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.

Jimsolo wrote:WYSIWYG is for competitive play. For friendly play, I don't care what you're running as what, so long as it's clear to both you and me what you've got.

I definitely agree with this 100%

I only play for fun with maybe a few tourny games but if it isnt on the model or isn't explained in detail i say hell no just because i have seen people try and switch around models that were not armed with what he or she said at first and change it. Maybe i play cheaters haha but still if it aint on the model then it aint there

Crom wrote:and now that WYSIWYG is required, it is just a ploy to get you to spend a ton of more money.

No, WYSIWYG was born out of independent tournamnets getting sick of people essentially cheating. It has nothing whatsoever to do with people spending more money - as someone who helps run tournaments for our club WYSIWYG is entirely to do with preventing arguments.

Very, very few tournaments, the non-shop ones, are run by shops to sell models. I'd hazard that none of them are. Theyre run because people want to see lots of awesome armies and a good weekend of gaming - not to make money from people having to comply with basic gaming etiquette in having the right models for their army.

As another example - do you complain about tournaments requiring (in the main) fully painted armies as "benig just a ploy to get you to spend a ton of more money [on paints]"? Hell we've even tightened up on the old stalwart "3 colours and based" because some people were, frankly, taking the p*** in just swiping the brush along their model 3 times and calling it good - is that "a ploy to get you to spend a ton of more money" by making you actually buy paints, and make the game more enjoyable for all concerned?

I started off using quite a lot of stand ins and I still sometimes play the "Big Shooters are Rokkits" bit but mostly because Black Reach only had big shooters and the more my army grows the less of an issue this is. Those I play with have no issues with stand ins because they would rather play with me now then wait around for me to get off my arse and sort out.

The more I play the more I like to have my army clearly modelled and painted and since I'm off to two tournaments this year I've spent quite a bit of time making sure my whole army is nice and shiny.

I in fact recommend using stand ins to new players/new codex for the whole "Try before you buy" reason. You may have read about how a Kan Wall is a great build and want to try it out so you grab your 3 kanz you have and 3 nids/tau suits/marine dreads all the right base size and scale but then find out you find the whole foot slog army not to your taste and enjoy the speed freak approach after you borrow a few rhinos. In my opinion this should never be discouraged as it allows players to find out what they like and build an army which they find awesome.

There is a limit. Using stand ins to gain advantage due to size/los or any other reason is childish as well as using stand ins because you decided to tailor your army at the last minute as soon as you see mine is not on.

Really for me WYSIWYG is that your model has the correct base size (even for conversions) and if you have special models with different weapons in units at least have something that isn't just a bolter marine.

nosferatu1001 wrote:

Crom wrote:and now that WYSIWYG is required, it is just a ploy to get you to spend a ton of more money.

No, WYSIWYG was born out of independent tournamnets getting sick of people essentially cheating. It has nothing whatsoever to do with people spending more money - as someone who helps run tournaments for our club WYSIWYG is entirely to do with preventing arguments.

Very, very few tournaments, the non-shop ones, are run by shops to sell models. I'd hazard that none of them are. Theyre run because people want to see lots of awesome armies and a good weekend of gaming - not to make money from people having to comply with basic gaming etiquette in having the right models for their army.

As another example - do you complain about tournaments requiring (in the main) fully painted armies as "benig just a ploy to get you to spend a ton of more money [on paints]"? Hell we've even tightened up on the old stalwart "3 colours and based" because some people were, frankly, taking the p*** in just swiping the brush along their model 3 times and calling it good - is that "a ploy to get you to spend a ton of more money" by making you actually buy paints, and make the game more enjoyable for all concerned?

To be honest, with the ability to magnetize your plastics these days it is easy enough to swap out pieces and parts. You cannot really magnetize pewter models, I have tried, and it doesn't work as well or at all like it does with the plastics. Boxed sets do not give you all options and if you want them, you either have to 1) mod your spec and heavy weapons with magnets to be able to swap them all out, or 2) buy more models and more sprues to get all the options. Why can't GW just put all the options in the boxed set and make it easier for the user to get WYSIWYG.

I haven't played in tournaments in years and really no desire to. The OP didn't mention anything of tournament play, and generally the tournaments I played in before previously you had to submit a copy of your army list to the refs and people running the game, and they were considered a non biased third party.

The pain thing is ridiculous in comparison and that is totally up to the tournament. However, again the OP said nothing about tournament. Would you deny your friend from using flat primer-ed base coated models because they aren't painted.

