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.

 Asmodai wrote:
I strongly prefer WYSIWYG and wouldn't field something non-WYSIWYG, even if it means that I don't field the most competitive possible option for a unit. Most of the people I play with are casual enough that there's no need to go with a 100% optimized army anyway. My Tactical Marines are a hodgepodge of options built from 2nd to 7th editions.

Exactly. WYSIWYG is more important than competitiveness, just build the list with the stuff you actually have models for.

I'd like to point out that my previous viperous comments were entirely comedic. Just saying. Actually when you read a post by DC you should probably ask yourself before you reply 'is DC trying to be funny?' and then go from there.

That being said I think Asmodai sums it up pretty good. WYSIWYG is alive and well. We enforce it on ourselves because we are terribly obsessed with toy soldiers and wanna make them look cool. It's like reverse penis measuring.

Oh yeah, that's a pretty tiny campaign badge freehand looks good. Check out my Farseers head gem. Seven colour fade, no biggie.... I'm seeing your mom, cough!

As long as it's uniform I don't really mind proxies, aka "every tac squad has melta/lascannon". That's easy to keep track of during a game. But if we're playing 2k and each squad has a different loadout proxied, I'm going to be annoyed and say as much. That's a favorite trick of TFG's for teleporting melta guns so unless I know the person I'm going to be suspicious. With so much going on in a 2000pt game, it can be quite difficult to keep track of who has what, especially since you need to remember your army too. This is why wysiwyg exists after all, so your opponent can identify things at a glance. Granted some armies like eldar or nids about all I'm going to know at a glance is big gun/little gun or shooty/stabby, but that still is an important detail that plays into your tactics. Having to ask what units have what also slows the game down, and with everyone's insistence on playing 2k anything that slows down the game should be avoided at all costs.

I try to avoid proxies wherever possible. I'm currently rebasing all my heavy weapons and deciding what kind of power weapon I want to model my officers with, so that's the one place I'm stuck with having to proxy a bit right now. I always make it consistent though to keep things simple. If guns are being proxied then they're all going to be the same type. Same with gear or close combat.

Lots of people in my area are still figuring out what they want to run in 8th so we've been seeing lots of proxies. I don't really care much, most of them are already starting to settle on what they like, or learning how to magnetize. With the constantly shifting meta of 8th I can't blame people for being unsure of what they want to build at first.

I also have to agree with WYSIWYG over comp.

I can raise my hand in the air and say I will choose an autocannon over any other option if it's available. And I will shoot those autocannons and love it even if I'm doing so at penalty because I moved. Even if you make all your saves, I shot you with an autocannon and it was awesome.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

Speaking of irony.

Let me summarize your argument:

"I want to field units that have the best weapons possible, but I don't want to do what other people have done and actually craft my models to represent the unit properly. I don't want to spend money, either."

Welcome to tabletop wargaming.

This is not a 'tournament' mindset. I dislike tournament play unless I know people in the tournament. This is one of the most basic tenets of the game: "Your units must be modeled in a way that represents what you are fielding". If using a pair of snips, a crafting knife, a file, and glue are 'too time consuming' then I think 'lazy' would be the appropriate word. But based on your attitude alone, you strike me as the guy that would exploit the confusion.

Now that's just funny...and sad, all at the same time.

I only need to know which models are which.

Otherwise wysiwyg is a waste of time.

I used to try to stick to it. But ive never seen anyone kitbash/model their relics. Ive never seen anyone get down to every combination of weapons and wargear.

You either care enough to do it 100% (nigh impossible) or its really not that important.

 ncshooter426 wrote:

Now that's just funny...and sad, all at the same time.

>Be you
>Come into thread insulting people
>Claim you don't have the time or effort to dedicate to properly constructing models
>Claim it's not important unless people are stupid
>Get mad when people call you lazy
>Pretend you are not the embodiment of TFG
>Call someone toxic
>Never have a single shred of self-awareness
>Double down

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 ncshooter426 wrote:

Now that's just funny...and sad, all at the same time.

>Be you
>Come into thread insulting people
>Claim you don't have the time or effort to dedicate to properly constructing models
>Claim it's not important unless people are stupid
>Get mad when people call you lazy
>Pretend you are not the embodiment of TFG
>Call someone toxic
>Never have a single shred of self-awareness
>Double down

Edit: Nah, I'll take the high road here. Have a good weekend!

 ncshooter426 wrote:
How's that game mechanics coming?
https://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/751124.page

In its early phases. Much like your impending boot, I hope.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ncshooter426 wrote:
Edit: Nah, I'll take the high road here. Have a good weekend!

Too late.

One less troll on the forum.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 ncshooter426 wrote:
Why would wysiwyg even matter any more? You choose the model to remove, no more weapon destroyed events. Print your loadouts, and just reference it.

