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.

 Jidmah wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

2. Liar, liar, pants on fire. According to yourself, you are running a Raven Guard successor chapter called "Shade Harriers". Which do have a cool paint scheme that is probably a PITA to paint because of all that white, but still no sororitas horde and definitely no harder to paint than white Death Guard. Which are a ridiculously easy to paint compared to orks.

i mean, he could very well have more than one army.

True, but I think he would have posted at least once in a topic regarding adeptus sororitas. All his posts about tactics, army lists, painting and rules are about marines.

And it's not like I was trying to find this information - I actually was curious to get a picture of those sisters to see whether he had metal miniatures or already painted a horde of plastic sisters.

Not in the sororitas thread, no, but I have indeed posted about buying them. I haven't played them yet, guess why. Not painted.

And yes, plastic.

 auticus wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 auticus wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 auticus wrote:
I love how a rule designed to reward people who put in the effort is flipped to be a PUNISHMENT to those that don't want to do it.

lol.

Its PUNISHMENT for me to have to chase around the meta and continuously buy new models to have good games too because the balance is utter garbage, but we all seem to embrace that punishment with the continued chorus of git gud and learn to play and build better lists if you want a good game.

I guess some of you better get to picking up a paintbrush. It takes all of 15-20 minutes to spray paint a squad of marines and dip them in some shade and paint their guns black and they are at that point just fine battle ready.

Or you can house rule it... but as I have been told MANY times over the past decade... that wouldn't be "real 40k".

unless your painting standard is higher than that.

My models are at the very least basecoated with an airbrush with 2 tones. I still don't consider them "done" at all.

We can find 1000 ways to circle round and round on it. Base coat and shade is the first two levels of any painted model. Just base coat and shade and then get back to them as you go along. If you are fine with fielding bare grey plastic, then fielding a partially painted miniature shouldn't be a bother either other than one simply just doesn't want to be forced to do so (but I say don't do it then just give up the 10 points no biggie). From a painter's standpoint, I have tabletop qualitied a good dozen armies and then went back and made them better but they were painted for events so I could play them. And basecoat and shade isn't tabletop quality. Basecoat and shade is the bare minimum of effort.

yeah but theres a difference between slapping a basecoat and dipping in shade vs basecoating every detail and applying precise shading in how much time it consumes. I don't just drown my minis in shade so shading actually takes quite a while.

My dude I've been painting miniatures for about 30 years now and did commission painting for many years from tabletop quality on up. You are still describing a partially painted figure vs a fully painted figure. If you are fine running about with grey plastic, there shouldn't be an issue running around with a basecoated and one layer of shade applied miniature. You can get back to applying all of the precise shading later.

The only thing that you are arguing against is that goes against your workflow. Fair enough. Your best bet then is to houserule 40k to not use the rule and not attend events that require painting, which is also perfectly fine.

Yeah i've just been pretty emotional with that subject. I paint my models, i never have bare grey plastic in my games and the paint quality is above average in my area. Its just that stuff that i feel are "unjust" really ticks me off.
i doubt i'll ever not get the 10vps personally.

 Jidmah wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
Red paintjob for orks is long gone. And even when it was in the codex it didn't require to actually paint the model in red. It was just one of those inivisible upgrades (I mean that didn't require to be represented by a specific bitz) like armor plates and such that you could take for a vehicle, nothing more.

Yes it did. What part of "all weapons and wargear must be represented on the model" do you not understand? WYSIWYG used to be a thing back in the day.

Like I said, short memories...

All my trukks and battlewagons are painted both red and battle ready!

Still 0 VP for me, because I have an unpainted plane and a primed weirdboy

I have no idea why you have chosen this hill, however, given that you are a painter and just missing some models.

 auticus wrote:

Not Online!!! wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Funnily i do houseruling too, wouldn't be the first edition i just kink out dents GW leaves in there and it's balance. So, erm, what group are you talking about?

I invite you to come over to the states and set up shop and then try to get your houseruling on and see how that goes for you.

While its possible, in my region anyway many groups will ride you out of the store for trying that. Your private games are a bit easier to do that but public store games with houserules are largely a big no no here.

