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:

 JNAProductions wrote:
I like to build minis, and customize them. I've got 10 kitbashed Possessed, made with three different kits and some green stuff.
They aren't painted, because I don't enjoy painting. They are built, because I enjoy that part.

For you, painting is essential. A mini can't even be considered complete without a paintjob. For me, it's not.
We have different preferences-and that's okay.

If you could press a button and magically have all of your models fully painted would you consider them improved? Or would you refuse to press the button because you prefer bare plastic with glue/green stuff/etc still visible from the conversion work?

It'd be cool. I do like fully painted models.

Vatsetis wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
I have friends that can not paint, nerve damage, muscle issues, etc.... I have painted armies for them before even. Not everyone has time as well. Its a hobby and not having painted models wont effect other players, so why does it matter if they are painted if someone is unable to or unhappy to do so?

This literally has nothing to do with the poll question.

Being unable to drive because you have some sort of cognitive condition (ie being blind) and insisting to drive even if you are blind are two different issues... A third, different, issue would be being against driving because its bad for climate change, due to frecuent accidents or whatever.

Its so difficult to stay on topic? Since I was curious about an specific issue I open a poll not to hijack other fellow posters threads.

They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?

"I hate painting my army, I'm not playing with 10VP for painted army"

"Dude WTF why?"

"BC I physically can't paint...."

But I guess that isn't a good enough reason for you to "stay on topic"? I mean for me it seems like a pretty good reason to not like painting their army.

 JNAProductions wrote:
It'd be cool. I do like fully painted models.

So we're in agreement then, that the painted models are superior?

 Sim-Life wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:


Its very dificult for me to see a sensible reason why anyone will actively oppose painting..

Thats because no one does. They just don't want to or aren't able to do it.

If someone prefers PL and can't be asked to paint their minis, though, they're probably too casual for me to get a good game against them.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?

Because the question was about why people choose not to paint. A person who has a disability that makes them unable to paint is not making a voluntary choice and their reasons for not painting have nothing to do with the reasons OP is asking about.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
It'd be cool. I do like fully painted models.

So we're in agreement then, that the painted models are superior?

We're not in agreement to the degree.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you highly value painted minis. It is essential to your enjoyment of the game and the overall hobby.

For me, that's not true. I'd rather have a painted than unpainted army, but it's not even close to essential for me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?

Because the question was about why people choose not to paint. A person who has a disability that makes them unable to paint is not making a voluntary choice and their reasons for not painting have nothing to do with the reasons OP is asking about.

The OP did not ask "Why don't you like to paint?"

They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"

And the options are:

1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAAC TFG
4) All the above
5) None of the above

As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.

Enlighten me on how you've come to fully understand the hobby. Where have you discovered this universal truth? Show me where there is a rule that says not only must I paint my figures but I must also read all the lore and make all of my armies "fluffy". That, to me, is what you must mean by "fully understand the hobby".

Your choices are all biased with the idea that if your figures are not painted then you are doing it wrong. What's the point in answering when your reply is nothing more than "You're wrong!" You're entitled to your opinion but that doesn't mean you are right in your assumption.

 JNAProductions wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
There's a big difference between "Not as appealing" and "Unappealing", Shas'O.
If you gave me a well-made burger and a well-made pork chop, I'd find the burger more appealing to eat. Does that mean the pork chop is bad? No-just that I find the burger better.
Likewise, grey plastic doesn't offend my sensibilities. Nor does it for the people I game with. It's not as appealing as a painted mini, but it's still appealing because the model is very well-designed.

And Vatsetis, I enjoy the game of 40k. I fully admit it's got TONS of flaws and faults, but despite that, I enjoy it. I do not enjoy painting. The two parts are related, but they aren't the same. Do you understand that?

Edit: Shas'O, I think you're conflating "I don't want to paint my own models" with "I think painting is bad".

The former is an attitude I have, because I don't enjoy painting.
The latter is not something I agree with at all.

But enjoying painting and playing with painted armies are not the same thing. Unless you are ofuscated or trolling.

Okay, allow me to elaborate.

I don't enjoy painting. And I don't care about whether or not my models are painted.
I do enjoy building the models, and customizing them that way-so I buy kits and build them.
So, buying second-hand minis isn't something I'd enjoy. And throwing $500 to get an army painted isn't worth it for me.

Does that make sense?

