What is the point of painting requirements in tournaments?

I have heard that eventually, the Inner Circle will have this requirement for most tournaments.

Yesterday, for once in my life, I agreed with Brent. I can't see how they enhance the tournament, other than to better show off Games Workshop's models. Some people dislike painting, and since this is a hobby that people do for enjoyment therefore shouldn't have to be forced to do so to play in a competitive environment. The other option they have is they can pay people to paint their armies, but it’s unfair for them to have to pay significantly more to have a "tournament acceptable" army.

To quote Brent’s infinite wisdom, making tournament players paint their armies is like telling Dave Taylor he's not allowed to paint until he plays more games.

These requirements just serve as restrictions. They limit the number of people that can participate in the tournament. To say that it encourages them to get their army painted is irrelevant. The point is people should be able to participate in the hobby however they please, whether they just paint, just game, or do both.

There is no problem with using a painting score in tournaments, as long as it only determines the winner of best painted. The winner of the tournament should always be decided only by whoever had the most battle-points/victories. That being said, there are places for fully painted tournaments, but your basic tournament is not one of those places.

So please, explain to me the purpose AND the benefits of these requirements.

I agree that requiring an all painted army for a "normal" tournament is a bit much. However, I think the way things are generally run is perfectly fine, with three winning categories:

Best Painted (just paint score)
Best General (Just Battle Points)
Best Overall (paint score, battle points, comp, etc)

Will you win best overall with an unpainted army? Not likely. But that is because "overall" is supposed to encompass all aspects of the hobby, including painting and sportsmanship. So, I guess it depends on which category you consider to be the "winner of the tournament"

Quote :

Best Painted (just paint score)
Best General (Just Battle Points)
Best Overall (paint score, battle points, comp, etc)

Will you win best overall with an unpainted army? Not likely. But that is because "overall" is supposed to encompass all aspects of the hobby, including painting and sportsmanship. So, I guess it depends on which category you consider to be the "winner of the tournament"

Something like this is what we are going to head to. Look at the tournament were running the 10th. It's made for all people in the hobby.

Quote :

To quote Brent’s infinite wisdom, making tournament players paint their armies is like telling Dave Taylor he's not allowed to paint until he plays more games.

A person like Dave Taylor but not just him will still play in a tournament to win best painted army. Just like I'd play in a tournament with an unpainted army to win best gen.

The reason for the painting req. is to get people to have them so when we have a GT in I don't know July our people can play in it. People like Brent who doesn’t have a fully painted army he wants to play. Now he is going to start IG cause there a hell of a good army. If we were to allow him to play in our 40k tournament he would just build all the gay he could fit in. Instead we say your army hast to be painted so he will be forced to pick an army and paint it. No Brent that’s not a dig at you look at me I play lizards because they can beat daemons. I'm just a cheap and gay. I'm not telling anyone they need to paint like a Dave Taylor I don't I paint like I paint and I win over all at allot of tournaments.

The idea of an all painted tournament brings out allot of older players. We aren’t going to all of a sudden stop Hosting non painted tournaments were running tournaments before the ICGT to get people to paint there army’s, so they can play in the ICGT.

Having painted models on the tournaments also brings people who aren't in the hobby or not members of the club over to look at what we are doing. If they like it or like what they see they get interested and start asking questions and just might join us or start playing the game you enjoy so much. What looks better on the table, unpainted or painted miniatures?

I don't paint and I understand why this is happening. And painting should be for the best painted and overall winner. Best General is the only one that painting score doesn't have a factor in.

Maybe this is just me but most people that I have played

If they have a fully painted army it means they are really into the hobby, whcih most of the time also means they are good players. I have never played at a tournment that had painting requirements where every battle was not a great game. And nost just fun but a hard fight.

However, when you play people that dont have painted armies alot of them don't really care they are just trying stuff out, new to the game, etc.

I think both cases are fine because before I paint up my armies I play with them un painted to see how they work so I can make changes before I commit to what I am going to do.

