Switch Theme:

New ITC painting requirements  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


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.




Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





The Golden Throne

LVO 2020 40k Championships Update and Guidelines

In addition to the ITC standard modeling and painting guidelines, we are requiring that all models meant to represent a certain faction, for example, <Iron Hands> (or whatever faction) must be painted in a coherent fashion. This means that visually, your opponent must be able to identify which models are <Iron Hands> (or whatever faction).
Sensible exceptions will be made to this rule, for example, if you painted your Space marines Librarian the traditional blue in your <Iron Hands> army, this is fine. What expressly is not allowed is to have multiple different and conflicting paint and basing schemes and to play them all as the same faction.
The picture below illustrates what is NOT acceptable. (Picture of random SM squads painted differently) Despite all models being fully painted and based, playing something like the below as <Iron Hands> (or whatever faction) would NOT be allowed even if you only have 1 detachment of the said <Faction> in your army.

You may have models painted in the same paint scheme count as different <Factions> so long as you clearly visually distinguish them. For example, if you have an army all painted in the same scheme using Cadian models (or whatever models) but distinguish them using something like Squad Marks (who will have a booth in the vendor area of the LVO) that IS acceptable. Something like colored rubber bands put on to models is NOT acceptable. The below picture illustrates what we mean. If all of the red based Cadian models were the same regiment of Astra Militarum, and all of the blue based Cadian models were a different regiment of Astra Militarum that is acceptable so long as you are consistent throughout your army. Models with no base such as Vehicles would require a similar, easily distinguishable and consistent visual indicator of which <Faction> they were. When in doubt, submit pictures to the form linked at the top of the article for judge approval.

Failure to comply with these rulings will result in a judge removing said models from the game, even in the middle of a game. The player in question will not be able to use these models until they at the minimum required standard.

-- comments?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
So right before "roll for deployment" will be "remove model phase".

Gonna be abused. Has to be. Its the rules!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/12/16 17:34:14


 
   
Made in us
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos






Toledo, OH

I thought this was already the policy?

Having different factions painted differently makes sense. With how complicated the game is with various buffs and interactions, clearing signifying what rules each model is using is one way to keep things straight.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





The Golden Throne

 Polonius wrote:
I thought this was already the policy?


Its new. All detachments must be painted uniform and coherent and be different or otherwise marked from other detachments or removed.
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




This rule kinda sucks for those that have collected and painted over a long span of time.

I have old school space wolves in the traditional blue grey (which I hate) and my newer models are a more metalic blue (which I love).

I can't base half of my detachment with snow and the other half with gravel, WTF?

Is ITC telling me that one of the shades of my space wolves would be removed from play if I wanted to run them in the same detachment alongside a blood angels?

What about my blood angel scouts which 2 units are done with old school GW paints but the newest one is done with GW contrast. My opponent gets to remove whatever one they want?

RAW do you get to pull my death wing termies (classic bone) from my DA army (dark green) since they are not uniform and coherent?

They are already asking me to re-base all of my original space marines (since the new ones come with bigger bases), asking me to re-paint dozens of models just so my paint scheme is consistent is so dumb.

Let's not even talk about how much better of a painter I've gotten since my first couple of models.

So painting my entire space marine force basic three color black and then painting different colors around the rim of the base is good enough but using different color blues for my space wolves will get models removed from the table (only against TFG is my guess)?

BS rule is BS and meant to "solve" a problem that no one was having for some unknown reason.

ITC caving to some GW pressure to stop people from playing borrow hammer I guess? Why would anyone care as long as the red ones are blood angels, the blue ones are space wolves and the green ones (except for the bone ones) are dark angels.
   
Made in us
Fate-Controlling Farseer





Fort Campbell

You're working to hard at being upset at this.

This is a policy to put in place things like "this new army is the hotness, but I don't have time/inclination to make it look nice, so I'm just going with the 3 different colors for my centurions cause the dudes I bought them from on Ebay painted in different schemes.

No. Evolution of Space Wolf paint theme won't affect your army. no Greenwing and Deathwing won't impact your army (why would you even think this?)

Painting guidelines have always been about the spirit of the intent. You want to be good with this? Put good faith work into your army. Don't be a git who is chasing the meta the easiest way possible and putting a bag of ass on the table.