Not really. If you are such a passionate modeler but you dont enjoy painting. But you understand that many people indeed enjoy much more the 40k games against painted armies. Then you could exchange your valuable modelling labour (and enjoyment) for a fellow gamer paint job, its a win-win situation.

In many social contexts you might not want to do something (like saying "thanks") out of selfish own interest but nevertheless understand the need for that social convention and make the sacrifice (like following the dress code at a party)... Thats assuming that you consider ypur 40k hobby a social activity and not something strictly solitaire, but if you dont why are you exchanging views about the hobby in a publuc forum?

Vatsetis wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
There's a big difference between "Not as appealing" and "Unappealing", Shas'O.
If you gave me a well-made burger and a well-made pork chop, I'd find the burger more appealing to eat. Does that mean the pork chop is bad? No-just that I find the burger better.
Likewise, grey plastic doesn't offend my sensibilities. Nor does it for the people I game with. It's not as appealing as a painted mini, but it's still appealing because the model is very well-designed.

And Vatsetis, I enjoy the game of 40k. I fully admit it's got TONS of flaws and faults, but despite that, I enjoy it. I do not enjoy painting. The two parts are related, but they aren't the same. Do you understand that?

Edit: Shas'O, I think you're conflating "I don't want to paint my own models" with "I think painting is bad".

The former is an attitude I have, because I don't enjoy painting.
The latter is not something I agree with at all.

But enjoying painting and playing with painted armies are not the same thing. Unless you are ofuscated or trolling.

Okay, allow me to elaborate.

I don't enjoy painting. And I don't care about whether or not my models are painted.
I do enjoy building the models, and customizing them that way-so I buy kits and build them.
So, buying second-hand minis isn't something I'd enjoy. And throwing $500 to get an army painted isn't worth it for me.

Does that make sense?

Not really. If you are such a passionate modeler but you dont enjoy painting. But you understand that many people indeed enjoy much more the 40k games against painted armies. Then you could exchange your valuable modelling labour (and enjoyment) for a fellow gamer paint job, its a win-win situation.

In many social contexts you might not want to do something (like saying "thanks") out of selfish own interest but nevertheless understand the need for that social convention and make the sacrifice (like following the dress code at a party)... Thats assuming that you consider ypur 40k hobby a social activity and not something strictly solitaire, but if you dont why are you exchanging views about the hobby in a publuc forum?

Are you saying I should offer to build someone else's models in exchange for them painting my minis?
I don't think that would work. Especially given that most of the people I know ALSO like to build their own models-some of them also enjoy painting.

And you seem to be assuming that the people I play with care strongly about paintjobs. They don't. So it's not impolite to have unpainted models.

 JNAProductions wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you highly value painted minis. It is essential to your enjoyment of the game and the overall hobby.

Correct. I will have some room for compromise if someone is making a good-faith effort to paint their army and needs more time to finish it, it's silly to make people wait months/years before being able to play their first game. But it's definitely a sacrifice made for the good of the community, and I'm not really interested in playing with someone who is not at least working towards that goal.

For me, that's not true. I'd rather have a painted than unpainted army, but it's not even close to essential for me.

And that's the contradiction I'm getting at. I understand not painting because you don't value aesthetics (though I question the point of spending thousands of dollars on aesthetics). I don't understand claiming to value aesthetics but having no problem settling for the option that is clearly inferior from an aesthetic point of view and feeling no drive at all to achieve a better aesthetic result. IOW, being the gaming equivalent of the guy who claims to love burgers and really want to have a great one but refuses every offer of a high-end burger because the dollar menu at McDonalds is good enough.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but you highly value painted minis. It is essential to your enjoyment of the game and the overall hobby.

Correct. I will have some room for compromise if someone is making a good-faith effort to paint their army and needs more time to finish it, it's silly to make people wait months/years before being able to play their first game. But it's definitely a sacrifice made for the good of the community, and I'm not really interested in playing with someone who is not at least working towards that goal.

For me, that's not true. I'd rather have a painted than unpainted army, but it's not even close to essential for me.

And that's the contradiction I'm getting at. I understand not painting because you don't value aesthetics (though I question the point of spending thousands of dollars on aesthetics). I don't understand claiming to value aesthetics but having no problem settling for the option that is clearly inferior from an aesthetic point of view and feeling no drive at all to achieve a better aesthetic result. IOW, being the gaming equivalent of the guy who claims to love burgers and really want to have a great one but refuses every offer of a high-end burger because the dollar menu at McDonalds is good enough.

