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.

Alright, well, then please don't play me in Warpath or Deadzone then. Cuz you'd be facing a LOT of Tony Stark stuff. Lol. And I'd really hate having to apologize for the mouth-frothing that would occur as you ate the rulebook in retaliation!

Sorry guys, done with the semi-off topic stuff of relating other companies minis as an example!!

 jreilly89 wrote:

 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.

It is an unreasonable position. In your armymen example the problem one might have is that the models are of low quality or do not fit with the aestetic of the universe. Regardless of who produced them.

I'd much rather face an army made up exclusively of Orcs from Spellcrow, Kromlech etc than an army consisting of a hundred identical 2nd edition monopose plastic goff boyz.

Or to illustrate further. Would you prefer your opponent has some of these in his army:


or some of these:



If you have a problem with awful models, that's one thing. If your problem is wholly about whether a model is produced by GW or not, without consideration for whether or not the models are awful or not, that's a unreasonable position.

 Zywus wrote:

If you have a problem with awful models, that's one thing. If your problem is wholly about whether a model is produced by GW or not, without consideration for whether or not the models are awful or not, that's a unreasonable position.

Very well said. Million times this.

 jreilly89 wrote:

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.

Why would red, white and blue colour schemed Space Marines break your immersion any more than the whole plethora of ridiculously colourful chapters which already exist in the fluff?

 Zywus wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 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.

It is an unreasonable position. In your armymen example the problem one might have is that the models are of low quality or do not fit with the aestetic of the universe. Regardless of who produced them.

I'd much rather face an army made up exclusively of Orcs from Spellcrow, Kromlech etc than an army consisting of a hundred identical 2nd edition monopose plastic goff boyz.

Or to illustrate further. Would you prefer your opponent has some of these in his army:


or some of these:



If you have a problem with awful models, that's one thing. If your problem is wholly about whether a model is produced by GW or not, without consideration for whether or not the models are awful or not, that's a unreasonable position.

The only thing that was ever stated is that models breaking the immersion can make it less fun for some people including me.

Nobody cares who makes the models I think.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 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.

So where does it stop?
Modding?
Kit-bashing?
Custom jobs?
Scratch builds?
I started with the 7th ed Space Wolves codex, I've been playing for what equates to the blink of an eye to some players but I took to tournaments quick and in the two years I played tournaments I've seen some truly terrible efforts using 100% GW products. One really comes to mind was Grey Knights - Usually lovely models, but the owner had used a GW spray paint that clearly reacted badly with the undried glue and damn near ate his models, the blisters in the paint were bad - so bad I suspect they were in the plastic.
My favorite was a guard army. The guy used small army men from a $2 shop and about two kits of IG to spread proper iconography. Only reason I know that is he told me.

morgoth wrote:
There's no ridiculous culture, WHFB and 40K go with a setting, with a universe which has clearly defined visual aesthetics.

I remember people saying the exact same thing when the Tau came out.

The truth is what people really mean by such sentiments is that they want others to conform to their desires. They want to be the judge of what fits in with the "clearly defined visual aesthetics."

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?

Crappy stuff gets included and great stuff gets excluded based on who is selling it?

The down side should be fairly obvious. Which is why I think it's more about trying to control what other people do with their hobby. Fit in with the aesthetic I like as I claim it's somehow objective and not my opinion! Stuff clearly part of the history of 40k doesn't fit either! Respect my package!

No thanks!

If I were to pick an aesthetic for a 40k or WHFB project, I'd go something like this:



But I would never think that just because I like that others should conform to it or that it is *the* objective aesthetic. Even if I can back it up by saying it is at least the original aesthetic rather than the current "moar skullz 12 year old power fantasy" aesthetic.

Vermis wrote:
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.

Well said. GW is still largely about maintaining an ignorant and segmented customer base so they can charge more. They can pass off bad rules, charge silly amounts for white glue, and jack their prices up to pretty crazy levels as long as they can maintain their virtual monopoly based on customer ignorance.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 jreilly89 wrote:

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:

Spoiler:

It'll always be imperial guard to me. "Astra whatever" is such a perfect example of financial interests clobbering creative interests. 40k became the most played miniature game on the planet and spread around the world with Imperial Guard and then GW discovers they can't own it legally so they scrap it. Lame. If GW was competing on a quality level in terms of rules and figures they wouldn't need to fall back on such lame renaming. The appearance of third party bits sellers that caused all these legally motivated changes was the direct result of GW scrapping their own bits service. They made a bonehead move and then tried to quash the result with lawyers and then threw their hands up in the air and changed the names of things to extra stupid fake latin. Treating a symptom instead of addressing the root cause.

