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.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
They look pretty damn similar don't they?

They're very similar, and I certainly wouldn't have an issue with someone using them as Rohirrim, but they are also clearly NOT Rohirrim. Where is the horse iconography? Where are the green cloaks?

I made a papercraft chimera back in the late 90s when Bile first released his templates. I used a very heavy card stock, filled it with expanding foam spray, primed it, painted it and people thought it was the real thing.

Printed on colour is nice and all, but I like papercraft that goes the extra step and is painted up using miniature painting techniques.

I'm super laid back about what models represent what. As long as I'm not confused (this guy with a bolter actually has a missile launcher), I'm fine.

Proxying: Using one miniature to represent another where the miniature is not necessarily representative of the model it is replacing. Consistency is often not maintained. When you face that opponent, that model might have been used last game as model X but this game it might instead be switched to suddenly be model Y.

Alternative model: Using one miniature to represent another where the miniature is representative of the model it is replacing and consistency will be maintained. When you face that opponent, that model will always represent model X and not be switched to suddenly be model Y.

Papercraft, scratchbuilt, alternative manufacturer, actual model, I don't care as long as it gets out of the proxying category and into the one where it's representative, not confusing and consistent.

I find the actual models, but all in bare metal or primer, to be worse than any proxy or alternative model though as telling them apart is a pain.

WOW what an emotive subject.

I have tried to build the paper tanks and its amazing how much work is involved.

I used to play in clubs and gw stores, and I dont think I would have used a papertank then, but at home and with my mates group, then yes.

At the moment I am getting back into the game and I only play at home with my kids and so "house rules" apply. Games workshop themselves have always stated that the rulebook is a guideline and that house rules are needed. Several of my current models would not be allowed in any store or tourney. Nor would I expect them to.

I have had oppenents who fielded SM as eldar and paper printouts glued to 3d shapes. I think I would be pushed with a tisssue box as a tank though.

As to people complaining about 4 x baneblade papertanks cheesyness, well if they have spent that much in points you have the same points to spend, I do not know the points value of a baneblade but it probably buys me an awful lot of nobz and boyz, or tank busterz or lootaz. My point being yes its a bit cheesy but the whole point of the points system is that it evens the playing field, ( which as it happens I am not in complete agreement with.)

To me the biggest crime I have seen after getting back into this game was at my sons after school club. On an off chance and at his request he took my attempt at a leman russ papertank along. It was rejected because the barrel was a bit long and it stood 3mm to tall on the field. I do not object, it is thier "house rules". But the local rich kid turns up with his nice shiny new fw warhound with the worst paintjob ever and only half built and its OMG get it on the field NOW

I live 50 miles from the store, work all week and spend all my spare time on my kids and this wonderful hobby, to be able to represent some tank that I will never afford and play games with my own small group, and to possibly but some of my efforts out on the web for others to criticize/praise is what its all about for me. Obviously its diferent for others.

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
Kinda not quite on topic, but GW make Rohan Warriors that look like:

Spoiler:

Gripping Beast make Viking Hirdmen that look something like this:

Spoiler:

They look pretty damn similar don't they?

Now, for 20 pounds you get 44 Vikings and for 15 pounds you get 15 Rohirrim. Yet the miniatures are nearly the same, or very similar.

I see a GW Chaos Marauder head on the leader guy of those Vikings.

But, yes; this isn't even in the same league as papercraft. It's simply swapping a model over. Which is perfectly fine(to an extent) in GW circles.

If they look good, I'll play against them. If they're just a box about the size as what it is representing, no way (unless the person is proxying to test a list before they buy models and asks me if it's ok first).

I'd be interested to know what people would think of papercraft models made from templates that I have put a lot of work in to shading/highlighting/weathering like those in my gallery...

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/images-59981-29312_Paper_rhino.html





I haven't had a chance to actually build anything from them yet (too busy with work and don't have a printer capable of doing it justice), but I'd be interested to hear what some of the paper-haters would think of papercraft models made from templates of that level quality (which is frankly better than I paint most my "real" tanks ).

 Deathshead420 wrote:

And that chaos kitbashes rhino passes rule of cool to me

Thanks, but its a vindicator. I was hoping people would be able to tell it was by the huge cannon. I might have failed.

I thought it was a..... storm bolter.

I think none of it matters to play, its about meeting new people and having fun to me. As long as theyre not buying 2 dollar plastic army men and saying theyre space marines I'm good. (thatd even be fine for IG, same thing really )

I've never had an issue proxying something or even if someone wants to try out a model and proxy other models for it as long as he points out spec weapons its all gravy.

