|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 5, 2018 19:19:06 GMT
I know that there are no TOs in my area that would ever institute a painting requirement voluntarily - they (and I) see it as an unnecessary burden on players. Painting required tourneys don't often happen in my area, because of how damn hard it is to find enough players with fully painted armies. Make it a variant if you must, don't force the rest of us to abide by your criteria as to how the game should look (not speaking to you, mcdermott ). I fail to see how your preference in playing against fully painted models gives you any right to dictate how I play my models. crimsyn - if you want to play fully painted, I suggest you offer to paint your opponent's armies for them, or pay for them to be painted. Failing that, you're making unreasonable demands upon other players. First, I’m not suggesting that all tournaments be painted, I’m suggesting that PP keep painting requirements as default for one of their variants. Basically, I’m suggesting that PP should maintain status quo. Also, it’s not me dictating how people play their models. Play with coins and scraps of paper for all I care. But painted minis generally enhance the experience for everyone at the table, so I am suggesting that PP retain said requirement in one of their tournament formats. As an asides PP already has pretty strict conversion rules. I like to do conversions, and I’ve run into issues where it is difficult or impossible to do a conversion I want and stay within the rules. PP already dictates how I play with my models; I can’t bring owlbear cavalry or too heavily converted models to tournaments. It’s not unreasonable for a company that goes so far as to specify the profile of the rim of your base to have a format that has painting requirements. Finally, I do offer painting advice to new players, help them figure out what to buy to get started, co-host hobby nights at an FLGS, produce hobby content for the internet, and have in the past helped people pin their models when they kept breaking on them. I don’t do commission painting for free (which is a ridiculous demand — how about you buy me a new army?), but I do my share of promoting the hobby aspect. First off, saying that painted minis 'generally enhance the experience' is a generalization. I know plenty of people who don't care for the painting aspect of the hobby at all, and would gladly play with empty bases and proxies if it was an option. Personally, I have no strong opinion on the painting status of my opponent's army, and the same goes for more than 50% of the people in my meta. Second, the current conversion/proxy rules serve a purpose. Base size regulations are important for maintaining consistency and accuracy in the game state - otherwise it would be possible to gain an in-game advantage by changing base size, especially since there are actual rules tied to base size. Restrictions on conversions and proxies have the twofold purpose of making it easier to identify models (making for a cleaner game) and allowing PP to continue making money (no miniature company is going to sanction use of home-made proxies in official tournaments, just from a business standpoint.) By contract, the only advantages offered by 'playing fully painted' are to the opponent (if they care about that) and (in theory) by making the game prettier and more attractive to new players (which is, again, debatable, as many new players find painting daunting). As for painting other players' models for free - I agree, it is ridiculous. About as ridiculous as it is to insist that another player paint their models to be able to compete, simply because you prefer playing against fully painted armies. In my opinion, if you're the one who wants to insist on playing fully painted against an ambivalent opponent, it's perfectly reasonable to expect you to undertake the burden of painting those models. You're the one getting the benefit out of their models being painted, after all. That's without even getting into the fact that painting requirements de facto discriminate against players with limited time to paint, and/or without the money to afford to commission someone else to do it. Most notably, younger players, newer players, students, people in less stable economic situations...all groups that are less likely to be able to meet painting requirements. Sure, you can argue that people in these situations shouldn't play (I would strongly disagree with that position, btw), but there's still no excuse to raise the already significant barriers to competitive play. As for maintaining the status quo...have you considered that maybe PP is trying to make their game more accessible? Seems like a laudable goal to me. |
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389 
|
Post by crimsyn on Mar 5, 2018 19:46:11 GMT
If you object to me saying that painted minis generally enhance the experience for all, then you should raise that issue with PP, not me, because that’s what it says in the Steamroller doc. Maybe you should have suggested in the CID that they remove that phrase and replace it when “painting is totally optional and not encouraged by PP, because it makes no difference.” I doubt they would have accepted that change though.
Second, the stuff you say about conversions is also relevant to painted models. Regarding base size, I’m not talking about diameter, I’m talking about profile — I can’t use bases with flat angles, or clear bases with straight sides, even if they are the right size (as an aside, try measuring PP bases sometime; the sizes are far from consistent).
