Would you find this acceptable at your gaming group/table?

[the jeske]

On the berzerker issue, why not get some cool MkIII models from GW and the World Eaters upgrade kit from FW and make some amazing looking berzerkers?

 

 

Because it costs more money then someone finds it worth it, and considering an avarge WE army is going to need between 24-30+ chain axs you may as well tell someone to recast. Imagine someone told you that to play with tacticals you have to order their bolters from FW [and you have to deal with the normal FW problems of bad resin, flesh, extra tax in some countries etc].

[gideon stargreave]

I think we should be clear in this discussion, that buying from recasters is not in fact stealing on your part, and is not a federal crime in the US.

There is a lot of moralising going on here that should be left at home

[Iron Father Ferrum]

This is why I avoid pick up games.

 

as an aside. Every single model in my army is converted to be a mighty hero, so there are axes and swords and spears and shields and banners and so on all over the place. Lots of them are based on box and codex cover artwork. For me to use my army, a lot of counts as has to take place.

"all of these are tactical marines. The guy with the banner is the sergeant"

"all the sergeants have power fists and bolt pistols." 

" None of these special weapons are actually special weapons"

"The army has taken the black, sacrifice through rage, everything is death company"

 

Would you rather play my painstakingly converted army, or unpainted WYSIWYG?

 

Would you play the Iron Sleet Rout? Even if every time they had to use different rules for the same models?

 

 

Link to an old thread here if you want to know what I mean in general

 

http://www.bolterandchainsword.com/topic/325952-unification/

 

 

I'd rather play unpainted WYSIWYG than an army that has a dozen or more "This model is actually armed with X, not Y" proxies.  At least I know what I'm looking at.

[the jeske]

When first table top w40k mini store opend in Moscov, the first thing we always did. Was open the new boxs that just came, make new molds, print new armies. And the only thing that changed from that time is that, the recasters got better, the resin is better and the tech is good enough for people not just to make stuff for themselfs, but to sell it too. In the end it does matter if someone scults them alone, buys them from a 3ed party or FW. If you have something basic in your army, and you use a lot of it AND your army is in general not that good, asking people to pay extra money to get those [in case] chain axs, may not be an argument accepted by all. Specially when counts as exists. And it is not like people aren't playing marines without any weapons[or even arms], because they are "preping them to be painted".

 

I'd rather play unpainted WYSIWYG than an army that has a dozen or more "This model is actually armed with X, not Y" proxies.  At least I know what I'm looking at.

 

 

I mean I get it, but one would have to totaly oblivious to what meta game is played by different factions to not know [to again use the zerker example] that the zerkers are going to run with swords and axs. In fact I would probably be more suprised, if they were run with pistols [and then yes, it would be nice to be told about it, if the zerkers somehow are not WYSIWYG].

[Dragonlover]

Re: the Berserkers. What are they armed with? Why do you want to run them with something else?

It's a mishmash. Twin pistol, axe and pistol, sword and pistol and twin sword/axe are all in there. As is fence post and pistol and bare hands because of breakages.

 

I won't lie, I'm using the sword/axe combo because it's effective. Similarly, I converted four melta bikes in 7th to have the gun on the bike. Now I run them on the dudes, but you can sod off if you think I'm swapping them back to the guys. Again, that's a combination of effectiveness and, frankly, an unwillingness to paint another four bikers. Even if a new kit dropped tomorrow.

 

To put this in perspective btw, my other list is chosen with loads of combis. I've been proxying it with non-combi versions but finally got my hands on the FW weapon packs. Once I get hold of some compatible arms, I'll be making them WYSIWYG.

 

Dragonlover

[Adeptus]

I won't lie, I'm using the sword/axe combo because it's effective. 

 

If someone has armd their berserkers with chainaxe and boltpistols, but wants to use them with chainaxe and chainsword, then IMO they need to convert their models. Counting your boltpistols as chainswords just because you like the rules better isn't cool, IMO. I'd play someone who did it, I wouldn't refuse the game, but I'd prefer if they just used the rules for the equipment their models are carrying.

