3 hours ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@TauntaunScout So preparing the miniatures (basing then priming) takes up two day's hobby slots for me,

Wait. You glue static grass etc. on the base then prime the mini? How do you avoid priming the grass? Most people wait until the end to finish bases I think. And if they're not primed and THEN you start on the actual painting as you describe... how did miniature paint get on the base, in order that you can be hiding with basing materials as you describe? I'm missing something.

2 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

Wait. You glue static grass etc. on the base then prime the mini? How do you avoid priming the grass? Most people wait until the end to finish bases I think. And if they're not primed and THEN you start on the actual painting as you describe... how did miniature paint get on the base, in order that you can be hiding with basing materials as you describe? I'm missing something.

Sorry, I may have been unclear.

1) Attach mini (unless I'm doing a Greenstuff base, or rubble under the miniature, in which case 1 and 2 are kinda swapped)

2) Apply sand/pumice, clean miniature of any sand/pumice

3) Prime

4) Paint sand/pumice

5) Paint miniature

6) Apply flock/static grass/etc covering any instances where paint from mini got on base

24 minutes ago, Derpzilla88 said:

By refusing to play people with unpainted armies, you're already being hostile and rude to those people.

14 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

@TauntaunScout Edit: Sorry too quick on enter: I think some of those "you"s are the generic you, as in "a person who refuses to play against unpainted" not you specifically as a person.

I still think some people are confusing me with other posters. I don't actually refuse to play with someone who's army isn't painted. But how's it different than turning down mirror matchups?

The answer is probably this:

"I'm fascinated with math and statistics, mirror matchups provide a boring mathematical situation. I'm not fascinated by the arts so it's ok to be artistically boring."

Unless the answer is about backstory, in which case, like paint, it's about turning down something that doesn't impact who the winner or loser is.

So either both are wrong or neither is IMO.

20 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

First, did you read what I wrote?

Second, it's not my job to play against anyone and everyone who wants to get a game in. Some folks don't want to play a mirror match of Han Rebels vs Han Rebels, because they want the more thematic Rebels vs Imperials match-up. Should they be forced to play the mirror match just because there is an opponent who would want to do so? I have one night a week to play games. Should I be forced to juggle my whole weekly schedule around so I can get to the game store to play someone who can only play on Tuesday night but really wants to play? Or if someone has a bad reputation as a dice-blaming, angry, whining table-flipper who is a miserable NPE to play with, should I be forced to play against them so that they don't get left out? If I'm looking for a game of Legion, and my would-be opponent shows up but tells me he only brought his X-Wing stuff instead because he wants to play X-Wing now, should I be forced to indulge his desire to X-Wing?

Don't be ridiculous. No one is forced to play anyone against their will (outside of a tournament with random pairings--but that's what you signed up for), as that's not how the hobby works. No one has an obligation to accommodate whatever whim their might-be opponent demands of them, and to try and guilt people into doing otherwise is coercive and a sure-fire way to make a community miserable.

Yes, I did read what you wrote and it reeked of just as much high horse attitude as the first post.

Second, refusing a game because of someone's attitude is completely different and understandable. No one wants to play against someone with bad reputation.

But refusing to play a game against someone just because their army isn't painted is absolutely rude. You're turning them away not because of their reputation, not because of their attitude, and not because of their skill level but because they don't have their little plastic figures painted. Why should players have to spend their money and time to appease your aesthetic desires?

And who said anything about you having to reshuffle your weekly schedule or play a different game? No one's asking you to change you're weekly routine or force you play a different game. But in that one night a week, if you're trying to get a game in, why limit yourself (and possibly come off as elitist) and push away other players by refusing to play anyone without painted armies?

If someone just wants to play Legion, just play. The lack of paint should never matter.

6 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

Sorry, I may have been unclear.

1) Attach mini (unless I'm doing a Greenstuff base, or rubble under the miniature, in which case 1 and 2 are kinda swapped)

2) Apply sand/pumice, clean miniature of any sand/pumice

3) Prime

4) Paint sand/pumice

5) Paint miniature

6) Apply flock/static grass/etc covering any instances where paint from mini got on base

Interesting. I kinda do both, incorporating the process into each other due to the problems of drying time.

