Why we play this game?

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

The latest issue of the 9th Scroll is here! You can read all about it in the news.

  • New

    Personally,

    Any future events i run will have an expanded paint and modelling score.
    Basically you shouldn't place top 3 without a fully painted army of miniatures.

    As for admission to the tournament? My #1 requirement is units on proper sized bases - After that I won't really be bothered - many people have to learn to convert/model/greenstuff somewhere - and I've already said I have no issue with paper miniatures.

    Pitching up with a gorgeous army of 3d miniatures is great... unless they're all on rounds from AoS - that to me breaks the game more than anything else- because base size is the absolute most important thing.

    I've stated my flexibility on the issue, but this idea that everyone needs to fit into categorized boxes as set by previous GW conceptions of what an army "is" ; is frankly furstrating.

    My 28mm roman/Avras project would not be enough for many people here because "They wouldn't know what things are"

    What about @Klexe 's Tsuandan army he's running as EoS?

    Or my idea I had for a east asian themed VC army?

    We have to make sure we don't stunt what our greatest asset is: Creative flexibility of interpretation.

    ----------

    Inspiration and fun is different for many people. The fact that everyone is discussing tournaments is missing the point (or rather is the point of the OP) - Tournaments are great, but this game needs to look to the wider hobby beyond to inspire players.

    Head of Lectors

    Quick Starter Team

    "...take a step back and remember that we are playing a game where we roll dice and move little people around the board."

    - Grouchy Badger

  • New

    SaM wrote:

    I would like to try and put this thread back on track with a question: how do you think we could enhance the fluff and the aesthetics of the 9th age, also to attract new players?
    1-2 lines of fluff describing each unit in the slim army books. As well as a little picture, like a black/white artist sketch/doodle. Not too fancy.

    For some reason this just works. It peaks a small interest because its so easy to read 1-2 lines of text - you can't ignore it like you can a whole paragraph.
  • New

    kisanis wrote:

    Personally,

    Any future events i run will have an expanded paint and modelling score.
    Basically you shouldn't place top 3 without a fully painted army of miniatures.

    As for admission to the tournament? My #1 requirement is units on proper sized bases - After that I won't really be bothered - many people have to learn to convert/model/greenstuff somewhere - and I've already said I have no issue with paper miniatures.

    Pitching up with a gorgeous army of 3d miniatures is great... unless they're all on rounds from AoS - that to me breaks the game more than anything else- because base size is the absolute most important thing.

    I've stated my flexibility on the issue, but this idea that everyone needs to fit into categorized boxes as set by previous GW conceptions of what an army "is" ; is frankly furstrating.

    My 28mm roman/Avras project would not be enough for many people here because "They wouldn't know what things are"

    What about @Klexe 's Tsuandan army he's running as EoS?

    Or my idea I had for a east asian themed VC army?

    We have to make sure we don't stunt what our greatest asset is: Creative flexibility of interpretation.

    ----------

    Inspiration and fun is different for many people. The fact that everyone is discussing tournaments is missing the point (or rather is the point of the OP) - Tournaments are great, but this game needs to look to the wider hobby beyond to inspire players.
    Themed armies and really dumb proxy models are 2 different things entirely. I mean if someone tried to pull off saying that their chaos warrior models represent scrapings in their ogre army, that's a dumb proxy. Now taking those same chaos warriors, cutting them up and dressing them up a bit and putting them on the correct base and saying that they are imperial guard or some other heavy armored infantry... yeah I can see that working.

    I think Roman's can be made to work fine as an empire or even army (or pretty much anything as long as the base is correct and the equipment is somewhat correct). I mean I've been kicking around the idea of buying some historical celts and using beastmen rules to represent the army.

    Just when someone tries to tell me that their high elf on a dragon is actually dwarf grudge buster.... (<-- this was a real thing)
  • New

    Klexe wrote:

    What the hell is a tsuadan army and what's is going on here :)

    Just got tagged.



    I play this game to destroy my brother
    sorry for bringing you here,

    did you have a pretty army of asian themed empire?