 

I've currently got three Inquisitors in Power Armour that can't actually take power armour any more. So to use those models I HAVE to proxy. I think if you have legacy models that don't work in the rules any more then you've got a freer rein to count them as something else, although I think there's still an obligation to keep them as close to theme as possible. But just outright using one type of model as another type, just because the other type is better under the new rules kinda grinds my gears, I'm not going to lie.

[Olis]

I think we should be clear in this discussion, that buying from recasters is not in fact stealing on your part, and is not a federal crime in the US.

 

There is a lot of moralising going on here that should be left at home

 

As far as UK law goes, if I remember it right, recasting models or parts yourself for personal use is fine. Absolutely fine. There is nothing that can be legally done about it. Doing it and then selling it definitely is not fine. You'll get a C&D if you're lucky. You'll be prosecuted if not. Buying it from someone else? I'm less sure. I'm under the impression the buyer is not breaking the law here but I could be wrong. Anyone with actual knowledge of this area (someone from the legal profession) would be helpful in clearing that point up. ^_^

 

As always, B&C does not encourage or condone the sale of recast miniatures. 

[Ishagu]

I actually know someone who was taken to court by GW for buying Chinese casts and re-selling them!

 

 

Going back to modelling:

 

 

This is an expensive hobby. I don't think any of us are under an illusion.

 

If you're in this hobby but keeping it cheap is a top priority then perhaps it's time to look at something new? I don't meant that in an offensive way - it's just an unpleasant reality. I've pointed out that games like X-wing are ultimately no cheaper if you want to be competitive - the meta changes with every new wave, and FAQs are known to invalidate entire list combinations.

 

Lets say a new edition or codex is release that changes the weapon balance. A weapon you had equipped on your squads in the last edition is no longer as much of an optimal choice. At what point do you decide to change your models? A month in? A year in? Do you decide not change them at all? Well, after a year of proxies I don't think it's unfair for someone to call you up on it. You have to decide to make due with an inferior choice or re-model your squad's weapons.

[Holier Than Thou]

On the berzerker issue, why not get some cool MkIII models from GW and the World Eaters upgrade kit from FW and make some amazing looking berzerkers?

 

You've proxied for a long time, I'd just say no. We're talking about a few Marines here - not a large financial commitment, and they certainly won't take long to paint.

Just as an example of why I can understand people not wanting to replace models they've had for years. I bought Imperium Index 2, decided to add a new Inquisitor to my collection and went to the effort of converting him to have a Plasma Pistol and Stormbolter, not an overpowered combo but something I thought would look cool. Approximately 3-4 weeks later, the FAQ removed this as an option. That's less than a month after releasing a new ruleset allowing it as an option.

 

And I have personally replaced almost my entire army before, replacing 40 metal Grey Knights in Power Armour with the new (at the time) plastics.

[Slave to Darkness]

So what if someone turns up with Space Wolves armed with spear and shields?

[Adeptus]

So what if someone turns up with Space Wolves armed with spear and shields?

 

Like, just full on using plastic vikings from Gripping Beast?

[Dragonlover]

Ishagu, I'm glad you have the privilege of just dropping hobby cash at the drop of a hat. I don't, this stuff has to be planned. Now how about you climb down from your high horse eh?

 

Dragonlover

[Slave to Darkness]

 

So what if someone turns up with Space Wolves armed with spear and shields?

 

Like, just full on using plastic vikings from Gripping Beast?

 

No proper Astartes armed with said weapons. Someone in the Wolf threads did some last year I think it was. 

[Adeptus]

Ishagu's language can sometimes be a bit... evocative I guess.

 

But IMO it comes down to "Why not just use the models as they're armed?" and the answer is almost invariably "Because if I use this other equipment, I stand a better chance of winning".

 

So when a person refuses to use their models as armed, and instead counts them as the 'better' equipment option, they're basically saying they think that improving their chances of winning is more important than being polite and consistent for their opponent. 

 

 

So what if someone turns up with Space Wolves armed with spear and shields?

 

Like, just full on using plastic vikings from Gripping Beast?

 

No proper Astartes armed with said weapons. Someone in the Wolf threads did some last year I think it was. 

 

 

That actually sounds really cool. I'm having images of stormsields and 'power lances' made from GK halberds.