As for the plastic army men, heck yes as long as they were painted. Maybe even once if they weren't painted. As for third party models in X-Wing, 3d printing the huge variety of ships and variants that have shown up in the star wars media over the years is definitely a thing. As for Warmachine, yes, I use Reaper Miniatures in my armies.

The hobby would likely not exist without people playing wargames with Airfix plastic soldiers in the 1960s. It's part of the history of the hobby and should be respected rather than derided.

A Town Called Malus wrote:Why would red, white and blue colour schemed Space Marines break your immersion any more than the whole plethora of ridiculously colourful chapters which already exist in the fluff?

I've thought that I'd quite like a couple of SM squads in white with green and purple trim. They'd be the 'Space Rangers' or the 'Star Commanders' or something.

frozenwastes wrote:
I remember people saying the exact same thing when the Tau came out.

Now you mention it, so do I! I got into the (hh)hobby just before they were released, and the online uproar about 'silly clean-looking anime rubbish' was pretty noticeable.

If GW was competing on a quality level in terms of rules and figures they wouldn't need to fall back on such lame renaming.

Well said yourself. I've thought that with the quality increase in GW's plastics, they could put out good, reasonably-priced generic minis (fantasy ones anyway) and clean up with WFB and non-GW army-building gamers alike. Third-party sellers and businesses like Mantic, AoW and Shieldwolf might barely have a look-in. But thanks to the fact it's GW, they isolated themselves even further, with the overblown EndTimes/AoS aesthetic (looking ironically like a WoW ripoff), raised prices, and doubling down on the 'buy this expensive box because it's got deadly roolz!!!' thing.

The hobby would likely not exist without people playing wargames with Airfix plastic soldiers in the 1960s. It's part of the history of the hobby and should be respected rather than derided.

Spoiler:

 Vermis wrote:

frozenwastes wrote:
I remember people saying the exact same thing when the Tau came out.

Now you mention it, so do I! I got into the (hh)hobby just before they were released, and the online uproar about 'silly clean-looking anime rubbish' was pretty noticeable.

It's been going on for years. People have this idea that 40k or the Old World (or the Age of Sigmar since that blew up) should look like it looked when they got into the game. Just like how I think the current design approach is very adolescent power fantasy and am not a huge fan. The main difference though is that I am aware it's preference and that I like the late 80s aesthetic because I started playing in the mid 1990s and that's what was presented at the time. The shift to something like we have today happened in 1997 with the rebranding for 3rd edition. I thought it hit a peak with Murderfang and his Murdeclaws from the town of Murderville, but releases still come out that push it even further. I thought the Tau were a nice reinjection of some of the cleaner lines of the past GW aesthetic.

I've thought that with the quality increase in GW's plastics, they could put out good, reasonably-priced generic minis (fantasy ones anyway) and clean up with WFB and non-GW army-building gamers alike. Third-party sellers and businesses like Mantic, AoW and Shieldwolf might barely have a look-in. But thanks to the fact it's GW, they isolated themselves even further, with the overblown EndTimes/AoS aesthetic (looking ironically like a WoW ripoff), raised prices, and doubling down on the 'buy this expensive box because it's got deadly roolz!!!' thing.

GW created their competition during the decline of LOTR. Their churn and burn approach to their customer base combined with massive yearly price hikes pretty much created the market for the hundreds of small competitors. It was also a perfect storm with the internet and online shopping maturing during that same time period. GW could have crushed them had they actually learned from the success of LOTR rather than just being scared of the effects of the popping of the bubble. Prior to the crash of LOTR GW had an approach of getting their product into as many hands as possible. Since the crash they've been going for an intentionally smaller customer base but one where each customer pays more money. They could have crushed the competition had they reversed course only slightly. Instead they consigned Warhammer to slowly bleed out and then die and ceded massive market share to their competitors.

I hope that's official Airfix static grass.

Seriously though, belter.