1. Attach mini to base.
2. Prime all.
3. Paint mini. At some point in the painting o' the mini I paint the edges of the base a coat of green or something.
4. Keep painting mini. When the parts that touch the base are all done, apply sand to base. Keep painting. Sand will be dry tomorrow.
5. Keep painting and ink the sand brown. Ink will be dry tomorrow. Better do this at the end of the painting session or it'll run on your hands.
6. Keep painting and drybursh sand light brown. Apply 2nd coat of green or something to base edges. When that's dry and the minis done, add patches of static grass.

Unless it's Legion in which case every base gets two coats of light yellow and that's that. The nature of the vehicle's bases have made me shy away from base textures.

4 minutes ago, Derpzilla88 said:

But in that one night a week, if you're trying to get a game in, why limit yourself (and possibly come off as elitist) and push away other players by refusing to play anyone without painted armies?

Again I ask. What about turning down mirror matchups? It's a common practice in many games.

42 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

Using grey, broken, (but always name brand!) models makes for some serious virtue signaling .

And that's where you lost me.

So by being accepting of others they are somehow jerks?

Also, people questioning how you use your time is not "anti-painting sentiment." Everything in this world that you do has an opportunity cost. Painting is one of those things. People can rightly question why you engage in this time use rather than that time use. Now, if someone says they refuse to play against your painted models, or they set fire to a Vallejo rack or something like that...sure we can talk about an anti-painting sentiment, but asking why you paint ins't that level.

Also virtue signaling is the dumbest phrase ever. You're basically saying "I can't disagree with the thing you just said because that would make me look like a jerk, so I'm going to pretend you're a jerk for saying it and that you don't actually believe the thing you said."

On the opportunity cost thing....I can tell that I'm missing out with my non-gamer friends since I started painting. "Have you watched/read X?" "No, I really can't have visual media going while I'm hobbying, I know I can't pay attention to both things. So I'm missing out on cultural connection and have to figure out how to devote time to the visual media I also want to consume. I'm not rending my garments over it, but I am aware of it.

25 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Some folks don't want to play a mirror match of Han Rebels vs Han Rebels, because they want the more thematic Rebels vs Imperials match-up. Should they be forced to play the mirror match just because there is an opponent who would want to do so? I have one night a week to play games. Should I be forced to juggle my whole weekly schedule around so I can get to the game store to play someone who can only play on Tuesday night but really wants to play? Or if someone has a bad reputation as a dice-blaming, angry, whining table-flipper who is a miserable NPE to play with, should I be forced to play against them so that they don't get left out? If I'm looking for a game of Legion, and my would-be opponent shows up but tells me he only brought his X-Wing stuff instead because he wants to play X-Wing now, should I be forced to indulge his desire to X-Wing?

Way to reductio ad absurdum.

No one mentioned any of those things. Accepting that your opponent doesn't have painted miniatures is not the same as accepting that you will play a completely different game because they decided they wanted to at the last minute with no warning. You might as well have asked if you should be expected to let them drive a spike through your skull simply because they asked.

3 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

Again I ask. What about turning down mirror matchups? It's a common practice in many games.

I would never turn down a match . There is a whole three people, counting myself, who play these games in my area and if I did start turning matches down then I simply wouldn't play. Even if there was a community here, I still wouldn't turn down a match

Just now, TauntaunScout said:

Again I ask. What about turning down mirror matchups? It's a common practice in many games.

Indeed, and in games like X-Wing it is very common at game nights for folks to turn down games based on the list their opponent wants to play (e.g. things like TIE Phantoms or Fat Falcons or Palp Aces or Dengaroo back when those lists were widely considered broken and not fun to play against). People would say something like "Ah, no thanks, you'd crush my list. I've played against the list you're using a dozen times and it's just no fun for me, so I don't want to waste 75 minutes doing it yet again."

