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.

So, I'm painting my Guard to resemble the 88th Cadian Mechanized Infantry from the novel "Cadian Blood." But, I was considering running Strike Pack Alphic as my Kill Team. So, I went looking around the web and found a paint scheme that I'd really like to use for the Kill Team that is completely different from that of my main Guard units. But, let's say I wanted to use those Stormies and that Taurox Prime in my Guard Army. Is it looked down upon to have units with different paint schemes in the same army? Is it something I should stay away from? To the best of my knowledge, there's nothing in the rules against it, so I was curious what you all thought.

Thanks

SG

Its all up to your preference and finished work.

I play orks, so went out of my way to make each unit a different color scheme.

If youre concerned about how your army looks on the table top, or fluff reasoning for different paint schemes, it can be a combined force that happen to be working together for that battle.

Well my orks have different paint schemes(by clan). If you like it go for it.

Incidentally fluffwise IG is an army where different schemes SHOULD be employed. Infantry companies don't have tanks and tank companies don't have infantry so all your tanks should be in different colour scheme than your infantry.

Different paint scheme on a squad level is complete OK by me. But as there are more paint schemes in a single squad, it looks odd at least...

So long as your color scheme doesn't serve a rules purpose, personally, I wouldn't care. If it's just a bit of "fluff" on your part, then rest assured:

I don't really care.

I don't know how many people would care. I'm not one of them.

My general saying is this:

So long as it's clear which models represent which rules, I don't really care.

In my main army:

Red helmets/shoulder pads = sergeant. Golden helmets = sternguard. Golden helmet + golden shoulder pad = sternguard sergeant.

Except for the captain. He gets two golden shoulder pads and a golden helmet.

 ServiceGames wrote:
So, I'm painting my Guard to resemble the 88th Cadian Mechanized Infantry from the novel "Cadian Blood." But, I was considering running Strike Pack Alphic as my Kill Team. So, I went looking around the web and found a paint scheme that I'd really like to use for the Kill Team that is completely different from that of my main Guard units. But, let's say I wanted to use those Stormies and that Taurox Prime in my Guard Army. Is it looked down upon to have units with different paint schemes in the same army? Is it something I should stay away from? To the best of my knowledge, there's nothing in the rules against it, so I was curious what you all thought.

Thanks

SG

That is an actual thing in the lore believe it or not.

Look up the idea of "composite regiments" I believe. Essentially you take the tattered survivors of several depleted units and just combine them to make one full strength one. I'm running something similar.

Keep in mind though, you will want some sort of theme to tie the army together. For example, mine are the "Cadian" 13th. There are models from about 6 different regiments in it, as well as different variants of the same tank. So every model has the number 13 on it somewhere, in roman numerals (aka XIII) I also make sure to try and have similar colors, even if the scheme or exact camo patterns don't match, although that can be something as simple as every model just have a shoulder guard with a matching color or even just the number.

Also, having a matching basing scheme helps too. That way when theyre all on the table they could have any number of schemes but the bases will subtly hint that "hey I meant to field all these together."

 ServiceGames wrote:
So, I'm painting my Guard to resemble the 88th Cadian Mechanized Infantry from the novel "Cadian Blood." But, I was considering running Strike Pack Alphic as my Kill Team. So, I went looking around the web and found a paint scheme that I'd really like to use for the Kill Team that is completely different from that of my main Guard units. But, let's say I wanted to use those Stormies and that Taurox Prime in my Guard Army. Is it looked down upon to have units with different paint schemes in the same army? Is it something I should stay away from? To the best of my knowledge, there's nothing in the rules against it, so I was curious what you all thought.

Thanks

SG

Stormtroopers are an Elite special forces unit, outside the normal Force Organisation of an Imperial Guard Regiment. They would absolutely look fine painted differently. In fact, Imperial Guard are probably the one Imperium of Man codex (other than Codex: Inquisition) you could expect to find a fluffy difference in the visuals of the models in the same army due to how the Guard is organised - highly specialised regiments that can't support themselves, and rely on support from an external unit. So you could have a company of Mordian Iron Guard infantry directly supported by Valhallan Heavy Armour Squadrons with Cadian Artillery Batteries providing fire support. That's 3 separate and distinct colour schemes in the one army.

It can help to have things that tie them together. Basing is a big help here. Keeps everyone unified. But also things like painting all the lenses, cables, grenades, etc. the same will help keep things cohesive.

tneva82 wrote:
Incidentally fluffwise IG is an army where different schemes SHOULD be employed. Infantry companies don't have tanks and tank companies don't have infantry so all your tanks should be in different colour scheme than your infantry.

True. That said, I plan to use my infantry as human shields for my tanks. So, for the moment, they are all painted in the same color scheme.

SG

My army is Goffs, Deathskulls and Evil Sunz with some cameo appearances from other Klans. It's your army paint them as you wish. Modeling and painting is my favorite part of 40k and making the army my very own is part of my investment into this hobby. I recommend the same mentality.

I always enjoy the idea of painting an army different colors because of how fun it would be to paint and looks on the table. Some armies are built for that style of painting, like Eldar or Chaos. But I think it would be very cool if you painting different units different colors. So paint them up by what army in the lore has that unit as their specialty.

 ServiceGames wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Incidentally fluffwise IG is an army where different schemes SHOULD be employed. Infantry companies don't have tanks and tank companies don't have infantry so all your tanks should be in different colour scheme than your infantry.

True. That said, I plan to use my infantry as human shields for my tanks. So, for the moment, they are all painted in the same color scheme.

SG

They can work as human shields even with different colour scheme.

Of course you are free to do how you wish though Official fluff is though that the regiment types are separate unlike in our world as a way to reduce effect rebellions can be. Infantry regiment defecting is vulnerable without tank/artirelly support while tank regiment is vulnerable without infantry etc.