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.

I'm glad most don't have such a high standard to expect their conversions to look pro... it's the creativity that counts.

 Siberiandreamer wrote:
I'm glad most don't have such a high standard to expect their conversions to look pro... it's the creativity that counts.

Agreed

I just think it stinks when people use third party models. You're playing a GW game, use GW product... Do you bring your 40k games to warmachine games?

Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I just think it stinks when people use third party models. You're playing a GW game, use GW product... Do you bring your 40k games to warmachine games?

Sure, if there's been some effort it making them look like their warmachine counterpart.

There are Necron/Cryx armies, for example.

Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I just think it stinks when people use third party models. You're playing a GW game, use GW product... Do you bring your 40k games to warmachine games?

If it is a good conversion, sure.

What I've yet to hear out of you is any reason other than 'uh it is a GW game' that is utterly silly. What I have heard more of is you constantly shifting around every time a statement of yours gets called for being the nonsense it is. First, it is you don't like conversions or proxies at all. But then when you realize that your own army has one, you squirm around so that you don't have to even possibly consider that you're off-base. That's what bothers me more.

Can't say I'm a model purist if it means just fielding what GW give you out of the box and nothing else. Not even slightly. I love seeing a well executed conversion, whether it strictly fits this edition of rules or not.

For starters, with Orks, there are some units that you have to convert and/or kitbash. Looted Wagons & Flash Gits in particular. Those two units are practically designed with intense conversions in mind, unless of course you want to field a unit exclusively made up of the one Flash Git model besides Badrukk they sell? *Laughs like a Nob that's just seen a Weirdboy's head explode*

As for exact wargear and the use of proxy/counts as... I like as many of my models as possible to be as representative as I can but within reason. I do make an effort for them to look their best with what skills I have, but I'm certainly NOT going to be a slave to what is an ever-changing game and do something like buy several different Deff Dreads just so I can field different permutations in different battles. That's completely into the realm of obsessiveness for me and I don't have the time or money to get into that.

Here's one from my army to ponder over. I've got 2 current war buggies (which I'm sure are about to be discontinued), 2 current wartraks (ditto, it'll probably be a combined option kit going forward) and two of the Old Gorkamorka trukks. Now to my mind the GM trukk is about the same size as a war buggy (slightly larger but hardly much). As I see it they work very well together painted up similarly and fielded as two units of Buggies. Anyone got an issue with that going forward now or when they replace the models when the new Dex drops? I'll even let you decide where the fire point is measured from on the GM buggies with the gunner sitting alongside his driver mate.

I like diversity about my non rank-and-file models and don't want everything to look exactly the same when it doesn't have to. To me that just gets real boring, real fast. I'm not playing with a Chapter of Marines that follow the zoggin' Codex Astares after all.

So to sum up for me the rules of cool, and common sense most definitely dictate things. If I like something and can believe it being what someone says it is and it's obvious that the opponent isn't seeking to take the proverbial in gaining an unfair advantage, I'll want to play with or against it. If I don't and/or can't, then I won't.

As for the sub-subject of non-GW models...for friendly games round someone's house the above applies. Don't own any but wouldn't rule it out if they're nice enough. For games in a GW store I'd expect you to be told where to go lol.

Oh one final thing. Yes I do have one of those Flash Git models, but with the size of the gun he's got on him I'm planning to use him as a Nob for my Shoota Boyz.

 curran12 wrote:

Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I just think it stinks when people use third party models. You're playing a GW game, use GW product... Do you bring your 40k games to warmachine games?

If it is a good conversion, sure.

What I've yet to hear out of you is any reason other than 'uh it is a GW game' that is utterly silly. What I have heard more of is you constantly shifting around every time a statement of yours gets called for being the nonsense it is. First, it is you don't like conversions or proxies at all. But then when you realize that your own army has one, you squirm around so that you don't have to even possibly consider that you're off-base. That's what bothers me more.

That was a cool read! Still I'm entitled to my opinion, happy wargaming!

And I'm entitled to tell you how utterly ridiculous and hypocritical your opinion is.

 curran12 wrote:
And I'm entitled to tell you how utterly ridiculous and hypocritical your opinion is.

And I'm entitled to not take any stock in what you say!

If somebody doesn't like to use alternative models or convert any of GW's models, that's fine with me. For me personally, that would be the death of the hobby.

How can a proper ork army be done without conversions? Why would you want your special character to look just like the enemy's special character? I even have an issue when a model looks like it would be unique (such as the Helbrute or an ork battlewagon) yet the table has 3 or 4 of them. That's jarring to me, so I do what I can to make each special model...special. I used to bend the arms on the old pewter terminator models just to give them some variety. Some armies just lend themselves to greater variety, such as orks, chaos and imperial guard. My friend's been working on a winter-themed space marine army with snowmobiles instead of bikes, for example. You don't have to change the basic models, but to begrudge those who show some creativity is pretty sad.

 amanita wrote:
If somebody doesn't like to use alternative models or convert any of GW's models, that's fine with me. For me personally, that would be the death of the hobby.