Those army men are actually Tamiya rather than Airfix. Don't tell the Airfix police! They'll send someone to tell us how the Tamiya figures don't mesh with the defined aesthetic of the Airfix package.

Found some classic army men painted up. Looks to be modern Chinese recasts of 1950s Marx stuff.


The main reason not to use these for 40k would be the scale would be way off. They're almost twice the height of a marine. I think they look pretty good painted up. A lot better than a lot of 40k stuff I've seen. Though if someone wants to pay top dollar for GW's stuff and then not paint it, that's their business.

 frozenwastes wrote:

The main reason not to use these for 40k would be the scale would be way off. They're almost twice the height of a marine.

Give it another year or so...

 A Town Called Malus wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

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.

Why would red, white and blue colour schemed Space Marines break your immersion any more than the whole plethora of ridiculously colourful chapters which already exist in the fluff?

Because it's pretty clearly trying to bring an outside universe into 40k? Same reason I posted above why I wouldn't play against a guy's Iron Man army, even though it's company sponsored: smashing two unintended universes together and ruining my immersion.

 jreilly89 wrote:

Because it's pretty clearly trying to bring an outside universe into 40k? Same reason I posted above why I wouldn't play against a guy's Iron Man army, even though it's company sponsored: smashing two unintended universes together and ruining my immersion.

Do you feel the same about official GW figures that are a direct rip-off of some other IP setting? Like Sly Marbo? Tau? Stormcast?

Given that GW used to encourage custom Space Marine Chapters, how close is too close in terms of inspiration from other worlds? What if the creator didn't realise the link?

Honestly if you're arguing against the GW IP continuum... why do you even play with GW miniatures or rules?

I find it incredibly self-centered to be unable to recongize that most people into 40k appreciate the 40k setting and that it is a core driver of their involvement in the hobby.

I'm only telling you I don't want to play your non-40k-themed army, what is there to disagree with?

Personally, I understand not wanting to play against action figures or army men or W/E in 40k; you want to play 40k with 40k models. Fair. But to deny a game because you don't like the way your opponent painted his army? Not gonna lie, that makes you kind of an ass. It's HIS army. He painted HIS models the way HE got enjoyment out of it.

You don't want to play against my Mantic models or someone else's army men or MLP toys in 40k because they're a different scale and they don't "fit"? Okay, I get it. No sweat. You don't want to play against my Mantic army in a Mantic game because you don't like how I've painted them? You aren't worth playing against. You don't decide my paint scheme.

And yes, every game is by permission (except tournaments, which you grant permission by paying entry). But don't ever try to dictate how someone needs to paint their army, otherwise it's "wrong". That's all I'm saying.

Herzlos wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

Because it's pretty clearly trying to bring an outside universe into 40k? Same reason I posted above why I wouldn't play against a guy's Iron Man army, even though it's company sponsored: smashing two unintended universes together and ruining my immersion.

Do you feel the same about official GW figures that are a direct rip-off of some other IP setting? Like Sly Marbo? Tau? Stormcast?

Given that GW used to encourage custom Space Marine Chapters, how close is too close in terms of inspiration from other worlds? What if the creator didn't realise the link?

Well, if we want to get into it, Tau and Stormcast are garbage, and if I could, I'd rip them from the game Sly Marbo is fine because he's a single reference. If there was an army of Sly Marbos, Predator and Die Hard ripoffs, I'd refuse to play against that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Personally, I understand not wanting to play against action figures or army men or W/E in 40k; you want to play 40k with 40k models. Fair. But to deny a game because you don't like the way your opponent painted his army? Not gonna lie, that makes you kind of an ass. It's HIS army. He painted HIS models the way HE got enjoyment out of it.

You don't want to play against my Mantic models or someone else's army men or MLP toys in 40k because they're a different scale and they don't "fit"? Okay, I get it. No sweat. You don't want to play against my Mantic army in a Mantic game because you don't like how I've painted them? You aren't worth playing against. You don't decide my paint scheme.

And yes, every game is by permission (except tournaments, which you grant permission by paying entry). But don't ever try to dictate how someone needs to paint their army, otherwise it's "wrong". That's all I'm saying.

This only makes you an ass in the way that people refusing to play against unpainted armies does. Either both are sacred, or neither are.

Frozen wastes has already shown why arguing against people who think like morgoth is futile..

