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.

If someone was playing, for example, Guard mixed with Ultramarines and the guard portion was painted Green and the Marines were Blue, would you have an issue with it?

Or if someone was running Pathfinders in a T’au sept army and they Pathfinders were Camo’ed out instead of matching the rest of the army, how would you feel about that?

What about if someone had 4 squads of Cultists and each squad was painted differently to distinguish them from each other when used as bubble wrap?

There is no reason at all why the guard and marines should match. It would actually be wierd if they did since Marines keep the their color scheme all of the time while guard paint/change their gear to match the environment.

Pathfinders having better camo makes sense although I'd expect them to match the firewarriors in most cases. Tau septs don't have fixed colors (the sept color is the color used for markings) - their gear should match the environment just like guard.

Cultists aren't an army, they can and in many cases should be ragtag.

I don't think there's a problem with it. I actually like stuff like that really, like with your Tau example it makes perfect sense in my mind for a unit like pathfinders to be painted differently because of their scout role. Stealth suits are the same, I think they look best painted in darker colors or camo.

All of your examples are totally fine.

For me it's more of a problem if someone brings a uniform army and then tells me: "These red firewarriors are T'au Sept, but these red firewarriors over here are Bor'kan Sept."

You spent your own money on the models & the paint. Paint your models the way you want.

phydaux wrote:
You spent your own money on the models & the paint. Paint your models the way you want.

Completely agreed.

In any case, paint != rules.

Unacceptable. All models must be painted exactly the same way. Use a different highlight color on a model? Get that WAAC TFG trash off the table and don't play until you can properly appreciate the value of the painting hobby.

 Peregrine wrote:
Unacceptable. All models must be painted exactly the same way. Use a different highlight color on a model? Get that WAAC TFG trash off the table and don't play until you can properly appreciate the value of the painting hobby.

The real reason why the DAK was defeated in WWII, they had a hard time matching paints.

It being your army, do with it as you will.
As a side note, as someone who never really paints anything why am I even reading this thread.....

Paint your models however you want, they're your models. My only caveat is that if you are running multiple detachments with different faction traits in the same army that each detachment be easily identifiable. Be it through different paint schemes, markings, or other heraldry, I need to be able to tell what I'm dealing with on the other side of the table without having to constantly ask you what is what.

Pink Marines with My Little Kitty heads are perfectly fine. Do what ever you like with your models.

Looks like it's not as controversial as I thought lol. I haven't played in any real sense since before allies were a thing. Good to see that it's not as big of a deal.