But after a few gams I paint them, and yes its a pain in the but, but I do enjoy the way it looks when it is done.

So if you want to paint your army great, if you don't great. But like scooter said if you want to play in any big tournaments you will loose points for it or not be allowed to go. So why not just paint your army???

Even if you don't like it just get the basic three colors on there and flock the bases with sand takes about to seconds. And if you really want to be cheap just spray paint the first color on then all you have to do is add two more colors!!!

although I may sound biased because I've now got two fully painted armies, I will give my two cents.

If I hear about a tournament that has no painting requirement, I am less likely to go to it. For me, tournaments should be a competition in painting, sportsmanship and tactics. That way you've got an event that covers the hobby as a whole. Rather than just battle tactics.

I go to tournaments to play against fully painted armies. And I think the painting requirement is a great motivator for people to paint their armies.

@TimW
I specifically said that as to painting requirements being a motivator, it unfair to the people that just don't enjoy painting.

@Scooter
Why does the ICGT need a painting requirement. Why does any?

To your point of it allowing Brent all the gay he wants, that's a terrible reason. You know he probably won't have a fully painted guard army by the ICGT, but what about people that like to paint, and be gay. Are they allowed all the gay they want just because they like to paint?

The main problem I have with best overall, is that it is usually, if not always, seen as "1st" or the winner of the tournament. If that's true then you can't call it a tournament. The winner of the tournament should be the person that won the most games/whatever. A tournament should test a persons tactics and strategies, and best painted/sportsmanship/etc should just be compensation for the people that aren't the best players in the game. To call something a tournament, yet have the chance of the winner being somebody you didn't win, doesn't make sense to me.

I see it differently. I think tournaments should be competition on both game skills and paint skills. I don't think we should ever give best overall to someone with a grey plastic army. because quite simply they aren't the best overall. Best general could be awarded to the one who wins the most games but this hobby is multifaceted and we need to incorporate that in tournaments.

This is why I like it when paint scores settle ties. If you have to have both a painted army and be totally on top of your game to be one of the top-tier players. Thats the hobby. Its both games and painting. Tournaments should reflect that.

I'm sorry for those who don't like painting and modelling because if thats the case, is this really the game for you?

The phrase "Warhammer Tournament" sounds to me like it would be playing games to determine the winner, not playing games and then if your army was pretty enough, you win. Playing the games is the tournament aspect, you don't have painting "tournaments". I disagree with giving somebody that's not the best painter or the best player first place.

As to your last question, do you think that way towards people that only like to paint, or is that "different"?

If you really want to say the phrase warhammer tournament

maybe you should break down the words.

Warhammer is a game where you build your models and paint them and battle with them. All three things combined. Thats what warhammer is to me. When I hear warhammer tournament I don't expect everyone to show up with just a bunch of glued up guys. That would be really boring. In fact if that were the cases I would probably not play.

If you have a problem with the painting thing talk to games workshop maybe they can start making all the models pre-colored and take away all the personal aspect to the game.

And yes there are painting tournaments and a lot of them. Have you not herd of Golden demon??? That is the biggest painting tournament for warhammer. I know people that don't play the game and all they do is paint for tournaments like that. So I don't understand what you mean be you don't have painting tournaments because people do.

Some people don't care to much for the games like 40k I don't really like but I like to paint so I paint up only the models that I like and make a fun army with them. I don't always expect to win best painted when I go to tournaments but that is a nice aspect to a tournament. And if I happen to win all of my battles, I think I should win overall over someone that does not have all their models painted or if they are only glued together.

But no matter what there is going to be no end to this argument. Because everyone has their own opinion to tihs subject.

But if you ever want to be competitive in the warhammer GT circuit or at any gamesday or big warhammer event. You will have to paint your army.

But if you don't care and you just want to play with your plastic guys then congrats go do that. And if your good enough to win all your battles all the time then you will win best genearl, but you won't win best overall, because that has painting score in it. Thats how it has always been done, and I don't see why it would ever be changed because warhammer is a modeling hobby.

