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.

“Not very good” is not unplayable. And in my case, I’m working on a home brew ruleset, so I’m not playing 40K 8E - I’m sure there are others who are using other systems too (one page 40K, Beyond the Gates of 40K, Bolt Action 40K, Kill Team, etc.).

And just to throw in, I have an Eldar “guest” army for my brother to use that I initially bought back when the models were metal - they’ve been sprayed red, but I’ve haven’t painted them further because I’ve been waiting for my skills to get “good enough” before I tackle them (save the Falcons/Wave Serpent). As you can guess, that’s been years they’ve been their basic red selves, and I still don’t feel confident I’m near to the quality I’d like to get them done. Why don’t I have my brother paint them? Well, he paints at the speed of about one model a year, and completely gave up after his Tomb Kings army was invalidated (the only army I know of he ever fully painted).

skchsan wrote:
I just feel like, and this is purely my opinion which you are more than welcomed to disagree with, painting and modelling is one of the biggest parts of the hobby and I just don't seem to understand the 0/100 painting/gaming camp's attraction to the game. What exactly is it that draws you into the hobby if you don't like the hands on aspect of it?

You'd actually be surprised; a lot of people do enjoy 40k as a game, despite it's imbalances, and (in part, maybe because of the community?) find great enjoyment from playing the game?

Some of the top ITC players have expressed (I think Kopech and Nanavanti, maybe others, but my memory could be wrong) that the hobby holds little enjoyment for them, because they garner pure enjoyment from the competition, and keeping up with the meta and building the newest hot list for whatever event they're attending is exhausting if they also have to put in the effort to hobby to a high standard as well (and nevermind the extensive collection they'd have to maintain).

I'm not saying it's wrong, but they have their own reasons, equally as valid as yours, if admittedly totally mysterious and unknown to you.

 Thadin wrote:
I would find that strange, that you would buy in to a miniature came because it's the only one in town to play, instead of buying in to a miniature game for the lore, for the gameplay or for the entire modelling package.

"You" used in an unspecific manner, not directed at anyone in particular.

Actually, I am one of those. There are a number of games I thoroughly enjoy (or did enjoy), but simply don't play because nobody else does with any regularity in my gaming community, or it's only one player and it's boring playing the same game against the same person over and over again (games like Flames of War, Firestorm Armada until it was discontinued, Battlefleet Gothic, Necromunda (campaign), X-Wing and Guild Ball).

I bought in to 40k and Fantasy almost two decades ago because I did love the lore, and the miniatures, and because they were literally the only option when it came to tabletop games (I wasn't into video games, plus art background).

Do I like 40k or AoS? Meh. They're fun to play with beer and pizza, and for me, the game is just an excuse to throw dice and hang out with friends. And the majority of my community plays 40k or AoS, so those are the games I continue to collect.

Could I not play, and just collect single miniatures? Probably, but I love hobbying and painting, while occasionally getting some games in. If that means I have to play 40k or AoS, great.

If the entire local community tomorrow quit GW entirely and started playing exclusively, I dunno, Infinity and only that, I'd probably switch over too.

 skchsan wrote:
While I understand the "I don't want to paint because I don't find it enjoyable" sentiments, and I am not enforcing or forcing 'you have to paint it or don't play the game' policy upon anyone, but I have to ask why exactly you're interested in 40k at all?

Let's face it - 40k does not support or sport a very good game system/mechanics, and there are better miniature based wargames out there most of which forego great models for great system.

What really draws/drew people into 40k is the modelling and painting aspect of the kits because 40k has one of the best line of miniatures, and it just happens so that there are loose set of rules where you can play with your little figurines.

I just feel like, and this is purely my opinion which you are more than welcomed to disagree with, painting and modelling is one of the biggest parts of the hobby and I just don't seem to understand the 0/100 painting/gaming camp's attraction to the game. What exactly is it that draws you into the hobby if you don't like the hands on aspect of it?