[Dantay VI]

That would be me

 

Was athematic choice as I wanted a bit of a viking shieldwall look, but hey all have their boltguns too, so they are legal. I also put the spears in the rear ranks so as not to interfere with charge ranges etc

 

Hidden Content

20170216_203817 by Danny Taylor, on Flickr

[Slave to Darkness]

A lot of my Wolves have shields, playing against regular opponents/mates Ill explain that the shields on my Bloodclaws are just decoration etc and talk them through my force so they understand whats what. If its not a regular or a random pick up game Ill use my 'alt' list and just run the entire army as Wolf Guard so everything is easier for the other guy. 

That would be me

 

Was athematic choice as I wanted a bit of a viking shieldwall look, but hey all have their boltguns too, so they are legal. I also put the spears in the rear ranks so as not to interfere with charge ranges etc

 

Hidden Content

20170216_203817 by Danny Taylor, on Flickr

 :wub: :wub: :wub:  Beautiful aint they

[Brother Captain Sirus]

While i think Ishagu's comment may be a little harsh, i think playing with what you have is generally a more pleasing game, for example i have loved plasma weaponary for years and countless times lost marines to a plasma overheat super nova, and now for the first edition in years plasma weaponry is top choice so my army has gained a boost.

I have never chased metas or online power lists as its the easiest way to invalidate your army between editions, and i have nothing against those that do this, but after a couple of edition changes your left fighting against proxy armies because players dont want to plough more money in to having a wysiwyg army, or they are ripping their collection to pieces to arm them with the new flavour of the month. Now the latter is fine if they have the time a patience to do so but it does lead to sometimes fighting an army with no arms on a few poor souls.

So the best advice i'd give to anyone in this hobby is make an army armed in a way that you like and eventually those weapons will be the best, it may mean waiting for 10 years but atleast you'll like your army and not feel robbed when grav weapons are no longer auto include.

And at the end of the day everyone in this thread and on B&C as a whole knows that everyone can do whatever they like creatively in this hobby, but when it comes to games each member has their own standards and tolerance of what they will accept, which is fine as long as they approach the subject pleasantly at the gaming table.

[Dantay VI]

I do like them

 

I will say in 40K, I would run this unit as Wolg Guard with Storm shields, bot guns and power weapons, to keep them as wysiwyg as possible.

 

If I ever get a game of 30K I would use them as breachers, just ignore the CC weapons.

 

However if someone was reallyunhappy, then I would consider making them Grey Slayers as they can be armed as per Wolf Guard (I think).

 

Its swings and roundabouts.

 

Recently I had my first game of 40K. I used my friends SW army, and we played power levels. Because of this he offered me the option to run the TWC at maximum carnage levels (shields and hammers) against his necrons. I opted to keep them Wysiwyg, as I did not want the hassle of remembering what was what, even if it put me at a disadvantage.

 

I play to have fun (when I get the chance to play).

[Arkangilos]

All I can say is that I'm not going to remodel my entire army just to use different loadouts in different games if I feel like it.

[Mileposter]

Lets say a new edition or codex is release that changes the weapon balance. A weapon you had equipped on your squads in the last edition is no longer as much of an optimal choice. At what point do you decide to change your models? A month in? A year in? Do you decide not change them at all? Well, after a year of proxies I don't think it's unfair for someone to call you up on it. You have to decide to make due with an inferior choice or re-model your squad's weapons.

 

This is a question I've actually enjoyed pondering since this and the other thread came up. It raises two follow up questions.

 

Firstly, why do they have to change them? Not why do you think they should, why is it required? "Call you up on it" suggests that someone who hasn't changed them is doing something wrong. There is a fair difference between "I only have fun in WYSIWYG games" and "If your models aren't WYSIWYG you aren't playing the game right". This question seems to suggest that latter.

 

And second, where is the line drawn on acceptable exception? What if the player in question doesn't have the skill to perform said conversion to the new weapon? What if it is one of those models in a position where changing that weapon means cutting off half the chest? What if the change is not because the weapon is no longer optimal, but the option to take it simply no longer exists? What if it's simply someone who is busy enough that they have to choose between crafting or playing?

