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.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Sheokronath wrote:
Given the number of unpainted armies I suspect it's more a matter of just finding someone else in the room than it is painting their armies.

Yes, obviously the situation isn't ideal right now. But people with unpainted armies should be excluded until they paint them, like they would be in the historicals community. It's unfortunate that GW has managed to lower the scifi/fantasy community's standards with their obsessive "sales at any cost" approach and unpainted armies are tolerated.

While I disagree with you I can appreciate that what you're saying is coming from the same place as what I'm saying is and you just want what's best for 40k, same as I do. But where I will agree with you is that GW have perpetuated the lack of need for painted minis since they went public and shifted their approach towards selling as much as they can with little thought to aftercare for the people who actually stay with the game. They've been able to push it this way because they're the powerhouse in the sci-fi wargaming business and are the face of miniature wargaming to a lot of people and most people entering 40k do it through a GW and so adopt GWs attitude to the hobby. I just think the way around this is by nurturing the desire to paint and not pushing people away until they do, GWs attitude isn't going to change, people who won't paint are always welcome there and that's not good for independents, if we set bars to entry most people will go where they can pursue the same activity without the same bars on entry.

 Peregrine wrote:

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
You can tell them but you can't force them to leave unless the store owner kicks them out. Seriously its a free coun... ER world. Even weird people have rights you know.

Obviously I can't, but nobody is suggesting that they have the ability to force someone to leave a store. We can, however, refuse to play against them and let them sit in the corner watching until they get bored and go home to paint their models.

That sounds like a horrible gaming group.

You know if all you want to do is line up your models and pat yourselves on the back over the wonderful sight you've created... you don't even have to play a game. You can literally just line up your models and look at them. It seems to be the only thing you're interested in anyway given how reprehensible you find the rules themselves.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Sheokronath wrote:
While I disagree with you I can appreciate that what you're saying is coming from the same place as what I'm saying is and you just want what's best for 40k, same as I do. But where I will agree with you is that GW have perpetuated the lack of need for painted minis since they went public and shifted their approach towards selling as much as they can with little thought to aftercare for the people who actually stay with the game. They've been able to push it this way because they're the powerhouse in the sci-fi wargaming business and are the face of miniature wargaming to a lot of people and most people entering 40k do it through a GW and so adopt GWs attitude to the hobby. I just think the way around this is by nurturing the desire to paint and not pushing people away until they do, GWs attitude isn't going to change, people who won't paint are always welcome there and that's not good for independents, if we set bars to entry most people will go where they can pursue the same activity without the same bars on entry.

I see 40k as a wargame with mainstream appeal, accepting some people aren't going to paint their armies is part of what allows it to have mainstream appeal.

It's true that in historics there's the assumption that models are going to be painted before being played with.... but historics aren't 40k and I don't think 40k needs to narrow it's target audience to only include those willing to spend hundreds of hours painting models (or thousands of dollars for commission painters).

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
[quote=Peregrine 650417 7872269 6e2a7a65b40f1b794057fa352dcb053f.jpgI see 40k as a wargame with mainstream appeal, accepting some people aren't going to paint their armies is part of what allows it to have mainstream appeal.

It's true that in historics there's the assumption that models are going to be painted before being played with.... but historics aren't 40k and I don't think 40k needs to narrow it's target audience to only include those willing to spend hundreds of hours painting models (or thousands of dollars for commission painters).

I agree, I don't expect anyone to paint, I barely do, I'm fine with playing with anyone who doesn't choose to. I enjoy my games anyway but if a group is consistent people paint then they'll make more headway by supporting them than they will be forcing them out.

 Verviedi wrote:
There is no such thing as a model so poorly painted that it shouldn't be on the table. Even a bad paint job shows effort on the part of the painter.

Actually, bringing a "tabletop-standard" painted 500GBP titan is kinda like coming in a tubgirl printed on t-shirt DDDDDDDDD: . It's simply obscene DDDDD: . I was exaggerating when writing about cringing before but after seeing it, my reaction was like this.

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I don't think 40k needs to narrow it's target audience to only include those willing to spend hundreds of hours painting models (or thousands of dollars for commission painters).

Painting an army to tabletop standard doesn't take hundreds of hours.

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I don't think 40k needs to narrow it's target audience to only include those willing to spend hundreds of hours painting models (or thousands of dollars for commission painters).

Painting an army to tabletop standard doesn't take hundreds of hours.

