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.

Once you realize all the armies are bad it becomes less about being awful and more about whether or not you can come up with a cool reason for Sgt. Ironpants to have that conversion beamer.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 NivNeos wrote:
Honesty, 40k is not a good competitive game to begin with so don't be so hard on yourself. I've always seen 40k better leaning towards RPG and I think game modes like Crusade are the ideal way to play 40k on a higher level.

One advice I have tho its more practical and not feel good is to not put so effort on painting the minis and try to reduce costs, only doing the bare minimal. Looking at the organization paper, it says with all areas painted with a basic finish. I don't remember were I heard but having a model based and with three colors was a standard minimal and I think that's a good minimal point.

Your army may not look good, but at least you haven't sink so much for a list.

I'd turn that around: Paint your miniatures nicely, because no matter how the rules und dice gods treat you, at least you look great while going down .
The visual spectacle is one of the big selling points of the hobby, otherwize we'd just print out cardboard tokens for minis.

¿Porque no los dos?
There are some people who don't want to paint minis that well (or physically can't). If they can have just as much fun and satisfaction kitbashing a sweet commander for their D-tier army but only want to do 3 colors, I think we should welcome that just as much as we should encourage others to go further with their painting.

 Hairesy wrote:
Once you realize all the armies are bad it becomes less about being awful and more about whether or not you can come up with a cool reason for Sgt. Ironpants to have that conversion beamer.

I'm converting models first and then trying to wedge them into a semi-cohesive army.

My Blood Ravens Kill Team already has modified Custodes Armor, modified Grey Knight armor, Dark Angels power armor, and a partially assembled Tech-priest (without the extra arms) and I'm still not quite sure what these guys are going to be... Angels of Death, maybe?

God-Emperor, Yes! Please paint your models at least 3 colours. My local community consists of unpainted meta lists where half the models is proxied and only thing people pursued is win at any cost. That not damn fun. I'm ok with loosing but loosing to painted army..

kabaakaba wrote:
God-Emperor, Yes! Please paint your models at least 3 colours. My local community consists of unpainted meta lists where half the models is proxied and only thing people pursued is win at any cost. That not damn fun. I'm ok with loosing but loosing to painted army..

Perhaps you should find another playgroup.
There’s nothing wrong with playing hardball and/or playing with unpainted minis, so long as everyone has a good time.

If the rest of the group doesn’t match your preferences, try finding a group that does.

 waefre_1 wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 NivNeos wrote:
Honesty, 40k is not a good competitive game to begin with so don't be so hard on yourself. I've always seen 40k better leaning towards RPG and I think game modes like Crusade are the ideal way to play 40k on a higher level.

One advice I have tho its more practical and not feel good is to not put so effort on painting the minis and try to reduce costs, only doing the bare minimal. Looking at the organization paper, it says with all areas painted with a basic finish. I don't remember were I heard but having a model based and with three colors was a standard minimal and I think that's a good minimal point.

Your army may not look good, but at least you haven't sink so much for a list.

I'd turn that around: Paint your miniatures nicely, because no matter how the rules und dice gods treat you, at least you look great while going down .
The visual spectacle is one of the big selling points of the hobby, otherwize we'd just print out cardboard tokens for minis.

¿Porque no los dos?
There are some people who don't want to paint minis that well (or physically can't). If they can have just as much fun and satisfaction kitbashing a sweet commander for their D-tier army but only want to do 3 colors, I think we should welcome that just as much as we should encourage others to go further with their painting.

This is true as well of course. And I didn't mean to say I wouldn't welcome people that don’t paint well, I guess I just see it differently from Nivneos, in that I'd feel discouraged from the hobby if I lost every game and because of that had no fun in the gaming part AND put no effort into the minis or even, as it reads in their post, see the painting rather as a burden to sink time into. I mean, at this point maybe look for a hobby that's more fun and were you feel your "investment" pays out?

 JNAProductions wrote:

kabaakaba wrote:
God-Emperor, Yes! Please paint your models at least 3 colours. My local community consists of unpainted meta lists where half the models is proxied and only thing people pursued is win at any cost. That not damn fun. I'm ok with loosing but loosing to painted army..

Perhaps you should find another playgroup.
There’s nothing wrong with playing hardball and/or playing with unpainted minis, so long as everyone has a good time.

If the rest of the group doesn’t match your preferences, try finding a group that does.

I live 125 miles away from city and we have not many players at all. So I need to communicate with fellow opponent beforehand. And it's always the same:
- hey wanna play 2k points game?
- yeap
- your army painted?
- yeah, it's table ready
- is it some kind of power meta?
- no, no, it's thematic <chapter name> army
- ok, let's meet in warlord(flgs name) sat 16:00

And Saturday I drive to city and see damn pile of grey... Power meta build.

