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.

 Da Boss wrote:
Personally, I found that looking at painting videos and the like made me less motivated. Loosening up, finding a standard I was happy with with techniques I didn't find onerous was how I liked to paint and I get a lot more done that way.

Perfect is the enemy of progress. Anything worth doing is worth doing poorly. Done is better than perfect. Etc, etc.

Social media uses a lot of camera tricks and framing to provide an enhanced reality that most of reality fails to accomplish. Even before the age of digital touch ups, a lot of what you see would only be half a model and very rarely a whole army.

I have a standard I'm happy with and while I could definitely benefit from some new techniques, I'm also just more interested in playing with painted armies than winning painting competitions. To that end, I tend to favor learning things that get me to that standard quicker.

Guess it depends what you’re looking for.

I find some tutorials/demos really useful. Like the aforementioned quick grimy metal thing I use for terrain.

I’ve no interest in especially fancy painting, I like my quick and effective stuff. Takes a bit of trial and error to find the sort of tutorial/demo I want, but it has encouraged me.

Yeah that's fair - especially more general hobby channels can be good for that sort of thing more so than painting channels specifically.

I realised after a while that lots of these painting guys don't really really have complete armies and it's because painting for that sort of extreme close up photography is really time consuming and draining.

I use painting guides for very specific things, like Duncan Rhodes' guides for plasma and volkite glow (though I didn't follow it 100% as I don't have his skill and precision).

Otherwise I prefer to make it up as I go along. It feels more personal that way. Many Alpha Legion players use Akhelian Green, but no one uses quite the mixes I do, and most don't go so hard into edge highlights and chipping.

 catbarf wrote:

Between hobby products like Contrast and the ubiquity of online tutorials, it has never been easier to paint to a decent standard if that is something you genuinely want to pursue.

I've been a good+ painter for decades. Neither Contrast paints nor those ubiquitous tutorials have changed my motivation to paint nor the speed I do it....

 catbarf wrote:
And lastly, to circle back to paint-vs-gameplay a bit, I would argue there are tangible gameplay differences between a highlander-style army whose owner has been slowly painting it for the last three years, versus a grey tide army that the owner bought according to the latest meta developments and won't paint because it'll be sold or relegated to a box in another three months once it's no longer top-tier. Paint is, to some degree, emblematic of a fundamental difference in perspective between viewing models as hobby projects versus viewing models as playing pieces, and the players who embody either extreme of that spectrum are unlikely to have a great time together for reasons that go far beyond how their respective armies look.

Obviously there's gameplay differences. I'd argue unit selection is the cause, not how much paint is involved.

 catbarf wrote:
As always, the hobby is what you make of it and as long as you and your opponents are on the same page, knock yourselves out.

(Quote snipped for brevity)

Fantastic post, exalted. Agreed with pretty much everything, especially since I recognise myself as that highlander-style painter you mentioned.

What do you do if nothing works for you?

I have an airbrush waiting to be used as soon as life allows me to spend more than 2 hours per Month on hobby time. That's my last option - if an airbrush doesn't make painting bearable for me, there are no options left. I literally tried everything, watched every video about motivating yourself.

There is zero fun in painting for me. It's a chore, I need to highly focus over a long time period to paint models, so it's both tiring and can't be done when I'm tired for other reasons. The only reasons to do it is because I enjoy having my models painted in the way I want and not getting bullied/punished by game rules. And since those two motivations are in conflict, they cancel each other out.

Play with likeminded people who don't want to paint either and just want to game, I suppose?

It's what I do. Well, the other end of the spectrum, but the principle is the same. Doesn't seem so complicated to me. Both people are likely to have more fun if they want the same sort of experience from the game.

ccs wrote:

 catbarf wrote:
And lastly, to circle back to paint-vs-gameplay a bit, I would argue there are tangible gameplay differences between a highlander-style army whose owner has been slowly painting it for the last three years, versus a grey tide army that the owner bought according to the latest meta developments and won't paint because it'll be sold or relegated to a box in another three months once it's no longer top-tier. Paint is, to some degree, emblematic of a fundamental difference in perspective between viewing models as hobby projects versus viewing models as playing pieces, and the players who embody either extreme of that spectrum are unlikely to have a great time together for reasons that go far beyond how their respective armies look.

Obviously there's gameplay differences. I'd argue unit selection is the cause, not how much paint is involved.

Sure, but if your options are limited to whichever units you've gradually painted over the course of the last few months to years, your unit selection may look very different from someone whose only obstacles to army composition are monetary cost and assembly time.

