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.

 Crimson wrote:

Axes are iconic for Berzerkers, so they should have them. But they're only good very situationally. And once they're modelled, then they're stuck with them against every foe.

It would bug me less if the Berzerkers just came with the axes, instead it being an option, even if they ended up costing the same as with the upgrade in the end. Then it at least wouldn't feel like you chose to waste twenty points or so just for laughs every time you play against marines.

the modeling is ambiguous. there are chain axes and then their are heavy chain axes of khorne. you can have either.

 Crimson wrote:

Axes are iconic for Berzerkers, so they should have them. But they're only good very situationally. And once they're modelled, then they're stuck with them against every foe.

It would bug me less if the Berzerkers just came with the axes, instead it being an option, even if they ended up costing the same as with the upgrade in the end. Then it at least wouldn't feel like you chose to waste twenty points or so just for laughs every time you play against marines.

If Axes are an upgrade, doesn't matter if they've been modelled on. If you don't pay for the upgrade you don't get the weapon. I could put 5 LC on my Predator, but it doesn't get 5 LC. WYSIWYG is mainly for upgrades. For example you could model a Marine to be holding a newspaper, with no bolt gun in sight, but he still has a bolt gun. Model doesn't force you to buy upgrades, you can use a chain axe Zerkers as a non chain axe Zerkers if the chain axe is an upgrade.

 rodgers37 wrote:

If Axes are an upgrade, doesn't matter if they've been modelled on. If you don't pay for the upgrade you don't get the weapon. I could put 5 LC on my Predator, but it doesn't get 5 LC. WYSIWYG is mainly for upgrades. For example you could model a Marine to be holding a newspaper, with no bolt gun in sight, but he still has a bolt gun. Model doesn't force you to buy upgrades, you can use a chain axe Zerkers as a non chain axe Zerkers if the chain axe is an upgrade.

I wouldn't be cool with that. If you model an upgrade, then you take it and pay for it. It would be really confusing if people started to model, say special weapons on their space marines and then say that they don't actually have them.

iirc WYSIWYG isn't even in the rules anymore? if it is, can someone give me a page reference?

AFAIK, it isn't. It's just a convention. But I'm personally a bit neurotic about it, and anyway, it is something that many players expect.

i hear you. i'm pretty much the same way. ref: beserkers, it's a non-issue for me. all of mine are magentized anway.

chain axes are way cooler though.

 Crimson wrote:

 rodgers37 wrote:

If Axes are an upgrade, doesn't matter if they've been modelled on. If you don't pay for the upgrade you don't get the weapon. I could put 5 LC on my Predator, but it doesn't get 5 LC. WYSIWYG is mainly for upgrades. For example you could model a Marine to be holding a newspaper, with no bolt gun in sight, but he still has a bolt gun. Model doesn't force you to buy upgrades, you can use a chain axe Zerkers as a non chain axe Zerkers if the chain axe is an upgrade.

I wouldn't be cool with that. If you model an upgrade, then you take it and pay for it. It would be really confusing if people started to model, say special weapons on their space marines and then say that they don't actually have them.

You sound like a lot of fun to play with.

 Crimson wrote:
AFAIK, it isn't. It's just a convention. But I'm personally a bit neurotic about it, and anyway, it is something that many players expect.

unfortuneatly the new chaos book sounds like wysiwg hell. how do you model "verterans for the long war"
khornate axes?
plague knives?
all the marks?
icons?

 Crimson wrote:

 rodgers37 wrote:

If Axes are an upgrade, doesn't matter if they've been modelled on. If you don't pay for the upgrade you don't get the weapon. I could put 5 LC on my Predator, but it doesn't get 5 LC. WYSIWYG is mainly for upgrades. For example you could model a Marine to be holding a newspaper, with no bolt gun in sight, but he still has a bolt gun. Model doesn't force you to buy upgrades, you can use a chain axe Zerkers as a non chain axe Zerkers if the chain axe is an upgrade.

I wouldn't be cool with that. If you model an upgrade, then you take it and pay for it. It would be really confusing if people started to model, say special weapons on their space marines and then say that they don't actually have them.

If I take upgrades that would be difficult to model (such as ripping off all the chain-axe arms from my bezerkers or having to build,paint more bezerkers with chain swords) I just take the upgrade across all my units. That way there is no confusion without having to build and paint or re-build a ton more models.

 Defiler wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I wouldn't be cool with that. If you model an upgrade, then you take it and pay for it. It would be really confusing if people started to model, say special weapons on their space marines and then say that they don't actually have them.

You sound like a lot of fun to play with.