How can a proper ork army be done without conversions? Why would you want your special character to look just like the enemy's special character? I even have an issue when a model looks like it would be unique (such as the Helbrute or an ork battlewagon) yet the table has 3 or 4 of them. That's jarring to me, so I do what I can to make each special model...special. I used to bend the arms on the old pewter terminator models just to give them some variety. Some armies just lend themselves to greater variety, such as orks, chaos and imperial guard. My friend's been working on a winter-themed space marine army with snowmobiles instead of bikes, for example. You don't have to change the basic models, but to begrudge those who show some creativity is pretty sad.

I haven't begrudged anyone. I've stated I don't like conversions or counts as. Never put anyone down nor stated I was envious.

Perhaps 'sad' is the wrong term...strange, maybe? How do you feel about terrain? Does it also need to be manufactured by GW, and if not why not?

Dalymiddleboro wrote:
I don't like conversions, and not a huge fan of using other models as counts as... I like my units to be the units they were modeled to be. Anyone else feel this way?

By definition, conversions are the modeller's implementation of the unit they were modelled to be.

Conversions are great. Im not extremely dextrous human being and still, it was great fun to kitbash my own Master of Ordnance which suits my army better than the generic one. Conversions FTW, on last tourney I saw amazing Space Marines riding chariots driven by giants rats... It was great work, probably dozens of hours...

 amanita wrote:
Perhaps 'sad' is the wrong term...strange, maybe? How do you feel about terrain? Does it also need to be manufactured by GW, and if not why not?

Terrain doesn't bother me. GW doesn't own the rights to landscapes etc, unless it's something extremely unique. I'm 100% ok with crafted terrain, but when it comes to the actual models in the army I like everything to be GW

To me converting is the whole point of the hobby. I'm pretty sure my armies literally don't have a single model that wouldn't be at least some way converted.

Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 amanita wrote:
Perhaps 'sad' is the wrong term...strange, maybe? How do you feel about terrain? Does it also need to be manufactured by GW, and if not why not?

Terrain doesn't bother me. GW doesn't own the rights to landscapes etc, unless it's something extremely unique. I'm 100% ok with crafted terrain, but when it comes to the actual models in the army I like everything to be GW

Have you thought about applying for a job with GW?

I'm sure they have a constant need for people with your approach, they've been trying to drum creativity and independent thought out of their customer base and workforce for some time now.

 Siberiandreamer wrote:
I'm glad most don't have such a high standard to expect their conversions to look pro... it's the creativity that counts.

I don't "expect" my conversions to look pro, it's that I know they aren't, so I'd rather have a model that looks good out of the box.

Creativity counts... but so does looking good, lol. I'm not trying to sound harsh to people who convert and it doesn't look pro, it's just personally I'd rather spend 3-5 hours painting a model/squad that looked good out of the box and will look good painted than spend 15-20 hours converting and painting a model/squad that will look mediocre but a bit unique.

Unless it's something crazy like an Ork riding a Tyranid or a Stormtalon that doesn't look like a guppy.

I felt differently when I started out in the hobby... maybe because I was younger, had more time, and didn't have an eye to see how terrible my conversions looked

 azreal13 wrote:

Dalymiddleboro wrote:

 amanita wrote:
Perhaps 'sad' is the wrong term...strange, maybe? How do you feel about terrain? Does it also need to be manufactured by GW, and if not why not?

Terrain doesn't bother me. GW doesn't own the rights to landscapes etc, unless it's something extremely unique. I'm 100% ok with crafted terrain, but when it comes to the actual models in the army I like everything to be GW

Have you thought about applying for a job with GW?

I'm sure they have a constant need for people with your approach, they've been trying to drum creativity and independent thought out of their customer base and workforce for some time now.

qft daly

Someone I know does nothing but conversions for armies. Like he made this ne knight conversion and it just sucks. He doesnt ever buy the expensive models, just makes them outta toys and it pisses me off. He just constantly pisses in the face of people who buy the official mmodels.
Now, I do run proxies, my Khorne Hounds are VC Dire Wolves because for 50$ I could get 20 of them.

I play a lot of my games in a actual GW store, so obviously an Imperial guard army made out of lego men isn't gonna cut it. that said I have no problem with creative conversions. that said they need to be good ones. putting a green army men tank turret on a brick, does not a predator make.

 Crimson wrote:
To me converting is the whole point of the hobby. I'm pretty sure my armies literally don't have a single model that wouldn't be at least some way converted.

That's a good way to think about it. I've always thought that a well painted army that is just unchanged GW models is nowhere as good as a mediocre painted army that has some really good conversions with some thought put into it.

I use bretonnians as rough riders in my army because i am not a fan of the rough rider models and bretonnians are sweet, and I love seeing people with conversions and funny armies, so long as I know what I am facing I don't care if they are gw or not, and have seen some very clever armies out there, such as once i saw a Mars Attacks! army that had brains as screamers, and then little martian dudes in ufos as demon princes and it was awesome.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Someone I know does nothing but conversions for armies. Like he made this ne knight conversion and it just sucks. He doesnt ever buy the expensive models, just makes them outta toys and it pisses me off. He just constantly pisses in the face of people who buy the official mmodels.
Now, I do run proxies, my Khorne Hounds are VC Dire Wolves because for 50$ I could get 20 of them.