The truth is what people really mean by such sentiments is that they want others to conform to their desires. They want to be the judge of what fits in with the "clearly defined visual aesthetics."

Their line in the sand isn't straight, it's a meandering, wandering, occasionally tightly coiled, line that's unique to each person and basically boils down to "I can't handle other people having a different take on this universe, despite the fact this universe has been specifically engineered from the get go to allow for diverse ideas, and even includes as canon (or has at various points) the various "out of universe" references that are apparently such an issue."

Or even more succinctly "stop liking what I don't like."


Automatically Appended Next Post:

If there was an army of Sly Marbos, Predator and Die Hard ripoffs, I'd refuse to play against that.

 jreilly89 wrote:
Sly Marbo is fine because he's a single reference. If there was an army of Sly Marbos, Predator and Die Hard ripoffs, I'd refuse to play against that.

Soo, Catachans?

morgoth wrote:


I'm only telling you I don't want to play your non-40k-themed army, what is there to disagree with?

you telling him he's doing his hobby wrong, perhaps?

 Azreal13 wrote:

If there was an army of Sly Marbos, Predator and Die Hard ripoffs, I'd refuse to play against that.

Spoiler:

Nice try. That's as much Rambo and Predator as it is Platoon, Apocalypse Now, and just basic Vietnam War inspiration. It's not as immersion breaking as:





Again, I'm fine with subtle influences or inspiration, but saying "LOL Tony Stark built an army of 40k Marines" is pretty dang stupid.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Fenrir Kitsune wrote:

morgoth wrote:


I'm only telling you I don't want to play your non-40k-themed army, what is there to disagree with?

you telling him he's doing his hobby wrong, perhaps?

Where do you stand on the painted vs. unpainted debate, by chance?

Well, the problem with that Batman mini is that he has guns. And we all know Batman hates guns.

And...I'm not ignoring your other points. I'm just going to answer when I have access to a real keyboard instead of my phone.

JReilly, I'm just gonna ask you to look at my plog (pblog?) to see what I mean for my models, instead of inserting another company's models into a thread about GW. There are no "repulsor weapons" or anything that would involve PITA book keeping or anything. See if you'd still have issue with it. Like I said, I wouldn't use those Mantic Models in a GW game as space marines (without being a one-off game that I created first with a friend). Just hypothetically in the case of playing Warpath with those.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And what's wrong with the red and gold tau suit?! That looks perfectly acceptable under any circumstances to me.

jreilly89 wrote:ruining my immersion.

To you, and Morgoth: I can understand immersion. Background and characterful modelling are the biggest of the few factors that keep me hovering around GW. But in this case I think reality needs to intrude a little. The grand heroes and stoic warriors are little models that you push across hairy green mdf or injection-moulded tiles. The rules, despite how much the special rules bloat is called 'characterful', are still just an abstract system of numbers and dice rolls. Without that little paragraph saying "Murderius Codlatinus is a dead scary bloke. He gets extra attacks and gives extra Ld to everyone around him" it'd be practically meaningless. (Heck, from a certain PoV, the arbitrary feel of those kind of modifiers make 'em practically meaningless anyway) It's not exactly the Matrix.
Red and yellow armour might knock a chip out of some kind of fourth wall, but with all of the above, and the creativity and personal investment exhibited by the painter, it's negligible and so not worth getting wound up about. As has been said, they're not your minis. They're not scribbling new fluff into your books with biro. You just have to be a tiny bit gracious (or unclench) and play against them for an hour or so. Going so far as to refuse to play against them because they don't fit into some rigid view of the official fluff comes across like some of the worst Napoleonic button-counting grognards. Worse, because it's a fictional setting that - at one time, at least - encouraged personal interpretations and a tongue-in-cheek attitude.

TL;DR: toy soldiers - serrius biznis.

(This is in no way influenced by the fact that I was going to paint Malifaux constructs in red and yellow. )

morgoth wrote:Honestly if you're arguing against the GW IP continuum... why do you even play with GW miniatures or rules?