I enjoy the gaming. I enjoy the modeling. I don't enjoy the painting.

It's not an intellectual decision. It's not something you can crunch the numbers and find the results of. It's how I feel. You don't have to understand or share the feelings, but you should respect them.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?

Because the question was about why people choose not to paint. A person who has a disability that makes them unable to paint is not making a voluntary choice and their reasons for not painting have nothing to do with the reasons OP is asking about.

You did not ask "Why are players that are still able paint with no obstacles in their way against painting"

You asked why players are against it and nothing else. Maybe phrase your question better next time.

 JNAProductions wrote:
The OP did not ask "Why don't you like to paint?"

They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"

And the options are:

1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAAC TFG
4) All the above
5) None of the above

As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.

Yes, the poll is obviously stupid and I'm starting to think OP is some kind of anti-painting false flag thing given their comments about "painting incels" and such. But to interpret it as charitably as possible for the sake of having any discussion at all you have to generalize it to "why do people who are strongly against painting feel that way" and someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished yet clearly isn't in that group. Asking that person why they don't like painting is a nonsense question where the only answer is "WTF, I like painting".

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
It'd be cool. I do like fully painted models.

So we're in agreement then, that the painted models are superior?

We're not in agreement to the degree.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you highly value painted minis. It is essential to your enjoyment of the game and the overall hobby.

For me, that's not true. I'd rather have a painted than unpainted army, but it's not even close to essential for me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?

Because the question was about why people choose not to paint. A person who has a disability that makes them unable to paint is not making a voluntary choice and their reasons for not painting have nothing to do with the reasons OP is asking about.

The OP did not ask "Why don't you like to paint?"

They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"

And the options are:

1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAAC TFG
4) All the above
5) None of the above

As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.

Yes he just asked "Why are they against it" not "Why are able people against it" vehement doesn't mean able, it means strongly or passionate, so he literally said "Why are some players so strongly against painting their armies?"

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
The OP did not ask "Why don't you like to paint?"

They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"

And the options are:

1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAAC TFG
4) All the above
5) None of the above

As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.

Yes, the poll is obviously stupid and I'm starting to think OP is some kind of anti-painting false flag thing given their comments about "painting incels" and such. But to interpret it as charitably as possible for the sake of having any discussion at all you have to generalize it to "why do people who are strongly against painting feel that way" and someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished yet clearly isn't in that group. Asking that person why they don't like painting is a nonsense question where the only answer is "WTF, I like painting".

No one is AGAINST painting. Or at least, I've not seen a single poster say "You shouldn't paint your models."
I have only seen people say "I shouldn't paint my models, because [REASONS]." For me, that reason is I don't enjoy it.

DeathKorp_Rider wrote:

Vatsetis wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
No, it's more akin to buying a car and not upgrading the radio, or adding bluetooth to it, or various other things like that.

If you enjoy the game of 40k, whether or not the models are painted, your enjoyment is just as valid as someone who enjoys painting but not gaming, or someone who enjoys both, or someone who just reads the novels.

How is this poll about the validity of enjoyment? Its about denial.

You know some people would say that eating until vomiting is a great pleasure. Certainly it defeats the standard porpouse of eating and in some cases might be unhealthy... But subjectively this people enjoy doing so, to the point of addiction.

Im sure that accumulating stashes of unpainted minis... With no intention of painting or perhaps even playing with them creates enjoyment to the point of addiction amongst many in the hobby.

Why are you making these outrageous comparisons?

Because its not outrageous from my POV.

Compulsive consumption/shopping can be an adiction just as compulsive eating.

Painting your miniatures, and making the discipline choise of not fielding unpainted miniatures can actually reduce the rithym of unnecesary shopping.

Food for thought

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Stop assuming that your opinions are universal. They're not.

Then, like I said, poll the general population. You and I both know which answer is going to win.

It doesn't matter which one is more "popular". It only matters for the person who owns the models. Only their opinion matters when it comes to their own property. Not yours, or the "majority". It's their property, and they can do whatever they want with them, regardless of what you think.

Sorry, I was trying to actually talk about people who actually exist. No one is "vehemently opposed to painting their armies". There's people who don't, but they're not "vehemently opposed" to it. They have their own reasons, that are generally sane, and not some silly strawman for you to smack around.

And, like I said already, even if you discard "vehement" from the description it still doesn't apply. Someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished their army yet is not in the same category as someone who does not paint at all.

That wasn't the little "snippet" you took from my post. The snippet was: "Who says they don't value the aesthetics of the models?". And you've yet to prove that someone can't value those aesthetics on an unpainted model. Only that you can't. And you're opinion only matters for what you do with your models. You don't get to tell anyone else what they can or can't do with theirs.

 Amishprn86 wrote:
You did not ask "Why are players that are still able paint with no obstacles in their way against painting"

You asked why players are against it and nothing else. Maybe phrase your question better next time.

I am not OP, btw.

And someone who is unable to paint is not against painting. Being against painting means having made a deliberate choice, someone who is unable to paint has made no such choice and is clearly not in the group OP is asking about.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
It doesn't matter which one is more "popular". It only matters for the person who owns the models. Only their opinion matters when it comes to their own property. Not yours, or the "majority". It's their property, and they can do whatever they want with them, regardless of what you think.

Ok? Nobody is disputing that they can do whatever they want, there are no pro-painting death squads enforcing painting rules. But appealing to their property rights isn't a very useful argument in a discussion about their motives.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
You did not ask "Why are players that are still able paint with no obstacles in their way against painting"

You asked why players are against it and nothing else. Maybe phrase your question better next time.

I am not OP, btw.

And someone who is unable to paint is not against painting. Being against painting means having made a deliberate choice, someone who is unable to paint has made no such choice and is clearly not in the group OP is asking about.

The group the OP is asking about doesn't exist.

There's a group of people who don't paint their own minis, for various reasons. But they're not railing and raving against people who paint their own models. There is some pushback against people who insist they need to paint their models, but that's not at all the same as sayhing you shouldn't paint your own models if you want to.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
It'd be cool. I do like fully painted models.

So we're in agreement then, that the painted models are superior?

We're not in agreement to the degree.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you highly value painted minis. It is essential to your enjoyment of the game and the overall hobby.

For me, that's not true. I'd rather have a painted than unpainted army, but it's not even close to essential for me.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
They have strong feelings on it.... so how is that not part of the discussion?

Because the question was about why people choose not to paint. A person who has a disability that makes them unable to paint is not making a voluntary choice and their reasons for not painting have nothing to do with the reasons OP is asking about.

The OP did not ask "Why don't you like to paint?"

They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"

And the options are:

1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAAC TFG
4) All the above
5) None of the above

As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.

Option 1 is was not supposed to mean" they are stupid", perhaps that they are under some sort of self-delusion, but those are hardly synonims. :(


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
The OP did not ask "Why don't you like to paint?"

They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"

And the options are:

1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAAC TFG
4) All the above
5) None of the above

As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.

Yes, the poll is obviously stupid and I'm starting to think OP is some kind of anti-painting false flag thing given their comments about "painting incels" and such. But to interpret it as charitably as possible for the sake of having any discussion at all you have to generalize it to "why do people who are strongly against painting feel that way" and someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished yet clearly isn't in that group. Asking that person why they don't like painting is a nonsense question where the only answer is "WTF, I like painting".

Perhaps you are overthinking my intentions.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
It doesn't matter which one is more "popular". It only matters for the person who owns the models. Only their opinion matters when it comes to their own property. Not yours, or the "majority". It's their property, and they can do whatever they want with them, regardless of what you think.

Ok? Nobody is disputing that they can do whatever they want, there are no pro-painting death squads enforcing painting rules. But appealing to their property rights isn't a very useful argument in a discussion about their motives.

Neither does appealing to the "popularity" of painting, but that was the statement that you made that I was responding to. Jeez, pick a lane.

And they've explained their motives. Over, and over, and over. And you apparently won't listen to them.

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 Amishprn86 wrote:
You did not ask "Why are players that are still able paint with no obstacles in their way against painting"

You asked why players are against it and nothing else. Maybe phrase your question better next time.

I am not OP, btw.

And someone who is unable to paint is not against painting. Being against painting means having made a deliberate choice, someone who is unable to paint has made no such choice and is clearly not in the group OP is asking about.

The group the OP is asking about doesn't exist.

There's a group of people who don't paint their own minis, for various reasons. But they're not railing and raving against people who paint their own models. There is some pushback against people who insist they need to paint their models, but that's not at all the same as sayhing you shouldn't paint your own models if you want to.

I have edited for clarity the tittle of the poll because there seem to be some basic misunderstanding of my intentions here.

Im just simply trying to make sense of why people seem so adamant to express publickly their contempt towards painting their OWN 40K armies.

When making the OP I had my doubts, but I realised after all this healthy debate that many posters in the "you cannot force me to paint my minis" camp only really want to win the internet argument and are therefore, trolling. :(

Not painting your army, in itself, is actually your own choice and a legit hobby option for a number of reasons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
The OP did not ask "Why don't you like to paint?"

They asked "Why are some players so vehement against painting their armies?"

And the options are:

1) They're stupid
2) They're trolling
3) They're a WAAC TFG
4) All the above
5) None of the above

As of writing this post, Option 5 is 63% of the respondents.

Yes, the poll is obviously stupid and I'm starting to think OP is some kind of anti-painting false flag thing given their comments about "painting incels" and such. But to interpret it as charitably as possible for the sake of having any discussion at all you have to generalize it to "why do people who are strongly against painting feel that way" and someone who is in favor of painting but hasn't finished yet clearly isn't in that group. Asking that person why they don't like painting is a nonsense question where the only answer is "WTF, I like painting".

No one is AGAINST painting. Or at least, I've not seen a single poster say "You shouldn't paint your models."
I have only seen people say "I shouldn't paint my models, because [REASONS]." For me, that reason is I don't enjoy it.

Thats not a reason, its a tautology statement.

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Neither does appealing to the "popularity" of painting, but that was the statement that you made that I was responding to. Jeez, pick a lane.

Is the appeal to popularity completely decisive? No. But when virtually everyone who doesn't have a personal stake in unpainted armies being allowed is in agreement that the painted model looks better it does pretty strongly suggest that "I like unpainted models" is less of a genuine aesthetic opinion and more of a self-interested rationalization for why not painting is ok.

And they've explained their motives. Over, and over, and over. And you apparently won't listen to them.

"I don't like it" isn't much of an explanation, especially when it isn't carried through to its natural conclusion of using cardboard tokens instead of expensive miniatures.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:


There's that double standard again, complaining about how "insufferable" the side you dislike is while ignoring the fact that every time this comes up even the most mild of criticism of unpainted models draws an endless parade of hyperbolic statements about how nasty everyone is being to them.

theres no double standard, your side has been attacking and insulting the people that dislike painting by telling them theyre lazy or they should quit the hobby. Thats why you've been described as insufferable.

again, no one here is saying painted minis are bad or look worse than unpainted ones.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Vatsetis wrote:

How is this poll about the validity of enjoyment? Its about denial.

You know some people would say that eating until vomiting is a great pleasure. Certainly it defeats the standard porpouse of eating and in some cases might be unhealthy... But subjectively this people enjoy doing so, to the point of addiction.

Im sure that accumulating stashes of unpainted minis... With no intention of painting or perhaps even playing with them creates enjoyment to the point of addiction amongst many in the hobby.

you keep bringing up that argument (and the driking and car ones) as if it was a good "gotcha" argument when in reality it falls short because it has no basing


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

Then, like I said, poll the general population. You and I both know which answer is going to win.

poll the population about what?

"Do you think painted minis look better than unpainted ones yes/no?"

No gak "yes" is gonna win. But thats not at all whats being argued by the non painters, they just don't wanna be insulted for not spending time doing something they dislike doing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
I like to build minis, and customize them. I've got 10 kitbashed Possessed, made with three different kits and some green stuff.
They aren't painted, because I don't enjoy painting. They are built, because I enjoy that part.

For you, painting is essential. A mini can't even be considered complete without a paintjob. For me, it's not.
We have different preferences-and that's okay.

If you could press a button and magically have all of your models fully painted would you consider them improved? Or would you refuse to press the button because you prefer bare plastic with glue/green stuff/etc still visible from the conversion work?

THATS NOT WHAT WERE SAYING
you keep trying to gotcha us with that argument when everyone here agrees with it, you're being a dumbass


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 JNAProductions wrote:
It'd be cool. I do like fully painted models.

So we're in agreement then, that the painted models are superior?

THAT WAS NEVER IN QUESION FFS

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Neither does appealing to the "popularity" of painting, but that was the statement that you made that I was responding to. Jeez, pick a lane.

Is the appeal to popularity completely decisive? No. But when virtually everyone who doesn't have a personal stake in unpainted armies being allowed is in agreement that the painted model looks better it does pretty strongly suggest that "I like unpainted models" is less of a genuine aesthetic opinion and more of a self-interested rationalization for why not painting is ok.

Only for your hypothetical "virtually everyone". Whose opinions only matter for their models. Not anyone else's.

And they've explained their motives. Over, and over, and over. And you apparently won't listen to them.

"I don't like it" isn't much of an explanation, especially when it isn't carried through to its natural conclusion of using cardboard tokens instead of expensive miniatures.

It is when they do like the models, and building them, but just don't like painting. Again, everyone doesn't think like you.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

Ok? Nobody is disputing that they can do whatever they want, there are no pro-painting death squads enforcing painting rules. But appealing to their property rights isn't a very useful argument in a discussion about their motives.

Dude, the motive is sooo fething simple, get it in your stupid head : THEY DON'T ENJOY PAINTING.

You : Do you enjoy crawling through broken glass?
Them : No.
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why?
Them : Because i don't like it
You : But why are you so against it
Them : Because i don't like it



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:


"I don't like it" isn't much of an explanation, especially when it isn't carried through to its natural conclusion of using cardboard tokens instead of expensive miniatures.

its a perfectly valid explanation : 3d minis look better than paper minis.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
your side has been attacking and insulting the people that dislike painting by telling them theyre lazy or they should quit the hobby.

And your side has been posting hyperbolic claims that even mild criticism is an inexcusable attack. The double standard is obvious.

THAT WAS NEVER IN QUESION FFS

You're right, it wasn't. I just wanted to get it on record that JNAProductions is in agreement about painted models being aesthetically superior, therefore undermining any claim to valuing the aesthetic component of the game while not painting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Only for your hypothetical "virtually everyone". Whose opinions only matter for their models. Not anyone else's.

And, again, the point is that it isn't a genuine opinion. Which is more likely, given the overwhelming numbers for the population as a whole: that a person who "enjoys unpainted models" is a genuine extreme outlier, or that they are using their supposed "enjoyment" as nothing more than a self-serving defense of that precious 10 VP they don't want to lose. You and I both know which one it is.

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
your side has been attacking and insulting the people that dislike painting by telling them theyre lazy or they should quit the hobby.

And your side has been posting hyperbolic claims that even mild criticism is an inexcusable attack. The double standard is obvious.

what hyperbolic claim?

We were litterally told that we're :
ofuscated or dont fully understand the 40K hobby.
just Trolling.
meta chasers and painting is an inconvenience for reselling.

in the poll.

we've also been called lazy and told to get out of the hobby for enjoying it the "wrong way" how are those not attacks?

Did someone attack you because of how you choose present your armies?

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
your side has been attacking and insulting the people that dislike painting by telling them theyre lazy or they should quit the hobby.

And your side has been posting hyperbolic claims that even mild criticism is an inexcusable attack. The double standard is obvious.

THAT WAS NEVER IN QUESION FFS

You're right, it wasn't. I just wanted to get it on record that JNAProductions is in agreement about painted models being aesthetically superior, therefore undermining any claim to valuing the aesthetic component of the game while not painting.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gadzilla666 wrote:
Only for your hypothetical "virtually everyone". Whose opinions only matter for their models. Not anyone else's.

And, again, the point is that it isn't a genuine opinion. Which is more likely, giving the overwhelming numbers for the population as a whole: that a person who "enjoys unpainted models" is a genuine extreme outlier, or that they are using their supposed "enjoyment" as nothing more than a self-serving defense of that precious 10 VP they don't want to lose. You and I both know which one it is.

Again, you're conflating "Prefers painted models to unpainted models" with "Unpainted models are an eyesore."

Moreover, I can value aesthetics without enjoying the process of getting there. I like a well-painted army. But I don't enjoy the process of getting an army painted, I don't want to spend the money on a commission paintjob, and I don't value aesthetics enough to make either of those worth it.

 VladimirHerzog wrote:

 Shas'O Ky'husa wrote:

 VladimirHerzog wrote:
your side has been attacking and insulting the people that dislike painting by telling them theyre lazy or they should quit the hobby.

And your side has been posting hyperbolic claims that even mild criticism is an inexcusable attack. The double standard is obvious.

what hyperbolic claim?

We were litterally told that we're :
ofuscated or dont fully understand the 40K hobby.
just Trolling.
meta chasers and painting is an inconvenience for reselling.

in the poll.

we've also been called lazy and told to get out of the hobby for enjoying it the "wrong way" how are those not attacks?

Did someone attack you because of how you choose present your armies?

Honestly I would consider the whole topic and poll a troll.