A heavy weapon is easy to id as one, but I dont care which one it is. Just say what it is, and have it written down in the list

This is pretty absurd. How do I tell which unit has the plasma gun and which does not?
How can I tell if that plasma gun is in range instead of magically teleporting around to shoot?

Had a guy do this in a GW store I used to frequent. He had half assembled/painted models all over as he would hop from SM codex to codex and that special weapon (or whatever was most convenient would ALWAYS be the last to die). fething annoyed the hell out of me as the staff looked the other way as he spent a lot of cash (plus they fancied his mum too).

Ah, mum fancying.

That is always a problem for losers with hot moms.

 Crimson wrote:

 Asmodai wrote:
I strongly prefer WYSIWYG and wouldn't field something non-WYSIWYG, even if it means that I don't field the most competitive possible option for a unit. Most of the people I play with are casual enough that there's no need to go with a 100% optimized army anyway. My Tactical Marines are a hodgepodge of options built from 2nd to 7th editions.

Exactly. WYSIWYG is more important than competitiveness, just build the list with the stuff you actually have models for.

my models are wysiwyg and modeled that way because that's how my army is kitted out. I have stuff magnetized but only for transport and very occasional swapping but when I play its all right there in 3d. I also fully paint my stuff and love it when my opponent has put the time and effort into creating an eye-pleasing and easy to identify army. If I really want to have different options I'd rather go buy another unit and do it up that way.

Adeptus Doritos wrote:
>Be you
>Come into thread insulting people
>Claim you don't have the time or effort to dedicate to properly constructing models
>Claim it's not important unless people are stupid
>Get mad when people call you lazy
>Pretend you are not the embodiment of TFG
>Call someone toxic
>Never have a single shred of self-awareness
>Double down

That takes me back.

 Infantryman wrote:
That takes me back.

Been a while. Too many normie greentexts. Even saw a boomer greentext.

F

Well my stuff is almost always painted except for a unit or 2 at most. My opponents rarely field a painted army. Sometimes I am lucky to get a fully painted army.

I am more concerned with the dozen or more units that I have converted....some are GW serial numbered kitbash/bitz pieces but now they dont have rules.

My dark eldar Reaver jetbike with a Shredder for instance.

My Archon modeled on a Hellion Skyboard is not legal...so she has become a Succubus with a +2 move combat drug to represent the faster move.....but still can fly model. I even magnetized her feet to the skyboard so I can take her off it.

You see players like me that make every cool model or conversion out there show cased in the past with supporting rules...now see no love for them to bring said models to the game.

Guess what WE who do that IN EVERY WAY have taken the time and the love of the hobby to do that as any of you chestbeating your WYSIWYG armies....at least as much effort and time. So enough about how much you can pat yourself on the back....Cause this can go all nite long as we piss on each other....lets not be neanderthal about it.

I myself dont like an unpainted opponents force .....than some highly done force with 'count as' pieces. You see each to their own. It dont make one better than the other.

 admironheart wrote:
Guess what WE who do that IN EVERY WAY have taken the time and the love of the hobby to do that as any of you chestbeating your WYSIWYG armies....at least as much effort and time. So enough about how much you can pat yourself on the back....Cause this can go all nite long as we piss on each other....lets not be neanderthal about it.

I'm fine with you enhancing the cool of your models. I've put two pistols on guys with one pistol, combat knives in place of a chainsword, silencers on bolters, etc. You think I won't be using the Alpharius model as a Chaos Lord in 40k? However, that's not the issue...

The issue is, like we said, when people are trying to say that the guy with the flamer actually has a melta, the guy with the melta has a plasma, the guy with no arms has a missile launcher, this random dude with a bolter has a grav, etc.

We mean to a point where it can cause confusion while playing the game. To be clear, no one is saying you can't make cosmetic conversions on characters and whatnot. That's fine and outright encouraged. The issue is when people are generally just shrugging off some pretty reasonable things, like placing models on the table that can represent what they are actually supposed to be. Even if in some way making that weapon a different color or sticking a bit onto the barrel.

It can be really, really frustrating when you have to keep asking which squad has what weapons over and over again. These aren't even big fancy models, these are basic troops that come in multiples and can easily be purchased on eBay loose and added to your forces.

I don't care if you make autocannons out of tongue depressors and tooth picks, but I do want to be able to tell which guy has what from a glance, without having to ask. It's just common courtesy, in my opinion.

You make it look consistent, and you make it look good, and I'm happy.

The "at a glance" talking point cracks me up. I'm probably too new and or optically challenged but plenty of weapons are nearly indistinguishable at a glance.
What's that one? A combi plasma. Where's the bolter part? Over here behind the chain sword. Is he equipped with a chain sword? No that's just part of the gun.

