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 would play against this player.

Makumba wrote:

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.

Did you get all those models at the same time, or did you collect that over a space of months or years?

 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:
One explanation for stuff like this becoming prevalent:

Spoiler:

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

One better explanation: GW removed the painting requirement to play in their stores. If they hadn't changed their rules then none of those models would have been allowed on the table, and the players would have had a choice of either painting their models or never playing at the store. IOW, just like it should be.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Makumba wrote:
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.

Your math is completely wrong. 76 weeks is a year and a half, not 19 years. So even if you only paint 3 hours per week it would take you a year and a half to paint your entire army. Spend a whole afternoon and make it 6 hours per week and you've got the whole thing done in less than a year.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 carlos13th wrote:
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.

And, as I keep pointing out, we do this all the time about things besides painting. If someone refuses to bathe more than once a month we say "you're not welcome here, come back when you're clean". If someone swears all the time in front of kids we say "watch your language or you'll have to leave". If some spends the whole game rules lawyering every possible advantage we say "this isn't fun, I'm going to play someone else instead". We don't just accept that some people have different values and interests, we tell them to fix their bad behavior or be excluded from the community. But somehow painting is different, and we're supposed to respect everyone's differences even when those differences consist of "I'm lazy and don't want to do my part to have an enjoyable game".

 Peregrine wrote:

 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:
One explanation for stuff like this becoming prevalent:

Spoiler:

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

One better explanation: GW removed the painting requirement to play in their stores. If they hadn't changed their rules then none of those models would have been allowed on the table, and the players would have had a choice of either painting their models or never playing at the store. IOW, just like it should be.

It's the same thing. They allowed amassing armies of unpainted models while destroying the games for people who want to play with only a few painted miniatures or want miniatures designed for fast painting. Apocalypse should have never happened.

 Peregrine wrote:
Automatically Appended Next Post:

Makumba wrote:
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.

Your math is completely wrong. 76 weeks is a year and a half, not 19 years. So even if you only paint 3 hours per week it would take you a year and a half to paint your entire army. Spend a whole afternoon and make it 6 hours per week and you've got the whole thing done in less than a year.

If it would be an Epic army, it would be done in three-to-five weekends.

This topic again, eh? Well, here's my stock answer:
I don't enjoy painting.

If you want me to spend many hours of my time and much monies of my money just to you don't have to look at an unpainted army then I'm afraid you're going to be disappointed.

Yes, painted armies do look better. Yes, (apparently) painting to a battlefield standard isn't too difficult. Yes, it might not take too many hours. But still:

I don't like painting.

As I collect and play GW products for my enjoyment, spending time and effort doing something I don't enjoy is rather pointless, wouldn't you say?
Also, if you don't want to play against me, for whatever reason at all, then I don't want to play against you, so it all balances out in the end.

Az

Peregrine your false equivalence is hilarious and absurd once more.

 carlos13th wrote:
Peregrine your false equivalence is hilarious and absurd once more.

There's nothing false about it. You just don't want to accept that bringing unpainted models to a game is bad behavior.

When I started playing 40k (about 4 yrs ago) I honestly thought I HAD to have all my minis painted in order to play. It was a bit intimidating and made me thing twice about starting it up. I think I had that idea from the "old days" when I first saw 40k and it was fairly standard to require painting models for participation. I went to a few game days and tournaments in my area and saw this was NOT a requirement, so i decided to go ahead and start playing. For better or worse I think the "social norm" has simply moved from the painted model requirement. There are plenty of other "social norms" that have changed since 40K was first published, so it is not a real surprise the position on painted minis has changed. I will say for me it made the game more approachable to see that model painting was NOT required to participate. If it was still that way I might have looked closerat other games.

That being said I still went to the effort to buy models and get them painted. I will admit I have played a few games with un-painted models but in the privacy of my own basement. Playing "out" I don't think I have played any un-painted models (maybe 1 or 2 "in-process models"?) I also would not refuse play or ostracize a player who did not have painted models, but if that is your thing, more power to you, but you may be fighting an uphill battle to swing the pendulum of "social norm" back in the other direction. You may also soon find yourself ostracized as TFG in the store. Then again I have been told I have "low standards" for my models, so take that for what it is worth.

There is one place in my area that does require "official" and painted models to participate in their tournaments. I heard they had refused a guys army because his Gazkull model was missing a bosspole or something so it was not "official". That kind of strictness makes me kind of avoid that place, over all I think that kind of thing might be a little short sighted and driving players/customers away from the store. I can tell you if I ran a store, I would rather have a busy store with an active scene composed of "legions of gray" over a store where I sit alone or with a few good customers and their fully painted armies.

Let me put it this way. I love painted models. I love having my army look awesome and amazing. But I also love gaming.'