    Head of Lectors

    Quick Starter Team

    "...take a step back and remember that we are playing a game where we roll dice and move little people around the board."

    - Grouchy Badger

  • New

    kisanis wrote:

    I've stated my flexibility on the issue, but this idea that everyone needs to fit into categorized boxes as set by previous GW conceptions of what an army "is" ; is frankly furstrating.

    My 28mm roman/Avras project would not be enough for many people here because "They wouldn't know what things are"
    I agree.

    I've been pushing for more varied base sizes with in armies. The recent update to upgrade some monsters to bigger bases with a couple extra stats is a great move forward in my opinion.

    I was also pushing for the inclusion of 30mm wide bases. Its a great spot for standard size infantry with like 2 wounds. Orc big'uns/headbashers was my main example - 30x30mm base, 2 wounds, extra attack. It just fits! Creates more variety. Can also do it with cavalry headbashers on 30x50mm or 30x60mm bases. Warriors chosen is another example.

    With the way the legacy rules work we can't invalidate old stuff. But the Auxiliary books are a great spot for this stuff. ...we just have to get Auxiliary books.


    I also have some Avatars of War Kingsguard Dwarfs and they don't really fit on 20mm. I'd love to jst run them on 25mm even though its a big disadvantage, but most players would get uppity about it.
  • New

    kisanis wrote:

    Klexe wrote:

    What the hell is a tsuadan army and what's is going on here :)

    Just got tagged.



    I play this game to destroy my brother
    sorry for bringing you here,
    did you have a pretty army of asian themed empire?
    Yes the titan forge yellow and black nippon / Asian guys are mine.
    Rarly use them though :/

    Still gorgoues

                

    Translation Team DE

    Product-Search

    KoE Community Support

  • New

    JordanBladen wrote:

    WastelandWarrior wrote:

    JordanBladen wrote:

    Lock in the rules and up painting requirements for tournaments.

    The state of some armies is shocking.

    Not due to someones painting skills but no caring due to the changing updates / meta.
    Absolutely mate. Its a travesty when my army is one of the nicest on show and its tabletop standard at best. So much broken unpainted stuff keeps being tolerated and its kinda shitty
    Your army is above table top bud lol.
    Its the truth though - its just not appealing to people looking at events and watching them.

    I also think the whole - "use what you want" ethos needs changing. I walked past a table at a recent event and couldn't tell what two armies were playing each other due to proxying of different models.

    Make 9th great again.
    I appreciate the compliment but nearly all my stuff is just basecoat wash drybrush. Im no artist, anyone who can be bothered can do this. I agree with you fully.

    Wesser wrote:

    WastelandWarrior wrote:

    JordanBladen wrote:

    Lock in the rules and up painting requirements for tournaments.

    The state of some armies is shocking.

    Not due to someones painting skills but no caring due to the changing updates / meta.
    Absolutely mate. Its a travesty when my army is one of the nicest on show and its tabletop standard at best. So much broken unpainted stuff keeps being tolerated and its kinda shitty
    Myeah
    I was in the hobby for years before attending my first tournament (partly that was because I was unsure about too competitive attitudes) because I didn't feel my painting mastery was good enough.

    And sure enough every tournament with painting requirement have been fraught with elitist bullcrap of the worst kind (I've received a paint score of zero once because some individual models had scenic bases where the majority didn't).

    It's great playing against a painted army, but do I put that over a) people getting excluded from events even if they use proper models and not beer cans and paper cut-outs? and b) people who've actually put effort into their painting still getting crapped upon by a low paintscore?

    Isn't the joy and praise of owning a well-painted army enough?
    Painting mastery is certainly not necessary, im not a fantastic painter by any stretch and anyone who has at least made an effort has my respect, would certainly never crap on anyone who had actually done some painting themselves

    Feaynnewedd wrote:

    Some of you guys really make me cherish the people I play with. I started to play the game, and of course I have a bunch of unpainted minis! And of course I need to prox some things before I spend a lot of money and time on a mini I will never field!
    I have a more than full time job and a kid, my minis don't paint themselves, and sometimes I want to do other things in my free time. So of course I will have unpainted and proxed minis for a long time still, maybe always!

