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.

 Vermis wrote:

Kilkrazy wrote:
Some people look down on things like Hello Kitty Marines, or using cheap toys for Ork Trukks, and so on, because they are very emotionally invested in GW as the ultimate source of wargame wisdom and magnificent models. Everything must come from GW because that is the pinnacle.

When someone comes along and makes a comedy version, or does it just as well on the cheap, and has a great time, it undermines the emotional investment the 'true fan' has made. Naturally this is very irksome.

I think that has a lot to do with the financial investment too. After all, the GW hobby is buying GW products. Anyone using finely wrought styrene or card is cheating at the real game.

Cleatus wrote:
Also, wow, I am never going to get into historical wargaming.

I think it depends where you get into historical wargaming, and perhaps whether you get into Napoleonics or not. (There are so many other centuries' worth of people stabbing and shooting the shinola out of eachother) And like you experienced, there's always three or four mini police out there, for any game.

All Napoleonics isn't about prolonges and pompom colours, so don't get the wrong idea. It's like Vermis said, it's to do with the kind of people playing, not the kind of game.

I think we should consider the background to this, or at least the background that springs to my mind when I read the term 'poorhammer'.

I hear all those lofty gakkers who, on GW cranking up the prices each year (and the resultant grumbling and, for some, pricing out of the hobby) leap up to post that 'if you're too poor, you should get out of the hobby...

I imagine these people are a) children with no actual income or expenses or b) forever alone singles with no kids/mortgage/taxes/presents for significant other to pay out for or c) the simultaneously wealthy and obtuse.

When I read that someone had applied the term 'poorhammer' to this guy's scratchbuilt stuff, that's the first thing I heard from it. 'Poor'. I took it as an implied insult and the owner of the image did too. I don't think that's an unreasonable assumption.

Exalted, Stompa. It's my feeling, too.

Us "old guys" who have been with 40k for longer than some of the elitist jerks have been alive remember when a good scratchbuild was seen as cooler than the actual model. Used to be to have a Wave Serpent, you had to use spare Shuriken Cannons from a (newly released) plastic Vyper and a plastic spoon. And it was endorsed that way in White Dwarf!

It's just some idiots thinking that their way of playing with armymen gives them some sort of moral highground to troll their "lessers". Which is more than a little sad.

Hell, I play Epic Armageddon with tokens made from Vassal40K sprites printed and mounted at correct scale. So Epic Poorhammer, evidently.

 AegisGrimm wrote:


Hell, I play Epic Armageddon with tokens made from Vassal40K sprites printed and mounted at correct scale. So Epic Poorhammer, evidently.

I can picture that conversation already.

"So you're too cheap to buy models, and you've made up your own lame 40K knockoff?"

Lol, except in cases where altering the sprites pixel by pixel (or converting different patterns of tanks I could not get sprites for) to be WYSIWYG took longer than painting actual 6mm minis. I used to call it digital converting.

I guess I'm just too "poor" to spend what Epic stuff goes for nowadays.

Oh my god your army is fantastic. Still laughing at ground pounders thing. I would play you any day of the week. We mostly use whatever is at hand for terrain ourselves be this cardboard or boardgame boxes as buildings. We do have some fancy craters but that's about it.

 Cleatus wrote:
I recently discovered that some pictures of my scratch builds had been tagged "poorhammer". For what it's worth, the images in question had voting disabled and were marked as WIP. I also found some images belonging to other users that had been tagged with "poorhammer" and "cheaphammer". That's pretty insulting. It's one thing if you don't happen to like something that someone else creates, but to go out of your way to poor shame someone and mock something they have created because it's not an official model, that's pretty low. The Dakka Dakka community has been extremely supportive of scratch builders. It saddens me to see this kind of behavior here.

I have removed the offending tags from my images.

I like the term poorhammer, and see no shame in it. All those who used Kings of War to make Vampire Counts armies are into poorhammer.
Many time I have taken shortcuts to field units that resemble more expensive GW models.

I agree with the earlier statements that poor hammer rolls with warhammer and i a better term for budget warhammer than other options. Also those who practice budget warhammer should own the phrase, not the haters.
When you look at it, poorhammer players are a large minority. People who use alternate models, people who scratchbuild, people who proxy, people who use techniques to make ranked units have fewer models in them than the unit numbers (and I have seen GW staff use this technique). I could argue that those who buy exclusively from auctions are also into poorhammer.
Also as complaining about GW pricing is a common theme, it should be laudable, not derisable, to do something about it. Perhaps us poorhammer players are smarter.

Can I see your poorhammer units please Cleatus. I promise you it is not to laugh at them.

