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.

Good for you

nkelsch wrote:

Norn King wrote:I think an oppenent should, if possible, put a painted army on the table. If, for example, he has just bought the army, its not a problem, as some people simply do not have the time to paint there army. I agree with the above comment. Some people should really lose the elitist attitude, it ruins the fun of gaming.

Being unable to distinguish which squad is which because they all look the same and have no markings and not being able to distinguish wargear quickly and easily because all I see is unclear greys instead of painted models with distinguished weapons ruins the fun of gaming to me.

Burdening your opponent with things that make the game harder to play is gamesmanship. In casual play, ask permission... Keep your unfair burdens out of competitive play. Appearance issues directly harm 'ard boys ability to be considered a valid fair competition and many people have reported issues where the game broke down due to unpainted models.

Don't pretend it is never a burden and has zero impact as that is untrue. At least you can do is give your opponent a chance to opt out of a legitimately degraded gaming experience which they may not enjoy without taking it personally or calling them names. Just find some like-minded gamers who don't mind the impact and you will be fine.

Im sorry how is it hard to distinguish a plasma gun from a boltgun painted or unpainted? or lascannon from multimelta its really not hard... and to be fair you just shoot the unit and then he allocates his wounds so its the owners problem.

As with most people i prefer seeing a painted army on the field but i will never refuse a game against someone who wishes to field unpainted armies or proxies as i prefer the gaming side to the hobby and take every chance i have in my spare time to play games.

I'm fine with it. I'm a slow painter myself, and I can always assume the other player just bought an item and assembled it minutes before hand.

Las wrote:Unpainted models are lame. Acceptable in most cases, but always lame.

Agreed.

Models play the same painted or not. I like playing. Why does this thread keep getting made? Feels like I see it every couple of months. Getting kinda silly I think.

I don't really care, as long as I can tell what's what. That said, seeing fully painted armies on the table is impressive and there is a point of pride to put down a fully decently painted army not to mention when other gamers compliment your paint scheme and painting. Totally worth the hours of painting.

sometimes i really enjoy painting, but for the most part, i find it a chore. i have some facility at it and can usually make the model look how i want it to.

the only reason i do it is because i want to have a great looking army across from my opponent. it's just a question of personal pride and principle to try and field a good-looking army.

for the most part, i'm pretty easy going and won't bust balls over unpainted models, but here's the thing:

i work a 40-60 hour week plus family time, and yet I can find time to paint and base my bersekers or work on my wraithlords. this tells me that people who can't get their models to a rudimentary tabletop are either lazy or just don't care enough to make painting them a priority, which is too bad.

i understand the argument that people can enjoy the hobby how they want, but if i put a decently painted force that I took the time to work on as best as I can across the table from an unemployed dude with a half-assembled field of grey, it's kind of a slap in the face, and makes me feel like i wasted my time.

by way of imperfect analogy: if you have an idea that dinner should be well-prepared and enjoyed with friends and good conversation, and you invite someone over to a soiree where you've painstakingly made a nice menu, selected some great wines and music and guests who you think will get along, and he shows up with a big mac and a mickey of smirnoff and asks if you have some coke to chase it down with...

Playing with unpainted models is fine to me, as long as they are going to be painted at some time in the foreseeable future. I understand if someone wants to take their time painting models nicely, instead of making it a rushjob just to play the game.

I've been slowly working on getting my 2000 pt Tyranid army painted so that when i go to play with my friends the games can look better when we take pictures of the dramatic moments. All in all though I can't see a reason for someone to not play, simply because his army is not painted yet. If I had just dropped $750 on a shiny new Orc horde I think I'd like to get to play it, rather than waiting until I'd finished painting it (seeing as it's taking FOREVER for me to finish these gaunts). And if an opponent ever told me he wouldn't play me due to unpainted models, I'd call him something entertaining (at least to those who heard me).

Las wrote:Unpainted models are lame. Acceptable in most cases, but always lame.

I agree with you.

Amphsix wrote:Playing with unpainted models is fine to me, as long as they are going to be painted at some time in the foreseeable future. I understand if someone wants to take their time painting models nicely, instead of making it a rushjob just to play the game.

Basically this. As long as you are painting and making progress, even slow progress, then it's fine. Not everyone has the time, patience or ability to paint a large force quickly. But if you're not bothering at all, then you're in the wrong hobby.