My guess is the social aspect. I feel like a lot of Dakkanauts are forgetting the social aspect of it all. I haven't met many people who absolutely hate painting, but the very few I have basically were seeking the gaming and/or the social aspect of it. They also tended to lean towards easy to paint armies like Necrons.

I also think people tend to underestimate the fun of playing Warhammer. Regardless of balance a lot of people find the game highly entertaining and I could just as easily turn the question around and say:

"If you think the rules are gak and get nothing out of playing it then why the interest in 40k? Why not paint something else?"

Now, I know all of us here are very passionate about the hobby and as I have mentioned people come to it from all kinds of backgrounds. The rules may not be perfect, but to me and many people they are bloody fun, just like the painting aspect of it. This is why I just embrace it personally. Sure, I have some hard limits myself, but even then - in certain circumstances - I am willing to sidestep them.

Warhammer is also the largest wargame around that offers large scale battles with huge robots and small goblins. Which again ties into "social aspect" of it all. I mean, there are probably better rules around, but finding players and a group to play with? Easier said than done. At this point - and this is something a lot of us might have to accept - but Warhammer is the de facto language in wargaming where everyone meets at one point or another. It is the nexus and draws people of all kinds like Freeport.

the_scotsman wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

the_scotsman wrote:


Welp, saving THIS comment for a rainy day.

Peregrine, in pretty much any thread that's ever come up where it is mentioned that a person who runs a list significantly more competitive than their local meta will most likely have a problem finding a game in the future, you rail against this phenomenon as the epitome of hated CAAC behavior. Generally you equate it to some kind of anti-competitive gamer conspiracy within local play groups, rather than just a large group of individuals who notice that all their games against a certain player end up one-sided and privately decide to stop playing against that person.

Off the top of my head, I'd say you probably said something to this effect two or three hundred times in the first 100-page "But Muh Superheavies" thread by Unit.

fixed it for you.


someone needs to learn the difference between subjective & objective or just understand that others may have a different opinion. it's ok if you're incapable of that.

I playing against unpainted. Its boring and feels like going through the motions. If my opponent charges a unit with a half built unpainted mix of bloodcrushers, skull crushers and unmounted juggernaughts and smashes my unit into pieces I just shrug and pick up my models. If it was charged and destroyed by a beautifully painted unit of Bloodcrushers with a hand painted banner and maybe a converted champion I'll laugh and probably retell the tale. Might even take a few pics on my phone.

I have painted quite a few armies in my day.
In order from memory (starting on the last week of 2nd edition)...
Space Marines.
Chaos Marines.
Space Wolves.
Necrons (metal models).
Orcs and Goblins.
Ultramarines (warmonger and several best painted awards).
Deathguard.
Dark Elves.
Chaos Daemons. (Nurgle)
Chaos Daemons. (Slaanesh)
Chaos Daemons. (Nurgle/Tzeentch)
Imperial Guard. (this was never painted)
Eldar.
Currently working on Daughters of Khaine and Custodes and 2 Knights.
This doesn't included all my Mordheim warbands and BFG fleets. Nor does it include fun extra things like Assassins, random cool minis, a comission for a friend ect.

My Ultramarines won several best painted and best overall awards. I spent about 4 hours per 10 marines. It was 3.5 and 4th those days so I had exactly 100 marines at 2000pts including vehicle crew. I showed a friend how I painted them and he started a Necron army (his first models ever). He painted a Necrons Lord on Destroyer body with no prior experience in painting or modeling. After about 3 hours he had a beautiful, unique and based Necrons model. Other long time players and painters praised him on fantastic work and couldn't believe he had never painted a model before. By the end of the month he had 2500pts of fully painted Necrons. And he didn't go the lazy route. They were copper and bone with silver damage and scuffs. He even converted a few to stand in different stances.
2 months after that he had a fully painted 3000pts force of Tau. He actually painted the City Fight color scheme before that book came out. He hand painted electricity on all the energy based weapons. He had dead Ultramarines around their feet. He pained his stealthsuits to match the pine forest terrain at the club and put his own plants on the bases to line up with the shifting camo.
He went on to collect and paint Grey Knights, Traitors and Heretics, Chaos Space Marines, Chaos Daemons, And most importantly... I sold him my Ultramarines which he sold for text books. Then he started his crowning achievement. His own Ultramarines 1st company army. It is breath taking how amazing they look.
In a few years he went from "Wow, man. That looks great!" to "Holy crap you're the best model painter I've ever known!"