Full Frontal Nerdity 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




Sounds perfectly good to me, able to tell at a glance which model is from which faction sounds a nice idea

its the joy of historical games, they tend to look amazing, 40k (& WHFB where it matters) can also look amazing.

Models that have 'evolved' but are clearly related works, its the random collection with variable quality that breaks it.

Personally also think if they are painted as ultramarines they should be used as such, a slight benefit of a custom chapter
   
Made in us
Elite Tyranid Warrior






Sounds fine, blame all the detachment soup nonsense.
   
Made in us
Rogue Daemonhunter fueled by Chaos






Toledo, OH

bananathug wrote:

I can't base half of my detachment with snow and the other half with gravel, WTF?

Is ITC telling me that one of the shades of my space wolves would be removed from play if I wanted to run them in the same detachment alongside a blood angels?

What about my blood angel scouts which 2 units are done with old school GW paints but the newest one is done with GW contrast. My opponent gets to remove whatever one they want?

RAW do you get to pull my death wing termies (classic bone) from my DA army (dark green) since they are not uniform and coherent?


The only possible issue on this based on my reading of the rules would be different basing, and I think that if you had similar rim colors and somewhat tied the different bases together, snow and gravel would be fine.

As for your other examples, the rules do not require them to be uniform, but coherent. They specially point out librarians in blue armor as coherent, which bone colored Deathwing clearly would be.

But yes, the goal of this policy is clearly to have armies present with a more uniform look. They can afford to do this since they sell out so quickly.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





The Golden Throne

bananathug wrote:This rule kinda sucks for those that have collected and painted over a long span of time.

BS rule is BS and meant to "solve" a problem that no one was having for some unknown reason.

ITC caving to some GW pressure to stop people from playing borrow hammer I guess? Why would anyone care as long as the red ones are blood angels, the blue ones are space wolves and the green ones (except for the bone ones) are dark angels.


Borrowhammer must be a factor. I agree that the requirement is an over reach and a bit elitist. What about knight armies? 'nids? This better apply to every army and faction.

"Remove model phase" right before roll for deployment. Lol!

Getting players to actually bring their rules with them would be a better concern imo.

djones520 wrote:
This is a policy to put in place things like "this new army is the hotness, but I don't have time/inclination to make it look nice, so I'm just going with the 3 different colors for my centurions cause the dudes I bought them from on Ebay painted in different schemes.

Don't be a git who is chasing the meta the easiest way possible and putting a bag of ass on the table.


Whats the issue with this? Some dudes cant paint. So now somehow buying finished models makes one TFG? Whatever...

   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran




Yeah, thinking about it again it's probably an issue that would never come up. As long as some effort has been put in 99% of people are okay as long as you can visually tell what's what (which I guess is the second and to me more important part of the ruling).

My main concern is that 1% which would just need a good TO to step in and make a rational decision. I should probably just slap some snow on the gravel bases and call it a day (will make a good cover for the base extenders anyway) but against TFG I hope the T.O. would let it slide...
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





The Golden Throne

 Polonius wrote:
bananathug wrote:

I can't base half of my detachment with snow and the other half with gravel, WTF?

Is ITC telling me that one of the shades of my space wolves would be removed from play if I wanted to run them in the same detachment alongside a blood angels?

What about my blood angel scouts which 2 units are done with old school GW paints but the newest one is done with GW contrast. My opponent gets to remove whatever one they want?

RAW do you get to pull my death wing termies (classic bone) from my DA army (dark green) since they are not uniform and coherent?

They can afford to do this since they sell out so quickly.


Can they?

It is yet to be determined how this will impact the common event goers. I predict a hot steamy mess. The exceptions will be so common it wont be worth enforcing the rule. Every judge will have a different standard. Players will show up and not have understood requirements after spending thoasand$ to get there. It will be the same thing as always. "We can't ask them to leave."

See the train? Can't look away...
   
Made in gb
Dakka Veteran





 Byte wrote:
 Polonius wrote:
bananathug wrote:

I can't base half of my detachment with snow and the other half with gravel, WTF?

Is ITC telling me that one of the shades of my space wolves would be removed from play if I wanted to run them in the same detachment alongside a blood angels?