I think everyone would agree that they would rather play with fully painted armies. However, there is also the time constraints of the real world to consider. I personally have c3000pts worth of minatures lying around mostly unpainted. I intend to paint them, but as a full time student I just don't really have the time to paint them as quickly as I would like, as when not in uni I tend to be writing essays or somesuch. As such, I usually have to field some models unpainted to make it a viable game. If I was going to play someone and they refused because I had unpainted modelsm, I would find them to be eliteiste, and I would probably think they were a bit of a prat, for forgetting that it is only a game and that I actually have a life outside of the hobby, which tends to be more high priority.

I agree that at tournaments demanding a fully painted army is a good thing, but in a friendly match? No, jog on.

I don't mind playing an Unpainted army at all. I pay to get my stuff painted now, because I never have time to do so with my work, and homelife, but I enjoy the game. I would never have an issue playing an unpainted force, tournament or otherwise.

I dont reallly mind unpainted models, but terrain irks me. It has to be of this standard: [img] http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=127140067374941&set=a.127138264041788.33526.100711616684453&type=3&theater

Gandair wrote:Models play the same painted or not. I like playing. Why does this thread keep getting made? Feels like I see it every couple of months. Getting kinda silly I think.

This has been proven to be false. If I have two units of unpainted AoBR boys next to each other, it is impossible to know where one unit ends and another begins. This happened for multiple people at 'ard boyz and the game broke down, especially in cc. People lost where they shouldn't have and games were influenced directly due to unpainted models with no squad markings or distinguishing marks.

And it is much harder to visually distinguish weapons when the model is all one color with no distinguishing accents. Slows down the game and is a burden. In timed games, burdens are unfair and unreasonable. This game has a large visual component in choosing tactics and making decisions. Having one person have to work harder to constantly decipher grey models from 3-4feet away to make decisions is a burden. Forcing burdens on opponents is poor sportsmanship.

I find it hard to believe it's that much easier to distinguish between squads when they're painted, at least when talking about Ork boys like in your example, because they all look the same and kinda bleed together whether they're painted or not. And Orks aren't really one of those armies where squad markings really make a whole lot of sense, in all the studio pictures of Ork models they don't really have any of that.

What do you expect from Tyranid players for that matter? Painting little armbands on them, or little spots of color on their heads? Yeah, that'll look good.

Oh, and you realize that it's very easy to solve your problem by just painting the base rings, right? One squad of Orks has red rings, another squad has blue rings, etc. For special weapons you could just paint the name of the weapon on the base to help single him out. So it's not really "impossible" or "proven".

Sidstyler wrote:

Oh, and you realize that it's very easy to solve your problem by just painting the base rings, right? One squad of Orks has red rings, another squad has blue rings, etc. For special weapons you could just paint the name of the weapon on the base to help single him out. So it's not really "impossible" or "proven".

And yet they still don't do it so the game breaks down... in tourneys no less!

The issue is making the game easier for your opponent to play and clearly distinguishing things requires a person to 'care about his opponent's experience' and 'willing to make an effort with his own models'.

When someone is unwilling to do either, it shows his selfish attitude which sets the tone for the game. If all people who played with unpainted models clearly considered the impacts and then took steps to mitigate them, there wouldn't be an issue... but they don't and it is. They are too busy screaming 'My hobby, my rights!' than being objective and saying 'gee you might be right about how you can't see the differences in my squads and it is hard to distinguish parts of a model when they all bluur together as a grey silhouette under fluorescent lights... maybe I will adopt a base-ring system to make sure I am not gaining an unfair advantage by using unpainted models, especially in this 'ard boyz tourney. Personally, I have never met a person who even attempted to distinguish models and units with unpainted.. I also have never met a person with a 100% WYSIWYG unpainted army either because the two usually go hand-in-hand which makes playing the game even harder.

People cry about time and their lives but they could put base rings on all their models in about 20 minutes and make people's lives easier, but they don't because they simply don't care about anyone but themselves.

Which is why I recommend finding people who want similar things and playing with them. If you want to be accepted everywhere by everyone... painted and WYSIWYG is how you do it.

Kai wrote:... If I had just dropped $750 on a shiny new Orc horde I think I'd like to get to play it, rather than waiting until I'd finished painting it

Norn King wrote: If, for example, he has just bought the army.