I already stated WYSIWYG is really only justifiable in tournament play, but it is still also a method of getting you to spend more money. Otherwise GW would put all weapons and equipment options in every boxed set so the user can run 5 missile launchers, for 5 heavy bolters, or use all melta guns. It is the same reason printers no longer come with cables, because they want you to buy the accessory, there is more profit margin in it. It is in fact a business model.

I have slowly been modifying my older stuff with plastic bits off of ebay and magnets to make them WYSIWYG but mainly because I think the idea is cool. Back when I quit war gaming the Internet was all dial up, sites like this didn't exist (not a lot of resources on modding, painting, etc) and I don't think green stuff or modeling putty really made it to our area as even a concept until the mid 90s. Back in the early 90s most of us didn't have access to great online resources like this website. When I saw you can magnetize your models and swap out parts I was like, wow I never thought of that. I don't think anyone thought of that back in the early 90s, at least not in my area.

So, with some work you can make WYSIWYG flexible if you are willing to spend the time and money to do so. Granted earth magnets are pretty cheap.


tl;dr - WYSIWYG is good for tournament play to mitigate cheating, otherwise it is a marketing tactic used by many other companies to sell more accessories.

Crom wrote: Otherwise GW would put all weapons and equipment options in every boxed set so the user can run 5 missile launchers, for 5 heavy bolters, or use all melta guns.

Do you realise how big, and how wasteful, the Marine Devastator box would be if it included 4 of every single heavy weapon?

There are various reasons that they don't include all of the options in the box. In some case, I suspect it's down to time constraints when they're sculpting a new range. In others, there is indeed no discernable reason (Genestealer sprue, I'm looking at you)... But in the main, it's to do with just how much will fit on the sprue, and how many sprues will fit in a box.

It's not always as simple as just cramming more stuff in there.

It is the same reason printers no longer come with cables, because they want you to buy the accessory, there is more profit margin in it.

I suspect that may have been a temporary fad, killed off by the advent of USB connectivity. The last couple of printers I bought have both come with cables. There's no need to squeeze an extra 50c out of you from a USB cable when they have you on the ink anyway.

WYSIWYG is good for tournament play to mitigate cheating, otherwise it is a marketing tactic used by many other companies to sell more accessories.

So you keep saying. But if GW are using it as a marketing tactic, again, they're doing a terrible job of it, since it's not even a general rule.

If it were truly a marketing tactic, it would state in bold writing in the rulebook that every model must be completely WYSIWYG. It doesn't.

Well, I do contradicit my self with this rule sometimes, and my friend catches me on it. But my friend's Lemartes is missing an arm, so we all say he should have WS 1 because his Crozius arm is missing

what i did was give a sargent a Chainsword, doublesided it and painted it like a power sword, blue with lighting, so i can say its a power wepon or a fancy chainsword.
No probs so far, but the people i play with aren't complete dicks and have a smile on there face when they play
People that wont play with you because their brain carnt adapt to a flamer being a melta should GTFO, and you should tell them that to


Automatically Appended Next Post:

insaniak wrote:

not even a general rule.

Bang jack pot.
Also how do wysiwyg freaks deal with Digital wepons lol

Well some Marine heads come with Optical Implants,as in the one in the SM Commander set,and on most vehicles.

RogalDorn69 wrote:Also how do wysiwyg freaks deal with Digital wepons lol

There are a whole bunch of things that can't really be easily represented on the model, and always have been. Even the most ardent WYSIWYG supporter is usually realistic enough to draw the line at those sorts of items.


Although having said that, GW have had at least one model in their range in the past that did have digiweapons modelled... was one of the RT-era Terminator Inquisitors, IIRC.

insaniak wrote:

RogalDorn69 wrote:Also how do wysiwyg freaks deal with Digital wepons lol

There are a whole bunch of things that can't really be easily represented on the model, and always have been. Even the most ardent WYSIWYG supporter is usually realistic enough to draw the line at those sorts of items.


Although having said that, GW have had at least one model in their range in the past that did have digiweapons modelled... was one of the RT-era Terminator Inquisitors, IIRC.

Or you can hack up a Jokaero Weaponsmith

I like to be notified of whats what in the begining and have it written down. That way WYSIWYG plays a factor, but isnt the main concern. Im still kinda new to the game and squads marines with 3 of this and 2 of that and 1 of these... I does get confusing for me. But im ok with being lenient to a certain degree.

Chimera proxing in for a baneblade is a little to much.

But maybe that why i play necrons, only unit in the army that has options is the lord. Keeps it simple for me and my opponent. Even then though then the only stuff you can "see" is the staff, warscythe, resorb and destroyer body so really simple.