And, in some ways, this acts as an informal check in local communities so that people weren't just bringing the same pre-nerf broken net decks and stomping casuals all night long in miserable, lopsided games.


But should we expect all players to play against miserable rock-paper-scisssor mismatches or to play against mirror matches when they would rather not? If we would demand they do so, lest they be accused of being on a high-horse, why? How can we justify this? If not, why is that sort of polite refusal any different than someone who has a preference to play on full-terrain tables with painted armies?

To all the people saying it's rude to not play against unpainted armies:


What if I showed up at game night which a bunch of 30mm circular paper discs cut out with the name of each model just written on the paper disc. I just want to use these flat paper proxies instead of miniatures, because they are much lighter and easier to pack and travel with. And since the game's quality rests on the mechanics and the tactics, the aesthetics don't matter. So people should just as happily play against my paper-disc army. I've even color coded the paper so it's clear what units and model types the paper proxy-discs are representing!

6 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

Again I ask. What about turning down mirror matchups? It's a common practice in many games.

It depends. Do I know about this beforehand? If I can bring multiple lists or we can agree what we'll be playing that's fine.

However if you're in a league or tournament and trying to change your list based on what the opponent has, then no you're being unreasonable. You're expected to show up for organized play with a single list that doesn't change, and that's the rule for everyone.

If we both showed up for an open night and both brought a single army and it's this or play no one for 2-3 weeks, I might ask you to chill out this one time.

Wow this topic is a pretty fun read.

So I'm reading about some very different experiences in the miniature gaming community (not just here) and I think this is actually a good thing. What strikes me as odd is the reaction some people have to these experiences. The funny thing is the reaction are found on both sides of the fence. I must admit that I have never been in or heard of a place or people that were actively anti painting, but that does not invalidate a person’s experience that has. Some of these experiences sound like people need to find new venues or people to play with, no jab intended. What I do find strange is when someone gives a reason for their case and explains how they have been "persecuted" for their stance, only to then turn around and do the exact same thing to someone else. Really shows how people tend to not really grow but just become older version of their young selves.

I think we can all agree that using painted miniatures is one of the absolute best things in miniature gaming. Visually its beautiful and does raises the excitement level, to me that’s irrefutable. However just because something has been done one way for a long time does not mean it’s the only way to do so. It also means that "your way" is not the only way to do something. Including opinions on webpages is also not proof that it’s the correct way to do something, on either side. I’ve said this before, for the most parts we are all adults and we should pretty much strive to act like adults. This means knowing that other people have differences of opinions and it’s not a personal attack when they do (there are always exceptions yes I know). To know that others will disagree and want to do play differently (I’m including painting in my use of the word play) and know the world of gaming is not ending is a mature view. It really does not matter the reason why some people do not paint, just know that it’s a different view and move on. I am also adding that if someone does paint and refuses to play against an unpainted army, while I don’t agree with that stance, that too is OK, the world is still not ending. What both sides should come to terms with is that the game community will live and die by the number of people playing that particular game. I would also want to point out that I think a game based on Star Wars is indeed a special case because of the source material and how its ingrained into so many people’s lives but that may be a little off topic.

For the record, I actually counted the years I’ve been gaming and was surprised to find that this is my 40th year... yes I am showing my age a little bit. I am one that at one point did not think anyone would ever play non painted army let alone “want” to play unpainted. However I found people that just didn’t care for that. Yes some were dinks, and some weren't but I also found people that did paint fell into the same categories. I didn’t feel these people ruined my enjoyment of the games I was play. I did find that I just didn’t care for some people and I even refused to play some people, but that was just personality conflicts not the state of their army. We should just play, however you define that and enjoy it with people you enjoy being around, or people you can just put up with for a little while anyway.

1 minute ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

To all the people saying it's rude to not play against unpainted armies:


What if I showed up at game night which a bunch of 30mm circular paper discs cut out with the name of each model just written on the paper disc. I just want to use these flat paper proxies instead of miniatures, because they are much lighter and easier to pack and travel with. And since the game's quality rests on the mechanics and the tactics, the aesthetics don't matter. So people should just as happily play against my paper-disc army. I've even color coded the paper so it's clear what units and model types the paper proxy-discs are representing!

again, ruductio ad absurdum.