Cmon even I have started painting stuff. In my opinion there is no excuse - if you wanna play warhammer with a grey plastic army, you can play all day at the bunker or other gaming stores. After going to some fully painted fully based (comp'd) tournaments, I can honestly say I prefer that style of playing over the grey ghey. I LOVE seeing all the armies at a tournament fully painted and based... it's just so badass and adds a whole new level of coolness to the hobby.

Painting is as much of the Games Workshop hobby as the battles, if someone wants to ignore that go ahead, bring the grey ghey and you can still win best general (usually second best prize). If you want best overall and you don't want to paint... you better get a paper route so you can buy a fully painted fully based army on Ebay.

I would be willing to concede with 1-2 bring the "Grey Ghey" tournaments a year - but then again that's the reason Ard Boys exists isn't it.

if you have an army, paint it or pay someone to paint it. Otherwise in the words of Ricky Bobby "Second place is first place loser".

In jousting you win the tournament if you knock all your dudes off their horses, but the one that gets to pork the princess is always the best looking knight.


And that's my summary of the thread.

joko12 wrote:

Have you not herd of Golden demon??? That is the biggest painting tournament for warhammer.

The Golden Daemon is not exactly a tournament, it also requires zero games played.


Perhaps it is a matter of opinion though, I have no problem with playing against an unpainted army. Whether or not the opposing army looks pretty does not ever effect the fun I have playing the game. I can go anywhere if I want to look at something cool, so seeing on the table is nothing special to me. When I see the word tournament, I think of this definition:

"A series of contests in which a number of contestants compete and the one that prevails through the final round or that finishes with the best record is declared the winner."

I think that the deciding factor of a tournament should be the quality of your generalship and the deciding factor of a painting competition should be your painting skills, and that the two should be kept separate.


And to clarify, I have no problem with painting, and I think the concept of "pre-colored models" is a terrible idea that ruins it for painters and does nothing for gamers.

I think the issue stems mostly from the way people confuse and conflate the words "hobby" and "game." A game by definition is (in the abstract) a ruleset and a win conditions. There's no "hobby" of Monopoly or poker but there is a game. Similarly a hobby is any activity undertaken for personal enjoyment or enrichment. Crochet and scrapbooking, woodworking etc are all hobbies but aren't by any means games.

There are people like Jonny, who seem to say that the game is one thing (this rule set over here with models/counters dice etc) and who are uninterested in painting etc. And I totally hear people like Tim and Martin for whom the hobby is the painting of models, conversion etc. They are two different things though.

The problem in part is that there isn't a third word to describe the conjoined activity (maybe that's the best word) and so each side uses it's word to describe the whole, when really they're seeing through their own lens.

I'm actually inclined to agree with Jonny, whereby a tournament (or at least the word) implies (but is not necessarily or exclusively) a test of ones game-playing skill and not of ones gamesmanship AND a whole bunch of 'hobby' stuff.

On the other hand, it's important to people like Tim and Martin (as an example) that the part of the activity (the hobby part) that they enjoy is valued too, and the easiest way to do that is to score it and rank people and pick a winner. Of course winner suggests competition which suggests game and you're back where you started.

One solution could be to actually only have 2 prizes, best general and best painted/converted. Don't give out a best overall where the two camps have to compete and let each person, the hobbyist and the gamesman each walk away with their respective laurels. In that system you should actually be able to win best painted without having to play, and best general without having to paint, but everybody gets to get together in one place on one day and bask in the nerd love.

until someone wins all the best general awards with an unpainted army over and over I don't see this being very relevant...and even then I'd still expect them to not have best overall without painting their army. that's just how it is. always has been. overall would include scoring for everything painting, game-playing skill, sportsmanship, etc... you gotta have it all, to have it all.