Speaking on behalf of our group - the weird kids in the corner - Poorhammer IS our philosophy - DIY papercraft and junk model tanks, and we settled on 1/72 for our games primarily because of the model pricing. Between our little group, the fun we've had scratchbuilding and converting, making awesome toys out of cheap junk, and writing our own ruleset and fluff to cover the demented creations of three lovers of bad sci fi and pulp horror has been tremendous.

Back when I was into the hobby as a kid, scratchbuilding was encouraged - anyone remember the WD with the Gobsmasha template? - and I have fond memories of an Ork Braincrusha I built around a kitchen roll tube representing the macro cannon. Happy days...

MeanGreenStompa wrote:I think we should consider the background to this, or at least the background that springs to my mind when I read the term 'poorhammer'.

I hear all those lofty gakkers who, on GW cranking up the prices each year (and the resultant grumbling and, for some, pricing out of the hobby) leap up to post that 'if you're too poor, you should get out of the hobby...

I imagine these people are a) children with no actual income or expenses or b) forever alone singles with no kids/mortgage/taxes/presents for significant other to pay out for or c) the simultaneously wealthy and obtuse.

When I read that someone had applied the term 'poorhammer' to this guy's scratchbuilt stuff, that's the first thing I heard from it. 'Poor'. I took it as an implied insult and the owner of the image did too. I don't think that's an unreasonable assumption.

That was how I read it, yes, that it was intended as an implied insult. It might not have been, but based on the replies in the thread I wasn't the only one that read it that way.

AegisGrimm wrote:Exalted, Stompa. It's my feeling, too.

Us "old guys" who have been with 40k for longer than some of the elitist jerks have been alive remember when a good scratchbuild was seen as cooler than the actual model. Used to be to have a Wave Serpent, you had to use spare Shuriken Cannons from a (newly released) plastic Vyper and a plastic spoon. And it was endorsed that way in White Dwarf!

It's just some idiots thinking that their way of playing with armymen gives them some sort of moral highground to troll their "lessers". Which is more than a little sad.

Hell, I play Epic Armageddon with tokens made from Vassal40K sprites printed and mounted at correct scale. So Epic Poorhammer, evidently.

Exactly. There was a time when GW didn't even make vehicles. Scratch building was the only option. Interesting how times have changed.

Gamgee wrote:Oh my god your army is fantastic. Still laughing at ground pounders thing. I would play you any day of the week. We mostly use whatever is at hand for terrain ourselves be this cardboard or boardgame boxes as buildings. We do have some fancy craters but that's about it.

Hehe, thank you. He's one of my favorites. I field him on a regular basis.

Orlanth wrote:

 Cleatus wrote:
I recently discovered that some pictures of my scratch builds had been tagged "poorhammer". For what it's worth, the images in question had voting disabled and were marked as WIP. I also found some images belonging to other users that had been tagged with "poorhammer" and "cheaphammer". That's pretty insulting. It's one thing if you don't happen to like something that someone else creates, but to go out of your way to poor shame someone and mock something they have created because it's not an official model, that's pretty low. The Dakka Dakka community has been extremely supportive of scratch builders. It saddens me to see this kind of behavior here.

I have removed the offending tags from my images.

I like the term poorhammer, and see no shame in it. All those who used Kings of War to make Vampire Counts armies are into poorhammer.
Many time I have taken shortcuts to field units that resemble more expensive GW models.

I agree with the earlier statements that poor hammer rolls with warhammer and i a better term for budget warhammer than other options. Also those who practice budget warhammer should own the phrase, not the haters.
When you look at it, poorhammer players are a large minority. People who use alternate models, people who scratchbuild, people who proxy, people who use techniques to make ranked units have fewer models in them than the unit numbers (and I have seen GW staff use this technique). I could argue that those who buy exclusively from auctions are also into poorhammer.
Also as complaining about GW pricing is a common theme, it should be laudable, not derisable, to do something about it. Perhaps us poorhammer players are smarter.

Can I see your poorhammer units please Cleatus. I promise you it is not to laugh at them.

I would post them here, but that would likely derail the thread, and to be honest I feel that this thread has probably gone on long enough already. With that being said, feel free to pop over to my gallery or my P&M blog (link in sig). I don't claim to be the most skilled scratch builder, but I've managed to make a few things that look "thematically correct" you might say. Trukks, bikes, artillery, etc.

Skinflint Games wrote:Speaking on behalf of our group - the weird kids in the corner - Poorhammer IS our philosophy - DIY papercraft and junk model tanks, and we settled on 1/72 for our games primarily because of the model pricing. Between our little group, the fun we've had scratchbuilding and converting, making awesome toys out of cheap junk, and writing our own ruleset and fluff to cover the demented creations of three lovers of bad sci fi and pulp horror has been tremendous.