Please stop.

3 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

To all the people saying it's rude to not play against unpainted armies:


What if I showed up at game night which a bunch of 30mm circular paper discs cut out with the name of each model just written on the paper disc. I just want to use these flat paper proxies instead of miniatures, because they are much lighter and easier to pack and travel with. And since the game's quality rests on the mechanics and the tactics, the aesthetics don't matter. So people should just as happily play against my paper-disc army. I've even color coded the paper so it's clear what units and model types the paper proxy-discs are representing!

I'd almost be okay with that actually. I've printed off stats for ships I didn't have in armada and proxied them with ships I did have. However TLOS is kind of important in legion and as such it wouldn't work very well

7 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

Indeed, and in games like X-Wing it is very common at game nights for folks to turn down games based on the list their opponent wants to play (e.g. things like TIE Phantoms or Fat Falcons or Palp Aces or Dengaroo back when those lists were widely considered broken and not fun to play against). People would say something like "Ah, no thanks, you'd crush my list. I've played against the list you're using a dozen times and it's just no fun for me, so I don't want to waste 75 minutes doing it yet again."

And, in some ways, this acts as an informal check in local communities so that people weren't just bringing the same pre-nerf broken net decks and stomping casuals all night long in miserable, lopsided games.


But should we expect all players to play against miserable rock-paper-scisssor mismatches or to play against mirror matches when they would rather not? If we would demand they do so, lest they be accused of being on a high-horse, why? How can we justify this? If not, why is that sort of polite refusal any different than someone who has a preference to play on full-terrain tables with painted armies?

Saying "Sorry, I've played against the list you're using a dozen times and it's just no fun for me" is not the same as "Sorry, I don't want to play against you because you didn't put your time and money into making your list look up to my aesthetic standards".

You could try and make that sound nicer by saying "Sorry, I'd rather not play against your unpainted army", but it still comes off (and is) very rude.

Again, you're not refusing to play the game because of the list the opponent is using or the attitude of the opponent, but you're turning them away because their models are simply gray.

2 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

To all the people saying it's rude to not play against unpainted armies:


What if I showed up at game night which a bunch of 30mm circular paper discs cut out with the name of each model just written on the paper disc. I just want to use these flat paper proxies instead of miniatures, because they are much lighter and easier to pack and travel with. And since the game's quality rests on the mechanics and the tactics, the aesthetics don't matter. So people should just as happily play against my paper-disc army. I've even color coded the paper so it's clear what units and model types the paper proxy-discs are representing!

Well your paper discs aren't at the right height size for determining cover, so they would be illegal to use in a game unless your opponent is okay with it.

An unpainted army still works perfectly within the rules and mechanics of the game.

3 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

To all the people saying it's rude to not play against unpainted armies:

So, I've got this buddy, he's been my most common opponent since the game launched.

He's got a family, he's been remodeling his house, he's also got a medical issue. All those things combined have made him much slower to paint then me. Months on his army isn't fully painted. Mostly there but not fully. I've really honed my skills against him. He's a great opponent, really calm and cool. Has taken it chill when rules questions don't go his way. He's the kind of guy who wins sportsmanship awards at tournaments.

But if I refused to play him because ever model he was fielding wasn't done yet.....man I really would have missed out on most of the legion I've played to date.

15 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

I still think some people are confusing me with other posters. I don't actually refuse to play with someone who's army isn't painted. But how's it different than turning down mirror matchups?

The answer is probably this:

"I'm fascinated with math and statistics, mirror matchups provide a boring mathematical situation. I'm not fascinated by the arts so it's ok to be artistically boring."

