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 it wasn't for the painting and model building I wouldn't have any interest in this game at all. I've really disliked the last two editions of rules. The models however have gotten even better looking.

carmachu wrote:

Da krimson barun wrote:
YEAH!All people with time to paint are jerks!

Well only you....

No seriously, jerks are jerks. Having a painted or unpainted army doesn't make the game better. My point being, which still stands, is that having a painted army doesn't make the game better or worse for me. Its always been about the guy across the table. Doesn't mean that all folks that love painting are jerks(although given the plethora of threads like this one, there are jerks in painting folks) but having a painted army doesn't automatically make the game better.

See I'm the complete opposite. A game against a completely unpainted army just feels off, like my opponent doesn't care.

My regular Infinity opponent has a grant total of 1 painted model, while another friend has zero time to paint so doesn't, but games even against them don't feel right. The Infinity player has got a bunch of absolutely lovely 40k armies, and is a fantastic painter, and games against those armies feel complete.

I've got nothing against those people who don't want to or don't have the time to paint, and will glady still have a game against them, but playing against a painted army definitely changes the game for me, which is why I try to have painted armies - mostly for my opponent. I never manage completely painted armies, but I do try.

Painting to me is like "Licking your lips while walking through the desert" I rather be playing

 Chute82 wrote:
Painting to me is like "Licking your lips while walking through the desert" I rather be playing

I can understand that, but for me, I'd rather spend the two hours it takes to play the game and spend it painting and talking about the game with 2-3 other guys across the table who are also painting. Its just as interactive, actually has something to show for 2 hours of work, and nobody gets screwed over by the dice gods.

 Jayden63 wrote:

 Chute82 wrote:
Painting to me is like "Licking your lips while walking through the desert" I rather be playing

I can understand that, but for me, I'd rather spend the two hours it takes to play the game and spend it painting and talking about the game with 2-3 other guys across the table who are also painting. Its just as interactive, actually has something to show for 2 hours of work, and nobody gets screwed over by the dice gods.

Just a point - most people paint at home as something to do for themselves. It's not taking away game time because they wouldn't be playing at that time anyway.

You missed one. "I enjoy conversions."

Can't stand painting as I'm too slow, and the end result never looks as good as I want it to.

For me, I no longer actually play 40k. I never limited myself to strictly GW models to begin with, but since I've quit playing the game, I no longer think in terms of "can I use this model in X army" or "that model would look cool on a DnD table"

I simply look for a good model, good sculpt,etc. something that I can envision looking better with some color on it. Often times, a new model will sit for a while waiting to get primed,etc. because once it comes in the mail or gets home and assembled, I may not quite see what/where I want to do/go with the piece until the inspiration hits me.