PAINT PAINT PAINT!!!! I hate going to a tournament that I pay for and have to show up and play against some guy who has the grey plastic or primer legion. It is a horrible experience. I agree very much so with Lincoln, that painted armies are wonderful to see and do nothing be get others to join in and play, your basement is where the primer legions belong, I dont even like to play in the bunker against people with unpainted armies.

Scooter had once asked me to join the Inner Circle, and one of the main reasons that I have not to date is that most people are not serious about the hobby in general. As a club that is supporting THE HOBBY everyone in the club should at least have a painted army for any system that they want to play....or at least a painted army. Its not hard and there are plenty of ways to paint models quick and good.

I can tell you that if you continue to charge for tournaments I would most certainly vote for all armies to be PAINTED!!!

My 2 cents....

I agree with Joe and lincoln painted is the way to go I dont like paying money to see peoples crappy unpainted armies.

But like I said there will be no end to this debate but it is funny to hear peoples comments about it.

Its like people with painted armies want there to be painted armies and people without painted armies dont care.

O well, its not going to change anything.

And how is Golden daemon not a painting tournament haha I think you need to start defining words or something to make your arguments more valid, but its at least a painting contest, but wait isnt that what a tournament is???? A contest of the best........

For what its worth, personally I really get in the games more when it's two fully painted armies going at it, Hell it's even more fun to WATCH two fully painted armies....

The reason there is a "ardboys and it's very lax requriments is to provide a forum for those who just want to abuse each others armies w/ out the "hobby" aspect...

One of the coolest things about going to a tournament, besides playing games, is seeing everyone's painted armies. That is one of the joys of a tournament. Without that, a tournament really loses something.

Last couple tournaments I have been to with inner circle, I have played painted armies every time. so yeah, I don't think this is a big issue like LIncoln says.

if you feel the need to play with unpainted toy soldiers, Wal Mart still sells those Red and Green army men. You can play with those on your bathroom floor till you pass out.

But if you want to play in a TOURNAMENT play with painted models.

just curious how many bags o' marines Joe has in his bathtub

Quote :

The reason for the painting req. is to get people to have them so when we have a GT in I don't know July our people can play in it. People like Brent who doesn’t have a fully painted army he wants to play. Now he is going to start IG cause there a hell of a good army. If we were to allow him to play in our 40k tournament he would just build all the gay he could fit in. Instead we say your army hast to be painted so he will be forced to pick an army and paint it. No Brent that’s not a dig at you look at me I play lizards because they can beat daemons. I'm just a cheap and gay. I'm not telling anyone they need to paint like a Dave Taylor I don't I paint like I paint and I win over all at allot of tournaments.

Our GT is fully painted fully based. Some of our tournaments and almost all of the tournaments in the area are fully painted and based. I'm just trying to get you kids ready for the real warhammer world. Look, were going to have non painted tournaments you will see, they won’t be as big as you would want them to be. Will I still play in a non painted tournament YES! Others would not. My only goal is to make the inner circle as big and strong as I can make it. You can play in our tournaments all you want you just won’t win over all
.

I don't think I want to know the answer to that question.

My problem is that painting competitions never require you to play games, yet most of the gaming competitions require you do paint. If the painters have Golden Daemon, where's the strictly gaming based competition of that magnitude for the games, and don't say 'Ard Boyz, that's a list building competition, not a gaming competition. The fact is that all of these "tournaments" penalize the people that just want to play the game, yet reward the guy that can lose all three rounds with a pretty army. The low quantity of gaming orientated tournaments, and the complete lack of gamer orientated large scale tournament (GT, etc), seems to put not enough emphasis on the game in competitions that should be about the game.

Sorry, Jonny, thats just the way it is. Tournament organizers want to see painted armies. That's how its always been and how it always will be.

You have a point Johnny the problem is there are more people that want to play in tournaments that are fully painted then not. I like Brent’s idea about only being able to play in a tournament if you have a non painted army. The problem is where do you go from there. I mean your pool of people for a tournament like that isn't that high.

