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.

 Crimson wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Are you going to complain if someone paints their Ultramarines black, including the new Calgar model (with the helmet of course), which makes him slightly harder to point out?

Obvious strawman is obvious.

How is that a strawman?

Because the argument is whether proxing models assembled/painted as UltraMarines as RavenGuard. The strawman is about a typically-UM model painted black, but as UM. So it's about "proxying" UM as UM - which isn't proxying at all.

Bharring wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Are you going to complain if someone paints their Ultramarines black, including the new Calgar model (with the helmet of course), which makes him slightly harder to point out?

Obvious strawman is obvious.

How is that a strawman?

Because the argument is whether proxing models assembled/painted as UltraMarines as RavenGuard. The strawman is about a typically-UM model painted black, but as UM. So it's about "proxying" UM as UM - which isn't proxying at all.

Then we get down to Brass Tax. Someone converted their Aggressor with a bunch of bling as a Calgar stand-in. They're painted all Black and have a hand as their Chapter symbol. They're Ultramarine successors. How do you act?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Are you going to complain if someone paints their Ultramarines black, including the new Calgar model (with the helmet of course), which makes him slightly harder to point out?

In what way "black" are we talking?

Are we talking "undercoated black with no paint details?" - No issues. They're not masquerading as something else.
Are we talking "black paint, but the Ultramarine symbols are still present on every model?" - No issues. They could be any Chapter.
Are we talking "fully painted black, no Ultramarine icons, and no symbols or scripture of another canon Chapter?" - No issues. They're a custom Chapter.
Are we talking "fully painted black, another Ultramarine successor Chapter's symbols and scripture, but Calgar present?" - No issues. They're Ultramarine successors, but I'll let it go.
Are we talking "fully painted black, a non-Ultramarine successor Chapter's symbols and scripture, but Calgar present?" - Slight issues, but if that Calgar model is being played AS Calgar, then he's got to be an Ultramarine.
Are we talking "fully painted black, a non-Ultramarine successor Chapter's symbols and scripture, and no Ultramarine specific characters?" - Issues. They don't look anything like Ultramarines, look identifiable as another canon Chapter, and have no markers that would tell me they're Ultramarines.

Would you complain if someone builds their plasma gun as a meltagun?

Calgar has a gaint hand where the toilet seat should be. It's the same model but not an Ultramarine, but being played like an Ultramarine.

So, we're looking at a black painted Calgar, with all his Ultramarine iconography removed and replaced with another Chapter's icon, being played as Calgar? Yeah, that's fine, because that's the only way of playing a Gravis-armoured model with two power fists with underslung bolters in game.

Remove Calgar, or resculpt him with something that ceases to look like a Gravis model with twin power fists? Then I'm not so fine with it.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

If painting a model is only an aesthetic choice, and building a model with a plasma gun is only an aesthetic choice, why is one good and the other bad?

It is because paint is just paint. Like you could literally paint a Formula One Ferrari car blue, and it would perform the same. (Unless the old Ork belief applies to F1 racing too..)

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
The aesthetic choice for model building affects actual rules.

And likewise, the aesthetic choice for painting affects actual rules. Or are you implying that subfaction rules don't exist? Do you need a notepad? to remind you?

Why are paint schemes any less of an aesthetic choice than what kind of gun I like to have modelled?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

If painting a model is only an aesthetic choice, and building a model with a plasma gun is only an aesthetic choice, why is one good and the other bad?

It is because paint is just paint. Like you could literally paint a Formula One Ferrari car blue, and it would perform the same. (Unless the old Ork belief applies to F1 racing too..)

And plastic's just plastic. Why is there a difference?

 Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

If painting a model is only an aesthetic choice, and building a model with a plasma gun is only an aesthetic choice, why is one good and the other bad?

It is because paint is just paint. Like you could literally paint a Formula One Ferrari car blue, and it would perform the same. (Unless the old Ork belief applies to F1 racing too..)

