New Trends - Weathering and Battle Damage

[LunchBox]

I'm sure you've all noticed the painting hobby leaning itself toward heavy weathering, corrosion, and battle damage. While browsing 24 models in an online painting competition, I noticed about half of them were heavily weathered. So much so, that it made it hard to tell if the painter had any real skills. The realism is good at first glance, but a lot of these artists seem to be sacrificing proper shading, highlighting, blending, and lighting techniques. It's getting to the point where it's somewhat difficult to tell if the painter is a master artist, or a 4 year old.

 

My question to the community: Do you think this is being used in leu of learning basic techniques? Is this something people are starting to do to grab attention, rather than actually improve their painting skills?

 

I think it is. Not to say there aren't some fantastic weathered Marine models out there, but it's looking more and more like painters are saying, "I don't have to spend countless hours blending, shading and highlighting...a few scratches, and brown washes will mask my inabilities."

 

*Please note that I'm talking about "competition level" painting. Using these techniques to crank out a gritty looking army is a good idea, and not really where I'm going with this.

[jugglingfool]

I am on the fence on this one. Some people try to weather their Marines and they just look like they have been smeared with poo and tampons. Even some of the competition pieces look like that have been over weathered. I prefer a nice clean model, we are Marines and not Orks. Most of the fluff I have read says that Marines spend countless hours training and cleaning their armor. Yet many Marines are now taking the field like they have never heard of a towel.

 

However, some of the competition pieces have what I would consider the right balance of shading and highlighting that is supplemented by some really nice battle damage. I guess it is a case by case basis, but I will almost always lean towards a clean well blended paint job that I will never actually create myself. Because isn't that what a painting competition is all about seeing models painted by people that I sometimes doubt are truly human. Some of the battle damaged piece I get the feeling that I could come close to replicating. So I totaly see your point.

[battle captain corpus]

I would have to agree also. :D

 

Many of the minis I had the joy to see at this years UK GD08 had these effects also.

I feel it has its place certainly, some minis lend themselves very well to weathering, space marines done well this way are outstanding, but you are right...somepainters go a little wild.

 

I do favour "old school" minis myself to look at. Visually well crafted models where the painter has really put their heart into the blending and glazing still stand out as a real testament to skill.

Im no great painter myself, I churn out minis purely for table top quality and thats about it. But when I do paint i like to think I dont need all the jazz hands to show off. Carefull use of the basics wins hands down I think.

 

BCC ;)

[Iacton]

I know where/what you mean, Lunchbox :D

 

I agree strongly and disagree slightly. The use of weathering, done well, over/with high quality blending work more than has it's place. I mean that no-one would say that nano's Slayer Sword winning Iron Snake - LINK or Yellow One's Ancient Vasoudaeva - LINK aren't worthy of their praise for the extremely high level of skill and balance between weathering and detailing a model.

 

I have been guilty of over doing the weathering in the past, and to be honest, at the expense of some blending or detail work. However, I'm trying to redress that. I would be hesitant to produce a completely clean model - at least in the case of a marine - but not adverse to it - I recently did a completely clean farseer for the Eavy Metal facebook comp, for instance.

 

There is a strong trend towards making the models really grubby or tarnished right now, and it will end up being to the detriment of the final effect if it continues in such a fashion. The new GW washes and the accessibility of things like MiG pigments are possibly largely "to blame" here also.

 

Also, there is only so much impact that a "display" piece can convey if it looks like it has been dropped in the mud or left out in the rain until it goes rusty!

 

I really liked your entry for the comp by the way (except the slightly long arm ;) ) and your particular style of painting is something that I aspire to myself, so don't get disheartened.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I could stare at your models at lot longer than most of the models on that particular competition.

[Arschbombe]

Interesting take on the situation. I see the trend, I like it and I don't think it anything at all to do with people trying to mask flaws in their technique. I think it is a natural evolution of the hobby as GW makes more and more plastic kits.

 

As a relative newcomer to the GW hobby, but a long-time modeler, I found it curious that there is such a divide between the gaming hobbyists and the "regular" hobbyists, between the figure painters and the modelers. You see it in the product lines in the stores. Go to a gaming shop and you will find GW paints, Vallejo and maybe P3 or Reaper. Go to a model shop and you'll find Testors, Tamiya, Floquil, Lifecolor, MIG, Gunze and maybe Vallejos Model Air or Model Color. You see the divide on forums like these where people ask about which GW paint they should use to get a particular color, not realizing or caring that maybe they could get that exact shade from some other company. You see it in questions about whether enamel paints from Testors will eat their plastic models, or if using an airbrush is cheating.