I support Crimson. If axes and swords have different rules, which they now do, then your modeling must reflect the rules that you pay for. You can't say "oh, there are 5 guys with axes modeled, but I'm just paying for 3." The correct analogy to the predator lascannon shenanigans would be someone trying to tell you that his AC/2xLC predator is actually a AC/2xHB predator. You modeled it, it's an option, it has rules, you pay for it.

text removed.
Reds8n

The main problem is the Berzerker kit comes with a lot of axes, and people put them on their berzerkers because they look awesome.

If you're fighting a Space marine army, taking the upgrade is a waste of points, but since it's been modelled on, it's a bit hard to distinguish who has a proper chain axe and who has a close combat weapon.

Personally, I'll be modelling chain glaives onto my berzerkers in place of chain axes for the upgrade.

I'm amazed, Davor, by how much scorn you can exhibit for someone that just wants to play the game by the rules without having to memorize all your off-books modeling quirks for you. Really, hats off.

Also, you might want to re-read your own post and compare your tone and insult slinging to the "high and mighty" tone you despise.

I think if it's clearly labelled and my opponent explains to me what the labeling scheme was, I don't care if they have tooth picks instead of bolters. However, if they are all the same toothpicks and there is lot of variability in the scheme, I would be annoyed. Remembering a few things isn't bad. If I have to remember that the guy who started 3rd from the right in a pile of 10 guys is the one with the melta gun that's not going to happen.

Even if WYSIWYG is no longer in the rules, I would not be surprised if the major tournaments continue to enforce it.

bogalubov wrote:
Remembering a few things isn't bad. If I have to remember that the guy who started 3rd from the right in a pile of 10 guys is the one with the melta gun that's not going to happen.

Exactly. Add on top of that the scenario that you are in a tournament and the other guy is expected to remember which of your modeling choices is real and which is fake? That's pretty rude to your opponent from where I stand.

 Exergy wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
AFAIK, it isn't. It's just a convention. But I'm personally a bit neurotic about it, and anyway, it is something that many players expect.

unfortuneatly the new chaos book sounds like wysiwg hell. how do you model "verterans for the long war"
khornate axes?
plague knives?
all the marks?
icons?

Veterans of the Long War; adds SM helmets/trinkets made out of Rosarius, purity Seals on the CSM Belt/Backpack.
khornate Axes; you really asks how to do it?...
Plague Knives; same has above.
Marks; They allready have it on their Shoulder pads for the Cult Troops, and for abyone else just paint them on their arms,torso,shoulder,forehead.
icons;...really...they have freakin icons in the CSM box..., what else do you want?

 ph34r wrote:

 Defiler wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I wouldn't be cool with that. If you model an upgrade, then you take it and pay for it. It would be really confusing if people started to model, say special weapons on their space marines and then say that they don't actually have them.

You sound like a lot of fun to play with.

I support Crimson. If axes and swords have different rules, which they now do, then your modeling must reflect the rules that you pay for. You can't say "oh, there are 5 guys with axes modeled, but I'm just paying for 3." The correct analogy to the predator lascannon shenanigans would be someone trying to tell you that his AC/2xLC predator is actually a AC/2xHB predator. You modeled it, it's an option, it has rules, you pay for it.

But it's not Axes and Swords, it's Axes and Close combat weapons. up until now a chainaxe was a close combat weapon. Also now a beserker box doesn't come with all chainaxes or all swords so you HAVE to mix and match. Local heavy tourney players around here agree that you simply have to tell your opponent what units have what upgrades.

For example how do you tell modeled purifiers from modeled strike knights if you don't want to paint white helmets. How do you tell paladins apart form normal terminators if you prefer the edged off helmet. How about boltgun holding sternguard veterans from tactical marines or chainsword holding vanguard vets from assault marines.

 carabine wrote:

 ph34r wrote:

 Defiler wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
I wouldn't be cool with that. If you model an upgrade, then you take it and pay for it. It would be really confusing if people started to model, say special weapons on their space marines and then say that they don't actually have them.

You sound like a lot of fun to play with.

I support Crimson. If axes and swords have different rules, which they now do, then your modeling must reflect the rules that you pay for. You can't say "oh, there are 5 guys with axes modeled, but I'm just paying for 3." The correct analogy to the predator lascannon shenanigans would be someone trying to tell you that his AC/2xLC predator is actually a AC/2xHB predator. You modeled it, it's an option, it has rules, you pay for it.

But it's not Axes and Swords, it's Axes and Close combat weapons. up until now a chainaxe was a close combat weapon. Also now a beserker box doesn't come with all chainaxes or all swords so you HAVE to mix and match. Local heavy tourney players around here agree that you simply have to tell your opponent what units have what upgrades.

If you want to play by 5th edition rules, ask your opponent to play 5th edition rules. If you want to play 6th, including different close combat weapons, then you have to model upgrades.

 carabine wrote:
How do you tell paladins apart form normal terminators if you prefer the edged off helmet.

