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.

RoninXiC wrote:
So you wouldn't play against old armies than? Armies that do not fit the powerporn fantasy of 2017? Like 80s miniatures?

I dislike many of the old miniatures, they're ugly.

So you wouldn't play against someone who plays with the wrong miniatures?

 Vermis wrote:

But clearly, you do realize 40K has way more than just rules, it's a whole big package and people who like any parts of this package can have fun with people who like any other part of this package so long as everyone respects the package.

What's not to like about that?

Replace 'package' with 'trap' and you might begin to understand. It's more about keeping you inside GW's ecosystem and away from anything else, than about fulfilling your every gaming need.

And how is that a trap?

I'm keeping myself to Eldar and I'm not interested in other collections.

I'm happy with Eldar fighting the other 40k races.

And I'm happy with the price/quality/universe compromise.

 Vermis wrote:


What makes it ironic is that Dreamforge's aesthetic should just scratch the surface of the variation of guard regiments suggested by the fluff in the 'package'. I remember 3rd ed mentions of feudal/medieval worlds, which should alllow you to stick a rifle in the hands of a Perry or Fireforge plastic figure. And what about the tiny handful of alternate guard miniatures (struggling against the Cadian monoculture) like Valhallans or Steel Legion? Do appropriate proxies from WWI - WWII ranges totally ruin that 40K aesthetic?

Yes well it looks like it doesn't belong.

And also I hate roughriders and your medieval lasrifle boys.
I'm not happy about the Imperial Guard Russians and Germans either but hey what can you do about it...
I'm quite sure proxies would make it even worse, but I'd have to see it to discuss it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

RoninXiC wrote:
So you wouldn't play against someone who plays with the wrong miniatures?

I would rather avoid that when possible, yes.
And I would totally avoid it if it goes full poney.

From a tournament point of view, you also have to consider the potential for opponent confusion.

Now, some Proxy stuff will likely be OK - so alternate Guard sculpts where it's obvious what's a lascannon and what's an autocannon, and that Tank A is clearly intended to be a Leman Russ equivalent by the sculptor.

Others? Not so much. If the models aren't the same scale, it interferes with True Line of Sight - and like or dislike that rule - it's still a rule to be adhered to.

It's the same personal rule I apply to proxy models - can I, at a glance, tell what's what? If my opponent has to take time each turn to remind what's what, the proxy has gone too far. And that I apply to proxy GW models as well. Don't arrange a game with me if your Lascannons might be Lascannons, Missle Launchers and Heavy Bolters in the same list, because you don't have the right models. Personally, I'm ok with say, all Lascannons in fact being Heavy Bolters. That helps eliminate the confusion. But when it's all jumbled up, the visual cues go out the window. That slows down play, and can lead to tactical blunders because what I thought was a Heavy Bolter suddenly rips the side off my Transport, incinerating the troops inside.

Proxying things is completely different to outright replacements.

It's one thing to say your lascannon is a plasma gun. It's another to use a completely different style of miniatures.

Still proxy in my lexicon - provided that I can spot the difference between your Guardsmen and your Stormtoopers, and know what they're carrying from across the board, I'll probably be fine - again provided they're reasonable sized (so actual 28mm would be too diddy, and thus give you an arguable edge when it comes to TLOS)

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Still proxy in my lexicon - provided that I can spot the difference between your Guardsmen and your Stormtoopers, and know what they're carrying from across the board, I'll probably be fine - again provided they're reasonable sized (so actual 28mm would be too diddy, and thus give you an arguable edge when it comes to TLOS)

It's not proxy to most people, maybe you should alter your lexicon.

Otherwise, beer cans are also proxy drop pods, which I think most people will disagree with.

Whereas, nobody really cares whether your land speeder storm is a real storm or just a regular land speeder.

morgoth wrote:


Whereas, nobody really cares whether your land speeder storm is a real storm or just a regular land speeder.

But it breaks the immersion if its one thing acting as another.

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

morgoth wrote:


Whereas, nobody really cares whether your land speeder storm is a real storm or just a regular land speeder.

But it breaks the immersion if its one thing acting as another.