 

The GW Hobby evolved in the figure painting world, not the modeling world and so the hobby has emphasized the techniques of that milieu. But as GW makes more and better plastic kits there crossover is occuring as people become exposed to the techniques of military modeling from magazines, books and websites. Weathering is a staple in that world because the modeler is not trying to achieve some standard of artistry, he is trying to accurately model something from history. His ultimate goal is realism, not beauty.

 

I think there is room for both pristine and weathered models in the hobby. Perhaps a pristine model makes it easier to appreciate the finer techniques of the art of figure painting, but I prefer the weathered models because to me that make the 40k universe come alive in all its glorious grimdarkness.

[CaptainForge]

Now I've been painting a long time, but can't really say I'm anywhere near the level of most of those here on the forums. But I do have years and years of experience looking at painted miniatures. And in my opinion I think the weathered, battle damage, rust is way over done lately. I have started doing some of the techniques myself, just to make up for my poor skills at blending, mixing paints. I recently found that if I rapidly paint some scrab red over chaos it gives the appearence of weathering and breaks up the all black/ silver look on weapons. I had accidently smudged a chainsword while attempting to reach a hard to get spot. I decided to come back later to fix it. But later it looked - more realistic like in the artwork and I thought "heck, I'll just leave it alone." But if you were to ask me to intentionally create a weathered look...I'd probably just say sloppily apply chest nut ink to your nicely painted model. Now battle damage looks ok if it's done with green stuff and is not over done. See the thing that many modellers forget is that Space Marines do take care of their armor, they polish it, take it to the armourer, get it repaired. In otherwords- a little damage goes a long way. IMHO.

[revmatt]

Its a point, well raised.

 

Personally I've seen weathering as a broadening of my skills rather than a replacement of the basics.

 

I'm trying it for the first time on a large scale recently (Iron hands test marine thread in the WIP forum HERE) but on the other hand I came second in the AoBR teminator contest with a mini that didn't use any weathering at all.

 

As with anything that is based on 'artistic creativity' I think that there will be natural progression and trends from within the hobby - weathering being such a trend. I always sigh fondly looking back over teh GW figures from when I first entered the hobby which had really bright vivid colours and goblin green ringed bases. Times have moved on since then and the trend towards weathering is just a stepping stone on the journey. At least thats how I see it.

 

For me, weathering is another challenge to master, another arrow in my quiver as it were. I think its important for us all to relish these challenges to make sure we keep improving our painting rather than flatline at one level and not progress.

 

rev

[Brother Adeon]

I think it's a matter of personal preference. Personally I don't like the 'parade ground' look for my armies. I also don't think that my marines should look like they just survived an orbital bombardment and a mud wrestling competition, but a bit of wear here and there adds to the realism.

 

I love the artwork in the rule books and codices and those marines look pretty beat up sometimes. Usually all the weathering I do on my marines is to make the exhausts on the backpacks a little dirty, along with the meltagun barrels. Also I put some mud stains on the boots and bottom of the greaves and cloaks.

 

On another note, I really really like the way that forgeworld paints its minis. Those things are hashed up but I like it, but not for marines.

 

Weathering is a skill just like shading and highlighting. If it's done badly it can really mess up a paint job. But if it's done with patience and love it can add a lot to the artistic value of a miniature.

[Skoby]

When done well I reckon it can be amazing, Iacton your Imperial Fists Veteran is phenominal and you've used the effect well on several of your more recent pieces, when it's done to that standard along with other techniques then I reckon it can make a really good display piece. I don't like it when lesser skilled painters just dab some black on and then a bit of boltgun... that method works well on orks and not a lot else! Basically in moderation it can really give charactor, there is such a thing as too much tho. Especially a guy in my store, his captain has scratches and bullet holes everywhere... yet somehow about 10 purity seals are pristine, and his cape is perfectly clean! Personally I don't have the confidence, I feel I could easily ruin an otherwise decent (at least from a distance :lol:) paintjob and since I collect imperial fists, it can be pretty hard to cover up mistakes seamlessly.