An inverted omega symbol bit, for example, is not just paint.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:
Are you going to complain if someone paints their Ultramarines black, including the new Calgar model (with the helmet of course), which makes him slightly harder to point out?

Obvious strawman is obvious.

How is that a strawman?

Because the argument is whether proxing models assembled/painted as UltraMarines as RavenGuard. The strawman is about a typically-UM model painted black, but as UM. So it's about "proxying" UM as UM - which isn't proxying at all.

Then we get down to Brass Tax. Someone converted their Aggressor with a bunch of bling as a Calgar stand-in. They're painted all Black and have a hand as their Chapter symbol. They're Ultramarine successors. How do you act?

"That's some really cool work you did there!" I'm not sure why you'd even ask.

Bharring wrote:

Because the argument is whether proxing models assembled/painted as UltraMarines as RavenGuard. The strawman is about a typically-UM model painted black, but as UM. So it's about "proxying" UM as UM - which isn't proxying at all.

What? You're arguing that you must use the rules associated with your colour scheme. Ultramarine colour scheme is blue not black.

 Crimson wrote:

Bharring wrote:

Because the argument is whether proxing models assembled/painted as UltraMarines as RavenGuard. The strawman is about a typically-UM model painted black, but as UM. So it's about "proxying" UM as UM - which isn't proxying at all.

What? You're arguing that you must use the rules associated with your colour scheme. Ultramarine colour scheme is blue not black.

I think this is where the disconnect is coming from. I'm arguing that there's value in fielding the models as they're built.

Now, typically, that matches a well-known scheme. But not always. Hobbyist investment and creativity being the most important thing (Rule of Cool is rule#1).

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And plastic's just plastic. Why is there a difference?

Because in universe is not just plastic, it is completely different piece of equipment. However, the paint is paint even in the fiction of the game.

Also, another reason why a lot of people apply WYSIWYG to models and gear but not paint is that this is how it was defined when it actually was a written rule in the game.

Bharring wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Bharring wrote:

Because the argument is whether proxing models assembled/painted as UltraMarines as RavenGuard. The strawman is about a typically-UM model painted black, but as UM. So it's about "proxying" UM as UM - which isn't proxying at all.

What? You're arguing that you must use the rules associated with your colour scheme. Ultramarine colour scheme is blue not black.

I think this is where the disconnect is coming from. I'm arguing that there's value in fielding the models as they're built.

Now, typically, that matches a well-known scheme. But not always. Hobbyist investment and creativity being the most important thing (Rule of Cool is rule#1).

If there really WAS value, then there would be no point in ever painting an official Chapter because you're stuck if you get bad rules.

Bharring wrote:

I think this is where the disconnect is coming from. I'm arguing that there's value in fielding the models as they're built.

You may think that, even I might think that, but I'm not gonna tell someone that they should think that and I certainly will not refuse a game because of it.

Now, typically, that matches a well-known scheme. But not always. Hobbyist investment and creativity being the most important thing (Rule of Cool is rule#1).

Yes. And if someone really loves the Imperial Fists colour scheme and Ultramarine rules I'm not gonna tell them that they're doing it wrong.

 Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

And plastic's just plastic. Why is there a difference?

Because in universe is not just plastic, it is completely different piece of equipment. However, the paint is paint even in the fiction of the game.

But how that equipment looks is just "fiction of the game".
Who *says* that a plasma gun has to look the way GW says it does?

Look, I haven't got a problem with people saying "yeah, I don't care how your models look, they can represent what they like!" - but please be consistent.

Also, another reason why a lot of people apply WYSIWYG to models and gear but not paint is that this is how it was defined when it actually was a written rule in the game.

And now it's not.

There also weren't subfaction rules. There haven't been for the last three editions before this one. But times, they are a-changin'.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Bharring wrote:

 Crimson wrote:

Bharring wrote:

Because the argument is whether proxing models assembled/painted as UltraMarines as RavenGuard. The strawman is about a typically-UM model painted black, but as UM. So it's about "proxying" UM as UM - which isn't proxying at all.