I picked up my AdMech army less than a week ago, a Knight, 3 Skitarii, 3 Dunestriders, 2 Kataphron squads, 2 Kastelan squads, 2 Dominii, 2 Sicarians, 2 Onagers. I'm only almost done assembling my Knight, the Kataphrons, and one Dominus. I haven't had a single game yet, and I'm itching to play the new army I picked up spending on average around 4 to 5 hours daily on them. If you haven't tried assembling any of the AdMech miniatures yet, try it. Literally half the assembly needs to follow the instructions, otherwise they don't fit. The Skitarii legs only fit certain torsos/robes, the Kataphron armatures only fit certain torsos.

Frankly, right now, I want to get this army onto the table ASAP and have a game. We're not even going to discuss the fact that I've another week plus before bits for my Kastelans to be converted (so they don't look like Fisher Price toys) arrive from ebay.

This army isn't going to be done painting anytime soon either, because I've waited 8+ years for it to be released, ever since I saw a converted AdMech army in White Dwarf, and I'm going to take my time to make sure they bloody well look good.

Is that going to stop me from playing a couple of casual games once they're all assembled and grey, at my FLGS? No. Does it make me any less of a hobbyist? No. Is this bad behavior? Sure, if you're judging me for wanting to have a good looking army at the end of the day rather than slapping 3 colors on one and calling it quits just to be able to play a single game with the army I just dropped around a thousand dollars on.

It's a freakin' game. It's a freakin' hobby. If you're not talking about tournaments, leave people alone - not everyone can devote hours every day to painting. Let them spend some of their free time gaming too.

 Peregrine wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
Peregrine your false equivalence is hilarious and absurd once more.

There's nothing false about it. You just don't want to accept that bringing unpainted models to a game is bad behavior.

It's really not. Just means they prioritise a different aspect of the hobby to you. You can't police how other people enjoy the hobby. You can say 'I prefer playing against painted armies', that's fine, but it certainly isn't 'bad behaviour' to not paint models that you bought and can do what you want with.

 ImAGeek wrote:
but it certainly isn't 'bad behaviour' to not paint models that you bought and can do what you want with.

So why is it bad behavior to rules lawyer and be TFG with the models that you bought?

 Peregrine wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
Peregrine your false equivalence is hilarious and absurd once more.

There's nothing false about it. You just don't want to accept that bringing unpainted models to a game is bad behavior.

Something you have repeatedly failed to establish despite the fact I have asked you repeatedly to do so. Hell you have made no attempt to establish it just claimed it then made bad metaphors to hygiene.

Its no wonder gamer's get reputations as socially awkward when some people claim that not painting your models and not washing your body are some how analogous.

 Peregrine wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
but it certainly isn't 'bad behaviour' to not paint models that you bought and can do what you want with.

So why is it bad behavior to rules lawyer and be TFG with the models that you bought?

Because the first is breaking the game for an unfair advantage and the second means your lying and cheating. Not painting is neither of those.

 DoomShakaLaka wrote:
Because the first is breaking the game for an unfair advantage and the second means your lying and cheating. Not painting is neither of those.

You can be a rules lawyer and generally unpleasant person to play against without cheating or lying. And besides, why is cheating unacceptable behavior instead of just "doing what you want with the models you bought"? What justification do you have for telling a cheater that they're doing something wrong?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 carlos13th wrote:
Something you have repeatedly failed to establish.

I've established it over and over again: the reason we play with miniatures instead of cardboard tokens is the aesthetic value of those miniatures. Unpainted models look like and significantly reduce your opponent's ability to enjoy that aspect of the game.

Its no wonder gamer's get reputations as socially awkward when some people claim that not painting your models and not washing your body are some how analogous.

I never said they're exactly equivalent (obviously not bathing is worse), my point was that you can't make blanket statements about how you're never allowed to judge how other people play the game while simultaneously judging how they play the game. If "no judging" is truly a universal rule then you can't judge the guy who never bathes. And if you want the ability to judge that person then you have to abandon "no judging" as a universal rule and explain why unpainted armies should be considered acceptable behavior instead of just saying "that's judging and it's not allowed".

 Peregrine wrote:

 carlos13th wrote:
Peregrine your false equivalence is hilarious and absurd once more.

There's nothing false about it. You just don't want to accept that bringing unpainted models to a game is bad behavior.

It is bad behavior in your opinion. What if someone enjoyed body odor? They might love playing with Captain Stinkfoot of the Fungal Lords chapter. In their opinion, it is fun to play a game with that smelly guy with only one t-shirt to his name.

Don't try to act like subjective notions are anything resembling fact.

 j31c3n wrote:
It is bad behavior in your opinion. What if someone enjoyed body odor? They might love playing with Captain Stinkfoot of the Fungal Lords chapter. In their opinion, it is fun to play a game with that smelly guy with only one t-shirt to his name.