[Vaaish]

I see weathering as a path just like blending an highlighting. I tend not to use it much myself, but I have started playing with simple boltgun chipping and rusting in my epic figures before attempting to transition it to 40k. Many times it gives an instant "cool" factor and realism when added. It's like any technique, too much or poor execution can kill the effect of the piece.

[HIMSA]

Personally, I think some well executed weathering help convey a sense of realism and scale far greater than that of multiple stage blending and highlights.

 

I've never been a fan of the OTT airbrush art look... The miniatures themselves are detailed enough now...

[Swordlord]

I think it entirely depends on the final result. If the battle damage and rough-hewn look seems just plain muddy, then it's probably best for that painter to return to the basics and get better. If the result is finely executed, and looks true to scale and imagery, then it's a technique done well -- no better nor worse than the trend of the past few years of using layering to produce a metallic effect, rather than using actual metallic paints.

 

Skill will tell all. If you look at a weathered/beaten/bloodied mini, and say to yourself, "Wow! He's been through the meat grinder!" -- then that painter has achieved the desired effect, don't you think? On the other hand, if you examine a mini painted that way and say, "It looks blotchy, and the shading is really off, and etc, etc, etc" -- then your concern is well-founded for that painter in particular.

 

This is all imho, of course.

[LunchBox]

I know where/what you mean, Lunchbox :lol:

 

I agree strongly and disagree slightly. The use of weathering, done well, over/with high quality blending work more than has it's place. I mean that no-one would say that nano's Slayer Sword winning Iron Snake - LINK or Yellow One's Ancient Vasoudaeva - LINK aren't worthy of their praise for the extremely high level of skill and balance between weathering and detailing a model.

 

I have been guilty of over doing the weathering in the past, and to be honest, at the expense of some blending or detail work. However, I'm trying to redress that. I would be hesitant to produce a completely clean model - at least in the case of a marine - but not adverse to it - I recently did a completely clean farseer for the Eavy Metal facebook comp, for instance.

 

There is a strong trend towards making the models really grubby or tarnished right now, and it will end up being to the detriment of the final effect if it continues in such a fashion. The new GW washes and the accessibility of things like MiG pigments are possibly largely "to blame" here also.

 

Also, there is only so much impact that a "display" piece can convey if it looks like it has been dropped in the mud or left out in the rain until it goes rusty!

 

I really liked your entry for the comp by the way (except the slightly long arm :( ) and your particular style of painting is something that I aspire to myself, so don't get disheartened.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and I could stare at your models at lot longer than most of the models on that particular competition.

 

Iacton...you're not really the "weather to cover" type...your stuff is more weather to enhance...and that's a GOOD thing.

 

*Also, glad you liked my entry...if I spoke Russian, I'd rail on my own mini for the stupid arm from hell, and the crappy face I repainted 3 times. The face still sucks...and faces are my trademark!

Its a point, well raised.

 

Personally I've seen weathering as a broadening of my skills rather than a replacement of the basics.

 

I'm trying it for the first time on a large scale recently (Iron hands test marine thread in the WIP forum HERE) but on the other hand I came second in the AoBR teminator contest with a mini that didn't use any weathering at all.

 

As with anything that is based on 'artistic creativity' I think that there will be natural progression and trends from within the hobby - weathering being such a trend. I always sigh fondly looking back over teh GW figures from when I first entered the hobby which had really bright vivid colours and goblin green ringed bases. Times have moved on since then and the trend towards weathering is just a stepping stone on the journey. At least thats how I see it.

 

For me, weathering is another challenge to master, another arrow in my quiver as it were. I think its important for us all to relish these challenges to make sure we keep improving our painting rather than flatline at one level and not progress.

 

rev

 

Agreed...but I think some painters out there are relying on it because they've flatlined...and they will not grow.

[Brother Plasticard]

Agreed...but I think some painters out there are relying on it because they've flatlined...and they will not grow.

True, that or they might be aspiring painters wanting to cut corners. I find that many painters don't take the time to apply paint on their miniatures that well, and often quickly throw on a bunch of 'damage/weathering' to either cover up or add 'realism' which is often OTP.

 

Cheers!

[LunchBox]

Agreed...but I think some painters out there are relying on it because they've flatlined...and they will not grow.

True, that or they might be aspiring painters wanting to cut corners. I find that many painters don't take the time to apply paint on their miniatures that well, and often quickly throw on a bunch of 'damage/weathering' to either cover up or add 'realism' which is often OTP.