I think that these kind of statements are representative of a large part of the "problem" (if you agree it is one) of unpainted armies. For many folks, buying an army all at once is a surefire way to become overwhelmed by the amount of painting you have to do. Not to mention the time spent assembling all the figs which -if one unit was bought at a time- could otherwise have been spent painting a few units.

Whether it's the "desire to acquire", the sheer number of figures required for a "standard" game, or just a disinterest by most folks in playing smaller games I don't know. What I do know is theres a lot of folks at my FLGS with huge armies that are all, or mostly, grey and it is flatly uninspiring.

"flatly uninspiring"

This sums it up better than anyone else has.

Gandair wrote:Models play the same painted or not. I like playing. Why does this thread keep getting made?

It is the never ending quest to be the coolest nerd...

As much as I'm into painting and conversion over all else in the hobby, I just haven't had the time to paint as much as I used to.

I really have no problem with unpainted stuff. I'd prefer it if things were painted, but I understand that not everyone is able to dedicate enough time to get everything done.

nkelsch wrote:

Sidstyler wrote:

Oh, and you realize that it's very easy to solve your problem by just painting the base rings, right? One squad of Orks has red rings, another squad has blue rings, etc. For special weapons you could just paint the name of the weapon on the base to help single him out. So it's not really "impossible" or "proven".

And yet they still don't do it so the game breaks down... in tourneys no less!

The issue is making the game easier for your opponent to play and clearly distinguishing things requires a person to 'care about his opponent's experience' and 'willing to make an effort with his own models'.

When someone is unwilling to do either, it shows his selfish attitude which sets the tone for the game. If all people who played with unpainted models clearly considered the impacts and then took steps to mitigate them, there wouldn't be an issue... but they don't and it is. They are too busy screaming 'My hobby, my rights!' than being objective and saying 'gee you might be right about how you can't see the differences in my squads and it is hard to distinguish parts of a model when they all bluur together as a grey silhouette under fluorescent lights... maybe I will adopt a base-ring system to make sure I am not gaining an unfair advantage by using unpainted models, especially in this 'ard boyz tourney. Personally, I have never met a person who even attempted to distinguish models and units with unpainted.. I also have never met a person with a 100% WYSIWYG unpainted army either because the two usually go hand-in-hand which makes playing the game even harder.

People cry about time and their lives but they could put base rings on all their models in about 20 minutes and make people's lives easier, but they don't because they simply don't care about anyone but themselves.

Which is why I recommend finding people who want similar things and playing with them. If you want to be accepted everywhere by everyone... painted and WYSIWYG is how you do it.

I would not accept you. You have some ordasity to say your better at this hobby because you have paint figures (No, you did not say that directly but thats what all the BS meant) I know lots of people with paint armys and they would never have an attititude like you sir... they love playing the game, and if they play agianst an unpainted army. Makes no differeance to them. I could not a agree more about WYSIWYG. But turning people away for a friendly game because they have un-painted models is and elitest and fething stupid attitude. You know what, mabye you should just go and collect stamps. Because you'll be better off doing that.

I sersiouly cant deal with clowns like him

can't spell either, but that's ok

I can understand where you're coming from though.

I would consider it a bit elitist to be told to feth off, and come back when everything is painted.

Base-ringing WOULD be very helpful though, for distinguishing squads. It's not an issue with my waagh, as each boyz mob is a different clan, and therefore a different colour (and are also distinguishable by hat... The unpainted ones have a dab of the clan colour on them until i can get them finished) but with a horde of gaunts from several units, backed by tervigons... I've seen more shenanigans played by merging units, and somehow having one at full strength and the other get whittled down, so baseringing is a bright move.

nkelsch wrote:This has been proven to be false. If I have two units of unpainted AoBR boys next to each other, it is impossible to know where one unit ends and another begins

Is it easier or more difficult to distinguish two groups of identically or nearly-identically painted AoBR boyz? Or a bunch of dissimilar models that don't have any similar markings?

I paint my Thousand Sons in the same pattern because that's how they appear in the fluff. I make the effort to keep them separate from one another during the game. I assume people playing with unpainted models are capable of doing the same.

I don't really care one way or the other.