My painting has remained the same for the most part. Consistent, clear and straight forward. My So far took exactly one month to paint. Why? Because another friend told me that if I could get it done in a month he would buy the army.
3 wave serpents, 20 dire avengers, 10 dark reapers, 10 fire dragons, 5 wraithguard, Avatar of Khaine, Eldrad, a few warlocks, 10 jetbikes and a couple of other things.
Did the entire army without a single metallic paint. One of the easiest armies I've ever painted.

I painted half of the Custodes named character...Trajann yesterday morning. Looks great so far. Took about 2 hours to get his robe done and the Retributor armor spray made the entire army a breeze. Shouldn't take me more than a month to finish 9 termies, Trajann and 6 jetbikes.

Models don't have to be perfect. Just painted. I judged a painting competition and the top 3 were Necrons (codex silver) space marines and Imperial Guard. I gave top score to the Imperial Guard player and the prize was a FW Thunderhawk.
The Necron player was furious he didn't win. He said the Imperial Guard player had chunky, unthined paints. That the conversions were sloppy. The eyes were sloppy. The basing was too chunky with too much static grass... Ect. He wanted to know what his Necrons (which were lovely btw) didn't win.
After the contest I spoke to him about it. I explained how Rogue Trader competitions were judged. I showed him the list of criteria that I was looking for. His Necrons army only had 3 colors on his models (silver, black and green) and his based were just brown on sand. No conversions, no creative basing, no unique ideas or hand painted symbology or icons.
The Guard player was much younger. He had a massive infantry based army. All his veterans had converted helmets. All bases had variant materials and lots going on. Home made autocannons to rep each autocannon, grenades and bayonets everywhere, hand painted banners, minimum of about 9 colors on ever models, kit bashes, lighting effects, and it was all on a diaramic carrying tray. Way more effort but not as pretty. I gave him top marks.

The point I'm making is that if someone wants their army painted it will get painted. If they don't it won't.
I have arthritis that usually flares into its worst stages after a few minutes of clipping bits from the sprue. I've had days where I couldn't even hold a Bloodletter because my fingers were twisted and swollen from assembling a few Fenrisian wolves. That never stopped me. If you want it, it will get done. You just have to do it.

Forgot to mention I painted the Eldar army while working 3 jobs. Mornings at a pizza place, afternoons in an Italian restaurant and overnight as a bank driver.

 Mmmpi wrote:
Sometimes it's the only game in town.

Quoted for truth. I do enjoy going to my local club for game night, but 40k in itself isn't the draw.

 Mmmpi wrote:
@Peregrine

Prove it.

I hate to step into someone else's ongoing argument, but Peregrine does have a point. I did a Skorne army a while back where my process was:

1) Prime to white.
2) Paint robes/cloth orange, skin tan, weapons slate gray, weapon handles black.
3) Brown wash.
4) Seal.

I could finish a 10-man squad in a couple of hours by the time I was done (including doing basing work and actually gluing finished models to bases), and I still wasn't particularly fast.

I'd wager that if I picked a simpler scheme that would work with a single wash and skipped squad/chapter markings I could churn out a 5-man tac squad every 45 minutes or so once they were assembled and primered in my base color. I'd lose my mind trying to stay focused that long, but I'd finish my current 2000 point marine list in under 10 hours at that pace.

 skchsan wrote:


What really draws/drew people into 40k is the modelling and painting aspect of the kits because 40k has one of the best line of miniatures, and it just happens so that there are loose set of rules where you can play with your little figurines.