I always modal the options I want on to my modal,unless it is impossible,for example,Tyranid Acid Blood,and bio-plasma,regeneration,Hive Tyrant Hive Commander,Indescribable Horror,Old Adversary,Thorax Swarms,Armoured Shells,SM Hellfire rounds,Locator beacons,Artificer Armour(I make this painted better to compensate).It is all written on my army list,and WYSIWYG,so I have no problems,

Crom wrote:To be honest, with the ability to magnetize your plastics these days it is easy enough to swap out pieces and parts. You cannot really magnetize pewter models, I have tried, and it doesn't work as well or at all like it does with the plastics. Boxed sets do not give you all options and if you want them, you either have to 1) mod your spec and heavy weapons with magnets to be able to swap them all out, or 2) buy more models and more sprues to get all the options. Why can't GW just put all the options in the boxed set and make it easier for the user to get WYSIWYG.

So you want the marine devastator box to have 20 weapons in it? Do you realise how expensive a box that would be? Instead of e.g. 4 weapons you dont use per box there would be 16 weapons you dont use. Oh, and i fyou want a 10 man squad of them, thats ANOTHER 20 weapons youre not using. That way madness lies.

They *are* better at putting weapons in the box - see the GK and DE releases. However its only because the sprue tech has advanced enough, thanks to computerised positioning and cutting, that they can put that density of plastics into one frame. As an experiment for yourself compare the SM tactical box sprue to the GK PA sprues, and notice the sheer density difference in them.

Crom wrote:I haven't played in tournaments in years and really no desire to. The OP didn't mention anything of tournament play, and generally the tournaments I played in before previously you had to submit a copy of your army list to the refs and people running the game, and they were considered a non biased third party.

Yes, but WYSIWYG was still required. The refs dont want to have to go over and check every game to explain what each flamer actually is a melta, or that THIS squads autocannon is a lascannon but those over there arent, and so on - thats a complete waste of time. Have you ever run tournaments, and understood just how busy you get while working for free? I have *far* better things to do, such as admiring awesome armies and answering rules queries, with my time than help out someone who hasnt the courtesy to model their armies with the correct equipment. It also shows some respect for the modelling side of the hobby - this is a 3 part hobby, the game is only one element.

I help to / actually run tuornaments regularly, and WYSIWYG (in 40k and to a lesser extent WHFB) is an absolute requirement of any tournament I run or help to run. It is not worth the pain.

Crom wrote:The pain thing is ridiculous in comparison and that is totally up to the tournament. However, again the OP said nothing about tournament. Would you deny your friend from using flat primer-ed base coated models because they aren't painted.

No, and I'd be more forgiving in a pick up game - with friends. With a pick up against someone i dont really know? WYSIWYG is a massive help there.

The paint thing is NOT rediculous in comparison, btw, its totally apt. You dont need painted models or wysiwyg to run a tournament - however both help IMMENSELY in the enjoyment of all participants. If you dont want to paint your army - fine, I dont want you playing as unpainted armies GREATLY detract from the primary purpose of playing / running a tournament (for me, at least) - actually seeing some cool armies and having some great games. Ditto non-WYSIWYG. It's tiring for opponents trying to remember exactly what is what (unless its cool - rule of cool IS applicable here, see enjoyment factor above, and the fact this is a 3 part hobby - and ive seen some amazing armies with people actually taking photos of their conversions, with the appropriate "GW standard" unit / model / gun next to it, for the opponent to have. Awesome) and when youre playing 3 / 4 games in a day thats added uneccesary hassle.

Crom wrote:I already stated WYSIWYG is really only justifiable in tournament play, but it is still also a method of getting you to spend more money.

BY WHO!!!

Seriously - WHO is it that is trying to get you to spend more money? The bigger tourney organisers, who by and large *dont* own gaming stores? GW, who dont run tht many tournaments at all compared to the indys, and took the wysiwyg idea from the indys? You see a consipiracy here, and keep repeating this blindly, yet have not offered *any* clue as to who you think is behind it!

WYSIWYG was instituted in tourneys to make them run smoothly and be more enjoyable for everyone. Thats it. Thats the reason.

Crom wrote: Otherwise GW would put all weapons and equipment options in every boxed set so the user can run 5 missile launchers, for 5 heavy bolters, or use all melta guns. It is the same reason printers no longer come with cables, because they want you to buy the accessory, there is more profit margin in it. It is in fact a business model.