I actually DON'T think it is different to turn down the mirror match vs turn down an unpainted match, as the only way in open play to avoid being forced to make the decision between mirror match and no match is to have two complete forces (which the one player who early on at my FLGS insisted on mirror matches did, playing his Empire against his opponent's Rebels or Rebels against his opponent's Empire). I think that turning down either, if handled indelicately in an open play situation, can be very rude. So long as both parties agree to "mirror/painted only" matches arranged prior to attending the club, then it's not as big of an issue. The rules of Legion do not require a mirror match, nor do they require painting.

Once Clone Wars armies are added, it will become more difficult to ensure "canon" games, in my opinion.

I do agree that in any wargame the board has a more interesting aesthetic when everything is painted and when the forces are different, but with the exception of special play events, prearranged games, or tournaments with painting rules, (so essentially any open play events) the factions and painting of the models should not be in consideration when one determines whether or not they will play with a given opponent .

8 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

Unless it's Legion in which case every base gets two coats of light yellow and that's that. The nature of the vehicle's bases have made me shy away from base textures.

I often like to change the color of the sand extensively, especially for larger grains of sand, so I do a heavy brush, dry brush, and light dry brush on the bases. I am often very sloppy with my dry brushing depending on the weather owing to carpal tunnel symptoms (I can usually tell when it is going to precipitate by the dull pain in my wrist and almost random slight loss of dexterity). . My very last step is painting the "middle" colour on the rim of the bases. I have found that keeping basing material off of the ridges still looks okay, but I respect your decision and actually kind of agree.

5 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

What if I showed up at game night which a bunch of 30mm circular paper discs cut out with the name of each model just written on the paper disc. I just want to use these flat paper proxies instead of miniatures, because they are much lighter and easier to pack and travel with. And since the game's quality rests on the mechanics and the tactics, the aesthetics don't matter. So people should just as happily play against my paper-disc army. I've even color coded the paper so it's clear what units and model types the paper proxy-discs are representing!

Legion rules require true line of sight, so that is a different situation. However if you wanted to proxy with different models of roughly the same size, with roughly the same base diameter to learn the game, yeah sure. I've done it before with other game systems.

9 minutes ago, Zrob314 said:

And that's where you lost me.

So by being accepting of others they are somehow jerks?

No. Being accepting wouldn't make them jerks, but they aren't BEING accepting, they're just TALKING about it. A lot. And flipping it around so they can claim moral virtue via not-painting. Not requiring painting is being talked about an awful lot considering no one around actually requires painting and hasn't for years to my knowledge, and there's no painted armies in sight to mislead someone into thinking it's required. But yet it gets brought up over and over: "Paintings not required. We don't require painting here." Now, if someone in most of my local stores paints their army, suddenly they aren't like the rest of their friends. Never underestimate the power of conformity. But that gnarly old chipped grey army? That "proves" to your friends that you aren't elitist! It "proves" to your local scene that you are a hard bitten competitor who doesn't have time to stop strategizing to paint!

BEING accepting would be doing things not just talking.

1 minute ago, Zrob314 said:

again, ruductio ad absurdum.

Please stop.

Umm it's not actually. I've seen people do that thing with discs (well, empty bases) with names written on them. That's a legit question.

7 minutes ago, Derpzilla88 said:

Saying "Sorry, I've played against the list you're using a dozen times and it's just no fun for me" is not the same as "Sorry, I don't want to play against you because you didn't put your time and money into making your list [fun for me].

Uh-huh. So you get to decide how someone else defines "fun" and when it is and isn't a moral hazard. If it's not going to be fun for him to play against an unpainted army why do you care?

8 minutes ago, Zrob314 said:

So, I've got this buddy, he's been my most common opponent since the game launched.

He's got a family, he's been remodeling his house, he's also got a medical issue. All those things combined have made him much slower to paint then me.

BUT. He's trying! He's making an effort! Unlike the people who use space marines without arms or whatever, and just sell them off to buy whatever's rules are broken in the next edition.