There are specific Paladin helmets?! I have 6 of those kits and I never noticed. Mine simply use the fancier shoulder shields and have gold lettering instead of silver...

 carabine wrote:
But it's not Axes and Swords, it's Axes and Close combat weapons. up until now a chainaxe was a close combat weapon. Also now a beserker box doesn't come with all chainaxes or all swords so you HAVE to mix and match. Local heavy tourney players around here agree that you simply have to tell your opponent what units have what upgrades.

Last time I checked most boxes, especially older ones, do not come with the full range of options to equip every marine in any way. I've never seen anyone making apologies for devastators not coming with 4 lascannons per box...

 carabine wrote:
For example how do you tell modeled purifiers from modeled strike knights if you don't want to paint white helmets. How do you tell paladins apart form normal terminators if you prefer the edged off helmet. How about boltgun holding sternguard veterans from tactical marines or chainsword holding vanguard vets from assault marines.

As for all of these examples, you are required to differentiate the models, modeling wise. For most of your examples this means either the standard veteran markings, or some other way of blinging the model out that makes it clearly identifiable as the veteran type of that unit without it having to be explained and memorized by your opponent; if your paladins and GKT look exactly the same then you are doing it wrong.

 ph34r wrote:
I'm amazed, Davor, by how much scorn you can exhibit for someone that just wants to play the game by the rules without having to memorize all your off-books modeling quirks for you. Really, hats off.

Also, you might want to re-read your own post and compare your tone and insult slinging to the "high and mighty" tone you despise.

So let me ask this question to the group at large: For those who go in for the strict WYSIWYG approach, do you decline games with "counts as" armies? As that is pretty much never going to be WYSIWYG, as it's not even the correct army. And do you also decline to allow your friends and mates to "proxy" models, to experience them in game before they spend the money on the actual model? Because that's really what I'm hearing, is that in friendly games, when its not WAAC, everything has to be perfect. I had a friend in Germany like this, and he actually drove people away from playing him and our group. A little inflexible for friendly games, but to each their own. I back you 110% if you're talking about a tournament or some other such event.

Anyway, not throwing stones, just asking to see what the answer is!

If you've got Zerkers who are modelled with both Axes and Swords, I'm of the opinion that you either need to take the upgrade on each guy that has an axe, for the whole squad, or not at all.

I currently have 13 Zerkers.

Five have axes, four have swords, three are dual-wielding pistols, and one is wielding a Lizardmen weapon(I gots me converted Lizerkers!)

I think that the Chain Axe is a worthwhile upgrade, however, I don't think the whole squad should have them. This means I have a problem. I can upgrade only the five that are modeled with them, all of them, or none of them.

It'd be REAL confusing for both me AND my opponent if I said, "Okay, five of my zerkers are modelled with axes, but only these three have the upgrade.". It'd be super easy for both me AND my opponent to forget which guys have it and which don't.

Salacious Greed wrote:

 ph34r wrote:
I'm amazed, Davor, by how much scorn you can exhibit for someone that just wants to play the game by the rules without having to memorize all your off-books modeling quirks for you. Really, hats off.

Also, you might want to re-read your own post and compare your tone and insult slinging to the "high and mighty" tone you despise.

So let me ask this question to the group at large: For those who go in for the strict WYSIWYG approach, do you decline games with "counts as" armies? As that is pretty much never going to be WYSIWYG, as it's not even the correct army. And do you also decline to allow your friends and mates to "proxy" models, to experience them in game before they spend the money on the actual model? Because that's really what I'm hearing, is that in friendly games, when its not WAAC, everything has to be perfect. I had a friend in Germany like this, and he actually drove people away from playing him and our group. A little inflexible for friendly games, but to each their own. I back you 110% if you're talking about a tournament or some other such event.

Anyway, not throwing stones, just asking to see what the answer is!

The deal breaker for me regarding counts-as armies is consistency and equipment:

1) There has to be consistency across the entire army. If a model "counts-as" something, then every single model of the same type better count as the same thing. I will be running an AdMech army using the Grey Knight codex, and if a model counts as an accolyte then all models of that type will count as an accolyte.

2) Weapons should always be exactly what they are in the codex. I don't care as much about you running an ork as a guardsman, but the ork needs to hold the weapon he is using so that I know what thread I am facing. RiTides had a good example at the last Adepticon, his almost 100% non-GW count'as Blood Angels had GW weapons, so you knew what you were dealing with.

Gifblaur wrote:
5deadly: I've never been a big fan of the nurgle asthetic(Granted Nurgle is actually tied with Tzee as fav chaos lord.) but you have changed my mind. It's not overly disgusting but just enough that it doesn't lose it's nurgleness. Looking at the FW set there are only two torsos I don't like, the overly bloated ones. I don't mind rot and rust but something about the bloating just freaks me out.(misson accomplished I suppose.) Great job man!