Granted, but it can take time people don't have. When I first got in to 40k I was working a job that had me out of the house 14 hours a day, needing eight hours to sleep, that left me four hours a day to shower, cook, sort out my clothes etc, by the time I was done I had maybe two hours a night to split between my family and alone time. When the weekends came I'd be so exhausted that I would spend my Saturdays in bed, battling my tiredness from the week and the depression my job caused. 40k was my way of escaping all that. The only time I had for campaigning beyond some hurried assembly after work was a three hour windows on Sundays when a friend and i would play.

This gave me about 12 hours a month for gaming time and I worked this job for seven months. It takes me nearly two hours to paint a marine to tabletop standard so the option came down to play a game of 40k or paint a marine. I literally did not have the time to paint an army, in my circumstance it may as well have taken hundreds of hours to paint the whole army, the time just wasn't there. If I went to your store and everyone there refused to play because i had no painted army then I just wouldn't have come back and probably would have dropped the game entirely. Or just gone to GW.

Some of the people in this thread I wouldn't want to play against or spend time with no matter how well painted their armies are.

If you want to see painted armies being inclusive and help people paint and give them interesting avenues to do so. Don't go being an donkey-cave towards them and exclude them until they have painted their armies.

Also depending on the size of the army, how quickly one paints and the level of painting one wishes to paint their models it very well can take hundreds of hours to paint army.

 carlos13th wrote:
Some of the people in this thread I wouldn't want to play against or spend time with no matter how well painted their armies are.

If you want to see painted armies being inclusive and help people paint and give them interesting avenues to do so. Don't go being an donkey-cave towards them and exclude them until they have painted their armies.

Also depending on the size of the army, how quickly one paints and the level of painting one wishes to paint their models it very well can take hundreds of hours to paint army.

Agreed and exalted.

The phantom I posted a little while ago took me about 40 hours of actual painting to get done... Includes assembly and sealing the paint.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The dark blue that I go for my army colors takes 3 coats to get done and the majority of the model is that color.

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I don't think 40k needs to narrow it's target audience to only include those willing to spend hundreds of hours painting models (or thousands of dollars for commission painters).

Painting an army to tabletop standard doesn't take hundreds of hours.

I don't want my army painted to "tabletop standard," I want every model painted so that I can be proud of it. I play Orks. I've been painting for nearly twenty years and I'm still not done. A lot of my painted models are from 2nd ed or Gorkamorka and aren't usable any more because they're on the wrong bases or flat out don't exist (looking at you, cyboar). I don't want to just slap three colours on each model and get to gaming; each unit is a project. I want to take my time and paint them until I'm happy. A character model easily takes a couple of weeks of painting; a five-man unit can take a month. I don't have a lot of time for painting; I have a job, I'm in school, and I have a kid. But when I paint my dudes, I want to be proud of the result.

At the same time, I want to play games once in a while. So yeah, sometimes I bring unpainted models, especially if it's a new unit that's just come out or one that I don't use very often. Some people just want to play the game and don't care about the hobby or the miniatures. I'm not one of them, but I'm happy to play against them. Some people just don't have the time. I respect that. Life is busy. Games are meant to be fun. Hobbies are supposed to be enjoyable. I'm not going to ask someone to pay a misery tax by doing something they don't like in their few leisure hours before I'll let them enjoy themselves by playing a game. I'll chat with someone new, play a fun game, and have a great time.

Anyone that doesn't like it can play against someone else, if it really bothers them that much.

If I didnt play with unpainted models I'd never play, or still be at < 500 points. I dont have a lot of free time and I paint slowly so I'd rather build more stuff first so I can actually play. That being said I do agree that playing with or against painted stuff is more awesome though.

 Sheokronath wrote:
It takes me nearly two hours to paint a marine to tabletop standard

I don't understand how. Spray prime the base color, and do a whole squad at once. Add a few details (secondary color, silver bolters, etc). Cover the whole thing in black/brown wash. You should be able to do a whole squad in two hours, if not more.

What a load of crap I'm sorry, just because someone's Army is not painted is no grounds for not playing a game with them, if anyone tried that in my community they would be looked at as TFG rather and a snob and games would be refused based on that not because of his army being painted or not. People should not have to cater to other people's needs to enjoy a HOBBY especially if they have more important things in life such as family, work ect. And I really don't understand the whole comparison to bathing, it doesn't fit at all. Poor hygiene can affect multiple people with odor and potentially illness, an unpainted army is just that, an army that is not painted.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Sheokronath wrote:
It takes me nearly two hours to paint a marine to tabletop standard

I don't understand how. Spray prime the base color, and do a whole squad at once. Add a few details (secondary color, silver bolters, etc). Cover the whole thing in black/brown wash. You should be able to do a whole squad in two hours, if not more.