I certainly won't go over, thank you, and that is just a community issue and difference, we do it plenty over here.

And you still haven't told me why i am in that supposed group.
Broad brushes broad strokes i heard.

And again if it were TRULY in the heart of the hobby, then not only painting would've needed to be rewarded but ALSO conversion and LORE.
Yet we got nothing in that regard?

Which is why i still deem this rule arbitrary as all.

I mean you can argue it until your face turns blue. I've been set on fire in these forums and ridden out because I can't stand the bad balance and being told to git gud and go buy new miniatures every 6 months to keep up and just learn to play and build lists better by staying on top of what is busted because thats "official 40k (or aos)". Doesn't change the fact that its the rule, and you have to follow the rules or you have to house rule and play an unofficial version of the rules.

If you do it plenty there (houserule) then this rule shouldn't affect you anyway so who cares?

Because i doubt it will longterm improve 40k and t's community as a whole.
And yes i have seen that, some rather nasty things were thrown your way. Doesn't make this correct.

I guess to me if its ok for people to shout that bad balance is fun and good for the community and making people buy armies every 6 months to a year to be able to play a game where they aren't being tabled in a turn or two, then its also ok for when a rule comes down to support the hobby side that they also adhere to that as well.

I don't think the bad balance and bad rules longterm improve 40k and its community as a whole either. But as you've seen, that seems to be something no one cares about and in fact people fight very passionately to enforce and support.

But they are VERY passionate about being told they have to spend 20 minutes to spray paint and shade dip their models or lose out on 10 victory points as that is unjust and a punishment.

 Kithail wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Kithail wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

It's also funny how half the people with the holier-than-though attitude about their painted army are playing marines which are ridiculously easy and faster to paint compared to most other armies. You literally just have to prime them in the color of your choice, highlight weapons and shoulder pads and you are battle ready. And if that weren't enough, you also have half the model count of most other armies.

I have a Sororitas horde infantry army. Unless you play something MASSIVE infantry Guard or HORDE tyranids/orks, I think we are even. And even then, I'd counter with that each sororitas model has way more detail and is harder to paint than gaunts OR boyz.

1. I do, in fact, play orks.
2. Liar, liar, pants on fire. According to yourself, you are running a Raven Guard successor chapter called "Shade Harriers". Which do have a cool paint scheme that is probably a PITA to paint because of all that white, but still no sororitas horde and definitely no harder to paint than white Death Guard. Which are a ridiculously easy to paint compared to orks.

Yeap, I'm painting the sororitas. Don't call people liars dude, that's bad taste. It's a lot of models. My plan for 8th was an infantry brigade. That's over 80 models alone, closest to 100. No, I haven't finished them, and if I bring them to the table now, I'll be giving the 10VPs no problem, no questions asked. However, I give it a couple of months before I reach the battle ready level with a playable list.

Pictures or it didn't happen.

Not talking about ORKZ in general but BOYZ in particular. I have painted boyz before, and it is easier to do them than battle sisters. And yes, I can concur with you that marines are easier than both.

I own ~180 painted boyz (depends on how many get cannibalized for tank busta squads) and another 60 or so without any paint on them. Priming orks turns them into black blobs without any features, so I keep them as grey plastic until they are in the painting queue.
It doesn't really matter whether you paint boyz, kommandoz, lootas, burnas or tankbustas though - they are all the same ork, they just have different gear.

Thanks for your comment on the paint scheme, but I eventually mutated it into a shade of light grey easier to manage. Still keeping certain details white, but yes, I haven't found any brand of decent white paint.

I don't think there is a good solution to the white problem. White paint just isn't easy to create for manufacturers.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Kithail wrote:
I have no idea why you have chosen this hill, however, given that you are a painter and just missing some models.

Because GW has decided to have me auto-lose games because I don't paint as fast as others. And because some people think that's perfectly fine.

Because GW has decided to have me auto-lose games because I don't paint as fast as others. And because some people think that's perfectly fine.