What about my blood angel scouts which 2 units are done with old school GW paints but the newest one is done with GW contrast. My opponent gets to remove whatever one they want?

RAW do you get to pull my death wing termies (classic bone) from my DA army (dark green) since they are not uniform and coherent?

They can afford to do this since they sell out so quickly.


Can they?

It is yet to be determined how this will impact the common event goers. I predict a hot steamy mess. The exceptions will be so common it wont be worth enforcing the rule. Every judge will have a different standard. Players will show up and not have understood requirements after spending thoasand$ to get there. It will be the same thing as always. "We can't ask them to leave."

See the train? Can't look away...





To be fair, they are essentially asking for something I think is very reasonable anyway.
Just coherency in the long run.
No one likes facing rainbow marines of varying chapters depending on what day of the week it is.
Tournaments (competitive) should always have this in play along with forced models.
So that flamer unit is just a flamer unit.
If you want it to have plasma, give them plasma visually on the model.

In a tournament scene you want things running quick and smooth, not having to guess or look at lists non stop.
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Byte wrote:
 Polonius wrote:
bananathug wrote:

I can't base half of my detachment with snow and the other half with gravel, WTF?

Is ITC telling me that one of the shades of my space wolves would be removed from play if I wanted to run them in the same detachment alongside a blood angels?

What about my blood angel scouts which 2 units are done with old school GW paints but the newest one is done with GW contrast. My opponent gets to remove whatever one they want?

RAW do you get to pull my death wing termies (classic bone) from my DA army (dark green) since they are not uniform and coherent?

They can afford to do this since they sell out so quickly.


Can they?

It is yet to be determined how this will impact the common event goers. I predict a hot steamy mess. The exceptions will be so common it wont be worth enforcing the rule. Every judge will have a different standard. Players will show up and not have understood requirements after spending thoasand$ to get there. It will be the same thing as always. "We can't ask them to leave."

See the train? Can't look away...


They've already sold out for the next LVO so they're probably not too worried about the immediate effect. I honestly don't see what the problem with these rules are. I think it's a step in the right direction. Frankly, a lot of tournament games I see pictures of look horrible and are not a good advert for the game or the participants, IMO. All these rules are asking is for a fairly minimal amount of effort to go into your army painting and basing. If you've made a good-faith effort to paint all your stuff the same you'll be fine. Slightly different reds or greys with BA/SW won't be an issue. Borrowing an entire army of the new hotness will be. You want to chase the meta you should at least be prepared to put some effort into painting your stuff.

They've already pulled models for not adhering to painting rules in the past. This will be no different and people now have a couple of months' notice to get their armies sorted out. Should be plenty of time, even for the slowest painters. Maybe the first time they implement these rules there will be a bit more pain for some people and there might be a large number of models removed relative to previous years but perhaps that's what we need if we want to have tournaments that represent the hobby in the best way possible.
   
Made in us
Grim Dark Angels Interrogator-Chaplain






A Protoss colony world

Personally I'm all for this, as it looks better visually and it makes it easier to tell different chapters, hive fleets, etc. from each other. I know Tyranids and Necrons frequently run multiple Hive Fleets/Dynasties, respectively, and so it would be nice to be able to easily tell the different ones apart since they get different buffs.

As someone who is starting a Sisters of Battle army and going with a homebrew color scheme, I hope it's okay to paint them all the same but just do different color base rims to differentiate different Orders. I'm probably not going to play at LVO anytime soon, but I might go to Adepticon in 2021, Lord willing, so it could come up for me.

My armies (re-counted and updated on 11/1/23, including modeled wargear options):
Dark Angels: ~15000 Astra Militarum: ~1200 | Adeptus Custodes: ~1900 | Imperial Knights: ~2000 | Sisters of Battle: ~3500 | Leagues of Votann: ~1200 | Tyranids: ~2600 | Stormcast Eternals: ~5000
Check out my P&M Blogs: ZergSmasher's P&M Blog | Imperial Knights blog | Board Games blog | Total models painted in 2023: 40 | Total models painted in 2024: 7 | Current main painting project: Dark Angels
 Mr_Rose wrote:
Who doesn’t love crazy mutant squawk-puppies? Eh? Nobody, that’s who.
 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

 ZergSmasher wrote:

As someone who is starting a Sisters of Battle army and going with a homebrew color scheme, I hope it's okay to paint them all the same but just do different color base rims to differentiate different Orders. I'm probably not going to play at LVO anytime soon, but I might go to Adepticon in 2021, Lord willing, so it could come up for me.