Slightly, but it doesn't break the universe.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Still proxy in my lexicon - provided that I can spot the difference between your Guardsmen and your Stormtoopers, and know what they're carrying from across the board, I'll probably be fine - again provided they're reasonable sized (so actual 28mm would be too diddy, and thus give you an arguable edge when it comes to TLOS)

some see a big difference between "proxy" and "count as" (at least here)
The red Rhino is a chimera, the blue rhino is an razorback with laser/plasma gun and the black rhino is a drop pod = proxy and not accepted outside play testing and asking the opponent before.

coming up with an IK army 100% out of PuppetWar Walker is considered "count as" and no one cares

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

morgoth wrote:


Whereas, nobody really cares whether your land speeder storm is a real storm or just a regular land speeder.

But it breaks the immersion if its one thing acting as another.

Or when one is shooting up a Speeder Squadron, where all the models are the standard HB loadout, but amongst them there's one with a Multimelta instead, and one with Assault Cannon underslung.

But proxy or 'counts as' - makes no difference to me. So long as it's clear what's what, and it doesn't look like you've modelled, proxied or 'counts as'd' for advantage, I'm flexible.

https://www.games-workshop.com/en-GB/Deathworld-Forest

Some times i wonder if i'm too bitter and cynical, then i see stuff like this and realise no i'm right.

£80 for that is nutz.

It's a boxed set of what appears to be four lots of terrain, which would normally be a more palatable £20 each.

I'm still flabergasted they want near £100 for terrain, i bet i could go to a pet shop and get something similar together for £20.

Personally, I don't care what figures are used as long as they FIT. Star wars converted space marines, as cool as they could be, don't fit. I might play someone, but I'll be shaking my head the entire time. same with things like pink glittery necrons (actually seen this), or brony space marines, etc. I get creativity, but at the end of the day I want immersion into the world.

Back on topic a bit, those deathworld forests look really cool, but not at that price point.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
It's a boxed set of what appears to be four lots of terrain, which would normally be a more palatable £20 each.

That's only "more palatable" if you consider GW prices reasonable in the first place. Those terrain pieces are awful...just abject in every way. £20 borders on daylight robbery for one of the sets.

Let's not even talk about the rules for them.

In general it seems GW are getting a little bit better but they're coming from a position so far behind how a modern gaming company should be run they're still a long way off where they should be IMO. The lack of information about new releases is ridiculous and prices remain too high, though at least there are now more boxed sets that represent actual deals which will help people get started.

hobojebus wrote:
I'm still flabergasted they want near £100 for terrain, i bet i could go to a pet shop and get something similar together for £20.

£20? Extravagance. Card and glue. So far.

I'll bet something more leggy wouldn't be impossible with a bit of cheap wire and cheap putty, too. And not much worse than the £80 option.

(But maybe they'll hold a seminar about it. That'll make it worth the price. )

morgoth wrote:


There's no ridiculous culture, WHFB and 40K go with a setting, with a universe which has clearly defined visual aesthetics.
I, and most people I know who have taken interest in 40K or WHFB, like the universe as it was defined.
You can't expect me to want to play against your little ponies or half-LoTR half-WHFB half-cheap fantasy army just because I would like to play a game of WHFB.

The companies you mention don't have a universe defined, so you can't really break the coherency by bringing anything.
But clearly, you do realize 40K has way more than just rules, it's a whole big package and people who like any parts of this package can have fun with people who like any other part of this package so long as everyone respects the package.

What's not to like about that?

Nothing, and there you seem to agree with me.
The ridiculous culture I was referring to wasn't that. It was this commonly seen discussion on dakka.

Person 1: "If you like rank and file, why don't you try KoW"
Person 2: "No, the models are gak"

(And you could replace the statement by 'Person 1' with another game or genre)

My point is that Person 2, said you could play the game. Nothing about the models. An average hhhhobbyist from GW, seems to immediately link a game with the figures. A vast majority of games out there don't require models by the same manufacturer. I'm certainly not saying I'd play my 40k Necrons against someone's my little pony collection. I too would want the immersion. But for some games, a unit of fantasy skeletons with swords and shields are skeletons with swords and shields regardless of the manufacturer. 28mm Dark Age Irish from Gripping Beast and 28mm Dark Age Irish from Footsore are all Dark Age Irish.

I just wish that people in the hhhobby could understand that this is the case in the rest of the hobby.

hobojebus wrote:
I'm still flabergasted they want near £100 for terrain, i bet i could go to a pet shop and get something similar together for £20.