 

Cheers!

 

Exactly...not to say all weatherers are like this...the two in the links above show how effective it can be to enhance a mini...not dominate it.

 

By the way...what does "OTP" mean?

[elijahdprophet]

I'm guilty of using weathering to cover for a lack of time spent on a mini. I am a fair to midland painter, I like to think so at least, and I only do it on my tac squads from AoBR. I know they don't look as good as they should, but I prefer to send the bulk of my painting time on more 'fun' minis like my custom Sterngurd or HQ units.

[LunchBox]

I'm guilty of using weathering to cover for a lack of time spent on a mini. I am a fair to midland painter, I like to think so at least, and I only do it on my tac squads from AoBR. I know they don't look as good as they should, but I prefer to send the bulk of my painting time on more 'fun' minis like my custom Sterngurd or HQ units.

 

 

That's not bad though, since you're going for an effect on an army. I guess what I'm trying to get at is that it makes me sick seeing people burst their pants when they see a heavily weathered model, and they themselves lack the painting skills to realize the difference between a good model, and a no talent hack.

 

Oh...Iacton...I saw your model too..good job, mate. I think you know what I mean with this thread. Entry 1 getting all those tens...makes me want to barf.

[Perry T]

OTP means over the top i think

[lmyrick]

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that it makes me sick seeing people burst their pants when they see a heavily weathered model, and they themselves lack the painting skills to realize the difference between a good model, and a no talent hack.

 

I don't know if you meant it that way, but that comes off as more than a bit elitist. I'm new to painting space marines, and don't have the skill and experience to paint the top-notch models the way you or some others on this fine board do, but I nevertheless have an eye for what I consider good modeling and painting and weak modeling and painting.

 

To your original point, I do think weathering is sometimes overdone, and I think it works best when done in moderation, unless one is going for a middle-of-the-swamp, mid-battle, utter carnage look, which can also be well done and interesting, though I wouldn't want a whole army like that I don't think.

[Iacton]

Oh...Iacton...I saw your model too..good job, mate. I think you know what I mean with this thread. Entry 1 getting all those tens...makes me want to barf.

 

Thanks Lunch, and yes, I know exactly what you mean :rolleyes:

The other Lamenter which was heavily weathered but in a really distinct "cartoony" style was excellent, the other was an exercise in how much GW wash could go on a model, really.

 

Also on lymrick's point, it isn't a point of being elitist at all. The initial statement that to field a force of weathered models to a theme is fine and more than acceptable, it is when producing competition standard pieces that the debate is opened up.

After all, the vast majority of competition pieces are done as a stand alone model, vehicle or squad.

Then, in competition, it should be a contest of skill and composition, not who can paint the most dirty looking model - Nurgle possibly excepted. ;)

[LunchBox]

Oh...Iacton...I saw your model too..good job, mate. I think you know what I mean with this thread. Entry 1 getting all those tens...makes me want to barf.

 

Thanks Lunch, and yes, I know exactly what you mean :D

The other Lamenter which was heavily weathered but in a really distinct "cartoony" style was excellent, the other was an exercise in how much GW wash could go on a model, really.

 

Also on lymrick's point, it isn't a point of being elitist at all. The initial statement that to field a force of weathered models to a theme is fine and more than acceptable, it is when producing competition standard pieces that the debate is opened up.

After all, the vast majority of competition pieces are done as a stand alone model, vehicle or squad.

Then, in competition, it should be a contest of skill and composition, not who can paint the most dirty looking model - Nurgle possibly excepted. :D

 

*Here's Iacton, rolling a cover-save for me... :P

 

I guess what I'm trying to get at is that it makes me sick seeing people burst their pants when they see a heavily weathered model, and they themselves lack the painting skills to realize the difference between a good model, and a no talent hack.

 

I don't know if you meant it that way, but that comes off as more than a bit elitist. I'm new to painting space marines, and don't have the skill and experience to paint the top-notch models the way you or some others on this fine board do, but I nevertheless have an eye for what I consider good modeling and painting and weak modeling and painting.

 

To your original point, I do think weathering is sometimes overdone, and I think it works best when done in moderation, unless one is going for a middle-of-the-swamp, mid-battle, utter carnage look, which can also be well done and interesting, though I wouldn't want a whole army like that I don't think.