From the first post
You may have models painted in the same paint scheme count as different <Factions> so long as you clearly visually distinguish them. For example, if you have an army all painted in the same scheme using Cadian models (or whatever models) but distinguish them using something like Squad Marks (who will have a booth in the vendor area of the LVO) that IS acceptable. Something like colored rubber bands put on to models is NOT acceptable. The below picture illustrates what we mean. If all of the red based Cadian models were the same regiment of Astra Militarum, and all of the blue based Cadian models were a different regiment of Astra Militarum that is acceptable so long as you are consistent throughout your army. Models with no base such as Vehicles would require a similar, easily distinguishable and consistent visual indicator of which <Faction> they were. When in doubt, submit pictures to the form linked at the top of the article for judge approval.


Sounds like they've already thought of that and even suggest it. A rim base colour variation for different subchapters/groups within the army sounds like its a very reliable interpretation of the rule they've put forward.


I also agree that this rule sounds very sensible. It's about creating a clear exchange of information using the models without being too limiting. Note that they don't even stipulate anything about "official schemes" for armies and keep the language that's purely talking about the coherency within the players force. You Ultramarines can be bright pink, so long as they are all using that same colour scheme.

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in ca
Junior Officer with Laspistol





London, Ontario

Borrow Hammer is a bad thing?

Sorry that I want to play a game and can’t afford to buy my own, but I have a friend willing to lend me the models... but shame on me for borrowing from a friend?

How’s the view from on top of that horse? Maybe a bit grumpy because the caviar wasn’t properly chilled? Or did your servants not provide you with adequate “sport” this afternoon?
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

 greatbigtree wrote:
Borrow Hammer is a bad thing?

Sorry that I want to play a game and can’t afford to buy my own, but I have a friend willing to lend me the models... but shame on me for borrowing from a friend?

How’s the view from on top of that horse? Maybe a bit grumpy because the caviar wasn’t properly chilled? Or did your servants not provide you with adequate “sport” this afternoon?


It is a "bad thing" within the context of:

1) Creating a visual atmosphere of random models on a table rather than a unified armed force.

2) Creating a potentially confusing situation on a table where model paint schemes might vary considerably and where the player might be using more than one army division; but where the variations in model painting and model division do not correspond to each other.

Remember point 2 is about clarity of information and whilst it might be really simple; at a competitive event you're going to play strangers against the clock and play multiple games. In such a situation hazy information can result in an unintended disadvantage to the opponent because now they might mistakenly mix up which models are in which division. At worst one could argue it would be done deliberately to engineer such a situation for the players advantage.

Of course no one minds if someone borrows models and the more the merrier is often the mantra most game groups and events work with. People are more than happy to have more people playing and there's no real stigma against borrowed models provided that the player is honest (eg if they come up for a "best painted" nomination) and that they fit within the painting coherency rules now noted above at the start of the thread.

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in gb
Longtime Dakkanaut




 greatbigtree wrote:
Borrow Hammer is a bad thing?

Sorry that I want to play a game and can’t afford to buy my own, but I have a friend willing to lend me the models... but shame on me for borrowing from a friend?

How’s the view from on top of that horse? Maybe a bit grumpy because the caviar wasn’t properly chilled? Or did your servants not provide you with adequate “sport” this afternoon?


It's about clarity of information on the tabletop as well as trying to present the hobby in the best light possible. There's nothing stopping you borrowing your army from a friend either, but you won't be able to borrow a bit of it from one friend, another couple of units from someone else and another couple from somebody else unless they all happen to have coherent colour schemes. Like it or not, the hobby side of the game is something that many people find important and enforcing a bare minimum standard of hobby effort seems like a perfectly reasonable approach for a TO to take. Also, it's entirely possible to play a fully painted, coherent army without being lord of the manor. Equating the two is, frankly, ridiculous.
   