Which is not to imply that anyone with a painted army is a casual hobbyist and anyone with grey tide is a powergamer, but it's difficult to powergame from an existing painted collection, and it's difficult to paint up a meta army before the next balance change invalidates it. The time and effort involved in painting stuff to a reasonable standard puts a personal cost on churn and a barrier to immediate deployment well beyond the time and money it takes to buy and assemble new models.

And again, if you and your buddies prefer the more competitive aspect and don't want trying new units and tactics to be hamstrung by a hobby task you dislike, more power to you. You don't owe anything to any uninvolved third party. It's just that if we show up for a pick-up game and I've got a fully painted army of models I thought looked cool two editions ago, and you've got a grey tide army based on points changes in a balance dataslate that just dropped six hours ago (don't touch the dreadnought's arms the glue hasn't dried yet), we are probably not on the same page about what we want to get out of the game. All things being equal I'd enjoy a game with painted armies more, but the paint or lack thereof isn't really the issue, it's more a reflection of where our priorities lie.

 Jidmah wrote:
and not getting bullied/punished by game rules.

Have you tried slap chop? I've been very impressed with what that can produce and you can do it even faster using an airbrush to zenithal models quickly.

That said, I was going to reply on the 10 point deal but saw this thread seems to have spun off of that discussion and thought best to comment here. I think the 10 point rule is weird in that it really only matters if winning has some sort of benefit like a league or tournament and those environments tend to have painting rules already in place.

I think part of the reason I find the 10 points ignorable is just because they don't change how I feel about how the game actually resolved. If I score 48 points and my opponent scored 56 but isn't painted, those 10 points don't give me the sensation that I scored more points, even if I "win". By the same token, in the reverse situation, I feel successful from the results of the game even if I guess I lost due to being unpainted. How I feel about the game is not changed by who is declared winner and in either case it was probably a good, hard fought battle.

I think that's why so many people ignore the rule. It's not that they don't value painting, but that it doesn't impact how the results of a game feel. I can't imagine what it would take to make me feel victorious because of the rule.

 Ashiraya wrote:
Play with likeminded people who don't want to paint either and just want to game, I suppose?

It's what I do. Well, the other end of the spectrum, but the principle is the same. Doesn't seem so complicated to me. Both people are likely to have more fun if they want the same sort of experience from the game.

You do realize that this is just a nice framing for "go find a corner where you don't bother me", right?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
and not getting bullied/punished by game rules.

Have you tried slap chop? I've been very impressed with what that can produce and you can do it even faster using an airbrush to zenithal models quickly.

Yes, thanks for suggesting it. It's actually slightly slower than my current way of painting models as I already work a lot with ink and colored base coats.

 Jidmah wrote:

You do realize that this is just a nice framing for "go find a corner where you don't bother me", right?

No one has an obligation to play a game with anyone else, and people generally are happier playing with people who approach the game similarly.

 Jidmah wrote:
You do realize that this is just a nice framing for "go find a corner where you don't bother me", right?

Huh? No, this is just me applying the same standard to you as I do to myself. If we have differing priorities and interests we're not likely to enjoy a game as much as if we shared them. Isn't that just pretty sensible? There are two sides to this thing.

 Jidmah wrote:

You do realize that this is just a nice framing for "go find a corner where you don't bother me", right?

No, it isn't. It's how social activities work. People are within their rights to refuse games for many different reasons. The important thing is how they do that. You can be a donkey cave about it, or politely decline a game. Kind of weird to jump straight to that conclusion from what was a pretty reasonable explanation.

 Jidmah wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunarSol wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
and not getting bullied/punished by game rules.

Have you tried slap chop? I've been very impressed with what that can produce and you can do it even faster using an airbrush to zenithal models quickly.

Yes, thanks for suggesting it. It's actually slightly slower than my current way of painting models as I already work a lot with ink and colored base coats.

Makes sense. Orks are definitely not easy to paint. Everyone has lots of details and faces and the like. I have failed to paint an army of them myself and finally found a reasonably speedy process that made it possible. Might not work with your style, but on the odd chance, check the spoiler for the process:

I can't necessarily speak specifically to to the "and 40k" part of the OP's question as I've long since abandoned 40k rules for Grimdark Future.

Still, I don't field unpainted miniatures and I avoid playing against them. I'm in this hobby specifically for "The spectacle of painted armies clashing on evocative terrain" and to game without them is just not a hobby that I'm interest in participating in.