Back when I was into the hobby as a kid, scratchbuilding was encouraged - anyone remember the WD with the Gobsmasha template? - and I have fond memories of an Ork Braincrusha I built around a kitchen roll tube representing the macro cannon. Happy days...

More power to you. I have also embraced the scratch building philosophy. Oh yes, the Gobsmasha template! And the articles in WD that taught you how to scratch build terrain and such. Admittedly I was not playing the game back in those days, but I have seen pictures from the old WD's and I'm a little bummed that GW doesn't include that sort of content anymore.

It's a shame really, I mean, part of the enjoyment of the hobby is to create your own models, and to be creative with parts. I've seen some scratchbuilds in my time, and they all take a level of creativity which, regardless of how much money went into the model, should be appreciated. And here's a picture of some budget flayed ones (because $72 is too much for 5).

I love most converted armies. The ones I love are the ones that are uniform(a plasma looks similar to a plasma, a bolter looks similar to a bolter, ect) It is amazing what some people create with their armies. Though I am particularity fond of some armies more than others. 2 examples being these

 conker249 wrote:
I love most converted armies. The ones I love are the ones that are uniform(a plasma looks similar to a plasma, a bolter looks similar to a bolter, ect) It is amazing what some people create with their armies. Though I am particularity fond of some armies more than others. 2 examples being these

Heresy and blasphemy an inquisitor is on its way to purge these atrocities!
If you don't have thick skin when making these conversions, you will run for the hill, some of the comments in my Hello kitty thread i find hilarious while others may find it offensive.
I don't mind every time someone gets offended by my creations a chaos god in the warp becomes stronger

Warhammer has gotten the reputation for being an overly expensive hobby so I can imagine that "poor" would be a problematic term. I have seen people upset at the costs and value told to play something else if they can't afford it, though not here but I am sure it has happened, even though the complaint wasn't about whether one could afford it or not.

My wife showed me an image recent where someone talked about how he and his wife had played Warhammer together and the first comment said that it had to be a lie as no house could afford to have two people that played Games Workshop games.

I'd also take anything from this board with a grain of salt. Dakka prides itself on uncensored and hostile opinions, while simultaneously chastising people for defending themselves. This is especially prevalent in the painting and modeling categories.

I stopped posting all my project logs here a while ago for that very reason.

 pox wrote:
I'd also take anything from this board with a grain of salt. Dakka prides itself on uncensored and hostile opinions, while simultaneously chastising people for defending themselves. This is especially prevalent in the painting and modeling categories.

I stopped posting all my project logs here a while ago for that very reason.

Overall I find the P&M section is generally helpful and nice. Obviously not 100%, but generally. I think the rules sections are generally more galvanized in their opinions and vitriolic.

Sorry you felt the need to leave, I quite enjoyed your work.

 Phydox wrote:
As a long time ork player I always enjoy seeing scratch built stuff. A lot of time Gdub didn't even have models made for stuff in their codex.. *cough*battlewagon *cough*

But for a while I played in the back of a bookstore and one guy would show up, start removing paperbacks from the shelves to "count as" rhinos, and when he stood then up on their end they were "counts as" dreadnoughts. He didn't even bring the books!

Come on man!

I think this is the same guy who tried to bring his little brother, wrap aluminum foil around him, and have him "count as" a titan. I don't mind warhammer on a budget, but sometimes you have to draw the line!

I would have absolutely 0 qualms with playing against this.

Until his little brother god-machine stood on your army.

 Cleatus wrote:
I recently discovered that some pictures of my scratch builds had been tagged "poorhammer". For what it's worth, the images in question had voting disabled and were marked as WIP. I also found some images belonging to other users that had been tagged with "poorhammer" and "cheaphammer". That's pretty insulting. It's one thing if you don't happen to like something that someone else creates, but to go out of your way to poor shame someone and mock something they have created because it's not an official model, that's pretty low. The Dakka Dakka community has been extremely supportive of scratch builders. It saddens me to see this kind of behavior here.

I have removed the offending tags from my images.

Somebody must be as blind as the proverbial bat. Because I looked over your gallery, and all I see is good work on your part.


Scratch building embodies the very heart and soul of the Orks. And you captured that spirit very well.


To hell with the snobs and elitists. Keep doing what you're doing as long as you're enjoying yourself.

 conker249 wrote:
I love most converted armies. The ones I love are the ones that are uniform(a plasma looks similar to a plasma, a bolter looks similar to a bolter, ect) It is amazing what some people create with their armies. Though I am particularity fond of some armies more than others. 2 examples being these

First image is heresy. Orbital strike imminent with an Exterminatus following.

Maybe we should close this thread now ?
We now know that no offence was intended by the term
' poorhammer ' and leaving it open only means more people not reading the whole thread get the wrong end of the stick.

I agree. We've found out all we need to about this topic.