I just feel like, and this is purely my opinion which you are more than welcomed to disagree with, painting and modelling is one of the biggest parts of the hobby and I just don't seem to understand the 0/100 painting/gaming camp's attraction to the game. What exactly is it that draws you into the hobby if you don't like the hands on aspect of it?

That might be what drew you into the hobby. That's fine, but people start projecting what they prioritize as a universal constant and use it as an excuse to go so far as to outright berate and harass people and cheer others on for doing so.

Some people like the game.
Some people like the lore.
Some people like the game and the lore.
Some people like the modeling.
Some people like the modeling and the game.
Some people like the modeling and painting.
Some people like the modeling, painting, and the game.
Some people like the lore, modeling, painting.
Some people like the lore, modeling, painting, and the game.

I could go on with every possible combination of every aspect of 40k, but the point is, people like different things about it. They enjoy all, some, or none of these aspects in varying priorities and none of these combinations is the "right one", full stop.

Understanding this premise is a basic empathetic skill. You want to enjoy what you want to enjoy, probably without feeling questioned or judged for it constantly, and these other people would just like that same respect. I doubt most would not appreciate it if people constantly berated them for using their time to sit around painting toys and point out they could be doing something better when they're at your FLGS and I'm willing to bet most of the holy hobby rollers in this thread wouldn't appreciate it, either.

I'm not criticizing certain opinions. Someone not wanting to play an unpainted army is no more or less wrong than not wanting to paint your army. Competitive play styles do not hold any moral or objective truth over casual play styles. It's the complete lack of respect and value judgements for each other over these opinions that some people choose to rationalize that crosses the line and should be addressed.

This problem is prevalent on both extreme "sides" of the debate (of which there are many and not just two) of casual or competitive, hobby or game enthusiasts and contribute to 40k's reputation for community toxicity which, imo, is the biggest hurdle to actually expanding the hobby. Which is fine with some, since a surprising amount of these people would actually rather see the game dwindle and die before having a mainstream movement accepting of all playstyles. Or that they're the anointed savior of that which is the morally just cause of which gives them license to act upon others without this empathetic respect everyone deserves.

It's ultimately not even really your business, people don't owe you an explanation, and we all just want to be treated well and respected and have people stop making sweeping moral judgements based on how they like to play with their toys. How this is still even up for debate among the so-called "adults" in this hobby is what I don't personally understand.

Not sure i want 40k to be mainstream... i feel we would have new races like e.g "flower orcs"


Automatically Appended Next Post:
too mainstream*


Automatically Appended Next Post:
oh who cares, it doesn't matter, i can just stick to older editions and ignore any thing new.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
ignore me

Let's not forget that looking at the poll results overwhelming majority prefers playing against painted armies. It is just that when this preference is expressed in a manner that can be interpreted as "I'd prefer if you painted your army" it triggers a "You can't tell me what to do, you're not my real father!" reaction in some people. This is a very common occurrence in playstyle discussions.

loool, its like if we were playing scoccer, but some chose not to use the ball..


Automatically Appended Next Post:
cant really say you're playing soccer

 Stormatious wrote:
loool, its like if we were playing scoccer, but some chose not to use the ball..


Automatically Appended Next Post:
cant really say you're playing soccer

And yet, if you play soccer but are just wearing any old T-shirt instead of a club strip, you're still playing soccer.

 Crimson wrote:
Let's not forget that looking at the poll results overwhelming majority prefers playing against painted armies. It is just that when this preference is expressed in a manner that can be interpreted as "I'd prefer if you painted your army" it triggers a "You can't tell me what to do, you're not my real father!" reaction in some people. This is a very common occurrence in playstyle discussions.

A common preferred style of play is not a justification for disrespect and harassment, that's a straight up bandwagon fallacy.