I agree with the sentiment of others in regards to that this wargaming, building, painting, is our hobby and collectively we are all connected to it. In that connection people feel strongly about what constitutes the hobby for them and tries to force that ideal on others. I think it is best to just step back and realize the fun that you are having is not necessarily the same fun someone else believes in. This is our hobby and what we make of it.

If people didn't plan outside the box we wouldn't have fantastic pieces such as the one gent who has the remote control lego tanks, or beautiful scratch built titans/ most forgeworld related vehicle models.

You are more then welcome to place restrictions on what you believe is fun but I believe it is ethically wrong to suggest what others do is unacceptable/wrong/ breaking the spirit of the hobby because their scope doesn't match your scope of what is fun.

 GaussGuy wrote:

You are more then welcome to place restrictions on what you believe is fun but I believe it is ethically wrong to suggest what others do is unacceptable/wrong/ breaking the spirit of the hobby because their scope doesn't match your scope of what is fun.

Well said.

I absolutely hate tournaments so 100% of my games are friendly.

I really don't care what people bring. Proxies are totally fine, papercraft is fine, stuff from other games is fine. I really don't care as long as you're not modeling for advantage and being reasonable about telling me what stuff is.

That said, I REALLY prefer fully painted armies. Games against them are 1000 times better and I reserve the right to say things like "man, you really need to finish and paint your army" every turn.

But refusing a game? Saying that it's not "fair" if they don't have a fully painted army? That's not even what those words mean. I would never refuse a game for those reasons.

 Rented Tritium wrote:
That said, I REALLY prefer fully painted armies. Games against them are 1000 times better and I reserve the right to say things like "man, you really need to finish and paint your army" every turn.

But refusing a game? Saying that it's not "fair" if they don't have a fully painted army? That's not even what those words mean. I would never refuse a game for those reasons.

I agree. I'm never going to refuse playing against someone with an army of proxies and unpainted models. However, I feel playing with and against a fully painted army is much more enjoying, which is largely why I haven't gamed much over the past 8 years, I don't have the time or patience to paint a full army.

I thought it was a..... storm bolter.

You my friend might need to get your prescription updated lol.

Something I should have said about the OP, his paper craft looks epic and would play against it any day. As someone already stated, I would play 100 games against them, then 1 game of white or black primed figs.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'd be interested to know what people would think of papercraft models made from templates that I have put a lot of work in to shading/highlighting/weathering like those in my gallery...

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/images-59981-29312_Paper_rhino.html





I haven't had a chance to actually build anything from them yet (too busy with work and don't have a printer capable of doing it justice), but I'd be interested to hear what some of the paper-haters would think of papercraft models made from templates of that level quality (which is frankly better than I paint most my "real" tanks ).

Again, I seem to go more by shapes than colours so no, it'll still look too flat. I might play against it - but I'd prefer not to.

That would be 3d - there's a template for the 4 exhaust covers, cutouts for the front and back...

Flat rivets, flat detail on the exhausts to name but two - you like papercraft? Fine please do understand there's plenty of folkto whom it still looks like crap even when pretty well-executed.
This ranks below shoddily painted decent mini for me, as personal taste.

 Bolognesus wrote:
Flat rivets, flat detail on the exhausts to name but two - you like papercraft? Fine please do understand there's plenty of folkto whom it still looks like crap even when pretty well-executed.
This ranks below shoddily painted decent mini for me, as personal taste.

I'm curious, what flat detail on the exhausts? (Aside from rivets)
I'm not trying to antagonize, I'm trying to help. If you're dead set against paper craft that's fine, but just say that it's not going to be acceptable ever.

Does making it out of plasticard make a difference?

rigeld2 wrote:

 Bolognesus wrote:
Flat rivets, flat detail on the exhausts to name but two - you like papercraft? Fine please do understand there's plenty of folkto whom it still looks like crap even when pretty well-executed.
This ranks below shoddily painted decent mini for me, as personal taste.

I'm curious, what flat detail on the exhausts? (Aside from rivets)
I'm not trying to antagonize, I'm trying to help. If you're dead set against paper craft that's fine, but just say that it's not going to be acceptable ever.

Does making it out of plasticard make a difference?

Carboard or Plasticard won't make much difference, apart from plasticard is more durable in the long run.

The exhausts have vents on them, to do it right, you'd need at least 3-4 layers of detail.
i.e.:
Layer 1: Base shape.
Layer 2: bulking - first holes for vents.
Layer 3: Top layer - final holes for vents.
Layer 4: Rivets.