I wrote a blog essay about this 14 years ago that spawned ALOT of responses and it still expresses my opinion...
https://www.chicagoskirmishwargames.com/blog/2014/08/painting-matters-in-defense-of-hobby/
... but suffice to say I believe in firm standards with inclusion. So, if you show up to my wargaming club (15 years old this year!) where we only play with painted armies, and you don't have a painted army, we'll always have one ready for you to play with. Everyone is welcome at Chicago Skirmish Wargames, but unpainted miniatures are not.

One last thing to note is that we have no particular standards for wargaming. We've got everything from limited-palette tabletop quality up to showcase and everything in between. Even some pre-painted minis and I personally field many minis painted by other people.

I found a pretty fast way to get mine painted (although the last time I had to work on painting any was a few years ago. Don't ever buy a fixer-upper house LOL especially since I'm working 8 days a week now, 2 shifts on Friday)

Anyways, it helps I have marines. I just find a can of spray primer in the color I want their armor, then after priming it's filling in other colors, then a wash for shadow and a drybrush for highlights and done.

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
You do realize that this is just a nice framing for "go find a corner where you don't bother me", right?

Huh? No, this is just me applying the same standard to you as I do to myself. If we have differing priorities and interests we're not likely to enjoy a game as much as if we shared them. Isn't that just pretty sensible? There are two sides to this thing.

(I'm quoting your post because I responded to you, but I'm also address all the others)

When you normalize excluding people from one part of the hobby (gaming) for not following a relatively unrelated part of the hobby to your standards (painting), you eventually exclude them from the hobby as whole.

Hating on people who play unpainted models has become normal online for a long time. Ever since the 10VP rule has made its way into the rulebooks, it also has become a reality for me whenever I play a game.

When you tell me to only play against people who don't want to paint (I do want to paint, but at my speed), you are essentially telling me to stay away from all stores, clubs or game nights. To never play pick-up games, join crusades, tournaments, apocalypse games or leagues. Is that what you meant? if not, what did you mean?

 Jidmah wrote:

 Ashiraya wrote:

 Jidmah wrote:
You do realize that this is just a nice framing for "go find a corner where you don't bother me", right?

Huh? No, this is just me applying the same standard to you as I do to myself. If we have differing priorities and interests we're not likely to enjoy a game as much as if we shared them. Isn't that just pretty sensible? There are two sides to this thing.

(I'm quoting your post because I responded to you, but I'm also address all the others)

When you normalize excluding people from one part of the hobby (gaming) for not following a relatively unrelated part of the hobby to your standards (painting), you eventually exclude them from the hobby as whole.

No you don't. It might lead to that, but it's not inevitable. The truth is, nobody is compelled to play against anyone else (even at an event you always have the right to concede if you don't want to play the game). It's quite common, for example, for some groups to only ever want to play 2k, tournament-style games, which excludes anyone looking for a different type of game. Any form of blanket exclusion sucks but ultimately each individual has to make their own decision on how much they're willing to compromise or how much work they're willing to put in to push for change in a scenario where literally everyone else has a different approach to the game than they do.

 Jidmah wrote:

Hating on people who play unpainted models has become normal online for a long time.

Has it? Maybe, but I'm not sure it's productive getting too worked up about what random people online think about your approach to painting. People get worked up online about all sorts of weird things.

 Jidmah wrote:

Ever since the 10VP rule has made its way into the rulebooks, it also has become a reality for me whenever I play a game.

When you tell me to only play against people who don't want to paint (I do want to paint, but at my speed), you are essentially telling me to stay away from all stores, clubs or game nights. To never play pick-up games, join crusades, tournaments, apocalypse games or leagues. Is that what you meant? if not, what did you mean?

That's your locale and is likely not the reality for everyone. I think it sucks, and your gaming community sounds pretty awful if that's the attitude of all of them, TBH.

However, you're wrong about what Ashiraya is saying. They're only speaking for themselves. They're not saying everyone should have the same attitude to unpainted models. They, like everyone else, have the right to refuse games for whatever reason they want (or no reason at all, frankly). That has no bearing on anyone else's attitude towards your unpainted models.

Well said, Slipspace. I also think it might be often the case that players who don't like being denied games when somebody doesn't want to play against unpainted models, have no problem denying games themselves, when, for example, someone asks them to play an unusual narrative scenario with non-standard points limits and force organisations that deviates from what they expect from the game.

On painting’s place in the hobby? I don’t agree it’s an unrelated part at all.

We only need look back through WD over the years to see it’s far from unrelated.

Now don’t misunderstand. I’m not saying therefore if you don’t paint you’re doing it wrong. That would be inaccurate, and unnecessarily antagonistic.