 

Now, I'm ambitious. If a new release drastically changed my troops in that manner? I'm up to the challenge of converting! The only exception for myself is if it was an army I did a lot of modeling and basing work with, I might actively decide to leave them as is from an artistic point and not risk destroying my work. But if it's a hardly noticeable change to begin with - like the Eldar bikes now being more optimal with Shuriken Cannons instead of Scatter Lasers - bring it on!

[Slave to Darkness]

What about Cultists armed with black powder weapons? They aint Autoguns/Pistols... 

[Interrogator-Chaplain Ezra]

I was playing today at my FLGS at another table when I heard a bit of a kerfuffle behind me at another table.

 

One of the newer players was playing Death Guard. No problems with that. But what started a pretty long and fairly serious fight was what he brought as his army.

 

He brought little plastic green army men to "count as" his Poxwalkers. His other models were not fully assembled and none were painted. The veterans there were either amused, angry or outraged that someone was bringing sixty green army men to "count as" any GW model.

 

The guy he was scheduled to play refused to play him and no one there was willing to play him. I was busy with my own game and had to go to work after that game finished. I hate seeing a relatively new player being chastised to the degree he was but I can understand why no one would want to play that.

 

Have you guys had something like this happen to you before? Do you think it is too much to ask others to play against something like that?

Did they ask beforehand? Like, say, when we agreed to play a game, did they mention that they were going to use some stand-ins? If so, go right ahead. I'd just like to know ahead of time.

 

Did they spring it out while setting up? A frown, a bit of snark, and I'd mark them as someone to not play without asking some questions before agreeing to play them.

 

Of course, this is dependent on the FLGS owner not having an issue with it.

[Brother Captain Sirus]

In many respects this discussion highlights the doublesided nature of having customisation within tabletop wargames and what the game was originally designed to be.

40k has always had more flexibility than armies in other game systems and while this has led to many amazing models and armies being created, that i couldnt make in my wildest dreams, it can lead to confusion on the tabletop, on the flipside it has also lead to situations like the OP where some take a this will do approach, and while a plastic army man on a base fills the criteria of a model on a base for use in game, does it actually work within the rules? Honest answer no, why? Because of line of sight, if your model is of taller scale both you and your opponent will have LOS more often, as you can see them over walls that no cadian could hope to see over, which in turn means they can see you.

Overall everyone will be willing to accept different levels of divergance within the game, but if you arent happy with someones army you can politely decline to play and leave it at that, no harm no foul

[the jeske]

 

I actually know someone who was taken to court by GW for buying Chinese casts and re-selling them!

I got a C&D from GW for mass producing lemman russ turrets. Even if the turrets were not made by me .I was making the bikes, in times when bikes sucked and were sold in one bike squads :)

 

 

I've pointed out that games like X-wing are ultimately no cheaper if you want to be competitive - the meta changes with every new wave, and FAQs are known to invalidate entire list combinations.

 

In which edition?  The cost of books for w40k in 7th ed was higher then 2 armies for X-wing. For infinity you can get 2 armies for less then 400$. Tournament lists for w40k go way past 800/900$ mark and it was even more in 7th ed[because of the multiple books you needed to play armies].

 

Lets say a new edition or codex is release that changes the weapon balance. A weapon you had equipped on your squads in the last edition is no longer as much of an optimal choice. At what point do you decide to change your models? A month in? A year in? Do you decide not change them at all? Well, after a year of proxies I don't think it's unfair for someone to call you up on it. You have to decide to make due with an inferior choice or re-model your squad's weapons.

 

Only chainswords/ax for zerkers are like bolters for marines, basic gear. there should be enough of them to arm a squad with them. this is not the case of some using Rocket launchers as grav cannons in 7th.  So no it is not a good thing to force people to pay for upgrade packs to old models that look bad, and if they get updated in the future[which in case of csm it is an if, unlike with loyalist marines you play], its more less forcing someone else to pay for the same unit twice. It stinks of elitism at worse, and is loyalist sm skew point of view at best.

[Bulwyf]

As long as I have a list to show my opponent what unit has what that should satisfy any reasonable (imo) fellow gamer. I'm not about to tear off arms or load outs for models every time I play a game. Most of my models are WYSIWYG but not all of them. I don't think it is reasonable to expect people to labor endlessly on new kits and kit bashing every time they want to try a different load out.