What? You're arguing that you must use the rules associated with your colour scheme. Ultramarine colour scheme is blue not black.

I think this is where the disconnect is coming from. I'm arguing that there's value in fielding the models as they're built.

Now, typically, that matches a well-known scheme. But not always. Hobbyist investment and creativity being the most important thing (Rule of Cool is rule#1).

If there really WAS value, then there would be no point in ever painting an official Chapter because you're stuck if you get bad rules.

If you only cared about the game, perhaps. If you cared more about something else, perhaps not.

Again, that's fine to care more about the game than anything else. Just be honest about it.

My time is far to valuable to be wasted on meta chasers.

To all those who want to play Iron Hands with your obviously not Iron Hands models and subsequently whine like a petulant child because my point of view is different from yours... stop trying to force your prejudice onto me. I wont have it. Take your insolence somewhere else.

My game experience is equally as important and I want to have an immersive one. For me that means models are GW and their color schemes are correct.

 Crimson wrote:

Bharring wrote:

I think this is where the disconnect is coming from. I'm arguing that there's value in fielding the models as they're built.

You may think that, even I might think that, but I'm not gonna tell someone that they should think that and I certainly will not refuse a game because of it.

I believe we can both agree with this: There's value, to some people, in armies in their game being fielded as they're built

Is that fair?

Now, typically, that matches a well-known scheme. But not always. Hobbyist investment and creativity being the most important thing (Rule of Cool is rule#1).

Yes. And if someone really loves the Imperial Fists colour scheme and Ultramarine rules I'm not gonna tell them that they're doing it wrong.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But how that equipment looks is just "fiction of the game".
Who *says* that a plasma gun has to look the way GW says it does?

This is not what I'm saying at all. The fiction matters. But Space marine in black armour could easily paint their armour differently in the fictional setting too. Why would they do it? To confuse the enemy, it's a Halloween party, I don't know? But they easily could.

Similarly the subfaction traits are just fighting styles in the setting. I can easily imagine that Vanguard Marines of Imperial Fists tenth company could employ tactics similar to those favoured by Raven Guard. However a meltagun suddenly starting to operate like a plasma gun is a much bigger stretch.




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Bharring wrote:

I believe we can both agree with this: There's value, to some people, in armies in their game being fielded as they're built

Is that fair?

Yes.

I wouldn't tell someone who's playing 40k with poker chips that they're doing it wrong.

I totally would.

It's not what I want to do. I'm not excited to play against them. But it's not wrong if they (and their opponent) are enjoying themselves.

A lot of the back and forth comes from being told that the only reason I'd rather not play with poker chips is because I'm not capable enough to remember what's what. It's insulting and dismissive, so obviously it gets responses.

Well, that's silly argument on their part, and I never implied anyone was dumb. I understand why one might prefer the rules to match their colour schemes for thematic reasons. In theory I'd prefer that too, but the truth is that the official rules do not necessarily reflect the fluff well anyway. And of course the power differences can be pretty drastic. One doesn't need to be a WAAC tryhard to at some point get tired of being constantly curbstomped. And even if it wasn't that, people might want to try different rules without having to paint a completely new army.

And yes, your'e perfectly within your rights to reuse the game for any reason, but please think about what the message actually will be. If it would be common that people would insist on correct colour schemes, then it would encourage people not to paint their models. And this is the last thing I want to see. Models being painted in 'wrong' colour is at least to me way (WAY!) lesser dealbreaker than the models not being painted at all.

Crimson wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:
But how that equipment looks is just "fiction of the game".
Who *says* that a plasma gun has to look the way GW says it does?

This is not what I'm saying at all. The fiction matters. But Space marine in black armour could easily paint their armour differently in the fictional setting too. Why would they do it? To confuse the enemy, it's a Halloween party, I don't know? But they easily could.