Do you honestly believe this and think that people shouldn't say "go home and take a shower" and call it bad behavior, or are you just trying to win a forum argument?

 Peregrine wrote:

 j31c3n wrote:
It is bad behavior in your opinion. What if someone enjoyed body odor? They might love playing with Captain Stinkfoot of the Fungal Lords chapter. In their opinion, it is fun to play a game with that smelly guy with only one t-shirt to his name.

Do you honestly believe this and think that people shouldn't say "go home and take a shower" and call it bad behavior, or are you just trying to win a forum argument?

That's most definitely some peoples' kink.

 Peregrine wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
but it certainly isn't 'bad behaviour' to not paint models that you bought and can do what you want with.

So why is it bad behavior to rules lawyer and be TFG with the models that you bought?

You seriously think playing with unpainted models is the same as cheating/rules lawyering? Okay, fine, but you can't make people paint models, so I guess you'll just have fewer opponents. Such a petty reason not to play someone though really. It doesn't actually have much effect on the enjoyment of the game, whereas TFGs and rules lawyering does.

 ImAGeek wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
but it certainly isn't 'bad behaviour' to not paint models that you bought and can do what you want with.

So why is it bad behavior to rules lawyer and be TFG with the models that you bought?

You seriously think playing with unpainted models is the same as cheating/rules lawyering? Okay, fine, but you can't make people paint models, so I guess you'll just have fewer opponents. Such a petty reason not to play someone though really. It doesn't actually have much effect on the enjoyment of the game, whereas TFGs and rules lawyering does.

It's really hard to reason people out of a position that was arrived upon via irrationality.

 Peregrine wrote:



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 carlos13th wrote:
Something you have repeatedly failed to establish.

I've established it over and over again: the reason we play with miniatures instead of cardboard tokens is the aesthetic value of those miniatures. Unpainted models look like and significantly reduce your opponent's ability to enjoy that aspect of the game.

Still failed to establish it as bad behavior just repeating your own personal peeves. Not everyone thinks unpainted models look like gak and not all opponents significantly have their enjoyment reduced by a lack of painted models.

Once again if you don't want to play with or against unpainted models then don't no one is making you. Expecting the entire world including people you don't play with and very likely would not want to play with you to do what you want or never not play war games at all.

No one claimed that you should never judge anyone about anything ever. Your comparison to bathing is not only false equivalence but it is attacking a straw man. Also someone playing with unpainted models doesn't fething affect you, just don't play with them yourself instead of claim they should be banned from playing in any way other than your preferred way.

TBH your general view and arguments in this thread can be summed up by the following.

^^ agreed

 ImAGeek wrote:
You seriously think playing with unpainted models is the same as cheating/rules lawyering?

No, you just keep missing the point of that argument. There is clearly no blanket rule against judging people for how they use the models they bought because we do judge cheaters/TFGs/etc. We don't just say "oh, you must enjoy cheating, so have fun". So an appeal to a blanket "no judging" rule as a reason not to judge people for having unpainted models is a broken argument.

It doesn't actually have much effect on the enjoyment of the game, whereas TFGs and rules lawyering does.

It really does. Unpainted models look like , if that's all I'm going to get from my opponent I might as well play a much better game instead of 40k.

 Peregrine wrote:
explain why unpainted armies should be considered acceptable behavior instead of just saying "that's judging and it's not allowed".

That's simple. You're one of the few people in this thread whose enjoyment of the game is affected by unpainted models.
Vast majority of posters here either plays with unpainted models or has no problems with playing with unpainted models.

There may also be some benefits of it like for example having more partners for big games.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

 ImAGeek wrote:
It doesn't actually have much effect on the enjoyment of the game, whereas TFGs and rules lawyering does.

It really does. Unpainted models look like , if that's all I'm going to get from my opponent I might as well play a much better game instead of 40k.

And here's the basic problem. You actually don't like Wh40k while most of people here do.

 Peregrine wrote:

I've established it over and over again: the reason we play with miniatures instead of cardboard tokens is the aesthetic value of those miniatures. Unpainted models look like and significantly reduce your opponent's ability to enjoy that aspect of the game.

So, what, is it also bad behavior to be a poor painter? Is there some kind of minimum standard people have to live up to before the game is enjoyable enough to warrant playing? Can you quantify it for me, or can I call people out for not matching my Golden Demon standard paintjobs? I mean, my gaming experience is being negatively affected here by you casual plebes. People can always pay someone to get professional paintjobs done for them, so no excuses. Pro painted or get a new hobby, that's what I say.

 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
explain why unpainted armies should be considered acceptable behavior instead of just saying "that's judging and it's not allowed".