"I prefer to play painted armies" is not the same as name calling, character judgements, and encouraging real life harassment to repeatedly "encourage" people of a different opinion all of which is also a common occurrence in playstyle discussions; there is plenty of examples in this thread alone.

 Crimson wrote:
BTW, about the noobs. I think at least initially most people are drawn in to this hobby by the visuals; they see the pictures of resplended armies fighting in the magazine or on the internet and want to experience something similar. So if when they go to their local store and see legions unpaited models battling over lumps of styrofoam the are likely to lose interest.

So like GW requires to play in their stores, which is a 3 colour minimum. Are GW the bad guys for daring to suggest gamer cannot play their own game without painting their gak first? No, they're not. Just like anyone else making the reasonable request you paint your models. What you choose to do with this request is up to you, but IME an unpainted force (sometimes part assembled) is like a giant red flag of "do not play this person" as it goes hand in hand with TFG behaviour and those that chase the proverbial dragon of the latest meta.

One of 40k's biggest selling points is the visuals. plonking a load of (let's face it, with modern GW models...) multicoloured plastic with sometimes parts of green stuff and/or bits used for gap filling on the board is just a mess. Even a simple undercoat will cover a multitude of sins here yet you don't see that sometimes for years on end. I just HATE that look. I know from experience of doing loads of conversions over the years that that extensive conversion will look awful until you hit that first undercoat and it brings it all together with a single colour, but I'm going off at a tangent here...

Note, I'm referring to generic "you" here and not "you you".

 Eldarsif wrote:


My guess is the social aspect. I feel like a lot of Dakkanauts are forgetting the social aspect of it all. I haven't met many people who absolutely hate painting, but the very few I have basically were seeking the gaming and/or the social aspect of it. They also tended to lean towards easy to paint armies like Necrons.

The social aspect of painting is precisely why I tend to do it at home. I've tried painting at my FLGS but get naff all done as I'll just start chatting.

Not Online!!! wrote:

That fits the bill. Grey is such a depressing colour that would suit only the downtrodden which are desperate enough to ally themselves with the denizens of the warp.

Filthy imperial, do we need to burn down the southern realm again like 1499, you corpse copulating plebian!!!

(historic joke is historical, i'd never burn down someones house, only loot his food supply!)

Edit: tbf the choice was made since it Highlights well with Red, and I like khorne, and secondly it's forgiving so that i am actually fairly content with the look. And as Strg Alt pointed out, fits the bill nicely for Chaos cannonfodder.

There is nothing wrong to have a healthy necrophilia fetish. You should know this, Slaanesh worshipper. Raiding my food supply? I fear you will run out of luck then because there are only sacks of potatoes and no cheese wheels to be found in my basement.

What kind of terrain are you using? I would advise a city of ruins theme to go with your grey painted models. The first source book from GW concerning cityfights had a great section for hobbyists in order to build their own ruins. These self-built ruins are way cheaper and more useful than the overpriced stuff GW tries to peddle us.

Aelyn wrote:

 Stormatious wrote:
loool, its like if we were playing scoccer, but some chose not to use the ball..


Automatically Appended Next Post:
cant really say you're playing soccer

And yet, if you play soccer but are just wearing any old T-shirt instead of a club strip, you're still playing soccer.

not if you refuse to use ball

BlackSwanDelta wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Let's not forget that looking at the poll results overwhelming majority prefers playing against painted armies. It is just that when this preference is expressed in a manner that can be interpreted as "I'd prefer if you painted your army" it triggers a "You can't tell me what to do, you're not my real father!" reaction in some people. This is a very common occurrence in playstyle discussions.

A common preferred style of play is not a justification for disrespect and harassment, that's a straight up bandwagon fallacy.

"I prefer to play painted armies" is not the same as name calling, character judgements, and encouraging real life harassment to repeatedly "encourage" people of a different opinion all of which is also a common occurrence in playstyle discussions; there is plenty of examples in this thread alone.

When did I harass anyone or advocate such?