And these plasma guns just happen to be built from a certain STC that makes them look similar to meltaguns. Or they're disguised as meltaguns, to confuse the enemy.

That makes even more sense than Iron Hands going into battle carrying the inverted omega, blue power armour, codex colour markings, and the words "Ultramarines/Ultramar/Ultra/Macragge" or similar festooning their armour.

The fiction matters, except when it doesn't, eh?

Similarly the subfaction traits are just fighting styles in the setting. I can easily imagine that Vanguard Marines of Imperial Fists tenth company could employ tactics similar to those favoured by Raven Guard.

And the model of a plasma gun is just an aesthetic design! I'm sure there could easily be a plasma weapon that has a conical vented muzzle and a casing that encloses the plasma coils. Oh, it looks a lot like a meltagun now. But it's not!

However a meltagun suddenly starting to operate like a plasma gun is a much bigger stretch.

I disagree. Clearly the meltagun is either a heavily modified version, or it's just a variant plasma gun casing, that happens to look like a meltagun one!

See? How something looks isn't important to how it functions on tabletop, right?

Well, Imperium just doesn't treat tech like that.

 Crimson wrote:
Well, Imperium just doesn't treat tech like that.

Not true. It's a big Imperium - I'm sure there could be something out there. You're telling me that there's no chance that there's a plasma gun design in the Imperium that looks like a meltagun?

And the Iron Hands don't just wear Ultramarines armour like that. When was the last time you saw a proud son of Ferrus Manus bedecked in Ultimas, blue armour, and waving pennants devoted to Macragge?

 fraser1191 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Elbows wrote:

 fraser1191 wrote:

 Elbows wrote:
You are chasing rules to benefit you, regardless of how you try to mask it

This is an incredibly unfair statement. Traits are basically play styles

Did you stop reading my post at that point in a rush to respond? I'll assume so. It's also an incredibly fair statement, by the way.

I have over 5000 points of lovingly painted Ultramarines.

And your statement is unfair. You have no right to tell someone how to play unless they're cheating. These traits are essentially arbitrarily assigned to these factions.

Lets flip some stuff around. White scars known for bikes and such suddenly get an extra +1 to armour save for their trait in cover and imperial fists gets a trait that suddenly benefits bikes more and play better for how that person originally imagined their army.

You're telling that person that they have to use something doesn't really fit the idea of white scars?

How about this, I've been using the Ultramarines trait for over a year, I like my list and I wanna shake things up. Can I not use another trait to broaden my stratagies and get more enjoyment out of my army?

It's a game, there's give and take. I'll cut you some slack and say yes I'd stop my opponent from using different traits if it was a bunch of different traits in the same list. But otherwise it's fair game

He isn't telling anyone how to play. He's pointing out that chasing strongewr rules is... chasing stronger rules. Also your example here whilst fine theoretically makes no sense, as the traits irl match the themes of the chapters in the lore. RG are sneaky, WS are good on bikes, IH are tough, apparently really fething tough. So no he isn't telling someone to p;lay their army in a way that runs counter to their desired theme. Indeed, if you'd read the post, you'd see he doesn't think you shouldn't, just be honest about the fact you''re chasing the win, and that's not the kind of game he personally would play.

Again, "Can I not use another trait to broaden my strategies and get more enjoyment out of my army?" yes of course. You're still chasing the win though. You could also play IK with IG CP farm to broaden your strategies and have fun. Still chasing the win.

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Well, Imperium just doesn't treat tech like that.

Not true. It's a big Imperium - I'm sure there could be something out there. You're telling me that there's no chance that there's a plasma gun design in the Imperium that looks like a meltagun?

And the Iron Hands don't just wear Ultramarines armour like that. When was the last time you saw a proud son of Ferrus Manus bedecked in Ultimas, blue armour, and waving pennants devoted to Macragge?

I dunno, the Red Talons might have colors that might confuse you with Blood Angels or Ravens so who knows?

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

 Crimson wrote:
Well, Imperium just doesn't treat tech like that.