First and foremost I want to reiterate that is not my model but a model from Raffaele “Picster” Picca… but it is inspireing for the reasons you named above… search Nurgle marine… you’ll see a lotta horrible GS job and a lot of “painted green” models that one above All I’ve seen has the right mix and really is inspiring. Bloated for me is cool.. but Bloated and poorly done… not sexy…
I’m going to do press molds of Plague bearers stomachs, Gasmasks with GS and Plasticard and go from there…

 Gargantuan wrote:
Can Nurgle characters get FNP?

Plague Marines Do… so run Plague Marine army and you get FNP.

Salacious Greed wrote:

 ph34r wrote:
I'm amazed, Davor, by how much scorn you can exhibit for someone that just wants to play the game by the rules without having to memorize all your off-books modeling quirks for you. Really, hats off.

Also, you might want to re-read your own post and compare your tone and insult slinging to the "high and mighty" tone you despise.

So let me ask this question to the group at large: For those who go in for the strict WYSIWYG approach, do you decline games with "counts as" armies? As that is pretty much never going to be WYSIWYG, as it's not even the correct army. And do you also decline to allow your friends and mates to "proxy" models, to experience them in game before they spend the money on the actual model? Because that's really what I'm hearing, is that in friendly games, when its not WAAC, everything has to be perfect. I had a friend in Germany like this, and he actually drove people away from playing him and our group. A little inflexible for friendly games, but to each their own. I back you 110% if you're talking about a tournament or some other such event.

Anyway, not throwing stones, just asking to see what the answer is!

It all depends.

If my buddy is proxying 'this marine with a plasma gun' as having a melta gun, that's fine. If he's proxying, "this marine who has his bolter up slightly to the right" as having a melta gun, that's wrong. If he's proxying a Rhino as a Predator, that's fine. If he's proxying a wrecked supply cart terrain piece as a Rhino, that's not.

If my opponent is proxying an Eldar army with cardboard circles the correct size of the bases, that's even fine. I've had someone do that before. Every single piece of cardboard was labelled with what it was and what wargear it has.

So long as there is a clear representation of what my opponent is trying to pull off, I will allow it.

Zakriv wrote:
If you've got Zerkers who are modelled with both Axes and Swords, I'm of the opinion that you either need to take the upgrade on each guy that has an axe, for the whole squad, or not at all.

Honestly, I'd be very surprised if the entry allowed you to upgrade individual models with Axes to begin with.

I have a feeling it will be "The squad may be equipped with Chain Axes for +X pts/model".

 ph34r wrote:

 carabine wrote:
But it's not Axes and Swords, it's Axes and Close combat weapons. up until now a chainaxe was a close combat weapon. Also now a beserker box doesn't come with all chainaxes or all swords so you HAVE to mix and match. Local heavy tourney players around here agree that you simply have to tell your opponent what units have what upgrades.

Last time I checked most boxes, especially older ones, do not come with the full range of options to equip every marine in any way. I've never seen anyone making apologies for devastators not coming with 4 lascannons per box...

 carabine wrote:
For example how do you tell modeled purifiers from modeled strike knights if you don't want to paint white helmets. How do you tell paladins apart form normal terminators if you prefer the edged off helmet. How about boltgun holding sternguard veterans from tactical marines or chainsword holding vanguard vets from assault marines.

As for all of these examples, you are required to differentiate the models, modeling wise. For most of your examples this means either the standard veteran markings, or some other way of blinging the model out that makes it clearly identifiable as the veteran type of that unit without it having to be explained and memorized by your opponent; if your paladins and GKT look exactly the same then you are doing it wrong.

Sorry but since there's no equipment differentiation so there's no required differentiation in the model. Some chapters don't use standard equipment or markings so you're hosed there alot.

I plan to differentiate between berzerkers and axe berzerkers by a unique and identical piece of equipment on each model. Like maybe larger or double headed chainaxes, or the bigger ones from FW that'd make it clear and obvious.

That said I also plan to model my berzerkers with no horned helmets but with a unique tilt shield with the mark of khorne (etched brass) somewhere on the model so players can clearly notice.

I mean hell, even my Khorne Lizzerkers are WYSIWYG. It's really not that hard to do.

Also, if my opponent is proxying/using a counts as army/model out of laziness or unwillingness to convert a model, it's a deal breaker.

Someone who is thinking about purchasing an army/unit and wants to try it out is fine, as well as someone using a model as a substitute for an unreleased model is also okay with me.

Lol @ thread... Really a wysiwyg debate?.......here?..... As always wysiwyg MUST be determined at the table, this is a stupid debate for the internet.