Then the smokestaks:
- L1: Base,
- L2: Vent Holes.
That door:
- L1: Base (possibly just base of tank).
- L2: Raised inner door rim + holes for footholds + handholds.
- L3: Ground Spikes at top (be it little boxes or 2-3 layers of card as required)
The Rhino Chasis:
- L1: Base
- L2: Vents
- L3: Raised Armour sections 1
- L4: Same again. (though these thick layered sections will depend on the width of the card at the end of the day.)
- L5: Rivets
And so on, the final layers must be the correct dimensions, everything else adjusted back.

You apply that method to everything, and it'll result in a much stronger, much classier piece, that done right - may be indistinguishable for a proper model.

So long as they don't involve ridiculous rulesets all is well.

I remember those DIY vehicle rules that were in a white dwarf a few editions ago and boy were those a disaster!

rigeld2 wrote:

 Bolognesus wrote:
Flat rivets, flat detail on the exhausts to name but two - you like papercraft? Fine. please do understand there's plenty of folkto whom it still looks like crap even when pretty well-executed.
This ranks below shoddily painted decent mini for me, as personal taste.

I'm curious, what flat detail on the exhausts? (Aside from rivets)
I'm not trying to antagonize, I'm trying to help. If you're dead set against paper craft that's fine, but just say that it's not going to be acceptable ever.

Does making it out of plasticard make a difference?

Look at an actual plastic rhino, and spot the recesses. the exhaust pipe has some sort of holes in it, there's recesses in the armour structure leading up to it as well (3 on each side) all of which are flat on this model.
...And that's just the exhausts - Im not even getting into flat paper tracks, as usually seen on such models.

I don't care one bit what it's made out of - if you get all that detail right I'd be perfectly happy with it. However, these complaints were just exhausts and tracks - not the most detail-heavy bits of a rhino by a long shot
Again, it's a matter of personal taste.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I'd be interested to know what people would think of papercraft models made from templates that I have put a lot of work in to shading/highlighting/weathering like those in my gallery...

Spoiler:

http://www.dakkadakka.com/gallery/images-59981-29312_Paper_rhino.html

I haven't had a chance to actually build anything from them yet (too busy with work and don't have a printer capable of doing it justice), but I'd be interested to hear what some of the paper-haters would think of papercraft models made from templates of that level quality (which is frankly better than I paint most my "real" tanks ).

Don't do things because other people may or may not like it. Do it because YOU want to.*




*= Note: Please continue to keep morals, ethics, and the law in mind while following above advise. Easy E isnot responsible for the outcomes of following such advise.

 scipio.au wrote:

 Highland_Piper wrote:

 Lansirill wrote:
Heck, why should I have to play against someone with a poorly painted army? If you can't paint to a high tabletop standard, pay someone else to do it. If you can't afford to pay someone, then maybe you need a more affordable hobby.

Can't play the game at a top tournament level? Hire someone to train you until you figure it out, or stay away. Why should I waste my time playing someone who isn't very good? Again, if you can't afford it, maybe this isn't the right hobby for you.

Wow! Really? So if everyone who does not have the skill of the Heavy Metal team should go find another hobby? You realise that GW would fold within a year if that was the case. Out of all the posts yours shocked me the most!

Mate, you pretty clearly fell into the Sar Chasm there.

Sigged.

Playing 40k is not participating in GW hobby, it is doing MY hobby. The rules and the models are means to have a common basic when playing with others, no more, no less. GW may preach "thou may not purchase from other companies", I don't care. In the end I want to have a aesthetically and game-wise pleasing table-top experience that gives me the illusion of having a Sci-Fi battle like movies do.
One of my gaming buddies fields self-made Leman Russ based on WW2 Tiger tanks. They are convincing as tanks, in the context of IG at once recognicable as counts-as LR, allright with me. If someone fields a Greater Deamon of Slaaneesh featuring a converted Barbie doll, why not? Just have some work done so that it fits into the overall aesthetics. Myself, I cannot afford to purchase much for new models, also I love the RT Land Raiders. Papercrafting the basic model with some extra effort concerning convincing gunnery, searchlights and such, then having a paint job of the same standard as the rest of my army does the work for me. Also there are models I find completely ugly and looking like they will never work. Papercraft and scratchbuild my own design is the answer.
In my opinion one of the greatest armies of all time is that much disputed "Styrofoam cubes" army of Tzeentch Demons. Grand idea, because of the low number of unit types no problem to distinguish the units, and the image of standing against such a horrendous force of abstract objects that smash into your rows out of nowhere is super-cinematic of a level seldom achieved.

Someone have a problem with it? Then we do not share the same hobby.

 Hruotland wrote:


Someone have a problem with it? Then we do not share the same hobby.