Made in ca
Junior Officer with Laspistol





London, Ontario

I’m not equating. I’m *implying* elitist snobbery through barbed exaggeration. Like, I would ask you to lend me your polo mallet, but I know how much you’re opposed to borrow hammer.
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

 greatbigtree wrote:
I’m not equating. I’m *implying* elitist snobbery through barbed exaggeration. Like, I would ask you to lend me your polo mallet, but I know how much you’re opposed to borrow hammer.


Borrowing the hammer is fine. It's when you borrow your friends team uniform and tack when its all in the colours of the opposing side and nor your own team.
That's basically all that is implied as wrong with borrow hammer up above.

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in ca
Junior Officer with Laspistol





London, Ontario

So I’m allowed to play, as long as I can afford the horse, boarding, feed, tack, and uniform... in that case borrow-hammer is ok.

With no sense of irony, or willingness to acknowledge the clever wordplay. In light of the point of this exercise being to actively mock people’s lack of self-awareness in creating an elitist scenario in which if you can’t afford to play, and paint consistent models yada-yada-yada I’m-better-than-you.

Are you sure that’s going to be your strategy? It’s a bold move, Cotton.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/12/17 00:58:03


 
   
Made in gb
Decrepit Dakkanaut




UK

 greatbigtree wrote:
So I’m allowed to play, as long as I can afford the horse, boarding, feed, tack, and uniform... in that case borrow-hammer is ok.

With no sense of irony, or willingness to acknowledge the clever wordplay. In light of the point of this exercise being to actively mock people’s lack of self-awareness in creating an elitist scenario in which if you can’t afford to play, and paint consistent models yada-yada-yada I’m-better-than-you.

Are you sure that’s going to be your strategy? It’s a bold move, Cotton.




So your overall tactic is to take a comparison and beat the horse to death with it? Whilst at the same time creating a total fabrication?


I never said anything about what you could or could not "borrow" within the context of the analogy save that the issue presented was when you borrowed the opposing teams colours to wear for the match. I didn't even mention the horse or anything else.




Though honestly I think you're just fishing to bait this into a "its a luxury product you're not entitled to play" angle at some stage.


Again no one was saying borrowing models was bad. It was borrowing models that have no single paint scheme for each different subfaction present within your army that was the issue. That being no different to if you'd bought the whole lot yourself and painted them into random groups of painted units.

A Blog in Miniature

3D Printing, hobbying and model fun! 
   
Made in ca
Junior Officer with Laspistol





London, Ontario

Only if I can beat the horse to death with the loaned mallet. I’m trying to use humour to make a point but that doesn’t always translate in post form. Come on, loaned polo mallet (and the implication of wealth that comes from playing polo) juxtaposed with borrow hammer?

Loan-Mallet. Borrow-Hammer? Come on, a bit of credit for setting that up and then running with it is all I ask.

I also like seeing consistent paint schemes when it comes to models. Who doesn’t? But when money’s on the line (most tournaments have a prize structure) the pragmatics of using the best available models to win the game goes hand in hand. People aren’t after the best-painted if they’re doing that. They’re after the prize for winning. Thinking this will somehow alleviate meta-chasing and people using bare-minimum effort modeling just puts the meta-chasing one (financial) step further out of reach.

Put another way, does someone deserve a better chance to win a tournament because they are more financially capable of owning the bestest models, or should the best player win? If each person has an equal financial stake (tournament entry) in the outcome, should one player be penalized because their models aren’t all the same colour?

We can disagree. That’s different points of view and that’s ok. I think some kind of visual differentiation is useful for the game tokens the tournament is played with.

No hard feelings, no harm intended. Just being playful. *internet fist bump offered*
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





The Golden Throne

 greatbigtree wrote:
Borrow Hammer is a bad thing?

Sorry that I want to play a game and can’t afford to buy my own, but I have a friend willing to lend me the models... but shame on me for borrowing from a friend?

How’s the view from on top of that horse? Maybe a bit grumpy because the caviar wasn’t properly chilled? Or did your servants not provide you with adequate “sport” this afternoon?


A lot of the national view of 40k is down the nose unfortunately.