Painted models are a lot easier to distinguish, even if they are not in a studio scheme. The simple act of painting different parts of a model different colours makes it much easier for the eye to pick out shapes. For example, I find it a lot easier to distinguish between IFP and Black dragons when they are painted because the slight differences in model shape stick out more. You object to my conversions because they can possibly cause confusion, but don’t object to fighting a blob of grey plastic or black primer where it is hard to make out what is what. I also go above and beyond, and paint very clear markings to show who is the leader, UA, etc. at a glance.
As for the business side, as a converter, I probably spend more per model than people who don’t convert — after all, many of my conversions are made of multiple models, so I have several models which represent two or three times the sales of the original model. Further, if we want to get back to the painting side of the equation, PP sells paints and hobby supplies, so a fully painted army will often represent a greater investment than an unpainted one when you factor in the use of PP paints, etc.
Finally, PP also wants to make their game more attractive. It’s why they pay people like Dallas Kemp to paint studio models and produce hobby content. That is also a laudable goal, and I feel like a good way to balance that goal with accessibility is to keep the status quo — no painting requirement most of the time, but certain formats retain one to cater to people who like painted armies and to encourage people to aspire to field painted armies.
|
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Mar 5, 2018 20:21:49 GMT
Painted models are a lot easier to distinguish, even if they are not in a studio scheme. The simple act of painting different parts of a model different colours makes it much easier for the eye to pick out shapes. For example, I find it a lot easier to distinguish between IFP and Black dragons when they are painted because the slight differences in model shape stick out more. You object to my conversions because they can possibly cause confusion, but don’t object to fighting a blob of grey plastic or black primer where it is hard to make out what is what. I also go above and beyond, and paint very clear markings to show who is the leader, UA, etc. at a glance. Quoted for truth. For the life of me I cannot imagine how people who don't paint models can reasonably play a mirror match. |
|
skormedlover87
Junior Strategist
Desperately searching for days off to game...
Posts: 517
|
Post by skormedlover87 on Mar 5, 2018 21:15:04 GMT
This seems like one of those intractable questions that plague humankind. Like "who am I", "why am I here", "what's the meaning of life" and of course "an African or European swallow?"
|
|
|
|
Post by dogganmguest on Mar 6, 2018 0:33:04 GMT
If you object to me saying that painted minis generally enhance the experience for all, then you should raise that issue with PP, not me, because that’s what it says in the Steamroller doc. PP says a lot of self-serving shit that isn't true. It doesn't matter. All that's needed to disprove a bogus claim is a counter-example, and you've seen that. There exist a non-negligible number of people for whom painted models do not enhance the experience in any way. Painted models are a lot easier to distinguish, even if they are not in a studio scheme. The simple act of painting different parts of a model different colours makes it much easier for the eye to pick out shapes. I can easily paint different coloured front arcs on the bases, and it doesn't depend on your eyesight being good enough to pick out small details on tiny plastic models across a table. My approach is more useful and accessible to more people, and no-one had to waste a large amount of their personal time doing something they didn't enjoy. |
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 6, 2018 0:59:15 GMT
crimsyn - of course PP 'encourages' painting - there is a subset of their fanbase that enjoys the hobby aspect of the game (hell, I'm one of them, I just happen to paint slowly, and not have a ton of time to paint period). promoting painting is one thing. It's part of the hobby, it expands their target market, and yes, helps them sell incidentals and hobby supplies. Promoting painting is just a smart business move. Excluding players because they don't enjoy that part of the hobby is something else entirely. It contracts the market to which their game appeals, and at the very least there's a tradeoff between 'gamers who will leave the game if there is no painting requirement' and 'potential gamers scared off by a painting requirement'. As to your other point...there is absolutely no requirement that my color scheme make my models easier to identify. If I want to paint every single model with silver armor, black cloth, and pink faces, with no detailing, that's still a 'painted model.' If I want to paint my black dragons red and my normal IFP black (or both black or both red) I can do that too. Similarly, there's nothing stopping me painting a feral warpwolf white and pureblood brown, or a winter argus brown and a normal argus white. The only thing that I think you can make a legitimate argument for having as a requirement in terms of painting is arc markings, and some way of differentiating units if you run multiples. Those things have the potential to actually affect the game, while virtually everything else is just your aesthetic preference. Warmachine is not a job. It is a hobby. Gamers should not be discouraged from engaging with that hobby because they're not playing it 'the right way' any more than I should disparage people that enjoy narrative play or non-steamroller scenarios. As for promoting the game...I'll do it my way, you do it yours, and how about we both acknowledge that we have no obligation whatsoever to give PP free marketing. They'll make the decisions that serve them best as a company, and I'll make the ones that I feel serve myself and my meta, thank you very much.