Then don't complain when people refuse to play you and you are not welcome at a majority of the well-run and highly participated in events run by the Indy community. Your foam cubes, barbie dolls and paper boxes can have fun playing with yourselves.

Everything is fine when people find like-minded gamers, the issue is when people who feel entitled that their barbie doll should be universally accepted everywhere.

The problem is the people who want to use their toys as proxies don't have the skill or won't put the effort to turn this:


in to this:


Rule of cool is a fickle bitch...

So your complaining someone doesn't have the same skills as you?

 ExNoctemNacimur wrote:
So your complaining someone doesn't have the same skills as you?

If they don't have the skills to turn a barbie doll into a game-quality figure, then they shouldn't attempt to bring that to a game table with standards. They can simply buy the the official model and give it a 3 color paint job which is do-able by everyone.

Scratch-building has standards and if you don't have the skills or won't do the effort, don't be mad when your models are not welcome everywhere.

If you lack the skill, you can spend more money and time to make quality models.
If you lack the money, you can use more skill and time to make quality models.
If you lack the time, you can use more skill and money to make quality models.

If you lack all 3, or are unwilling to develop any of those efforts, then why are you trying to participate in this hobby?

Barbie dolls, paper boxes and nondescript foam cube are not welcome everywhere. People act as if they are entitled to be accepted everywhere, which they are not. Being broke, lazy or talentless is not a reason to allow a barbie doll on a wargaming table.

nkelsch wrote:

 Hruotland wrote:


Someone have a problem with it? Then we do not share the same hobby.

Then don't complain when people refuse to play you and you are not welcome at a majority of the well-run and highly participated in events run by the Indy community. Your foam cubes, barbie dolls and paper boxes can have fun playing with yourselves.

Everything is fine when people find like-minded gamers, the issue is when people who feel entitled that their barbie doll should be universally accepted everywhere.

The problem is the people who want to use their toys as proxies don't have the skill or won't put the effort to turn this:


in to this:




Rule of cool is a fickle bitch...

Omg that is an awesome conversion. I just go that Toy story mr potato head for my daughters birthday, can't wait untill she's outgrown it lol.

And you don't think it is so funny BECAUSE you recognize the cited concept of Mr Potato Head? Or that you cannot achieve the same with a real Mr Potatohead? Or you could not achieve the same degree of work on a Slaaneesh daemon with a real Barbie doll , still somewhat recognizable? In the end it is about creativity!

And Nkelsch: indeed, we two don't share the same hobby. The events I visit everyone would applause if someone turned a Barbie doll into a greater Slaaneesch daemon. Not if someone just sat a Barbie onto the table and called it "daemon", mind.

 Hruotland wrote:
And you don't think it is so funny BECAUSE you recognize the cited concept of Mr Potato Head? Or that you cannot achieve the same with a real Mr Potatohead? Or you could not achieve the same degree of work on a Slaaneesh daemon with a real Barbie doll , still somewhat recognizable? In the end it is about creativity!

And Nkelsch: indeed, we two don't share the same hobby. The events I visit everyone would applause if someone turned a Barbie doll into a greater Slaaneesch daemon. Not if someone just sat a Barbie onto the table and called it "daemon", mind.

I think Hroutland and Nkelsch are making the same point without realizing it. Sounds like you'd both be happy to see Mr Potato Head or Barbie on the game table IF AND ONLY IF, it was a good quality conversion.

Of course "good quality" is subjective and a grey area, but I'm really only interested in seeing good quality kitbashes or conversions on the table. If you're just plunking down a toy with some paint on it, then I will not be impressed.

nkelsch wrote:

Scratch-building has standards and if you don't have the skills or won't do the effort, don't be mad when your models are not welcome everywhere.

If you lack the skill, you can spend more money and time to make quality models.
If you lack the money, you can use more skill and time to make quality models.
If you lack the time, you can use more skill and money to make quality models.

If you lack all 3, or are unwilling to develop any of those efforts, then why are you trying to participate in this hobby?

Barbie dolls, paper boxes and nondescript foam cube are not welcome everywhere. People act as if they are entitled to be accepted everywhere, which they are not. Being broke, lazy or talentless is not a reason to allow a barbie doll on a wargaming table.

Very, very, true.

Another thing that seems to be a point of contention for a lot of players (and myself, if I'm in a competitive mood) is that when scratchbuilding, the model needs to be representative of the original. i.e. sponsons and fire points can't be modeled for advantage, and the hull needs to be similarly shaped and sized. For example, anyone else remember that cool Stormtalon walker? Unfortunately, I wouldn't play against it in a tournament setting, because its profile and height are different from that of an actual Stormtalon - doesn't mean that I don't think it's cool, though.