Because without the mindset that GW background MUST be used with GW models MUST be used with GW rules, I can pick and choose what I like. I like GW's high elf models and Ulthuan background, but I think WFB and AoS rules are execrable. But there are half a dozen other rulesets I can slip the models and setting into. (It matters not one whit that they don't get 'always strikes first', or whatever) I like Heresy's sci-fi troopers and won't touch 40K with a ten-foot skull-encrusted pole. I can use them with Warpath, ViDe:FuCo, or a range of other sci-fi rules, and still call them Imperial Guard. I like Epic rules, and this might be more an issue of availability, but I can mix Vanguard novan elites and Onslaught juno transports into an SM army, or use Heroic & Ros colonial brits as IG.

It's great.

Azreal13 wrote:Frozen wastes has already shown why arguing against people who think like morgoth is futile..

If there was an army of Sly Marbos, Predator and Die Hard ripoffs, I'd refuse to play against that.

Spoiler:

That's the other thing: 40K is largely based on 'ripoffs'. Space versions of their fantasy Tolkien and Moorcock ripoffs; Dune ripoffs; Nemesis the Warlock ripoffs; Judge Dredd ripoffs; Alien ripoffs; Terminator ripoffs; whatever anime that Tau rip off; even historical ripoffs... I think it puts complaints about one more tiny pop-culture reference into perspective.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

If there was an army of Sly Marbos, Predator and Die Hard ripoffs, I'd refuse to play against that.

Spoiler:

Nice try. That's as much Rambo and Predator as it is Platoon, Apocalypse Now, and just basic Vietnam War inspiration.

Things that are inspired by the Vietnam conflict are fine, but other things just as inspired by the Vietnam Conflict are not.

Their line in the sand isn't straight, it's a meandering, wandering, occasionally tightly coiled

Plus it took me several seconds to realize that Tau suit was an Iron Man copy, hardly immersion breaking if it's not noticeable until you look for it.

It just looks like a variant on

 Vermis wrote:

jreilly89 wrote:ruining my immersion.

To you, and Morgoth: I can understand immersion. Background and characterful modelling are the biggest of the few factors that keep me hovering around GW. But in this case I think reality needs to intrude a little. The grand heroes and stoic warriors are little models that you push across hairy green mdf or injection-moulded tiles. The rules, despite how much the special rules bloat is called 'characterful', are still just an abstract system of numbers and dice rolls. Without that little paragraph saying "Murderius Codlatinus is a dead scary bloke. He gets extra attacks and gives extra Ld to everyone around him" it'd be practically meaningless. (Heck, from a certain PoV, the arbitrary feel of those kind of modifiers make 'em practically meaningless anyway) It's not exactly the Matrix.
Red and yellow armour might knock a chip out of some kind of fourth wall, but with all of the above, and the creativity and personal investment exhibited by the painter, it's negligible and so not worth getting wound up about. As has been said, they're not your minis. They're not scribbling new fluff into your books with biro. You just have to be a tiny bit gracious (or unclench) and play against them for an hour or so. Going so far as to refuse to play against them because they don't fit into some rigid view of the official fluff comes across like some of the worst Napoleonic button-counting grognards. Worse, because it's a fictional setting that - at one time, at least - encouraged personal interpretations and a tongue-in-cheek attitude.

TL;DR: toy soldiers - serrius biznis.

That's the other thing: 40K is largely based on 'ripoffs'. Space versions of their fantasy Tolkien and Moorcock ripoffs; Dune ripoffs; Nemesis the Warlock ripoffs; Judge Dredd ripoffs; Alien ripoffs; Terminator ripoffs; whatever anime that Tau rip off; even historical ripoffs... I think it puts complaints about one more tiny pop-culture reference into perspective.

What I'm trying to get it as I spend a large amount of money and time on hand painted models, so I should be able to enjoy the hobby the way I want to. I don't go to tournaments, I play at a LGS, and usually with friends, who share (generally) my opinion on what is and isn't acceptable.

Also, if you think Morgoth and I are really too uptight about this, then you should have no problems facing someone who plops down paper cup Drop Pods or Sprue-Crons. That, or just accept people don't want to play the game the way you do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azreal13 wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:

If there was an army of Sly Marbos, Predator and Die Hard ripoffs, I'd refuse to play against that.

Spoiler:

Nice try. That's as much Rambo and Predator as it is Platoon, Apocalypse Now, and just basic Vietnam War inspiration.

Their line in the sand isn't straight, it's a meandering, wandering, occasionally tightly coiled

Things that are inspired by the Vietnam conflict are fine, but other things just as inspired by the Vietnam Conflict are not.