Not true. It's a big Imperium - I'm sure there could be something out there. You're telling me that there's no chance that there's a plasma gun design in the Imperium that looks like a meltagun?

And the Iron Hands don't just wear Ultramarines armour like that. When was the last time you saw a proud son of Ferrus Manus bedecked in Ultimas, blue armour, and waving pennants devoted to Macragge?

They're the Ultramarine Armoury Guard. They're led by the Ultramarine Master of the Forge (counts as Feirros) and composed mostly of vehicles from the Armour and those marines who aspire to be Techmarines or otherwise show special affinity to the machines. Their fighting style differs from typical Ultramarine forces and resemble more of that of the Iron Hands.

Anyway, I know that you will never budge from your position, nor will you ever accept that people disagreeing with you could have a valid point. I am not particularly interested in engaging with your false equivalencies.

Personally I always use custom colour schemes for my armies. Not for rule-hopping purposes, but because I like creating my own thing. Nevertheless, with this colour-strict interpretation, this opens me a possibility to switch rules at whim (though with my previous custom IF successor chapter I never did.) I really wouldn't feel comfortable telling someone who had painted their army in official colours that they couldn't pick the rules they like, while I myself could. It would feel like a total dick move. I want to encourage an environment where people paint their models however they like, were it an official scheme or custom, and use whatever rules they personally feel most suitable.

Now, people chasing the most powerful rules possible certainly can be annoying, but I really don't think that getting repeatedly tabled by Iron Hands would feel any less frustrating if they were painted black instead of blue. Hell, perhaps some players with armies painted as IH will get tired of having no challenge at some point and might want to use their army with a weaker set of rules. (Personally I have intentionally chosen suboptimal traits against less experienced people even with the old codex.)

 oni wrote:
My time is far to valuable to be wasted on meta chasers.

To all those who want to play Iron Hands with your obviously not Iron Hands models and subsequently whine like a petulant child because my point of view is different from yours... stop trying to force your prejudice onto me. I wont have it. Take your insolence somewhere else.

My game experience is equally as important and I want to have an immersive one. For me that means models are GW and their color schemes are correct.

Hear hear!
Still have to play a guy who has an IW painted army for 30k with primaris elements for 40k that he's now running as IH this weekend. In a friendly tournament set up by the university RPG soc. Although he was kind last time we played a friendly, he only used his FW tanks, leviathan and one repulsor executionor with the special character. As opposed to taking three repulsor executioners.

Now I'm not saying everyone who takes IH in suspiciously non IH colours never had any interest in the lore and suddenly made the switch because they can't handle losing, but I that's exactly the shameless stuff these people are pulling.

I'm sorry but as a neutral wistander without a horse in this race, the "Paint matters" crown don't do any favours to their cause when to demostrate how paint matters they use the argument that models matter.

Yeah we all know models matter. Demonstrate that paint really matters, not go the lazy way, and try to make the two things be the same when they aren't.

Because it is not the same to play with an army of bases than with an army of built and unpainted models. It has never been in 40 years of hobby. In no reasonable way, shape or form, has the same impact on a game of warhammer, nor competitively, nor narratively, and not even socially.


But for all the "You only change subfaction rules to be more powerfull" crown I have to say that you are flat out wrong: As a Tau Player my subfactions are so specific that they basically dictate the list you are gonna build. And I use them all in different lists whenever I want to try something new because I have a very big Tau army to play any kind of lists I want. Assault ones, long range based firepower ones, short range movile ones, Auxiliary based ones, etc... and I'll chose the rules they best work with the list I have in mind, of course.
Of course I could do a list with a theme and then take subfactions rules that don't work at all with that theme but... why? I wouldn't be different than making a... I don't know... full shooting Imperial Guard army and then take a general that gives buff to meele units. It will detrimentaly impact my enjoyement of a fair and balanced game with my opponent.