The social aspect of painting is precisely why I tend to do it at home. I've tried painting at my FLGS but get naff all done as I'll just start chatting.

We have a well attended painting group on Saturdays in our FLGS. Old players and new, both skilled and not skilled at painting, gather and share in the hobby. I find it beautiful.

I, however, do prefer to paint myself, but I also like to have Star Trek reruns or 40k audionovels playing in the background.

 Crimson wrote:

BlackSwanDelta wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Let's not forget that looking at the poll results overwhelming majority prefers playing against painted armies. It is just that when this preference is expressed in a manner that can be interpreted as "I'd prefer if you painted your army" it triggers a "You can't tell me what to do, you're not my real father!" reaction in some people. This is a very common occurrence in playstyle discussions.

A common preferred style of play is not a justification for disrespect and harassment, that's a straight up bandwagon fallacy.

"I prefer to play painted armies" is not the same as name calling, character judgements, and encouraging real life harassment to repeatedly "encourage" people of a different opinion all of which is also a common occurrence in playstyle discussions; there is plenty of examples in this thread alone.

When did I harass anyone or advocate such?

I said it was a common occurrence with plenty examples in this thread. Of which, there are.

You made a point about people getting "triggeed" by people saying they don't want to play unpaired armies, I made a point that many people also cross basic lines of respect when doing expressing that opinion of not wanting to play unpainted armies.

 Stormatious wrote:

Aelyn wrote:

 Stormatious wrote:
loool, its like if we were playing scoccer, but some chose not to use the ball..


Automatically Appended Next Post:
cant really say you're playing soccer

And yet, if you play soccer but are just wearing any old T-shirt instead of a club strip, you're still playing soccer.

not if you refuse to use ball

Good thing I have everything fundamentally required for the game then, even if the aesthetics aren't as good as you'd ideally like.

I didn't say any thing about how it has to look mate, im just saying your not really "doing soccer" because your not using one of the main points of the game, just because you have the ability doesn't mean any thing unless its utilized

BlackSwanDelta wrote:

A common preferred style of play is not a justification for disrespect and harassment, that's a straight up bandwagon fallacy.

"I prefer to play painted armies" is not the same as name calling, character judgements, and encouraging real life harassment to repeatedly "encourage" people of a different opinion all of which is also a common occurrence in playstyle discussions; there is plenty of examples in this thread alone.

Which examples? Would you be so kind as to point them out? We all know and love Peregrine for his pomp and bluster, but who aside from him is advocating for name calling, character judgments or real life harassment?

The vast majority of what I'm seeing here is people simply expressing their preference for painted armies, responding to hyperbole about how impossible it is to paint models, and expressing their willingness to offer help and assistance to new painters. The fact that someone saying how willing they are to help someone improve a skill or gain confidence gets interpreted as harassment is kind of interesting on a psychological level.

 Stormatious wrote:
I didn't say any thing about how it has to look mate, im just saying your not really "doing soccer" because your not using one of the main points of the game, just because you have the ability doesn't mean any thing unless its utilized

Just because you consider painting to be a key part of the game doesn't mean everyone does. Paint makes literally no difference to the ability to play the game, laugh about old war stories with friends, think about lists and tactics, or enjoy the background. The only difference it makes is that stuff (generally) looks nicer.

No having painted models is a key part, not saying you gotta do it ur self..

Aelyn wrote:

 Stormatious wrote:
I didn't say any thing about how it has to look mate, im just saying your not really "doing soccer" because your not using one of the main points of the game, just because you have the ability doesn't mean any thing unless its utilized

Just because you consider painting to be a key part of the game doesn't mean everyone does. Paint makes literally no difference to the ability to play the game, laugh about old war stories with friends, think about lists and tactics, or enjoy the background. The only difference it makes is that stuff (generally) looks nicer.

Yes. It. Does.

In this age of multiple detachments and soup lists, being able to specify which models belong to what chapter, regiment, hive fleet or whatever is more important than ever. A sea of grey makes this practically impossible.