Eldar weapons? I'll have to keep asking no matter how accurate.

The thing that hurt my ability to play was that my list is made for 2000pts, and the local tournament was for 75pl. It didn't translate super well but a bunch of converting made it in with sub optimal loadouts. At least I didn't paint that army, I would hate having to chop up finished models swap bits and repaint to play at all competitively. But that's just this salty noobs impression. Still, so glad to have randomly chosen the right gun for my fire warriors in the vey beginning.

When I said I want to be able to tell who has what at a glance, I didn't mean I expect everyone to have the official GW weapon for each weapon in their list. Just that if you tell me 5 guys in your squad have weapon x and the other 5 have weapon y, I would like to see that each of those groups can be easily identified by some kind of visual indicator. It's really not that big of a deal. If you want to call all of your storm bolters combi-plas, that's fine. Just don't say all of your storm bolters are combi-plas, except these ones which are heavy flamers, and these ones which are just storm bolters.

 Luciferian wrote:
When I said I want to be able to tell who has what at a glance, I didn't mean I expect everyone to have the official GW weapon for each weapon in their list. Just that if you tell me 5 guys in your squad have weapon x and the other 5 have weapon y, I would like to see that each of those groups can be easily identified by some kind of visual indicator. It's really not that big of a deal. If you want to call all of your storm bolters combi-plas, that's fine. Just don't say all of your storm bolters are combi-plas, except these ones which are heavy flamers, and these ones which are just storm bolters.

^ Pretty much this. As long as it's clear on what's what I'm cool with whatever.

Issues start to arise when you're playing a game and the opponent army is a mess of proxy and counts-as, and half way through he'll say "hmm.. which ones were these again?" or against people with the infamous teleporting weapons "oh no, the plasma guns were over here" - I've had games in the past with both examples.

I think the setting you play in and the reason you play the game will largely determine how important WYSIWYG is going to be.

If you play tournaments or pick-up games it helps to create a more fluid gaming experience.
If you’re into the modeling aspect it is going to increase your enjoyment of the game.
If it is more about hanging out with some friends it really doesn’t have much of an impact.

I’ve been playing with the same group of people for the last 20 years and it’s really the social aspect that’s most important to us.
We play so many different games that it is impossible to collect all of them, so we’ve played with everything from proxying entire armies, cut out cardboard verslons to just empty bases with the troop type written on it. As long as we have fun we really don’t care.

I like to have WYSIWYG on my army as a matter of pride, but am quite happy for my opponent to proxy or whatever (I think the most extreme case was half an old WW2 army vehicle chassis (unpainted green plastic) on a transparent dice case to represent a Falcon...)

GW removing many wargear options for models without actual plastic representation of those options on the sprues has if anything strengthened WYSIWYG...

Mark.

 Adeptus Doritos wrote:

 Luciferian wrote:
...I do expect you to at least proxy consistently; no this flamer is a lascannon and this flamer is a meltagun nonsense.

That. This is what I'm talking about.

For example, I put my Alpha Legion against Black Legion a while back. The 'Heresy Heavy Bolters' were actually Autocannons, and the regular Chaos Heavy Bolters were Heavy Bolters. Then it changed, I'm fairly certain. At least once. Then these Berserkers didn't have Chain-Axes, only this one in particular. But this OTHER squad is different. Oh and these three (originally Loyalist) Terminators with power fists actually have power mauls, except this one, but this one has a power sword.

This is a pain, and I had to just shake his hand and walk away after turn 3. I get it, the dude was on a budget. I know full well that it sucks trying to get a full squad of certain weapons, or even get your hands on certain bits- But at the VERY LEAST, if something has a different weapon- maybe glue something to the base, or make an effort to modify the model.

I really feel for you in this example, but I would be firmer about the WYSIWIG here. Sure, maybe someone doesn't have the skills to convert or money to buy more parts - maybe the original models were a gift or bought second hand. BUT... if you can't create the upgrades on your models, just run the list without the upgrades. Got 15 pts left over and want a plasma gun? Don't actually have a plasma gun? Too bad - you lose the 15 points!
I mean, what's worse? Playing a game and not having all the upgrades you'd ideally like to combat this foe, or (for the other player) being really confused, having your immersion broken and having a slight nagging feeling that your opponent might have cheated at some point? I think running cool upgrades is a part of growing your hobby, becoming a better modeller, saving up your cash, etc.

*NB I'm only talking about 'verbal' non-WYSIWIG here (i.e. "this bolter is actually a lascannon, that sword is a power fist etc). Conversions are all absolutely fine.