That's simple. You're one of the few people in this thread whose enjoyment of the game is affected by unpainted models.

My enjoyment of the game is directly affected by unpainted models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
explain why unpainted armies should be considered acceptable behavior instead of just saying "that's judging and it's not allowed".

Vast majority of posters here either plays with unpainted models or has no problems with playing with unpainted models.

The vast majority of posters here don't have a vast collection of images of games made better by comprising solely of painted models. http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/439793.page


I'm constantly made to feel like some elitist donkey-cave for the social equivalent of asking someone else to also wear pants. That doesn't mean I'll never ever tolerate unpainted or unfinished models, but when a friend doesn't have time to finish a model and the game can't be put off till it's done because its a practice game for a tournament, I basically just put the camera down and play. But the biggest problem is the second my buddy tells me he couldn't get x model or models done, it kills my incentive to finish what I'm working on. It also means I might not have a game this week to upload pics of.

I can understand why someone might see my preference to only play with painted models as elitism. But feth those people, I put a lot of effort into my armies and setting up boards with painted terrain and documenting it all and it's a better set of images for it. I've never mocked or chastised anyone for the quality of their paintwork, I barely paint tabletop myself. Consistency, not quality, just consistency is all takes to paint an army, that and time. You wanna play me? Paint your gak.

Drops the mic.

tgjensen wrote:
So, what, is it also bad behavior to be a poor painter?

No, because there's a difference between refusing to try and not having Golden Demon level natural talent. Virtually anyone can paint at tabletop level, if they bother to do it, so the only excuse for not doing so is that you don't care about your opponent's reduced enjoyment of the game when you put your unpainted army on the table.

 Crablezworth wrote:

 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
explain why unpainted armies should be considered acceptable behavior instead of just saying "that's judging and it's not allowed".

That's simple. You're one of the few people in this thread whose enjoyment of the game is affected by unpainted models.

My enjoyment of the game is directly affected by unpainted models.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Aszubaruzah Surn wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:
explain why unpainted armies should be considered acceptable behavior instead of just saying "that's judging and it's not allowed".

Vast majority of posters here either plays with unpainted models or has no problems with playing with unpainted models.

The vast majority of posters here don't have a vast collection of images of games made better by comprising solely of painted models. http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/439793.page


I'm constantly made to feel like some elitist donkey-cave for the social equivalent of asking someone else to also wear pants.

It is not the equivalent of asking someone to wear pants at all.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Peregrine wrote:

tgjensen wrote:
So, what, is it also bad behavior to be a poor painter?

No, because there's a difference between refusing to try and not having Golden Demon level natural talent. Virtually anyone can paint at tabletop level, if they bother to do it, so the only excuse for not doing so is that you don't care about your opponent's reduced enjoyment of the game when you put your unpainted army on the table.

Or, that you don't enjoy it and would rather play. You're reducing their enjoyment by trying to make them paint.

 Peregrine wrote:
No, because there's a difference between refusing to try and not having Golden Demon level natural talent. Virtually anyone can paint at tabletop level, if they bother to do it, so the only excuse for not doing so is that you don't care about your opponent's reduced enjoyment of the game when you put your unpainted army on the table.

But you can pay to have your army painted well. If you're in this hobby you can afford it anyway. You could always play at lower points values to cut down the cost. At the end of the day it is still affects my enjoyment that my opponent won't put down the money to get a great painted army. That's inconsiderate. This is about aesthetic value, not handing out gold stars for effort.

I don't enjoy playing against unpainted armies as much as painted ones, of course.

I also don't enjoy it as much when my opponent's clearly having a bad day. Or when I'm playing in a gaming store that isn't clean. Or when the environments too loud, or hot, or cold, or
anything at all. You can make people feel bad, or just forget about it. I say forget about it.

When I game, I live with the understanding that a 100%-primo awesome gaming situation isn't always going to happen. And all things considered, I'd rather play against a fun opponent with an unpainted army than a scrub with a bad attitude and a well painted army.

 carlos13th wrote:
Still failed to establish it as bad behavior just repeating your own personal peeves. Not everyone thinks unpainted models look like gak and not all opponents significantly have their enjoyment reduced by a lack of painted models.

Yes, I agree with you that It wouldn't be fair claiming a lack of will to paint ones models is a sign of bad behaviour. One should be able to bring unpainted models to a store with a reasonale expectation of a chance to play against like-minded folks. But on the same note, if Peregrine or I were ever to play a game with you and we decided that playing against you wouldn't be worth our time becuase your models were unpainted, then it would be perfectly reasonable for us to decline playing a game with you. For people like Peregrine and me, unpainted armies are an eyesore and completely immersion breaking. You and I just wouldn't be compatible in a game of 40K.