See? Just like I said earlier. TFG behaviour and unpainted armies tend to go hand in hand.

Whenever I have done intro games for 40K, 9th Age, Blood Bowl, Necromunda or Freebooter´s Fate in the past, I made sure to use painted minis from my collection. Tabletop games excel when the table features an interesting terrain set and minis which were painted with a love for detail. Noobs also get an impression right from the beginning that I care about the hobby and that they can achieve the same result with a little bit of dedication on their part. I also stressed the point that my painting skills were pretty bad at the beginning but nowadays with the interwebz, beginners can do much better than my younger self.
Do I criticize other people in my FLGS because they don´t paint their models? No, I just don´t associate with them. Tabletop games are after all a social affair and it can´t be expected that people get along well with one another who have a vastly different outlook on the hobby. My gaming buddies and myself want to have a good time when we decide to have a tabletop game. This means putting an effort with anything associated with said game. Having to face off against a grey plastic horde would be akin to showing utter disrespect to your opponent as much as a poster on this forum would refrain from using proper spelling or punctuation.

having grey models is not how you conduct warhammer games in the true sence and spirit of how the world of war gaming is.

 Luciferian wrote:

BlackSwanDelta wrote:

A common preferred style of play is not a justification for disrespect and harassment, that's a straight up bandwagon fallacy.

"I prefer to play painted armies" is not the same as name calling, character judgements, and encouraging real life harassment to repeatedly "encourage" people of a different opinion all of which is also a common occurrence in playstyle discussions; there is plenty of examples in this thread alone.

Which examples? Would you be so kind as to point them out? We all know and love Peregrine for his pomp and bluster, but who aside from him is advocating for name calling, character judgments or real life harassment?

The vast majority of what I'm seeing here is people simply expressing their preference for painted armies, responding to hyperbole about how impossible it is to paint models, and expressing their willingness to offer help and assistance to new painters. The fact that someone saying how willing they are to help someone improve a skill or gain confidence gets interpreted as harassment is kind of interesting on a psychological level.

I basically went over all of this earlier.

Offering help isn't harassment. Repeated, unreciprocated offers of "help" and/or calling people lazy, disrespectful, etc because they don't prioritize their free time the same as you, is harassment.

The true real wargamer has a fully painted army on his miniture terrain table top where he trys to appear as one with the terrain to fully get the feel and keeping to what wargaming really is, which is painting or highly detailed realistic tiny miniture statues and putting them to war in a miniture enviroment.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
One does not disrespect the laws of miniture wargaming


Automatically Appended Next Post:
and disrespect the miniturized battlefield in which to war on

 Stormatious wrote:
No having painted models is a key part, not saying you gotta do it ur self..

Okay, I'm done trying to engage with you now. There's no point if you aren't willing to even try to understand other people's perspectives.

 Grimtuff wrote:

Aelyn wrote:

 Stormatious wrote:
I didn't say any thing about how it has to look mate, im just saying your not really "doing soccer" because your not using one of the main points of the game, just because you have the ability doesn't mean any thing unless its utilized

Just because you consider painting to be a key part of the game doesn't mean everyone does. Paint makes literally no difference to the ability to play the game, laugh about old war stories with friends, think about lists and tactics, or enjoy the background. The only difference it makes is that stuff (generally) looks nicer.

Yes. It. Does.

In this age of multiple detachments and soup lists, being able to specify which models belong to what chapter, regiment, hive fleet or whatever is more important than ever. A sea of grey makes this practically impossible.

See? Just like I said earlier. TFG behaviour and unpainted armies tend to go hand in hand.

That's fair (the part about telling detachments apart, not the part about TFGs.) I didn't think of it because I've never actually played with someone using the same models for different detachments. However, that's a fairly corner case - most of the time painting models doesn't make any difference to the game.

Look if you like grey models its like i said, why are you not just using toilet rolls, why even spend all the money.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
for the detailed minis