Guess what not everyone paints to the same speed as you do and probably not in the same way as you do. Everyone is different, congratulations you figured out how to paint table top quality at good speed, just because someone else wants to take more time to do it there is nothing wrong with that.

 gmaleron wrote:
What a load of crap I'm sorry, just because someone's Army is not painted is no grounds for not playing a game with them

Of course it's grounds for refusing a game. If I'm not going to enjoy the game then why should I be obligated to play against someone?

People should not have to cater to other people's needs to enjoy a HOBBY especially if they have more important things in life such as family, work ect.

Nobody is saying that you should give up on important things like work or family to paint. But if you have time to play a game you have time to paint. Stop acting like painting is some kind of impossible requirement in a busy life.

And I really don't understand the whole comparison to bathing, it doesn't fit at all.

Of course it fits. Certain people have claimed that you have no right to judge how another person plays the game unless they're doing something unsafe or illegal, and mere preferences are not enough. Well, wanting to play against people who don't stink is a mere preference, not a legal/safety issue. So clearly we do have the right to judge other people for bad behavior that isn't a legal/safety issue, and it's absurd to make broad claims about how we can't as a matter of principle. What we're left with is the much less impressive argument that unpainted models aren't a big deal, so we should just accept them.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 gmaleron wrote:
Guess what not everyone paints to the same speed as you do and probably not in the same way as you do. Everyone is different, congratulations you figured out how to paint table top quality at good speed, just because someone else wants to take more time to do it there is nothing wrong with that.

In my experience very, very few of the people who play with unpainted models do it because they're amazing painters who work slowly and want to make everything perfect. It's much more likely that they don't care at all and half their models have broken pieces from being carelessly thrown into a shoebox between games. And I can't think of any army I've seen with unpainted models that was painted to better than the tabletop standard I described.

Then that is your experience, we don't have anyone like that at my FLGS or at any of the GW and other game stores I've visited out west. Even our resident Ork Player takes really good care of his models. If it's the case of laziness I agree they could be painted, however in my experience most of the people I've met just have a lot going on in their lives. One of my friends for example, lost several fingers on his dominant hand in the Middle East and only has a semi painted dark angels army because he has to commission out. The idea that he would be refused a game based on his physical disability I won't lie ticks me off a little bit and chances are you would be labeled TFG really quickly and never get a game at all. I can understand a preference of wanting to play against a fully painted army, I rather enjoy fully painted games more so than compared to someone who doesn't paint at all and I respect that. But I won't ever refuse someone a game because they have an unpainted army or in the process of painting it because in the end then you're not playing either.

 gmaleron wrote:
The idea that he would be refused a game based on his physical disability

He wouldn't. I would make an exception to the rule for someone who has a legitimate reason for not painting (IOW, not "I don't want to"), and I think most people who expect painted models would feel the same way. But people who have a physical disability like that are a tiny minority of the people who don't have painted armies. The vast majority of the time they are perfectly capable of painting but refuse to do it.

in the end then you're not playing either.

So what? If I'm not going to enjoy the game then not playing at all is no real loss. I have plenty of other things to do with my time if my only option for playing 40k isn't fun.

As long as i can tell what any given figure is in your army, I don't care if you paint it.

Meanwhile, I will not put any figure on the table that is not fully painted. If it isn't finished i won't play with it. Of course that means, any army of mine that is missing important bits won't be coming out to play until i finish painting those bits.

 Peregrine wrote:

AllSeeingSkink wrote:
I don't think 40k needs to narrow it's target audience to only include those willing to spend hundreds of hours painting models (or thousands of dollars for commission painters).

Painting an army to tabletop standard doesn't take hundreds of hours.

"Hundreds" might have been a slight exaggeration for your typical army, but not by a lot. I assume we're talking about relatively new players who probably don't know how to paint as well or as quickly as someone who has been doing it for as many years as you or me. Even then, at best I can produce a push fit Cadian in about 30 minutes from sprue to finished model including basing (average time for doing a batch of 5 to 10). That's my minimum "table top standard" and it's my, ummm, I think 5th army, so I've had plenty of practice. I don't expect a newbie to be able to do that, realistically I'd be saying 1 hour per model, and that's just a basic infantryman, characters/commands/vehicles can easily chew up more. Since your definition of "table top standard" is (if I recall correctly) having every detail painted an appropriate colour, some models take much longer than that, Space Wolves for example my time per model STARTS at 1 and a half hours for a basic model just from the sheer amount of detail on them.