The issue there is that they’re lying.
That’s a separate thing from armies not being painted.

Best of luck to you, though.

I give up. I don't wanted play with this community and dropped this hobby for other hobbies for 8 years. Now I just painting and play solo. And that's great. Army always painted, no one lying, and no bad army - I always win. Also opponent always open for any experiments and house rules.

kabaakaba wrote:
I give up. I don't wanted play with this community and dropped this hobby for other hobbies for 8 years. Now I just painting and play solo. And that's great. Army always painted, no one lying, and no bad army - I always win. Also opponent always open for any experiments and house rules.

Have you tried Kill Team, there are some fun rules for co-op and solo play.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

kabaakaba wrote:
I give up. I don't wanted play with this community and dropped this hobby for other hobbies for 8 years. Now I just painting and play solo. And that's great. Army always painted, no one lying, and no bad army - I always win. Also opponent always open for any experiments and house rules.

Have you tried Kill Team, there are some fun rules for co-op and solo play.

Yeah, I play it from time to time, I have karskin and komando and lot of cadians who represent npo alongside with other IG units. Really nice and fun play.

kabaakaba wrote:
God-Emperor, Yes! Please paint your models at least 3 colours. My local community consists of unpainted meta lists where half the models is proxied and only thing people pursued is win at any cost. That not damn fun. I'm ok with loosing but loosing to painted army..

Beware of what you demand....

Some if us have no problem hitting a model with 2 colors of spray (I prefer white over a black base) & then painting eyes/weapons.
This is my default basecoat- but it IS 3 colors. Models can stay in this state for a very long time before ever being finished (to MY preference/standard - wich may differ from yours/GWs)
I refer to this as "Winter camo".

But if annoyed I'll happily switch to random actual colors for you....
(Doesn't matter to me. I can always strip em when I get around to properly painting them)
Ex: I still have a few Skaven sprayed "Desert Tan" on front & "Pine Green" (both Testor Model Master spray colors from the early/mid 90s) with dry brushed silver weapons. From the last time (ages ago) someone insisted on 2, preferably 3, "real" colors from me.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:
Here's a hypothetical situation for you:


You have spent a lot of time, money, and passion planning, buying, building and painting your army. But there is a problem.

It's not that you can't win, you can't even enjoy the game. Face it, you've built a bad army.

Whether it was a Codex nerf, edition change, or just poor planning on your part, you have the same odds of winning a fight as Thug #8 does of beating Jason Statham in one of his movies.

So what do you do?

This was me when I originally started but I couldn't win either...

4th edition Chaos Space Marines. Collected a lot over the years before I decided to learn to play. I lost pretty much every game I had with only a few wins here and there until I bought a Defiler and winning went up a little more but still like 90% losing. I adjusted and change my army weekly and because I had my own custom painted legion I experimented with marked units too but nope, nothing. I just kept going despite the loses, I even started referring to myself as a loser because I was doing so bad.

Everything changed after the Eye of Terror campaign started and I figured "What the heck, lets try Lost & the Damned. I already suck, can't get any worse", well my local GW did combat patrol games and at 500 points so I threw together 500 points of traitors, mutants, chaos spawn and a couple chaos champs. I got wrecked over and over for every game I played my first day with the army but damn I loved every second playing the army so i went on to fully develop it and make it my main. Started doing much better and winning a good many games up until 5th came around and GW decided the Lost & the Damned was no longer legal to use where I stopped for some time, only coming back to the game now and then.

Now that Lost & the Damned is a thing again to some degree I've picked up the game again with a friend who wanted to get into it.

7th edition.

I had realised that I could take a mechanised 2000pt sisters list and by switching to the SM codex - same models, same wargear, etc - i'd get a free knight paladin, army wide ob-sec, game long re-rolls, and so on.

Didn't play again until 8th, the game was just too far gone.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 NivNeos wrote:
Honesty, 40k is not a good competitive game to begin with so don't be so hard on yourself. I've always seen 40k better leaning towards RPG and I think game modes like Crusade are the ideal way to play 40k on a higher level.

One advice I have tho its more practical and not feel good is to not put so effort on painting the minis and try to reduce costs, only doing the bare minimal. Looking at the organization paper, it says with all areas painted with a basic finish. I don't remember were I heard but having a model based and with three colors was a standard minimal and I think that's a good minimal point.

Your army may not look good, but at least you haven't sink so much for a list.

I'd turn that around: Paint your miniatures nicely, because no matter how the rules und dice gods treat you, at least you look great while going down .
The visual spectacle is one of the big selling points of the hobby, otherwize we'd just print out cardboard tokens for minis.

Hehe, if you like being the jobbers or a more DM outlook, that works. I like playing gimmicky armies in games.

waefre_1 wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 NivNeos wrote:
Honesty, 40k is not a good competitive game to begin with so don't be so hard on yourself. I've always seen 40k better leaning towards RPG and I think game modes like Crusade are the ideal way to play 40k on a higher level.