 Galas wrote:
I'm sorry but as a neutral wistander without a horse in this race, the "Paint matters" don't do any favours to their cause when to demostrate how paint matters they use the argument that models matter.

Yeah we all know models matter. Demonstrate that paint really matters, not go the lazy way, and try to make the two things be the same when they aren't.

Because it is not the same to play with an army of bases than with an army of built and unpainted models. It has never been in 40 years of hobby.

Legally the paint doesn't matter. But the question is does it bother you, not should it be allowed. And yeah it bothers me, it's just shameless meta chasing, and that's not what I engage with 40k for. The IH players who first heard about them last month but have been playing for 5 years can duke it out between each other all they like, but if I can avoid playing them I will.

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I'm sorry but as a neutral wistander without a horse in this race, the "Paint matters" don't do any favours to their cause when to demostrate how paint matters they use the argument that models matter.

Yeah we all know models matter. Demonstrate that paint really matters, not go the lazy way, and try to make the two things be the same when they aren't.

Because it is not the same to play with an army of bases than with an army of built and unpainted models. It has never been in 40 years of hobby.

Legally the paint doesn't matter. But the question is does it bother you, not should it be allowed. And yeah it bothers me, it's just shameless meta chasing, and that's not what I engage with 40k for. The IH players who first heard about them last month but have been playing for 5 years can duke it out between each other all they like, but if I can avoid playing them I will.

TBH whats the problem with meta chasing for those that do it? I mean... I have knew a couple of dicks that tell others to "git gud" but in most cases what I have seen are ... "I'm totally casual guys trust me" guys giving gak to pleople that play competitively.

If is not a play style you like, why do you have to add a moral and subjetive value to their actions? Lets not kid ourselves. All this "If you play blue IH , do it, but be honest and say you are doing it to win!" are just passive aggresive ways of claiming the moral high ground. Is a very, very toxic attitude.

And I say this being a giant casual gamer. I mean... I'm one of those that regularly plays with 3-4 giants in his fantasy armies... that should tell you everything.

there should be an option of: No, as long as all the marines are the same chapter it doesn't matter what they look like.

Anything GW writes is just counts as with more authority.

How many different versions of an assault cannon has existed since the game started. Same model, different rules.

The irony of this argument is that it's only possible because marine factions aren't really factions, they're different playstyles for the same miniatures.

When you can build a legal army with 100% the same models across 6 different army books, you don't have different factions at all.

I absolutely have no problem with people changing what ruleset their army is using - I'm even happy for people to use completely different codexes to play their army - who cares if your plastic toys use necron rules or Ork rules? GW certainly isn't precious because they keep changing how rules for an army work anyway...

People convert non GW models to be part of their armies, by some of this logic those models don't have rules at all and are invisible on the table.

I wish my Eldar had a tenth the variety of play styles that my space Wolves or salamanders have.

Half the time I'm tempted to just count them as which ever marine chapter GW decided needed to do a xenos army better than the aliens could.

Why saim Hann when I can play white scars?

I'm waiting for the day GW releases a horde marine army to out horde Orks...

 Galas wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I'm sorry but as a neutral wistander without a horse in this race, the "Paint matters" don't do any favours to their cause when to demostrate how paint matters they use the argument that models matter.

Yeah we all know models matter. Demonstrate that paint really matters, not go the lazy way, and try to make the two things be the same when they aren't.

Because it is not the same to play with an army of bases than with an army of built and unpainted models. It has never been in 40 years of hobby.

Legally the paint doesn't matter. But the question is does it bother you, not should it be allowed. And yeah it bothers me, it's just shameless meta chasing, and that's not what I engage with 40k for. The IH players who first heard about them last month but have been playing for 5 years can duke it out between each other all they like, but if I can avoid playing them I will.

TBH whats the problem with meta chasing for those that do it? I mean... I have knew a couple of dicks that tell others to "git gud" but in most cases what I have seen are ... "I'm totally casual guys trust me" guys giving gak to pleople that play competitively.

