be in effect , say 1000 pt per entry. And o yea they must be on the base supplied with the model.

Sounds crazy ? So do you people that want to have a paint requirement in a GAMERS tourny.

While 3-colors minimum seems like a reasonable requirement to you, that doesn't mean everyone shares that opinion. Personally, while I think that having (well) painted armies is a great thing, I'd hate to prevent someone from participating in an event because their army isn't painted.

As for the people who can't understand why someone would play 40k and not ever paint, it's the same reason some people paint tons and tons of figs but never play. Different strokes for different folks.

I don't think having a minimum requirement of 3 games a week before you could paint a unit would go over really well.

Leave at least one event for people who don't want/don't have time to paint. Doing that doesn't hurt anyone and allows everyone to enjoy the hobby in their own way.

you know, EVERY SINGLE tournament i've ever been to, outside of 'ardboyz, has a minimum painting requirement.

and EVERY SINGLE one of those tournaments has armies show up that have unpainted miniatures in them.

They get a 0 for their paint score, and as such, are ineligible to win overall, though they can still win the best general prize and get a good share of the loot.

I've never seen a tournament where people were turned away because their army wasn't painted, even when its a tournament that requires it.

Horst wrote:the only tournaments i've EVER seen that have no painting component at all are the yearly GW 'ardboyz tournaments, and we all know thats nothing more than a ploy to sell miniatures.

It's all a ploy to sell miniatures.

I always enjoy a wide range of tournament requirements. Comp, no comp, painting, no painting, objectives, VPs, open list, closed list etc. While I always feel embarrassed when I show up with unpainted models, that doesn't mean that everyone does. As long as the event announces its requirements in advance, I hope each tournament is a unique experience. The lack of GTs and their army scores to counterbalance the 'Ard Boys is what makes this seem more of an issue.