    The elitist attitude of some people really...
    elitist attitude, yeah do one clown. Expecting some paint on models at tournament level is hardly elitist. I have a job and a family, i am a slow painter, yet my army is painted. By all means play at home with friends with any models, thats fine id do the same and encourage it. At an event it does detract from the enjoyment, especially when quite a number of the worst offenders have been playing much longer than i have. Ive played guys with shocking armies and still had a good time, dont get me wrong, but if their army was painted it could have been a great time
    Take a look at my painted army so far. Feel free to share a pic of yours!

    Pics of my ever expanding warriors army

    WastelandWarrior Painting League 2018
  • New

    Feaynnewedd wrote:

    Some of you guys really make me cherish the people I play with. I started to play the game, and of course I have a bunch of unpainted minis! And of course I need to prox some things before I spend a lot of money and time on a mini I will never field!
    I have a more than full time job and a kid, my minis don't paint themselves, and sometimes I want to do other things in my free time. So of course I will have unpainted and proxed minis for a long time still, maybe always!

    The elitist attitude of some people really...
    As much as you may think that my attitude (or other's) is elitist. I can just flip it and talk about how entitled you and others are when you want people to just play against you regardless of your army's condition (be it broken, proxy, paper, ect...) when I've gone through and put in the hard work to get my army to a high level of game readiness. So once more you have the battle of the elite versus the entitled.

    And honestly dude, it doesn't take great skill or time to get an army table ready. I've sat down with some people who "could not paint" and done a couple of teaching sessions. Afterwards they were able to quickly and easily get models painted and on the table. It's all about motivation and a few tricks.
  • New

    To anyone who was offended by my post, I would like to apologize. I actually enjoy playing with people with fully painted armies as well. So that you know on which page we are: I already spent and am spending hours and hours priming, basecoating, washing, drybrushing and layering my miniatures. As you can tell by my avatar, I even try to do a little freehand. As I (re-)started painting this year, my skills are still not very good. My ideal of a ninth age game is definitely with fully painted armies.

    However, much more important for me is the ideal of two dudes (or dudettes!) just having fun playing a friendly game. This includes tournaments. I just attended my first, and was very fortunate playing with/against three absolutely fun and well-mannered people.

    What got me riled up was the idea, that I thought some people would have me (or people like me) excluded because not everything was painted and I used a Wasteland Chariot as a proxy for a second Lion Chariot. Maybe I started with the name-calling, and again, I apologize, but I don't think that makes me "entitled" either.

    Anyway, my five cents to the original topic of the post:
    Fluff is great, i love just browsing the Warhammer and 40k-Wikies (which I don't even play) to learn about the Fluff. I think the overwhelming majority isn't particularly well written (well, actually I think most of it is borderline ridiculous, but I think the writers don't take themselves too serious either...), but it's fun and gives my minis background.
    However, I don't feel the need to have Fluff as one of the priorities of the game, as we already have the warhammer fluff which gives background to all of the unit entries. Sure, because of the name changes immersion might not be what it was when I played 6th edition when I was 14 for a year or so, but then again, I'm not 14 anymore, so maybe I have changed...
    Don't forget to bring a towel!
  • New

    Wesser wrote:

    WastelandWarrior wrote:

    JordanBladen wrote:

    Lock in the rules and up painting requirements for tournaments.

    The state of some armies is shocking.

    Not due to someones painting skills but no caring due to the changing updates / meta.
    Absolutely mate. Its a travesty when my army is one of the nicest on show and its tabletop standard at best. So much broken unpainted stuff keeps being tolerated and its kinda shitty
    Myeah
    I was in the hobby for years before attending my first tournament (partly that was because I was unsure about too competitive attitudes) because I didn't feel my painting mastery was good enough.

    And sure enough every tournament with painting requirement have been fraught with elitist bullcrap of the worst kind (I've received a paint score of zero once because some individual models had scenic bases where the majority didn't).