If is not a play style you like, why do you have to add a moral and subjetive value to their actions? Lets not kid ourselves. All this "If you play blue IH , do it, but be honest and say you are doing it to win!" are just passive aggresive ways of taking the high ground. Is a very, very toxic attitude.

And I say this being a giant casual gamer. I mean... I'm one of those that regularly plays with 3-4 giants in his fantasy armies... that should tell you everything.

Personally I've seen more casual players complaining about competitive players than vice versa that's for sure

 Continuity wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I'm sorry but as a neutral wistander without a horse in this race, the "Paint matters" don't do any favours to their cause when to demostrate how paint matters they use the argument that models matter.

Yeah we all know models matter. Demonstrate that paint really matters, not go the lazy way, and try to make the two things be the same when they aren't.

Because it is not the same to play with an army of bases than with an army of built and unpainted models. It has never been in 40 years of hobby.

Legally the paint doesn't matter. But the question is does it bother you, not should it be allowed. And yeah it bothers me, it's just shameless meta chasing, and that's not what I engage with 40k for. The IH players who first heard about them last month but have been playing for 5 years can duke it out between each other all they like, but if I can avoid playing them I will.

TBH whats the problem with meta chasing for those that do it? I mean... I have knew a couple of dicks that tell others to "git gud" but in most cases what I have seen are ... "I'm totally casual guys trust me" guys giving gak to pleople that play competitively.

If is not a play style you like, why do you have to add a moral and subjetive value to their actions? Lets not kid ourselves. All this "If you play blue IH , do it, but be honest and say you are doing it to win!" are just passive aggresive ways of taking the high ground. Is a very, very toxic attitude.

And I say this being a giant casual gamer. I mean... I'm one of those that regularly plays with 3-4 giants in his fantasy armies... that should tell you everything.

Personally I've seen more casual players complaining about competitive players than vice versa that's for sure

See, they only want to win on their own terms. So when you decide to create a better army list, they get mad.

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

Spoiler:

 Continuity wrote:

 Galas wrote:

 CREEEEEEEEED wrote:

 Galas wrote:
I'm sorry but as a neutral wistander without a horse in this race, the "Paint matters" don't do any favours to their cause when to demostrate how paint matters they use the argument that models matter.

Yeah we all know models matter. Demonstrate that paint really matters, not go the lazy way, and try to make the two things be the same when they aren't.

Because it is not the same to play with an army of bases than with an army of built and unpainted models. It has never been in 40 years of hobby.

Legally the paint doesn't matter. But the question is does it bother you, not should it be allowed. And yeah it bothers me, it's just shameless meta chasing, and that's not what I engage with 40k for. The IH players who first heard about them last month but have been playing for 5 years can duke it out between each other all they like, but if I can avoid playing them I will.

TBH whats the problem with meta chasing for those that do it? I mean... I have knew a couple of dicks that tell others to "git gud" but in most cases what I have seen are ... "I'm totally casual guys trust me" guys giving gak to pleople that play competitively.

If is not a play style you like, why do you have to add a moral and subjetive value to their actions? Lets not kid ourselves. All this "If you play blue IH , do it, but be honest and say you are doing it to win!" are just passive aggresive ways of taking the high ground. Is a very, very toxic attitude.

And I say this being a giant casual gamer. I mean... I'm one of those that regularly plays with 3-4 giants in his fantasy armies... that should tell you everything.

Personally I've seen more casual players complaining about competitive players than vice versa that's for sure

See, they only want to win on their own terms. So when you decide to create a better army list, they get mad.

But I don't want to win, I want to have fun. If I win in the process, great, if I lose, so be it. It just rather be beaten by their skill or their luck, being beaten in the wallet department just isn't fun. Honestly I don't have too much problem with playing blue IH, it's when you go and buy a bunch of new models to milk the brand new rules as far as you can, then take your tournament level list to a casual game. (and carry on painting them blue with toilet seats) Like yeah, you're gonna win, well done, let's take that as read and go home.