One word of advice that I would give for someone who is venturing into this world is to be consistent. For example, my models have all kinds of weapons to represent power weapons, from actual power weapons to Chaos marauder axes and wrathmonger daemon weapons. But you can always tell what's a power weapon in my armies because their painted with a blue glow. Force weapons are purple, axes of Khorne have lava threads on them, and hellblades look like fire. There is no confusion, and those weapons are always power weapons. I never change them, because it's confusing for my opponent. And my opponents learn very quickly. Hell, my friend learned after one game that glowing purple swords were scary force weapons, after I killed all his monstrous creatures with them! Haha!

 argonak wrote:
This hobby is expensive and time consuming enough with out being freaks about WYSIWYG. Are you that overwhelmed with potential opponents that you can look down at someone’s army because they haven’t spent a ton of money and time to magnetize individual arms? Or spent loads of money on having extra miniatures to cover all the options?

I’m happy if my opponent has PAINTED his troops and they’re from the right boxed set.

It depends on what you want from this hobby. I love assembling models, IMHO it's the best part of the entire GW world, I enjoy assembling and converting more than playing and painting. So magnetizing models is actually a lot of fun for me. Painting (and basing) is an absolute nightmare instead, and it's way more time consuming and expensive. Don't know about the USA but here in europe you can get 100 chinese magnets from ebay for less than 3$, including shipping. In fact I've bought 700 2mm x 1mm N52 magnets and paid less than 6 pots of colour. Sites that sell bitz also exist and sometimes you can have good deals, trading and exchanging bitz from other players is also another viable option.

 Blackie wrote:
It depends on what you want from this hobby. I love assembling models, IMHO it's the best part of the entire GW world, I enjoy assembling and converting more than playing and painting. So magnetizing models is actually a lot of fun for me. Painting (and basing) is an absolute nightmare instead, and it's way more time consuming and expensive. Don't know about the USA but here in europe you can get 100 chinese magnets from ebay for less than 3$, including shipping. In fact I've bought 700 2mm x 1mm N52 magnets and paid less than 6 pots of colour. Sites that sell bitz also exist and sometimes you can have good deals, trading and exchanging bitz from other players is also another viable option.

It's funny how we are in (friendly) disagreement on pretty much every aspect of WH40k but we are 100% agreement about building our models

Building&Converting > Playing > Painting.

Whenever I try to paint a unit of boyz I somehow end up with another (unpainted) unit of nobz or flash gits

Slightly off topic but since we're talking about taking in things at a glance- one of my pet peeves is the lack of easily seen squad markings. Since my store uses ITC in a lot of games it's nice to be able to tell who belongs to which unit. And by easy I don't mean "See this guys shoulder pad it has a little spot of green at the very top as opposed to this guys little spot of blue. I mean how hard would it be to band a base or make all the bases of one unit different from the other same equipped unit.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I mean how hard would it be to band a base or make all the bases of one unit different from the other same equipped unit.

Because I've seen WMH players do that and it looks fething terrible.

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
Slightly off topic but since we're talking about taking in things at a glance- one of my pet peeves is the lack of easily seen squad markings. Since my store uses ITC in a lot of games it's nice to be able to tell who belongs to which unit. And by easy I don't mean "See this guys shoulder pad it has a little spot of green at the very top as opposed to this guys little spot of blue. I mean how hard would it be to band a base or make all the bases of one unit different from the other same equipped unit.

Can make it a pain if you want to try swapping out models within squads to try different weapon combinations... (although you can just say "the special weapon guy has a different shoulder pad because he's a special weapon guy, not because I lifted him from a different squad to try twin lascannons for a change...)

Mark.

 Grimtuff wrote:

Leo_the_Rat wrote:
I mean how hard would it be to band a base or make all the bases of one unit different from the other same equipped unit.

Because I've seen WMH players do that and it looks fething terrible.

Yeah, it's quite hard to keep your army looking unified while denoting squads. I don't find distinguishing squads is too often required - it is normally only in a massed combat that it becomes necessary, and then only once casualties have been removed - if the squads are identically equipped, you aren't going to be too worried about who is whom when fighting them in melée, surely?

But it is important to denote them all the same. It's easy with Imperial space marines, since they have squad markings. For Chaos marines, or even worse, cultists (!), it's really hard to denote squads, but I usually find a way with each army. With cultists, I write info on the base rim, so alpha-1 is squad 1 from alpha platoon, beta-2 is squad two from beta platoon, and so on. For my Khorne Berzerkers, I make the models look visually distinct, so whilst they all have the same equipment, one squad has double handed chainaxes, the second has double-hand chainglaives with shields, one squad are all bare-chested, and so on. My opponents find that easy to grasp: "are these berzerkers different to these ones?" "No, they're all the same - just different squads."