But painting is part of the hobby core, and it always has been. Competition Painting like Competition Gaming? Yes. Those aren’t core, just a particular specialisation within the wider hobby.

If you don’t enjoy it and/or don’t want to do it? Entirely fair enough. As I said, nobody is Doing It Wrong.

To refuse a game against an unpainted army is the opponent’s prerogative. Just as I can refuse a game if you’re a known power gaming douche that argues the smallest detail even when you know you’re doing so disingenuously. Or someone who’s a known cheater. Or someone who’s known to be that fatal combo of poor loser and poor winner. Or someone to whom hygiene is a dirty word. Or if I don’t fancy playing against your preferred army.

The reason for me is lesser than how you decline.

I don’t lack sympathy for you here, but it is what it is.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

But painting is part of the hobby core, and it always has been.

I do find this take quite strange.
Do you think games like Star Wars X-Wing, which provides pre-built and pre-painted minis is less of a wargame as a result?
The guy who can afford to get his whole army commission painted less of wargamer as a result?
In both cases the actual wargame played on the table is the equal of any game where players have painted it themselves. Often even better, as they're providing a consistent and good (or even excellent) standard of paint where a lot of self-painted armies honestly just don't look good (due to lack of time, care, experience, both or other from the player).


Automatically Appended Next Post:
What I found really helped me to paint my army was finding a methodology that was quick, easy, and effective.
Before starting my Ultramarines 30k army I spent a lot of time researching a method that would be all of those whilst also looking good on vehicles and the ability to push it further for characters.

I settled on sponging and oil washes, and I love it.
Basically paint them blue, sponge on a highlight, paint the metal, sponge on a highlight, paint the shouldertrim (and only the shoulder trim), decals, then slather in oil wash and wipe it off. The decals alone take longer than the painting tbh.

It really motivated me to paint more as I could sit down for 20 minutes and leave with material progress evident on the models. I could also do it when tired or whatever as it didn't strain my eyes very much.
Compared to back when I'd be sat carefully edge highlighting everything and painting wash directly in the recesses, that was a miserable experience I never intend to repeat lol. I think my new method even looks better (I find the Eavy Metal style a bit cartoony).

It’s less of a hobby wargame, yes. And that’s what GW put out, hobby wargames.

X-Wing and other pre-paint, pre-assembled model wargames aren’t quite the same fish, because there’s no focus on DIY. Yes, you as an individual can make it a DIY affair, repainting the stock models, even kitbashing into “counts as” Uglies. But the core product isn’t sold as a hobby unto itself.

On those who choose to pay for a commission paint? I’ve no real opinion at all. Some folk don’t have the patience/inclination to paint their own stuff. Some might prefer it because their own painting skills don’t result in the quality they want. The why isn’t of particular interest to me, and it seems entirely futile for me to develop an opinion, as it’s not gonna change owt. So long as they’re not picking up Best Painted, there’s literally no harm done. Same as those who don’t paint at all.

On the subject of keeping the non-painters separate from the painters, it's along a similar vein to when (back in 6th/7th edition) there was a divide between the Power-Gamers(tm) and the Casual Players.

We had a guy in the club who played Eldar. He went all-in on the old Eldar Jetbike Farseer super-unit with wave serpents which could basically ignore being damaged and destroy your units with their overcharging super-shields, and Wraith Knights which were T8 and so immune to all S4 weaponry. And honestly, if you fought him without having the most optimised option for your army, you were screwed, and not as in "I can enjoy the game, but will lose", as in "I will spend every turn doing nothing, then remove my models" sort of screwed. Rerollable 2++, -1 to hit, all that broughaha. It wasn't fun.

So, some of the players with more diverse model ranges (enough to build some powerful-as-heck armies) made some army lists to challenge him and his unkillable eldar. And the casual players, who were there to roll dice and have some back-and-forth before working out who ultimately won, steered clear. He wouldn't have enjoyed playing against them, and they wouldn't have enjoyed playing against him. Everyone aligned their fun, and everyone had fun. I managed to challenge him a couple of times with my Orks, and he got used to people saying "sorry dude, there's no way what I've brought can fight you today". I was generally there to play if everyone else said that, because I can have fun with my Orks in even the most dire of circumstances!

I would also say that there is a gulf (for me) between "most of my army is painted" and "none of my army is painted". I would be surprised if someone who loves to see everything painted would have their game "ruined" by one or two unpainted models or units in an otherwise painted game. People need to be somewhat flexible!