One advice I have tho its more practical and not feel good is to not put so effort on painting the minis and try to reduce costs, only doing the bare minimal. Looking at the organization paper, it says with all areas painted with a basic finish. I don't remember were I heard but having a model based and with three colors was a standard minimal and I think that's a good minimal point.

Your army may not look good, but at least you haven't sink so much for a list.

I'd turn that around: Paint your miniatures nicely, because no matter how the rules und dice gods treat you, at least you look great while going down .
The visual spectacle is one of the big selling points of the hobby, otherwize we'd just print out cardboard tokens for minis.

¿Porque no los dos?
There are some people who don't want to paint minis that well (or physically can't). If they can have just as much fun and satisfaction kitbashing a sweet commander for their D-tier army but only want to do 3 colors, I think we should welcome that just as much as we should encourage others to go further with their painting.

Exactly, at least lower the skill floor and/or allow someone to enter the hobby at their own pace. I wish GW was more laid back on using custom models, maybe a 20% custom limit.

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 waefre_1 wrote:

Sgt. Cortez wrote:

 NivNeos wrote:
Honesty, 40k is not a good competitive game to begin with so don't be so hard on yourself. I've always seen 40k better leaning towards RPG and I think game modes like Crusade are the ideal way to play 40k on a higher level.

One advice I have tho its more practical and not feel good is to not put so effort on painting the minis and try to reduce costs, only doing the bare minimal. Looking at the organization paper, it says with all areas painted with a basic finish. I don't remember were I heard but having a model based and with three colors was a standard minimal and I think that's a good minimal point.

Your army may not look good, but at least you haven't sink so much for a list.

I'd turn that around: Paint your miniatures nicely, because no matter how the rules und dice gods treat you, at least you look great while going down .
The visual spectacle is one of the big selling points of the hobby, otherwize we'd just print out cardboard tokens for minis.

¿Porque no los dos?
There are some people who don't want to paint minis that well (or physically can't). If they can have just as much fun and satisfaction kitbashing a sweet commander for their D-tier army but only want to do 3 colors, I think we should welcome that just as much as we should encourage others to go further with their painting.

This is true as well of course. And I didn't mean to say I wouldn't welcome people that don’t paint well, I guess I just see it differently from Nivneos, in that I'd feel discouraged from the hobby if I lost every game and because of that had no fun in the gaming part AND put no effort into the minis or even, as it reads in their post, see the painting rather as a burden to sink time into. I mean, at this point maybe look for a hobby that's more fun and were you feel your "investment" pays out?

The thing is tho, some people like specific parts of the hobby, they may like the comp side and/or lore side, and I could imagine a good sum of the new players coming in are coming from digital backgrounds with games like Darktide and Dawn of War, where there aren't much artistic elements aside from cosmetics and DoW paint maker. They want to play 40k because its big and trendy, and you can easily find players even in small towns, but since most new players don't come from a hobby background, painting and assembling can be seen as a burden to some.

Despise that, I think the hobby side is a important part of the game and personally why I enjoy it. I love making custom and unique armies and seeing others work. I refuse to play minis until I complete them 100%, hence why I say in my orginal point its not a feel good. I haven't liked GW making newer models more monopose and harder to kitbash and they seem less and less on focusing the hobby. I think I've really only see them in White Dwarf.

This killed the game for me tbh. Nids were terrible through 5th-7th, unless you loved spamming dakka tyrants (which I absolutely didn't want to do). After a lot of attempts and different armies (corsair eldar and armored krumpany orks, feelsbad) this led me to shelving my army and trying different games. I came back for 8th, but that wasn't what I was hoping for either.

Now I'm playing different games, often with the same models even, and I couldn't be happier.

I have seen four things being done. Not all done as commonly. A lot people quit, especialy when their armies are gone and they jumped in to the game to play that specific build. Full bike, full terminator armies, Beastman in AoS etc.

The second thing I have seen is that those that can afford it buy or have a second/third/fourt/etc army and just switch the army or game system.

Third is persistance. I did that mostly because I could not do the switch and I am unable to leave things.

Fourth is mix of wierd things, like OPR, trying to find people playing crusade, inventing your own rules etc.

In general bar, those that can just switch it is not very fun.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 JNAProductions wrote:
Perhaps you should find another playgroup.
There’s nothing wrong with playing hardball and/or playing with unpainted minis, so long as everyone has a good time.

If the rest of the group doesn’t match your preferences, try finding a group that does.

It is an eastern europe thing. The "just don't play win at all cost" may as well be "stop playing".

The shift to Kill Team is something that can be an easy solution that allows you to continue playing at least some of your army until the next edition reset when possibly, your rules get better.