 

For those of you unfortunate souls who know me personally, you know I'm a little "different". I'm kind of an a-hole, and I have little patience for stupidity, nor do I hide that disdain well. Lmyrick...this is NOT intended as a shot at you...just so that's clear. You are correct in your connotation that my response was in fact snarky, and snobbish. I feel I am justified in this response, but not because I'm "so good", or "better than everyone else"; I am certainly not. Many painters I know personally, and here on the B&C work their butts off to achieve excellence. This is true with me. I work very hard to attain a level of perfection that I have not yet realized. I have come so far, and have so far to go. What irks me, is when "Joe-Gamer" judges 2 miniatures, and gushes over the lack-of-talent weathered model, and ignores the artistic qualities of a real model, painted by someone who actually has a clue. Before anyone gets all excited, this is not in reference to any of my work...I'm discussing the general trend.

 

When I was a body builder and power lifter, I was very cocky, and confident. I knew that everything I had accomplished was due to hard work, and dedication. I had little patience for those idiots that "juiced" <used steroids> because it was a short cut, and did not make them better in any real way. So, people would look at those goons, and say wow, when those of us who actually accomplished something were not given proper recognition.

 

I hope that makes sense. I am an elitist. I proudly belong to a select group of painters who's accomplishments are not indicated by awards or trophies. Our mark on the painting community is our thirst for knowledge, and quest for excellence. We would rather grow, than show. We want to learn, as well as teach. None of us are at the same level. None of us are the best. Those who feel they are the best are not part of our group.

[GAR]

For those of you unfortunate souls who know me personally, you know I'm a little "different". I'm kind of an a-hole, and I have little patience for stupidity, nor do I hide that disdain well. Lmyrick...this is NOT intended as a shot at you...just so that's clear. You are correct in your connotation that my response was in fact snarky, and snobbish. I feel I am justified in this response, but not because I'm "so good", or "better than everyone else"; I am certainly not. Many painters I know personally, and here on the B&C work their butts off to achieve excellence. This is true with me. I work very hard to attain a level of perfection that I have not yet realized. I have come so far, and have so far to go. What irks me, is when "Joe-Gamer" judges 2 miniatures, and gushes over the lack-of-talent weathered model, and ignores the artistic qualities of a real model, painted by someone who actually has a clue. Before anyone gets all excited, this is not in reference to any of my work...I'm discussing the general trend.

 

When I was a body builder and power lifter, I was very cocky, and confident. I knew that everything I had accomplished was due to hard work, and dedication. I had little patience for those idiots that "juiced" <used steroids> because it was a short cut, and did not make them better in any real way. So, people would look at those goons, and say wow, when those of us who actually accomplished something were not given proper recognition.

 

I hope that makes sense. I am an elitist. I proudly belong to a select group of painters who's accomplishments are not indicated by awards or trophies. Our mark on the painting community is our thirst for knowledge, and quest for excellence. We ould rather grow, than show. We want to learn, as well as teach. None of us are at the same level. None of us are the best. Those who feel they are the best are not part of our group.

 

 

OK so HOWDY.

 

I don't see weathering as the only way of making/taking shortcuts. Its just another means to an end.

 

I liken it to the insanity of SENMM that had for so many years dominated anything that was deemed worthwhile.

 

Still, the way I see it is crap is crap and it will always show as such to those who know what they are looking at.

 

The uninformed or uninitiated will not get it or see it for what it is and getting upset about it really doesn't do any good.

 

For the most part Lunchbox, I completely agree with you. Shortcuts and tricks is crap, but so many wannabes will use them and then tell us how awesome they are cuase they know a much better faster way. Rubbish.

 

Sure this sounds elitists and snobbish. Sure I sound like a complete ego maniac. But hard work and the results it brings are in of itself it's own reward. I am content with that.

 

Now of course I don't much care too much about the results of local competitions. There was a time when I was really bothered by not wining them or not doing as well as I thought I should and I was beat out by clearly lesser figures/entries.

 

And then a funny thing happened at two of them.

 

In one instance, I lost a contest because the judges thought I did not put enough effort into my entry and even though mine was the best of all of the entries, I was placed at all. They flat out told me since "they knew I could do better" that I did not deserve to win. GO figure, my own reputation as a painter beat me.

 

The second example was another contest where another model beat mine out because the judges liked his decals better than my freehand. Seriously... They guy that was the winner was as excited as he could be that he had finally beat me, but in reality, the stupidity of the judges beat me.