What I do care about is some people making themselves masters over what is the more important part of our hobby, and monopolizing "the right way" of participating in it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

malfred wrote:

Augustus wrote:Painting isn't something done solely for the enjoyment of the owner, it's also a necessary for the opponent.

There is a WYSIWYG functional purpose to it, beyond the merit of the artistic virtue, to tell squads apart and identify separate units.

Painting is a core part of the hobby, just like army construction, the core rules, the use of miniatures and the use of dice, it can not be simply divorced as a separate optional piece.

From the other thread:

Augustus wrote:How many battle reports in white dwarf are done with unpainted figures? How many images of new GW product come with just images of the bare metal models? How many examples in the rulebook show bare metal or plastic figures? None.

ParatrooperSimon wrote:I'm pretty sure this has probaley come up on numerous ocations. But I'd thought I would ask

The question is in the title

The last time it was controversial, and a little heated. Some posters vehemently defending painting as optional, under a vague strawman guise of tolerance for several pages, and later exposed as defending their own viewpoint instead (because they liked to play in public unpainted and demand the same respect) when their gallery was filled with unpainted images.

I don't mind unpainted armies. Go on, check my gallery.

Me neither, check mine...and the Pbase too.

Ascalam wrote:can't spell either, but that's ok

I can understand where you're coming from though.

I would consider it a bit elitist to be told to feth off, and come back when everything is painted.

Base-ringing WOULD be very helpful though, for distinguishing squads. It's not an issue with my waagh, as each boyz mob is a different clan, and therefore a different colour (and are also distinguishable by hat... The unpainted ones have a dab of the clan colour on them until i can get them finished) but with a horde of gaunts from several units, backed by tervigons... I've seen more shenanigans played by merging units, and somehow having one at full strength and the other get whittled down, so baseringing is a bright move.

well to be fair, I was typing fast, but spelling armies with armys is sort of bad... lol. Also, do not use personal attacks one me, saying my spelling is bad is hardly on topic. So if you have nothing to say about wargaming, just go away and read a book or something

I dont mind it at all. It usually depends on whether or not they are pieces with some sort of conversion though, because that means they've invested they're not just lazy. Personally, most of my army is painted or at least primed to the same color as my army so its less noticeable.

But if you invest in your models, I have no issue

ParatrooperSimon wrote:

Ascalam wrote:can't spell either, but that's ok

I can understand where you're coming from though.

I would consider it a bit elitist to be told to feth off, and come back when everything is painted.

Base-ringing WOULD be very helpful though, for distinguishing squads. It's not an issue with my waagh, as each boyz mob is a different clan, and therefore a different colour (and are also distinguishable by hat... The unpainted ones have a dab of the clan colour on them until i can get them finished) but with a horde of gaunts from several units, backed by tervigons... I've seen more shenanigans played by merging units, and somehow having one at full strength and the other get whittled down, so baseringing is a bright move.

well to be fair, I was typing fast, but spelling armies with armys is sort of bad... lol. Also, do not use personal attacks one me, saying my spelling is bad is hardly on topic. So if you have nothing to say about wargaming, just go away and read a book or something

Over-reacting much? If you're going to post on a forum you're expected to maintain a certain amount of readability and civility. It's in the forum rules.

http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/354859.page

For future reference the orkmoticon is usually used to show that the person is making a joke, or otherwise being frivilous. If i was making a personal attack on you, believe me you would know it. Asking you (however non-seriously) to spell straight is not a personal attack, if your posts are hard to follow or near unintelligable.

Telling other people to in effect 'feth off and go do something else' is a deal less civil than gently hinting that they might want to slow down a little and check their spelling, btw It's also the kind of behaviour you were decrying from the elitists that told you to 'feth off and do something else (paint)'...

you like apple, i like oranges. dont kill each other over it.

Some people paint for fun
some people play for fun

you have a painted army you can be proud of, we are very happy for you, but dont go over board by being a dick about it.
because we know, some do turn obnoxious with elitism.

also, warhammer forum... try to not fight over spelling mistakes.

ParatrooperSimon wrote:I'm pretty sure this has probaley come up on numerous ocations. But I'd thought I would ask

The question is in the title

I love it.

Would rather play against a good opponent with an unpainted army then a poor one with a well painted one.

Its the person across the table that makes it a great game. Not whether the army is painted or not.