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.

ccs wrote:

So if I were to paint my army "Spue Grey" no problem.
But if I just left it as it came, ie Spue Grey, & saved myself the effort/$, then you'd suddenly have an issue?

Unironically, it would be better. Perhaps Sprue Grey is your favourite colour and brings your vision to life, although it would be a little silly if the end result of the process was the exact same look as before it started.

It's the same for your army men example, really. If love and commitment shines through it becomes good. If it's done out of spite it becomes bad.

I'd be very surprised if there weren't events and such where only accurately loreful depictions are wanted, which would make the topic of right/wrong more black/white.

ccs wrote:

If you were one of my HH opponents? I'd do whatever I pleased & tell you "Well this is the XI Legion".
Go ahead, prove I'm doing it wrong.

You are free to do what you want with your models. Converting and painting them purposely in a way that breaks immersion for me won't change my expectations or preferences, though.

As long as it's not SS Division Wiking: The Chapter, I'm fine.

 a_typical_hero wrote:

You are free to do what you want with your models. Converting and painting them purposely in a way that breaks immersion for me won't change my expectations or preferences, though.

Yeah. HH may be changing from what it was years ago - but while I've never had the time/patience/money - but I can appreciate people who've got beautifully painted up "historical" armies that even by the standards of GW cost a fortune.
If they run into someone who's army is some sprue-grey models and a few coke cans, the obvious reaction is that they just aren't actually in the same hobby. And maybe don't want to play together as a result.

 alextroy wrote:
There are only two things that would keep me from playing your army when it comes to color schemes:

A fully black basecoated army that prevents me from seeing what the heck anything is from less than a foot away.

A color scheme so hideous that it hurts my eyes to look at it.

I play 40K to have fun, not to torture myself.

This is where I stand as well.

I'll find it tiresome if your army is a shapeless, black blob or if (for reasons known only to you) you've painted all your models to look like a magic-eye picture. Beyond that, I really don't care. They're your models so paint them however you want.

I'll note that I've never seen the fabled 'army covered in Nazi symbols', though I can't say it would bother me all that much if I did.

I mean sure, go nuts. There is no point to tabletop gaming if you cant play with "your army", whatever that might be. Enemies will either cope with the colour scheme or appreciate it for what it is.

Personally however, if we talking established faction brands, I'd appreciate some reference to the ofc colourscheme.. you can always come up with a custom subsect of your faction de jeur which covers for every other case

This already means that the models are painted, which is awesome. And people are free to paint their models however they want.

Personally I almost never use "official" colour schemes, as coming up with my own is a big part of the fun for me, and I really like seeing what other people have invented.

What it looks like to me is that 40k allows you to beas open or as jokey as you want. My Mechanicus Knight House: Mine! would work in a 40k game, but would not be appreciated in a Horus Heresy game due to its lack of seriousness.

The same would be said for players who paint their armies up like characters/units from other sci-fi media.

Or am I off base with this line of reasoning?

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
What it looks like to me is that 40k allows you to beas open or as jokey as you want. My Mechanicus Knight House: Mine! would work in a 40k game, but would not be appreciated in a Horus Heresy game due to its lack of seriousness.

The same would be said for players who paint their armies up like characters/units from other sci-fi media.

Or am I off base with this line of reasoning?

Some 40k players would be salty about it and refuse to play you.
Some 30k players would chuckle and have a grand ol' time playing you.

Me personally? I'm fine playing against unpainted minis, so any paint is just a bonus. I'd be happy to play!

Cebalrai wrote:

ccs wrote:

So if I were to paint my army "Spue Grey" no problem.
But if I just left it as it came, ie Spue Grey, & saved myself the effort/$, then you'd suddenly have an issue?

Unironically, it would be better. Perhaps Sprue Grey is your favourite colour and brings your vision to life, although it would be a little silly if the end result of the process was the exact same look as before it started.

It's the same for your army men example, really. If love and commitment shines through it becomes good. If it's done out of spite it becomes bad.

Oh, the Green Army men BA force was 100% done to grind the gears of a way-too-serious player some years back.
Everyone else I play with doesn't mind/care/admires the creative effort. Afterall, we're just a group of adult guys getting together Sunday afternoons to keep playing with army men toys....

I care as much about my opponent's paint scheme as I do about their homebrew fluff: Not one tiny bit. I just have one line: Don't do it to be deliberately offensive

Orange ultramarines? Go for it.

Day-glo neon Tyranids who are an escaped Cawl experiment? Don't care, as long as the rules are the same you can have whatever story behind your army as you want.

Pride flag colours? Sure, go for it, they make for some interesting pastel schemes

Facist iconography? well if we're playing Flames of War and you have an appropriate force then that's fine. Otherwise you're doing it to be a dick. It's not the iconography or colour scheme that offends me, it's what it says about you as a person that I do not want to spend my time around you, and I don't want to contribute to you having fun.

Painting your army sprue grey? sure man, your models, ruin them however you want

Aesthetics don't matter, the character of the people involved matters

Charax wrote:
Facist iconography? well if we're playing Flames of War and you have an appropriate force then that's fine. Otherwise you're doing it to be a dick. It's not the iconography or colour scheme that offends me, it's what it says about you as a person that I do not want to spend my time around you, and I don't want to contribute to you having fun.

Is this a common thing outside of WW2 settings?

ccs wrote:

 Jayden63 wrote:
Show me anywhere, in any codex, supplement, novel, etc. where any faction/army is depicted as sprue grey. Because 80% of all armies I've ever played against are this color.

I have no care in the world what color your army is if its painted. Playing against a fully painted army is a rare opportunity.

So if I were to paint my army "Spue Grey" no problem.
But if I just left it as it came, ie Spue Grey, & saved myself the effort/$, then you'd suddenly have an issue?

LOL, my Grey Knights army is quite literally painted sprue grey with yellow trim and the occasional red, blue, black, white, or silver. It made for the lightest layer of basecoat I've ever sprayed, and that was nice. I found out just how many variations in sprue grey there is, and it sways HARD from light grey to medium dark.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Cyel wrote:



But...

I don't like crossover or joke armies, I like the immersion that comes from models and terrain belonging to the setting.

One joke army I actually liked was a Catachan Hippy army. All the tank-top dudes were painted to have blue jeans and tie-died shirts, and when he put one particular squad in a circle it quite literally formed a smoking circle, complete with one guy smoking a blunt and another guy reaching for the next pass. Also, instead of a Taurox, he converted up a VW Microbus mini to be an armored car, complete with "Piece Symbol" decal.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Charax wrote:


Orange ultramarines? Go for it.

I have several marine and chaos marine armies. White, grey, black, blue, rust red, silver, green. If I ever start another chapter, Orange with black and silver trim is high on my list of color schemes. My biggest obstacle is finding color-matching flat aerosol spray and brush-on paint that color matches in orange.

Why do you think that the Horus Heresy crowd is typically seen as stricter on what color schemes are allowed on the battlefield?

...

And as for Nazis on the tabletop, I had a Jewish buddy who played SS for Flames of War.

He would always laugh and say, "It's the only army that makes me happy to have them all get killed in a game."

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
Why do you think that the Horus Heresy crowd is typically seen as stricter on what color schemes are allowed on the battlefield?

Because the HH is often described as a pseudo-historical game in which people play the actual Heresy.