See, this is the sort of situation that the rule of cool was made for.

If he was buying Gundam kits to use as Riptides, and they were all well built, well painted, dynamically posed and had weaponry that was fairly simple to identify their type, all appropriately scaled, I bet you'd have less of an issue.

If he is just going to the toy store, buying some cheap, off brand transformer knock offs and gluing them to a base (or piece of card) then I think you've a right to feel somewhat aggrieved.

That said, while I would agree that I'd dislike playing against the latter example, if they're appropriate sizes and the equipment is consistent and easy to tell apart, from a game point of view it is difficult to justify this opinion as anything other than snobbery on our part. He isn't "pissing in people's faces" because they've bought official models, he has just made different modelling choices, or is being creative with perhaps a limited budget.

I like variety. I like the GW models for the most part but if they only have one or two poses I'm looking at you Grotesques then I'm fine with using something that looks the part to add variety to my units. I play Dark Eldar and love the idea of Wychs even though they arn't that great this edition. I have the OOP Fantasy Wyches OOP 40k Wyches current 40k wyches both sci-fi and fantasy blood vestals from Raging Heroes as well as some converted sister repentias for my Wych squades. That way when I field several units of them they arn't all carbon copies of each other(they may be gear wise but they will have different poses).

I will say that I personally like conversions and counts as models to look the part of what they are supposed to be. I played in a fantasy tournament a couple of weeks ago and a Skaven player had so many unit fillers and kit bashed mash ups of things that were supposed to be doom wheels and such that I couldn't tell what was what and had to keep asking him what things were when I was deciding charges. I didn't say anything because the more the merrier and I want my local store to be successful and it was one game out of three so no big loss.

I only play with Tonka Toys and Barbie Dolls.

I love conversions and only play these sorts of games with friends, and am not into kool aide, so long as it's about the right size, and looks suitable, counts-as models are just fine at my table!

Remember also there are people like me who dont get into 40k lore that much at all but like the models (and more importantly model freedom) and game a lot. So with that view in mind my friends and I admire cool models, fun games and good times over GW fluff and models.

Thats why everyone has their own armies, so your army can be to your standard and taste while your opponent can have his army to his taste. And if you have similar tastes then great! If not shutup really.

I mean GW models can be very boring to see. I for one hate space marines (love scibor marines though) and am sick of seeing hordes of GW marine models that dont look right and are hardly posable (and very short and stubby). But I understand that appeals to many players as they are a popular army and I wouldnt dare critticise someone for their taste in models.

Once you realise the game isnt just about you and more about you AND the player in front of you then things like this dont matter. The game goes on and you get to use your "awesome army" and he gets to use his "awesome army".

So if you see conversions and cringe, bite your tounge or change your veiw point. After all I would love to make everyone do something to make their army unique. Even if its just something simple like their own symbol or converted commander. But I realise that some people (like you obviously) llike one of the many GW schemes and regiments. Which is great because I know when i look at your army you enjoy them. But once I go "I cant stand people who just dont put any uniqueness in their armies" im the jerk not the guy im mad at. Which is exactly what you are doing.

So dont be the jerk who thinks their army is superior model wise for one reason or another. Just be the guy who likes his army for what it is. Because remember that there is always an army that looks better than yours out there. So dont get smug about yours and condemn others armies.

Be a cool hobbiest.

I like models to have the right wargear and look sort of in place with the original vision of the unit. What I don't like is awful counts as just because someone wants to have the best new power units etc. It irritates me when I spend time searching through eBay for example meltaguns to equip my units with only for someone else to turn up with a unit of devastators equipped with one heavy bolter, one meltagun, one plasma gun and one plasma cannon and tell me they are all equipped with lascannons. Or a riptide with a Heavy burst cannon actually using an ion accelerator.

I spent some time in converting gun drones into marker drones only to play someone who just assumes i'm ok with his mixture of drones being used as marker drones.

I love unique paint jobs and good conversions, but hate lazy arsed people who have to play optimum net lists when they don't have models to represent them. Saying that I make exceptions generally if it's one unit and someone may be testing something out before they commit in a purchase but when I play them the third time and they are using three different things to represent 3 heldrakes then its over.

Genuine? Purist? Official? The way it's supposed to be?

Oh, kids these days.

I used to have a hobby called 40k. This hobby had its own magazine called White Dwarf. This magazine had hobby articles in it. One of these articles showed you how to make rules for your own vehicles. Another one of these articles showed you how to make that vehicle from deodorants and balsa wood.

But hey, I get it. You're young. You want your stuff to be exactly like everyone else's stuff. You know, so you won't stand out.

I have been playing this game for nearly 20 years. As a result...have an exalt!

Also this thread is already getting hopelessly muddied because people are confusing proxies with conversions. There is a very big difference.

Conversions used to be a huge creative part of the game.

This may shock you, but the current version of the Ork codex has an entire page on examples of model conversion. Hersey!

I would laugh at someone if they had a problem with my conversion. I mean, get over yourself.