Ready Johnny how many Gw army’s do you have that are not painted? What army’s are they? What army’s do any of us have that have no paint on them? Look to Brent He has Noob bikers why? He wants to win tournaments and that’s all. No Paint on a single model all he wants to do is win tournaments. He doesn’t care what army he plays he wants to win. I agree with his style of play I play Lizards because they crush daemons. With the right list. But I paint them because I want to win over all. If all you Brent and Mike want to do is win tournaments then go for best general every time. I'll go for best overall. I'm asking everyone now how many people want there to be no painting req at our tournaments there for no painting prizes? I don't

Against
Scooter

To be clear, I prefer to play painted armies, but I'm under no illusion that it makes the other opponent a worse opponent if they don't have a painted army. In fact, I'd wager that I have nearly the most fully painted armies in this conversation (unless somebody's been holding out on us) and the reason for that is because I like painting, and I enjoy the way the models look when painted.

Painting doesn't however effect how they perform in the game. Though that's a funny idea, to play a tournament where there's no painting requirement but every painted model gets extra wounds, armor or range.

I'd post the relevant section of the Warmachine official tournament rules packet to compare to the 40k official tournament rules packet...but there isn't one. That's telling, since fundamentally Games Workshop is a hobby company that publishes rules for it's models instead of a game company that makes figures for it's game. Not saying one is better than the other, and they tend to attract different attitudes of players (as evidenced by this whole conversation).

A painted army and a non-painted army are like good beer and cheap beer. If someone offers you a beer and you accept it would be totally an asshole move to say "oh it's *that* beer. I only drink real beer"

tournaments are like bars. Most bars have plenty of the good stuff on tap and usually two or three of the cheap stuff. This is because the people who drink the expensive beer would go to a bar because it has thier favorite brand of beer but the guys that normally drink chep stuff rarely have an issue with a diffrent brands.

I understand why tournaments are painted and have scores but as long as there as some tournaments without then I'm happy. Maybe it's better to say the bar is the Club and the tournaments are the kegs.

now I'm thirsty

Here's the Warmachine text:

Quote :

Privateer Press encourages players to have a fully painted force on the table. Games with painted armies are more interesting to watch and generally enhance the experience for everyone. Although painted armies are not required, players should take this chance to show off all aspects of the hobby.

Nobody's anti-painting, it's just a different thing. There are formats where painting is required, but they're not the standard official format, they're called hardcore, and also have timed turns etc for the very serious player/hobbyist

[quote]I play Lizards because they crush daemons. With the right list.

when are we going to see that list?? lol

lol adepticon 2999 Slann 3 ancients 3 sals 3 razerdons 2 units of 10 skinks 3 units of 4 terradon riders 1 unit of 3.

i will play you with that and i will play demons....let see who wins

pit of shades crushes daemons

man i really need to come back and win all the tournaments again.....

pit of shades will crush some demons as it will with any low I model.

First off, let me say that I hate playing unpainted armies, and love to see a full house of colorfull models for tournaments.

That said, we decided to change the Gladiator Tourney this weekend to no painting required. Several people were working on baneblades, or adding units for it. So no painting needed, but still must be WYSIWYG.

My stomper however, is RED and painted, because I need that extra one inch to get to your unit and crush it. Everyone knows RED is best.

man scooter why you got to go after a guy cause he wants to win, my distain for loosing has nothing to do with my distain for painting, i just hate having to do something i hate to to some thing love, telling me i have to paint this army before i play it in a torn is like telling me i have to get F*** in the A** by some fat guy before i can F*** that sexy girl over there, i shouldn't have to do something i don't want to do just to play a game for fun

also every body should check out the first annual High Stakes shades of grey tournament to be held at G&S on 6/5/2010 the world first painting restricted tournament

o well I wont be able to play in that dumb tournament all my stuff is painted haha

And joe, I pit of shades a carios fate weaver with irristable force, it was really funny.