1) See above. Your idea is not based in logic. 2) Printers do come with cables - they didnt used to because you had about 4 different connection standards across machines, from LPT to serial to SCSI - 1. Bundling cables then was similar to your idea of putting every weapon in the box - 3/4 would go unused. Or youd have to put adapators in instead, although not all cables could be adapted.

Crom wrote:tl;dr - WYSIWYG is good for tournament play to mitigate cheating, otherwise it is a marketing tactic used by many other companies to sell more accessories.

And, again. It isnt a "marketing tactic" - its not even an actual rule in the rulebook. If it were a marketing ploy dont you think GW would actually make it a rule? Theyve had 25 years to think of it.

If both player agree on the line about WYSIWYG, then I do not see the problem.

But do not bring an army with proxys to your FLGS and play vs someone for the 1st time and expect him to agree with your proxies. When I play vs someone for the 1st time, I will not being any proxies. If I get to know the guy better, I'll as him for a little proxy here and there, but never something major (sluggas boyz to shoota boyz for example).


So overall, don,t expect strangers to allow proxies, make sure you make arrangment with your opponent about proxies before seeing his army and arrive with your list already done when youa re using proxies to prevent possible cheating. And if your opponent wants WYSIWYG, then either do it WYSIWYG or get another opponent.

Ok some one may have mentioned this but there is proxying and there is count as. My guard army has a count as Straken in it. He is decked out in the right wargear and even has some cybernetic part but he is far from the model sold by GW. Just because he isnt the "proper" model does not mean it isnt what i claim he is. Then there is the "oh so your playing ork horde well im going to have all of my little army men trade their rocket launchers for heavy machine guns and my meltas for flamers."


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also "THE MOST IMPORTANT RULE" if both sides agree to it anything goes.

insaniak wrote:

Crom wrote: Otherwise GW would put all weapons and equipment options in every boxed set so the user can run 5 missile launchers, for 5 heavy bolters, or use all melta guns.

Do you realise how big, and how wasteful, the Marine Devastator box would be if it included 4 of every single heavy weapon?

There are various reasons that they don't include all of the options in the box. In some case, I suspect it's down to time constraints when they're sculpting a new range. In others, there is indeed no discernable reason (Genestealer sprue, I'm looking at you)... But in the main, it's to do with just how much will fit on the sprue, and how many sprues will fit in a box.

It's not always as simple as just cramming more stuff in there.

It is the same reason printers no longer come with cables, because they want you to buy the accessory, there is more profit margin in it.

I suspect that may have been a temporary fad, killed off by the advent of USB connectivity. The last couple of printers I bought have both come with cables. There's no need to squeeze an extra 50c out of you from a USB cable when they have you on the ink anyway.

WYSIWYG is good for tournament play to mitigate cheating, otherwise it is a marketing tactic used by many other companies to sell more accessories.

So you keep saying. But if GW are using it as a marketing tactic, again, they're doing a terrible job of it, since it's not even a general rule.

If it were truly a marketing tactic, it would state in bold writing in the rulebook that every model must be completely WYSIWYG. It doesn't.

big and wasteful? Those boxes aren't ever full and can easily fit a few more sprues in them, and the plastic they use is dirt cheap.

I guess we will have to agree to disagree at this point

1) The molds are NOT cheap. As in, £30 - 50k per sprue "not cheap"

Argument refuted

2) So you dont think its wasteful to include 16 uneccessary weapons? You have a different idea of "wasteful" to the rest of the world. Especially if you want a 10 man unit, you've just wasted 36 weapons!

3) You do realise you missed the entire "plastic technology has improved" part? To get the density you want they would have to redesign both sprues OR include a new one. All to placate some people who cant be bothered to model their models correctly....

Agreeign to disagree implies one side has some form of logic behind their argument. You dont.

You havent even been able to answer where wysiwyg comes from - and it certainly isnt GW.

ummm....WYSIWYG does come from GW.

p 47. BRB box in bottom left of page

"Character models in particular tend to have a lot of options as to what weapons and wargear they can use-given in the army list in their codex. THE RULE IS THAT SUCH EQUIPMENT MUST BE VISUALLY REPRESENTED ON A MODEL SO YOUR OPPONENT CAN CLEARLY SEE WHAT THEY ARE FACING. This concept is often referred to as WYSIWYG..."

It then goes on to state that from time to time its ok to test out different things (Power Sword is a CCW etc) albeit Tournaments may be strict about it. It also states that most people will be fairly accommodating so long as you a clear at the beginning of the game.

Honestly I have not had much of a problem with this, most everyone I play against has a fully or near fully WYSIWYG army. But then again I build a few interchangeable lists and then build an army...so when I glue a model together hes gonna get used with that wargear come hell or high water

and i use shredders!