My Tyranids (which took about 3 years to produce working a few hours a week) if I go through and add up is easily a couple of hundred hours and they're far from high quality.

One of the great deceptions of wargaming IMO is misleading people just how long it'll take them to produce an army. Especially when they're new and probably haven't mastered a lot of the time-saving techniques. I'm pretty sure that's a large contributor as to why there's so many half painted armies on ebay.

That's even assuming the player WANTS to paint their army to a low quality. If they don't want to waste their time and money painting an army to a crappy standard but would rather work their way through and paint them to a good standard, I don't see any problem with that either.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Sheokronath wrote:
It takes me nearly two hours to paint a marine to tabletop standard

I don't understand how. Spray prime the base color, and do a whole squad at once. Add a few details (secondary color, silver bolters, etc). Cover the whole thing in black/brown wash. You should be able to do a whole squad in two hours, if not more.

It is very hard for some people. I have a Base spray of white so I actually have to paint the whole model. I don't use a paint gun so I do everything by hand brush. It takes quite some time with having to do 3 coats of dark blue for my army. The dark blue alone on 10 wraithguard took me 4 hours.

 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:

 Verviedi wrote:
There is no such thing as a model so poorly painted that it shouldn't be on the table. Even a bad paint job shows effort on the part of the painter.

Actually, bringing a "tabletop-standard" painted 500GBP titan is kinda like coming in a tubgirl printed on t-shirt DDDDDDDDD: . It's simply obscene DDDDD: . I was exaggerating when writing about cringing before but after seeing it, my reaction was like this.

....Tabletop standard is not hardcore porn...
I need to stop replying to your absolutely idiotic posts. You are stating that nobody should ever play any wargame whatsoever. By the time your completely slowed idea produces any half decent painters, every single game company will have gone out of business due to people only buying buckets of toy soldiers. And before you say game companies will see toy soldiers, that's what they're doing now..

I will not forsake my models (which everyone in my FLGS enjoys playing against) just so I can buy non-detailed, low quality toy soldiers to satisfy somebody's half-baked desires.

You are expecting
•People are willing to paint for 3-10 years before playing a single game.
•People are willing to paint in general
•People hate decently painted models so much they would rather pay thousands of dollars for a pro painter.

All of those expectations are unrealistic.

 Sheokronath wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
Some of the people in this thread I wouldn't want to play against or spend time with no matter how well painted their armies are.

If you want to see painted armies being inclusive and help people paint and give them interesting avenues to do so. Don't go being an donkey-cave towards them and exclude them until they have painted their armies.

Also depending on the size of the army, how quickly one paints and the level of painting one wishes to paint their models it very well can take hundreds of hours to paint army.

Agreed and exalted.

x2 from me

 carlos13th wrote:
Some of the people in this thread I wouldn't want to play against or spend time with no matter how well painted their armies are.

If you want to see painted armies being inclusive and help people paint and give them interesting avenues to do so. Don't go being an donkey-cave towards them and exclude them until they have painted their armies.

Also depending on the size of the army, how quickly one paints and the level of painting one wishes to paint their models it very well can take hundreds of hours to paint army.

+1'd sir

Well said.

 carlos13th wrote:
Some of the people in this thread I wouldn't want to play against or spend time with no matter how well painted their armies are.

This is very true. Regardless of their stance on painting, gaming groups and communities should police the kind of behavior they accept. Rudeness and general unpleasantness should be nipped in the bud quickly.

 carlos13th wrote:

If you want to see painted armies being inclusive and help people paint and give them interesting avenues to do so. Don't go being an donkey-cave towards them and exclude them until they have painted their armies.

This is what our club has always done. We always make sure to have figures on hand to lend to anyone who doesn't have figs painted for a given game. This is especially important since the club runs a reasonably wide range of games. We trade painting tips and encourage each other and sometimes we trade units for painting as a way of getting armies done without too much monotony. If a club or community is going to have a paint requirement they should strive to make sure that no one is excluded for not having painted minis. I like to say that "Unpainted minis are not welcome ON the table, but everyone is welcome AT the table."

Life's to short for unpainted minis or unpleasant opponents.

 Eilif wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
Some of the people in this thread I wouldn't want to play against or spend time with no matter how well painted their armies are.