I'll pass on to you the dakka/facebook/twitter wizdomz that have been passed to me whenever i complain about auto losing because my chaos army's rules are horrible, my necron army went a whole edition with being garbage, and my fantasy chaos army went 5 years in AOS land as being flaming garbage that reached biblical stature in how bad it was:

"well then don't care about winning so much". That seems to be the universal go to when I complain about the really really bad 40k or aos rules. They said other things as well, rather personal nasty things, but thats the polite version I get.

I'll give you the second most common answer:

"work with your opponent to not field an abusive list then. its that easy." only in your case "work with your opponent to not enforce that rule."

 auticus wrote:
I guess to me if its ok for people to shout that bad balance is fun and good for the community and making people buy armies every 6 months to a year to be able to play a game where they aren't being tabled in a turn or two, then its also ok for when a rule comes down to support the hobby side that they also adhere to that as well.

I don't think the bad balance and bad rules longterm improve 40k and its community as a whole either. But as you've seen, that seems to be something no one cares about and in fact people fight very passionately to enforce and support.

But they are VERY passionate about being told they have to spend 20 minutes to spray paint and shade dip their models or lose out on 10 victory points as that is unjust and a punishment.

 auticus wrote:
I guess to me if its ok for people to shout that bad balance is fun and good for the community and making people buy armies every 6 months to a year to be able to play a game where they aren't being tabled in a turn or two, then its also ok for when a rule comes down to support the hobby side that they also adhere to that as well.

I don't think the bad balance and bad rules longterm improve 40k and its community as a whole either. But as you've seen, that seems to be something no one cares about and in fact people fight very passionately to enforce and support.

But they are VERY passionate about being told they have to spend 20 minutes to spray paint and shade dip their models or lose out on 10 victory points as that is unjust and a punishment.

I guess so, fair point.
However, balance is atleast achievable with toning down lists or handicaps etc. Stuff close knit groups or even just somewhat friendly players can achieve somewhat easily.
This, less so because it goes directly into the game result.

As for the bad balance and rules design, i'd say it allready has done damage imo.

No one in their right mind thinks bad balance is fun or good for the game.

Also, spray painting and dipping is not how I want my models to look.

Really? Because I know a certain community that forklifts crates of cash to GW despite the bad balance they produce year in and year out, and I can pull thousands of posts either from here, TGA, warseer before it basically died, facebook, and twitter where people celebrate how balanced and awesome the game is. On a daily basis I see those threads and posts. DAILY basis.

If spray painting and dipping is not how you want your models to look then you'll have to houserule the game with your play group to ignore the rule, just like I have to get on my knees and beg my opponents to not field their ITC power list because I happened to be unlucky enough to like Rubric marines and necrons, or how I have to basically spend an hour trying to convince my opponents not to field their triple keeper of aos secrets army because my chaos army is a running joke. Because of the great balance and all that gw puts into their game. (that last line was sarcasm)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

As for the bad balance and rules design, i'd say it allready has done damage imo.

I'd like to think that except actually balanced games get ignored and the community still sends forklifts of cash over to GW to produce new editions, with the same old same old garbage rules and balance.

Its like lighting your money on fire and then dancing around it.

 auticus wrote:

Because GW has decided to have me auto-lose games because I don't paint as fast as others. And because some people think that's perfectly fine.

I'll pass on to you the dakka/facebook/twitter wizdomz that have been passed to me whenever i complain about auto losing because my chaos army's rules are horrible, my necron army went a whole edition with being garbage, and my fantasy chaos army went 5 years in AOS land as being flaming garbage that reached biblical stature in how bad it was:

"well then don't care about winning so much". That seems to be the universal go to when I complain about the really really bad 40k or aos rules. They said other things as well, rather personal nasty things, but thats the polite version I get.

I'll give you the second most common answer:

"work with your opponent to not field an abusive list then. its that easy." only in your case "work with your opponent to not enforce that rule."

"Boo-hoo, people were mean to me, so I'm going to be mean to others!" Way to make the world a better place!

There are ways to get better at the game and these days there are ways improve any army. The one thing I can't do is magically create more time for painting or money to pay someone to do it.

 Kithail wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 Grimtuff wrote:

 Blackie wrote:
Red paintjob for orks is long gone. And even when it was in the codex it didn't require to actually paint the model in red. It was just one of those inivisible upgrades (I mean that didn't require to be represented by a specific bitz) like armor plates and such that you could take for a vehicle, nothing more.

Yes it did. What part of "all weapons and wargear must be represented on the model" do you not understand? WYSIWYG used to be a thing back in the day.

Like I said, short memories...

All my trukks and battlewagons are painted both red and battle ready!

Still 0 VP for me, because I have an unpainted plane and a primed weirdboy

I have no idea why you have chosen this hill, however, given that you are a painter and just missing some models.

because thats the rule.... even if the rest of his army is golden demon level, one model makes him lose all 10pts.

"Boo-hoo, people were mean to me, so I'm going to be mean to others!" Way to make the world a better place!

There are ways to get better at the game and these days there are ways improve any army. The one thing I can't do is magically create more time for painting or money to pay someone to do it.

I'm not being mean to you. I'm telling you you have to pick up a paintbrush now or negotiate with your opponents to houserule or not care about winning so much. Sucks to be you I guess? Just like it sucks to be me to own a ton of armies that are garbage rules-wise and just like I am told regularly here. Whats good for the goose and all.

As a serious question: earlier in this threat I proposed that to make the rule less binary one could grant 1 VP/10% models painted to a battleready standard while counting transparent or monocolored bases as battleready. I would be interested how the posters advocating against the rule would feel about this variation? It would adress the points of "I just have a one or two unpainted models" as well as "I like my bases plain" while still awarding to reduce the amount of grey on the table.

I've been told regularly that math is bad and that introducing math into the game is "toxic gatekeeping". (no seriously, no sarcasm - houserules I've proposed that had math in it were panned hard for having math as no one wants to have to be forced to do that during games).

So in that spirit I'd say if math == bad to the community, then that solution, while solid, should also be not acceptable.

 Pyroalchi wrote:
As a serious question: earlier in this threat I proposed that to make the rule less binary one could grant 1 VP/10% models painted to a battleready standard while counting transparent or monocolored bases as battleready. I would be interested how the posters advocating against the rule would feel about this variation? It would adress the points of "I just have a one or two unpainted models" as well as "I like my bases plain" while still awarding to reduce the amount of grey on the table.

I would have no problems with such a rule. Losing 1 or 2 VP for bringing an unfinished unit is a whole different beast than what we have now.

 Jidmah wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Because GW has decided to have me auto-lose games because I don't paint as fast as others. And because some people think that's perfectly fine.

I'll pass on to you the dakka/facebook/twitter wizdomz that have been passed to me whenever i complain about auto losing because my chaos army's rules are horrible, my necron army went a whole edition with being garbage, and my fantasy chaos army went 5 years in AOS land as being flaming garbage that reached biblical stature in how bad it was:

"well then don't care about winning so much". That seems to be the universal go to when I complain about the really really bad 40k or aos rules. They said other things as well, rather personal nasty things, but thats the polite version I get.

I'll give you the second most common answer:

"work with your opponent to not field an abusive list then. its that easy." only in your case "work with your opponent to not enforce that rule."

"Boo-hoo, people were mean to me, so I'm going to be mean to others!" Way to make the world a better place!

There are ways to get better at the game and these days there are ways improve any army. The one thing I can't do is magically create more time for painting or money to pay someone to do it.

After calling people liars and elitists you want sympathy for not having time to paint... nice

Noone is going to autoloose any game over this rule. Calm down.

 auticus wrote:
I've been told regularly that math is bad and that introducing math into the game is "toxic gatekeeping". (no seriously, no sarcasm - houserules I've proposed that had math in it were panned hard for having math as no one wants to have to be forced to do that during games).

So in that spirit I'd say if math == bad to the community, then that solution, while solid, should also be not acceptable.

You really need to get into your brain that not everything a single person says reflects the opinion of the entire community.

OK so I'm seeing that people view this as a punishment for not having a painted army more than anything now the whole disability argument has died off.

Why not view it as "90 points is the maximum" with a bonus 10 for painting. Better yet, look at it like a work bonus scheme, you turn up, you do your job, you keep your job. You go above and beyond, train the new guy etc and get that extra 10% bonus.

People can always get the 100% score if they really want, if something is more important to you than painting, then I'd hazard a guess it's more important than winning a game of 40k.

If that's the case, go do what's important, what makes you happy and just enjoy what level of time or effort you can put into the game. Given how many people on here are complaining, you've 50/50 odds your opponent won't get the points either and in any event, you can still win with a 10pt defecit.

 Pyroalchi wrote:
As a serious question: earlier in this threat I proposed that to make the rule less binary one could grant 1 VP/10% models painted to a battleready standard while counting transparent or monocolored bases as battleready. I would be interested how the posters advocating against the rule would feel about this variation? It would adress the points of "I just have a one or two unpainted models" as well as "I like my bases plain" while still awarding to reduce the amount of grey on the table.

Honestly I like the all-or-nothing approach. It's simpler from a judging standpoint and, I feel, reduces meta-chasing mentality a bit. You can't hot-swap models and still claim 9 out of 10 VPs.

 jhnbrg wrote:
After calling people liars and elitists you want sympathy for not having time to paint... nice

I call things what they are. And dakkadakka is pretty much the last place I would go looking for sympathy

Noone is going to autoloose any game over this rule. Calm down.

Yeah, you failed to provide a single argument for that in six posts now.
So I'll just declare that opinion to be flat out wrong.

 jhnbrg wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Because GW has decided to have me auto-lose games because I don't paint as fast as others. And because some people think that's perfectly fine.

I'll pass on to you the dakka/facebook/twitter wizdomz that have been passed to me whenever i complain about auto losing because my chaos army's rules are horrible, my necron army went a whole edition with being garbage, and my fantasy chaos army went 5 years in AOS land as being flaming garbage that reached biblical stature in how bad it was:

"well then don't care about winning so much". That seems to be the universal go to when I complain about the really really bad 40k or aos rules. They said other things as well, rather personal nasty things, but thats the polite version I get.

I'll give you the second most common answer:

"work with your opponent to not field an abusive list then. its that easy." only in your case "work with your opponent to not enforce that rule."

"Boo-hoo, people were mean to me, so I'm going to be mean to others!" Way to make the world a better place!

There are ways to get better at the game and these days there are ways improve any army. The one thing I can't do is magically create more time for painting or money to pay someone to do it.

After calling people liars and elitists you want sympathy for not having time to paint... nice

Noone is going to autoloose any game over this rule. Calm down.

I mean, most of my games end with a 1-2 pts difference in 8th. i know the translation in amount of pts isnt 1-to-1 between edition but i feel like yes, 10 vp is gonna be a game changer in many games.

There are ways to get better at the game and these days there are ways improve any army.

I will look forward then to your treatise on how to git gud with a rubric marine army or a necron army vs an ITC power list army. Maybe its just that before when I was placing at tournaments with my power list, and then I started fielding factions that had no powerlist that I simply forgot how to play properly. Maybe there is no such thing as a powerlist? Maybe all armies can beat any other army right?

You know because lists in 40k have little to do with winning the game. (that last line was also sarcasm)


Automatically Appended Next Post:

You really need to get into your brain that not everything a single person says reflects the opinion of the entire community.

After YEARS of hearing dozens upon dozens of people from the community say it with no one backing up the other side, I'd have to say that it reflects most of the community yes.

 Jidmah wrote:

 auticus wrote:

Because GW has decided to have me auto-lose games because I don't paint as fast as others. And because some people think that's perfectly fine.

I'll pass on to you the dakka/facebook/twitter wizdomz that have been passed to me whenever i complain about auto losing because my chaos army's rules are horrible, my necron army went a whole edition with being garbage, and my fantasy chaos army went 5 years in AOS land as being flaming garbage that reached biblical stature in how bad it was:

"well then don't care about winning so much". That seems to be the universal go to when I complain about the really really bad 40k or aos rules. They said other things as well, rather personal nasty things, but thats the polite version I get.

I'll give you the second most common answer:

"work with your opponent to not field an abusive list then. its that easy." only in your case "work with your opponent to not enforce that rule."

"Boo-hoo, people were mean to me, so I'm going to be mean to others!" Way to make the world a better place!

There are ways to get better at the game and these days there are ways improve any army. The one thing I can't do is magically create more time for painting or money to pay someone to do it.

How much closer would the plane and the Weirdboy be to being completed if you'd put the time you'd spent in this thread into painting them instead?

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:

 Sgt_Smudge wrote:

Slayer-Fan123 wrote:AKA do GW's job for them! Hell you don't even need rules! Just go pewpew and best pewpew noises wins!

Unironically yes. If you and your opponent want to play like that and would enjoy that more? Go for it. Bonus Command Points for acting "in character"? I'd play that. You've modelled your guy with a weapon they can't normally have? Tack on an extra PL, and we're golden.

Loosen up. Let GW's rules act as a guideline, and feel free to consider modifying and ignoring features if you and your opponent want to. Who cares about what everyone else does? All that matters is the people on the table.

Then you don't need to pay $60+ for rules.

You don't. The Core Rules are free for 9th, are they not? You can play 40k without paying anything for rules.
If you want to buy the additional rules/guidelines/systems in the full rulebook, you can - but that's your money, your product, to use at your leisure. If I bought the full rulebook, I'm quite happy metaphorically cutting bits out that I don't plan on using if I don't want to.

You can get as much value out of it as you like, but I don't plan on being hidebound to a book. I'll chop and change what I like, how I like, so long as my opponent and I agree on it. So yes - I absolutely don't have to pay for the rules.
(Ironic, coming from an Ultramarines player!)

 vipoid wrote:


If all of these are supposed to be equally important even in game, then why is painting not codified into the rules but lore isn't?

If anything, the indication seems to be that lore is utterly irrelevant. It's not even worth a measly 1VP.

Arguably, the lore has led us to the 'fair and balanced' Marine rules we have now, cos "Muhreens need to FEEL like Muhreens"

Dudeface wrote:
OK so I'm seeing that people view this as a punishment for not having a painted army more than anything now the whole disability argument has died off.

The thing is "not having a painted army" is not binary. Under this rule the whole spectrum from a grey plastic horde of someone not even owning a paint brush to people genuinely trying to finish their armies at their own speed are tossed in one bucket.

Why not view it as "90 points is the maximum" with a bonus 10 for painting. Better yet, look at it like a work bonus scheme, you turn up, you do your job, you keep your job. You go above and beyond, train the new guy etc and get that extra 10% bonus.

People can always get the 100% score if they really want, if something is more important to you than painting, then I'd hazard a guess it's more important than winning a game of 40k.

Not giving rewards is the same as punishment, because you lose the game because of it. Most of the battle reports made by the playtesters seem to end around the 30-40 points margin, so having an unpainted army massively reduces the chances of actually winning a game.
Why does losing the game matter? Because if you are in a campaign, a league, an event or even in the new crusade mode all non-competitive players are supposed to love so much, you do not get rewards for losing games - which means, you get punished.

 auticus wrote:

There are ways to get better at the game and these days there are ways improve any army.

I will look forward then to your treatise on how to git gud with a rubric marine army or a necron army vs an ITC power list army. Maybe its just that before when I was placing at tournaments with my power list, and then I started fielding factions that had no powerlist that I simply forgot how to play properly. Maybe there is no such thing as a powerlist? Maybe all armies can beat any other army right?

Risen rubricae + Veterans of the long war + infernal fusilade + prescience

Rubrics are actually one of the current best build for mono thousand sons.

Guys. At this point is obvious each one has his own opinion and no one os going to back on his own at least not by arguing on the internet.

I mean in the past 10 pages theres has been basically 8 posters going back and fort for nothing. This thread has given everything it could.

 Dysartes wrote:
How much closer would the plane and the Weirdboy be to being completed if you'd put the time you'd spent in this thread into painting them instead?

0%, honestly and truthfully.

That's the thing about all the presumptions many people on this thread are making about other people's life.
Despite the appearance, most of the time I spend on dakka is not time that I could use to paint. I'm not exactly sitting next to my models and paints while refreshing dakka to waste time, you know.