I personally have no problem in a friendly game against someone I know having all flamers be meltaguns or whatever....but I will not accept this in the tournaments I run, and I would find it mildly off putting in my first couple games against a new player to the store.
we had one big issue with WYSYWIG...we have one player who just loves to have his C:SM army to count as every kind of space marine under the sun. Now C:SM to BA, BT, even DA is not much of a problem....and then I heard this
"So these tactical squads are Grey Hunters, the special and heavy weapons are both meltaguns, and the sergeant is just a dude with a PF" A little part of me died that day.

I always try and kit out my models with the exact equipment they'll be using in game (when I start playing, anyway). Though when it comes to little things like grenades I'm a lot more forgiving. As far as I know Marines are equipped with Frag and Krak grenades as standard, so I don't see much point in adding the parts (I have done, though). Melta bombs on the other hand are more specialised equipment, so if I want a sergeant to have melta bombs I'll stick some on him.

Lightcavalier wrote:so when I glue a model together hes gonna get used with that wargear come hell or high water

I like the way you think!

Light - yet notice how it only applies to characters? So its not a general rule? As we've been saying all along?

General WYSIWYG rules are from indy tournaments.

ok i see that point (there is no counter to it)
but by extension of your logic you would not need to model anything that is not wargear on a character. So i could have a squad of 10 identical tactical marines, but 1 has a meltagun, 1 has a multi melta.

Anyway as i see it, if they provide a model for it you should try to use it (I understand testing stuff out etc, but there is a limit...eventually you should get the model)


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Sorry I was wrong...found a rebuttal.
Upgrade Characters defined (2nd bullet point, first column p 47)

"Upgrade characters are fielded as part of a unit from the start of a game, representing a squad leader or unit champion, such as a space marine veteran sergeant. they do not have an entry of their own and are effectively just another trooper in their unit, with enhanced characteristics, and perhaps a wider selection of wargear and weapons choices."

So...according to the rule book Characters such as ICs, Special Characters, and squad upgrade characters (like sergeants/syrabites, etc) should adhere t WYSIWYG.
Is it really too much more to ask that 2 models out of the remaining 9 have appropriate wargear?

You're missing the point - GW themselves have not made wysiwyg a general, applies-tto-all-models rule. This counters Croms assertion that wysiwyg is a money making scam.

Even for competative play, I believe that as long as the model is distinguishable in a specific way, not necessarily "This is a melta gun, this is a bloter, this is a combi-plas"

I too like to change my lists....

What about this. If the vertical (Slanted) part of the base were painted a different color.

IE. I have ten marines. 8 of them have a regular brown base. One has a melta gun, that is represented by a "Yellow ring" and one has a plasma gun, represented by a "blue ring" around the base.

Would you allow that in competative play?

That isn't WYSIWYG. It is a great way to distinguish squads/sergeants/special weapons but isn't changing what the model has. It would be incredibly helpful in a tourney if you have heavily converted/dynamic pose models where the weapon isn't clear, but you still need to have a 'bolter model', a 'plasma gun' model, and a 'meltagun model'.

Example: I have converted my orks and gave them all weapons I molded myself. All the sluggas look alike, same with shootas/rokkits/skorchas. When you look at my models, it isn't abundantly clear what model is what but there is a distinct difference between the model loadouts. I tell you all the red rims are sluggas, blue are shootas, and orange are skorchas.

-cgmckenzie

cgmckenzie wrote:That isn't WYSIWYG. -cgmckenzie

I know, but WYSIWYG is really a rule WE enforce, right? If we worked as a community to make it clear that WYSIWYG down to the last detail, doesn't need to be the norm, we could all save money and have alot more fun.

Out of control scenario - WYSIWYG Tourney: "I don't see any grenades on your Assault Space Marine, so you dont to use them in your assault phase, and your Initiative is now 1 for assaulting through cover..."


This isn't where we are going is it?

Connor McKane wrote:Out of control scenario - WYSIWYG Tourney: "I don't see any grenades on your Assault Space Marine, so you dont to use them in your assault phase, and your Initiative is now 1 for assaulting through cover..."

The common WYSIWYG standard is, and has always been, upgrades must be modelled. This is the only standard that makes sense since it tells you what you need to be able to know from looking at the models.

Not modelling upgrades leaves you missing important information.
Modelling non-upgrade equipment is redundant.

Playing guns as proxy isn't WYSIWYG, even if you paint up the base special colors. A boltgun will never be meltagun no matter how you paint it up.

-cgmckenzie