This is very true. Regardless of their stance on painting, gaming groups and communities should police the kind of behavior they accept. Rudeness and general unpleasantness should be nipped in the bud quickly.

 carlos13th wrote:

If you want to see painted armies being inclusive and help people paint and give them interesting avenues to do so. Don't go being an donkey-cave towards them and exclude them until they have painted their armies.

This is what our club has always done. We always make sure to have figures on hand to lend to anyone who doesn't have figs painted for a given game. This is especially important since the club runs a reasonably wide range of games. We trade painting tips and encourage each other and sometimes we trade units for painting as a way of getting armies done without too much monotony. If a club or community is going to have a paint requirement they should strive to make sure that no one is excluded for not having painted minis. I like to say that "Unpainted minis are not welcome ON the table, but everyone is welcome AT the table."

Life's to short for unpainted minis or unpleasant opponents.

Eilif am I right in thinking your club also generally has spare painted armies for people to play with until theirs is painted up too? So that people don't feel excluded while painting up their armies?

The problem I have with some people here is that it's not just they want to not play with unpainted minis but they want to make it a worldwide rule that anyone should follow at every store. I take no issue with our club saying only painted miniatures sorry it's how we prefer to game. I would have a problem if you tried to make every other club conform to that.

 carlos13th wrote:
Some of the people in this thread I wouldn't want to play against or spend time with no matter how well painted their armies are.

These threads always seem to bring out an odd fundamentalist streak from the Dakka community (or a few loud members). I've probably got one of the best ratios of painted minis fielded in my local group (though they're not the highest quality), but I can comprehend that some people (brace yourself, I'm going to blow your mind) don't enjoy painting.

 Elemental wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
Some of the people in this thread I wouldn't want to play against or spend time with no matter how well painted their armies are.

These threads always seem to bring out an odd fundamentalist streak from the Dakka community (or a few loud members). I've probably got one of the best ratios of painted minis fielded in my local group (though they're not the highest quality), but I can comprehend that some people (brace yourself, I'm going to blow your mind) don't enjoy painting.

Yeah for real, I've seen a few of the threads with the same topic. Seems like the same vocal minority of people who have this attitude about how you're supposed to enjoy the hobby. I would rather not play, than play with somebody who has a superiority complex about their minis, and how they want to project that onto my own.

 Elemental wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
Some of the people in this thread I wouldn't want to play against or spend time with no matter how well painted their armies are.

These threads always seem to bring out an odd fundamentalist streak from the Dakka community (or a few loud members). I've probably got one of the best ratios of painted minis fielded in my local group (though they're not the highest quality), but I can comprehend that some people (brace yourself, I'm going to blow your mind) don't enjoy painting.

It is amazing that some people cant comprehend that some people may not have the same values or interests as them when it comes to playing but instead of just accepting that and not playing with said people they instead think the should mould the hobby for everyone to suit their own preferences.

My Tyranids (which took about 3 years to produce working a few hours a week) if I go through and add up is easily a couple of hundred hours and they're far from high quality.

One of the great deceptions of wargaming IMO is misleading people just how long it'll take them to produce an army. Especially when they're new and probably haven't mastered a lot of the time-saving techniques. I'm pretty sure that's a large contributor as to why there's so many half painted armies on ebay.

So let me look at my army. 40 blobs , 30 veterans , 2 command squads , 3 chimeras, 2 russes, 2 vendettas and one medusa which I counts as a wyvern. 80 infantry models time is 80 hours. Lets say a tank takes up 10 or 15 min each, 10 vehicles will be 100-150hours to finish army. 230hours to finish the whole thing. 3 free hours per weekend times two days, not counting being busy or sicks or holydays is 76,666 week. which ends with a final 19 plus years to finish the army. even if I somehow tripled my free time it would still be 6+ years to be able to play the army. Now if 6 or more years is not long time, then I dont know what is. Going by GW timer it is 3 editions and the army may be illegal by the time it is finished being painted.

 clamclaw wrote:
Yeah for real, I've seen a few of the threads with the same topic. Seems like the same vocal minority of people who have this attitude about how you're supposed to enjoy the hobby. I would rather not play, than play with somebody who has a superiority complex about their minis, and how they want to project that onto my own.

With wording to marginalize a valid point some have to say like "vocal minority, attitude, superiority complex" it may be hard to find a middle ground.
I sincerely doubt many of those who spoke up here have a "superiority complex about their minis".
I think every single one of us can look at what we did and can see how it could be done better.
Sometimes you have to draw a line in the sand and figure out where to stop so you can get down to the business of playing a game and being social.