    It's great playing against a painted army, but do I put that over a) people getting excluded from events even if they use proper models and not beer cans and paper cut-outs? and b) people who've actually put effort into their painting still getting crapped upon by a low paintscore?

    Isn't the joy and praise of owning a well-painted army enough?
    Depends. I happen to be the paint judge that gave you the zero in paint score.(along with two other judges).
    The requirements for a higher paint score explicitly stated that all miniatures should be based in the same style. You knew when you bought the ticket.
  • New

    Feaynnewedd wrote:

    To anyone who was offended by my post, I would like to apologize. I actually enjoy playing with people with fully painted armies as well. So that you know on which page we are: I already spent and am spending hours and hours priming, basecoating, washing, drybrushing and layering my miniatures. As you can tell by my avatar, I even try to do a little freehand. As I (re-)started painting this year, my skills are still not very good. My ideal of a ninth age game is definitely with fully painted armies.

    However, much more important for me is the ideal of two dudes (or dudettes!) just having fun playing a friendly game. This includes tournaments. I just attended my first, and was very fortunate playing with/against three absolutely fun and well-mannered people.

    What got me riled up was the idea, that I thought some people would have me (or people like me) excluded because not everything was painted and I used a Wasteland Chariot as a proxy for a second Lion Chariot. Maybe I started with the name-calling, and again, I apologize, but I don't think that makes me "entitled" either.

    Anyway, my five cents to the original topic of the post:
    Fluff is great, i love just browsing the Warhammer and 40k-Wikies (which I don't even play) to learn about the Fluff. I think the overwhelming majority isn't particularly well written (well, actually I think most of it is borderline ridiculous, but I think the writers don't take themselves too serious either...), but it's fun and gives my minis background.
    However, I don't feel the need to have Fluff as one of the priorities of the game, as we already have the warhammer fluff which gives background to all of the unit entries. Sure, because of the name changes immersion might not be what it was when I played 6th edition when I was 14 for a year or so, but then again, I'm not 14 anymore, so maybe I have changed...
    not saying you are entitled, just saying that you calling others elitist is the same as them calling you entitled.
  • New

    Kristian wrote:

    Wesser wrote:

    WastelandWarrior wrote:

    JordanBladen wrote:

    Lock in the rules and up painting requirements for tournaments.

    The state of some armies is shocking.

    Not due to someones painting skills but no caring due to the changing updates / meta.
    Absolutely mate. Its a travesty when my army is one of the nicest on show and its tabletop standard at best. So much broken unpainted stuff keeps being tolerated and its kinda shitty
    MyeahI was in the hobby for years before attending my first tournament (partly that was because I was unsure about too competitive attitudes) because I didn't feel my painting mastery was good enough.

    And sure enough every tournament with painting requirement have been fraught with elitist bullcrap of the worst kind (I've received a paint score of zero once because some individual models had scenic bases where the majority didn't).

    It's great playing against a painted army, but do I put that over a) people getting excluded from events even if they use proper models and not beer cans and paper cut-outs? and b) people who've actually put effort into their painting still getting crapped upon by a low paintscore?

    Isn't the joy and praise of owning a well-painted army enough?
    Depends. I happen to be the paint judge that gave you the zero in paint score.(along with two other judges).The requirements for a higher paint score explicitly stated that all miniatures should be based in the same style. You knew when you bought the ticket.
    Eh lets agree to disagree about the explicitly part

    But the morale is still the same. I might as well have turned up with an unpainted army. It was actually my first tournament. Was close to being my last too
  • New

    infamousme wrote:

    Morgan_Treeman wrote:

    what is a proxy? Why can't a dragon model be used for a grudgebuster? Who are you to tell me what a grudgebuster should look like?
    and who are you to tell me that I have to accept it? It's just going to keep.going in circles dude.
    He is the owner of said grudge buster. So he probably knows his stuff ;)
    My gallery: Adam painting stuff (HbE, VC and lots of terrain)
    My battle reports: Adam Battle reports
    Sea Guard homebrew: Sea Guard