|
|
crimsyn
Junior Strategist
Posts: 389
|
Post by crimsyn on Mar 6, 2018 2:51:42 GMT
crimsyn - of course PP 'encourages' painting - there is a subset of their fanbase that enjoys the hobby aspect of the game (hell, I'm one of them, I just happen to paint slowly, and not have a ton of time to paint period). promoting painting is one thing. It's part of the hobby, it expands their target market, and yes, helps them sell incidentals and hobby supplies. Promoting painting is just a smart business move. Excluding players because they don't enjoy that part of the hobby is something else entirely. It contracts the market to which their game appeals, and at the very least there's a tradeoff between 'gamers who will leave the game if there is no painting requirement' and 'potential gamers scared off by a painting requirement'. Again, I'm not talking about excluding anyone, simply retaining the painting requirement that already exists on one of their formats. It feels like I'm saying "it would be nice if PP kept the painting requirement for one of their formats, so maybe once a year I can attend a fully painted tournament" and people are reading it as "I think anyone who pulls out an unpainted miniature outside of the privacy of their own home should be banned from playing Warmachine and have their army thrown in a wood chipper!" As to your other point...there is absolutely no requirement that my color scheme make my models easier to identify. If I want to paint every single model with silver armor, black cloth, and pink faces, with no detailing, that's still a 'painted model.' If I want to paint my black dragons red and my normal IFP black (or both black or both red) I can do that too. Similarly, there's nothing stopping me painting a feral warpwolf white and pureblood brown, or a winter argus brown and a normal argus white. The only thing that I think you can make a legitimate argument for having as a requirement in terms of painting is arc markings, and some way of differentiating units if you run multiples. Those things have the potential to actually affect the game, while virtually everything else is just your aesthetic preference. I'm not even talking about specific colour schemes. I don't follow studio schemes anyways. What I am referring to is the simple fact that painted models are easier to identify at a distance, because when you paint different parts of the model different colours, it's easier to distinguish. That silver armour, black cloth, and pink faces, even without detail, makes it easier for people to distinguish between models because each distinct element is a different colour, so it's easier for the eye to pick out shapes than on a big grey (or, god forbid, black primed) blob. For example, if I held up an unpainted Black Dragon and IFP shield 4' away from you, it would be a lot harder to tell them apart than if I held up these two shields, both with the shields painted blue with the logos painted white. I don't think anyone can argue with that? |
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Mar 6, 2018 8:54:06 GMT
"...waste a large amount of their personal time doing something they didn't enjoy."Large amount ? This excuse may have been legitimate 20+ years ago, but now with all the tricks like washes or textured paints or more you can paint a medium based solo in 8 minutes or a 10 man unit in an hour to a tabletop-worthy standard. Probably less time if you cut more corners. It means a full 75pts armycan be painted in one evening if you really want, or in just a few extremely short and rare sessions (like 30min once a week) over 2-3 months. So it's more of a question if you want to sacrifice a tiny amount of your time to improve the quality of the game for your opponent (and possibly yourself, if the "large amount of time" myth was the only thing discouraging you from having an, otherwise desired, properly looking army to play with) Or if you prefer to be the person who is responsible for lowering the bar of expectations when it comes to quality of the game.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Mar 6, 2018 9:18:00 GMT