I have stated before I have played against opponents who have not assembled their models fully they were actually "unarmed".
I am getting older and life is short, I have time for nice people and MAKE time for my opponent when they put obvious effort into the game (designed a scenario, made some terrain, JUST got their army together, fully painted their stuff), in each instance I can think "alright! cool!".

I have decided I need to draw the line on unarmed models and really, really prefer playing against painted armies.

If a person must judge, the only consistent way is by someone's actions.
When someone puts effort into the hobby into something as demonstrable as painting, you know the game really means something to them.

I have experienced too many times the unhappy coincidence (or not!) that some of the cave-face types field the grey legion until the next "hotness" or "netlist" comes out.
Because you know, things could change in a moment so why bother and it is not in the rules so too bad.

So, it may be unfair in certain circumstances but a person would "judge" the gamer by the state of the army he fields.
Makes a really easy evaluation method especially for something as precious as your gaming time.
<edit> By the way, I said "painted", the "quality" is somewhat meaningless because we all have varying skill levels. Though tie-dye marines may raise an eyebrow.

 Peregrine wrote:

 Sheokronath wrote:
Given the number of unpainted armies I suspect it's more a matter of just finding someone else in the room than it is painting their armies.

Yes, obviously the situation isn't ideal right now. But people with unpainted armies should be excluded until they paint them, like they would be in the historicals community.

Warhammer community can't be compared to historicals community. Historicals community has support of boardgame wargaming companies, so anyone who doesn't have a fully painted army can participate in gaming by playing high quality boardgames.

Games Workshop not only doesn't release board wargames but also axed the specialist games which were great for people with less money/time for painting.
Computer gaming support is also horrible last 15 years being dominated by gimmicky RTS and DOTA games.

One explanation for stuff like this becoming prevalent:


is disappearance of games focused on ease of painting/with less model per game.

 Peregrine wrote:
Of course it fits. Certain people have claimed that you have no right to judge how another person plays the game unless they're doing something unsafe or illegal, and mere preferences are not enough. Well, wanting to play against people who don't stink is a mere preference, not a legal/safety issue. So clearly we do have the right to judge other people for bad behavior that isn't a legal/safety issue, and it's absurd to make broad claims about how we can't as a matter of principle.

BO isn't a behaviour. Also, your assumption that people with BO don't wash everyday or a few times a day is based solely on your imagination.

 Verviedi wrote:
....Tabletop standard is not hardcore porn...
I need to stop replying to your absolutely idiotic posts. You are stating that nobody should ever play any wargame whatsoever. By the time your completely slowed idea produces any half decent painters, every single game company will have gone out of business due to people only buying buckets of toy soldiers. And before you say game companies will see toy soldiers, that's what they're doing now..

I will not forsake my models (which everyone in my FLGS enjoys playing against) just so I can buy non-detailed, low quality toy soldiers to satisfy somebody's half-baked desires.

You are expecting
•People are willing to paint for 3-10 years before playing a single game.
•People are willing to paint in general
•People hate decently painted models so much they would rather pay thousands of dollars for a pro painter.

All of those expectations are unrealistic.

Well, if painting is to be mandatory, there have to be some standards.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Makumba wrote:

My Tyranids (which took about 3 years to produce working a few hours a week) if I go through and add up is easily a couple of hundred hours and they're far from high quality.

One of the great deceptions of wargaming IMO is misleading people just how long it'll take them to produce an army. Especially when they're new and probably haven't mastered a lot of the time-saving techniques. I'm pretty sure that's a large contributor as to why there's so many half painted armies on ebay.

So let me look at my army. 40 blobs , 30 veterans , 2 command squads , 3 chimeras, 2 russes, 2 vendettas and one medusa which I counts as a wyvern. 80 infantry models time is 80 hours. Lets say a tank takes up 10 or 15 min each, 10 vehicles will be 100-150hours to finish army. 230hours to finish the whole thing. 3 free hours per weekend times two days, not counting being busy or sicks or holydays is 76,666 week. which ends with a final 19 plus years to finish the army. even if I somehow tripled my free time it would still be 6+ years to be able to play the army. Now if 6 or more years is not long time, then I dont know what is. Going by GW timer it is 3 editions and the army may be illegal by the time it is finished being painted.

That's why axing Epic and creating Apocalypse was an awful idea.