Maybe all the proponents of the change are right and it's not a big deal. Personally I think it's an over reach of a requirement and is going wreck a lot plans that weekend if this is actually enforced. I'm not going for this reason, my models would be fine but I dont want to deal with the drama of calling people out and I'm not programmed to over look stuff. I would he labeled TFG before dice are even rolled. But rules! If models indeed get pulled than it's fair. I seriously doubt models and units will actually get pulled. The requirement is to broad. Wait and see I guess
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut




 Byte wrote:


A lot of the national view of 40k is down the nose unfortunately.

Maybe all the proponents of the change are right and it's not a big deal. Personally I think it's an over reach of a requirement and is going wreck a lot plans that weekend if this is actually enforced. I'm not going for this reason, my models would be fine but I dont want to deal with the drama of calling people out and I'm not programmed to over look stuff. I would he labeled TFG before dice are even rolled. But rules! If models indeed get pulled than it's fair. I seriously doubt models and units will actually get pulled. The requirement is to broad. Wait and see I guess


This would have gone over a whole lot better had a significant set of model related rules changes not been announced after the event had sold out.
   
Made in us
Decrepit Dakkanaut





The Golden Throne

Sterling191 wrote:
 Byte wrote:


A lot of the national view of 40k is down the nose unfortunately.

Maybe all the proponents of the change are right and it's not a big deal. Personally I think it's an over reach of a requirement and is going wreck a lot plans that weekend if this is actually enforced. I'm not going for this reason, my models would be fine but I dont want to deal with the drama of calling people out and I'm not programmed to over look stuff. I would he labeled TFG before dice are even rolled. But rules! If models indeed get pulled than it's fair. I seriously doubt models and units will actually get pulled. The requirement is to broad. Wait and see I guess


This would have gone over a whole lot better had a significant set of model related rules changes not been announced after the event had sold out.


Absolutely! So right.

Players don't even bring their army lists and rules as required and nothing happens. If they actually enforce this as written it will be interesting at a minimum.

I don't think the change and repercussion of it has sunk in yet from what I'm seeing so far about the feedback here and other places.

During and after the event is gonna be must see information!
   
Made in gb
Raging-on-the-Inside Blood Angel Sergeant





Luton, England

I think the whole thing is down to an issue of scale.

At a small tournament the TO can list out some simple guidelines and players can happily contact them and discuss the matter before hand, common sense will generally rule the day.

When you get up to the level of 1000 players at an event you have to have very clear, written down guidelines that apply to all. The problems will arise when some players are let off for certain models and other players are not, there will be some discretion given no doubt but I fear some feel bad situations will undoubtedly happen.

I'm not attending, if I was the painting and basing guide lines wouldn't be a problem but the base size rules certainly would.

I'm part way through re-basing my massive marine collection, a decent base extender costs £0.25 each model so that's not a huge issue and they are pretty quick to do. There are various issues where I have based some character models on larger bases to make them more stable and to look better, not sure what I'd do there.

My daemon army would face big issues, it quite old and may of the models are metal and attached through their bases. Having to re-base these to the newer slightly different sizes would be a big job, metal models and their paint jobs don't respond well to being forcibly removed from their bases. Many of the new base sizes for the medium to large chaos models are not easily obtainable and in some cases are supplied with different versions in different sets they are available in.

I think having a fixed base size requirement based on a what a company supplies them with when said company has no coherent policy for what size bases they use and who are constantly changing their bases sizes is pure folly.

40,000pts
8,000pts
3,000pts
3,000pts
6,000pts
2,000pts
1,000pts
:deathwatch: 3,000pts
:Imperial Knights: 2,000pts
:Custodes: 4,000pts 
   
Made in us
Dakka Veteran





Tournament guys will just adapt pretty rapidly. I think there should be 1 exception and this is to basically not kick borrow-hammer people in the face.

IF all detachments are from the same faction/chapter/cult/hive fleet/etc. Then so long as they are 3 colors and based it shouldn't matter.

While I get why it's being done why kick game store kid in the face? If he wants to waste $20 getting hosed by 35+ year old rules nerds with actual budgets so be it.
   