 

So for the most part I don't worry too much about local contests because more often than not the judges are not very skilled at judging or know what to look for. Sometimes they like splatered on poo and other stuff in an almost catoony manner. I don't care about that kind of judge or contest.

 

I worry about Games Days, the Reapercons, Gen cons and others where the judges know what they are looking at and more importantly what it takes to get those results.

 

I mean after all, if you know what you did and how hard you worked to get those results and set of skills, who cares what everyne else is doing.

 

Still, I appreciate your posotion. I do at times find myself part of the lesser known artists who strive for perfection and work to achieve this.

 

I find the most irksome thing is when I get lectured at length by some moron who sdays his technique is way than any Golden Demon winner and how he does not bother with " those kinds of contests" because they are rigged or it is who yo know or whether you are frineds with the judges or any number of innane excuses as to why they won't put their money where their mouth is.

 

ANyhoo, I guess this turned into an all around rant, sorry bout that. But my point is I really don't care what other people do try and find shortcuts. I don't care what the current trends are. I have my style and my vision of where I want to be and I keep working towards it. SOmetimes I get recognized for it, other times I don't, but I don't let that distract me from what I want to achieve.

 

Which is I think the same as you, to win a Sword. Hopefully more than one, be here in the US or abroad.

 

Yeah, I dream big, but is my dream. :)

[LunchBox]

I know what you mean. As far as myself and contests are concerned, I try my best. Of the awards I've won, I only feel I earned one of them, and that was this year. The other ones, I got lucky. So, I'm not really concerned with it from a "big" contest point of view. I'm more concerned with the community at large being somewhat misled into thinking this is an acceptable way to avoid learning more complicated or time consuming techniques. I don't really care too much what people favor, or what the little contests across the globe bring about. I realize that some of the voting and judging public resembles the zit-faced 14 year old that plays his cheese-list army...half of which isn't even primered.

 

Again, this is not an anti-weathering post. Look at Mathieu's dread, Comanse's Rhino, and Hudon's Tau flyer thingie from GD Chicago this year. All of them used weathering as a means to enhance their entries, and they were breathtakingly effective, as are the linked images in an earlier post.

 

Since we're discussing trends...NMM: I personally use it on most of my stuff, but I still work with metallics. I favor NMM because I'm not a strong painter with metallics. But, half of my contest entries throughout a year will be with metallics, as a means to test myself, and force me to be a more well rounded painter.

[GAR]

Oh, don't get me wrong. I don't have a problem with NMM, I use it myself if I think the model itself will benefit from it.

 

What I was getting at, and it is along the same line as you weathering topic, is that for a years SENMM was on everything, and the vast majority of it was done very badly. But painters were doing it because it was easier to paint blue and brown with a white line inbetween than it was to try and do correct highlighting and shading.

 

Eventually people gave it up and began to work on real technique, or just stopped trying to be pro-painters. LOL.

 

I myself continue to struggle with realism in my figures. I know I can paint well, but I am not where I consider myself "on par" with the more notable painters.

 

Still I consider it an effort worth working on so I keep on keepin' on. I share what I have learned over the years in hopes of building up the community here in Texas and with whomever online has an interest.

 

Weathering is one of those things that I think is pretty hard to do well, and more often than not I find it is done like a bad Japanese Anime, over the top and with too much blood. ;)

[Pants]

So, I read this thread. And its a great discussion. I'll add my two cents to it.

 

In our group I'm referred to as "The Artificer." I can model a bit, I can paint a bit and I take my time to make stuff look phenomenal. I also bust out great looking stuff (not awesome looking, just great) in record time. It takes me one night to paint an HQ well. I painted a space marine army completely and they were clean cut, no damage on them. Since I am rebuilding and doing another 3 armies, I decided that I'd do something a bit different with each. I am doing my Salamanders to look like they've been fighting. I am painting them up to look like they have been at war. The tanks have mud on the tracks, some chips, broken armor plates. The marines' armor isn't quite as pristine as when they first set out. They'll be clean, but gritty.

 

Now, what this helps me do is go "oh, I made a mistake trying to get this shoulderpad to look right. I can cover that with a bit of battle damage." This is not to say that I will do this for each and every mistake I make, but if the model is nearly done and I slip up with the brush over a part that took time, especially on a display piece... I may just add some damage to it because it would save time over trying to go back and reblend/touchup that part.