18 minutes ago, AllWingsStandyingBy said:

To all the people saying it's rude to not play against unpainted armies:


What if I showed up at game night which a bunch of 30mm circular paper discs cut out with the name of each model just written on the paper disc. I just want to use these flat paper proxies instead of miniatures, because they are much lighter and easier to pack and travel with. And since the game's quality rests on the mechanics and the tactics, the aesthetics don't matter. So people should just as happily play against my paper-disc army. I've even color coded the paper so it's clear what units and model types the paper proxy-discs are representing!

jumping in on this because Ive had someon try this a while back. Thats when you need to break out the rules of your game. If the models are required for game mechanics then you know the person is just being a dink. This is also not the same as an unpainted army, just because someone does it does not mean its the same thing.

13 minutes ago, Caimheul1313 said:

I actually DON'T think it is different to turn down the mirror match vs turn down an unpainted match,

As long as you're consistent I support you. Hypocrisy is the only thing I really can't stand. And hot peppers. I like spicy food just not hot peppers. But I digress.

Rules to no game required painting but... it was just the thing to do. Back to the "then we'd just play cheaper chit and map simulation games" thing.

4 minutes ago, miridor said:

jumping in on this because Ive had someon try this a while back. Thats when you need to break out the rules of your game. If the models are required for game mechanics then you know the person is just being a dink. This is also not the same as an unpainted army, just because someone does it does not mean its the same thing.

Yeah no.. I actually knew a Warmahordes club that thought they were SUPER smart for using discs and saving all that money. Wouldn't let me use my painted models though: I'd put them on scenic bases of the slightly wrong size!

Oh and for the record I just checked my copies and 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition 40k, the rules on LOS were pretty darn vague and didn't even reference bases. "If a model can't see another model, they can't shoot them!" was about it. Definitions of "see" were left up customers. Anyone who says this stuff doesn't change is wrong.

Just now, TauntaunScout said:

Yeah no.. I actually knew a Warmahordes club that thought they were SUPER smart for using discs and saving all that money. Wouldn't let me use my painted models though: I'd put them on scenic bases of the slightly wrong size!

Oh and for the record I just checked my copies and 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition 40k, the rules on LOS were pretty darn vague and didn't even reference bases. "If a model can't see another model, they can't shoot them!" was about it. Definitions of "see" were left up customers. Anyone who says this stuff doesn't change is wrong.

Oh yeah I remember that. I had one guy would put his minis on their belly "They were crawling" was his reasoning. So yeah these people just being dinks. We had to establis groud rules for some people.

19 minutes ago, TauntaunScout said:

Oh and for the record I just checked my copies and 1st, 2nd and 3rd edition 40k, the rules on LOS were pretty darn vague and didn't even reference bases. "If a model can't see another model, they can't shoot them!" was about it. Definitions of "see" were left up customers. Anyone who says this stuff doesn't change is wrong.

Yea, and true LoS has never made sense in a lot of games, because in many of the "Golden Era" GW games, you had some models that were in crouched or kneeling positions, and some who were a whole head or two taller than others. Some with arms wide apart, some in a tight profile. Technically, it will be easier or harder to see each of these models with true LoS. But, most gaming communities were quick to realize they didn't want to see entire Cawdor gangs of the crouching pose, so they quickly adopted an "estimated LoS based on the average sized average posed humanoid."



To your earlier point about proxies, absolutely. In my days in 40k, Fantasy, Necromunda, and X-Wing it's been not entirely uncommon for folks to use empty bases or balsa wood or cardstock from time to time as proxies of new units they wanted to try out, or hadn't bought yet, or hadn't finished assembling yet. Really, it functions no different than the actual models being there--the game plays the same, especially with estimated LoS like everyone uses anyways. My many experiences with players doing this is precisely why I brought it up.

I find it funny that some people are like "GET OFF YOUR RUDE HIGH HORSE IF YOU ONLY PLAY WITH PAINTED ARMIES ON THE TABLE!" and in the same breath are like "GTFO WITH THESE PAPER PROXIES, NO ONE WOULD DO THAT AND IT'S REDUCTIO AD ABSURDUM TO THINK ANYONE SHOULD HAVE TO PLAY AGAINST PROXIES!"