For some factions, that's a particularly good option. Like if you play Tau, and you've got Pathfinders, Kroot and Vespid, that's three KTs right there. The more of your units you can get use of, the better.

 Hairesy wrote:
Once you realize all the armies are bad it becomes less about being awful and more about whether or not you can come up with a cool reason for Sgt. Ironpants to have that conversion beamer.

Or, more accurately, a reason for every HQ in your army to have a power sword and bolt pistol because GW removed all the other options.

 vipoid wrote:

 Hairesy wrote:
Once you realize all the armies are bad it becomes less about being awful and more about whether or not you can come up with a cool reason for Sgt. Ironpants to have that conversion beamer.

Or, more accurately, a reason for every HQ in your army to have a power sword and bolt pistol because GW removed all the other options.

Or they give you the option of taking a Laspistol or a Bolt Pistol for the same cost.

Why would anyone say, "Thanks l, Jerry, but I'll take the weaker of the two guns."

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Hairesy wrote:
Once you realize all the armies are bad it becomes less about being awful and more about whether or not you can come up with a cool reason for Sgt. Ironpants to have that conversion beamer.

Or, more accurately, a reason for every HQ in your army to have a power sword and bolt pistol because GW removed all the other options.

Or they give you the option of taking a Laspistol or a Bolt Pistol for the same cost.

Why would anyone say, "Thanks l, Jerry, but I'll take the weaker of the two guns."

Honestly, the difference between a Bolt and Las Pistol is so minute, it doesn’t matter.
A Plasma Pistol though…

I took both bolt and las pistols cause there is no actually difference and I have two sarge in squad, so they look a bit different. And yes GW gives us choice without choice. Let's hope they return points cost for wargear.

 Lathe Biosas wrote:

 vipoid wrote:

 Hairesy wrote:
Once you realize all the armies are bad it becomes less about being awful and more about whether or not you can come up with a cool reason for Sgt. Ironpants to have that conversion beamer.

Or, more accurately, a reason for every HQ in your army to have a power sword and bolt pistol because GW removed all the other options.

Or they give you the option of taking a Laspistol or a Bolt Pistol for the same cost.

Why would anyone say, "Thanks l, Jerry, but I'll take the weaker of the two guns."

Fluff. For example, I've got a list that's based around a deep raiding force that operates outside regular supply for extended periods, so las weapons are the go-to as they require significantly less supply (just a few new cells every now and again to cover for losses, allowing the transport craft to carry more water/foodstuffs/plasma cells/spare parts/etc) and allow for replenishment in the field via recharging.

kabaakaba wrote:
I took both bolt and las pistols cause there is no actually difference and I have two sarge in squad, so they look a bit different. And yes GW gives us choice without choice. Let's hope they return points cost for wargear.

So that bolt pistols are always the wrong choice?

 LunarSol wrote:

kabaakaba wrote:
I took both bolt and las pistols cause there is no actually difference and I have two sarge in squad, so they look a bit different. And yes GW gives us choice without choice. Let's hope they return points cost for wargear.

So that bolt pistols are always the wrong choice?

i think so. cause both have no effect in combat now. s3 on las against s4 on bolt with single shot matters nothing. earlier( at least at 6th? only dex i have) bolt has ap5 and cost 1 point. but anyway useless

kabaakaba wrote:

 LunarSol wrote:

kabaakaba wrote:
I took both bolt and las pistols cause there is no actually difference and I have two sarge in squad, so they look a bit different. And yes GW gives us choice without choice. Let's hope they return points cost for wargear.

So that bolt pistols are always the wrong choice?

i think so. cause both have no effect in combat now. s3 on las against s4 on bolt with single shot matters nothing. earlier( at least at 6th? only dex i have) bolt has ap5 and cost 1 point. but anyway useless

So, I still see that as a choice without choice and between the two, I prefer the current situation of Sgts have special guns over Sgts with special guns being overpriced. I'm way more interested in the design space of different weapons having different roles and would really hate to see that go away because of some legacy options that aren't really relevant either way.

Well, it's just give us some options model wise. May be GW change this is 11th and it would be relevant option for something. Idk some options for shock troops to be shock troops like assault keyword for squad weapon. But now it's cosmetic options.

Yeah, there's absolutely ways to give weapon options more meaningful roles to pick from. I'd love to see them dive into that design space further. I just try not to get hung up on the pistols that generally just aren't that relevant and feel way more bathwater than baby in the overall scope.

It isn't a particularly hard thing to balance even within 10th's design.

Just give laspistols BS 3+ to represent them being much easier to aim (which is why Cain prefers his laspistol over a bolt pistol).

It is one of those examples that shows that GW isn't taking advantage of their current ruleset as much as they could.

Well, they are miniature company, not a wargame company so they don't really bother out of tournament rules. And definitely not bother about representing something related to their own univers.