Thanks for cutting out this part:

Again, I'm fine with subtle influences or inspiration, but saying "LOL Tony Stark built an army of 40k Marines" is pretty dang stupid.

So, in summary, I have to play the game the way you want me to?

Yes. Because my way (having a live and let live attitude) is clearly the better way.

Thanks for cutting out this part:

It's a separate sentence, I didn't cut anything out, I quoted the part I was responding to. I didn't materially change what you had written in any way.

 jreilly89 wrote:

Nice try. That's as much Rambo and Predator as it is Platoon, Apocalypse Now, and just basic Vietnam War inspiration.

A Vietnam where everyone's Sly, or Arnie, or (to the credit of GW and the cover artist [one of the Kopinskis?]) Carl Weathers.

Why doesn't the basic Vietnam reference bother you, by the way? Why doesn't the transposition of an old real-world event and location into a far-future setting with giant supersoldiers, savage aliens, psychic demons and world-breaking catastrophes break your immersion?

And the Batman marine is hilarious, and the Tau-ny Stark is brilliant. I wouldn't mind playing a game against either.

 timetowaste85 wrote:
Well, the problem with that Batman mini is that he has guns. And we all know Batman hates guns.

And...I'm not ignoring your other points. I'm just going to answer when I have access to a real keyboard instead of my phone.

JReilly, I'm just gonna ask you to look at my plog (pblog?) to see what I mean for my models, instead of inserting another company's models into a thread about GW. There are no "repulsor weapons" or anything that would involve PITA book keeping or anything. See if you'd still have issue with it. Like I said, I wouldn't use those Mantic Models in a GW game as space marines (without being a one-off game that I created first with a friend). Just hypothetically in the case of playing Warpath with those.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
And what's wrong with the red and gold tau suit?! That looks perfectly acceptable under any circumstances to me.

Time, I assume you're referring to these?



The original for reference:



I'll be honest...I'm not a fan. I really do think it takes away from the game too much. At this point, I'd say go full force and just plop these down instead of the enforcers:



BTW, I do want to commend you on your painting. Great work


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Yes. Because my way (having a live and let live attitude) is clearly the better way.

You are (assuming you're still in the UK) literally continent away from me. Why should I have to bow to your rules? That's what my forefathers fought for.

Posting constant pictures of minis with cool paint jobs isn't really helping your argument.

 Vermis wrote:

 jreilly89 wrote:

Nice try. That's as much Rambo and Predator as it is Platoon, Apocalypse Now, and just basic Vietnam War inspiration.

A Vietnam where everyone's Sly, or Arnie, or (to the credit of GW and the cover artist [one of the Kopinskis?]) Carl Weathers.

Why doesn't the basic Vietnam reference bother you, by the way? Why doesn't the transposition of an old real-world event and location into a far-future setting with giant supersoldiers, savage aliens, psychic demons and world-breaking catastrophes break your immersion?

Because, again, it's subtle. It's not Catachans fighting against the Vietnamese, it's Guardsmen fighting in a jungle environment, using Vietnamse-esque tactics. Yeah, the Sly reference is funny, but the basic inspiration for Catachans is used in a fun, subtle way, rather than an obvious in your face reference.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Posting constant pictures of minis with cool paint jobs isn't really helping your argument.

I was responding to time, trying to have an actual discussion with him.

 jreilly89 wrote:

 Azreal13 wrote:
Yes. Because my way (having a live and let live attitude) is clearly the better way.

You are (assuming you're still in the UK) literally continent away from me. Why should I have to bow to your rules? That's what my forefathers fought for.

Now you're not even being coherent. This is a digital discussion, our locations are irrelevant? Neither am I trying to force you to do anything (and Dakka discussions aren't legally binding btw) I'm disagreeing with you, if I was trying to force you into anything then that would make me a hypocrite, but I'm well within my rights to think your attitude towards the matter at hand is wrong and well within my rights to say so.

I'll be honest...I'm not a fan. I really do think it takes away from the game too much. At this point, I'd say go full force and just plop these down instead of the enforcers:

At some point it starts to look like you're trying to forbid not just Iron Man references, but an incidental combination of red and gold paint on any armoured or robotic minis, in case you make an accidental inference.