I guess they hope that eventually people like morgoth will start refusing to play on tables containing anything but GW (tm) terrain since it would break their immersion to know the models representing troops or trees in a fictional universe were sold by a different company in the real world (or even built from scratch! )

Personally, my suspension of disbelief, as well as enjoyment of the game, would take a lot bigger hit facing an opponent who's army fielded these:

rather than one who's army included these:

 Vermis wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
I'm still flabergasted they want near £100 for terrain, i bet i could go to a pet shop and get something similar together for £20.

£20? Extravagance. Card and glue. So far.

I'll bet something more leggy wouldn't be impossible with a bit of cheap wire and cheap putty, too. And not much worse than the £80 option.

(But maybe they'll hold a seminar about it. That'll make it worth the price. )

I'd actually split the difference. Battlefield in a Box is fantastic, comes pre-painted, and runs between $40 and $60 for the bigger stuff (based on my LGS' prices).

http://www.gf9.com/

 Zywus wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
I'm still flabergasted they want near £100 for terrain, i bet i could go to a pet shop and get something similar together for £20.

I guess they hope that eventually people like morgoth will start refusing to play on tables containing anything but GW (tm) terrain since it would break their immersion to know the models representing troops or trees in a fictional universe were sold by a different company in the real world (or even built from scratch! )

Personally, my suspension of disbelief, as well as enjoyment of the game, would take a lot bigger hit facing an opponent who's army fielded these:

Spoiler:

rather than one who's army included these:

Spoiler:

Thanks for the ad hominem.

And sorry, I make my own terrain and game tables.

morgoth wrote:

 Zywus wrote:

hobojebus wrote:
I'm still flabergasted they want near £100 for terrain, i bet i could go to a pet shop and get something similar together for £20.

I guess they hope that eventually people like morgoth will start refusing to play on tables containing anything but GW (tm) terrain since it would break their immersion to know the models representing troops or trees in a fictional universe were sold by a different company in the real world (or even built from scratch! )

Personally, my suspension of disbelief, as well as enjoyment of the game, would take a lot bigger hit facing an opponent who's army fielded these:

Spoiler:

rather than one who's army included these:

Spoiler:

Thanks for the ad hominem.

And sorry, I make my own terrain and game tables.

Then I'm afraid I'd have to refuse playing at your place.

Using anything other than exclusively GW models, GW terrain and GW realm of battle boards would ruin my immersion of the 40K universe.

 Zywus wrote:
Then I'm afraid I'd have to refuse playing at your place.

Using anything other than exclusively GW models, GW terrain and GW realm of battle boards would ruin my immersion of the 40K universe.

Here, here. The point of the game is to enjoy the experience. It really gets to me when it's clear someone painted their army in colors produced by another manufacturer, like Tamiya or Vallejo. It takes so much away from the game, I usually have to walk away.

For that matter, I refuse to play against armies with models that were assembled using anything other than official GW glue. If I suspect the models were removed from the sprue with anything other than a GW hobby knife, I am out of there.

That better be citadel brand sand and slate on that base buddy, or get outta my face!

 techsoldaten wrote:

 Zywus wrote:
Then I'm afraid I'd have to refuse playing at your place.

Using anything other than exclusively GW models, GW terrain and GW realm of battle boards would ruin my immersion of the 40K universe.

Here, here. The point of the game is to enjoy the experience. It really gets to me when it's clear someone painted their army in colors produced by another manufacturer, like Tamiya or Vallejo. It takes so much away from the game, I usually have to walk away.

For that matter, I refuse to play against armies with models that were assembled using anything other than official GW glue. If I suspect the models were removed from the sprue with anything other than a GW hobby knife, I am out of there.

So take it the other way: what about games like Warmachine and X-Wing? Would you refuse to play someone who used non-PP miniatures? What about playing a game of 40k with all my Astra Militarum as:



I think morgoth's position is a bit extreme, but not unreasonable. Some of the 3rd party or proxy models are pretty awful.

Wayniac wrote:
Personally, I don't care what figures are used as long as they FIT. Star wars converted space marines, as cool as they could be, don't fit. I might play someone, but I'll be shaking my head the entire time. same with things like pink glittery necrons (actually seen this), or brony space marines, etc. I get creativity, but at the end of the day I want immersion into the world.

Back on topic a bit, those deathworld forests look really cool, but not at that price point.