Made in us
Blackclad Wayfarer





Philadelphia

This is wonderful news

I'm so happy they put their foot down on this. It's 99% lazy and 1% actual disability/cannot afford paints



edits

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2019/12/17 18:48:48


   
Made in us
Fixture of Dakka





Los Angeles

Some perspective from a guy who has seen the offending armies:

The night before LVO, a top guy brought his models (a couple years ago), primed white, and with 2 washes for 3 colors, primer white, a blue (I believe Nightshade) and green or purple. He was painting Thursday night. It looked like ass. And I mean I picked up the models and eyeballed them. It'd be funnier if I said they were still wet, but I can't remember if so. I know this was the army that, well maybe not started the resolve, but definitely got the ITC guys moving toward this goal.

Another:
A buddy of mine my pretty much always plays borrow hammer, and just-purchased-ebay hammer. At a BAO, me and the other buddies saw his really awful ebay purchases and put in 2 hours the night before to bring some coherency to its appearance ... maybe 3 years ago. He finally commissioned someone to paint an army, and hey! Looks good.

Both of these players are Top Table guys. GT level top competitors. They're being held to this higher standard fer sure.

As I understand Reece's intent, *these* guys need to step up and not have:
silver blue eldar jetbikes, 2x5 black DAs, and another unit of red Dire Avengers (1 is actually orange), a white/blue Crimson Hunter, another painted like USC's burgundy and yellow (one based, the other base is still back plastic), black primer farseer with blue trim and the other farseer green & white ... this is the stuff that this ruling is intended to eliminate. Easily seen as a hodgepodge of models with about 6 different themes.


@ the detractors:
If you're not going to LVO, why are you harping on this?

Are you worried about the fallout at your local scene? Okay, that makes sense.

However, if *your* local ITC scene is gonna go this route, then get your buddies together for a beer, discuss, plan, and take control of your local scene. If all 15 locals players tell the TO that you want a continued, relaxed paint requirement for events, and he balks, screw him. Organize your own tourney, the same day, spread the word and let the TO hold is empty BCP roster, while *you* hold your own event. "Oh, hey, man, since no one's playing in your RTT, I guess we can go ahead and use the tables and terrain?" Course, I don't think any TO would be so daft as to allow things to go so far.


I nearly did this to make sure a local TFG/WAAC unpleasant player got shut out for our RTT. The TO banned him before I need to pull the trigger.

This ITC thing is pretty much just gonna be LVO, BAO and SoCal Open. If other events are on your agenda, and you don't want this, call them up! Ask for concessions or even flat out Get-Out-of-Jail, that is, Get-Out-of-Paint-Jail and say you're gonna be in the kiddie pool and are there just for fun.

@Byte:
I didn't see any pix from the first post. Did I miss something?

@those complaining about announcing it "After the event Sold Out"
Quoting Reece, "You've got 2 months!" I agree with him. Here are a couple points:
a. the meta is likely to shift again, and some people are gonna be swapping out units anyway
b. Us die-hards who play the same mid-level to kiddie pool armies are (based on experience) gonna play armies that already match the standard. For those that don't, you've got 2 MONTHS!

Base sizes:
@ WisdomLS - $4 american for 10 bases going from 25 to 32 mm (those extender things). Is that really gonna break your bank? For 40k?! Really?

My 50+ bloodletters are half on 25s and half on 32s. I'll get to it, so I'm there with ya, but ... as Reece stated, fielding 30 BLs with 25mm bases is gonna afford me far more attacks because of the "1 inch within 1 inch" attack mechanic. It'll be a lot less with 32 bases.

40k has always been about playing an edition for a few yeas, and then a new edition comes out, and many of your models get shelved or altered. I've been playing since 4th. Lo! and behold, indexes were just rendered absolete. Give it 5 years. The army you're playing now won't be the same in 9th edition. And it'll have nothing to do with ITC. It's GW.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
Throwing down a gauntlet of "Lookit what I did when I had to resize muh bases!"





Those are 1988 era, metal termies on 25 mm bases. And then I got the bigger ones and added trophies.

B**ches!

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2019/12/18 01:26:37


"You can bring any cheesy unit you want. If you lose. Casey taught me that." -Tim S.

"I'm gonna follow Casey; he knows where the beer's at!" -Blackmoor, BAO 2013

Quitting Daemon Princes, Bob and Fred - a 40k webcomic 
   
 
Forum Index » Tournament and Local Gaming Discussion
Go to: