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.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:
Ah, the last resort of the sore loser, making up excuses for how you really won and it's only because of Reasons that anyone thinks otherwise. You may find this article informative: https://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/introducingthe-scrub

No. Your bias is showing.

If I play a game and I "won" before paint scores then I know I played well enough to win if my army were painted. My paint has no relevancy to how I play the game.

And all my armies are painted so it's doubly irrelevant. It's just people who are incapable of coping with "losing" if they're not painted and frankly it's absurd.

 Daedalus81 wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:
Ah, the last resort of the sore loser, making up excuses for how you really won and it's only because of Reasons that anyone thinks otherwise. You may find this article informative: https://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/introducingthe-scrub

No. Your bias is showing.

If I play a game and I "won" before paint scores then I know I played well enough to win if my army were painted. My paint has no relevancy to how I play the game.

And all my armies are painted so it's doubly irrelevant. It's just people who are incapable of coping with "losing" if they're not painted and frankly it's absurd.

Why would someone who won the game have to "cope" with losing? The only cope going on in this scenario is the person that cant accept that they lost a game.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
And I don't see how any of my examples were strawmanning. If a rule about beards were included, I'm sure people with amazing beards and painted armies would be very happy.

It's a straw man argument because having a beard has no effect on the game and "more beards" is not something anyone is asking for. Painting, on the other hand, does have an effect on the game and the long list of events with mandatory painting requirements sent a clear message to GW that we the players want painting to be the expectation. If anything you should be glad that GW only made it 10 VP instead of following the tournament example and not letting you play at all without a fully painted army.

BucketHead was referencing actual rules used in Age of Sigmar upon release. So it's a precedent just a cross-game precedent.

 Just Tony wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
And I don't see how any of my examples were strawmanning. If a rule about beards were included, I'm sure people with amazing beards and painted armies would be very happy.

It's a straw man argument because having a beard has no effect on the game and "more beards" is not something anyone is asking for. Painting, on the other hand, does have an effect on the game and the long list of events with mandatory painting requirements sent a clear message to GW that we the players want painting to be the expectation. If anything you should be glad that GW only made it 10 VP instead of following the tournament example and not letting you play at all without a fully painted army.

BucketHead was referencing actual rules used in Age of Sigmar upon release. So it's a precedent just a cross-game precedent.

Yeah, I know the reference. It's just a silly comparison because nobody was asking for the AoS garbage GW published, while there is a strong message from the players to GW that we want painting to be expected.

But there are people who enjoy the rules, and people who want them purely for an advantage.
I think it is an apt comparison. Painted models providing points, and roleplay providing bonuses.

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
But there are people who enjoy the rules, and people who want them purely for an advantage.
I think it is an apt comparison. Painted models providing points, and roleplay providing bonuses.

Virtually every event larger than a local store tournament has a zero tolerance policy on unpainted models. Hardly anyone is setting roleplaying requirements. The two are not equivalent.

They arent equivalent in "factual" reality... But if you are going to doban excercise in sophism I find it to be quiteva fitting analogy.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 Just Tony wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
And I don't see how any of my examples were strawmanning. If a rule about beards were included, I'm sure people with amazing beards and painted armies would be very happy.

It's a straw man argument because having a beard has no effect on the game and "more beards" is not something anyone is asking for. Painting, on the other hand, does have an effect on the game and the long list of events with mandatory painting requirements sent a clear message to GW that we the players want painting to be the expectation. If anything you should be glad that GW only made it 10 VP instead of following the tournament example and not letting you play at all without a fully painted army.

BucketHead was referencing actual rules used in Age of Sigmar upon release. So it's a precedent just a cross-game precedent.

Yeah, I know the reference. It's just a silly comparison because nobody was asking for the AoS garbage GW published, while there is a strong message from the players to GW that we want painting to be expected.

Only in large tournaments. Don't make up some weird fictional group of people who were loudly demanding that there should be in game advantages for painting models. Not even playing a game in a GW store demands that of players.

 Daedalus81 wrote:
My paint has no relevancy to how I play the game.

Like when indicator lights sync up at a traffic light, D and I are 100% in lock step on this one.

 Sim-Life wrote:
Only in large tournaments. Don't make up some weird fictional group of people who were loudly demanding that there should be in game advantages for painting models. Not even playing a game in a GW store demands that of players.

And what did I say? Oh right:

Virtually every event larger than a local store tournament has a zero tolerance policy on unpainted models.

Third-party events require painting. GW's events require painting. When event organizers get together and start putting together a list of what makes a desirable game, a game worth paying money to play, they almost unanimously agree that painting is necessary for that positive experience. The fact that your casual kitchen table group doesn't require painting doesn't change the fact that even hardcore competitive tournaments have zero tolerance for unpainted models.

PS: even on this forum you appear to be a minority, as currently at least 58% of voters in this poll want some form of in-game paint scoring.

Actually, I hate battling a fully grey army.
I never go out without a fully painted army.

I think that a rule like this doesn't really make a difference because it's not like victories get logged or anything. It's just something someone can bring up to say: "technically, I won even if you scored more game points" and that's about it.

I like that they tried doing something to encourage painting, but this rule just doesn't do that. The only rules that do that are rules within groups or venues that say that you have to paint or you don't get to play at all.

On that note, I think stuff like Contrast paints, painting tutorials and suggested paint colors for themes are the better way to encourage people to pick up painting.

Have a good video on how to paint your miniature based on a "level" of effort. Show the people that you don't have to be anxious about it and that it can be easy to achieve an okay result. Battle ready, Golden Demon ready and so on.

a_typical_hero wrote:
On that note, I think stuff like Contrast paints, painting tutorials and suggested paint colors for themes are the better way to encourage people to pick up painting.

Have a good video on how to paint your miniature based on a "level" of effort. Show the people that you don't have to be anxious about it and that it can be easy to achieve an okay result. Battle ready, Golden Demon ready and so on.

I think that works for some people, but I think we've reached the point of diminishing returns on that method and reached pretty much everyone who is willing to listen. The problem is the people, several of them posting in this thread, who have declared that painting is not part of "their hobby" and they will not be doing it no matter how many tutorials you offer to show them. The only thing that is going to get them to paint is for not painting to have practical consequences. If they're allowed to play at all there needs to be an in-game penalty that continues to apply until they paint their armies. Maybe that's 10 VP (or more!) in the final score, maybe that's the classic rule that fully painted units may re-roll hits/wounds against any unit with unpainted models, but whatever it is it needs to be a clear statement that if you want to win you need to meet the painting standards.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:
The problem is the people, several of them posting in this thread, who have declared that painting is not part of "their hobby"... it needs to be a clear statement that if you want to win you need to meet the painting standards.

The thing is, not everyone agrees that this is a problem or that there needs to be a statement of that nature. It's really not that hard - some people are only interested in games with fully-painted armies, and that's fine; some people couldn't care less about painted models, and that's also fine. The issue comes when one group tells the other they're having fun wrong and need to be penalised for it.

Personally, I love painting, but it's a completely separate side of the hobby for me from gaming. I couldn't care less about whether the opponent's force is fully painted or a grey horde, what matters to me when playing the game is... Well, the game. So I paint as and when the mood strikes me, so as to not turn a hobby I love into a chore. If someone absolutely hates painting, that doesn't impact on the game as far as I'm concerned, and I actively dislike that someone in that boat should be punished for not painting (and yes, having a reward actively withheld is a form of punishment).

(BTW, that bit about "the classic rule of re-rolling against unpainted"? AFAIK there has never been a rule like that in any GW system. At best it's a houserule and we're back to each group playing the game in the way that suits them best.)

No body is telling people how to have fun... Only that "grey tides" look awfull and are hard to track on the battlefield and therefore playing with them against an oponent that would rather prefer gaiming against painted armies (like the one he has fielded for your amusement) makes for an overall poorer 40k experience.

So, unless some one have a weighty reason beyond, "I dont care about actual minis since I only churn through units as a metachasser", perhaps it will be polite on your part to start painting your figures to reach the standards of your community (assuming you are in a playing community that cares even a bit about minis aesthethics).

Vatsetis wrote:
No body is telling people how to have fun... Only that "grey tides" look awfull and are hard to track on the battlefield and therefore playing with them against an oponent that would rather prefer gaiming against painted armies (like the one he has fielded for your amusement) makes for an overall poorer 40k experience.

So, unless you have a weighty reason beyond, "I dont care about actual minis since I only churn through units as a metachasser", perhaps it will be polite on your part to start painting your figures to reach the standards of your community (assuming you are in a playing community that cares even a bit about minis aesthethics).

This feels like a response to me, but it's also clear you didn't actually read my post.

Because I dont agree with a phrase in your post? And try to explain that nobody is hunting down anybody else fun?

In the last 48 hours i have been call ignorant or illeterate like 20 times, certainly I wont be disturbed by some one else joining the crowd.

Voss wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

Have you considered getting clear acrylic bases? They're great at making your dudes feel like theyre really on the battlefield

Have to disagree. 'clear' bases look like the models are standing on plastic discs. I find it even more jarring than basic black bases.

They need to be thin plastic so they aren't floating. I use them for games like core space. A 1mm thick base works well on card surfaces. Don't like them on wargames tables, in part because I am used to seeing goblin green/whatever everywhere, but also because of uneven terrain makes the base more noticeable. Finally the games are rougher on the models than board style games so you can't have such a thin base.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
But there are people who enjoy the rules, and people who want them purely for an advantage.
I think it is an apt comparison. Painted models providing points, and roleplay providing bonuses.

Virtually every event larger than a local store tournament has a zero tolerance policy on unpainted models. Hardly anyone is setting roleplaying requirements. The two are not equivalent.

Completely not true, many large events let a lot of 1/2 painted models count as fully painted.

Example Ork Buggies and Mek gun Orks are not painted > https://youtu.be/5SD2OVJbcKg?t=10421

I've seen MANY lack of painting models at 100+ (even 300+) person events that gets painting points. Heck I've seen literally less than 1/2 painted armies not only get point but also won best painted army.......

Edit: Pic so you dont need to watch.

 Amishprn86 wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 TheBestBucketHead wrote:
But there are people who enjoy the rules, and people who want them purely for an advantage.
I think it is an apt comparison. Painted models providing points, and roleplay providing bonuses.

Virtually every event larger than a local store tournament has a zero tolerance policy on unpainted models. Hardly anyone is setting roleplaying requirements. The two are not equivalent.

Completely not true, many large events let a lot of 1/2 painted models count as fully painted.

Example Ork Buggies and Mek gun Orks are not painted > https://youtu.be/5SD2OVJbcKg?t=10421

I've seen MANY lack of painting models at 100+ (even 300+) person events that gets painting points. Heck I've seen literally less than 1/2 painted armies not only get point but also won best painted army.......

This are "mostly painted" armies... Perhaps should be denied the 10vp reward... But its not a "grey tide" by a far strecht

I think it's a good rule, and rewards those for painting their models. With contrast, and other easy-to-use techniques, painting your army isn't so much of a barrier that it used to be.

The fact that Shas'O is now calling for people who don't paint to be punished in game for not doing so should prove that he's a troll.

Vatsetis wrote:
Because I dont agree with a phrase in your post? And try to explain that nobody is hunting down anybody else fun?

In the last 48 hours i have been call ignorant or illeterate like 20 times, certainly I wont be disturbed by some one else joining the crowd.

Because you basically said I don't care about models except to churn them out models as a metachaser and that I need to start painting to match the standards of my community, when my post made it very clear that I do enjoy painting and do paint up my forces over time.

Also you say it makes things worse when playing against an opponent who does value painting, but missed my entire point - the corollary is that having an unpainted army doesn't make things worse when playing an opponent who doesn't care, and yes, when you or Shas'O tells someone they're in the wrong for not painting (in the context of a group that doesn't care about that) that's you telling them they're having fun wrong.

For what it's worth, there's no expectation in my community for models to be painted. You'll note that my comment about the VP punishment was made in reference to other people being punished for not enjoying painting.

 Sim-Life wrote:
The fact that Shas'O is now calling for people who don't paint to be punished in game for not doing so should prove that he's a troll.

There was a doubt? It's clear from his creation date, posts on other threads, and similarity to other posters who mysteriously stopped posting the day before he came along....

Aelyn wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:
Because I dont agree with a phrase in your post? And try to explain that nobody is hunting down anybody else fun?

In the last 48 hours i have been call ignorant or illeterate like 20 times, certainly I wont be disturbed by some one else joining the crowd.

Because you were said I don't care about models except to churn them out models as a metachaser and that I need to start painting to match the standards of my community, when my post made it very clear that I do enjoy painting and do paint up my forces over time.

Also you say it makes things worse when playing against an opponent who does value painting, but missed my entire point - the corollary is that having an unpainted army doesn't make things worse when playing an opponent who doesn't care, and yes, when you or Shas'O tells someone they're in the wrong for not painting, that's you telling them they're having fun wrong.

For what it's worth, there's no expectation in my community for models to be painted. You'll note that my comment about the VP punishment was made in reference to other people being punished for not enjoying painting.

Edited my post so its even more obvious I wasnt refering to your non existent un painted models.

Latter you make a misintrepetation of my words. There is no good or bad "fun" (subjective issue) its caring or not about your fellow gamers enjoyment (intersubjective issue).

If you only play with people that dont care about painting this is a non issue to you and perhaps you have no stakes in this debate.

While I get that painted armies look nice and all, and I do prefer playing games where everything is painted, that is often just not an option for me. If I'm lucky I have enough time to get maybe 10 models painted in a month. I also like to play horde armies. This means that while I'm always painting when I can, even after two years of having my current army, it's only about 80% painted.

I know about a dozen other players in my area that like me would like to attend larger tournaments when we are able to make the time work, but we're also fairly competitive and don't want to be told that we lost a game that we actually won, simply because we don't have dozens-hundreds of hours of free time to paint all of our models to battle ready.

So, should there be incentives to fully paint your army? Yes. Should it have any effect whatsoever on the results of a match that should be about skill? No. While I can only speak to my local scene, it is disincentivizing a lot of people from participating in larger events.

I'm not a huge fan of the painting part of the hobby and will likely never go into difficult techniques or even strive to paint my minis at the highest possible level as it's just too time consuming and tiresome.

On the other hand, playing with a fully painted army feels more enjoyable and emersive than with not-fully painted or even fully unpainted one.

So, I try to keep my minis at least at some low-ish standard of "not the best but fine". And I'm usually painting right before the tourney where I want to try something on the table. I think it's called " Game paint" if you translate roughly.

Here are some examples of what I've fast painted this way. As you can see, it's not great but it's passable and looks good enough.

Vatsetis wrote:

 Tawnis wrote:
While I get that painted armies look nice and all, and I do prefer playing games where everything is painted, that is often just not an option for me. If I'm lucky I have enough time to get maybe 10 models painted in a month. I also like to play horde armies. This means that while I'm always painting when I can, even after two years of having my current army, it's only about 80% painted.

I know about a dozen other players in my area that like me would like to attend larger tournaments when we are able to make the time work, but we're also fairly competitive and don't want to be told that we lost a game that we actually won, simply because we don't have dozens-hundreds of hours of free time to paint all of our models to battle ready.

So, should there be incentives to fully paint your army? Yes. Should it have any effect whatsoever on the results of a match that should be about skill? No. While I can only speak to my local scene, it is disincentivizing a lot of people from participating in larger events.

If you want to attend a tournament and dont want to have the "handicap" for an uncomplete army, pay a propainter or borrow painted minis for the event.

There are always ways arround if you have the will to do it.

Some of the people in the "unpainted crowd" look as some one that didnt recognize disabled parking laws because "driving has nothing to do with ableism" (or what ever) and sistematically parked his car in disabled only spaces and then complain online about how the they received a fine and the police spoiled their freedoom and fun.

Except the person paying the propainter didn't actually participate in 100% of the hobby like you want.

I have never said "people have to participate in 100% of the hobby"... Perhaps fellow dakka nauts should not amalgamate different people and opinions together.

Painting yourselve, borrowing, propainters or buying 2nd hand painted minis are al from my POV all valid options... Certainly all superior to a "grey tide".

I have practice all 4 of those options and encourage others to do it too.

I have no interest in winning thia debate (Im a scrub... SHAS'O), just wanted to give positive feedback, try to be pragmatic with your hobby.