Brent you're unlikely to get best sportsmanship with your nob bikers anyway... best i see you getting is best general. mooooooot point.

once again the army i choose to play has nothing to do with this desire to discriminate against people who don't enjoy painting

You can play all the for fun games you want, how is that discrimination? Hell most tournaments you can play with unpainted, most of them you wont when anything without paint but you can play.

Brent wrote:

once again the army i choose to play has nothing to do with this desire to discriminate against people who don't enjoy painting

"This desire to discriminate".... LOL you're a tool. Go buy some paint. Until then be happy with Best General.

Baneon wrote:

You can play all the for fun games you want, how is that discrimination? Hell most tournaments you can play with unpainted, most of them you wont when anything without paint but you can play.

yeah so just cause we don't like painting it becomes or civic duty to give prizes to people who are good at painty thats really gay like really dum

I put in the time, I want my prize!

avatar8481 wrote:

I put in the time, I want my prize!

then enter golden deamon

or do the whole hobby and paint your guys

joko12 wrote:

And joe, I pit of shades a carios fate weaver with irristable force, it was really funny.

Dont get me wrong im noting saying that it wont happen, but that doesn't make any army consistantly able to crush demons. You can beat demons but i wont be with magic and i play lizardmen too and they are by no means the end all be all for beating demons.

magic is so iffy, IRF is the only way to get most things off that will matter, and then you have to hope to be in range and LOS for most stuff.

@ Brent- we all understand that you dont want to paint...thats fine, but you cant get mad if there are restrictions that limit you to not taking overall with out a painted army. Best general is for pure battle. If you want an OVERALL award you have to do it ALL.

Brent wrote:

Baneon wrote:

You can play all the for fun games you want, how is that discrimination? Hell most tournaments you can play with unpainted, most of them you wont when anything without paint but you can play.

yeah so just cause we don't like painting it becomes or civic duty to give prizes to people who are good at painty thats really gay like really dum

You don't like to paint. That's fine by me, and your choice. There are plenty of tournaments you can play in, especially 'ardboyz events.

But your choice to not paint doesn't mean anyone is punishing or discriminating against you. It's like someone yelling at the NBA because they are fat and can't play basketball.

How you want to play warhammer is up to you. But other people like to paint, and like to play in tournaments with painted armies. Your choice to participate or not.

and some dudes like to have sex with other dudes that doesn't mean that people shouldn't be able to have heterosexual relations too, i am not and have never advocated having no tournaments with paint as a part of them, however some people in our area have a desire to run only fully painted and fully based tournaments, that would be discriminating agents people who don't care to paint i would like to see a mix of events that accommodate all the players in the warhammer world

and since hard boys i a list building event it and only held once a year, i fails to accommodate the need of none painter tournament players

@Baneon
Who cares if you can play in a tournament with an unpainted army if you won't win anything. Winning is the goal of the tournament. If you wanted to just have play some games for fun, then you can go play some casual games. Tournament are there to create a competitive environment where one can play against others to test their gaming skills. If you don't go to win, you're just wasting your time, and the time of the people that want to go to play challenging, competitive games.

@mikhaila
There are tournaments that don't require any sort of painting, but the ones that do outnumber those, which doesn't make sense. The Golden Daemon is the largest painting competition and does not require any playing of games, yet all the biggest gaming tournaments require your army to be painted. Some people want more than just a few local tournaments with 20-30 people in them. Some people want to play against the best of the best to determine that they are the best gamer. Some events should have a painting requirement, such as GW's Grand Tournament, which since its run by GW, it should be a showcase of the entire hobby. That being said, there should be a large scale tournament that's purpose it to test your generalship, and just your generalship.

Also, 'Ard Boyz is not a gaming tournament. It is simply a test of who can make the most broken list. To consider it as just a uber-competitive tournament of tactics and strategy is foolish, since with a lot of the lists don't require thought (WOTR 'Ard Boyz for example).

Also, please try to keep the discussion on topic, and Brent perhaps you could find better ways to describe your ideas other than with sexual comments.