"...waste a large amount of their personal time doing something they didn't enjoy."Large amount ? This excuse may have been legitimate 20+ years ago, but now with all the tricks like washes or textured paints or more you can paint a medium based solo in 8 minutes or a 10 man unit in an hour to a tabletop-worthy standard. Probably less time if you cut more corners. It means a full 75pts armycan be painted in one evening if you really want, or in just a few extremely short and rare sessions (like 30min once a week) over 2-3 months. So it's more of a question if you want to sacrifice a tiny amount of your time to improve the quality of the game for your opponent (and possibly yourself, if the "large amount of time" myth was the only thing discouraging you from having an, otherwise desired, properly looking army to play with) Or if you prefer to be the person who is responsible for lowering the bar of expectations when it comes to quality of the game. So, what if I want my army to look better than just slapping some wash on it, but I'm really bad at it and it takes me a long time? |
|
|
|
Post by oncomingstorm on Mar 6, 2018 9:27:40 GMT
"...waste a large amount of their personal time doing something they didn't enjoy."Large amount ? This excuse may have been legitimate 20+ years ago, but now with all the tricks like washes or textured paints or more you can paint a medium based solo in 8 minutes or a 10 man unit in an hour to a tabletop-worthy standard. Probably less time if you cut more corners. It means a full 75pts armycan be painted in one evening if you really want, or in just a few extremely short and rare sessions (like 30min once a week) over 2-3 months. So it's more of a question if you want to sacrifice a tiny amount of your time to improve the quality of the game for your opponent (and possibly yourself, if the "large amount of time" myth was the only thing discouraging you from having an, otherwise desired, properly looking army to play with) Or if you prefer to be the person who is responsible for lowering the bar of expectations when it comes to quality of the game. So, what if I want my army to look better than just slapping some wash on it, but I'm really bad at it and it takes me a long time? This. Just 'washing everything with Devlan Mud' produces really lazy-looking paintjobs. If you want your models to look good, you have to put the time into building up highlights and/or glazes. An hour for a unit is ludicrously low, unless you're literally just basecoating and washing them and calling it done. And even then, you're cutting it close if you're basecoating more than 3 primary colors onto the model. |
|
|
|
Post by dogganmguest on Mar 6, 2018 9:46:19 GMT
Large amount ? This excuse may have been legitimate 20+ years ago, but now with all the tricks like washes or textured paints or more you can paint a medium based solo in 8 minutes or a 10 man unit in an hour to a tabletop-worthy standard. Probably less time if you cut more corners. You can believe this if you want, but I say it's disingenuous. You did not gain the ability to paint well overnight. Every quick method, if the end result does not look like crap, takes practice and skill. Quite possibly practice and skill you've forgotten over the years you've put into doing this. Talking to new painters this way is like me telling everyone how easy it is to write assembly code; anyone can do it these days with access to the internet, hell I did it with three different architectures before the internet was even around. |
|
Cyel
Junior Strategist
Posts: 685
|
Post by Cyel on Mar 6, 2018 9:48:27 GMT
An hour for a unit is ludicrously low, unless you're literally just basecoating and washing them and calling it done. And even then, you're cutting it close if you're basecoating more than 3 primary colors onto the model. So you say the reason so many people always seem to play with an unpainted army is they want their army to look nice ? One would think they should get to having it painted at some point... An hour may seem "ludicrously low" until you actually try and it turns out it works. I also had to run an experiment on that, when I wanted to bust the myth of "wasting a large amount of one's time". The result:  The entire experiment: privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?258792-Quick-painting-experiment-vol-2&highlight=quick+painting+experimentAs for just washing, yes, it is also a legitimate way for havin an army done quickly. While it won't achieve any super spectacular results, it will still look infinitely better (and make models much easier to identify mid-game) than unpainted mass of plastic. The result of four 2-minute painting sessions, 8 minutes total, including basing. Note that models painted in such simple style, while not too impressive individually, will look much better in a context of an entire army with consistent basing and colour scheme:  The entire experiment: privateerpressforums.com/showthread.php?246071-Quick-painting-experimentI disagree there's any philosophy, talent, or effort to it - it's just applying wash with a big brush. |
|