This is just an example, not GW models, but I have all my Mantic Enforcers (fully modeled correctly) but with the paint scheme being that of the Iron Man various armor marks. Would that break your "not fitting" line of thought? And, while asking that, I want to mention that when Mantic did their kickstarter, they offered multiple paint set options, and one was designed to be the red and gold if you wanted to go the playboy philanthropist route of armor...Mantic personally "okay'd" that line of thinking/painting in their first Deadzone kickstarter.

 jreilly89 wrote:



I think morgoth's position is a bit extreme, but not unreasonable. Some of the 3rd party or proxy models are pretty awful.

No problem with those, some GW models look worse
and a good paint job always helps (well painted awful models > bad painted good models)

 timetowaste85 wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
Personally, I don't care what figures are used as long as they FIT. Star wars converted space marines, as cool as they could be, don't fit. I might play someone, but I'll be shaking my head the entire time. same with things like pink glittery necrons (actually seen this), or brony space marines, etc. I get creativity, but at the end of the day I want immersion into the world.

Back on topic a bit, those deathworld forests look really cool, but not at that price point.

This is just an example, not GW models, but I have all my Mantic Enforcers (fully modeled correctly) but with the paint scheme being that of the Iron Man various armor marks. Would that break your "not fitting" line of thought? And, while asking that, I want to mention that when Mantic did their kickstarter, they offered multiple paint set options, and one was designed to be the red and gold if you wanted to go the playboy philanthropist route of armor...Mantic personally "okay'd" that line of thinking/painting in their first Deadzone kickstarter.

Yes. If we were playing Warmachine and you had all your guys modeled as Batman, I'd be pretty annoyed.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
Personally, I don't care what figures are used as long as they FIT. Star wars converted space marines, as cool as they could be, don't fit. I might play someone, but I'll be shaking my head the entire time. same with things like pink glittery necrons (actually seen this), or brony space marines, etc. I get creativity, but at the end of the day I want immersion into the world.

Back on topic a bit, those deathworld forests look really cool, but not at that price point.

This is just an example, not GW models, but I have all my Mantic Enforcers (fully modeled correctly) but with the paint scheme being that of the Iron Man various armor marks. Would that break your "not fitting" line of thought? And, while asking that, I want to mention that when Mantic did their kickstarter, they offered multiple paint set options, and one was designed to be the red and gold if you wanted to go the playboy philanthropist route of armor...Mantic personally "okay'd" that line of thinking/painting in their first Deadzone kickstarter.

Yes. If we were playing Warmachine and you had all your guys modeled as Batman, I'd be pretty annoyed.

Even if the company recommended it? Like I mentioned, in my case, the company flat out offered a paint set they built using army painter for exactly the purpose of what my project is. If PP offered a P3 paint set for one of their armies that was essentially a "dark night" set that was an obvious rip on Batman (yes, I know it should be Dark Knight, but putting it that way for copyright yada yada), would you have issue with it? Cuz...that would be a company promoted paint scheme then.

 timetowaste85 wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 timetowaste85 wrote:

Wayniac wrote:
Personally, I don't care what figures are used as long as they FIT. Star wars converted space marines, as cool as they could be, don't fit. I might play someone, but I'll be shaking my head the entire time. same with things like pink glittery necrons (actually seen this), or brony space marines, etc. I get creativity, but at the end of the day I want immersion into the world.

Back on topic a bit, those deathworld forests look really cool, but not at that price point.

This is just an example, not GW models, but I have all my Mantic Enforcers (fully modeled correctly) but with the paint scheme being that of the Iron Man various armor marks. Would that break your "not fitting" line of thought? And, while asking that, I want to mention that when Mantic did their kickstarter, they offered multiple paint set options, and one was designed to be the red and gold if you wanted to go the playboy philanthropist route of armor...Mantic personally "okay'd" that line of thinking/painting in their first Deadzone kickstarter.

Yes. If we were playing Warmachine and you had all your guys modeled as Batman, I'd be pretty annoyed.

Even if the company recommended it? Like I mentioned, in my case, the company flat out offered a paint set they built using army painter for exactly the purpose of what my project is. If PP offered a P3 paint set for one of their armies that was essentially a "dark night" set that was an obvious rip on Batman (yes, I know it should be Dark Knight, but putting it that way for copyright yada yada), would you have issue with it? Cuz...that would be a company promoted paint scheme then.

Yeah, company or not, that's pretty immersion breaking. Likewise, someone converted and painted a Captain America Space Marine. It's cool for a trophy, but if the guy had a whole army of them, I'd think it's pretty annoying.