7th edition was a riot
I joined a tournament after the organiser swore up and down it was a friendly narrative/casual affair.
So I turn up with my army, list all beautifully typed as like an in-universe vox transmission (and also handwritten in Tau language).
I think I killed one (1) model all tournament (3 games). Even the organiser himself was running a Knights/Smashfether list.
I actually just stopped coming halfway through the season and no one bothered to ask if I was coming back or wanted to continue lol.

One of the practice games was good fun though, against a guy in the same sort of situation as me. Nice casual laugh.

I honestly don't hate that way of playing. Gloves off can be a fun experience.
But for Emperor's sake be open about it. Let people prepare or avoid gracefully.

 kirotheavenger wrote:

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:

But painting is part of the hobby core, and it always has been.

I do find this take quite strange.
Do you think games like Star Wars X-Wing, which provides pre-built and pre-painted minis is less of a wargame as a result?
The guy who can afford to get his whole army commission painted less of wargamer as a result?
In both cases the actual wargame played on the table is the equal of any game where players have painted it themselves. Often even better, as they're providing a consistent and good (or even excellent) standard of paint where a lot of self-painted armies honestly just don't look good (due to lack of time, care, experience, both or other from the player).

I think the painting side is more about the experience for the players. In that case it doesn't really matter how the models got painted, just that they are. I would say games like X-Wing emphasise the game side of the wargaming hobby way more than the build/paint side, and that's fine. It's also fine for two players to not care about painting at all, as long as everyone's on the same page.

That said, it's not exactly a secret that GW games are much more a combination of gaming and painting for many people, including GW themselves. They don't have to be like that for everyone, but it's always a little strange to me to hear people complain about painting requirements for gaming when that's the social side of the game that affects other people and the expectations shouldn't be a major surprise. You might not like it, but within the context of how GW games are sold and marketed it's a reasonable expectation form other people. I'll reiterate that how someone who is refusing a game for whatever reason deals with those social interactions is an important part of the process. Belittling people for not painting or painting poorly is just as obnoxious as criticising their lack of meta, turbo-busted army.

I’ve also found the painting community to be really supportive. I know my stuff is basic, and that the only reason I don’t get fancier is my own laziness. But I’ve never had a negative experience.

Had people suggest ways I could push it a little further? Absolutely. But all criticism has been put constructively. And mostly people just being impressed at the amount I’ve painted, and how I’ve managed to achieve a unified scheme across models of often wildly different sizes.

Now, I’m certain obnoxious “my way am only way” types do exist in the painting side of the community. I’d be shocked if they didn’t. But they don’t seem particularly common, or have been dogpiled into righteous silence by more encouraging voices.

Even competition winners seem incredibly welcoming and encouraging of all skill levels. Compare that to notable tournament clagnuts, such as Da Wreckin Crew of old? And it just seems a much warmer, fuzzier community.

As ever, I’m not claiming tournament clagnuts are a majority or even a significant part of the competitive scene. But by gum then can make a lot of self satisfied noise!

I struggle, because my standards for painting are unfortunately higher than is allowed by the time I have available to paint... It also doesn't help that my mate that I play with is a damn good painter - he just won a bronze at MPO...

 kirotheavenger wrote:
7th edition was a riot
I joined a tournament after the organiser swore up and down it was a friendly narrative/casual affair.
So I turn up with my army, list all beautifully typed as like an in-universe vox transmission (and also handwritten in Tau language).
I think I killed one (1) model all tournament (3 games). Even the organiser himself was running a Knights/Smashfether list.
I actually just stopped coming halfway through the season and no one bothered to ask if I was coming back or wanted to continue lol.

Over the years I've had a few experiences of this.
I find it hard to determine whether
A) people who've clearly brought the best stuff to crush fluffy lists
or
B) people who have brought the best stuff, but will go on and on about how its fluffy and the fact it won all those tournaments last month is just a coincidence honest.
is more annoying.
I guess the other option is C) - where its clearly 90% a tournament net-list, but they have 1 unit that's a bit unusual and they insist that's a figleaf for the rest.

FWIW no one has to play anyone. But I wouldn't turn down games from people just because their army wasn't painted. I have friends who have taken over 6 years and counting (when was the sisters re-release?) to paint up 2k lists. If I'd insisted they wait, they'd have long since quit the hobby (or at least I'd have never played them anyway.)
If you are at a tournament and they enforce the 10 VP rule then that's fine, you knew that going in. For casual 1v1 I think its meaningless and would just laugh at someone who was gloating they'd won because of it.

Option D?

They’re Eldar players, and with the extreme swingy history of Codex Eldar, genuinely just happened to find their long standing army suddenly ridiculously ‘ard.